by Denis A. Conroy for the Saker blog
“The cause of laughter is simply the sudden perception of the incongruity between a concept and the real project”.
Arthur Schopenhauer.
The concept of Founding Fathers as distinct from Founding Mothers is a prime example of thought that might do more than merely titillate the collective funny bone. The tribal jocks in the West have a long history of averring the role of patriarchy by asserting male dominance; elect a father figure who knows how to handle (invent) weapons of war comes to mind.
The personality of the current American President, Donald Trump, in sync with the foundational aspirations of his predecessors, expresses a desire to Make America Great again…at any cost…continues a not-so-funny American way of bullying and cajoling the rest of the world into accepting American trade deployments. There is abundant evidence to show that American Foreign Policy has created a theatre of cruelty. Donald Trump is part of an American narrative forever reinventing the authority of the Founding Fathers in ways that restore the idea of the ‘Fatherland’ as a place where everybody can become a billionaire, or at least be part of a system promoting unilateral acquisition by military means.
America, a country without a conscience, has acquired a reputation for doing bizarre things in its desire to reseed the American Dream. Time after time, its citizens toddle off to the polls to elect their preferred leader of choice, but little changes. Elections are always about the economy (stupid) while issues like Foreign Policy (stupid) or social programs (enlightened) hardly get a look in. Whoever gets the job believes that he is elected to bestow America’s blessed usurious hairshirt on all who fall within the parameters of its hegemonic church.
It gave the job of President to Ronald Reagan…1981—1989. His platform; building support for a policy of military strength and moral clarity. This alone might have qualified as joke number one on Arthur Schopenhauer’s score card. And the jokes kept coming; the American public kept turning up to vote for one war-lord after another while remaining oblivious to their blood-stained hands; Kennedy/Johnson/Nixon/Ford/Carter/Reagan/Bush/Clinton/George W/Obama…and Trump, all wanted to do the ‘order’ thing…“building a new Liberal World Order” said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently (something for us to focus on in the lead up to Xmas 2018) is but one more such declaration suggesting the world needs America’s rule of law.
As America became a tech giant the American Dream became ever more the provenance of specialists talking in superlatives amongst themselves. The common people were expected to stay tuned per medium of patriotic narratives that artificially included them in various incarnations of the American dream via entertainment; hence Hollywood. The fact that America is no longer the sole tech giant escapes their attention; the exceptionality of the American tech giant has secured a place for itself in the American psyche by attaching itself to a spectral gravy-train. Democracy and the American Dream having morphed into tech theatre, meant that the common people had become ever more irrelevant. Think Tanks and new project-narratives, springing up like mushrooms in laboratories, came into the system to corroborate an interpretation of the future that would enable corporate elites to consolidate their power. The age of tech-distilled culture had arrived!
Not to be overlooked was the insidious offerings of the Zionist intellectual sperm bank to reshape…or reinvent…American Foreign Policy in the era of the obtuse George Bush the 2nd…The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative Think Tank based in Washington DC. that focused on United States Foreign Policy and was founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. PNAC’s stated goal was ‘to promote American Global Leadership.” The organization stated that “American leadership is good both for America and for the world” and sought to build support for a “Reaganite policy of military strength and clarity.” What wasn’t stated though, was that this PNAC deal was put forward as a vehicle to promote Zionism’s political interests.
The neoconservative agenda established in the spring of 1997 and funded by the energy and arms industries. Having won the cold war and with no military threat to speak of, this group of ideologues created a blueprint for the future whose agenda was to capitalise upon U.S. military might and replace the U.N.’s role of preserving and extending international order with its own portfolio of ‘strength and clarity’ …cover for their shock and awe shenanigans.
High on phenomenology and the availability of consumer goods at home, the American public, in sheeplike mode observed the great American military machine kicking the badass global population…which was revealed to them on multiple telly-channels multiple times a day … with no obvious concerns about the multiple atrocities their boys and girls in uniform were engaging in. They responded with dumb acceptance to this demonstration of power by adopting a wait-and-see attitude, believing all the while that America was invincible and they would benefit from this fact.
American Foreign Policy, which dealt aggressively with regimes resisting their hegemonic dragnet failed to awaken any moral sensibilities in the public at large. Indifferent to the consequences of their government’s actions, the national psyche, inured by now to other people’s suffering, accepted all this as reality, believing that the mission of their junkie Frankenstein military was to apply force to those who resisted America’s ‘liberal torch of enlightenment’. Sadly, the tech peasantry, having lost faith in the American Dream, sat back to watch as the butchers, the bankers and the bloviators took control of the narrative.
Like children listening to a fairy tale, the public came to rely more and more on elites who told them how exceptional America was vis-à-vis its exceptional leadership. The task of the common people was to imagine how it would all end. That the ‘children’ of this faux ‘enlightenment’ should perform as chorus to an odious patriotic matrix flaunting military exuberance, demonstrated the sheeplike role they had adopted.
Elections were frequently held, and most people insouciantly went out to vote for their preferred tyrant, ‘he’s’ or ‘she’s’ who had made it to becoming a Hollywood ‘somebody’, a four-star-general or a billionaire, were the only choices available. The lesser of two evils had become a staple in the unenlightened narrative that fed into a showbiz matrix that had taken hold in American culture. American culture had reached the point where interpretations concerning the direction of the country had become obfuscated due to the rapacity and secrecy driving the corporate sector. The American Dream as such had become ‘toast.’
There was nothing that America could possibly learn from the cultural achievements of say China, Russia, Iran or Peru, because they believed they possessed the locomotion to pioneer global progress…and they had Hollywood to prove it. Strangely, the Founding Fathers informed the children of the Republic that they should be the architects of the American Dream but refused to relinquish the reins of power that kept patriarchy in place. Exposed to the sop interpretations of the propaganda machine, the ‘people’ were relegated to the role of spectators observing the Machiavellian shenanigans of all those vying for the role of chief honcho.
The Project for the New American Century, a Zionist wet dream, replete with lies, was served up to the American public in the 1990’s as an enlightenment libation to assuage the insecurities that existed between the Empire Builders and the public at large. With egos inflated by the success of Israel’s occupation of Palestine…the Jewish state that was created by an international cartel of bankers…the ensuing hubris that accompanied the creation of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East was nothing less than a set-up involving Western Media and big money. The biased American media lent great heft to Zionist ambitions for capitalizing on the chaos that arose from the American/Israel coalition’s commitment to dominance as their modus operandi. Bringing change to the Middle East without considering the wishes of the Arab nations meant regime change was designed for the benefit of the colonizers…and subterfuge became a magnet for tax payer dollars.
