שלום.नमस्ते.สมาธ.Pax.سلام.Peace.साटीनाम.صلح.Kwey.Amani.Udo.Barış.ειρήνη.Pace.Paz.Paix.Fred.
Frieden.Vrede.Siochana.мир.امن.和平.平和.평화.Ingatka.Wominjeka.Aloha.
.
.
.
...
ૐ.אמן
Holy Scriptures
Study, Week 9; Vayeishev; 118.4.8
Vayeishlev
Bereshit
37:1 – 40:23
Yaakov
settles in Canaan in area where Yitzak settles.
Yaakov
favours Yosef (with coloured coat), and brothers have animosity towards Yosef.
Yosef
has dream of his brothers’ sheaves bowing to his sheaf.
Yosef
has dream of Sun, Moon, and 11 Stars bowing to him (comparing Yaakov, Rachel,
and brothers).
Yaakov
sends Yosef to join his brothers in the field.
Yosef’s
brothers throw him in a well and sell him to merchants travelling to
Egypt; Yosef is sold to Potiphar.
Yudah
moves away from brothers and has children with natives.
Yudah
sleeps with his daughter-in-law, Tamar, who bears Peretz and Zerach.
Yosef
finds favour with Potiphar and attains responsibility and status.
Potiphar’s
wife attempts to seduce Yosef and accuses him of attempting to rape her; Yosef is sent to prison.
The
Pharaoh’s cup-bearer and baker are put into prison and both have different
dreams; Yosef interprets the dreams and
tells of 2 different outcomes; the
cup-bearer is restored and the baker is executed.
--
Why
does Yosef dream about sheaves in the field when he, his family, and the tribes
of Avraham are herdspeople?
It
seems as though Reuven is the responsible and compassionate son in trying to
save Yosef from his brothers. Yet,
Reuven is described as later sleeping with one of Yaakov’s wives, causing him
severe disgrace and curses. Who is
Reuven and what can be learned from his example?
How
does the story of Yudah, through this time, compare with that of Reuven? What is the significance of Yudah “moving
away” from his brothers, and what implications does this having with respect to
the subsequent occurrence of the tribe of Yudah amidst the “lost tribes”? What lessons are to be learned from Yudah
propositioning a prostitute who later is revealed as his own daughter-in-law?
What
esoteric (“Karmic”) lessons exist within the story of Yosef? Whilst it may seem unfavourable for Yosef to
be placed within prison, this facilitates his transfer from Potiphar’s house to
Pharaoh’s house that may otherwise be prevented by a possessive Potiphar. Similarly, when Yosef’s brothers capture him
and sell him to the merchants going to Egypt, this secures the survival of the
tribes of Israel (as is later explained in subsequent Parshot). How can we better appreciate the purpose of
contemporary circumstances that seem to be other than what we favour?
--
Bhagavad
Gita
Chapter
9
All
Creation is derived from, and returns to, Brahman
Wise
look beyond aesthetics to realise Brahman
Jnana: spiritual wisdom, seeing Brahman within
everything
Various
descriptions of the Omnipresence of Brahman
Brahman
is ultimately the destination of all worship
Make
all actions (eating, sacrificing, helping, suffering) an offering to Brahman
All
creatures are perceived equal to Brahman;
Brahman “comes alive” in those creatures that worship Brahman
Absolving
of harm through devotion to Brahman
Supreme
goal available to all births, races, sexes, castes
--
Bhagavad Gita
Chapter 9
“Because of your faith, I shall tell you the
most profound of secrets: obtaining both jnana and vijnana, you will be free
from all evil.
“This royal knowledge, this royal secret, is
the greatest purifier. Righteous and imperishable, it is a joy to practice and
can be directly experienced.
But those who have no faith in the supreme
law of life do not find (Me), Arjuna. They return to the world, passing from
death to death.” (v1-3).
“I pervade the entire universe in (My)
unmanifested form. All creatures find their existence in (Me), but I am not
limited by them.
“Behold (My Divine) mystery! These creatures
do not (actually) dwell in (Me), and though I bring them forth and support
them, I am not confined within them.
“They move in (Me) as the winds move in every
direction in space.” (v4-6).
“The foolish do not look beyond physical
appearances to see (My True) nature as the Lord of all creation.
