« November 2006 | Main | January 2007 »
December 31, 2006
to walk on the earth
My intention for 2007 is to follow and old chinese proverb that says: the miracle is not to fly in the air, or to walk on the water; but to walk on the earth. and just take time to savour these very miracles.
We all walk this earth but in our hurry, we forget to understand that every tiniest occurence is a complex picture crafted by someone I like to call godJi as it trascends all hues. When I was little and faced with disppointments, my pa use to tell me that these too were part of a huge picture we were unable to see and that its real significance would be revealed one day, provided one did not give up believing. The wisdom of these words took time to seep in, and its only in what I call y twilight years that it all began to make sense.
The years went by and one was busy living or rather surviving; there were many moments when the picture seemed filled with greys and black, but somehow the big picture did not come to mind. Instead one cursed fate or sometimes when defeat loomed large, petitioned the godJi of the moment.
Then life took a turn and things changed: project why came by and with this the reality that the greys and blacks were not simply restricted to one's life, but concerned the destiny of others, where by some part of godJi's plan, you found yourself in a steering position. Fatalism and empty petitions were in no way sufficient and to make things worse obstacles were plenty. As one carried on obstinately, things happened and fell in place.
My fist post on intentblog was about assuming responsibility. Somehow a year down the line it still rings true, but what has changed is the fact that if one does, and hence plays the part in the big picture with honesty and faith, then someone makes the seemingly impossible happen.
So my intent for 2007 is to assume that responsibility with more fervour with the firm knowledge that my action may somehow hold the seed of a miracle in the making.
Or in other words to walk the earth with all my heart.
Posted by Anouradha Bakshi at 10:33 PM | Comments (5)
The Muslim prophet born in Bethlehem
Our friend, Ashie, at Heart In Action Enterprises have sent us this story.
The story of Jesus held a special place within early Islam. There is no need for a clash of civilisations
Karen Armstrong
Saturday December 23, 2006
The Guardian
In 632, after five years of fearful warfare, the city of Mecca in the Arabian Hijaz voluntarily opened its gates to the Muslim army. No blood was shed and nobody was forced to convert to Islam, but the Prophet Muhammad ordered the destruction of all idols and icons of the Divine. There were a number of frescoes painted on the inner walls of the Kabah, the ancient granite shrine in the centre of Mecca, and one of them, it is said, depicted Mary and the infant Jesus. Immediately Muhammad covered it reverently with his cloak, ordering all the other pictures to be destroyed except that one.
This story may surprise people in the west, who have regarded Islam as the implacable enemy of Christianity ever since the crusades, but it is salutary to recall it during the Christmas season when we are surrounded by similar images of the Virgin and Child. It reminds us that the so-called clash of civilisations was by no means inevitable. For centuries Muslims cherished the figure of Jesus, who is honoured in the Qur'an as one of the greatest of the prophets and, in the formative years of Islam, became a constituent part of the emergent Muslim identity.
There are important lessons here for both Christians and Muslims - especially, perhaps, at Christmas. The Qur'an does not believe that Jesus is divine but it devotes more space to the story of his virginal conception and birth than does the New Testament, presenting it as richly symbolic of the birth of the Spirit in all human beings (Qur'an 19:17-29; 21:91). Like the great prophets, Mary receives this Spirit and bears Jesus, who will, in his turn, become an ayah, a revelation of peace, gentleness and compassion to the world.
The Qur'an is horrified by Christian claims that Jesus was the "son of God", and depicts Jesus ardently denying his divinity in an attempt to "cleanse" himself of these blasphemous projections. Time and again the Qur'an insists that, like Muhammad himself, Jesus was a perfectly ordinary human being and that the Christians have entirely misunderstood their own scriptures. But it concedes that the most learned and faithful Christians - especially monks and priests - did not believe that Jesus was divine; of all God's worshippers, they were closest to the Muslims (5:85-86).
It has to be said that some Christians have a very simplistic understanding of what is meant by the incarnation. When the New Testament writers - Paul, Matthew, Mark and Luke - call Jesus the "Son of God", they do not mean that he was God. They use the term in its Jewish sense: in the Hebrew Bible, this title was bestowed upon an ordinary mortal - a king, a priest or a prophet - who had been given a special task by God and enjoyed unusual intimacy with him. Throughout his gospel, Luke is in tune with the Qur'an, because he consistently calls Jesus a prophet. Even John, who saw Jesus as God's incarnate Word, usually made a distinction, albeit a very fine one, between the eternal Word and God himself - just as our own words are separate from the essence of our being.
