שלום.नमस्ते.สมาธิ.Pax.سلم.Peace.Sat Nam.صلح.Kwey.Amani.ειρήνη.Pace.Paz.Paix.Fred.Frieden.Vrede.Siochana.мир.和平.平和.평화.Aloha.
Holy Scriptures Study, Week 18 Mishpatim, 118.6.7
Torah
Shemot 21:1 – 24:18
“These are the laws that the Israelites must obey.” (v1)
“If you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve for six years, but in the seventh year he is to be set free without paying for his freedom.” (v2)
Wife and children gained within slavery to slave remain property of master.
Slave has option to remain for life with master, with piercing of his ear.
Rules are prescribed for relationships with female slaves.
“If one person deliberately strikes another and the victim dies, the murderer must be put to death.” (v12).
Respite is given for manslaughter.
The death penalty is proscribed for specific offences.
Rules are prescribed amidst injuries to slaves.
“Compensation must be paid for the loss of an eye, a tooth, a hand, or a foot. Compensation must also be paid for a burn, a wound, or a bruise.” (v24-25).
Rules are proscribed for an ox goring a person.
Rules are proscribed for responses towards thievery.
Rules are proscribed for agricultural interaction.
Rules are proscribed for safeguarding and entrusting material to another person.
“If a man sleeps with a virgin who is not engaged to anyone, he must pay a dowry and must marry her.” (v15).
The death penalty is proscribed for additional offences.
“Do not abuse a foreigner or oppress him, for you must remember that you were foreigners in Egypt.” (v20).
“Do not abuse a widow or an orphan. If you abuse them, and they cry to Me for help, I will hear their cry.” (v21).
Generosity and patience is proscribed in lending to indigent people.
People are obliged to judge in fairness, without favouring the rich or poor.
Additional law of Kashrut are proscribed.
Transgressive speech is admonished.
“If you come across your enemy’s ox or donkey that has wandered away, you must bring it back to him.” (v4).
“If you see an overloaded donkey that belongs to someone who hates you, you may not want to help him unload it, but nevertheless you must do so.” (v5).
“You shall not accept bribes.” (v8).
“You shall not oppress a foreigner. You know how it feels to be a foreigner, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt.” (v9).
Shabbat is proscribed for land and for all people, including servants.
Feasts of Matzot (Pesach), Harvest (Shavuot), and Ingathering (Sukkot) are proscribed.
“Be aware that I will send an angel to safeguard you on your journey and bring you to the land I have prepared for you.” (v20).
Adonai describes the clearing away of the previous inhabitants of Eretz Israel.
Praying to other deities is forbidden.
“(Moshe) came and repeated to the people all of Adonai’s teachings and laws. The Israelites responded with a single voice: “We will treasure and obey every word that Adonai has spoken.” (v3).
Moshe writes down the mitzvot.
Sacrifices are made to Adonai.
“(Moshe), along with Aaron, Nadav, and Avihu, and the seventy leaders, went up the mountain, and there they saw a vision of Adonai, and under (Adonai’s) feet there was a floor decorated with sapphire jewels as clear as the heavenly skies.” (v10).
Moshe ascends the mountain with Yoshua.
--
What is the intrinsic and esoteric connexion between the respective rules for servitude, for violence, for the “ger” (stranger), for the orphan and widow, and for the enemy? What is being taught about the intrinsic responsibilities that each person has within life, and perhaps the intrinsic value and legitimacy that each person also has?
How do the rules for the servitude of, and lending towards, foreigners compare with the servitude of, and lending towards, an Israelite?
What is the metaphysical and tangible benefit within observing a Shabbat for the land, and how does this compare with the respective ecological principles, teachings, and stories within additional religious traditions, including within indigenous communities?
What is the nature of the angel of Adonai, as well as that of Adonai’s protection and preceding the children of Israel?
How can the “clearing away” of Eretz Israel be understood in an esoteric and metaphysical manner, as well as within an actual manner? And what are the contemporary implications and relevance of this guidance amidst the current circumstances involving Eretz Israel? Is it necessary to even wage violence against transgressors amidst proficient Faith in Adonai?
Within Chapter 24, Verse 4, of Shemot, it is written that Moshe writes all these rules down; amidst this, why is it necessary to ascend the mountain to receive the stone tablets with the 10 Commandments?