The fact that the hybrid Jewish state of Israel… calling itself a democracy…met with surprisingly little opposition in America was because the moneyed elites…Wall Street et al…and the media had so many Zionists in their ranks. Believing that they could sell PNAC to the American public by merely giving it a patriotic flavour, they used a combination of vilification… of Arabs of course…and the military alliance that had sprung up between their two countries. Wrapping up the deal in a stars-and-stripes narrative suggesting that toppling Middle Eastern regimes was good for world peace might have pushed the imagination of the late and great George Carlin…post-haste…to new heights; deconstructing the credentials of the Zionists would have been a walk in the park for him.
As Judaism’s moral code is characterised by its particularity—an absence of a Jewish universal moral code is characterised by its particularity …it only binds Jews vis-à-vis Jews, not Jews vis-à-vis-goys. As soon as a Jewish/goy conflict is encountered, what the non-Jew regards as universal morality does not apply. Instead it is particularised interpretation that comes into play…forget about the binaries, the equalizers that underpin the enlightenment philosophers of the West…Aristotle and others for example…it is interpretation conducted by a succession of Torah interpreters known as rabbis who specialise in rabbinical interpretation per se that perpetuate a bias underpinning the status of the superior Jew and the inferior goy… the bible is not binding, only the Talmudic rulings are binding and the rabbis are there to keep this perspective hot-to-trot…this particularism separates Zionism from the Universal fold and threatens…from within…the crystalizing process that exists in the mind of the universal thinker whose inclination is to include rather than exclude his fellow creatures. Hence, the unmistakably unpleasant bias that shows up in the Jewish lexicon and legal system to perpetuate inequality. The term goy has a pejorative meaning…the “other” who is without a soul—therefore unequal to the Jew and is perceived as not being fully human.
If the matrix of the Israeli society is based on force, violence and inhumanity which derive from ‘values’ found in the Jewish religion, then the American public would be wise to question the close relationship the current ‘Founding Fathers’ have with Zionism’s Founding Fathers. American exceptionalism…the celebration of hubris…may now be perceived as its Achille’s heel… becoming a storehouse of knowledge turned-in on itself, suggesting that the ship of state has lost its rudder.. Knowledge of its military might, economic power, production capacity, propaganda machine and its insane need to privatise everything, has created 20 trillion dollars of debt. Ponzi schemes, too numerous to mention, operate in a zone somewhere between knowledge and thoughtlessness. Big banks and their chicanery, big military budgets…The Pentagon’s Massive Accounting Fraud…continues on its merry way while people-power hides behind curtains. The population of ageing children, posing as adults, wait for a spectral redeemer to come. Believing themselves to be the torch-bearers of enlightened capitalism, they cringe at the thought that maybe their system might be found wanting.
At this point they are at one with Zionists who imply that Edward Said or Mahmoud Darwish are less human than they are, suggesting that the value of identity can only be interpreted by Founding Fathers, be they rabbis on the one hand, or the ‘fathers’ of white Anglo stock performing their own brand of racism to separate themselves from the ‘other’. Sadly, as allies, they separate themselves from the company of thoughtful humanity…universalism… by selectively particularizing knowledge for the purpose of excluding the ‘other.’ And the American public has no qualms about subsidising a Zionist State that has occupied Palestine and subjected the entire population of that much abused country to the whims of an inverted religious mindset that needs to lock itself behind closed doors in order to celebrate its self-made biases.
In every country throughout history, writers, philosophers, painters, architects and poets have produced great things by observing the order of the natural world and pathos within the human heart. Possessed of innate qualities, they perceived the union of all things reflected in the ‘particular’…or vice versa…the particulars that only had meaning when perceived in the light of a universal context. Fortunate were they who were able to avoid the trap of building separation walls in their minds. But to achieve this, one had to free oneself from the dead weight of instruction-as- knowledge and pass through a portal that would free individuals from the shadows that hang over false interpretations of false knowledge.
“I have lived on the lip of insanity, waiting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I’ve been knocking from the inside” … RUMI… 13th. century Persian poet.
At this point one might have wondered if all the derisive wits had gone to sleep. Aware of the many blasphemous and impious words of revolutionaries such as Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Mark Twain, where the visions of the prophets were turned into derision for the purpose of confronting addle-minded wankers keen on patronizing the ‘deplorables’ in their pursuit of power.
Voltaire’s Candide had a lasting impact on the thought of the Founding Fathers of the United States and Jean-Jacques Rosseau, 1754 Discourse on Inequity is still relevant.
“The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said ‘This is mine,’ and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From the many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.”
“Stop acting so small, you are the universe in ecstatic motion.” …RUMI
Denis A. Conroy
Freelance Writer
Australia
PNAC’s stated goal was “to promote American Global Leadership.” Laughable. How can a former colony lead anyone, let alone demand the right to create an empire of it’s own ?
What is the US ? An artificial creation, whose mere existance from the historical and legal point of view is debatable, bearing in mind there is no such thing as the American ‘language’, The only reason English is spoken is because in the 18th century there were more English speaking people in America than German. In fact the newly created US adopted the English language by a single vote.
Before 1776 the American colonies were under the direct control of the British Crown. After 1776 they were placed under the control of the Rothschilds banking empire. George Washington and his ‘revolutionaries’ were nothing more than freemasons, private intelligence operatives of the Rothschilds. George Washington took on the role of Oliver Cromwell and repeated the methods of the English Civil War of the 17th century, financed by zionist bankers resident in Holland. The bankers needed Britain, an island fortress, for imperial expansion.
When the American ‘revolution’ began, only a limited number of ‘revolutionaries’ joined Washington. According to conservative historians, a mere 7 %, while according to liberal historians, 25 % joined Washington. However, even liberal historians admit that another 25 % joined the British side. And the remaining 50 % of the population ? It stood aside, not understanding what was going on. All of the sudden they became ‘Americans’, as if they wanted to be. When the ‘revolution’ came to an end, we had the phenomena of immigrants emigrating back to Europe. According to one English commentator of the day, there was not a single village or town in England which did not receive emigrants from America, who fled back to Europe.
The methods which the Rothschilds used in 1776 were repeated in France in 1789 and in Russia in 1917. Good old fashioned internal subversion, where a minority is used to control the majority. These methods are still used, but are becoming well known. For example, they were used against Putin in Russia, with laughable results, all the more so if you take into account who was picked for the role of ‘revolutionaries’, like TV personality Sobchak and blogger Navalny.
