No Jesus is put on cross without his consent

No Jesus is put on Cross without his consent. He chooses to be there and walks his path up to the Cross. He could always take a different route. He doesn't. He didn't. A Cross is not destiny: its a choice.

Jesus, cross and consent

No Jesus is put on Cross without his consent. He chooses to be there and walks his path up to the Cross. He could always take a different route. He doesn't. He didn't. A Cross is not destiny: its a choice.

No Jesus is put on Cross without his consent

No Jesus is put on Cross without his consent. He chooses to be there and walks his path up to the Cross. He could always take a different route. He doesn't. He didn't. A Cross is not destiny: its a choice. Destiny is choice.

Ishk di gall

ਨਹੀਂ ਸਿਵਿਆਂ ਦੀ ਚੁੱਪ ਹਾਂ ਮੈਂ , ਹਾਂ ਇਕ ਸ਼ਹੀਦੀ ਜੋੜ ਮੇਲਾ ,
ਕੋਈ ਆਖਰੀ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਮੇਨੂੰ ,ਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਆਸਾ ਦੀ ਵਾਰ ਆਖੇ /

ਮੈਂ ਜੋ ਆਖਾਂ ਸੋ ਪਿਆ ਆਖਾਂ , ਪਰ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਓਸ ਦਾ ਏ
ਜੇ ਗੱਲ ਇਸ਼ਕ਼ ਦੀ ਕੋਈ ਆਖੇ, ਤਾਂ ਫਿਰ ਸਰਬੰਸ ਨੂੰ ਵਾਰ ਆਖੇ /

Price tags on moon

"This life refuses you nothing but it gives nothing free. Its like a vast bazaar. Everything you want to buy is on offer. But everything has a price tag. There is no harm aspiring for the moon. Even moon is on offer. But check the price tag . If you really want something very badly, be prepared to pay the price: it will be yours. Otherwise, too, do not fret and fume. Just walk through this Mall, window-shop and entertain yourself. And be happy for those who can buy what you can not. Ordinarily, there are only two ways to be happy here. Either desire big and work hard to increase your buying power. Or check your buying power and peg your desires accordingly. Other than health and happiness, everything can be had off the shelf. For health and happiness, you must go to a different bazaar and be prepared to pay a different price. But price tags are unavoidable."

The heart behind the hand that places flowers at the Cross is often the same that drove nails into tender human flesh...(Hazel

EXTRACTS FROM A CONVERSATION: EDITED FOR COHERENCE

" To have your pain humiliated through denial or ridicule : you will often find yourself hated or laughed at and your innocence ridiculed and denied by the very people whose teeth are red with your blood. This is your first look at the world that you find so charming, so fascinating, so child-like when you are in love. Whether you join this world and be one of them or you resolve your pain and purify it depends solely on whether you steer your mind and soul unscathed out of this or you get drenched in hatred that surround you. ...."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
"And the proof of that will be in the choices you make: either return this violence of hatred with violence of hatred or be stubborn in your love and care for this world.

>>>>>

"Those who have truly loved life have often chosen death. Those who truly desire to lessen suffering and hatred in this world are often made the target of both. Those who want to kiss the wounds on every hand and heart often have nails driven through their own hands and hearts. A Cross awaits everyone who prepares a bed of roses for the children of this earth.

"But no Cross has ever frightened a Jesus.

"Do not be hurt if you find that the world is not shamed by the presence of Cross in its midst , and in fact is least embarrassed in placing flowers at its root. Generally, the heart behind the hands that place the flowers is nearly the same that ordered nails driven through tender flesh.

"Yet stick by the Cross.And be prepared to receive more than the first man on the Cross was given. Do not be surprised at the spectacles you see.Those who crucified Jesus will be the first to grab his legacy and call you an impostor. They will turn even Cross into a throne and will pronounce you a pretender to it.A pretender to the Cross! Indeed. Those who crucify a Jesus are also the ones who milk his legacy. It always happens. Everywhere. It will happen to you too. It must.

