Djedi Blog - Secret Teachings Of The Ancient Djedi

Energy Fields

2012-01-17T20:35:00.000-08:00

Energy fields look/feel like this...

Using a specialized technique, called Kirlian photography (not the con where a camera is used to photograph your 'aura' but an actual electrical photographic method), some mechanical observations can be made...

(Image source)

The Ancient Djedi discovered energy pathways called meridians which acupressure and acupuncture utilize. These "meridians" have also been mapped in great detail...

Meridians have also been found using an imaging technique...

To summarize, they indicate that:No radioactive isotope was observed to migrate when it was injected into points of normal electric resistance. Nor was any migration observed when injecting isotopes other than sodium pertechetate in points of least electric resistance.

Each time sodium pertechetate was injected into points of least electric resistance, its migration was observed constantly, approximately at 2.5 cms per minute and always following the same longitudinal pathway.

The characteristics of the migration rule out the possibility that the radioactive isotope was carried through the nerves, vessels or lymphatic system. For example, when it was injected in a vein underlying the point of least electrical resistance, transport of a different speed and pathway was observed. Additionally on injecting sodium pertechetate and thallium at the same time, it was observed that the first was transported while the second was not.

One of the methods to balance meridians (i.e. your 'energy levels') and even increase your 'energetic mass' (i.e. the amount of prana/life-force you can absorb or have access to) is called Qigong or Chi Kung.

About Qigong...

[Learn more about Qigong practice (including recommended programs) here.]

One kind of Qigong Master...

---------------------------------------------
Some scientific studies

(extract from my ebook "Become Like A Jedi")

You can increase the level of the force in your body by doing deep regular breathing.
Everybody has detectable energy fields which can be increased with deep diagrammatic
breathing.

Here is an extract from an abstract reported on a government site.

What was found: Emission of extremely strong magnetic fields from the head and whole
body during oriental breathing exercises.

“This article reports the result of an experiment that was designed to measure the
biomagnetic field emanating from two individuals who were practicing traditional
Oriental Qi Gong breathing exercises.

It is concluded that traditional Oriental Qi Gong breathing appears to stimulate an
unusually large biomagnetic field emission.”

Another article on the same site is an abstract of how the levels of energy from the
practitioners hands was more than normal...

What was found: Detection of extraordinary large bio-magnetic field strength from human
hand during external Qi emission.

“It is generally accepted that more than 10(-6) gauss order magnetism was not detected
in normal human condition. However, we detected 10(-3) gauss (mGauss) order
bio-magnetic field strength from the palm in special persons who emitted External Qi
(”Chi” or “Ki”).

This magnetic field strength was greater than that of normal human bio-magnetism by
1,000 times at least. A simultaneous measurement of bio-magnetic field strength and its
corresponding bio-electric current was examined in one subject. During exhibiting such
strong bio-magnetism, its corresponding electric current was not detectable. Therefore,
the extra-ordinary large bio-magnetic field strength can not derive from internal body
current alone, hence the origin of the large bio-magnetism is still unknown. We suppose
that the extraordinary large bio-magnetic field strength might be originated from “Qi”
energy in the oriental medicine or in the oriental traditional philosophy.”

Discovery of meridians described by Chinese acupuncture (abstract on a government
site)
“The “Bi-Digital O-Ring Test” imaging method has been successfully used not only to
outline the internal organs but also malignant tumors as long as identical reference
control tissue is available, regardless of whether it comes from the same individual or
others, without exposing the patient to undesirable radiation from X-Rays, strong
magnetic field or ultra-sound. While imaging the outline of the internal organs the author
found that, from the surface of each organ, lines or networks of lines extend to other
parts of the body. Such a line closely resembles well-known lines of meridians of major
internal organs in Oriental medicine.”

An exploration of meridians (abstract on government site)
“It is imperative to define the fundamental concepts of Qi, channels, and the meridian
system of Chinese medicine in terms of scientific terminology before any meaningful and
mutually beneficial dialog can begin between Chinese and Western medicine. In the
Chinese theory, the meridian system as a whole is the system of the body. We propose the
existence of a meridian regulatory system that governs interactions between and adjusts
functions of internal organs, connects them to the body surface through a network of
pathways (channels) and displays their status on the skin.”

From Time.com
ACUPUNCTURE There is growing scientific evidence that acupuncture, a pillar of Chinese medicine, can relieve many kinds of pain, but there's no clear agreement about how it works. That was underscored by a German study of migraines: it found that inserting needles at various acupuncture points in the body relieved pain just as effectively as inserting them in the points that are supposed to affect migraines. Both therapies cut the number of episodes more than 50% over a 12-week period; a control group that did not receive either treatment continued to suffer as before.
-----------------------------------------------

Basic energy balancing

First master basic breathing...

Basic breathing meditation tips

-Inhale and exhale slowly, taking full deep breaths.

-Keep your attention only on your breathing. Be aware of each inhale and exhale.

-If you notice your mind drifting (i.e. if you start thinking about something) then just return your attention back to your breathing. It doesn’t matter if your mind wanders as long you bring your attention back to your breathing as soon as you notice your attention is not solely on your breathing.

-Do this for 5-15 minutes.

Next, imagine (or 'visualize') your entire energy field filled with golden light, as if you are sitting in the middle of a mini Sun that surrounds and encompasses you (about 5-10 feet around you, on all sides)...

(Image source)

The following balancing meditation is from here.

Exercise 1: Golden Light Breathing Meditation

Visualizing Yourself Breathing in 'Golden Light' can be a Very Effective Breathing Meditation to Help Calm and Focus.

· All you have to do is imagine yourself surrounded by golden light and slowly start breathing it in.
· First breathe in the light through your mouth then pretend to breath it in through your skin.
· Breathe this light in deeply and breathe out any tension.
· Breathe through each part of your body in turn.
· Finally see if you can feel as if you are breathing in this light through every pore in your body.
· Fill your body with the golden light while saying to yourself, "I feel Wonderful, I feel Relaxed, I feel focused. I feel re-energized."

Useful links for stress relief and energetic balance:

Basic Acupressure for Stress Relief

Creativity May Be The "Heart Of Life"

15 Instant Stress Relief Techniques

Book: The Body Electric: Electromagnetism And The Foundation Of Life

The Body Electric tells the fascinating story of our bioelectric selves. Robert O. Becker, a pioneer in the filed of regeneration and its relationship to electrical currents in living things, challenges the established mechanistic understanding of the body. He found clues to the healing process in the long-discarded theory that electricity is vital to life. But as exciting as Becker's discoveries are, pointing to the day when human limbs, spinal cords, and organs may be regenerated after they have been damaged, equally fascinating is the story of Becker's struggle to do such original work. The Body Electric explores new pathways in our understanding of evolution, acupuncture, psychic phenomena, and healing.

Energy/Emotional Healing - Help

Nancy Paul

Sally Chang

The origins of acupuncture is over 5,000 years old and was practiced beyond the borders of China. An Egyptian treatise from 1550 Before Common Era (BCE) called the Papyrus Ebera refers to vessels that resemble the 12 meridians. South African Bantu tribesman scratched parts of their bodies to cure disease, while Arabs cauterized their ears with hot metal probes. Inuits used sharp stones for tattoos that seem to relate to acupuncture meridians, and Brazilian cannibals shot tiny arrows with blowpipes into diseased parts of their bodies to bring about healing.

