Sufi jokes (2)

Sufi jokes (2)

(From Syed Ali Abbas Zaidi’s blog)

When I was in the desert,” said Nasruddin one day, “I caused an entire tribe of horrible and bloodthirsty  Bedouins to run.” “However did you do it?” “Easy. I just ran, and they ran after me.”

Once, when Mullah Nasruddin was visiting a Western town, he was invited to attend a fashion show. He went, and afterwards he was asked how he liked it. “It’s a complete swindle!” he exclaimed indignantly. “Whatever do you mean?” he was asked. “They show you the women – and then try to sell you the clothes!”

One day, one of Mullah Nasruddin’s friend came over and wanted to borrow his donkey for a day or two. Mullah, knowing his friend, was not kindly inclined to the request, and came up with the excuse that someone had already borrowed his donkey. Just as Mullah uttered these words, his donkey started braying in his backyard. Hearing the sound, his friend gave him an accusing look, to which Mullah replied: “I refuse to have any further dealings with you since you take a donkey’s word over  mine.”
A certain man claimed to be God and was brought before the Caliph, who said to him, “Last year someone here claimed to be a prophet and he was put to death!” The man replied, “It was well that you did so, for I did not send him.” (9th century joke)

 

(“An aeronautical engineer by force, an activist by mind, a wanderer by soul and lover by heart. Founder – Pakistan Youth Alliance”)

On religion – a belief based on free will

“What of those of us who hold beliefs which range from the religious to the psychic? My dialogue with the spirit of my uncle (we did have a three-way exchange) led me somewhat reluctantly to an acceptance of the spirit world. Why reluctant? Because it did not fit into my then understanding of reality. Since then I have had other exposures to the spirit world. I now have reason to believe that I have benefited from the involve­ment of this domain in my life. Proof? None! It is, however, not so much a gut-feeling as a subconscious intellectual awareness. Otherwise I remain as rational as humanly possible.

This belief in the reality of the world of souls supports what I was taught to believe in my youth, enhanced by my recent understanding of Hinduism. This understanding was obtained late in life through my reading of the Upanishads. These writings represent, to me, the highest level of meta­physics of any religion. A succinct summary of my beliefs follows. I have been reading about religion and society since I was about 24.

At death, I would join the souls of my predecessors (except those who have been reincarnated). After a period of learning in whatever dimension I find myself, I would be reincarnated on Earth. Let me make clear that I was never taught to believe in a spirit domain from which the soul of a former relative or, for that matter, the soul of perhaps a guru, could enter my life and offer me advice. Or that those in this domain might be able to influence the direction of my life at some significant point – as has apparently happened more than once!

Moving on – each Earthly life would involve me paying for the sins of my past lives while being offered opportunities to learn to better myself morally, possibly spiritually. After many, many rebirths, I might be permitted to return to that Ocean of Consciousness from which, it is said, we had origi­nally arisen. The ultimate objective of this extended process? To improve the stock of human souls? So, is there meaning and purpose in human existence?

The above belief would give meaning where none exists for the unbeliever. It would give more meaning than the claim that human existence has meaning but only for each Earthly existence. A concept embodying continuity through lifetimes, of opportunities to move up some moral scale, life by life, and of exercising free will rather than being carried blindly through time on Earth, is enticing, because it offers a path of purpose, and of hope – with free will.”

These extracts are from my book ‘Musings at death’s door: an ancient bicultural Asian-Australian ponders about Australian society’.

On religion – achieving control

Institutional religions of the Western kind (the ‘desert’ religions) are authoritative; they involve control, unlike Hinduism and its derivative offshoots (the ‘forest’ religions). The following are extracts from my book ‘Musings at Death’s door: an ancient bicultural Asian-Australian ponders about Australian society’.

“What could have been more persuasive? The creation of a hierarchy of gods, angels and other heavenly (or even satanic) intercessionists? A claimed devolution of heav­enly (that is, godly) authority, leading to god-kings or their authoritarian priestly equivalents? A created theology seem­ingly made available to the chosen by a process of revelation from on-high? Inherited authority allied to control of knowl­edge would have enabled the exercise of power, enforced over time by the use of force by some. So says the history of reli­gious institutions.

Were fragments of the faithful, the fearful, then hived off by the cleverer, the more power-hungry, priests through their creation of theological schisms? Did then come the schis­matic wars, some overt by fighting and killing in the name of some god, or by forced conversion? Did the priests insidi­ously and persistently proselytise in order to claim a relative strength of their faith through numerical size? Even today, there are ordinary Christians continuing to collect souls for Christ in Africa and Asia. To what end?