In 1913 the Rothschilds concluded their control of the US with the introduction of the US Federal Reserve, a private central bank, whose mere existance is contrary to the US Constitution, which prohibits private individuals and groups from printing and controlling sovereign currency. This Bank is now controlling the US, and in conjunction with other Anglo-American banks, financed both world wars. For example, Hitler comes to power in 1933. However, in 1931 the US creates the Bank for International Settlement in Basel, Switzerland, right next to the German border. That bank financed Hitler, who was sent to Germany to grab power as were Lenin and Trotsky sent to Russia, by the same people of course. Hitlers chief task was the invasion and break up of Russia, something Napoleon failed to complete. Both Hitler and Napoleon were financed by private bankers, something historians love to ignore, because if they mentioned it, then they would have a lot of explaining to do, including that little matter of Hitlers bunker having four escape tunnels (in Argentina and Japan it’s common knowledge that he excaped in 1945).
The US has fought wars during 93 % of it’s existance. The chief beneficiaries were banks and corporations, who else. Both the US military and NATO were given the role of the French Foreign Legion, to be used for world wide aggression. The chief obstacles for a global banker empire were Germany, Russia and China. Well, Germany was placed under control in 1945. Russia and China remain, which explains Washingtons present animosity towards them. Well, too late to have them subverted and conquered.
In 1971 Nixon takes the US dollar off the gold standard. Personally I think that date is the beginning of the end for the US. After that the US Fed starts printing huge amounts of dollars backed by nothing, with the result that now the US foreign debt is 21 trillion dollars, while even US university professors cannot agree what the total US domestic debt is. Can these debts be repayed ?
In 1998 Igor Panarin, Dean of the Russian Diplomatic Academy, presented his famos map showing the disintegration of the US into six parts. The map is basically correct, although he probably made a mistake with a small number of US states, placing them in wrong parts of the actual disintegration. This is unimpotant. The map is basically correct, and I do think that the US will indeed break up into six parts. I have lived in the US, and the impression which I obtained was that the entire country was kept unified by the combined efforts of the police and the military. This is not how in the long run you keep a country unified.
This comment reads as a fitting addendum to the article above: moneyed interests ‘ruled’ the American experiment from inception to . . . internment; and it only made sense when viewed this way.
Except, where is the conclusion? — we already know the moral of the story; we should also know the plot for the sequel (as Jerusalem, who killed the prophets); but how does this one particular plot climax?
My feeling on the matter is that we are even now being prepared to ‘know’ and accept the conclusion: somewhere along the lines of E. Zeusse— America is the source of all evil, and if only we can kill it now (before it’s too late) the World will unite in eternal utopic pieces— under the zionist throne of abomination.
“Except, where is the conclusion? — we already know the moral of the story; we should also know the plot for the sequel (as Jerusalem, who killed the prophets); but how does this one particular plot climax?”
Chris K, these are not difficult questions for Christians, Muslims and (Observant Messianic) Jews, I think. The climax is a well-telegraphed eschatology. The moral of the story is that usury grinds along until all early wealth is consolidated into an impossibly confined space, the capstone if you like, to which the man most antithetical to Christ will hold title. This process is self-evident in the arithmetic determinism of usury and the Law of Large Numbers.
At the final possible moment, this man will lose his human aspect and be ‘usurped from himself’ by Lucifer.
Prior to this, there will be a ruinous thermonuclear war, of which we appear to be on the cusp. Clearly the world is being orchestrated towards this climactic moment.
After its own extended period of ‘diaspora’, human history is returning to its old historic haunts: Jerusalem, Damascus, Constantinople. Read your newspapers! The world beyond the Old Cities is becoming increasingly ancillary. Everybody and his brother is bumping into one another in the Syrian skies. The last major task of the extended ‘new word’ is to reduce its scale, to collapse in upon itself. This reduced scale world will be ruled from Jerusalem. Russian Orthodoxy inhabits a peculiar and unique in this unfolding end. Western Christianity is an infiltrated and overrun catastrophe.
The fiat, dollar-impregnated world will collapse like a House of Cards. Derivations of wealth served as a means of control during the expansionary era of humanity. This ephemeral unit of value will no longer be needed to bind the world together because the world will be a much smaller place under the successor to Pax Americana, Pax Judaica. (Shades of Sheikh Imran Hossein, I readily confess). Islam is a entirely valid tradition imho. Though it exceeds my theological grasp to reconcile the Abrahamic paths, I believe they are reconciliabe, perhaps at a dimension of comprehension that presently exceeds our human ken. The oft-discussed contradictions don’t trouble me greatly. I’m more enthralled by the stunning commonalities.
I’ll speak as a Christian. The trick is not to be overcome with despair, nor wallow in fatalism. But rather, to be a Christian every day. Watching the sky is a form of neurosis. Date-setting is a similarly inauthentic mode of existence.
It will get much worse before it gets better. Rather an odd notion to take solace in! Oh well. Then suddenly, it will get better than it’s ever been before.
““The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said ‘This is mine,’ and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society.”
Love this Denis!
Thank you Dennis, that was a good read. You’re describing the Pharaonic system, that has basically been around since the time of the Pharaohs, and even before them. From time to time it just changes up a little, its given different names, maybe the overall system changes a little in theory, but the end result is always the same. Which is probably why the 1 dollar bill has the picture of the pyramid in the back, I don’t know the exact significance of the pyramid on the 1 dollar bill, so if anyone knows, please share. It could be paying homage to the former tyrants in ancient Egypt. The western world is in a tough pickle, especially the US. Its hard to resist when your collective ego, pride, arrogance, is being pumped all the way to the moon. Its hard to say “Stop, can we try to view this objectively, enough with the empty platitudes.” On top of that when your entire system is based on acquiring material wealth, or capital, the calls to arrogance and pride grow even louder. I’m not trying to say material in itself is bad, its just when your whole point of existing is material acquisition, that’s where the trouble begins. You begin to look down on others who are less “fortunate” , see their existence as inferior, any excuse is valid in order to go and acquire what lays beneath the other peoples feet. Since it doesn’t take to much to figure all this out, the people at the top have to obfuscate the situation, in order to leave the masses in the dark. The ways of doing this are many. One of the main ones is to constantly divide up the people into different groups. Democrat/Republican, male/female, white/black, east/west, capitalist/communist, Judeo-Christian/Muslim, native/migrant, and many more. This helps keep the people at bay, and not realize they all, collectively have been swindled. What they do with their hands, is opposite of everything they claim with their mouths. They are basically Gold medalists in hypocrisy. Here’s a short video that quickly explains this aspect of the Pharaonic system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuVbPyLEGcM
ahmed,
islam was founded in 7th Cen AD, i.e. there were no muslims to be oppressed by the pharaohs at the time as the vid presentation suggests. i think it is important to get the chronology right.
best wishes, lb
@Anonymous
Hey, so the Muslim belief is that all the Prophets(pbut) were “Muslim.” Now to clarify that. When we say this we don’t mean all the Prophets(pbut) before the Prophet Muhammad(saww) used the exact term “Muslim.” Languages were different, they evolved over time, and we don’t know exactly what those terms were. Now a Muslim by definition is one who “submits to the will of Allah(swt).” Now if we believe in one God(swt), who sent various prophets(pbut) throughout history, the message/revelation, were always the same in essence, or spirit, even though the content of the law or specifics might have varied. Again this is because the messages were sent to different people, at different times, however the essence of the message always remained the same. Therefore according to the Islamic teachings all those Prophets(pbut), without exception “submitted to the will of God(swt),” and this is the path they(pbut) taught to their followers. So whichever people followed the Prophets(pbut) of their time were also “Muslim,” because they obeyed the revelation that was sent to them. On top of that the Prophets(pbut) are seen as the best of Muslims. Meaning what I am, or others are today, who are classified as “muslims” pales in comparison to the Prophets(pbut), because they were the ones who completely submitted to the will of God(swt).