The Nature of "The Self" - Plus easy techniques for self 're-creation' (i.e. stress relief)

2011-10-16T02:15:00.000-07:00

In ancient India a concept developed called ‘Maya’ which means illusion. Since the world is considered impermanent and constantly changing - and you can interpret it in many ways with your mind - it is considered to be an illusion. Thus a common, though ancient, psychological perspective on 'attachment': if you hold on to it as your psychological/mental foundation, you are holding on to something that will dissolve away - eventually - so you are holding on to something which is inherently unstable.

Note: The ancient idea of the world/universe as an 'illusion' has re-emerged in modern physics as the idea of the world and universe as a hologram from string theory (approx 5 minutes into following video)...

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Siddhartha (Buddha) agreed with the basic premise of ancient Indian philosophy that the world is an illusion but he took it one step further claiming that not only is the world an illusion, so is the ’self’. (Impermanence)

To put it in other words; you are not the person you were a year ago. You know this. You can probably see the ways in which you’ve changed and grown over the last year. You probably see the world in a different way then you did a year ago (or ten years ago). Since you see the world differently, you have a different image of yourself as well. You define yourself differently than you did 10 years ago. What you are capable of, what you can do, who you are, all these definitions tend to change for every person - given enough time.

The ancient philosophers noticed that as soon as you imagine a event happening to you - or your role in any situation - you first have to place yourself in it (i.e. you have to imagine your role or character) then you decide what to do or how to feel (this all tends to happen very fast for most events). In other words, every time you imagine yourself or a situation that you are in you are, in a sense, recreating yourself.

Scientific American Mind magazine in an interview with the Nobel laureate Neuroscientist Eric Kandel (click here to read article)

Mind: We tend to think of memory as a kind of library that holds a record of events and
facts that can be retrieved as needed. Is this an accurate metaphor?

Kandel: No, memory is not like that at all. Human memory reinvents itself all the time. Every time you remember something, you modify it a little bit, in part dependent on the context in which you recall it. That is because the brain’s storage is not as exact as written text. It is always a mixture of many facades of the past event: images, pictures, feelings, words, facts and fiction—a “re-collection” in the true sense.

Modern nuero-science agrees with the Buddhist idea of an impermanent self. As Eric Kandel points out that, “Every time you remember something, you modify it a little bit, in part dependent on the context in which you recall it.” In other words you recreate your image of yourself to fit the new situation. If the self was something permanent and real, then your image of yourself would always remain the same. The fact that you can consciously or unconsciously change your image of yourself and react to situations in a new way - or just create a new you - proves that the self is something you make up as part of living in society.

What does this mean?

This means that you are not limited to being any particular ’self’ or person. If you feel like you have low self-esteem you can change that self. If you feel like you are not comfortable is social situations, you can change that image too. Any limiting image you have of yourself can be changed as you create your 'self' or how you want to be.

Tools for Balance and 'Self' Creation...

Learn how to to basic stress management using acupressure.

To deal with phobias use the 10 minute phobia cure.

To deal with tough habits learn NLP's swish technique...

Finally, for ultimate in self-control and re-creation according to your highest goals and ideals, learn hypnosis and self-hypnosis...

Here is a playlist which begins with soothing sounds followed by 6 self-hypnosis audios with affirmations for creativity, confidence, self esteem, relaxation, motivation, and weight loss;

Instructions: Use stereo headphones for the full effects of the binural beat relaxation sound effects. Find a comfortable position with your arms and legs uncrossed, close your eyes and enjoy!

[Edit - Monday 2 Jan '12 - Note: Some parts of this article are extracts from this ebook.]

A lecture by Karen Armstrong and a few notes and links

2011-06-27T22:31:00.000-07:00

In the following lecture Karen Armstrong explains her view on the compassionate life and provides some guidance that can also be found in her book "Twelve Steps to a Compassionate Life"

Watch live streaming video from uuaga at livestream.com

A Few Notes and Perspectives:

The leaders for the Charter is Pakistan (Business men and others in the private sector). :-)

War is fought for political and economic reasons, religion is often used as the disguise as it can motivate the masses. [Religious fervor is a great tool for tyrants, be it from traditional religions such as Christianity or Islam or one of the new ones such as the new version of Republicanism (which is not the proper Republicanism) or, what I call, 'Scientism' (i.e. if it's not proved by the group of scientists that you believe in then it must be false) etc.

[Note: one of the problems between the Muslim World and the west stems from the fear generated by the Pope during the time of the crusades (a reference used in Bush's speech right after 9/11). This fear is an unconscious (and sometimes conscious) motivation in many political decisions made in the west over the last 1000 years.]

She refers to entering 'Presence of the Doa':

Definition of TAO
1 a : the unconditional and unknowable source and guiding principle of all reality as conceived by Taoists
b : the process of nature by which all things change and which is to be followed for a life of harmony

My perspective on the Tao which may be different from Karen Armstrong's (or may not) : To follow the Tao one must be aligned with the processes of nature - this includes life and death.

A balanced perspective, when following the Tao, (in my opinion), consists of accepting death, learning the how to observe yourself (i.e. self detachment for self understanding - The observer technique is to learn how to observe yourself as you go about your day and feel whatever you feel, for example, if you are angry you should be able to keep a part of yourself separate from that anger in an 'observer' perspective) and how to let go of observation and emotional attachments and just flow (this is a zen perspective which I have outlined in my part real part fiction: Guide to Become Like A Jedi Knight)

'Putting yourself in the shoes of others' - This is important to help build understanding, compassion and is absolutely essential in war as knowing your enemy is half the battle. [Note: It is also useful to love your enemy as it removes any blocks from your perception - i.e. hate or anger can blind you from seeing essential shatter points on your enemies strategies (though anger can be useful at times - if controlled using the observer technique), once an enemy is eliminated or placed in line for the execution block you can let go of that love and go back to neutrality (another essential for strategists in war).]

To hate others because they are different from us or have some different beliefs or life patterns is a dangerous attitude to have in today's heavily integrated AND armed world.

Learning to acknowledge that you don't know something and instead have a willingness to learn (through independent investigation and not JUST some authority figure)

"Socrates insisted on accepting the importance of accepting the limits of human knowledge"

Socrates said, 'I am wise in one thing only and that is that I know nothing at all'

------------------------------------------------------------
Edit - Added Jan 17 '12.

‎"Allot of religious people prefer to be right, rather than compassionate." Karen Armstrong

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Peter 3:8

2011-06-08T07:25:00.000-07:00

The Colbert Report
Tags: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Take Aways:

Question by Colbert: 'How can the caves be 32,000 years old when the world is only 6,000 years old?'

Answer: Colbert is referring to the dating system derived from the Gregorian calander and the Genesis version of creation (i.e. everything was created in 6 days and the 7th day God rested). The problem here can be solved from the New Testament... "2 Peter 3:8 (KJV 1900)
8 - But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." I.e. To say the earth was created in a 'day' is a metaphor. Someone who wants to cause problems can focus on the old testament reading rather than the new testament one. Those who believe that Paul is wrong about Genesis being a metaphor are obviously NOT Christian.

