The Saker on Anglo-Zionist Empire’s escalating lies & hysteria
source: https://www.patreon.com/posts/17657399 (you can listen to the interview here)
download file: tjradio-3-19-18-saker_-_31918_9.10_PM.mp3 (for direct download)
Kevin Barrett’s show notes: The Saker is one of the our best geopolitical analysts. In this interview we begin with issues from his recent article “When dealing with a bear hubris is suicidal,” which discusses the increasing absurdity of such obvious Western false flags as the “Skripal nerve gas attack”—par for the course for “an Empire built (and maintained) on lies, accepted on the basis of ignorance, justified by hypocrisy and energized by hysterics. This is what the ‘Western world’ stands for nowadays.”
Is the Empire’s pathological behavior rooted in Western arrogance and millenarianism dating back to medieval times? Is the current official elite religion of Anti-Religious Religious Fundamentalism (AARF) even more dangerously fanatical than traditional religious fundamentalism? Are Western elites secular humanists or satanists? Is there a meaningful difference between those categories? Why are they willing to risk nuclear war with over 500 million dead to push forward a hopelessly implausible scheme for a one-world empire? What can we do to stop them? These are some of the questions considered in this very stimulating hour of conversation.
Please support Kevin Barrett and become a patron here: https://www.patreon.com/DrKevinBarrett
Good. Well said. The US and it’s people would be far better off if the Empire were dismantled. This should be the goal of all well intentioned people. Envisioning or praying for it can only help our cause.
The key to dismantling the Empire is breaking US military trade in opium, including forcing a withdrawal from Afganistan, that produces 93% of world supply, which is the tie that binds the saner and more US-centric militarist faction to the internationalist Anglo-Zionist Deep State Cabal.
I am concerned that an outing of those behind 9/11, without a simultaneous withdrawal from Afganistan, will merely signal a changing of the guard in the worldwide trade in drugs. If Pompeo and the new CIA Director can be trusted then perhaps we are seeing the begining of a genuine fight against state sponsership of trade in narcotics. Competition with China may aid in this regard because if the people who sorround Donald Trump want genuinely to rebuild their society the number one way of accomplishing this is to stop turning everyone into a junkie.
Nimratta ‘Nikki’ Haley, née Randhawa, is a puppet of Sheldon Adelson, who sponsered her before she became Governor of North Carolina. I imagine her seat at the UN, as with the Governorship, was purchashed for a steep price, but the fact it is saleable indicates the United Nations is still primarily a theatre of the irrelevant and absurd. The Sikh representitive of the US deep state should be completely ignored.
Concerning your comments on Satanism and self worship, I posted this earlier today but I will post it again because it really goes to the heart of this part of your discussion. Please listen to the podcast below.
E. Michael Jones on Sapiens, Metahistory, Metaphysics and Logos – Our Interesting Times
http://tkelly6785757.podomatic.com/enclosure/2018-03-19T05_06_06-07_00.mp3
“Nikki” was governor of South Carolina.
Self-worship is the basis of Rabbinical or Talmudic Judaism, the Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox adherents of which see themselves as God, and the Rabbis as superior to God. Of course, in 2000 years of endless speculation, exegesis and disputation the Rabbis invented numerous mutually contradictory dogmata, but the basic orientation of separation from and hostility to the non-Judaic world (in which they include non-Talmudic Jews, as we see in Israel)is perennial. To have creatures like this controlling the West, through straight political bribery and money power, is not a happy prospect.
One of the weirdest events I attended was a Mason funeral. I can still hear their medals jingling that were pinned to their aprons as they walked around the casket with their one arm extended similar to a Nazi salute. Every one was invited for tea and danties after the service. I looked at my father and he said let’s get out of here. All I can say after a number of years of that event is Wow!!!!!!
… check this out and feel better …
Pete & Dud 1965 “Worst Bloody Thing That Could Happen to You” Sketch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88iiMUKepSE
I think there is a benefit for the West to buttress international institutions such as international law etc.
These institutions will act as a counterbalance and may buy more time for the West when China is clearly the dominant world power and has little interest in these western institutions which can protect the smaller nations.
‘…western institutions which can protect the smaller nations’??!! Surely you jest? How many ‘little nations’ has China invaded and destroyed, or sanctioned and destroyed, or subverted and destroyed, lately?
You mumble really, if you buy into the Tibet narrative be known that Tibet was a Chinese province for thousands of years and that the lamas are a retrograde oligarchy that suppresses ignorant Tibetan populace, opposed to progress and education.
The leaves the Uyghurs a Turkic people intent on sabotaging the unity of China with terrorist actions.
Ther are 5 stars in the Chinese flag, the largest simbolizes the Han, largest ethnic group, the other are smaller ethnicities, all united under the Chinese flag.
Don’t buy into the imperial narrative.
In the 1840s when Britain and Russia both had plans for colonizing central Asia, the British and Russians both agreed that Tibet was off limits because it was a part of the Chinese dominion. They also agreed that Iran was off limits because it was a civilized country not subject to colonization.
Boris, me old china, re-read what I typed. I agree with your position entirely. Xinjiang has been part of China since the Han, and Tibet was liberated from a vile theocracy, run by a CIA asset for sixty years, the Dalai Lama.
Mulga,
Admittedly, Bobzibub has a point regarding the West’s benign protection of small states: Think Israel, the Vatican, and The City (London).