Later, did not many gods, most local or regional, give way to one god, resulting in supremacy sought by priesthoods on a wider geographical front? Did some priesthoods subse­quently develop into a hierarchy, a tower of authority com­posed entirely of men, enabling a lifestyle of considerable quality, while their flocks survived as best they could? What grandeur these priests must have portrayed, with a pageantry normally associated with god-kings! Indeed, some of them still do. Yet, there were other priesthoods which displayed a simpler lifestyle.

Is this not how religious institutions achieved control and began to mislead the people, even while purporting to guide, lead and comfort? Is this not why the more independent-minded people withdraw from participatory religious events and practices, to the extent that some go to the extreme stance of atheism?”

On religion -probable origins

“I have long wondered how a religious belief could have come about, looking way back into Man’s social history. Before seeking an answer to that question, I had to define what I consider to be religious belief. My conclusion?

A sense or feeling of awe about something or events so powerful, so beyond our control or understanding, so ubiq­uitous, more often than not very frightening, yet uplifting at times. Since our primordial emotional state is anxiety, that is, uncertainty mixed with a degree of fear about what might happen, it is only natural that we would seek to reduce our sense of trepidation or fear.

Normally, when confronted by either an ethereal or a tangible source of anxiety, one either flees or fights. When thunder and lightning, torrential rain and floods, earth­quakes and tsunamis, and such like terrorised primitive Man, did he conjure up or imagine spirits of indefinable form, with malevolent intent, as causing his terror? Indeed, are not beliefs of an animist nature still held in the more simple soci­eties in the world? Did Early Man then also attempt to pro­pitiate the unknown and unseen causes of his terror in some way? Did he subsequently come to conclude that propitia­tion can at times be effective, especially after experiencing a period of relative peace?

Then did some opportunistic fellows set themselves up as competent intermediaries? That is, to intercede between the fearful and the feared – and perhaps for some small reward, price or benefit, which progressively led to control over the fearful? Was this how the shamans, the witchdoctors, the ‘brahmins’, and all other priesthoods came into being?

By interposing themselves as intermediaries able to reach fearsome spirits, and by appearing to appease them, as well as purporting to obtain guidance for the gullible, did the intermediaries then extend their power by subtle threats against both unbelievers and competitors? Were shrines then con­structed as places for placation? Did gifts, ostensibly to bribe the spirits (now possibly described as gods), then lead to the enrichment of the ‘priests’? Did they then begin to conduct ceremonies of some kind to convey the dead to their resting places, to welcome the newborn to the living, and to join in marriage those wanting to create new life?

Did these clever intermediaries use rituals they had devised; accompanied by allegedly explanatory mumbo-jumbo they had also concocted, to subjugate in superstition the fearful? Was this the process which engulfed not only primitive Man, but also the members of the simpler soci­eties which subsequently developed? Claiming to reach the Under-world, or the Over-world, or the mystical domains of those who allegedly have power over mankind must have been persuasive – especially if accompanied by some evi­dence of ill-luck for non-belief or non-compliance!”

The above are extracts from my book ‘Musings at death’s door: an ancient bicultural Asian-Australian ponders about Australian society’ 

 

Pre-history readable through the zodiac?

I have had real-life experiences to convince me that horoscope reading by experienced Indian astrologers, based on the minute of birth (and its geographic location) enable probabilistic conclusions about a broad view of an individual’s future. However, I am not persuaded that horoscope reading in Western nations like Australia, based on one of the 12 constellations of the zodiac, are reliable. Projected personalities do not match real-life personalities.

Paul LaViolette, a multi-disciplinary scientist and mythologist suggests that the sequence of cosmic ‘houses’ on the zodiac are not in their proper relationship positions.

Nevertheless, does the zodiac as we know it enable us to read pre-history? This is a crucial question. For instance, it appears that the Sphinx in Egypt had a lion’s head originally. Could it have been constructed in the zodiac Age of the Lion? If so, would we now have a date (within a span of 2,160 years for each Age) for its origin? It could be 8,000 BC to 10,000 BC.

I remember reading that a description of a cosmic event in Hinduism’s Vedas (whose oral origin is asserted as before time as we know it) had been dated at about 8,000 BC. Or, could the associated constellation of the zodiac (the ‘house’ against which the sun rises for 2,160 years each time) refer to the previous zodiac cycle 25,920 years before? Why not indeed! Do we know enough to reject this probability?