The Qur'an insists that all rightly guided religions come from God, and Muslims are required to believe in the revelations of every single one of God's messengers: "Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob ... and all the other prophets: we make no distinction between any of them" (3:84). But Jesus - also called the Messiah, the Word and the Spirit - had special status.
Jesus, it was felt, had an affinity with Muhammad, and had predicted his coming (61:6), just as the Hebrew prophets were believed by Christians to have foretold the coming of Christ. The Qur'an, possibly influenced by Docetic Christianity, denied that Jesus had been crucified, but saw his ascension into heaven as the triumphant affirmation of his prophethood. In a similar way, Muhammad had once mystically ascended to the Throne of God. Jesus would also play a prominent role beside Muhammad in the eschatological drama of the last days.
During the first three centuries of Islam, Muslims came into close contact with Christians in Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Egypt, and began to amass a collection of hundreds of stories and sayings attributed to Jesus; there is nothing comparable in any other non-Christian religion. Some of these teachings were clearly derived from the gospel - the Sermon on the Mount was particularly popular - but were given a distinctively Muslim flavour. Jesus is depicted making the hajj, reading the Qur'an, and prostrating himself in prayer.
In other stories, Jesus articulated specifically Muslim concerns. He was a great model for Muslim ascetics, preaching poverty, humility and patience. Sometimes he took sides in a political or theological dispute: aligning himself with those who advocated free will in the debate about predestination; praising Muslims who retired on principle from politics ("Just as kings have left wisdom to you, so you should leave the world to them"); or condemning scholars who prostituted their learning for political advancement ("Do not make your living from the Book of God").
Jesus was becoming internalised by Muslims as an exemplar and inspiration in their own spiritual quest. Shias felt that there was a strong connection between Jesus and their inspired imams, who had also had miraculous births and inherited prophetic knowledge from their mothers. The Sufis were especially devoted to Jesus and called him the prophet of love. The 12th-century mystic Ibn al-Arabi called him "the seal of the saints" - deliberately pairing him with Muhammad, the "seal of the prophets". Some Sufis went so far as to alter the shahadah, the Muslim profession of faith, so that it became: "I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that Jesus [not Muhammad] is his prophet."
The Muslim devotion to Jesus is a remarkable example of the way in which one tradition can be enriched by another. It cannot be said that Christians returned the compliment. While the Muslims were amassing their Jesus-traditions, Christian scholars in Europe were denouncing Muhammad as a lecher and charlatan, viciously addicted to violence. But today both Muslims and Christians are guilty of this kind of bigotry and often seem eager to see only the worst in each other.
The Muslim devotion to Jesus shows that this was not always the case. In the past, before the political dislocations of modernity, Muslims were always able to engage in fruitful and stringent self-criticism. This year, on the birthday of the Prophet Jesus, they might ask themselves how they can revive their long tradition of pluralism and appreciation of other religions. For their part, meditating on the affinity that Muslims once felt for their faith, Christians might look into their own past and consider what they might have done to forfeit this respect.
Karen Armstrong is the author of Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time
Posted by Intent at 10:22 PM | Comments (17)
Me first.
Me first.
Deepak has asked us to talk about our ‘intentions for 2007’. I’ll briefly explain a small decision I have taken for myself.
It’s been in my mind lately to increase my stake in being self-determining.
I’ve been imagining re-situating this purpose - not so much re-positioning personal intentions but relatively privileging the first person singular.
I don’t mean simply increasing the instances of I/me/myself/mine cropping up in my decision-taking in 2007 as compared to 2006. I am being governed by a desire to continue developing and refreshing (through active, iterative review) how I balance more strictly personal concerns with keeping a regard for ‘other than self’ – the latter might extend to include ‘civic mindedness’, ‘duty’, ‘responsibility’, ‘service’ and so on.
I could be feeling the effects of exposure to anxiety about restrictions to my exercise of my rights of self-determination. In actual fact in 2006 as in most other years I did note (as opposed to taking any action to prevent) how I sometimes omitted to put ‘self’ in the frame whether in the act of working or being at home. You know how it can go – defer not demur, almost as an act of communion.