Bored... So, Introducing my new music video company called "Death Dance Music Video Productions" - The Kesha Collection

2011-06-07T13:31:00.000-07:00

Blow

I Am Cannibal

Tick Tock

Take It Off

We Are Who We Are

None Shall Pass

How Change Works - plus research links

2011-06-02T14:30:00.000-07:00

Everything changes. Just not everything changes at the same pace. Plus there are times when change seems to happen real fast, which is sometimes true and sometimes the result of a great deal of work (that in some cases, goes back for years).

In politics the general rule of of thumb is that change should be implemented slowly or you'll cause allot of backlash. It's why politics moves so slow. It is only when these constituents demand a change that changes begins to happen.

There are times when change happens fast. Such as the events after 9/11. The reduction in the rights of citizens, the false imprisonment of individuals in Guantanamo Bay (so the rich can watch people get tortured and/or sexually abused?).

Types of change

All humans have a spurt of growth to a certain age, then slow down, then stop growing altogether. Same for animals - but some plants can grow for a long time, while others grow slowly.

Then there is change cased by the sea changing shorelines or weathering down rock (slow change) and the rise and fall of the tides that are caused by the effect of the Moon on our planet (fast change).

Then there is the change such as that caused by the earthquake off the coast of Japan. That earthquake increased the speed of the earth's rotation. (and since we must have had large earthquakes in the past as well it is only logical to assume that the speed of the earth's rotation may have change before [maybe even the tilt causing an up and down ice age?] - in fact maybe the Babylonian calendar of 360 days really once was accurate? - just curious speculation).

Then there is social change. One can say that the 'Arab Spring' is a sudden event but it is actually the result of years and even decades of change.

The rule of thumb is generally this, "Change moves slowly for a while till it reaches a tipping point then change happens fast, and then change moves slowly again."

For people who are in dire straights change can't happen fast enough. For those who are happy with the status quo, change happens too fast. For those not interested in the particular issue, it makes no difference how fast that particular change happens. For people who are so attached to their worldview that they ignore the reality of 'the constant change of life', change can be a traumatizing experience.

Learning to have the flexibility for creating and adapting to change is as necessary as being aware of death before you can genuinely live life.

To create change first you have to do careful research into the facts and perspectives of any given situation or field of knowledge. then you take determined and persistent action until events reach a crescendo and the change finally happens. If you discover some facts you had were wrong, you have to have the flexibility to adjust your actions accordingly.

Research links

A scientific formula

Some definitions

Quotations

Some philosophy

About social change

More ruins come to light...

2011-05-28T13:27:00.000-07:00

Finally more evidence of the past civilizations are coming to light. A city has been discovered under the sands of Egypt using an infrared satellite imaging method.

From The BBC:

An infra-red satellite image reveals the pattern of streets and houses in the buried ancient city of Tanis in Egypt. The new technique has also shown up the sites of 17 lost pyramids as well as thousands of tombs and settlements.

Dr Sarah Parcak of the University of Alabama at Birmingham explains the findings at Tanis to Liz Bonnin and Dallas Campbell for the TV programme Egypt's Lost Cities which can be seen on BBC One on Monday 30 May at 2030 BST or afterwards at the above link (UK only). It will also be shown on the Discovery channel in the US.

Here is an interview on Fox News:

Other areas where this technology may be useful are:

Cuba (these ruins are so deep underwater that this is all we have)

& Japan

You can see that the above structures are man made and they are under over 100 feet of water which places their age at around 10-11 thousand years old (see research links below).

This is the most interesting part...

Here is an underwater structure off the coast of Japan...

Here is the Sphinx...

Learn More From These Research Links:

Does The Sphinx Have Rain/Water Erosion Patterns?

The Earliest Evidence of Culture

Underwater Ruins 1

Underwater Ruins 2

The World's Earliest Cities

We Are Who We Are

2011-05-28T06:38:00.000-07:00

Djedi Perspectives from Native American Warriors

2011-05-27T13:37:00.000-07:00

Quotes selected from here and here.

When all the trees have been cut down,

when all the animals have been hunted,

when all the waters are polluted,

when all the air is unsafe to breathe,

only then will you discover you cannot eat money.

Cree Prophecy

Man's law changes with his understanding of man. Only the laws of the spirit remain always the same. - Crow

All who have died are equal. - Comanche

Force, no matter how concealed, begets resistance. - Lakota

Do not judge your neighbor until you walk two moons in his moccasins. - Cheyenne

Day and night cannot dwell together. - Duwamish

When we show our respect for other living things, they respond with respect for us. - Arapaho

If we wonder often, the gift of knowledge will come. - Arapaho

Those that lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. - Blackfoot

What is life? It is the flash of a firefly in the night. It is the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime. It is the little shadow which runs across the grass and loses itself in the sunset. - Blackfoot

Those who have one foot in the canoe, and one foot in the boat, are going to fall into the river. - Tuscarora

The weakness of the enemy makes our strength. - Cherokee

Man's law changes with his understanding of man. Only the laws of the spirit remain always the same. - Crow

It is less of a problem to be poor, than to be dishonest. - Anishinabe

When a man moves away from nature his heart becomes hard. - Lakota

Humankind has not woven the web of life.

We are but one thread within it.

Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.

All things are bound together.

All things connect.

Chief Seattle, 1854

If you see no reason for giving thanks, the fault lies in yourself. - Minquass

Every animal knows more than you do. - Nez Perce

Each person is his own judge. - Shawnee

It is no longer good enough to cry peace, we must act peace, live peace and live in peace. - Shenandoah

Man has responsibility, not power. - Tuscarora

Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf. - Tribe Unknown

The rain falls on the just and the unjust. - Hopi

Each bird loves to hear himself sing. - Arapaho

The way of the troublemaker is thorny. - Umpqua

God gives us each a song. - Ute

After dark all cats are leopards. - Zuni

"I was hostile to the white man...We preferred hunting to a life of idleness on our reservations. At times we did not get enough to eat and we were not allowed to hunt. All we wanted was peace and to be let alone. Soldiers came...in the winter..and destroyed our villages. Then Long Hair (Custer) came...They said we massacred him, but he would have done the same to us. Our first impulse was to escape...but we were so hemmed in we had to fight. After that I lived in peace, but the government would not let me alone. I was not allowed to remain quiet. I was tired of fighting...They tried to confine me..and a soldier ran his bayonet into me. I have spoken.” - Crazy Horse – Sioux Chief

"Grown men can learn from very little children for the hearts of the little children are pure. Therefore, the Great Spirit may show to them many things which older people miss." - Black Elk, Oglala Sioux Holy Man

"When a white army battles Indians and wins, it is called a great victory, but if they lose it is called a massacre." - Chiksika, Shawnee

I do not think the measure of a civilization

is how tall its buildings of concrete are,

But rather how well its people have learned to relate

to their environment and fellow man.

Sun Bear of the Chippewa Tribe

‘Pop’ Psychology

2011-05-24T11:23:00.000-07:00

Someone once asked me to imagine a scenario and play a sort of ‘game’. It was this.

