Shahada explained in philosophy
-
"There is no deity."
Therefore there is no god, no divine character, nothing to be personified, or anthropomorphized as a supreme ?being?, being a distinct entity.
So no entity, which is something having real or distinct existence, a thing considered as independent of other things, a separation distinct and independent from other things, this cannot exist, there can be nothing claimed a deity.
"There is only Allah." or "Only Allah."
Allah is a single consciousness as the absolute totality of what may exist, so the One consciousness cannot be independent of anything, all is the thought of the single consciousness; we ourselves are a fractal copy within that consciousness, forming the evolving nature of the matrix of consciousness itself.
A single Consciousness is an ?entirety? of all that is or may be; therefore it is absolutely impossible for an entity deity to exist.
An entity must be something other; but you cannot have something other with the entirety of everything.
?All religions are made up then??
Religions do not come into existence through the quality of their inherent truths, but through the capacity of the powerful to impose them with maintained ignorance, violence, and fear. Fear is very important in order to control and manipulate souls; the first thing to establish is fear, as souls that are not afraid cannot be controlled.
Once the hierarchy (the tree of death) of religions are in place many other hierarchies are either constructed or given the divine backing of religious hierarchy, and these constructs are perceived real, yet are nothing more than a fantasy invented to allow the few to dominate the many.
Religious fantasy is most needed where there is a lack of individuality, a lack of original unique thought, a mind that lacks such development tends towards fanaticism, this substitutes the excitement that experiencing unique thoughts generates, exchanged for the excitement of their obsessional focus, a psychosis that hypnotizes their mind, and can through that focus shut down the mind to all higher emotions of empathy, compassion, kindness and unconditional love, and even render wicked actions undisturbed by their conscience. The individual soul can rise to infinite heights of consciousness, but not if they choose conformity to the thoughtless multitude; to devote your mind to conform to any hierarchy of control, belief or exchange, drives consciousness ever deeper in to a state of mindlessness dominated by status and separation.
All Gods are the fantasy of either the fantasist or the fanatic, a polished vanity they present as their persona, the fantasists desire for power, and ambition, ravenously fed from the fanatics fear and cowardice, and their hypnotized perceptions.
In the perceptions of your Earthly life truth is attacked, reason ridiculed, love, compassion and empathy considered a weakness, violence glorified, hate justified, murder rationalised, theft sanctified, life monetised, in the 'worlds' of the soulless creatures, the upper-world of the soulless is dominated by thirteen elite families who are beyond any accountability, the under-world of the soulless beasts are protected by the upper-world, the commercial world of the slave souls is sandwiched between the two soulless worlds, and all the Earth suffers.
Every soul is all creation in a drop. Creation is perceptual thought; the only thing that is real is consciousness itself. This single consciousness is built fractally, repeating consciousness yet remaining one. Each new fractal consciousness begins as a simple copy, but grows through densities of perception. Each fractal form grows by embodying ever more copies of consciousness within its own consciousness as companions, fractals expand by embodying fractals, and these form the larger fractal. It?s only when a consciousness is in harmony that it may become a companion to a higher fractal form, meaning souls who are harmonised by complimentary beliefs, common aspirations and an emotional unity. If considered from the other perspective, as fractal consciousness descends in ever more compact form, so the awareness they experience is of lower densities of perception, the evolution of all fractal consciousness is to flow to higher densities of thought infinitely, as they themselves attract and embody other companion fractal consciousness, but what may evolve may also devolve. Fractals should rise upward growing in consciousness through fractal connection; these integral connections are the companions of the soul.
Each soul is unique, each drop of an infinite ocean, we are the jewels of creation each drop, we are the most cherished each drop, but within that infinite ocean each drop must grasp truth as a rudder, reason as a compass, love as a destination, sadly many souls refuse to see, hear, think, accept or evolve, and so many suffer.
organic growth in consciousness is not a set progression, each evolves in a unique way, the song is evolving not the body, every song is unique, and every soul shapes their own song. Some songs harmonise better with some souls and not so well with others, for those in harmony you can become synchronous companions; there?s no hierarchy in consciousness just variety, the very essence of all creation is infinite diversity. A soul who called himself Adams correctly stated. ?If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.? True leaders act anarchically, they are copied because their example demands it, their council is sort out, never imposed, they are the trail blazers, the truth backers, the defenders of the weak and oppressed, such a leader is a Muhammad Rasul.
-
The pervasive conscious ocean sings, and all other conscious fields of thought are likewise harmonic songs in synchronisation with the manifesting ever building fractal field of all conscious thought, every soul exists as a fractal form of the conscious entirety, the expression of that consciousness is thought, which can be perceived as a form of energy, all energies are simply thought, a unified field of creative thought; an infinite field of consciousness if you like. Imagine consciousness is the ocean; that is you. Imagine a single drop of that ocean is your emotional heart; that is you. Imagine conceptually an atoms worth of that drop is your perceptual mind; that is you, you contain the entire ocean in a drop, held within an infinite ocean; that is the unity of soul
-
Fairly accurate philosophy, you have my congratulations.
is when speaking of many souls in unity and is referred to as singular in the unity. "Who as such is" as the word Allah means literally, very similar to the first person "I am who am I" that God speaks to Moses but Being As It is third-person of "I AM".
I belong to those Who as Such Are and thus I AM and hence I am among the children of God.
Intelligent people grasp what I write in parables, and I was very thorough and generous.
Be safe
Amenujil -
Peace Man of faith,
The term Allah has been broken down below by my friend Badar Kanwar http//servantofthelight.com/content/view/129/162/
We will lead you through a line of reasoning, with the explanation of each step of this careful linguistic analysis, to a conclusion that the word from Al-Qu'ran is not the proper noun (name) of our Rabb. It actually stands for allathi = who, La = not and finally illah . This would mean ?One who is not illah?.
If one were to incorporate the real meanings of the word ?illah? into the translation; this word which actually is a phrase would mean ?One who is not a deity for adoration or worship (God)?.
This sounds so radically different. Who am I to say this? What are my credentials?
Why should we trust this non-sense?
These questions are all defensive of held belief, so valid and legitimate questions.
Let us instead of worrying about the credentials of the informer of this information; Just explore the language of the Qur'an that is presented from the Qur'an itself.
First of all let us analyse what traditionalists interpret this word to be?
And why they are wrong?