I can’t easily cite specific episodes when I have felt as if ‘my self’ has had to cool her heels in the cheaper seats (metaphorically speaking). It occurs to me though that one of the seeds of my pre-occupation is a prosaic one, to do with the fact of my professional, domestic and social lives co-habiting and intermingling; like an increasing number I am self-managing if not always self-determining in my work. It can be a crowded, precarious-feeling life, every day a Sunday or a Monday - or often both at the same time. A flux which in my experience can give rise to instrumentalisation and subordination of self or at the very least making it an easier option to be a bystander; as opposed to directing, ‘leading’ and animating outcomes.
My intention for 2007 therefore is to be quietly attentive of the baby whilst throwing out the bathwater. It can be all too easy these days to fetishise and prioritise submission of ego – and so forget to be direct in nourishing self. Unless the latter process becomes established however, there can be no cosmos, no firmament of twinkling constellations. So we need our stars to be well-provided - each of them - the better for them to be able to reach potential in their brief lives and round out their place in the human populace.
I hope you too construct moments in 2007 where your candle burns bright, true and with sustenance.
Posted by Aladin at 09:58 AM | Comments (3)
Happy 2007!!
A Very Happy New Year to Our Intentblog Friends!! We would love to hear your intentions for 2007! Also,
next week, we will be putting up a My Intention submission form for 1-2 sentence intentions that will rotate daily on the home page. These can be for personal intentions or global ones. We figure lets start planting all of our intentions here at Intentblog. I will explain more when we put it up!!
In the coming year, we plan to add a few new things to the site so stay tuned. I think we will also start a monthly newsletter and themes, as well as feature books, music and non-profit organizations that are doing great work. We would love your suggestions on additional fun things we can do. I would love to expand our community in 2007 so would love for all of you to tell friends or family about Intentblog.
As the year ends, I want to thank everyone in this wonderful community for making Intentblog a fun, challenging, and interesting place to come to every day.
Love Mallika
Posted by Mallika Chopra at 09:29 AM | Comments (39)
Weekly Intent - Thomas Herold
Attention & Intention - The Magic Combination to Fulfill Your Dreams
How do wealthy people create their wealth? For most of us it seems like magic; and many actually think that there must be a secret formula involved.
In our western world, we are conditioned to always believe that the most complicated solution must be true. That's why you see the word "easy" in many advertisements. "Easy," because with all the high tech stuff around us, life has not become easier at all. However, life itself is actually easy, and very simple. What it makes complicated is our perceptions and conclusions.
The same is true with manifesting wealth in your life. If you follow simple steps, you will create wealth in your life. The challenge is that we have forgotten to think in an easy way. Our mind comes up with the most deluded stories to justify why others have wealth and abundance, and we don't.
To create wealth and abundance in your life begin with one simple step: believe that it is possible for you to have it!
Think about how much time you spend during your day to achieve this goal. Most of us are so busy with our lives that we run almost all day on auto-responder. We have given ourselves a side role in our self-produced movie. We are not present to tell the director what to do in the movie. So our days either go as they have in the past, or just at random.
In order to direct your attention toward something you'd like to achieve, you need to have free attention. Attention is the magnet that will attract new situations in your life. Without free attention, you are back to playing the auto-responder 'bot.
Start with the intention to be wealthy and to live in abundance. Intend to create prosperity in your life. Make this the first thought when you get up in the morning. However, intention alone doesn't get you there. Remind yourself constantly about your new goal. This way, it gets imprinted into your consciousness. Your consciousness needs to build new neuronal pathways, and that will take some time. It is like working out - you cannot expect to be in perfect shape after visiting the gym once.
There are also times in your life where you feel discouraged and you just want to say goodbye to this world. Nothing works out, and you think you will never make it. It's almost impossible for most of us to shift ourselves out of this mood. We have the belief that circumstances outside of our control have contributed to our mood, and therefore our attention is stuck on the outside situation. Bringing the attention back to ourselves is the key to solving this dilemma.
Discouragement is a result of expectations. It happens when you expect something to happen and it doesn't. It is a confusion about time, because it will happen - just not at the time you thought. So relax, and realign with your intention. This may not be an easy task in the beginning.
What Can You Do to Help Guide Your Attention?
Today, take 30 minutes aside from your normal daily life – sit down, close your eyes, and start dreaming about what you really want to manifest.
- Is there anything you've always wanted?
- Is there something you have long given up on?
- What makes you really happy?
I remember my parents constantly reminded me not to daydream. I hated it when they threw me out of my lovely daydreams. They told me I will never make it in this world daydreaming. They probably didn't know that there are professional people that do nothing but daydream. These individuals have a wonderful life, as they need to be totally relaxed in order to 'download' new ideas, and then sell them for millions of dollars.
As an adult I had to re-learn daydreaming, as I had been conditioned not to by my parents. I've heard rumors that Google actually gives its employees some extra time during the day, to do creative daydreaming. Dreaming is highly effective for your creativity; many glorious inventions have emerged from it.
Thomas Herold is the founder and CEO of Dream Manifesto. The quantum method for manifesting your dreams. To learn more about creating your dreams with the Dream Manifestation Wizard software visit: Dream Manifesto - The Quantum Method for Manifesting Your Dreams
Posted by Intent at 03:42 AM | Comments (16)
December 30, 2006
A Morbid Night
James Brown. Gerald Ford. Saddam Hussein. Reading the headlines this evening, dead bodies is definitely the dominant theme. The ritual of death itself is a fascinating one to me.
Saddam's death is celebrated with dancing in the streets, and protests, bombings. He will be buried alongside his sons.
Gerald Ford's casket sits in the Capital Rotunda in the US Capital, with cannon salutes welcoming him. After being honored in DC, his body will be sent to Michigan for its burial.
James Brown was viewed at the Apollo Theater by thousands of fans, and his burial today in Georgia was hosted influential black leaders, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and Michael Jackson.
I remember my father describing the days leading up to the cremation of my grandfather and the graphic, intimate interaction with the corpse, preparing it to let it go. I remember each morbid detail from bathing the body to cracking the skull.
Rituals to let go of dead bodies. Does it really matter how a corpse is handled?
Burial has always freaked me out a bit. I like the idea of being cremated. I was always fascinated by the Parsi tradition of letting the vultures eat away your corpse.
A morbid evening indeed.
Posted by Mallika Chopra at 08:38 PM | Comments (17)
DISGUSTED AND COMPLICIT
DISCLAIMER: I reserve the right to evolve my opinion as I gather more info and process it. Also as I get some sleep.
I stayed up most of the night watching coverage of the Saddam Hussein execution, flipping channels between CNN and FOX news and searching for any other outlet disseminating information on the happening of yesterday evening (local time).
I've come away rather horrified as of this morning. As previously stated (and misinterpreted on this very blog), I have no sympathy for the serial killer that was Saddam Hissein. Anyone who does, only need do a little research and be reminded not only of the hundreds of thousands that he is responsible for killing but the truly inhumane and gruesome ways in which he personally indulged in torturing and killing. I mean feeding people to rabid dogs, strapping bombs to chidlren's chests, raping women in front of their families etc. People - this guy and his sons (and daughters allegedly) were/are satanists if there is such a thing, and I can't pretend to have much affection for their souls. All that said, I remain a staunch anti-death penalty, though such a sterile stance seems rather absurd considering the circumstances.
My horror, however, stems from what else I saw the last 12 hours or so since Saddam's execution. It's the way it's being covered - with such glee and admiration. CNN feigned gravity when it first received and ran footage of Saddam's escort to the gallows - warning viewers of the video they were about to see - as well as the post-hanging photos of a crudely twisted neck Saddam Hussein. They then proceeded to run the video on a loop for the next 12 hours (and counting). Fox News didn't even pretend to concern. They might as well have played the theme song from Rocky, there seemed to be such joy and glee.
Then came the breakout celebrations in Deerborne Michigan of Iraqi immigrants dancing in the streets. These images were then placed in a box on the screen and played right along the loop of the actual execution.
Here's the thing: and I know I'll take some heat for this: this shit is downright disgusting - and as much animosity I have toward the Bush administration and American imperialism for birthing many of these problems - there is something uniquely primitive about the behavior of the muslims behind this. The dancing in the streets, the alleged dancing over the dead body of Saddam, even the crude unsophistication of the whole execution itself (a bunch of men in hoods pushing a forlorn old Saddam through the gallows) and seemingly wanting to make sure that they were the ones to place the noose and detail to him exactly what was about to happen to him. While I am generally inclined to braodly indict the human race on such behavior, I have to say there is something just so barbaric about it that - at this time in history - I find so unique to certain Islamic cultures, it really makes me angry.