In the event, could we then focus on the culture or civilisation which produced the Sphinx? In the light of the very limited technology available in that period to mankind, as claimed by the protectors of the current explanatory paradigm,  could we contemplate the probability of extraterrestrial assistance? This may have come from a watery planet from the 3-star Sirius complex – because a moat apparently surrounded the Sphinx originally.

Or, were our then human ancestors so highly civilised and technologically advanced as to be able to cut, lift, shape, and place the huge and heavy stones (the megaliths) – which we are yet unable to handle.

Thus, we have an interesting choice: extraterrestrial involvement or highly civilised and technologically superior human ancestors. While neither seems credible, a choice has to be made.

As to whether the zodiac placed at the ecliptic enables human pre-history to be read depends on what the zodiac actually means, who conceived it, and why it seems to be embedded in a number of cultures of the past. Apart from the link with the precession of Earth, and the apparent usefulness of knowing when to expect the equinoxes and solstices (for agricultural or spiritual purposes?), what does the zodiac tell us? The next probable cosmic catastrophe?

The question of credibility

I asked in a recent post whether the scenario I painted of Earth having been tilted (to about 45%) about 13,000 years ago is credible (ie. plausible). This tilt seemingly caused the great Universal Deluge, attested by so many cultures throughout the globe. This Flood destroyed most of Earth and its population, with a new civilisation commencing about 8,000 to 10,000 years ago.

There is no denying the Flood, or when it happened. Did a tilt of Earth cause it, and the sudden end of the so-called ice age? Ice ages do not end suddenly.

Further, did Earth’s Golden Age, reported by ever so many cultures, end then? How explain this Golden Age? Did not this Age enjoy equable temperatures throughout the year? How could that happen today? Then, why did Siberia and Antarctica suddenly become frozen?

Is the scenario I postulated by calling upon sundry scientific researchers credible? What responses did I expect?

The science-oriented sceptic would ask: Where is the evidence? Yet, in the realm of science, how many speculative unproven hypotheses masquerade as facts? I instance the Big Bang Theory of cosmology; Darwin’s Theory of Evolution; and Punctuated Equilibrium (seeking to explain the appearance of fully-formed new or modified species). There is a more plausible alternative explanation available for each of these.

Another category of sceptic includes: those who claim (without proof) that our current civilisation is the most advanced ever (let us then ignore the great monoliths which we cannot explain or replicate); and those who claim to be the Chosen People or the Nation of Exceptionalism (how nice!).

The third category denying plausibility, much less probability, includes those who respond immediately thus: “I don’t believe it”; when the question is simply “Is this scenario plausible?” I am not sure if any of us is competent to go beyond plausibility. Then there are those who want to argue about the scenario, based on what they consider to be ‘first principles.’ But do look at how far religious, or even scientific, dogma has taken us in understanding human origins, our place in the Cosmos, and the origin and nature of the Cosmos.

If we want to know, we need to open our minds. Consider how many Ages (Suns) have been destroyed (according to the Mayans). From another framework, are we on the way to the Sixth Extinction (while murmuring ‘That could not have happened’)?

When Earth was rolled over

Was Earth rolled over relatively recently?  Was it tilted to about 45% about 13,000 years ago?  My reasons for suggesting that it was are as follows:

  • During my boyhood (a very long time go) I was told that Siberia had been a warm and luscious tropical region; and that, at the onset and prevalence of frigid conditions, the people there had migrated to Central Asia, creating a great civilisation there
  • Antarctica has been described (without credible challenge) as having once been in the tropic/temperate zone
  • Evidence has been found of stone buildings in the Arctic, now covered by ice (which is fast melting)
  • There was a massive world-wide flood, the Universal Flood (about 13,000 years ago), referred to in so many folk beliefs all across the globe; and this had buried an incredible mix of humans, animals, and flora – and silt – in caves all the way north
  • A very large ‘chunk’ of solid space material is believed to have been blown out into space through a supernova explosion; and that this material had entered and travelled through our solar system
  • This gigantic space material had caused perturbations in this system, dislodging satellites, destroying a planet, reversing the spin of one of our planets, etc., etc
  • The gravitational pull of this space material (named Vela by two researcher/authors) could have pulled Earth, through gravity, to rotate in the direction of the transit of Vela (to the sun)
  • The lands in the east would have been moved closer to the north pole, and the lands in the west would have been moved to the south pole
  • Such a strong gravitational pull would have emptied the seas, causing the moving waters to rise very high indeed, and to flow in the direction of the assumed Vela
  • When Vela had moved to its ultimate absorption by the sun, Earth would have naturally remained in its new position
  • Earth’s planets, believed to have been aligned East/West before the arrival of this space material, would now be aligned North/South (as they are today), with Siberia and Antarctica now in frigid conditions
  • Released from Vela’s gravity, the waters of Earth would have flowed back gradually, filling all the spaces available
  • The sudden onset of extreme cold in Siberia, which spot-froze all the animals, and the re-location of Antarctica, can thus be explained.

