The world has become like a close-net village
http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4253&p=82713#p82713

Hello Paar, I understand your love of Jesus, Mary and Moses. However, about Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster and Cyrus, are you sure you are not violating the Quranic injunction?

Buddha particularly was an agnostic or a Deist who never really discussed about divinity and supernatural in his teaching. Maybe your answer will be that these people were originally prophets but their teachings interpolated over time period. Right?

How about Confucius? Do you love him too?

Humanity is but one family.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Hi friends.

Since Quran is a Word of Revelation from the All-Wise, the Creator- God Allah YHWH; He sent Messenger Prophets to all the lands of the world to guide the humanity to His path. Now that the world has become like a close-net village; all these Messengers Prophets have been honored by Muhammad. The truthful Revelations, deeds/acts of all these Messengers Prophets have been secured in Quran; and their role has been set by God to introduce their nations and lead them to Muhammad – the Seal of Messengers Prophets; Muhammad authenticates their truthfulness, under lasting principles mentioned in Quran.

I love Jesus, Mary, Moses, Moses’ mother, Krishna, Buddha, Lao Tse , Confucius, Socrates, Zoroaster, Cyrus etc great leaders of the world in Ethics, Morals and Spirituality; I love them all; this is the teaching of Quran/Islam/Muhammad as explained by the Promised Messiah 1835-1908. I think it has got a lot of common sense and wisdom; my Atheist and Agnostic friends would admit.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

To which I replied, “not fucking likely,” and turned away to my shot glass. It’s filled with Absolut Citron, but I didn’t drink it, just held it, enjoying the chilled glass feel, the way I might enjoy holding an icicle until it numbed my fingers off, cold…and I switched hands, glancing in the mirror to catch reflections of what she was doing, and she wasn’t doing nothin,’ just trying to bore holes in my back with angry black eyes.

I smiled, but held the glass in front of my face so if she was watching same mirror too, she couldn’ t see nothing but cloudy liquid.

It is a mystery, here…

Downtown Kenosha, and I didn’t even know the girl well. Maybe spent a time or two in her living room, but I certainly didn’t want to know too much about her, or her bedroom, more comfortable staying on the surface, comfortable, because then I always have the freedom to push open the door for winter nights.

Back to the bar…old guy with long, grey beard, serving drinks, so institutionalized, his skin is made of hundred year old stone and he shuffles my way, eyeing my drink.

The shot glass is still full.

I wave him off with a smile.

In the mirror, she’s still glaring at me, but I pay less attention this time. I have no obligation to her. This is just the place I come after long hard day’s work to cash my checks before moving on to the next bar, but get the impression, the way the streets line her face that she thinks differently, as if she might be entitled to some attention…from me, but no. No reason. No way. No need. I’m free, and becoming more so each day that the calendar page gets flipped, torn and discarded into Lake Michigan.

I hear the Pixies on the jukebox.

I heard the Pixies on that same jukebox fifteen years ago, and it’s still a boring song; it’s not made any better with age.

All around my bar-stool, the chatter flits about, airy and light, and I walk inside, flicking the smoky air with my hands, waving them away until I’m approached by someone I hadn’t seen in twenty-one years.

He asks me my name.

I give it.

He tells me his, but I already know and I shrug silently as he speaks of a high school I don’t think about too often, about old classmates and throwing around insults I hadn’t heard in twenty-one years, like we just walked out that door yesterday except we hadn’t, and he’s been fucking that girl behind me for the better part of his life. The last time I saw him, actually, was when he and the bartender walked out her front door, slapping each other on the back and laughing, and in the mirror, I look quick but she ignores him, still focussing in on me. Mercifully, the guy leaves, almost as quick as he came and the whole bar is the better for it, til I notice he actually didn’t leave, he’s just in the back playing darts, and losing.

My mistake.

So, i take a quick look at the shot glass again, but I still don’t drink it. I think it might be poison, and not in the way that all alcohol is effectively poison, but actually, real poison and I set it down on the bar, but keep my hand around the glass, like icicles, cold, protecting it til it melts and I can’t take this any more.

I turn back around, “So why do you think I’m gonna die?”

She smiles triumphant, like she’s been waiting all this time for  that question and I just served it up, engraved on the inside of an engagement ring.

“Because you’re homeless.”

I shake my head no, but she insists, “You haven’t known a home since you were a kid, and this place, it really is as good as it’ll get for you.”

I think briefly of listing the places I’ve lived, but I can see in her resumed glare it wouldn’t make a difference, so I don’t.

“You know who Lao-Tse is, right?” I ask.

She shakes her head.

I nod, “Okay, he was a Chinese Philosopher and over his life, he was offered many kingdoms, many titles and many homes and whereas in his youth he might have accepted, as he got older, wiser…he learned through unlearning that he should accept none of these things. Want to know why?”

Her eyes roll, but she doesn’t turn away.

“Because the only thing he ever needed to master was himself, and the only home he ever needed was within…and I kind of like the way he looked at things.”

“You’re still drifting,” she smirks, “A nomad.”

I smiled, “Well of course, I already know what the inside of this place looks like. I just come here to cash my checks and look at filled shot glasses.”

“And me, you come here to look at me.”

“Sure, you can be nice to look at every once in a while.”

She grabs a can of Tecate off the scarred bar surface and smiles, “And that’s why you’re gonna die.”

I stop, for a moment…thinking.

The Pixies song continues to play on the Jukebox and when the Pixies song is over, I know that a song by the Steve Miller Band will come on. I know this because it always does, it always has and unless there is a major sea change of sorts, it always will.

Finally, I take one more look at the shot glass in my hand. In one quick movement I throw it back and cringe at the burn, burning all the way down my throat. I try to ignore that my eyes are watering.

“And that’s,” I say, quickly lighting a cigarette, “Is why I have to do this…”

I stand from the bar and turn towards the exit. Walking casually, I strive for the door, opening, and then I exit. I don’t look back. I don’t wanna see her anymore and as I skip down the steps, I quickly realize it’s time to find a new place to cash my checks, once and for all.

Unión de Oriente y Occidente: Psicoanálisis

Leyendo a Lao Tsé, taoísta chino, he tomado el siguiente aforismo:

“La orden que no es pronunciada y la visión que no mira, son los medios por los cuales los sabios se convierten en líderes.

De una manera natural, por la sensibilidad de la vitalidad esencial, acuden sin ser llamados y van sin ser enviados. Es un profundo misterio y nadie sabe qué es lo que hace que esto se produzca, pero los efectos se desarrollan de manera espontánea”.

Nos impresiona la precisión con que describe ciertos fenómenos psíquicos provenientes de mecanismos inconscientes, en una descripción de tipo fenoménica – de las conductas que se ven a simple vista. Lao Tsé es un observador notable de las formas en que se manifiestan los mecanismos inconscientes.

“La orden que no es pronunciada y la visión que no mira…” Sitúa lo  inconsciente; cuando consigue situarse en esta posición, el sujeto produce una influencia sobre los demás, porque la relación entre personas responde a las posiciones inconscientes.

En realidad, la existencia misma del sujeto depende de algo que viene del otro. Lacan formuló una frase: “El inconsciente es el discurso del otro”, que hace alusión a que el mismo ser se hace real, se produce por la forma de verlo que tiene el otro. No necesariamente de uno en particular, pero sí de eso que me viene del otro, como si me iluminara en un cuarto oscuro y me hiciera visible. Dice también que “El amor es dar lo que no se tiene a alguien que no lo es”. En síntesis es algo parecido a lo que Lewis Carroll nos ha legado en sus libros sobre el país de los espejos.