“The knowledge of such deluded people is
empty; their lives are fraught with disaster and evil and their work and hopes
are all in vain.” (v11-12).
“But (Truly) great souls seek (My Divine)
nature. They worship (Me) with a one-pointed mind, having (Realised) that I am
the eternal source of all.
“Constantly striving, they make firm their
resolve and worship (Me) without wavering. Full of devotion, they sing of (My
Divine) glory.
“Others follow the path of jnana, spiritual
wisdom. They see that where there is One, that One is (Me); where there are
many, all are (Me); they see (My) face everywhere.” (v15).
“I am the ritual and the sacrifice; I am
(True) medicine and the mantram. I am the offering and the fire which consumes
it, and (That) to which it is offered.
“I am the father and mother of this universe,
and its grandfather too; I am its entire support. I am the sum of all
knowledge, the purifier, the syllable Om; I am the sacred scriptures, the Rig,
Yajur, and Sama Vedas.
“I am the goal of life, the Lord and support
of all, the inner witness, the abode of all. I am the only refuge, the one
(True) friend; I am the beginning, the staying, and the end of creation; I am
the womb and the eternal seed.” (16-18).
“I am heat; I give and withhold the rain. I
am immortality and I am death; I am what is and what is not.” (v19).
“Those who follow the rituals given in the
Vedas, who offer sacrifices and take soma, free themselves from evil and attain
the vast heaven of the (deities), where they enjoy celestial pleasures.
“When they have enjoyed these fully, their
merit is exhausted and they return to this land of death. Thus observing Vedic
rituals but caught in an endless chain of desires, they come and go.” (v20-21).
“Those who worship (Me) and mediate on (Me)
constantly, without any other thought, I will provide for all their needs.”
(v22).
“Those who worship other deities with faith
and devotion also worship (Me), Arjuna, even if they do not observe the usual
forms.
“I am the object of all worship, its enjoyer
and Lord. But those who fail to (Realise) (My True) nature must be reborn.
“Those who worship the devas will go to the
realm of the devas; those who worship their ancestors will be united with them
after death. Those who worship phantoms will becaome phantoms; but (My)
devotees will come to (Me).” (v23-25).
“Whatever I am offered in devotion with a
pure heart—a leaf, a flower, or water—I partake of that love offering.
“Whatever you do, make it an offering to
(Me)—the food you eat, the sacrifices you make, the help you give, even your
suffering.
“In this way you will be freed from the
bondage of (Karma), and from its results both pleasant and painful. Then, firm
in renunciation and yoga, with your heart free, you will come to (Me).”
(v26-28).
“I look upon all creatures equally; none are
less dear to (Me) and none more dear. But those who worship (Me) with love live
in (Me), and I come to life in them.” (v29).
“Even a sinner becomes holy when he worships
(Me) alone with firm resolve. Quickly his soul conforms to (Dharma) and he
attains to boundless peace.
“Never forget this, Arjuna: no one who is
devoted to (Me) will ever come to harm.” (v30-31).
“All those who take refuge in (Me), whatever
their birth, race, sex, or caste, will attain the supreme goal; this
(Realisation) can be attained even by those whom society scorns.
“Kings and sages too seek this goal with devotion.
Therefore, having been born in this transient and forlorn world, give all your
love to (Me).
“Fill your mind with (Me); love (Me); serve
(Me); worship (Me) always. Seeking (Me) in your heart, you will at last be
united with (Me).” (v32-34).
“Listen further, Arjuna, to (My) supreme
teaching, which gives you such joy. Desiring your welfare, O strong-armed
warrior, I will tell you more.
“Neither (deities) nor sages know (My)
origin, for I am the source from which the (deities) and sages come.