Hahaha… Good point! We must mention this more frequently.
Or Libya-‘We had to destroy the country, to protect it’.
Soros, honey: You should keep your disciples to your own media outlets. They come a cropper here with such contributions about the Chinese bully, LOL.
Thank You Saker for the generous and rich sharings in your Vineyard. It is clear to me that many come here, not finding anything like it where we are.
I stand with you in asking for God’s infinite mercy.
As nearly always, Saker, your mind is hooked to your verbal prowess. You often think more clearly when answering and expounding than even your astute writings.
This one nails it from 30 minutes on.
Barret missed delving deeper on the ideology of Satan and, as you put it, egoism.
Also, your take on Trump’s “evolution” from emancipator to captive, from domestic reconstructor to foreman of the Hegemony were brilliant.
Again, the host needed to pump more fuel and time on these topics.
For instance, how does Trump get off the back of the Saber tooth Tiger?
How does the no-win wars never get going?
What forces of good, besides our prayers for humanity, can be marshalled?
It was a good ‘talk’.
We need you to expand on these rich topics.
Podcasts, my friend. Radio, too. You are a wonderful “listen”.
Maybe, a live event with a chat line for some prodding as you go.
Vineyard needs some technology in its toolshed.
The process of the Zionazification of Trump is complete with the return of John Bolton, in my very firm opinion, Evil Incarnate, to replace McMaster. An illegal aggression against Iran seems certain, now, possibly after a false-flag ‘nerve gas’ attack in the ‘American Homeland’. The Dominionist ‘End Times’ lunatics in the Trump regime must be slobbering with anticipation.
Kevin Barrett is a good guy – I got his book Truth Jihad – a long time ago – he’s had a hard road of persecution I believe – job losses etc – Hang in there Kevin – you’re a voice for the Truth Jihad for sure –
For a better understanding of the spiritual inversion of the Western World and the ‘saints of Satan’, the best introduction is “The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the Times” of Rene Guenon (1945) whose long overdue English translation is now available on-line (pdf).
Thanks much for this!
k
The issue with God or ‘not God’ is what Nietzche did metaphorically and unknowingly, and what deists who give up their views do unconcsciously and practically (cause very few think when they do this).
‘God is dead and you killed him’, is seen by modernity as a jump from one practically unobserved philosophical position, to one practicaly observed (or observer justifiable) philosophical position by atheists. But in truth, ‘there is God’ and ‘there is no God’ are both metaphysical statements without practical observation. Here religion is honest, because it does not ask for knowledge of God, but faith in God.
What atheists fail to grasp is that in denying God – an alien word to them firstly, both emotionally and philosophically, but one that is equivalent to Absolute, Essence, mechanically ‘the sum of Plato’s Forms’ – they simply turn a philosophical 360 and accept another position free from direct evidence. But this lack of facts, and even lack of possible facts (‘meta’ – beyond observation) is not acknowledged. Dull minds peddle Okham’s razor and that is enough to pull out any positive statement as to Absolute truth (Dawkins’ scale – level 7 Atheist, axiomatic belief in the non-existence of God)
But whilst there is a 360 philosophical, the practicalities are only spun 180. Emperor Ashoka stated:
“King Piyadasi, desires that all religions should reside everywhere, for all of them desire self-control and purity of heart.”
Atheism on the other hand, staring into the abyss of Absolute no-Absolute (a flat in the face contradiction), settles on the axiom of nothing (not ‘no-thing’, the careful Buddhist distinction for me!), and lets this materialize at least in Meinong’s jungle, making nothing THE reality of all experience.
6.371 The whole modern conception of the world is founded on the illusion that the so-called laws of nature are the explanations of natural phenomena.
6.372 Thus people today stop at the laws of nature, treating them as something inviolable, just as God and Fate were treated in past ages. And in fact both are right and both wrong: though the view of the ancients is clearer in so far as they have a clear and acknowledged terminus, while the modern system tries to make it look as if everything were explained.
Wittgenstein
The practical 180 is the change to human psychology that occurs if one consistently becomes negative, dismissive and pessemistic, yet confident, especially as to the whole of existence. ‘A pessimist is a well informed optimist’, but with the metaphysical, observed facts are not available, so the rational position based on observed facts aloner can be no more than agnosticism. Being irrational and pessimistic, only leads to suffering.
But the non-existence of Essence is demonstrably unreasonable, because the experience of the world is utter regularity. Whether the cycles of day/night, seasons, the action of gravity, any and all imaginable things are regular, at the very least because they can be described by mathematical models (which are subject to regular rules). It is this regularity that the appeal to God and Essence seems to explain well, but an appeal to no-God/nihilism/absurdism fails to explain in its entirety. If causality must be addressed, there are only three positions: 0 causes, 1 cause, many causes. Many causes for an entirely regular experience is hard to make right, 0 is straight out illogical (if a ‘ding an sich’ is expected to have meaning), and 1 is the only reasonble answer. (imo the psychological issue is then people concoct that this is an absurd world in their minds, and hey presto we have yahoos running aroud naked throwing shit at each other).
The issue is understanding that both Essential existence and Essential non-existence, causality as a fundament of all experience, are not logically consistent concepts.