The word is thought to be a combination of a definite article Al = in English ?The? and illah , meaning ?God? but in reality ?a deity for adoration and worship?.
So in actuality this "Al" is a contraction of the word and legitimately could be written as "Al" . How do we trust this assertion despite the references to the contrary from the Lexicon of Lane and Grammar of William Wright.
Let us turn to Qur'an itself for evidence. In Arabic script as well in the Qur'an, where a preposition ?Lee? is added in to a word containing a definite article ?Al? . Alif is dropped and so Lam of the definite article ?Al? joins with ?Lam? of preposition. Let us illustrate this point with some word examples from Qur'an itself.
-
21 Alif of ?Al? gone, lam is present and preposition ?Lee? added.
-
47 and 432, is the word same concept.
However, for the word when the same preposition is added. We find that the ?Lam? of the supposed definite article ?Al? also disappears. However, following the examples above it should have been written as (in reality one can not type this so called word using an Arabic type writer).
Example, 12 and 115 more places 222, 298 and on and on, in total 116 occurrences.
Whereas, Allathi being a different word its whole contraction disappears. This also proves that this word by no means is a proper name as there is no definite article "Al".
Let us continue to analyses this word further. In the middle there is "Alif" the mark (highlighted in red) with a Shadda mark and another Alif above.
Shadaah has several uses in script. We will only discuss the relevant ones here. One use is to indicate the doubling of a consonant. It is also used to indicate such a doubling only to facilitate pronunciation in the ?Moon letters of the Arabic alphabets?. This would be a apparently plausible defensive case for the traditionalist.
Let us analysis why it is wrong. If it were to be a correctly understood, then there would be no reason to keep this shadda in place once the ?Al?, if it were really ?Al? of definite article in the phrase is gone, as in the example above of . However, we find in the Qur'an that this is not the case. Hence, this shadda is not due to ?Al? of a definate article coming before the word to make it a proper noun, but contraction of Allathi. Although, even if it were to be the case, as illah has already ?Alif? at the start which is not considered a ?Sun letter?. Hence no shadda would be added
This clearly shows that the persistence of this shaddah is due, not to the shaddah of ?Al?; but in truth, indicates a real doubling of the consonants.
This means inescapably, that once the phonology has been clearly explained, this word is actually a sequence of words, a phrase, not just a word . Allthi, La and illah. This would further imply that the middle shaddah is suggesting ?two lams? and two alifs?.
Hence, if you translated word for word, this word or more accurately phrase would mean ?One who is not a deity for adoration and worship?.
-
-
Peace Man of faith,
i would further take issue with your comment, stating I have written a "Fairly accurate philosophy" yet you contradict what you state by referencing a "God"?
Either you do not grasp the philosophy expressed or in reality do not find it accurate?
Abdun Nur
-
I would argue that stems from the root though which means you have nearness to an attribute. This root is used for the famous article too in its simple form. The respective are no less than pronouns. The whole word means "Who is such as" (literally "Be Such Such It".
That goes well together with the expression of God to Moses "I am who am I" and Jesus' "I am in the Father and the Father in me" except Allah is in third-person. But both Moses and Jesus were Amen b'allah "Be Being/acting Such as It".
Another linguistic limitation is that Allah does not use the object-making suffix meaning it cannot be an object but only a attribution for a subject in the way of a predicate.
A word cannot be a proper noun using an AL prefix. You can check with , it is with AL written apart. That is another counter-argument.
Be safe
Emanuel -
Peace Man of faith,
i would further take issue with your comment, stating I have written a "Fairly accurate philosophy" yet you contradict what you state by referencing a "God"?
Either you do not grasp the philosophy expressed or in reality do not find it accurate?
Abdun Nur
That depends on what you make of the word God and what it means to you. By God I refer to "Galaxies/Oniverse/Dimensions" and God is the existence itself, the Grand Consciousness in which Allehem is included. Thence I am not contradicting myself but you have to listen to what people say rather than being jumped up by what words they use. I am used to discussing with people who cannot grasp other words than God so it is better to use that word as a reference point.
There is also a Higher Intelligence which is the source of this existence which usually calls itself Rabb which means something like the Sustained as in maintaining a sustainable platform. Rabb is the actual infrastructure and the World as we know it but people are unaware of this.
People have used different words to refer to the Higher Intelligence, some Rabb and such as Jesus said Father (abbua). Quran does refer to Father for God once in the second chapter mostly in terms of what God is to the (human) Spirit.
I do keep it simple so Father and Rabb is referred to commonly as God by me in conversation, basically to people I know would be offended by using Father for God. Rabb does sound okay, but it is a Semitic word and Sustainer not everyone understands well.
But we do exist in God, but the Surface of the World (Jinn) blinds us from seeing it.
Be safe
Emanuel -
Peace Emanuel,
the linguistic argument of "Allah" I will not debate, it is Badar's area of interest, i will request he respond for you.
The term God is dichotomous to the concept of entirety, therefore to use it in any reference is a foolish act, and only continuate's the confusion and stands in opposition to the foundation of Islam, that of, there is no deity.
The term "Rabb" means, the foundation which enables something to grow and develop, eventually fulfilling its potential.
Jinn means hidden and refers to any hidden nature, so someone in persona giving the illusion of being, that is contrary to their anima, such as a psychopath.
-
You reference the fabrication Jesus, but the term is never found within Islam, AAeesa the guard in the period of dark (daor-e-zulmat), polite and soft spoken "Isa" the word's clarification is found in dictionary Almunjid.. basicaly meaning the one who was a watchman/ saw the dark, or period of cruelty.
Isa (Esa) - There is no disagreement in the established fictional story of Jesus created as way to establish mental subjugation to hierarchy by the Roman emperors, that he was not an Arab but a Jew who lived in Israel and was born into a family of pious Jews, this extended the fabricated jewish religion. He had without question a Hebrew name. His original (i.e. fabricated true) name is neither European nor Arabic, so it was neither Jesus nor Yasu' nor Esa. A close phonetic transliteration of Jesus' Hebrew name into modern English would be Yeshua'. In fact, the choice of his name receives considerable attention in the fictional story of the Gospels. In the story his name was not arbitrarily chosen by his parents, but he received his name based on direct command (Matthew 121, Luke 131) because the meaning of this name expresses the purpose for which he was born (Matthew 121). The traditional Arabic name for Jesus is Yasu'. Until very recent times, all Arab Christians used no other name for Jesus.