How does the vision that the children of Israel have of Adonai compare with the vision that Arjuna has of Sri Krishna, the Heavenly Eye of the Buddha, the experience that Peter, James, and John have with Jesus, Moshe, Eliyahu and God, and the experience that Muhammad has with the angel, Gabriel (Jibril)?
--
Bhagavad Gita
Chapters 17 – 18
“Every creature is born of faith of some kind, either sattvic, rajasic, or tamasic. Listen, and I will describe each to you.” (v2).
“Those who are sattvic worship the forms of God; those who are rajasic worship power and wealth. Those who are tamasic worship spirits and ghosts.” (v4).
“Some invent harsh penances. Motivated by hypocrisy and egotism, they torture their innocent bodies and (Me) who dwells within. Blinded by their strength and passion, they act and think like demons.” (v5-6).
“To offer service to the (deities), to the good, to the wise, and to your spiritual teacher; purity, honesty, continence, and nonviolence: these are the disciplines of the body.
“To offer soothing words, to speak truly, kindly, and helpfully, and to study the scriptures: these are the disciplines of speech.
Sattvic, rajasic, and tamasic distinctions are described for types of food and performing sacrifices.
“Calmness, gentleness, silence, self-restraint, and purity: these are the disciplines of the mind.” (v14-16).
Sattvic, rajasic, and tamasic distinctions are described for motivations in providing such service and giving.
“Om Tat Sat: these three words represent Brahman, from which come priests and scriptures and sacrifice.” (v23).
“Those who follow the Vedas, therefore, always repeat the word Om when offering sacrifices, performing spiritual disciplines, or giving gifts.” (v24).
“Those seeking liberation and not any personal benefit add the word Tat when performing these acts of worship, discipline, and charity.
“Sat means ‘that which is’; it also indicates goodness. Therefore it is used to describe a worthy deed.” (v25-26).
“To be steadfast in self sacrifice, self discipline, and giving is sat. To act in accordance with these three is sat as well.
“But to engage in sacrifice, self discipline, and giving without good faith is asat, without worth or goodness, either in this life or in the next.” (v27-28).
“To refrain from selfish acts is one kind of renunciation, called sannyasa; to renounce the fruit of action is another, called tyaga.” (v2).
“Among the wise, some say that all action should be renounced as evil. Others say that certain kinds of action—self sacrifice, giving, and self-discipline—should be continued.” (v3).
“Self-sacrifice, giving, and self-discipline should not be renounced, for they purify the thoughtful.
“Yet even these, Arjuna, should be performed without desire for selfish rewards. This is essential.” (v5-6).
Responses to fulfilling and renouncing responsibility are explained in terms of sattva, rajas, and tamas.
“As long as one has a body, one cannot renounce action altogether. True renunciation is giving up all desire for personal reward.” (v11).
“Those who are attached to personal reward will reap the consequences of their actions: some pleasant, some unpleasant, some mixed.
“But those who renounce every desire for personal reward go beyond the reach of karma.” (v12).
“The body, the means, the ego, the performance of the act, and the (Divine) will:
These are the five factors in all actions, right or wrong, in thought, word, and deed.” (v14-15).
“Those who do not understand this think of themselves as separate agents. With their crude intellects they fail to see the (Truth).
“The person who is free from ego, who has attained purity of heart, though he slays these people, he does not slay and is not bound by his action.” (v16-17).
“Knowledge, the thing to be known, and the knower: these three promote action. The means, the act itself, and the doer: these three are the totality of action.
“Knowledge, action, and the doer can be described according to the gunas. Listen, and I will explain their distinctions to you.” (v18-19).
“Sattvic knowledge sees the one indestructible Being in all beings, the unity underlying the multiplicity of creation.
“Rajasic knowledge sees all things and creatures as separate and distinct.
“Tamasic knowledge, lacking any sense of perspective, sees one small part and mistakes it for the whole.” (v20-22).
Distinctions of the gunas are described for types of work, workers, intellect, will, and happiness.
“The different responsibilities found in the social order—distinguishing Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra—have their roots in this conditioning.” (v41).
Descriptions of varnas is provided.
“It is better to perform one’s own duties imperfectly than to master the duties of another. By fulfilling the obligations he is born with, a person never comes to grief.” (v47).
“Unerring in his discrimination, sovereign of his senses and passions, free from the clamor of likes and dislikes,
“he leads a simple, self-reliant life based on meditation, controlling his speech, body, and mind.” (v51-52).
“Free from self-will, aggressiveness, arrogance, anger, and the lust to possess people or things, he is at peace with himself and others and enters into the unitive state.