--
Discussion Questions From Chapters 9 – 10
How does the “secrecy” described within
Chapter 9 compare with the elusive oral tradition of the Torah within Judaism,
and the striving for authentic Hadith and explanation within Islam, and the
oral tradition of learning directly from (and through the example of) a Monk
particularly within a traditional lineage in the Theravadan Buddhist tradition,
as well as with the proclamations of Jesus regarding, “he who has ears to
hear”? What purpose does this notion of secrecy serve amidst the conveyance of
esoteric knowledge? What self-serving tendency might this have in simply
“marketing” and establishing mystique and appeal for the knowledge being
shared; and what legitimate characteristic of esotericism, exclusivity, and
even elitism exists within such knowledge? Is there any legitimacy within the
notion of ultimate Truth being Universally experienced by each being, and that
each being has the capacity to understand (in some way) the fundamental Truth
that exists within all phenomena and circumstances? And if so, how might this
be conveyed within a simple and basic manner (particularly with the
consideration of facilitating reconciliation, cooperation, understanding, and
Peace, within humanity)?
How might the Ultimate unity of Brahman be
appropriately perceived within a tangible manner? How does such a “supreme
consciousness” exist amidst the numerous sentient being simultaneously existing
within the Universe? What applicability does the Buddha’s teaching, regarding transcending
even thought, have regarding the nature of this Universality? Are
“supreme intellects” ultimately joined within
synonymity with each other, and how might this phenomena coincide with the
egoistic tendency that seems to exist within the intellect? And how is this
balanced with spiritual awareness and practises of benevolence and compassion?
Does the notion of “exhausting merit” through
the enjoyment of “pleasures” affirm the perception of there existing an
intrinsic “quid pro quo” “zero sum gain” arrangement for all beings regarding
the respective experiences of pain and pleasure? How does this compare with the
“blessing” and the “curse” from Moshe; with the Day of Judgment (Al Yom
Qayimah) and the Pleasures of Heaven, from the Koran; with the concepts of
Heaven and hell, within Christianity; and similar notions regarding Karma
within Buddhism? Can previous malfeasance genuinely be evidenced within the
current experience of adversity within an individual? How do respective
teachings regarding having compassion, benevolence, and empathy for individuals
experiencing such hardships (such as poverty, disease, oppression, and
additionally) factor within such a notion? How does “transcending pleasure and
pain” actually look within a temporal realm where mere existence seems to
predicate an intrinsic necessity to behave in a manner that favours one’s own
existence (and the continuance thereof), even if simply to promote the
wellbeing of others?
How does being “the object of all worship”
compare with Jesus’s teaching regarding “those who abstain from being against
us are with us” (in response to his disciples’ concerns about others healing
people in the name of Jesus, without being actual disciples of Jesus)?
Amidst “looking upon all creatures equally,”
what is the nature of the distinctions that exist amidst such creatures? What
is the nature of the synonymity? How does an individual’s perception of other
creatures, and the Universe, change amidst becoming increasingly united with
Brahman (and this phenomenon of equanimity)?
How does the Bhagavad Gita’s teachings of
deities (essentially that all deities are derived from the Ultimate Reality of
Brahman) compare and contrast with the respective teachings of deities within
both Judaism and Islam (both, similarly summarily rejecting the notion of other
deities, and forbidding any praise thereof); and with the Buddha’s teachings
(essentially acknowledging such deities, yet placing extreme insignificance
with the existence thereof, and actually proclaiming the Buddha as superior to
such deities whilst existing, presumably, subordinate to the Ultimate phenomena
of Nirvana); as well as with the Trinity of Christianity?
How do the characteristics described within
Verse 5 compare with the “feminine qualities” described later within the
Bhagavad Gita? Are these to be understood as “masculine” or “Universal”
characteristics” If Universal, does the Bhagavad Gita implicitly describe any
characteristics that are effectively masculine?
Who are the “7 sages” and the “4 ancient
ancestors”?
--
Digha
Nikaya
Mahali
Sutta
The
Buddha travels to Vesali; and the news
of his arrival is shared amongst the local residents and visitors.
The
Brahmins from Kosala and Magadha go to visit the Buddha; Nagita explains that it is inconvenient to
meet with the Buddha at that juncture;
the Brahmins sit and wait.
Hare-Lip
the Likkavi also visits the Buddha, receives the same response, and also sits
and waits.
Siha,
“a novice,” approaches, with same response, and further protests.
Nagita
relents and advises Siha to approach the Buddha by Siha’s own accord.
Siha
approaches the Buddha, and the Buddha acquiesces to the solicitation and
provides a discourse.