"Yet do not despair. This is your true test. And this is the only test you need to pass. If the test scares you, just tell yourself that this life is simply earning money, breeding and rearing children and leaving enough in your will for them. Your will then be different from the Will that you sometimes wish to pursue. Forget that. There is no sin in not doing what you do not have the will to do. It is a weakness but no sin.There is no such thing as sin in this world. There are just weaknesses. Sin is an invention by those who want to rule over you by frightening your heart. They want virtue to be based on fear turned into faith.Weakness is something that you can understand and therefore conquer; it is within your power. Sin is nothing but a weakness mystified and taken beyond your control. It suits manipulators....
>>>>>

"Accept your weaknesses, or try to control or minimize these. And live peacefully and usefully. You can still be happy. Do not aspire for love if utility is all you find interesting. There is nothing wrong in opting out of love: there is something wrong in remaining in it and not being worthy of it. The choices life gives you are not complicated. Make a simple choice and live like a respectable citizen of Israel."Those

Generation recovering from morality mistaken for religion: you're lucky n brave to cast d burden away away while others carry it as a trophy..

Are we a generation recovering from morality mistaken for religion, because religion has no meaning for us except as an excuse for tribal vanity ? Have we ruined morality too by taking away from it the only rationale - common sense - that could give it legitimacy, replacing it with something dark and outdated, because we know that the dictates of morality as we want it would not stand the test of common sense and reason?

And are we sure that we have not confused moral ghettoes with religion? When we repeatedly refer only to a certain script(ure) as God's word, is this mode of conduct religious or just tribaligious?

Has God, the Almighty ever mattered to us more than the dictates of our spiritual and moral ghettoes?

How many have died for denying God? How many have survived for denying 'prophets', who merely represent Him? Is the message still not clear?

An

d  have we made  sure that our sacred zeal and fervour is not in fact our crass mindlessness and prejudice ?  And what we consider our sublime missionay zeal is nothing more than our tribal loyalty with something obscure and communal  ? Are we caught in traps of centuries and centuries of  legacy. it is desirable, necessary and possible to free oneself of all this obscure baggage. And there is no shame in trying to off load it and lighten yourself of the burden because everyone is either carrying it  proudly and has carried it some stage or the other. You are one the very few and lucky and brave ones who consider this baggage a burden and cast it away, while most others proudly carry it as a trophy, much like the donkey who carried water-soaked cotton.

About to shake hands with God, looking over the edge to the other side of Big Bang

Are we about to shake hands with God,on the other side of Big Bang? Wither Future >>>

June 26, 2014 at 6:38pm

PublicFriendsOnly MeCustomClose FriendsFacefriendsSee all lists...Mahilpur, India AreaPanjab University, ChandigarhGovernment of PunjabGo Back

For the most part, the remaining history of mankind here will be a race between education and catastrophe. If education wins, we will gain sufficient peace to engage undisturbed in pursuits that may take us to the next level of creation and thus free us from the constraints of the fate of our planet, which must die a natural death a few million years from now .

As we all know , the Sun and its system have a very limited life span - at the most 5 billion years after which it will "bloat up" like a decomposed body and gobble up surrounding planets. That will mean the end of all life in Solar System. At our present level of scientific advancement, there is not a a dream within a dream  within a dream of a possibility of human being able to stop this inevitabled death of the Sun and its children,including earth, and her children - man,  beast, insects, birds, blossoms  and women (:) ) .

In fact, that  will happen much earlier than the death of the  grand savant, the Sun. Life on earth has a maximum of 1 million years of drama left, and human will go out even earlier than that, with sub-microbial life alone surviving a little longer.

Even this relatively secure tenure  depends on whether  Nature is allowed to have its full itinerary. But we all know that human have displayed the insincts of destructive infant in tearing apart Nature's calendar.

If this continues to happen, then our drama might last anything between six months to six decades. With all the nuclear stockpiles ready to kill all of us at least ten thousand times over, even six months looks foolishly optimistic.


This should take us back to the opening para: its race between education and catastrophe.