“United with Brahman, ever joyful, beyond the reach of desire and sorrow, he has equal regard for every living creature and attains supreme devotion to (Me).
“By loving (Me) he come to know (Me) truly; then he knows (My) glory and enters into (My) boundless being.
“All his acts are performed in (My) service, and through (My) grace he wins eternal life.” (v53-56).
Sri Krishna commands Arjuna’s obeisance and departs from Arjuna.
“Those who meditate on these holy words worship (Me) with wisdom and devotion.
“Even those who listen to them with faith, free from doubts, will find a happier world where good people dwell.” (v70-71).
--
How does the Hindu (and perhaps Buddhist) notion of service and charity compare with that of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam? How do the teachings for service and equanimity shared within these chapters (and additional chapters) of the Bhagavad Gita compare with the mitzvot of righteousness (specifically regarding servitude, foreigners, judgment, and economic interaction) shared within this week’s passage from the Torah of Judaism? What are the core, fundamental principles that are being addressed and cultivated within each; and where is there synonymity?
How is the perspective of multiple deities reconciled with the belief in an Ultimate Reality that is Brahman? How can the “personification” of the Divine, within different religious traditions and communities, be proficiently reconciled so that such religious communities may be able to coexist, cohabitate, coincide, and even cooperate with each other, and prosper, without imposing one’s beliefs on the other?
Whilst delving within extremities, there is the consideration of what actually is a “selfless act;” and a coinciding consideration with this is: what actually is a “selfish act,” recognising that every act has some type of benefit for someone else other than the actor? Amidst this, and returning into the gray area of regular life, there is the consideration of how to balance such “selfless” and “selfish” actions (and speech and thought) to enhance what seems to be intended within such “selflessness” (and perhaps even the “selfishness”): wellbeing of all beings; yet what is that wellbeing; what is an appropriate balance of such wellbeing, particularly with respect to the respective intentionalities of beings?
How does the description of “though he slays these people, he does not slay,” compare with the description from the Torah regarding the angel of Adonai driving out the previous inhabitants of Eretz Israel? What is being communicated within these messages?
Amidst the described distinctions between sattvic and tamasic knowledge, can it be considered that each individual maintains some form of tamasic tendency (even whilst being sattvic); that even the Bhagavad Gita guides a spiritual aspirant beyond the pursuit of such wisdom to transcend the gunas and attain Nirvana?
How do the Hindu varnas (caste system) compare with the code of righteousness within Judaism (considering the distinctions made for foreigners, Levites, Kohanim, and additionally)? Are such distinctions simply self-serving to the “priestly caste,” and/or is there some validity to the structure that such segregation establishes?
--
Digha Nikaya
Mahapadana Suttanta (Chapter 3)
“Then to Vipassi the Exalted One, ARahant, Buddha Supreme, brethren, this occurred:-- ‘What is I were to teach the Truth.’” (v1).
“Then to him, brethren, this occurred:-- ‘I have penetrated this Truth, deep, hard to perceive, hard to understand, calm, sublime, no mere dialectic, subtle, intelligible only to the wise. But this is a race devoting itself to the things which it clings, devoted, thereto, delighting therein. And for a race devoting itself to the things to which it clings, devoted thereto, delighting therein, this were a matter hard to perceive, to wit, that this is conditioned by that, and all that happens is by way of cause. This too were a matter hard to discern:-- The tranquillization of all the activities of life, the renunciation of all substrata of rebirth, the destruction of craving, the death of passion, quietude of heart, Nirvana. And if I were now to teach the Truth, and other men did not acknowledge it to me, that would be wearisome to me, that would be hurtful to me.” (v1).
Vipassi recites a poem of such intentions.
A “Brahma” solicits Vipassi to teach the Dharma; Vipassi refuses.
The Brahma pleads 2 additional times.
“(Leader)! Let the Exalted One preach the Truth! Let the Welcome One preach the Truth! There are beings whose eyes are but hardly dimmed with dust; they are perishing from not hearing the Truth; they will come to be knowers of the Truth!” (v6).
Vipassi changes his mind at the compassionate pleas.
“Then, brethren, when Vipassi the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha Supreme, became aware of the entreaty of the Brahma, because of his pitifulness towards all beings, he looked down over the world with a Buddha’s Eye. And so looking, brethren, he saw beings whose eyes were nearly free from dust, and beings whose eyes were much dimmed with dust, beings sharp of sense and blunted in sense, beings of good and of evil disposition, beings docile and indocile, some among them discerning the danger in rebirth and in other worlds, and in the danger in wrong doing.” (v6).