Suppose you are in a desert and you have six animals.

A horse, a lion, a monkey, a cow, a sheep and a duck.

Which animal would you get rid of first? and which one next? And so on, till I am left with one.

What would your choices be?

Well I figured that if I’m in a desert and want to get through it really fast I would get rid of the slowest animal. So I chose the duck. With each question to get rid of an animal, I got rid of the slowest, the sheep then cow. It occurred to me that the lion would be dangerous if not tame and that I maybe should have gotten rid of it first. So I got rid of that, then the monkey and I was left with the horse.

I was then told that the duck is ‘sense of humor’, the sheep ‘friends’, the cow ‘sustenance’, the lion ‘the ego’, the monkey ‘my children’ and the horse ‘passions’. The desert is adversity.

This was an interesting test, it seems to say that in adversity I first drop my humor then friends followed by sustenance and ego. Finally I let go of my children and try to ride out adversity on my passions.

Of course, this is a ‘pop’ psychology test and (to me) means absolutely nothing in terms of real psychology or metaphor. However, these symbols of this kids psychology test can be used to create a metaphor.

Many people I asked ended up with a horse. It after all seems to be the reasonable last resort to get out.

The trick is that of course, most will end up with a horse as you need a horse to get through the desert. By labeling horse ‘passions’ you are able to say that you leave everything behind and run on your passions and if anyone ends up with an animal that isn’t a horse (which is rare) then you have even more comedy on your hands.

This little pop psychology test got me thinking, where does passion to seek come from?

Eric Hoffer, in ‘The Passionate State of Mind ‘, writes:

“There is in most passions a shrinking away from ourselves. The passionate pursuer has all the earmarks of a fugitive.

Passions usually have their roots in that which is blemished, crippled, incomplete and insecure within us. The passionate attitude is less a response to stimuli from without than an emanation of an inner dissatisfaction.”

Being in a desert is certainly something which would make most of us a little insecure when what we seek is life which is beyond the desert. We wouldn’t turn to the elements to take care of us but try a dash across the desert in a ditch attempt to rescue ourselves.

In other words, when we are dissatisfied we often seek self forgetting through passion.

It could be a passion of anything, of work, adventure, mystery or even revenge. It takes our focus off of us and onto the passion which acts like a distraction. We may not know what we are doing here in the desert or how we got here or even know what lies at the end of it, but we still ride. At least some of us do. Riding but not really knowing what we are riding towards. Since the direction to the destination may be unknown we could end up riding till we finally perish.

Maybe there are some horses which are strong enough to get us out of the desert while another would just lead us to a slow and painful death. To know which horse which be the most dependable we would probably need to know why we are here in the desert in the first place, where we were before and what lies beyond the desert which would be worth pursuing, which would give us an idea of the capability our horse requires to get us across.

On the other hand maybe we are just plain tired and feel reckless. We do not believe we can know the answers and do not have any idea of how to get to our destination. Feeling helpless we see no reason we cannot just ride out in a blaze of glory. Fearing no mistake. So we get upon a beautiful horse though it is that outward beauty of the horse that attracts us - and we ignore looking for the inner strength we need in the horse to get us across.

There is another possibility, that we actually started out with a pair of each animal and found an oasis, here we set up camp to live out our lives. Forgetting that we are but in a desert and there are lush valleys beyond. Occasionally a lion comes from the desert and eats one of the animals or in some cases all the animals and then us. Yet here we are living in a desert not even wondering why we are here in the first place. As if it is the desert that gave birth to us and into its earth is our only return.

One last old college paper on "The Parable of the Sower" (New Testament)

2011-05-24T11:09:00.000-07:00

The Parable of the Sower

This particular parable is found in the Gospels of Thomas(9), Mark(4:1-9), Matthew (13:1-9) and Luke (8:4-8). The parable of the Sower exists, in its earliest form, in the gospel of Thomas (as I will show). Mark seems to have taken the parable from Thomas and fit it into his narrative. I am going to show that, in all probability, Mark copied this parable from the Gospel of Thomas and Matthew and Luke both seemed to have copied it from Mark, independently. All of this information is revealed in the differences existing between the books, of this parable.

Before going on, a word on the parable itself. The parable of the Sower relates to an agricultural practice of Israel. Since there were sharp rocks just below the surface(which would break any plough) and geological pressure causes these rocks to move, a farmer would not know from one year to the next where the stones would be. Since taking these stones out would be next to impossible a system called ‘broadcasting’ was used(and still is?). The farmer, or Sower, would simply scatter the seeds all over an area and let them take root. Some would be lost to birds and lack of depth of soil but there would always be enough good soil to ensure a good harvest. The striking part of the parable would be the yield of the harvest. In a good year a farmer could expect 5 to 10 times the harvest so up to a hundred fold yield would be particularly striking. This extraordinary result would be the point of the parable which makes it relate to something other than actual crop farming.

Thomas is a sayings collection and scholars have dated it approximately around 60-70 AD. The reasoning is that a sayings source probably lost its appeal after biographical books became common and also that the Gospel of Thomas has Thomas as a main character while Peter and Paul seemed to have gained prominence in early Christian literature after the first century AD. Some have tried to date it later based on it ‘Gnostic’ trends but it is entirely possible that these trends existed earlier. Another argument is that the Gospel of Thomas could have drawn from the other gospels for its material and the ‘harmonization’ of Thomas with other gospels is cited (using single words here and there as proof), however, this can also be explained by copying since the people doing such work would probably be familiar with the other gospels so would fit the words to what they deem appropriate(as was very common in the ‘Coptic’ tradition). Though some words are similar, Thomas is far more succinct than the other gospels and seems to indicate that it did not copy from these other gospels, since many descriptions employed by the other gospels are unused, as well as any kind of setting, for this parable. This places the Gospel of Thomas as written around the same time as Mark.

Out of 36 sayings in Mark, 21 appear in Thomas which is quite a large amount of sayings, since it seems that Thomas has not copied from Mark we are left with two possibilities, either Mark copied from Thomas or both copied from the same source(which no longer exits). In Thomas the sayings tend to exist in a more primitive form while in Mark the sayings are woven around a narrative. One example is Thomas 31, “a prophet is not accepted in his own town; a physician does not heal those who know him”, this becomes an elaborate narrative in Mark with a setting. In fact throughout chapters 1-8:22 and 11-12 in mark, when Jesus speaks to his associates in parables or in sayings not only do they parallel Thomas in content and meaning but the words parallel those in Thomas as well, though in Thomas the number of words are less. A good example, that Mark may have built a narrative sequence using Thomas, comes from the ‘wicked tenants’ parable and the explanation right after that (Thomas 65 and 66). In Thomas there is no indication that the parable refers to Jesus so it is entirely possible that sayings 65 and 66 are separate free standing sayings. In Mark the sayings exist in the same order though Mark relates it to Jesus and uses 66 as an explanation for the parable. It seems likely that Mark would have used the sayings for his own purpose and though they are free standing in Thomas, in Mark they fit into a narrative. This supports the hypothesis that Mark used Thomas, because the order of the sayings in both books are the same. Though in one they are free standing, while in the other they are put into a narrative sequence. Mark could easily have assumed that verse 66 explained 65. My final point in favor of Mark using Thomas comes from the ‘secrecy motif’. In Thomas 13 this secrecy motif appears where Thomas is taken aside and given a personal talk by Jesus. This secrecy motif is continuos in Mark as he tries to show that no one understood the identity of Jesus, so Mark may have been influenced by Thomas. However, since Mark intends to show that ‘No One’ understood Jesus while Thomas shows that ‘Thomas’ understood, it makes sense that Mark would take this scenario and change it a little(8:27-33). He changes it to lack of understanding of all disciples and turns Thomas into Peter. Where Thomas says he can’t say who Jesus is because of inability to do so, Peter says he is ‘the Christ”, which is a parallel in that in both instances one disciple understands Jesus. The difference is that in Thomas the understanding is complete while in Peter it is partial. A difference which would make sense in Marks work as his purpose is to show Jesus as misunderstood.