Cuando pronunciamos la orden – yendo en contra de Lao Tsé – cuando queremos mirar, no se produce el efecto sobre nosotros del que nos mira, ni el nuestro sobre él. El nos mira sin saber que en su mirada nos hace ser y asimismo nosotros con él. Eso es el amor, donación del ser.

“De una manera natural” nos dice, “por la vitalidad esencial, acuden sin ser llamados y van sin ser enviados”. Es la mirada del otro que nos da el ser, una donación de símbolos.

Esto se entiende en Lacan por su teoría del significante, que señala que el alma es habitante del lenguaje cuyo sentido gira en función del desplazamiento del significante, una especie de ruedita de símbolos en permanente cambio según a quién miro y quién me mira, en un deseo eterno.

Luis Schnitman

Madrid. 20.10.2009

Il bene più alto è come l’acqua.
L’acqua si prodiga per le innumerevoli creature senza competere e abita in luoghi che gli esseri umani detestano. Perciò essa è simile al tao.
Nell’abitare è bene restare vicino alla terra.
Nel meditare è bene entrare profondamente nel cuore.
Nel dare è bene essere come il cielo.
Nel parlare è bene essere sincero.
Nel governare è bene essere giusto.
Nel trattare gli altri è bene essere competente.
Nell’agire è bene essere tempestivo.
Astieniti dal competere e resterai impassibile.

L’osservazione degli elementi, nella loro spontaneità, può dunque darci indicazioni su qualità da acquisire, o meglio da risvegliare dentro di noi, visto che  siamo fatti della stessa sostanza energetica di terra, fuoco, acqua, aria, etere. Mettiamo l’attenzione sull’acqua: essa è trasparente, cedevole, perchè può prendere la forma del recipiente dove viene messa senza perdersi anche quando viene mischiata con altre sostanze, nutre e disseta tutti gli esseri viventi. Hai poi la capacità di trascinare con sè, di smuovere gli ostacoli in maniera dolce, smussando ed infine riflette…ci permette di osservare ed osservarci!…Una superficie d’acqua, che sia lago o mare, può presentare un apparente stato d’agitazione con onde e correnti, ma più si scende in profondità e più se ne potrà percepire la calma, il silenzo profondo.

Ma perchè il mondo orientale guarda così tanto al mondo degli elementi, alla Natura vista nei suoi aspetti più sottili? Certo lì si ha una profonda sensibilità per le immagini, per il concepire poeticamente la realtà,come per i meravigliosi giardini giapponesi, ma io credo che si tratti soprattutto di una capacità, a loro rimasta, di  entrare in contatto con gli elementi, riuscendo a percepirne l’empatia con l’uomo,  quell’intelligenza energetica che può essere ipotizzata per esempio per l’Energia Creatrice, che crea appunto, produce, dona generosamente, permette tutti i processi viventi. L’uomo non può creare dal nulla, non è in grado di nutrire se non durante la maternità, e dunque sente il rispetto, l’amore dovuto per un’entità più potente. D’altro canto altri tipi di uomini hanno preferito dare un credito eccessivo all’intelligenza della mente, che sicuramente ha una sua utilità, ma non può certo creare, se non manipolando materia morta, e spesso e volentieri ha dimostrato di poter facilmente essere utilizzata per scopi che con il benessere dell’uomo hanno niente a che fare.

Tentativi per dimostrare l’esistenza di questa intelligenza sono stati fatti: un ricercatore giapponese, Masaru Emoto, ha condotto degli studi sull’acqua. Egli ha sottoposto l’elemento a musiche, parole di diverso genere. I cristalli che l’acqua ha formato subito dopo sono risultati molto diversi a secodo della parole, delle musiche considerate, come se l’acqua percepisse le vibazioni provenienti dall’esterno e  si relazionasse ad esse. Questi video mostrano alcuni dei suoi risultati:

Altri estratti dal Tao Te Ching:

Meditando con Lao Tzu 4/8

Meditando con Lao Tzu 3/8

Meditando con Lao Tzu 2/8

Meditando con Lao Tzu 1/8

Central Station in Rotterdam has been and will be under construction for some time. This does not mean, that for the time being no investments are being made to improve the environment in which passengers have to stay before they can start or continue their journey. I noticed these new benches on platform 11, that definitely improve the atmosphere on the platform. Not only do they bring colour to the grey surrounding, they also bring comfort to the waiting passenger and moreover, they give travellers the opportunity to read and learn. Dozens of quotes by famous and unknown people about travelling are inscripted in different languages in the seats and backrests. Here are some examples:

Superior talent (which I cannot deny myself to be without being impious) will go to pieces if he remains remains forever in the same place [Mozart]

Travel and change of place impart new vigour to the mind [Unknown]

De grote Weg is vlak, maar mensen zoeken liever bergpaden [Lao-Tse]  (1)

Nicht da ist man daheim, wo man seinen Wohnsitz hat, sondern wo man verstanden wird [Christian Morgenstern] (2)

L’Absence ne tue l’amour que s’il était malade au depart [Comtesse Diane de Beausacq] (3)

These and many more quotes may inspire people, or move them to reverie and keep them company on their journey, where ever it may lead them. I like that idea!

—-

(1) The great Road is flat, but people rather seek mountain trails

(2) One is not home, where one has his domicile, but where one is understood

(3) Absence does not kill love if it was already ill at departure

Walking out the Cinema Nouveau after seeing Steven Soderbergh’s new movie The Informant!, which tells the true- life story of Mark Whitacre and his role in the investigation into price fixing at ADM, I was suddenly aware of a crawling, itching sensation of dread. All at once, fearful thoughts about the past week at work came crowding in — struggles with financial reports to donors, attempts to develop new funding proposals, my own career plans and decisions —   and it all seemed too much: doomed to fail, puny struggles in the uncaring eyes of the Powers that Be.    In the car on the way home, my father —  usually not someone given to complaint — started telling me about his hassles with his pension company.  The date stamp on his ‘life certificate’, which he has to send them every year to keep the payments coming, had been wrong, and for weeks now he had been on the phone to faceless voices at the call centre, trying to convince the company he was still alive.  I found it an unsettling story,  an unwelcome reminder of how powerless we really are —  we, the supposedly valued consumers at the centre of our present-day culture of money and consumption — when we lose our foothold in the distributed systems of process and information that undergird our lives.