The “Brahma” recites a poem to Vipassi, continuing the plea; Vipassi responds.
“Wide opened are the portals to Nirvana!
“Let those that hear renounce their empty faith!
“Despairing of the weary task, O Brahma,
“I spake not of this doctrine, sweet and good, to men.” (v7).
The “Brahma” perceives being the subject of Vipassi’s message, being destined to attain Nirvana, bows to Vipassi, and leaves.
Vipassi goes to the Sanctuary, in the deer-park of Bandhumati, to teach the Dharma.
The leaders of the land come to listen to Vipassi.
“When the Exalted One saw that they had become prepared, softened, unprejudiced, upraised and believing in heart, then he proclaimed the Truth which the Buddhas alone have won; that is to say, the doctrine of Sorrow, of its origin, of its cessation, and the Path.” (v11).
The leaders of the land gain the Dharma and become disciples of Vipassi.
84,000 additional inhabitants of Bandhumati come to listen to Vipassi.
“Surely this is no ordinary religious rule, this is no common going forth, in that the raja’s son and the chaplain’s son have had their heads shaved, have donned the yellow robe and gone forth from the House into the Homeless state. Khanda and Tissa have indeed done this; why then should not we?”
The 84,000 inhabitants adopt the Dharma of Vipassi.
84,000 recluses learn about Vipassi, arrive to hear Vipassi’s teaching, and adopt the Dharma of Vipassi.
Vipassi considers sending out the bhikkhus to teach the Dharma.
A “Brahma” learns of Vipassi’s intentions and pleads for Vipassi to do so.
“I gran ye leave, brethren! Fare ye forth on the mission that is for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, to take compassion on the world and to work profit and good and happiness to (deities) and men. Go not singly but in pairs; teach ye, brethren, the Truth, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation, both in the spirit and in the letter; proclaim ye the higher life in all its fullness and in all its purity. Beings there are whose eyes are hardly dimmed with dust, perishing because they hear not the Truth; they will become knowers of the Truth. Moreover, brethren, after every six years have passed come ye to Bandhumati, there to recite the Patimokkha.” (v26).
The bhikkhus venture out and return after 6 years.
Vipassi recites a poem:
“How many ye best the flesh subdue?
“Be patient, brethren, be forbearing.
“What is the highest, what the best?
“Nirvana, brethren, say the Buddhas.
“For he’s no Wanderer who harms
“His fellow man; he’s no recluse
“Who works his neighbour injury.
“Work ye no evil; give yourselves to good;
“Cleanse ye your hearts,--so runs the Buddhas’ word.
“Blame not, strike not, restrain self in the Law,
“With temperance eat, lonely seek rest and sleep,
“Given to thoughts sublime,--so runs the Buddhas’ word.” (v28).
The Buddha describes his conversation with celestial beings about Vipassi and the proclamation of him becoming a Buddha.
--
After attaining enlightenment, how can the previous Buddha, Vipassi, experience “hurt” and discouragement?
How does the description of the “Brahma” compare with Hindu Theology, specifically referring to the creative characteristic within Brahman: Brahma? Is this being to be understood simply as a celestial being, similar to that of an angel, described within this week’s portion within the Torah?
How does the Buddha Eye, within this passage of the Mahapadana Suttanta, compare with that of the “eye of equanimity” described within the Bhagavad Gita? Amidst the “eye of equanimity” and understanding the manner in which the Divine Self of Brahman exists equally within each individual, does that equate to absolute equality amidst the tremendous aesthetic differences (perhaps like drops of water within an ocean)? Where is the appropriate balance for recognising and genuinely appreciate the unique qualities in each person, whilst simultaneously cultivating the Divine nature within each individual as well?
How does Vipassi’s, “Let those that hear…”, compare with Jesus’, “He who has ears to hear..”? Is there danger or fallibility within the intrinsic dichotomy of such a doctrine; effectively proclaiming those who agree and adhere as the righteous? How can the dangers, and trappings, of such doctrines be preempted through recognition of the omnipresent Divine; or is such implicit criticism simply, intrinsically hypocritical and establishing the same binary?
How does Vipassi’s “sending forth” of the bhikkhus compare with Jesus’ “sending forth” of the apostles? How can these respective “sendings forth” be evidenced within the contemporary practises of the respective adherents of Buddhism and Christianity?