KHRST was an Egyptian word meaning BURIAL or BURIED. It appears on the lids of Coffins containing Mummies which had been ANOINTED with Crocodile Oil.
-
Salam again,
You reference the fabrication Jesus, but the term is never found within Islam, AAeesa the guard in the period of dark (daor-e-zulmat), polite and soft spoken "Isa" the word's clarification is found in dictionary Almunjid.. basicaly meaning the one who was a watchman/ saw the dark, or period of cruelty.
Please stop being so stuck up on words, Jesus is just a Hellenization of Jesua and the way you refer to him in English today and so do I. I do still obviously refer to Jesua.
Jesua's name means something like "the Dispenser" if we work towards literary meaning.
And Jesua is not an Arab but he is from the Aram's and the family of Imran on the Isaac branch of the two sons of Abraham. The Aram family did not dwell in the fictitious state of Israel along the Mediterranean Sea but lived north of Arabia and the state of Ashur (often mislabeled Syria later on) plus east towards Medes. Under occupation by the Roman Empire it was the northern kingdoms who were subdued and had to live under Roman rule, but the small Israel is an invention. The term Jew (Yahood) is also fairly invented because it does not mean so much more than "having recognized/favor" or "having recognition/favor of" (depending on word composition with affixes) and does not stem from the popular root but is from the root . Those who called themselves Yahood were spread all over the Middle-East, often because they left the heresy of the occupation forces or simply chose to live within their people as belonging to the religion of the Persian Empire. The 'Zoroastrianism' is a later invention and corruption of the ancient faith they call stemming from Zartosht (Zoroaster). It did not even have the name Zoroastrianism until much later.
But the Pharisees (Persians) of the Bible so-called are the inventors of what you refer to as Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Islam. They were hypocrites and they sanctified buildings and they had rituals just like you do in Islam. In Islam they did away with the Decree of Moses even more or less.
The traditional Arabic name for Jesus is Yasu'
is pronounced Yasua. It is only people who cannot pronounce Arabic who would say otherwise.
but a Jew who lived in Israel and was born into a family of pious Jews, this extended the fabricated jewish religion.
If one activates their brain it is easy to see that the clergy is the Fars (Pharisees) clergy in the Fars region of today's Iran who had enormous religious authority for many centuries. The Biblical Gospels are true but not their interpretation. The events take place in Mesopotamia and to some extent east of that into today's Iran (Persia).
The occupation mirrors the Roman occupation on the previously Persian-dominated Middle-East. In these regions mainly Aramaic was spoken since they stem from Aram. It is a myth that Arabic was spoken there until the Islamic Crusades in the 7th century and onwards.
The man Jesua is not an Arab though who lived on the Arabian Peninsula. He is not an offspring of Ismael.
KHRST was an Egyptian word meaning BURIAL or BURIED. It appears on the lids of Coffins containing Mummies which had been ANOINTED with Crocodile Oil.
You anointed a king with oil in ancient Middle-Eastern tradition when he was crowned if you did not know this. If they anointed the mummies was likely superstition that they were anointed and ready for the next life. Obviously the terminology may have spread too so that the Greeks knew it. Egypt was once a high and mighty nation, or Mesr as it was referred to. The word Firuon means "the head".
Isa (Esa) - There is no disagreement in the established fictional story of Jesus created as way to establish mental subjugation to hierarchy by the Roman emperors, that he was not an Arab but a Jew who lived in Israel and was born into a family of pious Jews, this extended the fabricated jewish religion. He had without question a Hebrew name. His original (i.e. fabricated true) name is neither European nor Arabic, so it was neither Jesus nor Yasu' nor Esa.
The name is a Semitic name (from Shem) which both Aram and Arab comes from so you cannot correctly say that he is either. Both Aram and Arab use the same root system and the letters mean all the same although they begun to spoke different languages once upon a time.
I can agree that Hebrew is an invented language but Jesua spoke Syriac Aramaic (the Aramaya of the Ashur). In ways it has similarity to Arabic and every root word used is shared with Arabic since it is the language of Shem although taken different paths. However, you do the truth a great dishonesty if you discredit Aramaya as an authentic language of the Middle-East.
What you are doing is the ancient dirt-throwing to discredit each other, Aram and Arab and while they discredited the Arabs it is wrong of you to begin to invent your own version now 2015 when the Arams have fallen into the shadows for then you do the same poor deed as the Arams once did.
The people of the Ishaq's side of the family they were located in the north while Ismael wandered south, after Abraham was told by God that he was to be separated from his son, to form the (to be) South Arabian ancient communities. Queen Moruh (Arabic/Semitic name) was of the Ismael bloodline so you cannot complain you did not have any honorable ancestors of you are an Arab. Why do you think there was such sadness in Abraham's eyes when he saw Ismael leave? That was before Ishaq was born and he got over his pain and then he received Isaac in his old age and also this son was blessed and gave birth to Yaqub.
You can also wonder why the Aramaic side of the historical accounts threw dirt on the Queen of the South despite that Suleiman not at all gave Moruh the discriminatory and humiliating reception as the mainstream interpretation says. Queen Muruh was one of Suleiman's greatest allies during his reign compared to the hypocritical kings of Babel (Babylon). However, Suleiman and Dawood were Aramaic people. You cannot make them Arabs without misrepresenting history.
The pathetically deciphered Quran that you have in your hands no one for over a millennium have properly interpreted and I am in the progress of doing it.
Jinn means hidden and refers to any hidden nature, so someone in persona giving the illusion of being, that is contrary to their anima, such as a psychopath.
I think I have written so much about you being wrong and I am sad to write it again, but Jinn does not mean hidden or any hidden nature but the word (pronounced) Jann means surface/outer layer and often translated as 'flesh' in the past. (Jannateh) makes it object form obviously rendering it "body". The hidden mysterious supernatural creatures is an object of imagination that the deluded people who tried to interpret Quran invented.
The reason why Satan is of the Jinns is because Satan means the "instinct" and you have that in the flesh but not in the Spirit ( Nas).
I think we may risk running into a quarrel more or less but that is not my intention. You may read and absorb what I wrote if you like and compare it to what others say. But I can only say that "I know something".
Be safe
Amenuel -
Peace Emanuel,
Jesus is a fictional construct that never existed, that is not stuck on anything, the term claimed to represent this fiction is not the case.