It   reminded me of a few lines from Lao Tsu which have  been pinging around in my head for some time now. We don’t know who ‘Lao Tsu’ was.  The name (Laozi, in the new orthography) apparently means simply ‘the old master’;   ‘he’ may in any case not have been just one person: there might have been a whole line of old men (and women, I am sure).  But the poems collected in the Tao te Ching, obscure and evocative, often seem uncannily resonant of lessons to be  learned today.  When the Way is lost, it  says in  Chapter 38, there is always goodness.  When goodness is lost, there is love or kindness.  When kindness is lost, there’s justice.  And when justice is lost … well, then you’ve got HR and Customer Relations Management.  Well, that’s not the way he put it – the text says ritual  - but you get my  drift:  we’re in trouble. In my current job as manager in a small university-based research unit, I have been much concerned with thinking about the systems and processes that can make working life either rewarding, empowering, enjoyable, or a living hell.  (And those worlds, let me tell you, can be a hair’s breadth apart.)  Systems are important, all right, and so are procedures, and so are policies aimed at addressing gender discrimination, or racialized exclusion, or unfairness.  But the more I do this work, the more I am convinced that it is the integrity of our relationships with one another and ourselves,  the quality of attention that we can bring into the workplace   that really makes the difference.  I am not sure whether a policy research organization operating in today’s divided, disconnected world can ever manifest the Way that ‘Lao Tse spoke about.  Even “Goodness” (real virtue, which does not seek to be recognised as such) seems improbable.  But Kindness seems to me to be a minimum requirement, and you’d be surprised how hard that is.  Well, not really. You are also a subject of present-day neoliberal capitalist bureaucracy — who isn’t? —   so unless you are delusional, you’ve felt it too:  that the rules and systems that regulate our lives in the present day world are not only impersonal and unfeeling, but dangerous  too, and that underneath their rationality there is something deeply disconnected. Ritual and empty form, they rule our lives, and so,  indeed we’re truly lost.

Which is what this film captures so beautifully. When I first thought about the bare bones of this story – a whistle-blower alerts the FBI about price-fixing in his company, but is then revealed to be involved in blatant fraud on his own account, and loses both himself and his FBI handlers in an ever-deepening tangle of lies and delusion — I wondered, what would the point of such a story be?  It is indeed a strange and baffling tale, and Soderbergh’s movie accentuates its bizarreness.  The cast lurch about from frame to frame in expensive suits, like so many earnest penguins, accompanied by chirpy instrumental jazz;  changes of scene are announced in absurd purple day-glo 70s lettering:   you cannot take this seriously.   And the action’s just surreal: the seriousness of the characters themselves is continually undermined by the ludicrousness of  what is happening, as the plot itself descends deeper and deeper into unreason.  Over and over again, the movie repeats what is in essence the same gag: Whitacre, who’s until now assured his handlers that this time he’s really been telling them the whole truth, calmly and without warning reveals a whole new layer of larceny and lies, laying them on the table with naive confidence, like a deluded poker player triumphantly displaying a losing hand. And what we laugh at is the silent consternation evident in the carefully blank face of his handler, or his lawyer, as he watches his client self-destruct and leave them in the lurch.   This is what the prosecution in the Selebi case must be feeling right now, as their star witness calmly destroys his own testimony. The film plays it for laughs:  they sit slack jawed and  goggle eyed, immobilised by horror as they watch their case fall apart before them. It’s funny, but it’s also not funny: though we laugh, it is with an undertone of discomfort. And no wonder.  It’s a scary thing, getting lost in the layered realities of a pathological liar.

‘What was Mark Whitacre thinking?’ That’s how the movie’s official website frames it, and it’s a good question.  Initially presenting as the unlikely hero in a story of white collar crime —  a slightly geeky guy motivated by the wish to be the hero’ —   he is slowly revealed to be a lunatic, a fabulist: all that is solid melts into air; you do not know what or whom to you believe; and you’re left wondering, with horrified  fascination, what could be driving such spectacular self-destruction.   Most accounts of the film explain it by referencing the facts of the actual story on which the movie is based.  Whitacre was suffering from bipolar mood disorder, they say; and in any case, being an undercover snitch for the FBI  would drive most people bats.  And don’t you think that it is unjust that he got imprisoned for so long for stealing a paltry nine million dollars when AMD stole hundreds of millions?

Well, personally, I don’t think it that is  a very satisfying explanation.   For one thing, the real-world veracity  of a story is actually one of its  less interesting aspects when you consider it as a story.  What matters in a story is how it is told,  how the events cohere.  That  a particular thing actually happened is in a way neither here nor there;   the question is what does it mean, what role does it play?  And in this regard, when you look at what is actually shown on screen, the real-life explanation clearly does not hold. I am no clinician,  but what we see on the screen is not a bipolar individual.  Bipolar people may be grandiose, but they don’t act like this.  This is something far more disconcerting and edgy.  Whitacre’s  steady stream of lies, his apparent lack of morals or shame, his utter disconnection from people around him, and, above all, his ceaseless projection of  a confident, sincere exterior, in the teeth of all the facts and all shared realities: these are symptoms not of a mood disorder, but of a much more severe disturbance.   I may be mistaken here, but I say  unto you: DSM IV. Axis II. Cluster B. Check it out, and be afraid.  And  be  very glad if you have not encountered this in your personal or working life. I am talking psychopathic, narcissistic, or borderline tendencies at the very least.

The Man Without a Self

This is where I think  the casting of Matt Damon is particularly brilliant.  Matt Damon comes to us from the Bourne trilogy, the story par excellence of the Man Without a Self —  the man who does not know who he is, and whose only means of survival is continuous, improvisatory dissembling. But while in the Bourne movies we are invited to identify with the hero — those films are structured so that we continually share his confusion and his burning, single-pointed desire to survive – The Informant! puts you in the shoes of those who have to deal with the mounting chaos of all the ever deepening pile of lies.  If you have been around it, you will know how disorienting, how scary it is to encounter this kind of personality disorder, and how much chaos and confusion  can be sown.  The thing is not only that you are dealing with a disturbed or damaged person; it is that their essential malfunction is often disguised by ahigh degree of apparent competence, a persona of considerable force and conviction.  But this mask is all there is.   When it slips, you will find, not an ordinary vulnerable human being, but another mask, another cover story, an another impenetrable  surface, presented with unflappable conviction.  And it’s scary, because the trick is that we very soon start feeling we are the crazy ones: we find ourselves in a dizzying mirror-world where the  ordinary rules of human behaviour and compassion simply do not apply.

In other words, it’s corporate culture.  This, I think, is the real point of this film. For the most noticeable aspect of the film, other than the frightening comedy of Whitacre’s ever more surreal lies, is its relentless evocation of the banal  surface of corporate life. Every frame is a picture of Guys in Suits, of bland hotel interiors, of boardrooms and golf courses.   Every image is of a world which asks you to conform while never giving you any safety;  a world in which there is no access to anything natural, spontaneous, unconditioned or real; a world in which your future depends on your fooling the system into thinking you are what you think it needs you to be.   In one of the most evocative  moments of the film, the soundtrack plays a long Aspergerish monoloue by Whitacre, a story  in which one company executive notices another’s tie  is the mirror image of his own, and then falls down dead.  The visuals show us a long, still shot of one of the FBI operatives — a representative of one paranoid, conformist, conspiratorial organization sent to spy on representatives of another — crouching over a box of cornflakes, contemplating it like Rodin’s thinker: a shackled man, clutching a box of artificial food.  The image captures an important aspect of the film: though this is a study of corporate power, no-one appears powerful.  The men wear  suits, but they are stripped of dignity; hunched; their bodies tense.   Everyone in the film — cops, executives, secret agents, judges — leads a life  subject  entirely to impersonal,  bureaucratic organisations; but even conformity cannot guarantee survival, for to depend on them is to depend on something  entirely arbitrary, unreasoning, untrustworthy, baleful.