On the other hand....maybe this is just the image that we see propogated by the media - images of heads being cut off in Iraq and Pakistan, images of kids being brainwashed in Gaza and Afghanistan, images of torture in Saudi and Syria, images of murderous glee in Deerborne Michigan for crissake....
Then came an interesting observation (if I don't say so myself): The vast majority of progressive Islamic commentary came from women. While a lot of the Islamic men (including scholars and Imams) seemed indulgent in the execution and often cited the satisfaction of revenge, many of the female analysts from the Islamic and Arab world expressed a level of critical thinking absent from their male counterparts. My simple conclusion: in much of non-secular Islamic culture, women have suffered the most broad prejudice that they see through the bullshit of their own cultural behavior. They instinctively feel how idiotic the celebratory behavior is. Case in point: Deerborne Michigan - all men in the streets celebrating, kissing one another etc - NO WOMEN.
Finally, the truly sad part of. We, as the so called sophisticated, enlightened, and evolved WEST are being more influenced by these worlds then we are supposedly exporting our so-called advancement. Meaning: when did it become okay to broadcast images of executions of television in the USA? Yes- we continue to carry out executions in this country on our hideous killers - from mass murderers like McVeigh to deviant serial killers. But we never put it on television (on a loop). We never celebrated in the streets.
Yesterday, watching television, was a very sad day for me. We've descended to a new low. My conclusion: Saddam Hussein and his deviant sons, the radical Islamic world (which ironically Saddam and fam nevere evn subscribed to) - even in death - are "winning." They are successfully exporting their primittiveness to us. Next step: watching the execution live on pay-per-view.
Will you watch it?
Worst offender: me. Because, yeah, I may youtube it.
P.S. - forgive all the numerous spelling and syntax errors, but I don't even feel like reading over what I just wrote.
Posted by Gotham Chopra at 08:35 AM | Comments (49)
December 29, 2006
Survival of the Wisest (Part 2)
To say that our future survival depends on wisdom can sound vague and vaporous--isn't every politician promising a new vision for tomorrow without meaning anything? But there's a serious point here. The state of the planet today is a direct result of human vision. The way we pursue happiness--by exploiting natural resources, ignoring environmental degradation, and largely giving up on overpopulation--represents our current stage of evolution. We have created a world that pictures outwardly an inner vision.
What went into this vision? The key ingredients are both obvious and subtle:
--A model for happiness based on consumption.
--A shift from centuries of religious idealism to pragmatic materialism.
--A desire to conquer Nature and thus be free from natural disasters and threats.
--A belief in science and progress as separate from spirituality.
--Loss of community, replaced with stark individualism and competition. Beneath this lies a deep fear of lack and deprivation.
--Feeling isolated and unsupported except on the physical level. The existence of a transcendent power is denied.
Changing these factors will take time, and there is no guarantee that we will succeed in finding a vision that will promote survival. But there's no doubt that mere political effort is woefully insufficient. Nor will technology alone save us, although no doubt the joint efforts of government and massive corporations will eventually deliver efficient cars, reversal of smokestack pollution, and alternative fuels, at least to developed countries. It's just as likely that we will suffer through many dangers and near disasters before the turning point is reached.
Survival of the wisest means a shift in consciousness that happens today. On the material plane it may seem as if this is a futile, even pointless effort. (As Jesus would have seemed futile to the Romans and Buddha to the emperor of China. Neither could have any idea that the fate of empires was being altered.) But humanity evolves through consciousness first and foremost. Current attempts to find a Darwinian benefit to social behavior feel rather ridiculous. To read Richard Dawkins and other committed materialists, one would think that Paleolithic man tested out behavior patterns at random, and only those that benefited survival won out. Thus jealousy, for example, might serve to protect a male's gene pool from invasion by other males desiring to mate with the same female. This may be an adequate model for sparrows in mating season. It's grossly misguided when applied to human beings.
The evolution of the mind happens on its own terms. There is nothing about physical survival at stake, at least not for the past few thousand years after populations discovered farming and were settled in safe communities. A bad painter in Florence who married, had three children, and got paid handsomely looks better as a Darwinian specimen than Michelangelo or Leonardo, neither of whom got married or passed on their genes. Yet in terms of human evolution, it's the latter two who represent progress.