I wanted to add this to further explain, the Islamic view on kingdoms, and also how the Prophets(pbut) were the main ones who opposed the systems of oppression. Since their are many who constantly blame “religion” for much of the ills of this world. Its from Tafsir al Mizan, from the Great Shi’i scholar from Iran, Allamah al Sayed Muhammad Husain Tabatabai
AN ESSAY ON KINGDOM AND ITS PLACE IN SOCIETY
It has already been explained that possession and property are among those conventional but essential concepts which man cannot do without — it makes no difference whether he lives alone or in a society. Possession basically is a recognized relationship between the owner and the property.
Likewise, kingdom is a conventional, nevertheless essential, concept; a subjective institution which man cannot do without. But it is as a member of society, not as an individual, that man needs this institution. No sooner do the people establish a society than they start disputing with one another; everyone wants what is in the other’s hands even if it means trespassing the limits and crushing other’s rights under his heels. This tendency leads to chaos and conflict. The society which was established to ensure happy and peaceful life, becomes a source of misery and disorder; the medicine turns into a poison.
This anomaly cannot be removed except by creating an overall authority which could compel each member to remain within the limits — thus curbing the reckless ambitions of the oppressor and giving new hope and vigor to the oppressed. That authority, which is called kingdom or rulership, lets everyone enjoy his due rights and keeps every member in his proper place.
Exploitation of weaker sections has been a constant feature of human history. In ancient times some strong persons imposed their will on the society and subdued their compatriots to accept them as their overlord or king. Although such kings and their officers themselves were mostly epitome of oppression and injustice, still their presence was of some benefit to the society. They, in their own interest, did not allow any section to oppress the others — because they did not want anyone to become strong enough to rise one day against their own authority. In this way peace reigned in the society; everyone was afraid of the autocratic king and no one had any opportunity or inclination to think about the general welfare of the society. If an individual ruler was less oppressive, the subjects sang his praise; if he was unjust beyond their tolerance, they complained and cried.
Sometime a king or ruler was killed or overpowered; and the subjects experienced chaos and disorder, to prevent which they made some strong and able man to take the rein of power in his hands, and he ascended the throne; and thus began the same story of oppression and injustice.
This continued for a long time. Ultimately, society was fed up with the autocratic and dictatorial monarchy. In order to restrain the king’s hands, people devised constitutions, delineating the mutual rights and duties of the ruler and the ruled, and somehow or other forced the king to agree. The autocratic monarchy thus became a constitutional one. Yet, it was a hereditary institution.
Then the public became aware of another big defect: Once a king ascended the throne, there was no way to remove him, no matter how unjust or unfit he might prove. Another defect was its hereditary nature; the first born child of a king got the kingdom, irrespective of his physical, moral and intellectual abilities. They found the answer in republic. Now they had an elected president for a fixed period
instead of a hereditary king who ruled for life.
Various nations invented various other system to restrain their rulers; and future might be holding various hitherto unimagined systems in store for us.
All these attempts throughout the world, to regulate the functions of the ruler, prove one thing, if nothing else. Humanity really needs the institution of rulership, no matter by what name it is called in a certain country at a certain time. One overriding authority must subdue all other people’s individual ambitions and aims; otherwise, society will suffer from discord, conflict and disorder. That is why we said at the outset that kingdom is an essential concept of the society. And like all other such concepts, society is constantly trying to perfect it by removing from it the harmful elements.
The institution of prophethood has played the most important part in this process. When an idea spreads in the public — especially if it is in accord with the nature, and satisfied the human expectations — it becomes the strongest bond to unit the differing groups, to unify the divergent views and to turn the individuals into a well disciplined society, which no power can defy.
Prophethood since its earliest days calls the people to do justice and to abstain from injustice; it teaches them to worship Allāh and to submit only to Him; and it forbids them to follow the arrogant pharaohs and exploiting nimrods. This cry has constantly been raised generation after generation, in one nation after another, exhorting the big bosses to submit to the rule of justice, and encouraging the weaker sections to stand up for their rights. It is impossible for such a powerful factor to remain active in the society for so many centuries and not to affect the human psychology, not to mold mankind’s way of thinking.
The Qur’ān often quotes revelations to this effect sent to the previous prophets, Nūh (Noah)(a.s.) is quoted complaining before his Lord: ‘‘My Lord! surely they have disobeyed me and followed him whose wealth and children have added to him nothing but loss. And they have planned a very great plan. And they say: ‘By no means leave your gods . . . ’ ’’ (71:21 — 23).The same thing appears in his disputation with the big bosses of his people: They said: ‘‘Shall we believe in you while the meanest follow you?’’ He said: ‘‘And what knowledge have I of what they do? Their account is only with my Lord, if you could perceive’’ (26:111 — 113). Likewise, Hūd (a.s.) admonished his people: ‘‘Do you build on every height a monument? Vain is it that you do: And you make strong fortresses that perhaps you may abide: And when you lay hands (on men) you lay hands (like) tyrants’’ (26:128 — 130). And Sālih (a.s.) advised his people: ‘‘Therefore, guard against (the punishment of) Allāh and obey me: And do not obey the bidding of the extravagant: Who make mischief in the land and do not act right’’ (26:150 — 152).
(Note: I’m adding this to clarify on Prophet Hud(as), and Prophet Salih(as). They were two prophets mentioned in the Quran. I’m not sure if they are mentioned in the bible, or what their biblical name is.)
In the same way Mūsā(a.s.) stood up against Pharaoh to oppose his tyranny and to defend and liberate the Israelites; the same stance was taken by Ibrāhīm (a.s.) against Nimrod; and by ‘Īsā(a.s.) and other Israelite prophets vis-a-vis the oppressors of their times. All of them condemned and attacked the arrogance and injustice of their kings and rulers, and called their people to throw away the yokes of tyranny and stand boldly against the exploiters and transgressors.