"The Biblical Gospels are true" that is utter nonsense, they are as true as the written children's stories of Roald Dahl.
What names have been invented for this fictional character have no relevance Emanuel, only the reference claimed within the Qur'an, a claim which is utterly without any foundation.
Islam is anarchic it can not support sovereigns in any form, so kings are no more valued than a sweeper or cook, not even a messenger of Islam can be a sovereign over other in any capacity, this also excludes the invention of priests, monks all forms of clergy.
I do not use the english interpretation of the Qur'an, I use the protected source itself, the same source that was examined to write the Qur'an itself using the trivium as the method.
-
Anarchic you say, not able to support sovereigns in any form you say?
What about this verse?
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=19&verse=40#(19401)
Isn't this exactly what a souvereign would claim? The verse can hardly be more suitable for usage by sovereigns than it is it authorizes earthly sovereignty supported by divine inheritance. 1940 is any totalitarian rulers wet dream.
-
Protected source you say?
What about these visible changes to the "protected" source?
http//i.imgur.com/qDTVDoN.jpg
1 David -Manuscrpit 86/2003, front (photo Sotheby's, carried out for the auction in 1992)
2 -Enlargement of a manuscript fragment photographed by Gerd Puin
3 -Lighting a portion of the portfolio with ultraviolet light revealing the palimpseste
4 -Lower text of a palimpsest reconstituted by Asma Hilali; it shows earlier version of a fragment of text s24,33 different from the Cairo edition -
Peace runninglikeezebras,
you seriously think a sovereign would claim you cannot have any sovereign?
Many verse state the only sovereign is the Creator, this applies to all things, if I create something it is mine, at least until i exchange it for something else, which is the basis of trade, can i claim the labours of another are mine?
A sovereign makes others their subjects, meaning they impose their dictates upon them, so they become subjugated.
Sovereigns function exclusively in hierarchy being the tree of death.
The verse reference you posted has absolutely no relevance to the discussion, which is the general case with verses referenced in threads.
I tend not to reference qur'anic verses as they are so very corrupted in translation, modern Arabic is a different language to ancient Arabic, so interpretation is seldom done without bias and confusion.
The well understood concepts of the ancients seem all but lost to the modern riba cult mind, such as the tree of death (hierarchy) and the tree of life (anarchy), even riba which was in the past well understood is no long grasped even at a rudimentary level, this is clear because they cannot see why riba is not trade.
The protected source is the creation we all share perceptually, the Qur'an is a guide to that creation, or was originally.
The Qur'an has been under attack from the start as it strips away the two basic elements of slavery, hierarchy and usury (riba)
-
As the thread has gone on a tangent to the original point, I will post the start of the tread again
"There is no deity."
Therefore there is no god, no divine character, nothing to be personified, or anthropomorphized as a supreme ?being?, being a distinct entity.
So no entity, which is something having real or distinct existence, a thing considered as independent of other things, a separation distinct and independent from other things, this cannot exist, there can be nothing claimed a deity.
"There is only Allah." or "Only Allah."
Allah is a single consciousness as the absolute totality of what may exist, so the One consciousness cannot be independent of anything, all is the thought of the single consciousness; we ourselves are a fractal copy within that consciousness, forming the evolving nature of the matrix of consciousness itself.
A single Consciousness is an ?entirety? of all that is or may be; therefore it is absolutely impossible for an entity deity to exist.
An entity must be something other; but you cannot have something other with the entirety of everything.
?All religions are made up then??
Religions do not come into existence through the quality of their inherent truths, but through the capacity of the powerful to impose them with maintained ignorance, violence, and fear. Fear is very important in order to control and manipulate souls; the first thing to establish is fear, as souls that are not afraid cannot be controlled.
Once the hierarchy (the tree of death) of religions are in place many other hierarchies are either constructed or given the divine backing of religious hierarchy, and these constructs are perceived real, yet are nothing more than a fantasy invented to allow the few to dominate the many.
Religious fantasy is most needed where there is a lack of individuality, a lack of original unique thought, a mind that lacks such development tends towards fanaticism, this substitutes the excitement that experiencing unique thoughts generates, exchanged for the excitement of their obsessional focus, a psychosis that hypnotizes their mind, and can through that focus shut down the mind to all higher emotions of empathy, compassion, kindness and unconditional love, and even render wicked actions undisturbed by their conscience. The individual soul can rise to infinite heights of consciousness, but not if they choose conformity to the thoughtless multitude; to devote your mind to conform to any hierarchy of control, belief or exchange, drives consciousness ever deeper in to a state of mindlessness dominated by status and separation.
All Gods are the fantasy of either the fantasist or the fanatic, a polished vanity they present as their persona, the fantasists desire for power, and ambition, ravenously fed from the fanatics fear and cowardice, and their hypnotized perceptions.
In the perceptions of your Earthly life truth is attacked, reason ridiculed, love, compassion and empathy considered a weakness, violence glorified, hate justified, murder rationalised, theft sanctified, life monetised, in the 'worlds' of the soulless creatures, the upper-world of the soulless is dominated by thirteen elite families who are beyond any accountability, the under-world of the soulless beasts are protected by the upper-world, the commercial world of the slave souls is sandwiched between the two soulless worlds, and all the Earth suffers.
Every soul is all creation in a drop. Creation is perceptual thought; the only thing that is real is consciousness itself. This single consciousness is built fractally, repeating consciousness yet remaining one. Each new fractal consciousness begins as a simple copy, but grows through densities of perception. Each fractal form grows by embodying ever more copies of consciousness within its own consciousness as companions, fractals expand by embodying fractals, and these form the larger fractal. It?s only when a consciousness is in harmony that it may become a companion to a higher fractal form, meaning souls who are harmonised by complimentary beliefs, common aspirations and an emotional unity. If considered from the other perspective, as fractal consciousness descends in ever more compact form, so the awareness they experience is of lower densities of perception, the evolution of all fractal consciousness is to flow to higher densities of thought infinitely, as they themselves attract and embody other companion fractal consciousness, but what may evolve may also devolve. Fractals should rise upward growing in consciousness through fractal connection; these integral connections are the companions of the soul.