This is because consciousness develops through self-awareness. The exact mechanism will never be understood using a physical model. In the field known as sociobiology, which Darwinians fashionably apply to human society, survival is achieved through naturally favored behaviors because a specie's genes benefit, even when survival isn't achieved for individuals. The most famous example is altruism. Why did honeybees develop a sting that once used kills the bee itself? There's no chance of passing on such a trait from a dead animal.
The answer supposedly is that the whole bee colony benefits, and this knowledge is preserved in their genes. Thus honeybee genes "know" that a fatal sting is evolutionary and helps them to survive. Unfortunately, this argument implodes on itself. Not only is it absurd to talk about genes knowing anything when you deny consciousness itself, but whatever the bee is doing exhibits consciousness on the face of it. There's no need for a mindless insect who happens to have brilliant genes.
Survival is a conscious act. When animals behave to survive, they are making a decision. Primal acts like hunting for food, mating, and rearing one's young show the existence of awareness. (It seems true that the bee's fatal sting was developed to benefit the whole colony, but that represents a decision and a creative solution to a problem, not the random blind action of genes.) It seems absurd to deny this, yet Darwinians must, because of their religious devotion to their founder and the credo of materialism. The irony is how much consciousness it takes to convince yourself that consciousness doesn't exist.
The survival of the wisest is therefore not vague or vaporous. It represents another step in the same evolutionary direction that life has been on forever. As in every past crisis, the environment has changed, new stresses threaten us; adaptation is the only way out. Like ancient man deciding whether to use fire or run away from its dangers, modern people face both good and bad choices. The outcome won't be based on Darwinian principles. We're already advanced enough to heal the sick instead of abandoning them and protecting the weak and helpless. Those decisions, made centuries ago, are absolutely non-Darwinian. Luckily, despite all the self-destructive threats from our innate hostility and aggression, our tendency to defend the tribe and hate outsiders, human consciousness displays a huge amount of good and an infinite amount of potential. We should try to survive on the basis of wisdom. If we succeed, this dark phase that we are passing through will dissolve, as the dark ages that went before it have.
P.S. --
Responders have criticized my example of honey bees that die when they sting. I am well aware that there are drones, workers, and a queen in each hive. But the fact that the workers are sterile doesn't refute the example but only strengthens it. How can a queen bee, who is responsible for laying all the eggs, possibly know whether some hatch with stingers that are fatal or not? How can her genes know? That they know is part of the credo of sociobiology.
Let's say, however, that some hives survive with workers that die after they sting while others don't survive with workers that can sting multiple times (as bumblebess can)? There is no way to attribute the survival to this adaptation, and in addition, it's only common sense that workers that can sting multiple times are far better defenders than those which die immediately. This is an evolutionary conundrum and remains one despite Darwinian efforts to explain it.
Posted by Deepak Chopra at 10:23 AM | Comments (44)
December 28, 2006
Kabalist "Zappy" at Stevie Wonder's house Xmas Eve
I was blessed this year to be able to spend Xmas Eve at Stevie Wonder’s house, partying, philosophizing, and laughing.
It was inspirational to spend time with Stevie, witnessing first hand the Kabalistic principle of “Less is More”, his lack of site is more than made up for in his ability to tune into people’s energy, and cut past the usual barriers.
Many of the times that we were speaking he held my hand and my arm, in doing so he was able to completely focus our attention.
The prayer that he made before we all ate was very powerful in its sincerity, and desire to have everyone in the World feel connected.
Listening to him sing along with the Christmas songs that were playing was pretty sweet too!
Have a Great New Year!
Peace. Zappy
Posted by Zappy at 11:45 PM | Comments (6)
Where is Swadesh Deepak?
In an old mansion, on Ambala's Mall road
He lay in his room, doing nothing, only
speaking to characters. His thoughts went
berserk like cigarette stubs on his ground.
Food was brought to him; he ate it silently
swallowing most of it, and at times,
winking at his image in the glass of water,
spilling it inside, without any sound.
He had stopped going out and didn't care
for what happened outside. Within himself,
much took place, and it went on and on
Like a child in a Fair on a merry-go-round.
As if she would ring the doorbell with a bouquet
of sunflowers in her hands, say, Hello, is he inside?
Her voice came tiptoed, smiled, and said: I am the hunter
What would you like to be: The hare or the hound?