If education is allowed to win, then who knows, human mind may yet reveal forces that lie concealed and buried under the weight of un-evolved organisms within our head.We may then be heading not only towards scientific gadgets that can boost the speed of light a thousand or a even a million times over but even make human bodies irrelevant by digging deep into mental or even spiritual versions (energy)    of our bodies ((incarnations) - matter), and help  us travel through vast intergalactic and inter-stellar spaces  at speeds not of light but of mind. Who knows we are sitting on the edge of finding out the secret of all secrets - why the speed light ought to have a limit.That may be the just a logical next stage of breaking the sound barrier: breaking the light barrier.
At this stage of our evolution, all that human imagination permits us is to persuade Albert Einstein to allow us a revision and update the General theory of Relativity and travel at speeds greater than the speed of light. And once we have persuaded this incredible agnostic Jew to alter his theory a bit, it shouldn't be really much more difficult to persuade God to change his mind and allow to play not dice but ping pong with astrophysics and erase the invisible boundaries that divide physics is and astrophysics from metaphysics.

There is a minor problem here.And that problem is our physicists who are convinced that the laws of Nature,once set at Big Bang, are not subject to change. ( They obviously haven't met a woman all their lives!!)  But ponce we have persuaded God to allow us to go to the other side of Big Bang and re-wind evolution from a different starting point, we can  move next to physicists.

Seriously, the question of a limit to the speed of light has to do with the nature of matter that we deal with. (And that includes energy also, because that too is only energy placed for a few hours in the top drawer of our kitchen refrigerator: matter is energy frozen to concrete just as ice is moisture frozen to brick.)

The next stage of human research will not be to understand the nature of energy but to change it. The moment you have changed the nature of energy, you have re-written the mind of God.If  energy begins to behave as we want it to behave, then there is nothing that can disobey us.The limits to speed will be broken - and how! At present, even travelling at the speed of light, you will need a million year to move from one stellar world to another . And there are trillions and trillions of these worlds, each one so large that the combined storage of all human minds that have ever walked this earth and all that are likely to walk can not visualise its limits and range.And we are dealing not with one but trillions a upon trillions of such worlds, each world made of  billions of universes, each universe made up of ......

(By the way, much of this was already known when Guru Nanak Dev ji.went into that rapturous rendition: paataala pataal lakh agaasa agaas..)

 Human mind,like everything else, is itself a mere byte of energy. Can a byte of energy transform, influence, conquer all energy ? Its like a little fragment of broken glass. Can that little fragment mirror a large broke fragment in it? Can it also mirror a trillion such fragments if placed at an appropriate angle and an appropriate distance? Can you see the whole sky reflected in a mirror which is a centimeter wide and half a centimeter long? can you see all the triilions of universe angled into that small fragment of mirror? Will the mirror refuse to picture what ti sees,provided the angle and distance are right?  I don't know. I have never been a broken fragment of a mirror? Or haven't I really been? Haven't you been? From the way even the most idiotic of human brains can mirror the entire sky with all the starry fabric beautifully reflected even in each one of his eyes, who can tell? I can't. Gori de long vich rab disda.
From romanticism to mysticism is just one small step. From physics to astrophysics,just a half step. From astrophysics to metaphysics, its not even  a step: its a leap made without effort.

But I stick to physics,to energy and matter. If education is allowed a chance, the possibilities that await human mind can overwhelm God -- the God that you and I have enslaved, not the God of Einstein. To Einstein , God may have been a little playmate, playing dice, or refusing to play dice just because Albert told him not to.
But we are certainly on the edges of a cosmological Great Wall of China from where you can get glimpses of what lies on the other side of the Big Bang. We are sitting, to use Carl Sagan's expression, "the edge of forever."

It all depends on who succeeds: education or our obstinacy, education or catastrophe. Education is the little baby step which human love takes to move ovr a few thorns of ignorance, hatred, bitterness, jealousies and what not. Education  is love. Education is joy. Education is the beginning of understanding the joys of giving, therefore of love:
Vidiya Vichaari
Ta par upkaari>>>>>>>>>>>.

"bikhar jaaoon main ban ke roshni ka sailaab" : Love , loyalty, and relational bonding

How can anyone love everyone ????????? What is the question, please ?? You can desire someone, admire someone, adore someone, be in relationship with someone , yes. Bu love everyone ???

You  can desire someone, adore someone,  possess , belong to or be in a relationship with  someone or  be attached to someone - and so on. But can you call this limited and well defined " arrangement" love? Can you really call it love?