Hare
Lip the Likkavi asks about another adherent’s experience regarding the ability
to seeing Heavenly forms but the inability to hear Heavenly sounds; and Hare Lip the Likkavi asks whether such
Heavenly sounds actually exist.
The
Buddha confirms that such Heavenly sounds exist; and Hare Lip the Likkavi asks why the other
adherent is unable to hear the Heavenly sounds.
The
Buddha explains the tendency for “one-sided concentration” as being the
cause; through “double-sided
concentration,” such Heavenly sounds can be heard.
Mahali
(Hare Lip the Likkhavi) asks whether it is for the experience of the Heavenly
forms and Heavenly sounds that adherents pursue such discipline; the Buddha describes that there are phenomena
“higher and sweeter than that.”
The
Buddha describes the destruction of the 3 Bonds (delusion of self, doubt, and
trust in the efficacy of good works and ceremonies) and this facilitating an
absence of rebirth.
Upon
Mahali’s solicitation, the Buddha describes the minimisation of lust, illwill,
and dullness; and this facilitating the
emergence as a “Once-returner.”
The
Buddha describes the destruction of the 5 Bonds and transcending into the
Heavens.
The
Buddha describes the destruction of the Deadly Floods (Intoxicants, Lust,
Becomings, Delusion, and Ignorance) and the attainment of Arahatship.
The
Buddha describes the Eightfold Path as the means through which to attain such
actualisation: Right Belief, Right
Aspiration, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right
Thought, Right Meditation.
The
Buddha provides the standard teaching: the arrival of the Buddha, awakening of the
adherent, self-training in act, word, and speech, minor details of ethics, and
the 4 Jhanas.
The
Buddha explains his doctrine of abstinence regarding the conclusion of the
existence of the soul and the connexion with the body.
The
Buddha describes the destruction of the Deadly Floods and the 4 Noble
Truths: pain, origin of pain, cessation
of pain, and the eightfold path towards the cessation of pain.
The
Buddha concludes his dialogue with Mahali.
--
Is
the notion of “one-sided” and “double-sided” concentration simply a form of
semantics? In the Buddha’s explanation,
he seems to suggest that the other adherent (Sunakhatta) abstains from
concentrating upon the Heavenly sounds and that is why he is unable to hear the
Heavenly sounds. Yet, presumably, if
Sunakkhatta tells this to Hare Lip the Likkavi, then presumably Sunakkhatta has
an interest in hearing the Heavenly sounds;
and if Sunakkhatta has a genuine interest in hearing the Heavenly
sounds, presumably he is at least considering such an interest, if other than
intently focusing upon such an interest, when he is practising the “one-sided”
meditation. What, then, is the
difference between having a genuine interest for something and proficiently
meditation upon that phenomena in order to actualise the experience of that
phenomena? What exists within the
distinction of being able to see the Heavenly forms but being unable to hear
the Heavenly sounds?
How
does an adherent progress from an absence of rebirth to becoming a
“Once-returner”? What is the difference
between the two?
What
is the nature of the interaction between the temporal realm of Earth and the
Heavenly realm, within Buddhist Theology?
It seems as though temporal beings, Arahats (Tathagatas, Bodhisattvas)
maintain a higher rank that celestial beings.
What are the implications of this, and how does this compare (similarly
and by contrast) with the coinciding beliefs within the respective Avrahamic
Faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and additionally (particularly
considering the nature of the relationship between Adam and the Angels,
respectively described within Bereshit of the Torah and the Koran)?
How
is the Buddha’s response to the question of the soul and its connexion with the
body difference from the equivocation that some of his contemporaries practise
and that the Buddha is previously described as criticising (or knowing
something better and beyond such equivocation)?