So far as the Qur’ān is concerned, it is no secret how it exhorts the people not to yield to the transgressors, not to surrender to the oppressors; it encourages the oppressed to stand up boldly against the oppressor to safeguard his self-respect and human dignity; and it warns the arrogant of the bitter fruits of haughtiness, of the chastisement that awaits the oppression and injustice. For example: Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with ‘Ād, (the people of) Iram, possessors of many columned buildings, the like of which were not created in the cities; and (with) Thamūd, who hewed out the rocks in the valley; and (with) Pharaoh, the lord of stakes; who transgressed in the cities, so they made great mischief therein? Therefore your Lord let fall upon them the whip of chastisement. Most surely your Lord is on watch (89:6 — 14).
The Qur’ānic comment, at the end of the story of Tālūt(King Saul), is in itself enough to prove that the kingdom (or rulership) is essential for the mankind: And were it not for Allāh’s repelling some men with others, the earth would certainly be in a state of disorder; but Allāh is Gracious to the creatures (2:251). We have shown in its commentary how it confirms this institution in a general way.
Many verses in the Qur’ān talk about kingdom, guardianship and obligation of obedience etc. Some of them count the kingdom as a bounty and gift from Allāh: . . . and We have given them a grand Kingdom (4:54); . . . and made you kings and gave you what He had not given to any other among the nations (5:20); . . . and Allāh grants His Kingdom to whom He pleases . . . (2:247). Nevertheless, it is an honor only when it is accompanied by piety. Piety is the only basis of honor, to the exclusion of all other illusory sources of respect. Allāh says: O you people! surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may recognize each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allāh is the most pious of you . . .(49:13).
But it is only Allāh Who decides the worth of a servant’s piety. Consequently, no one should use his piety as a lever to hoist himself over his compatriots. Nobody should boast about anything whatsoever: If the cause of boasting is some worldly thing, then it is obviously worthless; if it concerns the next world, then it is in the hands of Allāh. In any case, a Muslim, who is given this grace of Allāh which we call Kingdom, has nothing to boast about, nor any reason to think himself as superior to the others. All he has got for himself is an unenviable burden of responsibilities of the state. What brightens this gloomy picture is the hope that his Lord will give him great reward in the next life if he manages the affairs of the state with justice and piety.
This is the spirit which animated the whole lives of the true friends of Allāh. We shall write later on, Allāh willing, on this topic, looking at the lives of the Prophet and his purified progeny; we shall describe, with the help of the correct traditions, what they gained for themselves from their kingdoms: ‘‘nothing’’; their only interest in the kingdom and authority was to use it to crush the tyrants, to cut the root of mischief in the earth, to bring the arrogant and transgressors back within the limits of religion. And that is the only worth of the kingdom.
The Qur’ān treats the kingdom as a tool which is necessary for running the affairs of society — just as education and martial power is necessary for its intellectual and defense needs. Kingdom is an instrument of society; it is not the foundation upon which the society stands. The Qur’ān does not invite the Muslims to unite to establish an empire to shame the Byzantine and Iranian empires; it calls them to unite in Islam, and admonishes them not to differ in religion. This unity in religion is the foundation which the Islamic society is built upon. Allāh says: And (know) that this is My path, the straight one, therefore follow it; and follow not (other) ways, for they will scatter you away from His way (6:153); Say: ‘‘O People of the Book! come to a word, common between us and you, that we shall not worship any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate anything with Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allāh’’; but if they turn back, then say: ‘‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’’ (3:64).Clearly, the Qur’ān calls the people to surrender to no one except Allāh; the society which it recognizes is the one that is based on religion. It demolishes all other loyalties; a Muslim is not to submit to anyone besides Allāh; he is not to bow down before any magnificent palace or grandiose castle; he is not to humiliate himself before any Caesar or Khosrow. Consequently, the Qur’ān does not recognize the artificial boundaries which have cut the earth of Allāh into small pieces which they call countries, nor the resulting ‘‘nationhood’’ that divides the humanity into territorial segments, putting one group against the others.
America is an exceptional nation in the sense that it is not a nation as we’ve known it in the past. Somehow North Americans have attempted to put together a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society on the fly. It just happened. What we’ve got is a new kind of society one that has conquered much of the world with a totally new way of looking at the world and reality. The USA is not merely materialistic–it’s just that money is the only common ground most of us have but most of us also know that can’t be the ultimate goal of life so we are deeply torn. Our various religion and spiritual beliefs are at war with the consumer society and we are in the midst of a major struggle. I don’t know how it will end up but I do know this from a study of history, social science, moral philosophy, religion and spirituality that without a major spiritual movement the world, not just the USA is totally fucked because the vicious and cruel leadership you see in Washington is perfectly willing to go right to the edge of human extinction to achieve “victory.”
@cstahnke
Not exactly, the USA hasn’t conquered much of the world even if they meddle in a lot of countries.And their meddling isn’t enabled by being multi-ethnic/multi-cultural(incidentally those two factors are common in declining empires, as the host country for the empire starts failing the capital tries to keep the empire together by importing talent from foreign vassals) or a new way of looking at the world/reality, but by the connections to the comprador elite classes raised by the colonial empires of Europe, which were inherited by the USA.
And I don’t believe the materialistic and the spiritual are things that can be in conflict against each other.Conflict can only occur between two or more materialistic groups or between two or more spiritual groups(though I’m not so sure about this last part).
Took me a while to get through this piece as there is so much to think about and I so easily go off on tangents and rememberings—but it was a most worthwhile read and am very glad I persevered.
Dense with observation, comprehensive, learned and witty all at once, its leaves me with the satisfied feeling you get following an exceptionally good meal in convivial company.
Five stars, and thanks, Mr Conroy.
Metzitzah b’peh. Alexithemia.
The Rothschilds and their clan of “evildoers” (Louis Brandeis e.g.)
The United States was founded on the mass slaughter of the Native American Indians.
Immigrants from world earth universally also were the blood, sweat and tears that made the USA. Television became the drug to drug the minds. No more “Dogberry enlightened”, who was a pal of Mark Twain.
“There is a thinking stuff that permeates, penetrates and fills the entirety of the universe ………….
I say the TAO is the entirety of this universe and all universes known and unknown! CHI is the subtle and lucid energy we get to alchemy.”
So what has happened to the enlightened and the enlightenment as earth beings awaken (again) from the coma they are in via the “evildoers”!?
An Indian Guru Nasaguratta Majarajah (name spelling?) said simply three (3) words: “I am that”.
Americans in the majority do not think. Humor proves the highest intelligence of our species.
Most Americans are poisoned via drugs, alcohol, and food isn’t nutrition. The evildoers agenda destroyed China too.
Time is the element that changes all seasons.
The time has arrived for the dreamers to awaken and sleep no more in Goeth’s “siklied over the pale cast of thought”.