So though I cannot prove beyond doubt that Mark used Thomas, it seems possible that he did. The general trend in Mark is to take a saying and expand on it, like with the Parable of the Sower. In this parable (Thomas 9 and Mark 4), both Thomas and Mark start off in a similar way, where Thomas says “Look!” Mark says “Listen”, both of the other gospels have omitted this beginning. In Thomas the setting does not exist so “Look” would fit in, as the original saying Jesus may have been pointing to a Sower and reciting the parable, however, in Mark the setting is on a sea and in the form of a lecture so the word “listen” fits far better, therefore the change. For the rest of the parable Mark has taken the same order and format, even words to an extant but expanded on it trying to describe more fully the process he is describing.

This covers Marks relation to Thomas. The same parable occurs in the other two gospels under consideration, Matthew(13:1-9) and Luke(8:4-8). The parallels between the three are obvious enough to lend to the hypothesis that one gospel used the other. However there are four separate possibilities, that Mark condensed Matthew and Luke drew on both(Augustine), Luke edited Matthew and Mark condensed both (Griesbach), Matthew expanded Mark and Luke drew on both (Farrer) and finally that Matthew and Luke independently edited Mark and another document (which does not exist or hasn’t been found) labeled Q(two source Hypothesis).

First, did Mark edit Matthew? Matthew version is less wordy than Marks so if Mark copied Matthew then he messed up his text as he added unnecessary words to it. For example, replacing Matthew’s smooth transition from the previous scene with a vague ‘and again’(which would make sense if Mark is copying from a sayings source which has no setting), repeating the conclusion of the opening sentence of Jesus being beside the sea twice( ‘on the sea’ and ‘beside the sea’), repeating the fact that Jesus is teaching(third sentence), adding obvious distinctions to the parable that the seed ‘yielded nothing’ or that it ‘yielded abundance’ and finally adding an unnecessary transition ‘and he said’(on the aphorism on hearing) with another unnecessary ‘to hear’. All of this makes little sense if Mark copied Matthew but perfect sense if Mark copied a sayings source (which I have argued earlier, could be Thomas).

The other possibility was that Mark condensed Matthew and Luke. Luke’s version is even more succinct than Matthew’s which makes ‘condensing’ it somewhat difficult. Unnecessary words and statements in Mark are not echoed in either Matthew or Luke. Why would Mark make his narrative lenghtier with useless words?

What about Luke drawing from Matthew? One thing both Mark and Luke used are singular words where Matthew used plural and both have the words ‘to hear’ in the final aphorism as well as the introduction(i.e. that Jesus said it), which Matthew excludes (i.e. in the earliest documents found, Matthew leaves out the words ‘to hear’, scribes may have added it to later copies). This suggests that Luke probably did not have use of Matthew as he uses the word ‘to hear’ which Matthew dropped(as unnecessary), given Luke’s tendency to refined grammar, it seems unlikely that he would add an unnecessary word(i.e. ‘to hear’) if he was copying his parables from Matthew. Luke may have seen the final aphorism as complete and therefore saw it as unnecessary to alter it.

Another possibility is that Matthew used Luke which seems improbable since where Mark says the seed fell ‘into’ the earth, Matthew changes it to ‘on’ while Luke uses Marks wording. Also where Mark shows the return as increasing (30-60-100), Luke at least retains the idea of a great return on harvest though he shortens it to 100 fold, while Matthew uses the same figures as Mark but reverses the order, which not only defeats the purpose but may also indicate a need to avoid the same structure as another’s writing.

All of the conclusions I have arrived at , using the parable of the Sower, indicates that the structure of copying in the gospels follows the order of, Mark copies Thomas while Luke and Matthew both use Mark independently and not each other. While Thomas is very succinct and is without setting, Mark is wordy and has an unsmooth transition, both which could be results of copying from Thomas, as there would be a problem fitting a parable into a setting which could lead to a difficult ‘fitting’ process. Also the lack of words in Thomas may lead to a need for Mark to expand on the meaning to the point where the words become redundant. Mark shows all the signs of being the earliest biographical recording of the passage. On the other hand Matthew and Luke have independently improved upon Marks work, in terms of polishing off the narrative and grammar. Matthew preserves Marks setting while Luke sees the setting as unnecessary and removes it. The only commonality in use of the parable by Luke and Matthew is the change of the word ‘very large’ to ‘great’(for the crowds), so both saw the word as not fitting but still Luke uses the singular ‘crowd’ rather than Matthew’s plural ‘crowds’ indicating he did not use Matthew.

In conclusion, using the Parable of the Sower, I have shown that the two source hypothesis fits most snugly with the evidence that I have brought into focus with the analysis. Also it shows that in all probability Mark copied Thomas (with the help of some other sources).

Note to scholars: I have used Thomas, Mark, Matthew and Luke as names of the authors for the books for simplicity. There is no indication in any of the books of the identity of the authors.

(Note: Interestingly enough, the Egyptian and the Babylonians, used multiples of 60 in their calculations and are said to have come up with 60 as a main division unit. This may have a parallel with Thomas’s use of 60 and 120 fold in his description of yield. This may be an interesting aspect to look into.)

Another old college paper than looks at Genesis (Hebrew Bible/Old Testament)

2011-05-24T10:58:00.000-07:00

This paper looks at some differences between the Yahwist (J) and Priestly (P) sources in the Book of Genesis. The theory of Yahwist and Priestly sources of writing for the Hebrew Bible comes from the Documentary Hypothesis.

The Yahwist vs. The Priest (in the Book of Genesis)

The passages in question, Genesis 1 and 2 (The story of creation) and Genesis 6:5-8:22 (The flood story, or the story of destruction), are accepted to be written by two distinct authors. The first is considered to be earlier of the ‘Yahwist’ tradition (i.e. when Yahweh was the most popular name for the divine) and is said to come from the time of the ‘United monarchy’, it is given the symbol J. Genesis 2:4b-2:25 is considered to be written by J. The second is considered to come from a priestly source from the exilic or post exilic period in Hebrew history and is given the symbol P. Genesis 1-2:3 is accepted as written by P. The flood story is a splicing between both P and J.