An argument for relativity (though not Absolute relativity) from the progress of the scientific method:
Newton [relative motion, Absolute Time, Absolute Space, Absolute Property, Absolute Object].. quite accurate
Special relativity [relative motion, relative time, Absolute Space, relative property (Doppler shift), Absolute Object]
General relativity [relative motion, relative time, relative space, relative property, relative object]
QM (relational interpretation https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9609002.pdf) [same as GR].. why relational QM? No EPR issues https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0604064.pdf
Science has been becoming more accurate in its modelling and predictions, whilst moving away from Absolute frames, towards relativity. This means that, at least for this transient plane, relativity or dependent origination is more justifiable.
Anyways, the issue is not ‘God exists’ or ‘God does not exist’ – these are linguistic statements made in a demonstrably relational experience, and so are subject to relational, non-fundamental, meaning, at all times. God is a reasonably accurate description of the world on the whole, much more so that no-God, but both fail logically.
The text that explains this is a Buddhist philosophical text, though it is a heavy read, even with the commentary! https://ia800400.us.archive.org/4/items/NagarjunaTheFundamentalWisdomOfTheMiddleWay/Nagarjuna%20-%20The%20Fundamental%20Wisdom%20Of%20The%20Middle%20Way.pdf
Ideology = Idea – Fact
A known fact (99% of var explained by the model or whatnot) is something such as the progression of the Japanese population through time.
The Idea is what people answer when asked ‘where is the Japanese population heading’. If 2% of the Japanese population say it’s going up, find out who says it out of not knowing (small children), and what % says it out of statements like “Japan is the greatest country under the Sun, we will always multiply”, and youo have your % ideology, with respect to the concept of Japanese population growth, as understood by Japanese society.
There is no fact as to the metaphysical, that is axiomaticly so – God is an Independent, Permanent entity. So any statements as to the metaphysical is 100% ideology. It can be better ideology, and God fits into here, but it is not and can never be a factual construct.
This shows, because the First Classical Law of Thought, as well as the second Peano axiom are both ‘x=x’, or ‘For every x ∈ N, x = x’, if more systematically. But x=x is a 0 information tautology. The ‘ding an sich’ holds no explicative power. It is not counterproductive as the atheist has everyone believe, but it is not productive either.
(for some stoner musings on the ineffable:
∞ is the ineffable, x is the conditioned.
∞+x=∞; ∞-x=∞; ∞*x=∞; ∞/x=∞.
1 and 0 within conditioned experience:
x*1=1; x/1=1 (x+1=x+1; x-1=x-1)
x+0=x; x-0=x (x*0=0;x/0=undefined)
the concept of 1 and 0 half-approximate ∞. Hence the conceived duality of ‘exists’ and ‘does not exist’. In brackets, ‘1’ leads to the below rule, ‘0’ leads to extremes)
People need to understand the basic teaching ‘Treat this as this, and that as that. Not this as that, and that as this’. It’s through not seeing violence as violence, oppression as oppression, suffering as suffering that the masses go along with wars, happily soaking up convoluted reasoning.
When bomb→death→suffering turns into bomb→death→non-suffering, people no longer see or experience, but follow an ideology. Such people have either through themselves, or through others (or both usually!), become a much more basic life form, a machine that does not question or reason, just one that carries out orders.
The Matrix had the whole spiel of turning mankind into a battery, ideology does the same thing, but it turns mankind into a fully functioning robot, who follows and executes commands without question. Luckily, RT is the third most watched news channel in the UK, so mashallah the ratio of drones is not high enough to turn this planet into an ember!!
Ilya,
Beautiful comments here!!!! Very profound summation of difficult issues. Hopefully we hear more from you.
Thank you! (x*1=x and x/1=x lol, should be this though – my pea brain is failing me!!)
The problem with God is that this deity may not be good:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
Logical problem of evil
Originating with Greek philosopher Epicurus,[20] the logical argument from evil is as follows:
If an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god exists, then evil does not.
There is evil in the world.
Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god does not exist.
This argument is of the form modus tollens, and is logically valid: If its premises are true, the conclusion follows of necessity. To show that the first premise is plausible, subsequent versions tend to expand on it, such as this modern example:
God exists.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.
An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence, and knows every way in which those evils could be prevented.
An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists.
Evil exists (logical contradiction).
But how wonderful and gracious of God to lend or give us free will in order to experience and grow our conscience and consciousness individually and societally and as humanity…. and how often is this abused by us?
“But how wonderful and gracious of God to lend or give us free will ”
If there is such a thing as Hell and it is as described then the vast majority (broad is the way) of humanity for whom that is their final destination would definitely not agree with you.
Matthew 26:24
“The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.”
Swedenborgs writings re visions of heaven and hell…writings by Reverend Vale Owen the life beyond the veil…such as these can also assist in man’s opening of his conscious I believe….thank you for your biblical quote too.
“thank you for your biblical quote too.”
You are welcome.
“writings…such as these can also assist in man’s opening of his conscious I believe”
That does not make a being that says, of itself, that it is “Holy”, good – that is, perhaps, just a self ascribed word.
In antithesis to Ilya G Poimandres, everything could be relative.
The following is an excerpt from “Tafsir al Mizan.” Which was a commentary on the Quran by the great late scholar from Iran Allāmah al-Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Ṭabāṭabāʾī. I also read other explanations of the existence of evil, and how it doesn’t disprove the existence of a creator. This post is rather long, but i hope you find something in it.
ATTRIBUTION OF GOOD AND EVIL TO ALLÃH, THE HIGH.