Each soul is unique, each drop of an infinite ocean, we are the jewels of creation each drop, we are the most cherished each drop, but within that infinite ocean each drop must grasp truth as a rudder, reason as a compass, love as a destination, sadly many souls refuse to see, hear, think, accept or evolve, and so many suffer.
organic growth in consciousness is not a set progression, each evolves in a unique way, the song is evolving not the body, every song is unique, and every soul shapes their own song. Some songs harmonise better with some souls and not so well with others, for those in harmony you can become synchronous companions; there?s no hierarchy in consciousness just variety, the very essence of all creation is infinite diversity. A soul who called himself Adams correctly stated. ?If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.? True leaders act anarchically, they are copied because their example demands it, their council is sort out, never imposed, they are the trail blazers, the truth backers, the defenders of the weak and oppressed, such a leader is a Muhammad Rasul.
The pervasive conscious ocean sings, and all other conscious fields of thought are likewise harmonic songs in synchronisation with the manifesting ever building fractal field of all conscious thought, every soul exists as a fractal form of the conscious entirety, the expression of that consciousness is thought, which can be perceived as a form of energy, all energies are simply thought, a unified field of creative thought; an infinite field of consciousness if you like. Imagine consciousness is the ocean; that is you. Imagine a single drop of that ocean is your emotional heart; that is you. Imagine conceptually an atoms worth of that drop is your perceptual mind; that is you, you contain the entire ocean in a drop, held within an infinite ocean; that is the unity of soul.
-
I do not use the english interpretation of the Qur'an, I use the protected source itself, the same source that was examined to write the Qur'an itself using the trivium as the method.
I read Quran is in the original Arabic, but I am a translator and when I speak English I also render the words as according to how the characters are spoken about in English for most part.
Jesus is a fictional construct that never existed, that is not stuck on anything, the term claimed to represent this fiction is not the case.
"The Biblical Gospels are true" that is utter nonsense, they are as true as the written children's stories of Roald Dahl.
And what do you base your claims on? Opinions? Quran confirms what Jesua spoke about in those accounts written by Jesua's followers in detail yet you say they are inventions.
How can the Gospels be fake when most teachings are true in concept "I am in the Father and the Father is in me", that is exactly how it works for anyone who is a son/daughter of the Rabb. The Rabb is in me too and everyone who "separates the Body from their Spirit".
It is Quran's mainstream interpretation which is nonsense if anything.
If you read my post in its entirety you saw that I distance myself from the mainstream Christianity and place him towards the East and I also give the true account of Aram and that Jesua is a son of Imram through Miryem. You cannot make these people Arabs because they are not. I would be utterly surprised that Jesus who spoke Syriac Aramaic (not Hebrew), including most part of the northern Arabia, was an Arab. Jew in traditional remark perhaps he was not, but he was of the Aram. And I gave you an elaboration about what Yahood actually means and that is the favor of exercising as one is intended to do; in that regard Jesua was surely a Jew.
Like I said is that I warn you against committing the same kind of dirt-throwing that Aram did against the Arabs during the great ages of corruption about the true account.
What names have been invented for this fictional character have no relevance Emanuel, only the reference claimed within the Qur'an, a claim which is utterly without any foundation.
I care little as well, but people in the Middle-East call him Jesu/Yasu and there is no fictional character we are talking about here.
Islam is anarchic it can not support sovereigns in any form, so kings are no more valued than a sweeper or cook, not even a messenger of Islam can be a sovereign over other in any capacity, this also excludes the invention of priests, monks all forms of clergy.
How do you explain Malek Suleiman then?
A real king is not above his people though but they are one among the people. There was a difference between King Suleiman and the kings of Babel who conquered and looted which he did not do. There was not a question of value though, just because you are a maleikateh (angel) does not mean that you are above others because that is arrogance. Heck even God is humble as a malek giving also sinners their daily provisions even if lifeless people would deprive them of every commodity. You must understand the difference between doing right and doing wrong. But those who do wrong only cause their own destruction.
Nevertheless, if no one steps up against such as ISIS (Idiotic Satans InSane) which no one would do if they were anarchistic then the world would be a terrible place. The question is what methodology the Malek has, diplomacy and shrewdness or blunt violence. If we follow in the Spirit of Suleiman then it would be diplomacy and shrewd politics. It is hard to deal with these deluded people, but countering with goodly propaganda in return will be uninspiring for the ISIS affiliates. The problem is not on-site in Iraq and Syria either but that is the Islamic indoctrination that happens around the world and the Arab nationalization and mostly identification with Islam. People are succumbing to propaganda machines abusing the word Allah to maximum and having turned that into a war god, a kind of "skyman" on the moon with a military uniform yelling out orders like a drill sergeant.
That is how Allah looks to those who have the proper perception of the god that Muslims look at. It is a mystery that people can obey such folly, but then we can also remember the World War II and the insanity of Adolf Hitler and yet the German people followed him backed up by the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (NSDAP). It has another perspective but you can say that the indoctrination today with Islam goes by the same kind of methods of patriotism and peer pressure. Just replace that political party with Islam and the claim to fight for the right cause. But this kind of movement is larger than the "Third Reich", very intimidating actually due to it being global with Muslims everywhere. Muslims are a ticking bomb.
Just like with World War II obviously there has to be Malekat opposing this idiocy and with anarchy the world would be doomed obviously because anarchy does not work with the evil forces in the world even if it may work in an idealistic world. No, there has to be people to balance it all out, people that are like Suleiman, who prefer diplomacy and shrewd politics over violence. Earth had looked very differently if not the Allied Forces had fought against the Axis, and if no one ever raised a finger against ISIS then the world would soon begin to look very differently too.
Of course we wish we would not have to ever be considering violence, but someone has to be a leader and the leader that can avoid violence the longest is the best leader.
But the West today are also paying the consequences of exploitation that occurred for centuries in developing countries today so they reap what they have sown themselves. What comes around goes around, and the countries have to deal with it.
I am sorry that I am ruining your thread Abdun Nur, I shall refrain from posting any further.
Be safe
Amenuel -
Peace Emanuel,
you are not ruining my thread, but I just wanted to maintain the original idea while the tangent is completed.
The Arabic is corrupted both in modern definition compared to the ancient and in the rules of grammar applied. So read Arabic is no great help in grasping the original understandings, however examining the shared perception at fundamental fractal levels does expose the truth.
As the Qur'an is a guide for all time, no reference to any soul that may have lived or historical event would be contained within it, this means if it appears to contain such nonsense it is corrupted.
I can explain the tree of death for you as you seem very invested in hierarchy if you wish.