So how else to deal with such an irrational, baleful reality except by turning lying into a way of life?    Marc Whitacre’s most poignant characteristic is his deluded desire to be the good guy, the guy in the white hat. Well who doesn’t want to be that?  But the co-ordinates he has chosen, the values by which he lives, are those of corporate America.  And the point about corporations is not so much that they are soulless or impersonal. We should be so lucky.  Think about it: endlessly grandiose; obsessed with appearances; lacking any sense of  interiority; no capacity for vulnerability;   bereft of compassion;  virtuous only when trying to conform with the auditable, measurable indicators of virtue; and with only the most tenuous relationship to truth.   If companies were people, they’d be psychopaths.  These are the masters we have created.  No wonder sociopaths do so well in business. There’s a  deadly synergy between such folks and the culture they inhabit.  And this synergy is the secret of both Whitacre’s initial success and his eventual failure.

Whitacre and the ADM lawyers. Who's the real sociopath?

But failure kind of saves him. Most of us learn sooner or later that heroes exist only in stories; that we have to be learm to be the flawed,  ordinary people we really are.  Marc Whitacre’s tragedy is that for most of the film he is unable to make this shift: he can only try, over and over, with increasingly ornate fabulations, to be the hero he thinks he needs to be.   By the end of the film it is unbearable to watch: we watch him soldier on, unstoppably, caught like a fish on his own hook of lies.  Only one person is able to release him.  His wife, who all along has been playing along with him, maddeningly supporting him in his insanity, softly says to him during one of his meetings, Darling, you have to stop this.  It is a terrible, delicate moment.  It is the only time love speaks in the film.  I’m not sure whether it is goodness. But it is  kindness. She dares, oh so gently,  to speak the truth; and at last he can be liberated from his cage of lies.

To be like us:  Vulnerable.  Slightly pathetic. Slightly lost:  and therefore not so lost.

Viendo el éxito que tuvo el anterior post de Frases de ilustres emprendedores con 364 visitas y un promedio de 4 visitas al día, os dejo más frases, esta vez, no solo de emprendedores ilustres, sino de; filosofos, humoriastas, anónimos,… todas ellas para hacer reflexionar:

”Aquél que obtiene una victoria sobre otro hombre es fuerte, pero quien obtiene una victoria sobre sí mismo es poderoso”. Lao tse (Filosofo Chino IV a.C.)

”No SE PUEDE dar marcha atrás al reloj, pero sí se le puede dar cuerda nuevamente”. Anónimo

”Educar es formar personas aptas para GOBERNARSE a sí mismas, y no para ser gobernadas por otros.” Herbert Spencer – (Filosofo británico)

“La humanidad, partiendo de la nada y con su sólo ESFUERZO, ha llegado a alcanzar las más altas cotas de miseria.” Groucho Marx (Humorista)

“Haz lo necesario para lograr tu más ardiente DESEO, y acabarás lográndolo.” Ludwind van Beethoven (compositor y musico)

“DA EL PRIMER PASO con fe. No tienes por que ver toda la escalera. Basta con que subas el primer peldaño.” Martin Luther King

” La ILUSIÓN despierta el EMPEÑO y solamente la PACIENCIA lo termina. ” Anonimo

”Aquel que mete la pata, y reconoce su falta, da prueba de su VALOR, RECONOCIENDO su falta”. Cantinflas (Humorista)

GAZE zara!

ERIK

Bilge kişi su gibidir,

su ki, beslerken dört bir yönü,

yarışmaz, tartışmaz şunu, bunu.

Kibirsizce akar, seçmeden sağı solu,

bu yüzdendir ki, Yol’a uyumludur yolu.

İşte bilge kişi benzer şekilde,

yaşar, doğayla iç içe…

Düşüncesinde derin,

verirken tarafsız engin.

Konuşurken doğru,

ve yönetirken dürüst.

Gündelikte yeterli,

ve edimlerinde tutarlı.

Yeteneğince üretici,

fırsatlar kadar girişimci.

Ne kimseye üstün olma çabasında,

ne de kimse ona üstün.

Lao-Tse

“Tao Te Ching” (Yol ve erdem) adlı kitabından

.

o eterno retorno

.

me lembro bem, eu já fui um deus

daqueles que moviam mundos e fundos

bastava rir para ver tudo florir

mas aqueles que eu chamava de meus

aqueles que deveriam ter fé

foram virando as costas

e, sem mais nem menos, me largaram a pé

sem perguntas e sem respostas

.

eu sabia que a sensação de estar só

como tudo nesse mundo

um belo dia, retornaria ao pó

e assim me tornei um vagabundo

um inútil pária das estrelas

um monumento ao nada que sirva

um sinônimo de ovelha

não de pastor ou cristo ou shiva

.

o mundo era meu, estava escrito,

no entanto, não tomei posse

e deixei o bem dito pelo maldito

mas se a luz é sombra até que se mostre

encontrei no breu o farol da volta

a poesia me pegou na veia

e, com mil poetas como escolta,

voltei à vida com a caneta cheia!

.

Guardador de Vaca

.

.

“Inteligente é quem os outros conhece; sapiente é quem conhece a si mesmo. Forte é quem aos outros vence; poderoso é quem domina a si mesmo.” (Lao-Tsé)

Acolo unde dragoste nu e, nici Pace… Ziua Internationala a Pacii !

Moto :

* Ca să fie pace în lume, trebuie ca popoarele să trăiască în pace. Pentru ca popoarele să trăiască în pace, oraşele nu trebuie să se ridice unele împotriva altora. Pentru a fi pace în oraşe, vecinii trebuie să se înţeleagă. Ca să fie pace între vecini, trebuie ca armonia să domnească în familie. Ca să fie pace în casă, trebuie s-o găseşti în propria inimă. *   ( Lao Tse )

În 1981 Adunarea Generală a ONU a declarat că a treia marţi din septembrie, ziua de deschidere a sesiunilor ordinare ale Adunării Generale din fiecare an, să fie declarată oficial şi observată ca Ziua Internaţională a Păcii şi să fie dedicată comemorării şi întăriri idealului de pace atat in interiorul frontierelor, cat şi între toate ţările şi popoarele” (Rezoluţia 36/67 a Adunării Generale). În 2001 Adunarea Generală a ONU a adoptat o nouă rezoluţie, 55/282 declarând ziua de 21 Septembrie a fiecărui an ca şi Ziua Internaţională a Păcii.

„Ziua Internaţională a Păcii va deveni ziua de încetare a focului şi ziua nonviolenţei, o invitaţie către toate naţiunile şi popoarele să onoreze o întrerupere a ostilităţilor pentru toată durata acestei zile…”

Rezoluţia „invită toate statele membre, organizaţiile sistemului ONU şi organizaţiilor non-guvernamentale şi indivizii să comemoreze, într-o manieră acceptabilă, Ziua internaţională a păcii, participând la educaţie şi conştientizarea publicului şi să coopereze cu ONU pentru instaurarea unei încetări globale a focului.”

Pacea nu este absenţa războiului. Este o virtute, o dispoziţie spre bunăvoinţă, încredere, dreptate.   ( Baruch Spinoza )

* Dumnezeu nu ne poate oferi fericire şi pace în afara Lui, pentru că ele nu se află acolo. Nu există aşa ceva. *   ( C S Lewis )

Pentru pace mă rog

Pentru pace mă rog, pentru lucruri uitate
şi pentru oameni din singurătate.
Un cerc vrăjit se-nchide în jurul lor.
Si fruntea-ngheaţă, orele cobor,
spre zi, mai albe, orele cobor.