[al-Hasanah(= good, merit, benefit, beautiful) is opposite of as-sayyiah = evil, sin, ugly, misfortune).] Probably, man first became aware of the sense of “beauty” by looking at his fellow human beings’ good feature, i.e., balanced stature, well-proportioned limbs and lovely face. Then the meaning was extended to other material objects and phenomena; and finally it was used for “conformity of a thing with its natural purpose”
A human face is called beautiful when its eyes, eye-brows, ears, nose and mouth, etc. are exactly in the shape they should be, and are aligned to one another properly; This in its turn attracts the hearts and excites admiration and love.
If a thing is bereft of beauty, it is called bad, evil and ugly – various words used in different contexts. Ugliness therefore is a negative connotation as beauty is a positive one.
Then the concepts were extended to actions, abstract ideas and other characteristics found in a social set-up, keeping in view whether they were in conformity with society’s purpose or not; whether they agree with felicity of human life and its enjoyment or not. Justice is good; doing good to a deserving person is a merit; it is a virtue to educate, to train, to give good advice, etc., where it is needed. Injustice, transgression and similar things are evil and ugly. Why? Because the first group of actions is in accord with the man’s felicity and happiness and enables him to enjoy fully the benefits his society offers, while the second is not so. This merit and virtue (and this evil and demerit ) get their characteristics from the actions they are related to. There are some actions whose virtue is ever-lasting and perpetual, e.g., justice, because their consistency with the society’s aim and purpose is enduring and permanent. Likewise, there are some perpetual demerits like injustice.
On the other hand, there are some actions whose characteristics differ from time to time, place to place and society to society. Laughter and jokes are good in friends’ gatherings, but not in presence of elders; in joyous functions, not in mourning assemblies nor in mosques and other places of worship. Fornication and liquor-drinking is good in the Western societies, but evil and sin in the Muslims’ eyes.
You should not listen to those who say that [ethical values are relative, and no action has inherent merit or demerit in itself. They say that] virtue and evil are always changing, they have no permanency, no endurance; they are not absolute. They give example of justice and injustice; a system which a group considers based on justice, is diametrically opposed to that which another nation calls just and fair. Flogging a fornicator is justice in Islam, but not so in the Western countries; and so on and so forth. Thus meaning of justice is not fixed and permanent.
But such people are totally confused. They do not differentiate between the meaning [of justice, for example,] and its practical application. We should have no track with people of such a low intelligence.
The fact is that man is ready to change all his social customs, at once or gradually, according to the changing circumstances of the society; but he will never agree that he is deprived of the attribute of “justice”, i.e., he is called “unjust”. Even if he sees a friend oppressing someone, he will try to find excuses for him [but will not admit that his friend was unjust]. This topic needs detailed discussion, but this is not the place for it, because we are in the middle of a more important discourse. Lastly, the meaning of good and evil was further extended to cover all external happenings which man is faced with in his life owing to various factors. These are the individual or collective events, some of which agree with his expectations and conform with his individual or collective life’s felicity, like health and comfort. These are called good or benefits. There are other happenings on the opposite side like calamities and sorrows, poverty or sickness, humiliation or imprisonment, etc.; and they are called evil or misfortune.
It appears from the above that when good and evil are attributed to various affairs or actions, it is done with this criterion in mind: Are these affairs or action in conformity with human perfection or felicity or not. Good and evil are two attributes which are seen in relation to human felicity. This relationship in some cases is lasting and perpetual; while in other things it is changing. For instance, monetary help is good if given to a deserving person, and bad if dished out to an underserving man.
Good is always a positive thing, while evil and ugliness has negative connotation. That is, an evil thing or action lacks the above- mentioned conformity with human felicity. Otherwise, if we ignore this conformity or non-conformity, then the thing or action by itself is one and the same without any difference whatsoever.
Earthquake and flood devastate a community; they are evil and misfortune in their eyes, but their enemies will count them as blessings and good fortune for themselves. Every general calamity, looked from the religion’s view-point, is good if it visits the unbelievers, who create mischief in the earth; but the same will be seen as evil and bad if it attacks a believing and good community. Eating food is good and lawful, if it is prepared from one’s own money; and the same will become evil and unlawful if it is a part of another man’s property taken without his permission. Why? Because it lacks obedience to the prohibition in respect of eating other people’s property without permission; or the obedience to the imperative order of restricting oneself to those things only which Allãh has allowed. Sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is good and lawful if it follows marriage; and is evil and sin if it is illicit, without marriage – because the latter lacks conformity with divine commandment. In short, good is a positive aspect of things and actions, and evil is their negative aspect, although the thing or action itself is the same in both cases.
According to Qur’ãn, all that is called “thing” (except Allãh Himself) is created by Allãh. Allãh is the Creator of every thing (39:62); . . .and He created every thing, then ordained for it a measure (25:2). The two verses show that every thing is His creation. Then Allãh says: [Allãh] Who made good every thing that He has created (32:7). Thus, every created thing is good, and this goodness is an integral part of creation which cannot be separated from it; if it is Allãh’s creation, it is good.