21 days and pushing the unconscious, subconscious, conscious and superconscious the “meditation” can be for 365 days. After goal posts ~ 21, 30, 60, 90, 120 and so on to 365 (365 meridiand in the human body form) days the shift into higher CHI is inevitable.
The evildoers are not a new reality. Lao Tzu wrote the Manuscript the “Tao Te Ching ~ Transforming the Barbarians.”
Nature is our reality.
“Infinite cosmic giggle light bliss chi I am that”
Tesla was also one of our human family beings to lead us unto nature and out of the cave THAT Socrates | Plato showed = darkness too.
Thank you Saker for such incredible verve, in the family of sharing, our trust in making the unknown our friend.
I had to look up ‘Alexithemia’ on wiki, and found a very interesting bit on it from French psychoanalyst Joyce McDougall. Very helpful and clear, thanks for the prompt.
If you like Nissargadatta, then you must also be acquainted with his great teacher, Ramana Maharshi, another man of few words.
PNAC was one of the most disastrous cooptation to befall the post-Cold War world. Something I said elsewhere:
“In a climate hostile to resolution, facile bumper stickers preside. PNAC’s 1997 Statement of Principles serves as apt blueprint to [America’s] conceptual paralysis. Ripe with hubris and devoid of introspection, it forced a triumphalism upon the natural course of dialectical progression, or is this reader missing circumspection born of authentic synthesis in the following proclamation?
“Having led the West to victory in the Cold War…[w]e need to increase defense spending significantly…”
Sounds more like a shell-game from here.
Refused her duly earned ticker-tape parade, America was presented instead, at war’s end, with the preposterous Neocon invocation to beat her sword into yet another sword. The interminable loop of permawar (itself an indigestible bit of ahistorical mischief) became America’s ‘way forward’. As for our supposed adversary, ‘terror’, it offers an inexhaustible emotional response to perils of the real, imagined and endlessly manipulated kinds. The Neocon catastrophe is now a matter of global record. The peace dividend was purloined by a unipolar will-to-power that metastasized into a monomania worthy of Ahab himself.”
So much for 1997 and the ensuing carnage. What has America learned subsequently? Listen to Pompeo’s scolding speech in Brussels from a just few days ago and weep. Nothing has been learned. Internal contradictions stack up like dry brush awaiting a clarifying fire that never arrives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmXSo9P2FXc
At this moment, America supports the very Syrian Kurds that NATO partner Turkey is presently fighting. Who will invoke NATO Article 5 first? Can Defense Alliances have civil wars?
Yakov Kedmi: Allies Wanted to Kill Germans Without Trial; Without Stalin There
Would be No Nuremberg!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrkXLfvegkU
Yakov Kedmi Ex-IDF: Confrontation Will Come to a Head! Now China is Preparing for War Too!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwXFaabqyFI&t=110s
Churchill Hated All Germans And Called The Poles “Hyenas” – Yakov Kedmi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uApxIktoPsw
CrossTalk: Talking War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iKzI42W5n8
‘Patriarchy’ a term recently popularized by feminists, belonging to American left-wing/liberal/progressive political factions, and whose ideology/thinking is built on numerous misandric presumptions and generally serve to demonize all men.I guess this serves a similar function to the West’s demonizing of Islam/Muslims(driving them to extremism) on one hand and recruiting them for terrorism with the other.Must be running out of men, if they had to widen the scope to all men.Plus, demonizing all men makes it easier to target any man politically, selectively applied of course.
Curiously Orthodox Christianity in Russia also calls it’s head priests ‘Patriarch’, wonder if that is another patriarchy that needs to be smashed, feminist groups seems to think so.
If we use the common definition of patriarchy as a father-headed family or otherwise a system headed by the eldest male, then that is something seen across civilizations/cultures and times, pre-dating Western civilization itself, which suggests it is a naturally occurring pattern, not a man-made social construct.Likewise, the leader of a nation being treated as a father figure and the idea of a fatherland, are nothing new or unique to the USA.Interesting article though.
Yes my friends all well and good but there is a living European wisdom tradition now known as Depth psychology. Two generations of it. It has deep Hermetic Christian origins. It comes through Carl Jung. He psychoanalyzed Christianity and prescribed a cure. Essentially the problem was the one-sided imposition of patriarchal religious culture. And its historic demonization of the feminine. A denial of balance in the religious culture itself. He saw that condition being healed by the alchemical restoration of wholeness through the activity of the divine feminine.
So much of what we now call political oppression is the resistance to this healing process on the part of patriarchy. Anglo-Zionist power lusts etc. Jung saw the cold war as an argument between Christian patriarchy and the emergent feminine principle The white star fought the red star.
So any Christian solution must open to the insurgent feminine. The American feminist movement has great difficulty lifting this understanding out of their wounded egoic response to patriarchy. But there is real gold underneath the surface of their visible hostility. Well this is now in the living underground of the Western tradition. However it has yet to break through into political consciousness. I see no way we can leave this out.
Well, I’m neither European nor Christian and I’m not knowledgeable enough about Christianity to comment on whatever imbalances that may or may not exist in Christianity, but the groups you are defending, among other things, tend to demonize traditional cultures in general, which plays a role in Washington’s imperialism.Personally, I consider these groups to be false opposition.
The modern American feminist movement has great difficulty in reconciling their underlying myths. There is perhaps some reconciliation of original female schisms in the Christian narrative (Marry as mother, and another as lover, etc). However, those who cannot relate to this later stage are forced to dig down deeper (or eject altogether) into the underlying dark world(s) of early genesis creation myths that plague the Jewish mindset and magical thinking. That is, in particular the two genesis narratives that merged at some time and left the implications that there were two female partners of the original created (from earth) Adam. Initially, Lilith, the one created equally, from earth and who demanded to be on top and was excluded (and for whom there seemed little male interest); and the “2.0” version called Eve from the substance of the male rib bone etc. Little of this narrative is relevant for those who follow biological science and note that every other male/female animal species seems to have managed quite well without all the psycho-drama. However, for those who try and reconcile this complex narrative as a foundation to their own worldview, they risk becoming rich pickings for the psychology/psychiatry professions. Google will dig some relevant items on this theme. One I found useful was by Siegmund Hurwitz: “Lilith – The First Eve Historical and Psychological Aspects of the Dark Feminine”. However, before casting this strange story entirely to the winds, perhaps consider the rate of child deaths via industrialized abortion in this “free” age of ours, and the underlying rationale for genital mutilation of 8-day old male babies etc — another likely source of healthy psychology/psychiatry professions.
That’s very educational and I always did wonder why killing babies and genital mutilation of male babies were legal in the West.
There’s been a fair bit of female interest in Lilith in the west though, and why not? She’s had the most concertedly abysmal press of any mythical figure for as long as we’ve told ourselves stories. It sorely needs a re-balance.