Mă mai rog pentru sângele plin
de întuneric şi spaimă, sânge străin,
nicicând să nu fie vărsat pe pământ,
unde morţii aproape ca florile sunt.

Autor : Magda Isanos

http://www.poezie.ro/

* Pacea nu este absenţa conflictului, ci prezenţa alternativelor creative pentru a răspunde la conflict – alternative la reacţii pasive sau agresive, alternative la violenţă. *   ( Dorothy Thompson )

Poate ca intr-o zi… o zi pe care-o dorim , la care gandim si nadajduim, ea, Pacea, nu va mai fi doar un vis… Si nu vor mai fi Vietnam, nici Kosovo, nici Fasia Gaza, nici Iraq sau Afganistan… nu vor mai fi scene de conflict, si nici … pretexete…in ziua-n care vom pune pret mai mare pe Cuvant, vom stii sa iubim, iertam, toleram, vom accepta ca nu terorismul e raspuns la terorism, ca nu prin agresivitate instauram pacea-n lume ci prin dialog, negocieri, intelepciune…

Am mai scris, nu e deajuns niciun efort… refresh :

Profesorul Vojin Dimitrievic de la Facultatea de drept din Belgrad,  spunea ca : ” Anumite origini ale terorismului pot fi deplorabile in sine, datorita situatiilor penibile ( de exemplu rasism, colonialism, violarea drepturilor omului ) , in timp ce altele nu sunt astfel, daca se tine seama de faptul ca teroristii, in ansamblu provin din minoritati frustrate. In lupta pentru eradicarea terorismului ar trebui pornit de la studierea profunda si obiectiva a cauzelor care-l genereaza si facandu-se un apel umanist, o tema de casa pentru constiinta fiecaruia din noi : repararea nedreptatilor, inegalitatilor, discriminarilor pe care unele societati le provoaca, marginalizand, izoland grupuri sociale cu usurinta, in interes propriu , cu nepasare si irosind de cele mai multe ori talente si valori. “Teroristii” recurg la acte de violenta, invocand si acuzand in exasperarea si deznadejdea lor, tacerea si inertia autoritalilor responsabile in fata mizeriei, a institutiei si inegalitatilor, a opresiunilor. Actele lor de violenta apar mai degraba ca un raspuns la adresa societatii si nu ca un atac, deci ca un atac de aparare, ca o riposta la violenta oficiala organizata pe care cei bogati si puternici, cei care detin forta la un moment dat o utilizeaza cu nesimtire si perversitate pentru a-si mentine privilegiile. Violenta genereaza violenta. Daca s-ar studia cu obiectivitate si total dezinteresat germenii din care rasar actele de violenta, s-ar pune in lumina toate nedreptatile sociale, s-ar demasca adevaruri dureroase. Nu exista o preocupare reala pentru gasirea remediului total, dovada prea multele intrebari la care, nu exista interes pentru a se gasi raspunsuri viabile. Terorismul este neindoielnic si un razboi psihologic. Anumite mari puteri ale lumii s-au erijat de la sine cu aroganta si indolenta , in scopuri bine conturate, in mintile lor bolnave si diabolice, in ” politai mondiali ” de cea mai joasa speta, in musafiri nepoftiti ce profaneaza deseori pana si teritorii sacre si sfinte pentru popoarele defavorizate de soarta. Acesti viermi se ascund sub glazura stralucitoare a bunilor samariteni, luand drept model de comportament sarutul otravitor, lunecos si pervers al lui Iuda Iscarioteanul, vanzandu-si sufletele ratacite si putrede pe dorintele proprii de marire, imbogatire rapida. Acesti nemernici privesc cu dispret si aroganta popoarele defavorizate social, statele mici, a caror cultura nu fac nici un efort sa o inteleaga, dezinteres total deci; se avanta chiar in vendete personale fara urma de demnitate, sunt demni de sila si mila. In nemernicia si fatarnicia lor, putin le pasa de victimele inocente, de batrani neajutorati, de cei lipsiti de aparare, obligandu-i si antrenandu-i cu de-a sila in razboaie si revolutii cusute cu ata alba si toate acestea chipurile in a face bine cu de-a sila, pentru a incovoia spatele celor care-si duc crucea destinului cu demnitate, raman victimele colaterale, care sunt deja intr-o proportie alarmanta. Astfel s-a procedat, sa recunoastem macar pentru propriile constiinte in : Vietnam, Japonia, in fosta Republica Federativa Yugoslavia, in Iraq… si firesc este sa ne intrebam cine urmeaza… probabil Iranul, Siria, Correa si…cine mai stie cine…

Profesorul Radovan Vukadinovic spnea ca : ” Exista temeiuri sa se vorbeasca deja despre un veritabil labirint de raboaie si de intelegeri secrete, unde uneori este foarte dificil sa afli mobilurile politice, in timp ce este relativ usor sa recunosti anumite forme caracteristice de activitati teroriste. Mozaicul de forte, de orientari politice, de probleme nesolutionate si de conflicte deschise, alaturi de prezenta principalelor puteri mondiale, creeaza un teren incontestabil propice extinderii terorismului de care multi au cea mai mare nevoie > ” Reactia oficiala la cresterea intensitatii puseurilor de violente este incercarea de a-l controla si suprima in interese personale, numai prin forta si nicidecum prin indepartarea cauzelor care-l provoaca. Dorinta nestapanita si patologica de innavutire, saracia crunta, coruptia la cele mai inalte niveluri politice, injustitia, segregatia rasiala, nevoia cronica de a detine suprematia mondiala, alimenteaza continuu acest fenomen. In permanenta cineva va avea interes in acest sens, si, totusi… pana cand ??.. Rolul mijloacelor de informare este crucial pentru mass media, caci, nu trebuie confundat terorismul cu criminalitatea ordinara. Nu avem voie sa promovam cultul violentei, sa nu picam in pacatul de a glorifica terorismul ca pe un mijloc de a realiza ceva, sa nu promovam cinismul, atitudinea ostila, lacomia, lipsa de omenie, insensibilitatea, aroganta, ignoranta, altfel, ajungem a ne fi asezat de una din partile baricadei iar adevarul este de fapt undeva la mijloc. Opusul violentei este comunicarea, caci, a omori pe cineva este metoda cea mai rapida de a rezolva orice conflict. Rezolvarea lui neviolenta se poate face si altfel, da, cere timp, efort, stradanie, rabdare, dar si inteligenta. Altfel,sfidam cu buna stiinta valorile spiritului uman. Exista o tendinta de deturnare a atentiei opiniei publice de la cauzele reale ale acestui fenomen numit flagelul violentei. Mijloacele de informare in masa, televiziunile, cinematografia, nu ofera alternative de educatie tinerelor generatii, caci mai mult promoveaza actele de violenta, manipuleaza ideile, gandurile, mintea si astfel educatia de orice fel da nastere la insatisfactii. Cei care controleaza oficial sau neoficial aceste mijloace detin o pozitie cheie in structura puterii unei societati. Realitatea ne demostreaza ca trebuie sa facem ceva in acest sens, mai inati de toate sa fim obiectiv informati. Avem puterea de a accepta a recunoaste cine este cel mai ” veritabil terorist ” …???…. abia atunci cand vom fi pregatiti sa ne implicam, sa nu ne resemnam, vom primi intelepciunea de a face distinctie, de a gasii solutii, alternative, de a ne recunoaste greselile, unor dihanii precum USA, care, numai judecator al pacii nu poate fi numita, dovada, victimele si cimitirele, ororile si consecintele ireparabile… Si, iarasi zic : Vietnam, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, fosta Yugoslavja, Iraq, etc… peste tot, victime, orfani, vaduve, teroare, rani, cimitire, traume si, Doamne, cate altele… trist e ca acstea, chipurile, in numele * democratiei * , in numele * pacii *… Ori Pacea, inseamna mai intai de toate, Dragoste, iubirea care nu doare, nu  face victime, nu ucide!