--
Matthew
14 – 17
Herod
perceives Jesus as John the Baptist;
description of Herod beheading John the Baptist
Jesus
feeds crowd of 5,000 men with additional women and children with 5 loaves and 2
fish, with 12 baskets left over
Jesus
walks on water
Peter
tries to walk on water
Pharisees
and scribes ask about absence of washing hands;
Jesus references Isaiah (“precepts of men”) and teaches disciples
“cleanliness of actions”
Gentile
woman pleads for healing of her daughter
Jesus
heals additional people
Jesus
feeds crowd of 4,000 men and additional women and children, with 7 loaves of
bread and a few fish
Scribes
ask for a sign and Jesus rebukes
Jesus: “beware of the leavening (teaching) of the
Pharisees and Sadducees”
Peter
proclaims Jesus as the Christ; Jesus
proclaims Peter as “the Rock”
Jesus
prophesies his destiny
Jesus
climbs mountain with Peter, James, and John;
voice from God, with Moshe and Eliyahu
Jesus
explains John the Baptist as Eliyahu
Jesus
heals epileptic boy that disciples unable to heal
Jesus
pays Peter’s tax with a shekel from a fish
--
Gospels
Matthew
18
Disciples
ask Jesus who is the greatest in Heaven; Jesus teaches to be humble like
children
Jesus
teaches to remove causation of personal transgressions towards others
Jesus
tells parable of rejoicing over lost sheep
Jesus
provides guidance regarding the reconciliation of disputes
Peter: “How often shall my brother sin against me,
and I forgive him?”; Jesus: 70 x 7
Jesus
teaches parable of the ungrateful servant who is previously forgiven
--
Discussion
Questions From Chapters 14 – 17
Do
people actually eat an increase of food from the 5 loaves and 2 fish, or are
people simply genuinely fulfilled with the much smaller portions that are
given; (water and wine idea)?
Vegetarianism
and Jesus’ doctrine regarding clean hands and clean acts
Metaphysical
consideration of cleanliness: leprosy
and diseases being derived from previous transgressions
Consideration: what is Jesus’ doctrine regarding taxation
and spirituality/religion? Jesus seems
to rebuke conventional government, but then provides Peter with the means to
pay the tax (to “abstain from causing offence”)? Does Jesus actually conform to conventional
authority, or is there significance that the shekel is provided through a
miracle? Is there significance in the
fact that Jesus actually abstains from directly paying the tax (and instead,
simply telling Peter how to do so)? What
are lessons for contemporary circumstances with conventional government and
taxation?
--
Discussion
Questions From Chapters 18 – 21
Does
Jesus effectively teach a doctrine of celibacy for his disciples? What is the meaning of, “He who has ears to
hear, let him hear,” and “men who become eunuchs for the sake of Heaven”?
What
are the implications of the “first being last” and the “last being first” when
a proficient number of people share this doctrine and are all striving to be
the servant? Does this mean that amidst
such transcendent awareness, the ones who allow others to serve those ones
become the first again? Where does the
cycle stop? What is an appropriate
balance of moderation?
The
anecdote of Jesus and the fig tree seems to reveal some human-ness within
Jesus; how is it that he is “fooled” by
a fig tree, and then how is it that he becomes so hostile that he curses the
fig tree into shriveling; and why is
this described as an amazing feat?
--
Gospels
Matthew 17 – 18
“After six days Jesus took with him Peter and
James and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain apart. And he was
transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his garments
became white as light. And behold, there appeared to them (Moshe) and
(Eliyahu), talking with him. And Peter said to Jesus, ‘(Leader), it is well
that we are here; if you wish, I will make three booths here, one for you and
one for (Moshe) and one for (Eliyahu).’ He was still speaking, when lo, a
bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, ‘This is (My)
beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.’ When the disciples
heard this, they fell on their faces, and were filled with awe. But Jesus came
and touched them, saying, ‘Rise, and have no fear.’ And when they lifted up their
eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.” (v1-8).
Jesus heals the boy his disciples are
previously unable to heal.
“When they came to Capernaum, the collectors
of the half-shekel tax went up to Peter and said, ‘Does your teacher pay the
tax?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ And when he came home, Jesus spoke to him
first, saying, ‘What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth
take toll or tribute? From their sons or from others?’ And when he
said, ‘From others,’ Jesus said to him, ‘Then the sons are free. However,
not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook, and take the first
fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel;
take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.’” (v24-27).
“At that time the disciples came to Jesus,
saying, ‘Who is the greatest in the (Sovereignty) of heaven?’ And calling
to him a child, he put him in the midst of them, and said, ‘Truly, I say to
you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the
(Sovereignty) of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child, he is
the greatest in the (Sovereignty) of heaven.” (v1-4).