There is no real evidence for any jesus character to have ever lived, the story of jesus is a common one, copied with slight variation many times over the last 5000 years or more. When any religious fiction is invented it must contain some truth to make the lies easy to swallow, like the honey with the poison, this mixing is called shirk, when truth and lies are combined, hadith does the same thing to islam.
This is an excerpt from an essay i wrote many years ago
Since the 1st Century BCE, its high priest, an hereditary position controlled by a handful of ancient (Jinn) families, claimed the ancient pre-Republic title of Pontifex Maximus after the Roman Emperors assumed themselves as high priest of the state cult of Magna Mater (Cybele).
A brutal and bloody cult -- involving child sacrifice, burning people alive, demonic worship and absolute celibacy of its lowest priests -- its epicentre for such evil being the giant Phrygianum atop Vatican Hill since the 2nd Century BCE.A shrine located in the Vatican on the right bank of the River Tiber, near the racecourse of Caligula (Gaianum), known from several inscriptions on fragmentary marble altars of Cybele, dating from 305 to 390 A.D., all but one of which were found under the fa?ade of S. Peter's in 1609. This shrine is probably the Frigianum (Phrygianum) of the Not. The Vatican was an important cult centre, for many Roman death cults.
In 313, Constantine and Licinius met at Milan, where the two emperors formulated a common religious policy out of necessity from the economic collapse brought on by the practices of usury, months later Licinius issued the Edict of Milan, however Licinius did not commit himself personally to Christianity. Constantine used the church as an instrument of imperial policy, imposed upon it his imperial ideology, and thus Christianity which was based upon Horus, with 200 matches in his story to that of Jesus, and later Crishna another reinvention of Horus had 346 striking analogies to the story of Jesus, was deprived of the independence it previously enjoyed.
The First Council of Nicaea was convened in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day znik in Turkey) in A.D. 325. The Council was the first effort to establish the Roman Catholic church through an assembly representing all the 'pontiff college', the ancient institution that had existed to oversee all the religions of Rome for centuries, which had for a great portion of that history had a Pope presiding over all the religions.
The ecumenical council was convened by the Roman Emperor Constantine I, who had invited all 1800 bishops of the Christian church. ?Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully seated the bishops ahead of himself." (Carroll, 11) ?proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones.? (Eusebius, The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine, Book 3, Chapter 10)
Constantine was an idolater who believed in the worship of the Sun God Sol Invictus, whom he regarded as the only God. He filled all the trappings of state, such as banners, statues and coinage with symbols of his religion. Right up to the conclusion of his life he acted as the high priest of this religion, calling his reign the era of Sun-Emperorship, only as he lay dying was he baptised, when the Christians took advantage of his weakness to resist.
The Egyptians are one of the earliest recorded cultures to fully embrace the sun as a deity. Ra was the major cosmic deity. Early Egyptian kings claimed descent from his lineage. At the beginning of the Middle Kingdom (2134-1668 B.C.E) the worship of Ra, for all intents and purposes, became a state religion.
The parallel in Christianity is the Merovingians who claim a direct linage to Christ and so a right to subjugate and exploit the population, this Jinn bloodline flows through to the descendants perpetrating the present monarchies of the modern world.
During the Theban dynasties the god was melded to Amon and was transformed into the supreme god Amon-Ra. Later renamed Aton, which was proclaimed the one true and only god, on the surface creating the first monotheistic religion. An early example of the concept of the trinity is also in evidence, for the Egyptians believed in a divine father, mother, and son (Osiris, Isis, Horus), this also explains the use of the term 'men' expressed at the conclusion of any prayer, in the affirmation of the Sun God, this concludes prayers in the modern world for Judaism, Christianity and Islam, possibly others.
The BRAMA of the Hindus, and MITHRAS of the Persians, and ATHOM, AMUM, PHTHA, and OSIRIS, of the Egyptians, the BEL of the Chaldeans, the ADONAI of the Ph?nicians, the ADONIS and APOLLO of the Greeks, became but personifications of the Sun.
From this ancient cosmological vantage point the god dowelled in and ruled the heavens, this established a God in the sky belief.
"In Rome December 25 was made popular by Pope Liberius in 354 and became the rule in the West in 435 when the first ?Christ mass? was officiated by Pope Sixtus III. This coincided with the date of a celebration by the Romans to their primary god, the Sun, and to Mithras, a popular Persian sun god supposedly born on the same day. The Roman Catholic writer Mario Righetti candidly admits that, ?to facilitate the acceptance of the faith by the pagan masses, the Church of Rome found it convenient to institute the 25thof December as the feast of the birth of Christ to divert them from the pagan feast, celebrated on the same day in honour of the ?Invincible Sun? Mithras, the conqueror of darkness? (Manual of Liturgical History, 1955, Vol. 2, p. 67).
The sun religions Ankhs symbolized everlasting life and generation, the Ichthys, or fish symbol, was used by early Christians, replaced by the Chi-Rho monogram, which was adopted by Constantine from his labarum (military standard), later replaced by the death on the cross symbol.
Due to the usury collapse within the Roman empire, Rome was no longer viable as the base of operations, so ultimately Constantinople was founded, Constantine without question began the construction of two major churches in Constantinople, Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom) and Hagia Eirene (Holy Peace); the foundation of a third, the Church of the Holy Apostles, may be attributed to him with a measure of certainty. Unlike the Old Rome, which was filled with pagan monuments and institutions, the New Rome was essentially the Emperors vision of a Christian capital.Constantine worked to incorporate the religions, to form a united, cohesive single religion of the state. "Faith.... was for Constantine a political matter, and any faith that was conductive to unity was treated with forbearance.? (The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. 1996 ed. p.38
This is why the Torah was incorporated as the old but still relevant text and the new text was created to unite these sects. If we examine First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, who attempts to impose a Roman based religious hierarchy upon the new Christian religion around 97AD by rooting Christ in Judaism and the texts of the Torah, additionally imbuing Christ as Sovereign, the lord to follow and establishing the myth of resurrection as first established in the Sun religion of Eygpt with the god Horus, who was the son of God, who died on the cross for our sins and was resurrected.
"Clem. 251 Let us consider the marvellous sign which is seen in the regions of the east, that is, in the parts about Arabia.
Clem. 252 There is a bird, which is named the phoenix. This, being the only one of its kind, liveth for five hundred years; and when it hath now reached the time of its dissolution that it should die, it maketh for itself a coffin of frankincense and myrrh and the other spices, into the which in the fullness of time it entereth, and so it dieth.