Agreed one minion; The really challenging thing for the feminist consciousness issue as I see it comes down to the fact that the cosmic essence of the feminine principle has been subjected to millennia of religious based moral demonization. Just watch the ways they lay it out. It shows up powerfully in the Lilith mythology Carl Jung put it well. He said that over time, the imposition of patriarchal moral values has turned all the ways of the Goddess into vices. Locked away in a red light district. Particularly the erotic principle, which is so central to the feminine. So if a woman goes around town in tights with the word “pink” emblazoned on her rear is she morally virtuous or not? And what about the legalizing of sex work? The feminine principle is sex positive recall. We are so programmed into thinking or religious and spiritual matters through the framework of the patriarchal lens that we all must struggle to open our eyes to that aspect of the feminine spirit that stands outside the patriarchal vision of spirituality. As for male circumcision. That is a great way to cut the male off from the experience of the erotic pleasures of the feminine and instill a deep seated fear of the father. Useful for priests who need to build up obedience to yahweh.
Obedience: indeed an interesting way of viewing it. However, whether it is male patriarchal, or just simply social control in operation. The Judo-Christian West has this basic schism (among many) couched in a tribal creation myth grounded in the eons before the Jews came into an identity — e.g., Sumerian, Babylonian, Egyptian etc. They just carried much of it forward and polished the apple, so to speak. One line of thinking implies their god is simply the Pharaoh (system) depersonalized. However, there is also the Greek tradition via Plato and the issue of “Post-truth” — i.e., as to who gets to set the parameters for the plebs etc. This seems a less emotive way of understanding power at work. A nice short expose on this by Steve Fuller https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4Rwca7k_Fs
Hi Anon; Thank you. I watched Fuller’s talk. It makes sense. Hegel brings forward the same idea as Fuller/Plato in what I think is a more creative and democratic sense. He sees enlightened government being based upon what he called a “myth of reason.” Reason being enlightenment. The point of the myth being that it provides a language to be shared in kind between the enlightened and those who are not yet ready to realize it. The myth would provide a language and culture where one could move from a merely mythic understanding of reality to true enlightenment. It being a myth of democratic individual development. Now Hegel did not go on to articulate the myth. So this is not a widely known feature of his philosophy. However my research has shown me that this is the function Marxism is designed to fulfill. If one looks very closely at the type of language Marxists use, it has an identifiable mythic content, which only fully realizes itself in some form of supra liberation. High octane thought and dangerous if not understood properly. Marxism needs to be managed by Plato’s philosopher kings for it all to make sense. My sense is the Chinese have a reasonable handle on all this. The agony of the socialist struggle and democracy itself awaits this all coming together.
The founding fathers were somewhat aware that the creation of the United States is a ‘new Jerusalem’ and a ‘new Rome’, a dual nature. The most explicit mention of this idea is in the Russel Kirk history of the US. His first chapter (as I remember it) was totally focused on the rise and struggle of Israel and how the US reflects it and Rome. Rome and Israel are the two poles of the American psyche that are held together by love and hate and cannot reconcile. It is the two-pole unconscious drive that is behind the ‘indispensable and exceptional’ supremacism of the US. The two party US system reflects its dual poled unconscious: the Republicans and Democrats each represent one or other pole and several times in history have swapped poles.
Considering the above suggests that Russia and China are using the correct strategic diplomacy to not threaten the US too much with any overtly aggressive moves. The US keeps upping pressure on both but short of attacking directly as it at some level knows it is already checkmated by the Russia/China alliance. US elites are desperate to expand. If the US is held back from expanding the pressure will build up in its center and its elites will get demented with desperation and they will lose control of the people. We are there or getting close to that day that will be the most dangerous moment in history. There is no going back. Russia, China, Iran, and their allies cannot bend their knees. Those days are over. A moment something like the Cuban Missile Crisis is coming.
Remember that for just a war in Vietnam they killed the then father of the nation: JFK. It was the sin of patricide that they still carry.
Totally off-topic: What has become of the forecast Ukraine offensive from Mariupol to the Russian border and associated false flag chemical attack that was scheduled for 14 Dec?
Einstein said:
“We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them”.
So, my friends, the above essays are a lot of reading, a lot of truth and realization…
What do we do with it?
What is the conclusion? you ask.
For 2019, a year #3 in numerology, I invite everyone of the Saker blog to DARE THINK outside of the box and concentrate on the “possibility” that we can “influence” energies/universal consciousness with our thoughts.
A very daring “theory” but not so stupid when one understands “a little” the implications of “quantum physics”.
Physicists still can’t explain “quantum physics” and the “entangled pair” phenomenon.
But a lot of physics professors who are now retired and are not “afraid” to lose their tenure are writing books and giving conferences about “universal consciousness” being behind all this infinite soup of dancing atoms and subatomic particles.
“A field of potential” is what they talk about when they describe an electron field swirling around a nucleus of protons.
“infinite possibilities”. What makes one position “real” rather than another?
Our thoughts and emotions.
Could it be possible that we have such POWER of co-creation?
That, I dare say is the “conclusion” of this world experience of forces/ideologies/philosophies/religions battling for supremacy.
When human beings realize that they simply can create anything, that they are all inter-connected with everything else, that we are all “star-dust” to start with… then we might come to realize that there are better things to do, better things to create than wars, war machines, facebook and google that tract everyone to control everyone, power struggles, money power plays etc.
I dare believe that my thoughts create my reality and I choose accordingly.
I send all my deepest thoughts of LOVE, JOY, BEAUTY and LIGHT for this new year 2019 to The Saker for daring to tell things as they are, for everyone who shares and takes the time to discuss.
And I support my words and thoughts with a donation to Saker. Keep up giving us a place of lucid awareness on which we can build better thinking/thoughts.
@ Gabriel The Seagull – Yes, I’m with you! Beautifully said! And certainly true.
“Seth”, as channeled by Jane Roberts years ago, laid it all out in the Seth Books. Below the subatomic level, Seth said are Consciousness Units, the basic building blocks of “All That Is”, which will never be measured or proven by science. Consciousness has many properties, including an awareness of itself as an identity. Everything has a sense of self, including atoms, flies, and plants. Consciousness Units coalesce into the particles and waves of sub-atomic physics>atoms>cells> all matter, living or seeming dead. All of it with different levels of awareness. There is awareness, intelligence and cooperation at all levels. All consciousness “thinks” in it’s own way, without words. More like an intuitive understanding.
The collective consciousness of “All That Is” in the universe is what Seth refused to call God, as the term God has too many false, limited and often ignorant ideas associated with it. In simple terms, we can think of the soulful, intelligence within all and everything. Nothing and no one ever really dies. Consciousness units of the physically “dead” are forever, and forever coalescing into newer groupings of intelligent awareness. Consciousness created and creates matter, and matter doesn’t create consciousness.