Cultures everywhere refer to a Universal Flood. It is not for us to know better; or to ask for ‘scientific’ evidence for possible causes and outcomes. We have yet to come up with adequate explanations which suit our theories of how things should have been.

Neither plate tectonics nor crustal slippage (the moving orange-peel effect) offer an explanation of the known disruptions mentioned above. Cosmic catastrophes of a horrifying magnitude seem to be taboo.

Avoiding any attribution to cosmic catastrophes as contributing to such developments as the sudden arrival of fully-formed new or modified species on Earth; of the onset of artistic creativity in known historic ‘cave-men’; of the sudden flowering of conceptual capacities of Early Man; of the whitening of human skin in a band (from East to West) in the northern hemisphere; in the ‘sky falling’ and ‘the stars being scrambled’; the sun not moving for many days (ask the Chinese and the Meso-americans); and so on, is not likely to lead us to understand the long-term history of mankind.

Having Earth tilt would have effectively destroyed the then civilisation. The survivors (Quetzalcoatl and Viracocha, for example), possibly reflecting a high culture prevailing in the pre-Flood era, could have guided mankind as best as possible, calling upon the knowledge, skills, tools and technology which survived the Deluge. Refer Meso-american and Peruvian beliefs.

That there had been a Golden Age prior to the Deluge all over the globe is credible, were it accepted that the continents had previously been lying east to west. Most, if not all, human-occupied terrain would then have been in the temperate and tropical zones!

That Earth was rolled over and tilted recently seems credible. Do we need an Edgar C. Cayce to tell us what happened?

Were the planets closer to Earth once?

In historical times, when the planets were described (in mythology) as gods, were they closer to Earth than they are now? Were they described as being at war with one another, because of the terrible exchanges of lightning which reportedly took place? Was this how propitiation of the planets began?

Does this explain the commonality of the pantheons of gods to which all humans paid homage, except that the names of the gods reflected differences in language? Presumably, travellers and mystics contributed to some inter-tribal (inter-cultural) learning; that is, to the diffusion of belief about the Cosmos.

I instance the spread of Hindu beliefs, texts, and practices all the way from India to the South China Sea, and as far as the island of Bali in Indonesia. Even after the spread of Islam to Indonesia, Hinduism’s Ramayana, a most-durable epic, continues to be celebrated (as I discovered) in Bali – and in Buddhist Thailand. Perhaps matters human override matters religious in the realm of guidance for living – as the gods seemed to be at war with one another.

The only way our planets could have been closer to one another is through being pulled out of their normal orbits by a very, very huge intruder from space passing through our solar system. As I wrote in an earlier post, a remnant of a supernova has been held to have been responsible for a number of inconsistent aspects of this system:

  • Pluto, one of Neptune’s moons, pulled into a planetary orbit
  • the ‘equatorial alignment’ of Uranus changed, and its moon damaged
  • Saturn’s moon Chiron pulled away
  • Tiamat, a planet similar to Jupiter and Saturn, with an orbit between these two, believed to have been destroyed by Marduk/Phaeton (the supernova remnant), resulting in an asteroid belt in its place
  • Mars – orbit changed
  • Phaeton ‘rampaged near Earth only some 11,500 years ago’
  • Venus – its rotational spin reversed

(refer Allan & Delair in ‘Cataclysm,’ who relied on ‘Sumerian texts and recent astronomical data’)

This scenario does not, however, imply that the planets were once closer to Earth (as I have read elsewhere). Such proximity could only have occurred during the formative years of the solar system. But then there would have been no humans around. How then did this mythology develop?

The simpler explanation lies in errors in interpretation of ancient mythology. As well, the Sumerians’ writings are far too recent. Another explanation would be that nearby extra-terrestrials (on a Sirius planet?) were witness to this ‘war’.