Oh, welcome, Maya, so you have finally arrived
Place a kiss, if you may, on my parched lips
and erase all the lines on my forehead; who asks then:
Where is Swadesh Deepak, and where could he be found?
Posted by Rahul Pandita at 11:06 PM | Comments (7)
December 27, 2006
Savitri Allegory
Q. Why did you choose to use allegory, such as the story of Savitri and Yama, in writing Life After Death?
A. To provide an emotional experience of confronting death, and also to reach into the archetypal level of consciousness, the shadow, where death is always present. In my childhood I heard quite a few stories involving Lord Yama, the god of death. They stuck with me over the years, and I thought they would be a good framing device in this book.
One of the most famous tales is that of Savitri. I greatly expanded it in the book and gave it a new twist, so I don't mind telling you the childhood version. A beautiful princess named Savitri is sent out from Benares to find a husband. She's riding through the woods when she sets eyes on a handsome woodcutter named Satyavan. They fall in love, and she marries him. Her father, the king, is so displeased that the young couple is banished to a hut in the forest.
One day Savitri walks out into the front yard to see Lord Yama sitting there. Trembling with fear, she asks why he has paid her house a visit. "I am Death," Lord Yama replies, "and I have come for Satyavan."
Savitri begs him to reconsider, pointing out that her husband is young and fit, while there are many old, suffering people begging to die. But Lord Yama is implacable. Savitri decides to show him great hospitality, since that is her duty to a guest, and after she dances for him, Lord Yama is so charmed that he grants her any wish.
"I want life," says Savitri.
"But you're already alive. That's no wish," Yama replies. However, Savitri is not to be dissuaded, and reluctantly Yama grants her the boon of life. She then reveals that she cannot possibly live without her beloved Satyavan, and by this ruse she outwits Lord Yama, who goes away empty-handed.
It's a simple tale, but it brings out the main theme of Life After Death, which is that we are all confronting the darkness and doing what we can to move into the light. Savitri's redemption of her husband in the name of love symbolizes our own personal quest.
Posted by Deepak Chopra at 11:42 AM | Comments (17)
As though we buried the sun
Between the pages and Should I take you to Shaheen
Posted by Rahul Pandita at 06:12 AM | Comments (7)
Open Thread
Dec. 27, 2006
Posted by Intent at 04:30 AM | Comments (113)
December 26, 2006
Saddam's Death Sentence
Merry Christmas Saddam Hussein. Your days are numbered.
So deemed today an Iraqi appeals court after considering Saddam's appeal of a sentence handed out to him this year for his role in the 1982 mass killings of his own citizens. This trial was really the first of several planned, meant to solidify the former Iraqi president's role in the unlawful killings of thousands - perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people the last several decades during his rule. It's now unlikely that Saddam will be around to defend himself in any of those eventual cases because Iraqi law demands he head t the gallows within the next 30 days.
How are we suuposed to react to this?
Joyously, because it means one less mass murderer lives on planet Earth? A sense of closure, becaue it brings a sense of justice to the families of the scores murdered by Saddam and the death squads empowered by him for decades?
Or sadness, because it once more showcases our lack of evolution as humans - that we are still capable of creating Saddam Husseins and that we think by sending them to the death chamber we are solving anything at all?
Or anger because it seems to cover up and neglect the irrefutable truth of the US government's complicitness in the creation of Saddam Hussein? Specifically in 1982, Saddam has the overt support of the Regan administration in its battle againts Iran. Whatever crimes Saddam committed most likely did not happen without the US intelligence community's awareness, if not actual assistance.
As for me, I feel a mix of the the latter 2 - a real sense of tragedy, not because I empathize much with the darkness and uncertainty that any man - even a mass murderer like Saddam Hussein - must face when he knows his days are numbered. But because it is a reminder of our own primitive behavioral codes - that somehow we remain convinced that government sanctioned killings are okay while the same fundamental act under other conditions is somehow considered criminal.
Here's the thing though. As much as I despise teh death penalty and as much as I think the American government (for seveal generations) has been complicit in Saddam's criminal behavior, I also believe that in order to cease our involvement in such murky nation building in the future, Iraq must be left unto itself to start figuring out its own problems. An Iraqi court deemed this sentence and then backed it up after appeal. It's the Iraqi system that requires Saddam to be executed within the next 30 days. The America