That both versions were revered is not argued because, though they have been spliced together quite artistically, there are major contradictions in the text…it follows that the texts from these two sources were spliced together a while after they were written which would give them time to become revered so that the person splicing them together would not want to mess with what the texts say though once spliced they contradict each other quite obviously.

I, however, am not interested in the contradictions but the difference in the mind set (i.e. way of seeing the world/perception.) between the J and P versions of the creation and flood stories. After showing in what way J’s mind set can be contrasted from P’s mind set using the creation story, I will trace these different strains of perception through the flood story and possibly indicate a couple of lines which may have been wrongly attributed to J.

Comparing Genesis 1, where the author uses the phrase ‘heaven and earth’, to Genesis 4b, ‘earth and heaven, reveals the first clue as to the difference in perception. P’s was centered around heaven and J’s around earth. At a glance this does not seem to be a big difference but the implications of this are. P being a priest was in exile or just got over exile he lived in Babylon(probably) his mission was most likely to preserve the Hebrew tradition so the Babylonian culture does not wipe it out. The system of priests was adopted from its Babylonian hosts and the creation story seems like an explanation to the Hebrews of how the ONE god created the cosmos, since they were living in the Babylonian culture the Enuma elish was the accepted order of creation, however, this tradition had many deities so the priests redefined it in terms of one god to fit their beliefs. The Babylonians believed in gods who were indifferent to mankind- this was the perception inherited by the Hebrew priests.

J’s version is centered around man. This was written at a time of the united monarchy when the Hebrews most probably believed that their divine destiny was being fulfilled. This was a time when the common man felt more blessed by god and the relationship between them was imagined to be more intimate. Feeling blessed man equated the divine more with himself, this can be seen in the way J portrays god in the image of a man which can be seen in the Adam and Eve story in the garden of Eden.

P places man as one of the last to be made in creation, on day six (Gen. 1:26), while J places man right after the earth and heaven were created before even vegetation was created (Gen. 2:4b-5), even though a garden had been planted in Eden for man which presupposes vegetation, but the point of J’s account is that man was a necessary component to “till the soil’(indicating its agrarian source) and the rest of creation was created for man(Gen. 2:18-20). This is another indication of the split between J’s and P’s accounts of creation based on their perception. P saw man as relatively unimportant in the order of creation (creating him on the sixth day), while J saw man as the purpose of creation. However P does not see man as unimportant saying man was created in the image of god and that he has dominion over the rest of creation(Gen. 1:26-27). What this does show is the separation that had come between the Hebrews and their God. Before, in the time of J, they were close and everything was created for them, God was portrayed in the image of a father. By P’s time God had become impersonal and distant, a king that was to be obeyed.

This difference will become more apparent as I compared J’s and P’s account of the flood.

J - ‘it grieved him to his heart.’(Gen. 6:7), P - ‘I am going to destroy them’(Gen. 6:13); when man became ‘wicked’(J) and ‘violent’(P) the time came for the creation to be ‘blotted out’(J) or ‘destroyed’(P). For J’s God this caused grief, God was close to his creation -Man. P’s God is indifferent he notices man is corrupted so he decides to destroy him, and that is that. Another aspect is the difference in the usage of words. J uses wicked in contrast to P’s use of violent. Wicked is a bad state of mind, violence is something the priestly class would be familiar with since it is violence that took them out of Israel and put them in Babylon, so it is at the forefront of their minds. J just talks of a bad state of mind and not an aspect of it(i.e. violence is an aspect of wickedness, as is corruption). J’s use of blot is softer than P’s use of ‘destroy’…in fact the only time J uses the image of destruction is when God is feeling sorry for what he did to man (Gen. 6:21).

One example from the creation story of the separation that existed between P and god, which didn’t exist between J and god comes from comparing Gen. 1:30”-everything that has the breath of life-“ with Gen. 2:7 “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”. J gives man the privileged of being given the divine breath, P however, gives every creation the divine breath or breath of life make man more of a part of creation and therefore separate from the divine. Following this line of thought in the flood story we see in Gen. 7:15(and 6:17) that P continues to use ‘the breath of life’ for all creation; however, J’s use of the ‘breath of life’ in Gen. 7:22 could be interpreted as meaning man and animals, but it seems from the sentence that he is speaking of man being destroyed in somewhat poetic terms of awe since the verses before it (Gen. 7:19-20) talk of the mountains being covered with water in a sense of awe. J, seeing man as center of creation, would first seem to speak of the destruction of man poetically, then continue by explaining that everything was blotted out…”human beings and animals and creeping things and birds of the air”(Gen. 7:23) so that those reading would understand that just those in “whose nostrils was the breath of life” were not the only ones who perished, as the only time he used this phrase before was when he described the creation of man.

Another example is in Gen 6:8 “but Noah found favor in the sight of the Lord” compared to Gen 6:9 “Noah was a righteous man…walked with God”. J keeps man’s personal relationship with the divine by talking of Noah finding ‘favor’ with god…exactly as one would describe a relationship between father and son. P on the other hand seperated Noah from the rest of man, made him perfect and side by side with god, making him not a son of god but another person for the Hebrews to stand in awe of, something a priest had to do to justify himself being the connection between the common man and the divine.

A sense of seperation can also be felt from P’s “the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed” which sounds distant and mechanical while J’s “the rain from the heavens was retrained” makes god sound more ‘humanlike’ since he has to retrain it which makes it sound like he put some effort into it while closed is just closed.

Finally, in J’s version, Noah examines the outside and when he deems it dry he comes out of the ark himself, on his own volition(Gen. 8:12-13) which shows man having a freer will than in P’s version where Noah does not come out till he is commanded to(Gen.8:15-16), again signifying mans higher status in creation and closer relationship to the divine.

In the end J shows that God is sorry for the destruction(Gen8:21) which again portrays God as more human and caring rather than distant and uncaring as shown in P’s version(Gen. 8:11-13).

I think I have adecuately shown the difference in perception between P and J. P comes from a time of strict religious hierarchy, where priests are the connection between the common man and the divine which byitself signifies that times perception of God as being distant and uncaring. This most probably stems from the hebrews feeling a sense of abandonment, where till then they had been blessed by God and were under his care…they were the people of the covenant. When they were defeated and put in exile it must have felt like God had abondoned them and they began to see him as distant and uncaring. In contrast, during J’s time the Hebrews had a kingdom and seemed to be fulfilling their destiny as Gods ‘chosen people’. This was a time of prosperity where it was felt that the people were directly under Gods benevolent care. So J’s portrayal of God is fatherlike, a careing father that creates man as the center and basis for creation, looks over his creation and feels its sorrow and happiness, like they were his children.