Phaeton’s passage through the settled solar system is the most likely source of the claim of a celestial war. From our point of view, this event, believed to have occurred at about 11,500 years ago, seems to have coincided with the universal flood. This is believed to have occurred between 11,500 and 13,000 years ago. Phaeton’s rampage would explain this flood too (refer my earlier post).

Another major cosmic catastrophe is expected relatively soon by a barrage of expert researchers – from a variety of causes. We will not be taking our wealth, or theological differences, or any right to rule others, with us; only our soul memories.

Eskimo jokes

A tourist goes to the pole, and meets an Eskimo.
“During the summer you don’t have any nights, and during the winter
you don’t have any days… What do you do during that endless summer
day?” he asks.
“We go fishing, and make love to our women,” the Eskimo replies.
The tourist thinks a while, and asks another question:
“Then, what do you do during that endless winter night?”
Eskimo grins:
“We don’t go fishing…”

 

An eskimo was riding his snowmobile when it quit running. He took it to the local mechanic and had him look at it. The mechanic told the Eskimo to give him about 3-4 hours and he would have it diagnosed. So the Eskimo went into town to do some shopping.  When he returned to the mechanic shop he saw his snow mobile in pieces.  The mechanic turned and looked at the Eskimo and said ‘Looks like you have blown a seal.’  The Eskimo replies ‘No that is just frost on my moustache.’

 

 

What’s the difference between a eunuch and an Eskimo?

A eunuch is a massive vassal with a passive tassel,
while an Eskimo is a rigid midget with a frigid digit.

 

 

An Eskimo was tapping on some ice looking for some fish when a voice said; “You won’t find any fish under there!” The Eskimo just ignored it and carried on tapping. Again, the voice echoed saying “You won’t find any fish under there!” The Eskimo shouted up “Who are you… God?” and the voice replied, “No, the ice-rink manager!”

 

 

One day, an Eskimo family arrived in New York City. This was the first time out of their native village, and it didn’t take long before the wife got lost. The Eskimo husband asked a passerby for help and was told to go to the police and report it. When he got there, a police officer asked him for the wife’s description.
“What’s that?” asked Eskimo.
“Well, you see a description is telling what something looks like. For example, my wife is 25-years-old, 5’11”, 140 lbs, 38-25-36 measurements. Now, what can you tell me about your wife?”
“The heck with my wife”, said the Eskimo, “lets go look for yours!”

 

 

Hear about the Eskimo girl who spent the night with her boyfriend

and next morning found she was six months pregnant.

 

 

 

Hear about the Eskimo who was stabbed with an icicle?

He died of cold cuts

 

 

 

Dealing with prejudice

“When someone spits at you, ignore him and move on. But do not turn the other cheek!” That was my father’s advice. I probably needed that counsel. Why? Because I am a descendant of an extended family of strong men known to be fiery when necessary – a father and 3 maternal uncles. Anglo-Australians would describe us as men who ‘take no shit’ from anyone.

One does not have to say anything to anyone who feels free to be orally offensive. Those who utter an antipathetic thought may need to be discouraged by that calm look which says ’Enough!’. However, on the first occasion when I was shouted at in an arcade of expensive goods, I was initially surprised that a total stranger could be so noisily and stridently common (a word I learnt from my Italian mother-in-law). When a woman in the arcade kept shouting ‘Why don’t you go back where you came from, you black bastard,’ I just walked away.

Contrarily, when a comment was made to me about my integrity relatively late in life, my challenger heard from me, in the most crude language (learnt from working in a factory), all about himself and his ancestors. I had never done that before.

The best response to those who are clearly intent upon making an insulting comment is to ignore them – if possible. In any situation, an appropriate response cannot be predicated.

This adage, often quoted by my father, is apt: ‘The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on’! Let the ignorant yobbo be. I have also not found any Asian student of my day touched or affected by nasty remarks during the White Australia era. Having had extended contacts with European immigrants, I can also say that I have not heard of anyone complaining about feeling humiliated, hurt or offended. We are not wimps. How so?

We have pride in who we are, our ancestry, and our culture. These immigrants were mostly able-bodied men from all over Europe; and they were culturally and mentally strong, and impervious to words reflecting prejudice, and thereby ignorance. And there were lots and lots of labels (wogs, reffos, i-ties, etc.) to ignore.

In any event, words cannot hurt. They are merely sounds in the air. However, claiming to be hurt, offended and humiliated is fast becoming a national pastime. Where is the gain in that?

Then, when did the term ‘racial’ cover religion, politics, or culture?