Is there any similarity to Yitro’s advice to Moshe and the “Brahma’s” advice to Vipassi, the respective manners in which Moshe and Vipassi adopt such advice, and the respective, subsequent transmission of the mitzvot and the Dharma?
Also, how do the Buddha’s latter proclamations compare with the latter proclamations that Jesus makes within the Gospels?
--
Gospels
Chapters 13 – 16
Jesus responds to Pilate’s killing of the Galileans.
Jesus tells the parable of planting manure around the fig tree.
Jesus heals a woman during Shabbat and rebukes the leaders of the Synagogue for challenging him.
Jesus tells parables of the Sovereignty of God: like a mustard seed; like leaven.
“He said therefore, ‘What is the (Sovereignty) of God like? And to what shall I compare it? It is like a grain of mustard seed which a man took and sowed in his garden; and it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made nests in its branches.” (v18-19).
“And again he said, ‘To what shall I compare the (Sovereignty) of God? It is like leaven which a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.” (v21-22).
“Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.” (v24).
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’” (v34-35).
“And behold, there was a man before him who had dropsy. And Jesus spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying ‘Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath, or not?’ But they were silent. Then he took him and healed him, and let him go. And he said to them, ‘Which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well, will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?’ And they could not reply to this.” (v2-6).
“When you are invited by any one to a marriage feats, do not sit down in a place of honor, lest a more eminent man than you be invited by him; and he who invited you both will come and say to you, ‘Give place to this man,’ and then you will begin with shame to take the lowest place. But when you are invited, go and sit in the lowest place, so that when your host comes he may say to you, ‘Friend, go up higher’; then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at table with you. For every one who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (v7-11).
“He said also to the man who had invited him, ‘When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your kinsmen or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.’” (v12-14).
Jesus tells the parable of the man inviting guests to his banquet.
“If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (v26).
“Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” (v27).
“Salt is good; but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltness be restored? It is fit neither for the land nor for the dunghill; men throw it away. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” (v34-35).
Jesus tells the parable of rejoicing over 1 lost sheep; 1 lost silver coin.
Jesus tells the parable of the prodigal son.
“Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. It was fitting to make merry and be glad, for this your brother was dead, and is alive; he was lost, and is found.” (v31-32).
Jesus tells the parable of the thriftful steward.
“And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal habitations.” (v9).
“He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and he who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much. If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will entrust to you the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is another’s, who will give you that which is your own?” (v10-12).
“No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.” (v13).
“Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” (v18).
Jesus tells the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.
--
What is the background story regarding the Galileans whom Pilate kills?
Is the telling of forsaken souls a self-fulfilling prophesy? Does there similarly exist fallacy within the approach of proclaiming the liberation of everyone? Is there a fundamental contradiction between loyalty and equanimity of compassion? What are some of the prominent, tangible susceptibilities within the binary of righteous and unrighteous (such as social economic segregation and oppression, waging of righteous wars, preclusion of education and marriage, and additionally); and the susceptibilities within the proclamation of a “Universal” Heaven (such as diffuseness of social relationships, diffuseness of economic productivity and systems of exchange, making immediate discernments and judgments upon disputes between individuals, and additionally)? What susceptibilities exist within the other end of the spectrum from Universal compassion: complete cynicism and nihilism (such as hypocrisy within admonishment of convention whilst relying upon such systems; absence of responsibilities towards others and solutions for social challenges, and additionally)?
Without the incidents of healing, and without the teachings of extreme compassion that Jesus provides, how compelling is Jesus’s condemnation of the leaders of Israel? What is the nature of confluence and distinction between these two messages?
In one lesson regarding Shabbat, Jesus refers to an ox or child falling into a well; however, Rabbis may argue that the healing that Jesus performs is other than an emergency, such as the circumstances regarding the well (which may be permissible); how is the Christian doctrine regarding Shabbat formulated, considering the traditional observance of Sunday Worship?
Within the proficient humility within Jesus’s parable regarding the “low seat” at the marriage feast, there is the consideration of how taking the low seat in order to be honored seems to still delve into the susceptibility of seeking honor; is there benefit in assuming the “low seat” and remaining resolute within the low seat? How does this compare with the teaching from the Bhagavad Gita regarding the selflessness and selfishness within an action (and the characteristics of sattva and rajas)? How does Jesus’s teaching regarding “inviting the poor” compare with this, as well?
Within the poignancy of the parable of the prodigal son, what are the implications regarding the distinction between the brothers, presumably within the context of an individual entering Heaven?