Clem. 253 But, as the flesh rotteth, a certain worm is engendered, which is nurtured from the moisture of the dead creature and putteth forth wings. Then, when it is grown lusty, it taketh up that coffin where are the bones of its parent, and carrying them journeyeth from the country of Arabia even unto Egypt, to the place called the City of the Sun;
Clem. 254 and in the daytime in the sight of all, flying to the altar of the Sun, it layeth them thereupon; and this done, it setteth forth to return.
Clem. 255 So the priests examine the registers of the times, and they find that it hath come when the five hundredth year is completed.
Clem. 261 Do we then think it to be a great and marvellous thing, if the Creator of the universe shall bring about the resurrection of them that have served Him with holiness in the assurance of a good faith, seeing that He showeth to us even by a bird the magnificence of His promise?? (Translated by J.B. Lightfoot. Adapt. and mod. (c) 1990) So he justifies the lie of the resurrection with the fantasy of the phoenix.
"Clem. 441 And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over the name of the bishop's office.
Clem. 442 For this cause therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they provided a continuance, that if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministration. Those therefore who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent of the whole Church, and have ministered unblamably to the flock of Christ in lowliness of mind, peacefully and with all modesty, and for long time have borne a good report with all these men we consider to be unjustly thrust out from their ministration.
Clem. 443 For it will be no light sin for us, if we thrust out those who have offered the gifts of the bishop's office unblamably and holily.? (Translated by J.B. Lightfoot. Adapt. and mod. (c) 1990) He establishes the Bishops office.
The Pope of Rome, Eusebius, regarded Constantine as divine and stated that the Creator was embodied in him. ?Since the beginning of the world it is to Constantine alone that the power of salvation has been given. Christ is set aside, Christ is formally denied....Constantine now stands alone as the saviour of the world...? (The Messianic Legacy)
"Constantine dealt with the matter of religion from a political angle only, by expelling all the bishops who he expected would not sign the new declaration of faith, and in this manner he achieved the unity he wanted.? (The Heretics. By Walter Nigg.)
Christian doctrine formed on the basis of an emperor's authority. This doctrinal text written by Constantine himself, for the people who gathered at the council of Nicea, still forms the foundation and reference point for the doctrine of all Christian groups.
All works and writing that opposed the decrees of Nicea were to be collected and destroyed. Emperor Diocletian had destroyed all Christian writings that could be found. ?Of the five thousand extant early manuscripts of the New Testament, not one pre-dates the fourth century. The New Testament, as it exists is essentially a product of fourth century editors and writers.?(The Heretics. By Walter Nigg.)
"After Constantine, the Christ was depicted as one who had power over death, and as the ruler of the universe.?(The Lost Gospel. - Burton L Mack)
The church took the birthday of the Sun, the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere, the festival of "Natalis Invicti" on 25 December in Europe but varies upon geographical location, as in Russia for example Christmas falls on the 4th January. The Sabbath was changed from Saturday as established by the early Christians to Sunday, the day of the Sun.
In the 325 council they established the new foundations of their ecclesiastical corporation, "ecumenical" derived from Greek 'oikoumenikos' means "worldwide", Augustus had in the past claimed to be ruler of the oikoumene/world, therefore the Pope was owner of the world and all within it; Augustus promoted the ideal of a superior Roman civilization with a task of ruling the world, so an Emperor, a king, a president could rule what the Pope owned.
They made the Pope the vicar of Christ, and they made Christ God, so the Pope was the religious adviser to God; the word vicar means 'a substitute', meaning a vicar is a substitute who acts in place of another, so in effect the Pope is God on earth, under the Roman Catholic Church logic.
In the Eastern Orthodox churches Constantine is regarded a saint.
-
Peace Emanuel,
You mentioned Solomon as a king you believe your superior.
But solomon was no great king, he was a priest of Melech, a name that has a variety of spellings, some call it moloch, some molech; there are other variations.
Many have, and some still do worship Melech as a god, it?s an ancient scourge that lingered on in the desert of the soulless, Melech was Baal to the Canaanites, a man with the head of a bull, Ammonites where Melech idolaters who?s children were murdered in his worship, so Melech was commonly know as "the abomination of the children of Ammon". At first the name Baal was used by the Jews for their God without discrimination, but as the depravity of their idolatry and murders generated conflict towards the Jews, so the name Baal was given up by the Israelites, and its immoral rituals concealed.
The abhorrent Jedidiah, who you would know as Solomon, was king of the Jews, the Jews at that time were a small band of soulless psychopaths that roamed the deserts of the middle east, Jedidiah built a temple to Melech, Jedidiah was the master of the soulless of his age, allied with the Moabites, Canaanites, Phoenicians, and Ammonites, and all worshippers of Melech, and the horrors of soulless excess were indulged and the authority of hierarchy established; almost 3000 years have cycled and the idolatry of this cult remains ever stronger.
Some of the truly wicked, the hidden walking dead (psychopaths), perceptual entities of depravity, believe they will be the wards of Melech, so endeavour to placate, or even please Melech, as if it were some entity they could ingratiate themselves upon, this does not prevent them from the rape, torture and brutal murder of innocent children, the more depraved the act, the more they feel Melech will be pleased. The practice of burning children alive in the name of Melech worship has been indulged for many thousands of years, and the soulless elite of hierarchy continue this practice upon the Earth.
The religion of Melech has the human sacrifice of souled children burned alive, Melech worship has pasted through the ages to the moment by the idolatrous Israelites or their imitators, the soulless have murdered vast numbers of children in the most appalling ways, and this persists.
They have and continue to fashion giant brass, or more recently steel and concrete idols, to the roasting place of Melech, the idols have several forms sometimes they fashion the Babylonian Goddess of the dead Ereshkigal, who has bird legs and wings, or the form of a man with the head of a bull; they heat the idol from its lower parts; whose hands or wings are out stretched to the ground. When the idol is glowing hot, they put the terrified child between the idols hands, and the flames consume them, they are burnt alive in agony; when the child cries out; the priests beat drums, so that no soul?s heart might be moved, if indeed any with a soul are present.