An old paper from a religion class in college on the afterlife from an Islamic perspective

2011-05-24T08:35:00.000-07:00

Ma’ad

"Say: Lo! The death from which ye shrink will surely meet you, and afterward ye will be returned unto the Knower of Invisible and the Visible, and He will tell you what ye used to do." The Holy Quran (62:8)

Most people when dealing with life seem to forget death. Death is all around us and constantly within our vision. Our pets die, the plants die, we watch others relatives die and we see our own loved ones pass away. Yet when living we distract ourselves with preoccupation’s such as emotional distractions or intellectual distractions. The reason for this is our fear of death, which arises out of our lack of understanding of death. We fear death because we cannot see beyond it. It seems like an ending and not knowing if it leads to another begining can be very frightening indeed. If we were to understand death we would probably understand life better. Understanding these two is the first step to living life and exploring it’s mysteries. However, understanding comes from knowing and each person has to cross their own bridge to knowing or true belief. All that can be written about is knowledge. Knowledge is the ladder to knowing. This knowledge is obtainable by trying to understand life and death. This I am going to try and do using Quranic verses, Hadith and sayings of Hazrat Ali.

First it is important to understand why man and the world has been created.

“And when your Lord took from the loins of the children of Adam their descendants, and caused them to bear witness against themselves.[saying] ‘Am I not your Lord?’ they said: ‘Indeed[You are!].” The Holy Quran (7:172)

Ibn Arabi interprets the roots of the words, of the reply (i.e. ‘Indeed’), in Arabic as being one of innocence. Like a parent asking a child something, the child not understanding but replying in the affirmative anyway. Relating this to a Hadith-e-Qudsi (i.e. The words of Allah through the Prophet Mohammed-PBUH.)

“I was a treasure that wished to be known. So I created man and the world.” Hadith

We see that we are on this earth experiencing this reality so that we may perceive Allah and in the process grow from children to adults. As children we are filled with wonder at our surroundings and are captivated by its passing delights. The danger here is that we may become fixated to this world which is passing and forget our purpose of understanding and of moving towards Tawheed.

It is written;

[This world is]’like a mirage in the desert, which the thirsty man thinks to be water.”The Holy Quran (24:39)

“What is with you is perishing, but what is with Allah is enduring.”The Holy Quran (16:96)

What this says is simple. The world is in a constant state of flux. Everything changes i.e. is in motion. Living things grow and die, mountains erode, rivers dry up, the weather is always changing, the state of the world itself changes from peace to war periodically. To attach yourself to anything finite, like a person or something like money, will be painful because the person will die and money can disappear at the slightest notice. This will leave a person ungrounded and insecure. The only way to find security is to move towards the infinite. If we are to love the whole world, then we will also love change as it is a part of this world. If we reach for the infinite then we are reaching for the unimaginable. Allah is unimaginable so by reaching for the infinite we are reaching for the divine.

Approaching this from another angle. Being attached to something finite can also be considered to be an emotional attachment. It may be lust or it may be greed. The emotion that one is attached to the most is the emotion or state of mind which a person lives in. For example if one loves money then the state of mind is to accumulate wealth and the emotion is greed for more. Since money is something external to a person it can never bring inner security or peace but will always keep a the person worrying about its loss. So the person will become obsessed in accumulating more wealth looking for security and never finding it. This could go on forever. In the Quran it is written;

[Satan said:]"…I will surely lead them astray and fill them with desire.”(4:118)

…and how does desire affect your perspective?

Desire and passions refer to the emotional attachments to the external world. Like I said earlier this attachment is caused by a state of mind. If a person is preoccupied with only one emotion/state of mind, for example money, or food or hate etc. then that is this persons God. Instead of thinking about the infinite, or searching for truth and understanding, if a person is preoccupied with the love of this world then that will always be on their mind.

If all you want is revenge or vengeance beyond the peace of your fellow beings (where peace is possible) then that hate is your god. As it is written, you become…

“One who takes his passions to be his god.” The Holy Quran (25:43)

This brings me to the question of how to live ones life... I have three quotes in mind.

“Be in this world as a stranger or passerby.” Hadith

“Die before you die” Hadith

“People are asleep, and when they die they awake”. Hazrat Ali

“Live for this world as to live forever and for the next as to die upon the morrow.” Hazrat Ali

The Hadith states explicitly that non attachment to the world is the way to deal with this passing reality. By being unattached a person would feel like he is just passing through because the world would not destroy him emotionally or mentally. This world is a learning experience and then he moves on. Ali explains it in a little more detail. Be prepared to move on i.e. always keep death in mind and the transitory nature of this reality, but also live in this world.

The Next World.

“Sufficient for you today is your own soul as a reckoner!” The Holy Quran (17:14)

If we are asleep that means we are unaware of our actions. Being caught up in desires directed towards an illusory world may just be one aspect of our unawareness. If after death we awaken then that means we would suddenly become aware of something we were previously unaware of. For example we may be caught up dreaming of food and when we awaken, we would not understand what we found so alluring in the first place as we are not hungry anymore.

What does it mean to have your own soul as a reckoner?

Maybe it means that when we awaken (i.e. die) we feel so guilty that our guilt over what we did while we were unaware is so great that we are our own tormentors. On the other hand we could die and feel like we have just awoken from a pleasant dream and not feel any regrets over it. What could this mean in terms of attachment? If a person is attached to the world then death may simply be denied. The person may be so attached that he may not accept that he has died. This moment of self realization may be the ‘bridge’ referred to in 37:23, "guide them through the traverse of the blaze". A Hadith explains this bridge as razor sharp where the believer passes by smoothly while the unbeliever falls into fire and some just make it across to the other side all torn up by the bridge. Since this is all allegory it can be referred to a state of mind. At the time of death those who are unattached to the world have no problems leaving it behind. These are the ‘believers’. Then there are those who manage to leave the world behind only after much struggle and effort and may arrive emotionally and mentally drained. These are those who make it torn and bloodied. Finally there are those who are so attached to the world they left behind that they fall off into the ‘fire’.

The Quran says;

“The fire is two fires:
A fire entirely of flames;
And a fire of inner reality
Rising over the spirits.”

(104:7)

The fire of inner reality could just refer to a state of mind of the person on death. Attachment would allow the person to recreate the attachment in his head and all his worries and fears would probably be magnified since the veil of sleep no longer exists. Now the person is awake so his attachments and fears would face him straight in the face. The other fire could be referring to a psychic blaze. A mental and emotional fire using up pure psychic energy which would be fiercer than a normal earthly fire as it is purer i.e. it will burn right through ‘you’.

One who has chosen their own emotions for their gods... have rejected the Quran…

“as for the profligate, who has preferred this world, for him Hellfire” The Holy Quran (79:37)

On Forgiveness.

“Say: ‘O My servants who have gone to excess against their (own) souls, do not despair of the Loving-Mercy of Allah!’ Surely Allah forgives the sins altogether! Indeed He is the All-Forgiving, the All-Merciful/Loving.” The Holy Quran (39:42)

For those who may despair there is a consoling note throughout the Quran that Allah is compassionate and His mercy has priority over His wrath. It is encouraged that people should forgive each other and not hold grudges to the grave. How forgiveness is spread or how souls are salvaged from Hell is beyond me, yet there is constant reference to souls being saved or taken out from the Fire.

In fact non attachment to the world means that a person should be willing to forgive, because if he does not then he is attached to something another did in this passing world, which is an attachment.