Every thing has its share of beauty according to its share in creation and existence. If you ponder on the meaning of beauty, described earlier, you will understand our stand more clearly. A thing is good and beautiful if it conforms with the purpose it is intended for; and all parts of existence and all portions of this universe are consistent and in complete harmony with each other. Far be it from the Lord of the universe to create a thing whose parts lack consistency and harmony, or work against each other, as it would negate the intended purpose. Can a created thing overpower the Creator? Or, negate the purpose intended for this wonderful system which astonishes the intelligence and stuns the mind? Allãh says: He is Allãh, the One, the Subduer (of all) (39:4); and He is the Supreme above His servants (6:18); and Allãh is not such that any thing in the heavens or in the earth should weaken Him; surely He is the Knowing, the Powerful (35:44). Thus, nothing can overpower Allãh or weaken Him in anything He intends from His creatures and wishes about His servants.
Consequently, every good blessing in creation is attributed to Him. Likewise, every evil calamity, when seen by itself, and looked according to the basic relationship encompassing the whole creation, is attributable to Allãh – although it seems evil when looked from another angle. It is this reality which is described in some verses of the Qur’ãn: and if a benefit comes to them, they say: “It is from Allãh;” and if a misfortune befalls you, they say: “This is from you.” Say: “All is from Allãh;” but what is the matter with these people that well-nigh they do not understand what is told (them)? (4:78); But when good came to them they said: “This is due to us;” and when evil afflicted them, they attributed it to the ill-luck of Mūsã (Moses) and those with him; surely their ill omen is only from Allãh, but most of them do not know (7:131). There are other verses of the same theme.
As for misfortune, the Qur’ãn attributes that of the man to the man himself. Allãh says: Whatever benefit comes to you, it is from Allãh, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself (4:79); And whatever affliction befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most (of your faults) (42:30); Surely Allãh does not change the condition of a people until they change their own condition (13:11); This is because Allãh does never change a bounty which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition (8:53); there are many such verses.
In more clear words, the preceding verses show that the calamities and misfortunes too, like good fortunes, are good and beautiful in their creation. Then how do they turn into misfortunes, It is only because they do not agree with some people’s, or some thing’s, nature and these things or people get hurt by them. It means that Allãh had not created in these items what would agree with these people or things. It is this withholding of generosity which is considered misfortune or calamity for the people or things that get harmed by them, as is clearly seen in the verse: Whatever Allãh grants to men of (His) mercy, there is none to withhold it, and what He withholds there is none to send it forth, and He is the Mighty, the Wise (35:2).
Therefore, Allãh states that this withholding of generosity (when it is withheld), or increase or decrease in sending His mercy forth depends on the ability or capacity of the subject: How much is a person or thing able to benefit from His mercy? Allãh explains it in a similie: He sends down water from the cloud, then the valleys flow (with water) according to their measure (13:17). Also, He says: And there is not a thing but with Us are the treasures of it, and We do not send it down but in a known measure (15:21). Thus, Allãh bestows a favour on a thing according to what it deserves and keeping its condition in consideration. Does He not know Who has created? And He is the Knower of the subtleties, the Aware (67:14).
We that blessing and affliction, tribulation and comfort from one thing to another according to its particular situation and condition, as Allãh says: And every one has a direction to which he would turn (2:148). Every thing turns to that direction and seeks that item which agrees with its situation.
From the above discourse you will easily understand that happiness and distress, blessing and affliction, vis-à-vis this man, who lives with a free will in the light of the Qur’ãnic teachings, are strongly connected to his own free will; because he is proceeding on a path which will lead him to happiness if followed properly, while deviation from it will put him in turmoil and distress. This, of course, concerns those subjects for which he has been granted free choice.
The Qur’ãn confirms this understanding. Allãh says: That is because Allãh would never change a bounty which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition (8:53). Their pure intentions and good deeds have influence on the bounty which they have been blessed with; but when their intention is polluted with insincerity and actions tainted with evil, Allãh changes their condition by withholding His mercy from them. He says: And whatever affliction befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most (of your faults) (42:30). Their actions have a hand in the calamities and misfortunes which befall them, although Allãh pardons most of their misdeeds. Also Allãh says: Whatever benefit comes to you, it is from Allãh, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself (4:79).
However, you should not imagine that when Allãh revealed this verse to His Prophet (s.a.w.a.), He had forgotten the clear reality which has been stated in the verses which say: Allãh is the Creator of every thing . . . (39:62); [Allãh] Who made good every thing that He has created . . . (32:7). These verses clearly show that every thing has been created by Allãh and is good in itself. And He says: . . . and your Lord is not forgetful (19:64); . . . errs not my Lord, nor does He forget (20:52). So, the verse ( Whatever benefit comes to you . . . [4:79]) means that: The good which comes to you – and all that comes to you is good – is from Allãh; and the misfortune which befalls you, it is misfortune for you because it does not agree with your aims and desires, although in itself it is good; you have brought it to yourself by your wrong choice and also you have asked Allãh in the same manner. Allãh is too great to initiate any evil, harm or misfortune for you.
As explained earlier, the verse is particularly addressed to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), yet the meaning covers all human beings. In other words, this verse, like the other two ( That is because Allãh would never change a bounty which He has conferred . . . [8:53]; And whatever affliction befalls you . . . [42:30]) looks at social affairs as well as individual matters; the human society has its own existence, will and choice distinct from individual ones.
The society is a living entity in which the past generations and ancient people are dissolved [succeeded by coming generations]; in this way, the followers are held responsible for the evil deeds of their predecessors, the living bear the burden of the dead, and the innocent share in the punishment of the wrong-doers – while in the cases of the individuals it is never allowed. We have written about this subject in the second volume of this book in the Essay on the rules governing actions.