Amidst the benefits within the parable of the thriftful steward seems, emphasising one’s propensity for negotiation, how can this be applied within the diverse forms of disagreements that people seem to have towards each other? How can we offer discounting of each other’s “debts” towards each other? And what is meant by the notion, “unrighteous mammon.”
--
Koran
Sura 19: Maryam (Mary)
There is the story of Zechariah.
“Sufficient, Guide, Blessed, Knowing, Truthful God.” (v1).
“He said: My Lord, my bones are weakened, and my head flares with hoariness, and I have never been unsuccessful in my prayer to Thee, my Lord.” (v4).
“He said: So it will be. Thy Lord says: It is easy to Me, and indeed I created thee before, when thou wast nothing.” (v9).
There is the story of Mary.
“Surely We inherit the earth and those thereon, and to Us they are returned.” (v40).
“And mention Abraham in the Book. Surely he was a truthful man, a prophet.
“When he said to his sire: O my sire, why worshippest thou that which hears not, nor sees, nor can it avail thee aught?
“O my sire, to me indeed has come the knowledge which has not come to thee; so follow me, I will guide thee on a right path.” (v41-43).
“He said: Peace be to thee! I shall pray my Lord to forgive thee. Surely (Allah) is ever Kind to me.
“And I withdraw from you and that which you call on besides Allah, and I call upon my Lord. Maybe I shall not remain unblessed in calling upon my Lord.” (v47-48).
“And mention Moses in the Book. Surely he was one purified, and was a messenger, a prophet.
“And We called to him from the blessed side of the mountain, and We made him draw nigh in communion.” (v51-52).
“And mention Ishmael in the Book. Surely he was truthful in promise, and he was a messenger, a prophet.” (v54).
“These are they on whom Allah bestowed favours, from among the prophets, of the seed of Adam, and of those whom We carried with Noah, and of the seed of Abraham and Israel, and of those whom We guided and chose. When the messages of the Beneficient were recited to them, they fell down in submission, weeping.” (v58).
“But there came after them an evil generation, who wasted prayers and followed lusts, so they will meet perdition,
“Except those who repent and believe and do good—such will enter the Garden, and they will not be wronged in aught.” (v59 -60).
“They will hear therein no vain discourse, but only, Peace! And they have their sustenance therein, morning and evening.” (v62).
“Lord of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, so serve (Allah) and be patient in (Allah’s) service. Knowest thou any one equal to (Allah)?” (v65).
“And Allah increases in guidance those who go aright. And deeds that endure, the good deeds, are, with thy Lord, better in recompense and yield better return.” (v76).
There is reference to the Day of Judgment.
“Those who believe and do good deeds, for them the Beneficent will surely bring about love.” (v96).
“So We have made it easy in thy tongue that thou shouldst give good news thereby to those who guard against evil, and shouldst warn thereby a contentious people.”
--
How do the respective stories of Zechariah and Mary, within the Koran, compare with the same narratives within the Christian Gospels?
How do the respective narratives of Avraham and Moshe compare with those found within the Torah?
What are the implications regarding the Muslim beliefs regarding Israel? Does verse 58 affirm a lineage of inheritance from Avraham and Yitzak through Yaakov (Israel); and does the dispute of perspectives between Muslims and Jews exist regarding the circumstances of proceeding generations of the children of Israel?
How does the service referenced within verse 65 compare with that of tyaga described within the Bhagavad Gita; and how do the proscribed interactions and relationships between a servant and Allah compare with that between a servant and Brahman?
How does the “increasing of those who go aright,” described within verse 76 compare with the “he who is Faithful in little is Faithful in much” described within the Gospels?
Within verse 96, there is a conspicuous utilisation of the word, “love;” what are the implications regarding this specific passage, and does this maintain any significance that may be unique within the Koran?
--
Blessings upon the Prophets
May Peace and Blessings of God Be upon the Rishis, Moshe, the Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Universe, Baha’u’llah, Guru Nanak, Zarathustra, Avraham, Confucius, Lao Tzu, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, the Indigenous, Tainoterranea, Asia, Europe, Mediterranea, and Africa. Om. Amen.
שלום.नमस्ते.สมาธิ.Pax.سلم.Peace.Sat Nam.صلح.Kwey.Amani.ειρήνη.Pace.Paz.Paix.Fred.Frieden.Vrede.Siochana.мир.和平.平和.평화.Aloha.
No comments:
Post a Comment