“Woe to the world for temptations to
sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the man by
whom the temptation comes! And if your hand or your foot causes you to
sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life
maimed or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal
fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away;
it is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown
into the hell of fire.” (v7-9).
“See that you do not despise one of these
little ones; for I tell you that in heaven their angels always behold the
face of my (Deus) who is in heaven. What do you think? If a man has
a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the
ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray?
And if he finds it, (Truly), I say to you, he rejoices over it more than
over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of my
(Deus) who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.”
(v10-14).
“If your brother sins against you, go an tell
him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have
gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others
along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or
three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the
church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you
as a Gentile and a tax collector.” (v15-17).
“For where two or three are gathered in my
name, there am I in the midst of them.” (v20).
“Then Peter came up and said to him,
‘(Leader), how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him?
As many as seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven
times, but seventy times seven.” (v21-22).
Jesus shares the parable of the ungrateful
servant who condemns another.
--
Discussion Questions From Chapters 16 – 19
Amidst an awareness of the infinity of
miracles that exist within each second of this temporal realm, does the
necessity for “signs of Heaven” dissipate, in order to perceive the
manifestation of the Divine?
How may the teaching of the “leaven” of
conventional authority be applied to contemporary circumstances? How does this
compare with the mitzvot for Israelis to abstain from delving into the
religious practises of foreign tribes; with the Buddha’s emphasis upon
independent self-investigation; how does this compare with the Bhagavad Gita’s
emphasis for an individual to remain within one’s own Varna? And how does this
compare within the Koranic teachings regarding the relationship between
believers and unbelievers?
Why does Jesus initially revert from
explicitly proclaiming himself as the Moshiach? What is the purpose within the
secrecy?
What is the extent to which individual
contemporarily follow the exact example of Jesus? How does this compare with
contemporary following of the respectively exact examples of Avraham, Moshe,
Israel, Arjuna, the Buddha, and Muhammad?
How does Jesus’s, Peter’s, John’s, and
James’s encounter with Moshe, Eliyahu, and Deus compare and contrast with the
Buddha’s conversation with Sakka, and with Arjuna’s encounter with Sri Krishna?
Amidst the description of the disciples
“falling on the faces” when hearing the voice of Deus, what is the nature of
act of submission? Does bowing the head signifying a humbling of the ego,
perceiving the epitome of an individual’s will exists within the mind? How does
this compare with the practise within additional cultures and traditions
whereby the bowing of the head is regularly conducted within the similar
implications of such religious submission, but as a gesture of respect and even
love? What does the “bowing of the heart” look like? How does refusing to bow
to an aggressor’s will or command, compare and contrast with regularly bowing
(within warfare) to escape from danger, and as part of the strategy for
attacking an aggressor’s will or command?
Does Jesus provide Peter with the shekel
simply to keep Peter honest amidst his previous declaration? What is the
nature of the pressure that Peter experiences when being approached by the tax
collectors? And what is the nature of the provision of the shekel from
the mouth of the fish? The tax collectors’ initial question seems to be
unresolved: amidst Jesus’s teaching regarding “rendering unto Caesar,”
and the very example of effective asceticism from Jesus, is it appropriate to
refuse to pay the tax or to pay the tax?
Amidst the teaching regarding humility, and
the additional teaching of “the last being first,” does this establish a
practise of people striving (and even competing) to be “last”? Within the
contemporary practise of charity, tzedekah, Zakat, the Saddhu, and asceticism,
who is the “first” and who is the “last”? How does “moderation” factor
within these practises; what are some appropriate methodologies for
implementing, facilitating, practising, and inspiring such moderation;
and what are some historic and contemporary examples of such proficient
moderation?
Whilst rebuking temptation, Jesus also
affirms the necessity of temptation; how is this paradox appropriately
reconciled? How does this compare with the teachings regarding the senses
and Maya respectively within the Bhagavad Gita and the Digha Nikaya?
Jesus also teaches that it is what comes out of man that is
transgressive; so whilst a man’s hand, foot, or eye, may cause a
transgression, is it accurate to conclude that such actions emanate from the
mind and the thought of the man, and that it is the “mind” of the man that
should be “cut out”? What might “cutting out the mind” look like;
and is there any similarity of this with the notion of “relinquishing the
ego”? How might “cutting out the mind” compare with the selflessness also
respectively taught within Hinduism and Buddhism? And again, what is an
appropriate balance, presuming that some form of selfishness (and/or temptation)
is necessary simply to sustain life?