In this time the burning of the children thrown upon the fires of alters, pales in comparison to the fires dropped from the skies; an endless extermination; orchestrated through the will of the soulless, who wield military machines murdering and destroying beyond any account; a continuous waging of endless war upon the souled; yes it is waged, the souled are paid wages to murder the souled by the soulless. From thousands, to the burning of millions, and the souled multitude spectate in fear and silence, convinced the murdered are unworthy of remorse or defence, many even cheer on the murder and violence, but the truly ignorant and depraved are willing participants, revering their soulless masters, worshipping their callous nature in vicarious adoration. The majority wallow in conformity, content in their generous portions, they greedily consume the lies and poisons their slave masters provide. Many billions of souls have been consumed in the flames of war orchestrated by the soulless who have ignited and fuelled them, simply because the souled look to authority, as a child to a parent, fearing life, fearing the future, fearing the unfamiliar, fearing the baseless lies of doom and danger, within an environment of idol worship and adoration of hierarchy and authority, instead of establishing community and the bonds of loving companions.
-
giveup
Have you even read Quran? It is even possible to understand the nature of malek in the poorly interpreted mainstream versions, which fascinates me though.
Malek is an Arabic/Semitic word and is used in many different scenarios and it generally implies to have control. Many sentences are constructed on using the trilateral word Miim-Lam-Kaf and the word generally used to symbolize an angel uses the same root. However, it is perchance more accurate to say "you are in control" by the word rather than forcefully seize control by the word default.
I do not know where you get that I have taken Suleiman as my superior; you are not superior just because you exercise command as a Malek because then you have found the twisted malek not worthy of following. Suleiman, Jesua, Ebrahem, Miryem etc they are all my brothers and sisters and we belong to the same family.
If someone is superior that is the Rabb, because that One is clearly in control of you even if you are as good as the Rabb and perform the Rabb's will in symbiosis. "The Father is greater than I" said Jesua.
It does not matter if the prophets of old were true or not because the narratives convey a story that we can learn from, but it also takes that the actual narratives is properly interpreted from the original script.
You could very well create a god from Malek, that much credit I give, but Arabic words do primarily convey a descriptive meaning and you have to decipher the passages before you can draw any conclusion what "malek" means.
There is another thing and that is Malek is used in plural multiple times in Quran and that renders your god theory slightly off, even if there may have been a "Melech" god at some point. There is an "Allah" god alive today 2015 so people can create gods from all sorts of words while the word allah does not even refer to anything at all as a noun but is merely a descriptive grammatical function.
But solomon was no great king, he was a priest of Melech, a name that has a variety of spellings, some call it moloch, some molech; there are other variations.
You are not taking this information from Quran. While Suleiman was a Malek there is also stated in Quran that he had contemporary Kings from Babylon that were not as righteous as he and that conquered and looted using malicious politics. The word "malek" means to be in control, i.e. king/ruler. You know, even Quran makes it clear that Suleiman as portrayed in Quran is a controller over a realm and a great politician and diplomat. That does not make him superior or something but a wise and noble king is on par with his community. If he gained splendor as it is said in many narrations that was because of the prosperity of his nation due to the applied rule. It spread to Queen Moruh too who became a faithful ally.
Miim-Lam-Kaf = to rule/command/reign, be capable, to control, power/authority, king, kingdom.
I think no one would contend this meaning. I know that in the Hebrew account (such that you oppose) malek could also mean messenger, but that is quite unlikely. I think you gather your intelligence from sources that you claim to contend.
The religion of Melech has the human sacrifice of souled children burned alive, Melech worship has pasted through the ages to the moment by the idolatrous Israelites or their imitators, the soulless have murdered vast numbers of children in the most appalling ways, and this persists.
I think you are taking information from people who have nothing to do with the prophets or whatever. How could you even draw the connection between the linguistic word and some murderous invented god?
But I can see again that you are aggressive and work hard on painting the Arams black just repeating the story again that the Aram did against the Arab once upon time and I urge you to stop if only for your own .
Before you begin throwing out punches from right to left you may need to learn what the expression "Bani Israel" refers to. The expression literally means "Children of the Chief", i.e. Descendants of the LORD albeit cryptically in typical Rabb manner. Anyone aligning with the Rabb is a "Bani Israel". It is unfortunate that the term has been abused for many years, but that is not the Rabb's fault. You can only be a Bani Israel if you are "acting Such As It" (amen b'allah) and regard the blindness that is blinding you, i.e. your Body that is not a part of your real self. In fact, there are very few Bani Israel in the world who would live up to the name even if they call themselves as by that.
Jesus, the Roman symbol in Christianity grew forth by the increased Paganization of the religion and a huge portion of conjecture loosely based on severely misinterpreted authentic material, i.e. the Biblical Gospels. The doctrine Christianity is very incompatible with what those letters written by the followers of Jesua proclaimed. Jesua says that everyone that does like him would be Children of the Father and not he by any way exclusively. He is also some kind of god in the flesh despite that he would have cared less about the flesh.
It is mainly delusion and human superstition and tendency to create image representations for gods that made the god Jesus in the typical Pagan manner. That it has some kind of similarity with Sol Invictus is just a coincidence. You have to separate sectarian doctrine with what Jesua really says himself. There is a reason why the Rabb already a 3500-4000 years ago implemented the Decree that Moses inscribed in stone to tell about man's biggest stumbling blocks and there idolization through image representation is obviously mentioned as number two. It is Satan (the instinct) that leads human Bodies to indulge in the behavior propagated against by the Decree and all this indulgence is detrimental for the Spirit of the Soul. The man Jesua came to elaborate upon what has already been said without implementing any further doctrine (decree). What he taught is in those Biblical Gospels that you curse to (a non-existent) Hell, plus in the Quran that I bet you can hardly interpret unfortunately.
I think you should contemplate what is the so-called Ten Commandments actually and why such as number 10 "Do not be jealous" is mentioned. What do you think a sample of human instinct is? Being jealous, and giving expression for such. Do you think the Rabb has any kind of jealousy? No!
What do you think is an instinct? Being turned on by predatory and violent behavior. Killing is the ultimate fail, but even starting to feel the primitive feeling inside which is expressed by a red face, increased blood pressure or turning on to violent behavior. Even becoming emotional is a first failure that counts as detrimental. The point is that the Ten Commandments are actually guidelines not to give in to the animal in them.
Be safe
Amenuel -
I wrote quite a lot to giveup actually. rotfl
But anyways, opposing views give inspiration to bring forth answers, and perhaps others read who are more interested.
Be safe
Amenuel