You can't have relationships or bonding or attachment with everyone. True. But you can only love everyone. You just can't love except everyone. And the converse is also true: you can not desire everyone, can not "possess" everyone, can not be in a relationship with everyone, you can not admire everyone: you can only love everyone.
And yes, so can everyone love you and everyone else . And in fact if that someone tuly is in love and understand what love really is and how it differs from relationship and attachment and claims of possession, he or she not only will but MUST love everyone and everyone always.. That, I have always said,is the difference between desire and relationship on the one hand and love on the other. That also is the reason why petty violent instincts or sentiments like desire, possession, exclusivity in relationships, 'strings attached' deals called relationships etc. get confused with an all encompassing peaceful sentiment like love.

 Some part of the "relational bonding' is an  in-built mechanism in  Nature's  constraints of survival and the consequent laws  - like mother's strong bonding with her off spring, all through Nature. That's the most beautiful example of  relational bonding, but it still is not love in the sense that an all encompassing surge of love for all creation that sweeps through the hearts of poets at the highest  peaks of their creativity. Nor is it anything like  the peace-giving, sublime feeling that a saint perhaps feels towards the whole universe, blessing everything he sees.

In the end, A mind superior to mine with expression skills more forceful and creative than mine can do justice to the experience of "love" that I refer to but can not adequately express in words, much less make you experience it. In fact, I can not make you or anyone else understand or experience the intensity even of ordinary phenomenon like romance. So no surprise that 'love' that takes everything in its sublime embrace,  touching  everything  in equal measure,  is nearly impossible to convey in language.

The problem of inadequacy of language in describing subtle and forceful phenomena of Nature is something that even modern scientists have acknowledge as real. Scientists often encounter inexpressible situations while talking about glorious paradoxes in Nature even as they search for some sanity, some continuity, some coherence in natural phenomenon.

The problem arises also when we try to apply the idiom of something very limited in nature - like feelings of belonging, attachment , possession, relationship, moral or sexual loyalty etc. - to something as beautiful as love for all that one sees and hears or touches etc.

You  just said that "You can love everyone but so can they." Not only can but MUST. He or she will have no choice if he or she is also feeling something that I am feeling, which is not creating new relationships as triumphs, trophies or achievements on romantic territory but something as light and beautiful as fragrance.
In a state of mind like that, you want to embrace not Kim Kardashian but the entire mankind, the entire womankind,the entire Nature, the entire sky. .

I guess what is bothering you in my concept is the place of loyalty in relationships based on "love" ,Loyalty itself is essentially a concept in relationship. A person who has risen to the level of a saint has moved beyond the need for loyalty because he has also moved beyond the need for well-defined relationships that have names like lover, husband, wife and so on. This in itself contradicts the infinite range of love for the entire creation that lies invitingly in front of you,, asking you to hug it and be hugged back.

The problem is that minds not accustomed to living at a level where attachment driven relations are confused with love drag 'love' down to a question of indulgence, sleeping around with more partners than one, being 'loyal' to more than one person, and so on. These concepts do not even operate at that level,
In a layman's language (my own language, I mean) when someone says he is in love with everyone,obviously what he/she means is NOT that he/she is sexually drawn towards everyone - and so on. We must not lower the level of debate to by refusing to see the difference. These ideas and contradictions ( of sexual loyalty/disloyalty) themselves are the product of a mind that refuses to go beyond sexual attachments, possessiveness, achievement based on a need to feed one's vanity,or fill an emotional emptiness inside, etc,> Now that is something which our minds have always glorified as love.
For one thing, When someone experiences love for everyone, that "everyone" will include men,women, young, old, children, destitute, beautiful glamorous women, sensuous stars as well as lepers and handicapped, stinking gangrene stricken people, long and filthy slums inhabited by poverty stricken , foul mouthed men and women And move beyond that too, to animals, birds and so on. And sun , stars and the skies.

You can laugh at it. But if you ever happen to be in an extremely happy ( not indulgent and pleasurable but happy) state of mind, you will feel that inner expansion yourself. You must have, I bet, had moments when you felt so happy and full of love for everyone in this world. All of us have those moments. With the saint, these moments have been turned into a normal and everlasting state of mind. Sometimes, poets come close to this: "Dil ye chaahe bahaaron se kheloon, apni baahon main aakash le looN....."....OR....."Aur aag main apne dil ki har dil main lagaata jaoon"...Or ...."bikhar jaaoon main ban ke roshni ka sailaab"...