Astazi, la ora 12,  Minutul de Pace… de maine, fiecare din noi, sa promovam pacea ca Dragoste, educandu-ne copiii, informandu-ne, promovand nonviolenta, demascand inculpatii- indiferent cine sunt aceia- cerand insistent si raspicat autoritatilor sa inceteze a antrena tinerii nostri soldati in razboaiele altora, unde interesele sunt * cheia * nicidecum bunastarea vreunui popor, chemand la dialog, militand pentru incetarea fabricarii si comercializarii, a folosirii armelor de distrugere-n masa, a armelor biologice, etc… implicandu-ne, nu vom mai fi cu usurinta manipulati!

Adrian Paunescu – Sa fie pace in lume !

Sa fie pâine pe masa

Si toti ai casei acasa

Si grâu-n brazda sa iasa

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

Si ale lumii guverne

Sa stie bine-a discerne,

Nevoia vietii eterne,

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

Sa fie-o blânda lumina,

Si nu rachete-n gradina,

Doar vesti frumoase sa vina,

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

Ca focul rau sa nu arda,

Cât viata-n noi nu e moarta,

Sa stam cu totii de garda

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

Sub zbuciumatele astre,

Destul cu-atâtea dezastre,

O cer durerile noastre,

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

Destul cu traiul de câine,

Spre dezvoltare Si pâine

Si pentru ziua de mâine

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt.

De-o pace dreapta mi-e sete,

Plenara-ntregii planete,

A hotarât ce se vede,

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt

Ministrii lumii sa n-asculte

De interese oculte,

Ci de vointele multe,

Sa fie pace, pace, pace pe Pamânt!

* Hrăneşte-ţi inima cu pace. Aceasta înseamnă să trăieşti în pace cu tine însuţi. Dacă inima este plină de neîncredere şi egoism, capul nu găseşte niciodată căi către pace. Pacea începe acolo unde se termină ura şi lăcomia. Lumea nu poate fi schimbată cu violenţă, ci numai cu inima.

Hrăneşte-ţi inima cu pace. Aceasta înseamnă să respiri în linişte. Să devii una cu tot ce trăieşte şi moare! Gata cu micile războaie de zi cu zi! Pune capăt întregii violenţe din interiorul tău cu gesturi de împăcare.

Hrăneşte-ţi inima cu pace. Aceasta înseamnă să întâlneşti cu respect tot ce este slab şi vulnerabil. Să fii atent la tot ceea ce te face fericit. Nu există pace în lume dacă nu există pace în inima ta şi a mea. *   ( Phil Bosmans )

Sibilla

citate preluate de pe ww.citapedia.ro

imagini preluate de pe google.ro

Beim Surfen durch die Weiten des World Wide Web stößt man immer wieder auf diverse Zitate aus der Menschheitsgeschichte, die das Thema Reisen betreffen. Daran erkennt man, dass das Reisen seit Jahrtausenden nicht nur Vergnügen oder notwendiges Übel darstellt, sondern auch oft auch philosophisch betrachtet wurde. In den folgenden Wochen werde ich mich immer wieder dem Ursprung solcher Zitate widmen und versuchen, deren Bedeutung aus verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten zu beleuchten.
Zwei der größten Reisezitate der Menschheit stammen von dem chinesischen Philosophen Lao Tse (auch Laotse genannt), was übersetzt lediglich “Der Alte” bedeutet. Etwa 700 Jahre vor Christus sprach er die weisen Worte:

“Eine Reise von tausend Meilen beginnt mit einem einzigen Schritt.”
“Der wahre Reisende hat keinen festgelegten Weg, noch will er an ein Ziel.”

Daraus ergeben sich verschiedene Deutungsmöglichkeiten. Es muss zunächst beachtet werden, dass das Reisen erst seit Beginn der Industriellen Revolution einigermaßen schnell und komfortabel vonstatten geht. Im alten China war eine Reise durch das Land bereits eine Angelegenheit von Wochen. Zudem war unterwegs die Versorgung, zumindest für die einfachen Leute, nicht gesichert. Oftmals musste man sich unterwegs durch Tagelohn seinen Proviant verdienen. Auch dass Laotse von einem einzigen Schritt spricht, ist signifikant. Adelige reisten niemals zu Fuß, sie ritten oder wurden gar auf Sänften getragen. Was Laotse aber wahrscheinlich damit zum AUsdruck bringen wollte, war der Mut, der erforderlich ist, um eine solch lange Reise mit all ihren Risiken und Gefahren erst einmal in Angriff zu nehmen. Zudem stellen die Worte eien Metapher für das Leben selbst dar, was in Kombination mit dem zweiten Zitat sehr in den Vordergrund rückt.
Diese Worte stehen vor allem im Sinne des Taoismus, denn das Buch “Tao Te King” ist das bekannteste Werk von Laotse. Der Sage nach zog sich der Philosoph aus China zurück, als die öffentlichen Zustände unerträglich wurden. Als er die Grenze erreichte, bat ihn der Grenzbeamte um eine schriftliche Hinterlassenschaft. Daraufhin schrieb Laotse rund 5000 chinesische Zeichen nieder, die als das “Buch vom Sinn und Leben” bekannt wurden. Danach zog der alte Mann nach Westen und ward nie wieder gesehen. Somit erfüllt er auch selbst seine Weisheiten, denn auch er reiste wohl ohne echtes Ziel in ein fernes Land, in die Ungewissheit.

Por Sugel Michelén

Pocos personajes en la historia han tenido un impacto más profundo y de más largo alcance que el de nuestro Señor Jesucristo, la influencia de su vida, de su obra, de sus enseñanzas se puede palpar ampliamente a lo largo de estos 20 siglos que han transcurrido después de su paso por el mundo. Pero, ¿quien fue Cristo realmente? ¿debemos pensar en él sólo como un iluminado en el mismo nivel de Buda, Mahoma, Confucio, Lao Tse? ¿fue Jesucristo un profeta mortal, un hombre y nada más? ¿Quien es realmente Jesucristo? Esa es la pregunta que quisiera responder, centrando mi atención en una famosa declaración de Cristo mismo que encontramos en Juan 14:6.

Obtener audio

“Un viaje de mil millas empieza con un paso”

The government that seems the most unwise,
Oft goodness to the people best supplies;
That which is meddling, touching everything,
Will work but ill, and disappointment bring.
- Tao Te Ching

En algún tiempo parecía ser tu pintura al óleo,

en la que a cada pincelazo construías una primavera

y en cada mirada creabas nuevas ideas de cómo reflejar una realidad,

irreal.