Look at the Messenger of Allãh (s.a.w.a.) in the battle of Uhud. He was inflicted grievous wounds in the face and upper teeth, (and the Muslims too suffered great losses), and he (s.a.w.a.) was a sinless prophet. If we attribute this adversity to the society – because they had disobeyed the order given by Allãh and His Messenger – it was a misfortune wrought by the society, and he (s.a.w.a.) was a part of that society. And if it is attributed to his (the prophet) person, then it was a divinely ordained trial which befell him in the way of Allãh and in course of his sacred divine mission, of which he had full insight and in that case it was rather a grace of Allãh which raised his spiritual status and rank.
Likewise, whatever misfortune befalls a people is attributed to their actions from the Qur’ãnic point of view – and the Qur’ãnic view is but truth; and whatever bounty or benefit comes to them, it is from Allãh.
Of course, there are many verses which attribute the benefits to men themselves to some extent. For example: And if the people of the towns had believed and guarded (against evil) , We would certainly have opened up for them blessings from the heaven and the earth . . . (7:96); And We made of them Imãms to guide by Our command as they were patient and they were certain of Our signs (32:24); And We caused them to enter into Our mercy; surely they were of the good ones (21:86).
But at the same time Allãh says that nothing in His creation has power to reach its intended goal or to proceed to any good, except when Allãh gives it such power and guides it to that goal; as He says: “Our Lord is He Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it (to its goal)” (20:50); . . . and were it not for Allãh’s grace upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have ever been pure, but Allãh purifies whom He pleases . . . (24:21). These two verses in conjunction with the preceding ones show from another angle how the good comes from Allãh, that is, the man does not possess any good unless Allãh gives it into his possession; therefore all the good is from Allãh and the evil is from the man himself. This further explains the verse: Whatever benefit comes to you, it is from Allãh, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself.
To sum it up, all good comes from Allãh, because every good thing is His creation and the creation is not separable from goodness; and all good is from Him, because it is good, and He is the owner of all good – others receive goodness only when He gives it into their possession. No harm, evil or misfortune is attributable to Allãh. because evil, per se, is not created, and He is the Creator. So, what is misfortune? When Allãh withholds His mercy from people because of what their hands have done, it is called misfortune, calamity or evil.
As for the good and evil in the meaning of obedience and disobedience, we have discussed about its attribution to Allãh under the verse: Surely Allãh is not ashamed to set forth any parable . . . (2:26), in volume one of this book. If you see what other exegetes have written on this subject, you will find a great many different views, a lot of conflicting opinions and various objections that will confound you. We hope that what we have written here will be enough for one who contemplates in the words of God. Be careful to keep various aspects of this topic separate from one other, ponder on the Qur’ãnic usage of the words, good and evil , bounty and punishment , and differentiate between the entities of society and individual, then you will understand this subject clearly.
@ahmed
Very interesting. Thank you for post.
You’re welcome, glad you enjoyed it.
As far a a certain perception of God is concerned”: if God cannot create or be “evil” then he is not omnipotent Epicurus is just talk
Evil is a human error of language, absolute rules and turning X into Y.
Rule 1: Killing = 100% wrong, even evil (this is X=Y, ‘treating this as that’)
Rule 2: no killing > less killing > more killing
Take the trolley problem and subject it to these two rules. You wake up tied to a chair with a gun in your hand. You are told you have two options (by the person who has put you in the chair).
Option 1, kill one person.
Option 2, 100 people are killed (by the person who put you in this position).
You cannot argue with a 100% rule, if you do, you break the rule system, and are left required to create a better rule out of a vacuum. A person following rule 1 would actively choose option 2, maybe then justifiying that they were not the efficient cause of that action.
Rule 2 always chooses option 1, but it has a benefit and a cost. Rule 1 only breaks down when any and all your options contain ‘killing’, only with respect to itself – it has no relational aspect, no comparative power (like Galilleo with velocity not making sense without some reference point being known). But rule 2 is casuist, it is dependent on factors, which can be debated. The above rule defines ‘no, less, more, and killing’. But what about this set up?
Option 1: kill 1 person with 100 years to live
Option 2:100 people, each with 1 day to live, will be killed
And so rule 2 becomes open to casuistry – a relational rule is always subject to conditions.
Rule 1 would go for option 2 too, but it would only make the choice based on the number of people killed, the details of quality/quantity of life are not considered. Rule 2 would have to become to go for (what would be rationally the least life lost, assuming 100 days is less important than 36500 for life forms):
no life-time lost > less life-time lost > more life-time lost
You can go on and on, and the more complex a rule, the more likely is the defined object that the rule is set for (killing, life-time lost) to become difficult to justify from every frame of reference. At some level of analysis using rule 2 becomes unbeneficial and even negative for decision making. In fact, even the life-time example is enough to bring
If you can imagine a rule that works for 100% of the situations (a God-given rule), that is to say its following allows a rational agent to act accurately, according to the plain text of the rule, in every instance, from every frame of reference, then the Absolute rule is not that. Neither is the casuist relational one.
‘Evil’, if a definition is to be given, is seeing, perceiving the world in front of you, and conceptualizing something other out of it, something that goes against both the data and any individual goal.
Practically, the problem of evil is that there is a choice between suffering and learning. Take the US prison system – punishment, suffering. 43% recidivism rate. The Norwegian system, which deals with reform, learning, has a 20% rate. The choice is between remembering the lost, at the expense of the still living, or letting go of the lost, for the benefit of the living. It’s a strange choice imo.
sorry, rule 2 in part 2 would only act based on the statemend ‘killing is wrong’, it doesn’t even consider the numbers! :p
There is another way to consider evil, namely as a deficiency. In this system of thought, evil is a parasite which weakens its hosts, but cannot exist independently of the host. Thus, disease, or “ill health,” is the lack of some needed element of health in a body.
Turning to our body politic; the Obama Justice Department (e.g. in the matter of Fast and Furious, Tea Party, FISA ) was lacking in Justice and Truth and horribly weakened the government agency in the eyes of US citizens.
I’ve long been of the opinion that lies are the cancer of society.
When an Australian ‘bagman’ Graham Richardson in the 19eighties publicly stated that ‘everybody lies’, I was alerted to a critical problem in our public life.
And so it goes
Graeme Richardson, who has slithered into the Murdoch camp, is a ‘bag-man’, alright. A bag of….
In all that superb display of ‘logic’ the only undefined term is ‘evil’.
About inferences in axiomatic systems used to support logic reasoning, may I suggest this reading on formal systems:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel%27s_incompleteness_theorems
Read in particular the chapter “Completeness” and “Consistency”.
Howe tragic, President Trump’s appeasment left him a alone vurnerable lame “dead” duck. To add more insult to injury lots of Americans clinging to hope with the QAnon data. One wonders if the QAnon is resurected just for that purpose.
Reality in the Western world will hit when lots of bodybags hits home I am afraid.
Igor Berkut about New Jerusalem on Ukrainian soil 22.08.2017 – Video*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7B73FdFE6Y
Igor Berkut about creation of a Jewish State in South Ukraine 24.10.2017 – Video*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZNnNUWNuUA
Igor Berkut is an Ukrainian Zionist, leader of the party Great Ukraine (Великая Украина)
* You can change the language of the subtitles from Russian to English
New state of Israel will be in Ukraine (Zhirinovsky + Danilov) -Video*
[Speech of Vladimir Zhirinovsky in St. Petersburg 2004 and in final part of the video
speech of Sergey Danilov in Ukraine 2015.]
published on January 4, 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59TEZKcxoP0&t=259s
Crew UKRAINE Khazarian Kaganat (Empire) – Sergey Danilov – Video*
published on March 4, 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF8211JOoA8
* You can change the language of the subtitles from Russian to English
What’s new?
“The Crimean Affair”
“Name used to refer to the closed antisemitic trial of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee (JAC) held in Moscow from May to July 1952. One of the pretexts may have been a memorandum presented in the summer of 1944 by members of the Committee to the Soviet leadership containing a proposal to create a Jewish Soviet republic in the Crimea (the Tatar population of which was exiled by Stalin by May 1944) on the territory of the former German republic of the Volga. Noting the successes of the Jewish national regions in the Crimea and in the Kerson region, the authors of the memorandum based their proposal on the lack of a geographical base of a significant part of the Jewish population of the Soviet Union and on the need to grant the Jews equality in governmental-legal terms with the other nationalities of the Soviet Union. They also expressed the hope that “the Jewish masses of all countries, in particular the United States would give substantial aid” to building up such a republic. Despite the rumors that some members of the Politburo of the Central Committee ( Lazar Kaganovich and Vyacheslav Molotov) were favorably disposed toward the idea of the “Crimean Plan,” it was rejected in 1944.
The proposals of the memorandum contained nothing radically new. Projects for establishing a Jewish republic in the southern Ukraine or in the Crimea had been suggested earlier. For example, in 1923 the social leader A. Bragin had proposed that one be established on the Black Sea coast from Bessarabia to Abkhaz with its capital in Odessa, while Yuri Larin supported, in opposition to the Birobidzhan plan, a Jewish autonomous area in the southern Crimean and Azov region centered in Kerch….
At a secret trial the defendants were accused of espionage, anti-Soviet activity, and plotting the secession of the Crimea from the Soviet Union and establishing there a bourgeois Zionist republic which was supposed to become a base for American imperialism.”
@http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/crimean-affair
Another interesting interview with The Saker. However, when it comes to Trump, history will have the final word if he was placed under the control of the elite (neocons) before or after he became President. In Trumps entire election campaign one thing did not make sense, namely the fact that he had the backing of 200 active and retired admirals and generals. Why ? Why would senior military men back a 70 year old man who had no political and military experience ? The unfortunate conclusion is that they needed a stooge in the White House, who does as told. Trump has backtracked on every election promise he has made and is continuing the policies of Clinton, the two Bush presidents and Obama. I wonder how many people will bother to vote in 2020.
Wait. Time will tell who Trump really is.
Good article here –
What underlies The Concert Hate Campaign Against Russia …
https://www.clivemaund.com/article.php?id=4598
Brilliant article – i share it
Thank you very much, Спасибо большое
Danke schön, Köszönöm szèpen
Azorka
Another good article here, if you liked the first one:
No Spirit Of Liberty – The Salisbury Case, Corbyn And The Need For Dissent
http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2018/865-no-spirit-of-liberty-the-salisbury-case-corbyn-and-the-need-for-dissent.html
Yup very good link.