The problem of inadequacy of language in describing subtle and forceful phenomena of Nature is something that even modern scientists have acknowledge as real. Scientists often encounter inexpressible situations  while talking about  glorious paradoxes in Nature even as they search for some sanity, some continuity, some coherence in natural phenomenon.

The problem arises also when we try to apply the idiom of something very limited in nature - like feelings of belonging, attachment , possession, relationship, moral or sexual loyalty  etc. - to something as beautiful as love for all that one sees and hears or touches etc. You just said  that "if I am free to love more than one person, then that other person is also free to do the same."  Not only free, he or she will have no choice if he or she is also feeling something that I am feeling, which is not creating new relationships as triumphs, trophies or achievements on romantic territory but experiences something as light and beautiful as fragrance.Suddenly you want to embrace not Kim Kardashian but the entire mankind, the entire womankind,the entire Nature, the entire sky.  .

I guess what is bothering you in my concept is the place of loyalty in relationships based on "love" ,Loyalty itself  is essentially a concept in relationship. A person who has risen to the level of a saint has moved beyond the need for loyalty because he has also moved beyond the need for  well-defined relationships that have names like lover, husband, wife and so on. This in itself contradicts the infinite range of love for the entire creation that lies invitingly in front of you,, asking you to hug it and be hugged back.

The problem is that minds not accustomed to living at this level drag 'love'  down to a question of indulgence, sleeping around with more partners than one, being 'loyal'  to more than one person,  and so on. These concepts do not even operate at that level, neither do these concepts arise. In a layman's language (my own language, I mean)  when someone says he is in love with everyone,obviously what he/she  means is NOT that he/she is sexually drawn towards everyone - and so on. These ideas and contradictions themselves are the product of a mind that refuses to go beyond sexual attachments, possessiveness, achievement based on a need to feed one's vanity,or fill an emotional emptiness inside,  etc,> Now that is  something which  the minds os such people have always glorified as love. For one thing, when someone experiences love for everyone,   that "everyone" will include men,women, young, old, children, destitute, beautiful glamorous women, sensuous stars as well as lepers and handicapped, stinking gangrene stricken people,  long and  filthy slums inhabited by poverty stricken , foul mouthed men and women And move beyond that too, to animals, birds and so on. And sun , stars and the skies.

You can laugh at it. But if you ever happen to be in an extremely happy ( not indulgent and pleasurable but happy) state of mind, you will feel that inner expansion yourself. You must have, I bet, had moments when you felt so hapy and full of love for everyone in this world. All of us have those moments. With the saint, these moments have been turned into a normal and everlasting state of mind.  Sometimes, poets come close to this: "Dil ye chaahe bahaaron se kheloon, apni baahon main aakash le looN....."....OR....."Aur aag main apne dil ki har dil main lagaata jaoon"...Or ...."bikhar jaaoon main ban ke roshni ka sailaab"...

In religious or mystical poetry, too, seers are known to have touched these heights:

"Sagal sang hum ko ban aayee"

 "Hum sabhna ke saajan" .

 Saach kahooN sun le ho sabhe, jin prem kiyo tin hi prabh paayo"..... all this is not mere socialistic sense of responsibility towards soceity or even humankind. The Guru  is talking here of a profoundly moving feeling that floods his heart. Surely, Guru Gobind Singh could not have been asking for a moral license to indulge in the sense in which you have brought in the question of loyalty.

 And what a paradox again that people who truly feel  this amazing experience of love for everyone move not below but above the need for relationships...To them, everyone is a relation. "Hum sabhna ke saajan"

 Properly understood, this is also the experience of Lord Krishna, something which we Punjabis in particular have never ever strained our intellectual or mental muscles to try and understand. We insist on misinterpreting his myth as one of sexual or at best  romantic licentiousness. And we cover our lack of understanding by resorting to our pet ploy: ridicule.

Why Hazel loves everyone ?

"...but then, if I don't know why I love everyone, I know even less why I must not. This special feeling which is the only proof that I am not just alive but a part of the overwhelming infinite interplay of beautiful darkness with lovely stars tells me I can not run away from it even if I want to. But first of all,why must I want to ? ."..........