What is the nature of the confluence between
the “Gentile” treatment that Jesus prescribes, and the “70 x 7” forgiveness
that Jesus also prescribes? What is the appropriate balance between
forgiveness, reconciliation, and inspiring reformation?
Does Jesus teach a doctrine of celibacy to
his disciples (to become “eunuchs for the sake of Heaven”)? What
implications does this have regarding the historic and contemporary practise of
Christianity; and amidst the institution of marriage within Christianity,
upon what teachings are such practises, and such an institution,
established? And how does that affect the actual adherence to the
teachings of Jesus?
Are there any additional examples, from the
respective Prophets of any religion, whereby certain “allowances” are provided
because of the “hardness of heart” of the religious followers?
Judaism and Hinduism are respectively,
substantially predicated upon familial lineages, whereby there emerge certain
systems of caste affiliation, tribal duties and allegiances that are
facilitated through marriage and inherited by progeny; Christianity and
Buddhism respective emerge from Judaism and Hinduism (respectively) and
respectively (and similarly) share doctrines that alleviate the oppressive
nature of the historic adherence to these caste affiliations, tribal duties,
and allegiances; yet Christianity and Buddhism also respectively (and
coinciding with the alleviation of caste) call upon adherents to effectively
renounce all familial allegiances, and to abstain from marriage and the
procreation of progeny (this being arguable within much of Christianity);
is it possible to alleviate such “caste oppression,” whilst maintaining the
practise and institution of marriage and the procreation of progeny? If
so, how might such a practise look like? How do subsequently emerging
religious traditions (including Islam, Sikhism, and the Baha’i Faith) factor
within this consideration?
--
Koran
Sura
9: Al Bara (The Immunity)
Allah
proclaims dissolution of previous liabilities established with idolaters,
except for those idolaters that abstain from transgression and betrayal.
Allah
commands the smiting of idolaters unless there is repentance, prayer, and
payment of the “poor rate.”
Believers
are obligated to accept idolaters who solicit refuge.
Fear
towards fighting is chastised.
Stewardship
of the Masjid is the exclusive responsibility of Believers.
Those
who sacrifice livehood in the Cause of Allah are higher in rank.
Allah
commands favour over familial relationships with unbelievers.
There
is criticism towards the belief of Ezra as the son of Allah.
There
is chastisement for people who hoard material riches.
Believers
abstain from asking for a reprieve from striving in the Cause of Allah.
People
with lack of belief ask for reprieve;
and Allah intentionally separates such people from interfering with the
striving of believers.
“If
good befalls thee, it grieves them; and
if hardship afflicts thee, they say:
Indeed we had taken care of our affair before. And they turn away rejoicing.
The
recipients of Zakat are identified:
poor, needy, people administering it, recent converts, freeing of
captives, the indebted, those striving in the way of Allah, and the wayfarer.
Some
unbelieving people criticize the Prophet, Peace Be Upon Him.
Previous
Prophets are referenced.
Description
of people who make a promise to worship Allah whilst experiencing travails, and
when the travails are lifted, abstain from actualising such promise.
Description
of an absence of forgiveness from Allah towards disbelief.
There
is a prohibition of previous “refuseniks” to join a subsequent campaign.
There
is the direction to abstain from admiring the wealth and children of
unbelievers.
There
is the description of certain circumstances that warrant reprieve from fighting
for believers with specific circumstances.
There
is the description of the belief of certain desert Arabs.
--
Within
the first few verses of this Sura, there are a number of protocols that are described
specifically regarding negotiations, combat, Peace treaties, and guardianship
of idolaters. What are the temporal
circumstances that prompt these teachings, what are the actual teachings that
are to be understood within this specific passage, and how does this passage
fit within the context of additional teachings (both similar and distinct) that
are provided elsewhere throughout the Koran, regarding this general topic?
Is
there any distinction (room for negotiation) between an idolater practising
that individual’s religious traditions and repenting, praying, and paying the
poor-rate, with the idolater formally converting to Islam and summarily
negating the idolater’s previous religious practises? Is it appropriate for the idolater to be
compelled into Islam if the idolater abstains from transgressing against
Muslims? Or is idolatry intrinsically
transgressive against Islam?