Saw the great John Pilger on Youtube as well. The hate campaign is simply the manifestation of the evil mentality of deranged, hate-driven, psychopathic nonentities like Boris Johnson. Any state ruled by creatures like Johnson, the ludicrous poltroon Williamson, May and the treacherous Blairite scum in UK Labour, is rotten to the core-as the UK plainly is.
I liked this article also very much.
Many thanks for it.
Azorka
Just watched a BBC presstitute, female, and a ‘Times’ presstitute, female and anorexic by the look of her, on YouTube,positively vibrating with hysterical hatred and rage, directed at Russia, Putin, AND Corbyn, who is a traitor, more or less, with a long history of treachery dating back to Soviet days. These creatures are quite insane-no doubt about it.
http://tass.com/pressreview/995370
Round up of some Russian news…due to withdrawal of Russian funding PACE in financial trouble…news soon for revitalising economy more energetically…..Gaddafi family wishing to bring Sarkozy and other countries responsible for Libyan catastrophe to trial…. Turkey in Syria…etc
@”Are Western elites secular humanists or satanists? Is there a meaningful difference between those categories?”
Interesting and complex topic, impossible to exhaust in few words. Everyone will answer according to his faith: I am a christian, therefore my opinion is a consequence of my faith.
Christianity is the only faith that proclaims man to be entirely lost without God’s intervention, and no other faith contains a god who sacrifices his own life for men (in the person of the Son) to redeem them from their lost state. These truths are specific to Christianity: Christ’s death provided atonement for sin, and in this way He redeemed men to Himself. These men will be saved and will become free in this life, and in after-life will have the dignity to stay at the presence of God our Father. Simply because He is perfect while we are not.
The very difference between Jesus Christ and other prophets or religious founders of the past is Christ’s risurrection. No other person is in total control of what happens to him, not to say the natural forces. The astonishing correctness of His life has no match with anybody else. Also, the death of these other prophets or founders do not affect the salvation of anybody else: in the end, they IMHO are always philosophical helpers, not saviors. Many religions, especially Eastern mysticism, contain this sort of spirit guide or guru who “strays out of thought and time.” But these heroes-like are not a specifically christian characters in any sense. Think for example at the Bodhisattvas of Mahayana Buddhism (Great Vehicle) and their noble refusal to rise to higher planes, only to be reincarnated and help the worthy living beings to improve their position through “knowledge”. Truly fascinating, but a fundamental christian element that does not appear here is the redemption of the evil men: the compassion and mercy needed to help the blinded poor souls of the evil men. According to the Bible, evil lives in the heart of man, but God redeems us through Christ, from certain consumption by our evil nature (Romans 3:9-12; 5:7-9; 7:21-25; Ephesians 1:7) and open our hearts and eyes.
In other faiths, good men remain good, evil men remain evil, or at maximum men can save theirself only by a totally conscious and rational choice: men are definitely “self-propelled” (we can call this roughly a form of immanent Humanism). They can, for example, save theirself not via a true radical conversion, a long and difficult personal “jihad” against theirself, their inner demons and their sins, but simply adding more good “actions” to the evil ones: I have done 19 bad actions… ok, let’s make 20 good actions and it will be fine. But is this the case in real life? All humans are evil (Romans 3:9-12) and all are in need of redemption.
Men are free, thanks to mercy of God, to have faith in different “moral” religions (read religions as secular dialectics to dogmatize and codify faith), but every person in his life has definitely the choice to accept or refuse the role of God in universal creation, in human history and in our personal salvation, independently by the faith in these different religious systems. And we must pray to obtain this gift, because it comes from the will of God and not from the will of men.
Therefore, as christian my answer to the questions above is: No, for me there are no different levels of distance from God’s grace: no matter they are secular humanists or satanists, all those people have chosen the wrong damned large way. [Note: of course there is a practical difference because the consequences are at social level (satanists are much more dangerous), but I won’t expand here this text…]. From a “soul-centered” christian perspective, the selflessness, the strong devotion to the Master, the strength in resisting evil, the fearless face the death, the love for the truth and the adversity against all forms of materialistic manifestations of faith (rites) are all qualities that you can see in true, mature believers in Jesus Christ. Definitely this is not the case for the people failing in their quest and prove theirself stained by evil. I can only hope, in a wishful future, in their conversion as Last Hour Workmans.
Thanks .so well written.
selah
@ross
Thanks to you for your reply… but I am not deserving: it is difficult for me to go more deep without mistakes in english language. Sorry about that.
Your english is as good as the next speaker of that language….
Great commentary and thank you for having the courage and conviction to write
“President of the United States Donald Trump intends to propose the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, to offer “joint ways to make Russia pay.”
This was stated in regard to Russia’s policy in Syria.
In particular, the American leader intends to point out Moscow’s support for the government of Bashar Assad and the decision to block the resolution of the UN Security Council in February.
“During the talks between the US and Saudi Arabia, we will also look for a joint solution to force Russia to ‘pay’ for its activities in Syria, support for the Iranian nuclear program and Tehran’s interference in the civil war in Yemen. All these actions can aggravate the crisis and lead to regional catastrophe.”
https://www.fort-russ.com/amp/2018/03/trump-king-salman-to-make-russia-pay/
A-234 is the identifying code for the Agent Orange defoliant used by USA in their Vietnam Holocaust.