Amaba ser azul

y a veces rojo, amarillo…

ser el blanco lienzo que acariciban tus manos

buscando el punto exacto

para comenzar la creación.

Al parecer ya no soy más

ni un triste balde

para enjuagar tus penas.

Breve História da Humanidade

Sempre tem um malandro que quer levar vantagem sobre os outros. Isso foi observado desde o início da história das sociedades humanas. Movido pelo medo e pelo desejo, esse sacana mesolítico mentia, roubava, matava e estuprava. Esse macaco egoísta é você e eu.

No artigo anterior vimos que o egoísmo é a origem de todo sofrimento e desordem. Levantou-se a possibilidade de estarmos condicionados a acreditar que o sofrimento é uma característica inseparável do ser humano. Achamos que o homem não tem jeito. Como esse condicionamento pessimista foi acontecer?

O ser humano é movido por desejos de segurança física e psicológica, ânsia por prazer e estímulos em geral e, principalmente, por medo de perder tudo isso. Essa é nossa herança animal, e é tão forte que parece irremovível. Conforme as sociedades foram percebendo que o egoísmo gerava os problemas, foram criando regras para contê-lo. No início ninguém pensou em tratar os impulsos primitivos diretamente. Parecia muito mais fácil e rápido focar numa ideologia geral e mantê-la usando instituições: Polícia, Família, Educação, Religião, Partidos, etc.

Funcionou? Até certo ponto sim, porque seguimos esses modelos até hoje. As instituições se transformaram muito, e seus níveis de influência foram se alternando, mas o foco no coletivo e na ideologia geral de cada sociedade se manteve. Fizemos grandes revoluções; queimamos bruxas; unificamos feudos; decapitamos reis; industrializamos nossas vidas; impomos nossa ideologia a outros povos; queimamos sutiã; dançamos pelados no parque; veneramos uma maçã mordida e vibramos ouvindo “Yes, we can”. Mas não acabamos com nosso condicionamento.

(O comunismo merece um capítulo especial. Na teoria chegaram bem mais fundo na busca pela raíz do problema. Ainda assim, foi apenas outro sistema social. No parágrafo acima vimos que as mudanças sociais são apenas superficiais no que se refere ao fim do sofrimento e à liberação da humanidade. Os sistemas sociais tratam o problema por partes, apenas combatendo os sintomas. Os comunistas podem dizer que “não foi feito corretamente” ou o clássico “fomos traídos”. Mas traídos por quem? Nós somos a sociedade! “I am the world” diria o Krishnamurti.)

Na própria origem, as sociedades são criadas por impulsos primitivos e condicionamento: Medo, insegurança, desejo por poder, etc. Depois de tantos séculos de fracassos, acabamos acreditando que é natural que as pessoas mintam, roubem, matem e estuprem. “Se nenhum sistema social conseguiu eliminar nosso egoísmo significa que ele é intrínseco à condição humana. Tudo o que podemos fazer é direcioná-lo de modo menos nocivo”… Será? Pensando em Lao Tsé, Buda, Jesus e alguns gurus da atualidade, eu discordo.

Ilustração do Mestre Milo Manara

Posted by: pol.

“El conocimiento del ser humano es la base de todo éxito” (Charles Chaplin)

“A través de las acciones de los hombres se esbozan sus caracteres” (Aristóteles)

“La manera de actuar es la manera de ser” (Lao-Tseu)

La dramaturgia consiste en imitar acciones humanas, por lo tanto en crear personajes, empezando por el protagonista. El arte de crear personajes se denomina caracterización, y es un elemento fundamental en dramaturgia. Es, igualmente, una de las actividades más delicadas, ya que la facultad para crear personajes vivos se tiene o no se tiene; es como el sentido del humor.

(La Dramaturgia, Yves Lavandier)

El autor es quizás demasiado taxativo: “una facultad que se tiene o no se tiene”. Es posible que esto no sea del todo así… Tal vez exista un “sistema”, una “manera”. Tal vez esa ‘facultad’ se pueda adquirir. Un profesor mío solía decir: “para aprender a escribir hay que aprender a mirar“. Caracterizar a un personaje de forma verosímil, matizada, sin simplezas, se puede aprender observando la realidad, observando a las personas. Quiero creer -y así lo espero- que se puede aprender.

the prophet Jeremiah (Michelangelo, Sistine Chapel) was a contemporary of Heraclitus, as were Lao Tse, Zoroaster, and the Buddha. all of them participated in bringing about what's been called a Great Leap of Being, of which we need another.

lately i’ve been reading Heraclitus through Richard Geldard. to my joy, what the back cover of his book (Remembering Heraclitus) promised turned out to be true; through Geldard, i have advanced my appreciation and understanding of Heraclitus as “one of the principle sources of Western mystical thinking.”

here are some of Heraclitus’ fragments:

3. Listening to the Logos, and not to me, it is wise to agree that all things are One.

13. To God all things are beautiful, good, and just, but human beings have supposed some things to be unjust, others just.

15. Nature prefers to hide.

16. They do not apprehend how being in conflict it [the Logos] still agrees with itself; there is an opposing coherence, as in the tensions of the bow and the lyre.

39. You would not find out the limits of the soul, even by traveling along every path, so deep a Logos does it have.

53. I searched my nature.

And a thought from Geldard, inspired by his study of Heraclitus: Consciousness is not a part of us (generated, for example, by the brain); we are part of consciousness (the Greater Consciousness, the Logos). Just as any given radio can transform the flux and flow of all-pervasive electromagnetic waves into something locally coherent (a particular song, at a particular volume, in whatever room the radio resides), our central nervous systems are that which transforms Consciousness into little-c consciousness, our consciousness – a local coherence, or resolution, of peculiar being.

Cand esti multumit sa fii pur si simplu tu insuti si sa nu te compari cu ceilalti, toti te vor respecta.

Lao Tse

” Se cura aquel que se aburrió de estar enfermo…”

Lao Tsé

Im Laufe der Weltgeschichte hat der Urmeister in verschiedenen Ländern inkarniert und gewirkt, um den Menschen das DHARMA vorzuleben:

• RAJA JANAKA, der König von Mithila in Indien, lebte in der Zeit um 5000 vor Christus .

Er war mutig, tugendhaft, versiert in den alten indischen Schriften, den Shastras und Veden. Wie im großen Epos der Ramayana beschrieben, veranstaltete er einen Wettkampf , dessen Gewinner die Hand seiner Tochter Shri Sita erhielt. Der Sieger war Shri Rama.

König Janaka war total losgelöst. Einmal blieb er in Meditation am Fluß, während sein Palast abbrannte. Das beeindruckte seinen einzigen Schüler Nachiketa nachhaltig.

Shri Janaka war ein NATH. Das heißt, er hatte das Wissen über die Kundalini und gab es von Generation zu Generation weiter.

“Wenn du im Reich der göttlichen Kraft lebst, dann sorgt sie für dich!” Raja Janaka.

****

• PROPHET ABRAHAM lebte in der Zeit um 2000 v.Chr.in Mesopotamnien und Palästina.

Er war der 1. Patriarch der jüdischen Nation. Eine gleichwichtige Person für die Christenheit und für den Islam. Er ist anerkannt als der Stammvater von Mohammed, dem Propheten. Er wird mit den grundlegenden Qualitäten Glaube, Pflichtgefühl, Hingabe und Geduld assoziiert.

FLICKR-FOTO von jmcfall. Das Haus von Prophet Abraham.

****

• PROPHET MOSES lebte in der Zeit um 1200 v.Chr. in Ägypten und Palästina.

Als ausgestztes Sklavenbaby wurde er durch die Adoption der Tochter des Pharao zu einem ägyptischen Prinzen. Als er die Sklaverei, die die Hebräer erdulden mußten, nicht mehr ertrug und auswandern wollte, erschien ihm Gott in einem brennenden Dornbusch und trug ihm auf, nach Ägypten zurückzukehren. Und die Hebräer aus der Sklaverei zu führen. 40 Jahre wanderten sie durch die Wüste während Moses versuchte, die Unmoral und Inbalance dieser Menschen zu korrigieren. Am Berg Sinai erhielt Moses die 10 Gebote von Gott:

1. Du sollst an einen Gott glauben.
2. Du sollst den Namen Gottes nicht verunehren.
3. Du sollst den Tag des Herrn heiligen.
4. Du sollst Vater und Mutter ehren, damit du lange lebest und es dir wohlergehe auf Erden.
5. Du sollst nicht töten.
6. Du sollst nicht Unkeuschheit treiben.
7. Du sollst nicht stehlen.
8. Du sollst kein falsches Zeugnis geben.
9. Du sollst nicht begehren deines Nächsten Frau.
10. Du sollst nicht begehren deines Nächsten Gut.

Er ist als großer Prophet bei Christen, Juden und im Islam anerkannt.

FLICKR-FOTO von wallyg.

****

• PROPHET ZARATHUSTRA lebte in der Zeit um 1000 v. Chr. in Persien.

Er war auch ein religiöser Poet, der das Universum als kosmisches Ringen zwischen Wahrheit und Falschheit sah. Er hob die Wichtigkeit des Gebrauches unseres freien Willens hervor um die Wahrheit und das Gute im Leben zu etablieren. W.A.Mozart setzte ihm als Sarastro in seiner Oper “Die Zauberflöte” ein Denkmal:

“In diesen heil´gen Hallen kennt man die Rache nicht.

Und ist ein Mensch gefallen, wird Liebe ihm zur Pflicht.

Dann wandelt er an Freundeshand

vergnügt und froh ins bess´re Land.

In diesen heil´gen Mauern, wo Mensch den Menschen liebt,

kann kein Verräter lauern, weil man dem Feind vergibt.

Wen solche Lehren nicht erfreu´n

verdienet nicht, ein Mensch zu sein!”

****

• PHILOSOPH KONFUZIUS lebte von 551-479 v. Chr. in China.

Er hat das Leben und Denken in China, Japan, Korea und Vietnam sehr stark beeinflußt. Er betonte die Wichtigkeit der  Moral nicht nur bei Unterprivilegierten, sondern besonders bei den Menschen in höheren Positionen. Und auch den Wert der sozialen Beziehungen, der Justiz und der Aufrichtigkeit. Er schuf die vollkommene  Staatsordnung und nannte sie “das Weltgebäude der Ordnung”.

FLICKR-FOTO vonAnetteFotos.

KONFUZIUS:“Der Edle kennt weder Sorge noch Furcht!”

****

• PHILOSOPH LAO-TSE lebte im 6.Jhd. v. Chr.in China.

Er gründete die Schule des Taoismus. Seine Werke lehren die Philosophie des TAO oder des Weges – die universelle Wahrheit, die das Universum verwandelt. Das Tao findet man, wenn man die Einigkeit von allen Dingen erkennt, wenn man Eins mit der Natur und dem inneren Selbst ist.FLICKR-FOTO von heidelbär.

ELIAS DER POET erzählte uns einmal: LAO-TSE ritt auf einem Ochsen von China nach Indien. Ein Zollbeamer bat ihn, seine Lehre aufzuschreiben. So entstand das TAO THE KING = TUN OHNE ZU TUN.

****

• PHILOSOPH SOKRATES lebte von 469-399 v.Chr. in Athen.

Er war der klassische griechische Philosoph und Reformer, der Vater der Logik. Ursprünglich war Sokrates ein Bildhauer. Er glaubte an die Existenz der absoluten Wahrheit und sprach oft von seiner “inneren, göttlichen Stimme”. Er war ein Verfechter des sorgfältigen Urteilens im Streben nach der absoluten Wahrheit. Seine analytischen Praktiken wurden als Naturwissenschaften bekannt.

FLICKR-FOTO von whooz queen.

****

• PROPHET MOHAMMED lebte von 570-632 n.Chr. in Mekka.

Er gründete den Islam. Das Wort bedeutet HINGABE. Mohammed wurde in Mekka geboren. Mit 40 Jahren erhielt er die ersten Offenbarungen vom Erzengel Gabriel. Lange war er unsicher, er betete drei Jahre und übte spirituelle Praktiken aus bis er von der Echtheit der Botschaften überzeugt war. Diese Botschaften bekam er während seines ganzen weiteren Lebens. Er lehrte sie und schrieb sie im Heiligen Buch des KORAN nieder.

FLICKR-FOTO von  kellyv 27.       DER KORAN

“Gehorche Gott, bevor der Tag kommt, der Tag an dem Gott sich nicht mehr zurückhalten wird. An jenem Tag wird es keinen Ort der Zuflucht mehr geben. Ihr werdet eure Werke nicht verleugnen können”. Koran 42.47

****

• GURU NANAK lebte von 1469-1539 n. Chr. in Indien.

Er gründete die Religion der Sikhs. Geboren in einer Hindufamilie in der Nähe von Lahore sprach er über die Einheit Gottes, die Erlösung durch den Glauben und der guten Werke und die Gleichheit der Menschen. Er glaubte genauso an die Gleichberechtigung der Frauen und an eine universielle Religion.FLICKR-FOTO von yogadharma.

****

• SHRI SAI BABA VON SHIRDI lebte von 1838-1918 n. Chr.

Er war ein indischer Guru und Sufi. In seinem Leben trachtete er Islam und Hinduismus zu versöhnen. Er veranstaltete gemeinsame Feste und Rituale beider Religionen. Als Shri Sai Nath lebte er in Maharastra in Askese, predigte über Liebe, Genügsamkeit, Zufriedenheit,Vergebung, gegenseitige Hilfe, Nächstenliebe, inneren Frieden und die Hingabe an den Guru und an Gott.

FLICKR-FOTO von mehtakk55.

****

Das Meisterprinzip ist in unserem Bauchbereich angelegt. Hier ruht das Dharma, der ideale Verhaltenskodex, in uns. Durch das Aufsteigen der Kundalini-Energie kann mittels regelmäßiger Meditationen dieses Energiezentrum gereinigt und von Blockaden befreit werden.

****

ZITATE von ELIAS, dem POETEN:

“Die 10 Meister sind gekommen, damit sich die Menschen im Gerümpel des Void (Ozean der Leere – Region um den Bauchnabel) zurechtfinden. Z.B. mit Hilfe der 10 Gebote.

Der wirkliche Meister ist im Besitz der Leere und ist bestrebt dem Schüler  die Vereinigung mit dem Göttlichen zu ermöglichen.

Du mußt alles selbst machen, es kann niemand für dich tun, Die Wahrheit ist immer in Dir!”

Draupadi.