It is said that Ayub al Sakhtiyani once saw a funeral of a sinner, and turned into the entrance-passage of a house in order to avoid praying at it.[In time] the dead man was seen by someone in a dream and was asked, ’How did Allah deal with you?’. ‘He forgave me,’ he said. ‘And tell Ayub to repeat, “were you to own the very treasure-houses of my lords mercy you would assuredly hold back from fear of expense”. (17:100) {from Ghazali’s ‘remembrance…’}

Warning: Do not be one of those who “takes his passions to be his god.”(25:43).

Instead,

“Fear Allah and make reconciliation amongst yourselves” The Holy Quran (8:1)

Real - Eric Hoffer on Hatred and Intolerance

2011-05-22T14:22:00.000-07:00

Eric Hoffer "was an American social writer and philosopher. He produced ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983 by President of the United States Ronald Reagan. His first book, The True Believer, published in 1951, was widely recognized as a classic, receiving critical acclaim from both scholars and laymen."

This is from the preface of his book, The True Believer;

"All mass movements generate in their adherents a readiness to die and a proclivity for united action; all of them, irrespective of the doctrine they preach and the program they project, breed fanaticism, enthusiasm, fervent hope, hatred and intolerance; all of them are capable of releasing a powerful flow of activity in certain departments of life; all of them demand blind faith and single hearted allegiance."

To start a fundamentalist religious group (or a non-religious one) blind obedience without question is necessary. If people are educated with history and the sciences in a way where it becomes integrated with their perception then lying to them becomes very difficult. If someone with religious authority lies to them, it will hurt to have someone they like lying to them but they will do what is right...eventually, once they are sure.

"The ideal devil is a foreigner. Hitler—the foremost authority on devils—found it easy to brand the German Jews as foreigners." (pp. 92-93)

Given the history of America and Britain in the region painting the west as 'the devil' is an easy thing to do. What was astonishing that the educated west did the exact same thing! Fundamentalists there use evidence out of context to turn all Muslims into the equivalent of 'devils'! [These Christian fundamentalists are an important constituent of the Republican Party]

In the same way the Muslim world was painted as 'the devil' during the crusades (started by the Pope for territorial reasons).

Hatred becomes a habit. (p. 146)

It takes roughly 21-30 days for the brain to build the neural processes to form a habit (depending on the intensity of the installation). If you hate someone and attack them (for example, through slander) then that behavior becomes a habit. A fundamentalist group, claiming to be from ANY religion, has developed a habit for hate and thus has lost all reason.(or at least will ignore reason unless the evidence is simply overwhelming and can’t be avoided)

Fiction - Some Words From The Djedi High Council

2011-05-22T12:54:00.000-07:00

You hear a word, a story and you think you understand us. We are warriors of ancient times. We have fought and defeated enemies you can't even fathom.

Before we begin, since this technology is wireless, we would like to say something to our ancient foes...for whom we have returned:

We remember you, do you remember us? :-)

You destroyed our civilization once and tried to eliminate us. But we dispersed and hid our knowledge in clear sight.

When you returned we drove you away by self-destructing.

Turning water to sand and sand to water we created a planet of latent warriors.

Now, you return to our shores once again and we are ready...

and this time, we will wipe you out.

Back to business, this message goes out to the scholars:

We left clear signs for you and yet you do not see. What more proof do you need that your minds have been sealed? Now we return to show you what you were blinded from seeing and reveal that which the haters deny.

The books of Thoth are not actual books you fools! The books of Thoth consist of all of our knowledge which we divided into 7 books. 4 books have been taught to you, each in a separate region. And we have tied it all together through a common mythology for those who can see.

We spread one book of knowledge from the Americas, another from a city now underneath the sands of the Arabian desert (and Egypt), the third in the Himalayas and the fourth from a city that lies beneath another desert in Asia...

The ruins of the cities, that were once in our charge, lie ruined beneath your oceans, and yet you do not see.

A Warning to all: We have returned at the end of the fifth sun because it is now when you must face your greatest challenges and overcome them or perish. We estimate that you have 3 years to get your heads straight. We have charged Djedi Abbasa (so named because of his serious disposition) with bringing to light the basic knowledge necessary, in this world overwhelmed with information, to bring some balance. Also, it is time to let go of ancient technology and move forward to old technology - as Djedi Abbasa will soon explain. Finally, Djedi Abbasa made it to a Djedi Grandmaster several months ago. As a consequence the fool has accepted the title of master. Even he can't handle the immensity of our power. In any case, we have trained only one Djedi, to be our sword. No one is made a master except through us and admissions are closed. So you can just call Abbasa, Djedi.

Advice from a warrior

2011-05-22T11:59:00.000-07:00

So live your life that the fear of death can never enter your heart.
Trouble no one about their religion;
respect others in their view, and demand that they respect yours.
Love your life, perfect your life, beautify all things in your life.

Seek to make your life long and its purpose in the service of your people.
Prepare a noble death song for the day when you go over the great divide.
Always give a word or a sign of salute when meeting or passing a friend,
even a stranger, when in a lonely place.
Show respect to all people and grovel to none.

When you arise in the morning give thanks for the food and for the joy of living.
If you see no reason for giving thanks, the fault lies only in yourself.

Abuse no one and no thing, for abuse turns the wise ones to fools
and robs the spirit of its vision.

When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled
with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep
and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way.
Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.

Chief Tecumseh (Crouching Tiger) Shawnee Nation 1768-1813

Oldest recorded reference for the word Djedi

2011-05-22T09:59:00.000-07:00

Djedi is first mentioned in an ancient mythological story where individuals often represent an archetype...

Finally, Prince Hordedef stood and spoke. Instead of a tale of the past, this prince spoke about what he knew of his own time.

"...But there is a man, your Majesty, of your own time but unknown to you, who is a great magician." His Majesty said, "What is this Hordedef my son?" Prince Hordedef replied, "There is a commoner, Djed-djedi is his name, who lives at Djed-djed-Sneferu. He is a man of one hundred and ten years; every day he eats five hundred loaves of bread, a haunch of ox is his meat, and he drinks one hundred jugs of beer as well. He knows how to reattach a severed head and how to make a lion follow him with its leash on the ground. And he knows the number of secret chambers in Thoth's temple."

Wishing to model his own tomb on that of the secret rooms in the Temple of Thoth, Khufu ordered his son to bring the magician to him.

After a long journey, Hordedef managed to reach the magician. Plying him with offers of delicacies and all good things, Djed-djedi agreed to go to the court of Khufu with his family and collection magical spell papyri.

"Djed-djedi, why is it that I have not seen you before?" Djed-djedi answered, "When one is summoned, one comes, Oh Sovereign, may you live, prosper, and be healthy. I have been called and I have come." His Majesty asked, "Is it really true, this talk of your knowing how to reattach a severed head?" Djed-djedi said, "Yes, it is I who know, Oh Sovereign, my lord, may you live, prosper, and be healthy."

[Extract from here.]

What does 'magician' mean? or even better, where does the word magic come from?

A. Origins of the word Magic

1. Derived from the greek "Magike Techne" meaning the art of the
Magi.

a. The Magi were priests of ancient Persia (Iran) who also
practiced in Chaldea and Babylon.

(1) They were similar to the Druids, in that they wore white
robes and favored a simple mode of life and a vegetarian diet.

(2) The Magi worshipped no idols.

[Extract from here.]