All the problems in the world are caused by the human ego, which is the imaginary, but seemingly real, sense of an isolated self, unconnected from All That Is, thus lack of cooperation, fears, and ultimately wars. Bottom line is thought, an aspect of consciousness, effects and influences other consciousnesses. We are all ONE, all connected, and as a world of humans, unwilling to cooperate and get along as the untold trillions of cells are able to cooperate within a human body. Thought effects subatomic particles as if subatomic particles have awareness and everything is connected at the subatomic level are both proven physics. The thing people call God, is not outside of us, it’s within all and everything. I very much enjoyed your entry.
As an interesting aside, we can easily learn to observe or witness out “self talk”, which is the brain’s creation of our ego. Our “self talk” is our ego talking to itself. Who we really are, is the witness of our self talk. That’s our “being” prior to the ego and it’s numerous self-deceptions. The great problem of humans is that they identify with the “self talk”, rather than identifying with the observer of the “Self Talk”. It’s a subtle but vitally important difference.Thanks again for your thoughtful blog entry.
Barry, I share in your heartfelt sentiments to make rational this distorted and tortured world we live in, yet – my whole life experience proves something else; which is – that I am within God: safe, protected and secure, and not the God is within me: safe, protected and secure.
Often times I find, that speaking as you do, that, “God is within”, has a tendency to place God within the body; this is of course sacrileges, God cannot inhabit bodies (to dense), though we can exist within God, when one comprehends, that we are Mind within Mind – which means God is not within flesh.
Allow me to explain further: Decades ago, I was near to a mother who was instructing her child as you do about God, and the parent explained as you do, that God is within, I reacted viscerally to such a statement, and spoke thus, “We exist within God, God is not within us (btw, the idea promulgated by Seth, and this eager mother, that God exists within us and not that we exist within God – is sacrileges and blasphemous.
Wikiepedias: “The term “sacrilege” originates from the Latin sacer, meaning sacred, and legere, meaning to steal.
Sacrilege is the violation or injurious treatment of a sacred object or person. This can take the form of irreverence to sacred persons, places, and things. When the sacrilegious offense* is verbal, it is called blasphemy, and when physical, it is often called desecration.)”. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrilege
Lastly, consciousness is the booby prize; what is immortal as God IS is not fleeting, as consciousness is; And because consciousness is fleeting, it is not Godly and has no association with God; The Holy Grail is Awareness of Being, for awareness brings forth certainty from which God IS. Whereas consciousness of Being being impermanent, cannot reach eternity where God IS.
[*What is the difference between offense and Offence? There is no difference in meaning between offence and offense. They’re exactly the same in all their definitions. The difference is that offense is the preferred spelling in American English, while offence is preferred in British, Indian, Canadian, and Australian English.Mar 17, 2011 : Link: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/16668/is-there-any-difference-between-offense-and-offence.%5D
@Stuart, Barry, Gabriel
You guys might enjoy this.
From Najhul Balagha (Peak of eloquence) by Imam Ali (as)
Opening of sermon 1
Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be counted by calculators and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be satisfied by those who attempt to do so, whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot reach; He for whose description no limit has been laid down, no eulogy exists, no time is ordained and no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks.
The foremost in religion is the acknowledgement of Him, the perfection of acknowledging Him is to testify Him, the perfection of testifying Him is to believe in His Oneness, the perfection of believing in His Oneness is to regard Him Pure, and the perfection of His purity is to deny Him attributes, because every attribute is a proof that it is different from that to which it is attributed and everything to which something is attributed is different from the attribute.
Thus whoever attaches attributes to Allah recognises His like, and whoever recognises His like regards Him two; and whoever regards Him as two recognises parts for Him; and whoever recognises parts for Him mistook Him; and whoever mistook Him pointed at Him; and whoever pointed at Him admitted limitations for Him; and whoever admitted limitations for Him numbered Him. Whoever said: ‘In what is He?’, held that He is contained; and whoever said: ‘On what is He?’, held He is not on something else.
He is a Being, but not through phenomenon of coming into being. He exists but not from non-existence. He is with everything but not in physical nearness. He is different from everything but not in physical separation. He acts but without connotation of movements and instruments. He sees even when there is none to be looked at from among His creation. He is only One, such that there is none with whom He may keep company or whom He may miss in his absence.
I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly with this well-written essay and was totally dismayed when I read the last paragraph.
“..The fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody,” ..Well..yes, but the fruit of the labour spent extracting those ” fruits of the earth” , whether it’s hunting & gathering or tilling & sowing crops belongs to those who executed those tasks (and who then decide with whom to share it with i.e.their family /tribe etc.)
I find it very hypocritical that those who work in the cities and in factories expect to receive payment for their work but demand that the hunter/ farmer (an “imposter”? Is this what you call farmers ?) give up their food for free, to be shared, on the basis that the “earth belongs to nobody”. This unfortunate misconception that is widespread amongst the socialist/ communist ideologies has led to great crimes being committed against rural folk in the form of agrarian reform and land redistribution.
“I have lived on the lip of insanity, waiting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I’ve been knocking from the inside!”
“Stop acting so small, you are the universe in ecstatic motion.”
Two most beautiful – and unfathomably deep – quotes by Jalaluddin Rumi.
And actually heretic, if you think about it. Both short poems point to the unthinkable, but existential truth, that God cannot been found in the outside world, but only by going in.
All three Abrahamic religions – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – do not allow, under no circumstances, such a radical statements to be made. But, interestingly enough, all masters of all ages in the East expressed the highest state of consciousness in exactly such and similar terms, without exception.
I can’t see how those words by Rumi are heretical.
“And actually heretic, if you think about it. Both short poems point to the unthinkable, but existential truth, that God cannot been found in the outside world, but only by going in.”
The journey inward is mentioned in many Islamic traditions. However God(swt) is not confined in either. He’s apparent in the outer and the inner. The journey inward is beneficial to remove the walls that we have put up or exist within ourselves, so we can see things more clearly. So basically God(swt) is always there, it’s the creation that has to remove the dirt from their eyes in order to see properly.
“The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said ‘This is mine,’ and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society.”
Mafia asset Rousseau lying through his teeth. He wants us to believe that you can step into any shop, say “this is mine”, can grab whatever you want, and everybody will be naive enough to let you walk out of the shop, just like this. Good luck with that, Jean-Jacques!
But what Rousseau is not telling us that his ‘first man’ was most likely carrying a gun, or at least a knife, or a big stick. Therefore, ‘civil society’ was not founded by naivety of the people, but by brute force of Organized Crime against them. Quite a difference.