Further
within this passage of Sura Al Bara, there is the teaching that idolaters
abstain from respecting ties of relationship.
This may simply mean any form of social relationship, and the general
notion of loyalty; however, there is
also the consideration of whether the bond of marriage consecrated in one
religion is actually acknowledged within another religion, whether it is Islam,
Judaism, Hinduism, or otherwise. Within
an arrangement of marriage, and within an increasingly orthodox observance
within a specific religious tradition, there are certain qualifications that are
required in order to establish a marriage as officially recognised and
sanctioned within that specific religious tradition. So if a man and woman become married within a
specific religion, is the sanctity of that marriage recognised by other
religions? Or are both the man and the
woman effectively considered as unwed and both available for marriage
respectively with another woman and man within a different religion?
There
is the description of the believers abstain from asking for respite in striving
in the cause of Allah. There seems to be
an interesting comparison with this teaching and the teaching from the Torah
regarding the allowance for a soldier to return to his house amidst certain
pre-existing factors.
Much
of the content and teachings within this Sura seem to result from actual experiences
of military conflict amongst the Prophet Muhammad, Peace Be Upon Him, and his
followers with additional Arab tribes.
How are these teachings applicable to contemporary circumstances? How can such specific military confrontations
be understood in a general, continual (perhaps political, socioeconomic, and
even civil disobedient, ahimsic civil transcendent golden rule compassionate)
manner?
What
are the dynamics involved within the phenomenon of forgiveness? Within what circumstances (in response to
what previous transgressions and amidst certain repentance) is it understood
that Allah provides or withholds forgiveness?
Are these the same circumstances that are prescribed from believers to
similarly provide or withhold such forgiveness?
Is there any previous transgression that precludes a believer from
effectively soliciting and receiving proficient forgiveness from Allah and/or
other believers, people thereby adversely effectively that believer’s
progression amidst Kom Qasi’il (the Day Of Judgment)?
--
May Love, Peace, And Blessings Of
The Highest Authority We Respectively Recognise, Known By Many Names, Including
God, El Shaddai, Eloheinu, Elohim, Adonai, Hashem, Brahman, Nirvana, Dharma,
Karma, Tao, Gud, Dieu, Deus, Dios, Dominus, Jah, Jehovah, Allah, Ahura Mazda,
Vaya Guru, The Divine, Infinity, Logic, Wakan Tanka, And Additionally Be Upon
The Rishis, Moshe, The Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, Baha’u’llah, Guru Nanak,
Zarathustra, Avraham, Yitzak, Yaakov, Confucius, Lao Tzu, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle,
Black Elk, Martin Luther, Gandhi, Bob Marley, The Respective Indigenous Of
Taínoterranea, Asia, Europe, Mediterranea, Africa, The Earth, Galaxy, Universe,
Our Families, Friends, And The Universe.
Om. Shanti. Shanti.
Shantihi. Amen.
שלום.नमस्ते.สมาธ.Pax.سلام.Peace.साटीनाम.صلح.Kwey.Amani.Udo.Barış.ειρήνη.Pace.Paz.Paix.Fred.
Frieden.Vrede.Siochana.мир.امن.和平.平和.평화.Ingatka.Wominjeka.Aloha.
.
.
.
...
ૐ.אמן
Shalom(Hebrew).Namaste(Sanskrit).Samadhi(Thai/Pali).Pax(Latin).Salaam(Arabic).Peace(English).
SatNam(Punjabi).Solh(Persian).Kwey(Algonquin).Amani(Swahili).Udo(Ibo).Barish(Turkish).Erieni(Greek).Pache(Italiano).Paz(Espanol).Paix(Francais).
Fred(Scandinavian).Frieden(Deutsch).Siochana(Irish).Mir(Russian).Amin(Urdu).Heping(Mandarin).Heiwa(Japanese).Pyeonghwa(Korean).
Ingatka(Tagolog).Wominjeka(Wurundjeri).Aloha(Hawai’ian).Peace(Common
Symbol).Peace(Common Sign).Peace(American Sign).Peace(American Braille).
Om. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment