Charitylogy
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in fact mostly want to live in a world, where
everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the
least possible death and pain." All the rest consists more in views
(speculations).
JUDr. Dalibor Grůza Ph.D.
Own expense,
Hustopeče, Czech Republic, copyleft 2016, corrected 2022.
In support of the political Party for the Rights of All Living Creatures
www.spvzt.cz .
This book is released under CC BY-SA 3.0, text of the license see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ .
E-mail:
ak-gruza@seznam.cz ,
See also literature: www.filosofierovnovahy.sweb.cz , www.e-polis.cz , http://youtu.be/YhOv47fQlRU : My film in Czech language: Zahájí radikální
muslimové brzy atomovou válku? Je evoluce
přírody milosrdná?
Porážková daň. , http://youtu.be/ibV-Fwh4sUc : My film in English with multilingual subtitles: Will radical Muslims soon start atomic war? Is nature's evolution merciful? Slaughter tax. , www.filosofie.cz/forum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=3
My text on the www.spvzt.cz and on the mentioned webs is licensed under the terms
of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.cs Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported,
copyleft, unless stated specifically otherwise.
(All quotations from the Bible in this book because of
copyright are on principle in Czech from Kralice
Bible see http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1K15.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague , or from the Bible Old and
New Testaments | including deuterocanonic books |,
Czech Ecumenical Translation, CZECH Bible Society, 1995, see www.biblenet.cz , in English from King James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/ )
CONTENT:
1) 05/03/2016 Conflict of carnivorous and herbivorous living cells in
the human body. … 26
2) 06/03/2016 Limits of charitylogy as exact, i.e. measurable science.
… 26
3) 07/03/2016 Desire but unbelief in the power of charity in nearly all
living creatures. … 26
8) 04/03/2016 Question of dualism of good and evil in a world from the
point of view of charitylogy. … 41
10) 16/04/2016 Psychoanalysis Freud versus Jung. … 42
13) 28/04/2016 Usury, especially in the Czech Republic. … 48
15) 03/05/2016 My relationship to carnivores and herbivores according to
the Philosophy of Balance. … 54
17) 08/05/2016 My solution to the problem of infertility of my
contemporary fiancée. … 60
22) 21/052016 The Prophet Muhammad, i.e. alive against the Christian
Mahomet or Mohamed, i.e. dead … 68
26) 30/06/2016 (Mathematical definition of the Biblical God) … 91
28) 15/07/2016 My personal up to now life experience and relationship with the Jews. … 109
30) 07/08/2016 Jehovah's Witnesses and Philosophy of Balance. … 137
31) 07/08/2016 Angels and demons. … 139
36) 14/09/2016 About hell of sinful people in this world …
145
37) 22/04/2017 Problem of Roman Catholic Christian religion and premarital sex … 146
38) 27/05/2017 Why do women choose men with robbers genes? … 148
39) 03/06/2017 Theory of evolution and success on marriage market and at fertilization? … 148
40) 05/06/2017 Theory of successful firm from viewpoint of Philosophy of Balance … 148
41) 28/06/2017 How to do from orthodox Israel more unorthodox Israel … 149
Questionnaire
about definition of love in by you held worldview from the point of view of the
science of love (charitylogy)
Your worldview:
Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, other belief, fill what: , atheist, fascist and other right-wing
dictatorship, Communist and other left-wing
dictatorship, right-wing Liberal Democrat, center Liberal Democrat, left-wing Liberal Democrat, evolutionist, not Darwinist, Darwinist, creationist
As a
philosopher and jurist I aims to establish a science of love (charitylogy), for
this reason I present to you the following questionnaire to find your
definition of love (charity) as the representative of a particular worldview. Please send anonymously filled
questionnaire for possible publication on zakladatel@spvzt.cz . (in more
details see www.spvzt.cz , www.filosofierovnovahy.sweb.cz , www.spvzt.cz
)
Results of
the questionnaire of major worldviews according to my theoretical assumptions
|
Regardless of the weight of merits for less both
death and pain, and regardless of the responsibility for more both death and
pain the advantaging (prioritization) in causing less both death and pain of
various living creatures in comparison to other living creatures according to
major human worldviews |
||||||
|
Belief from newest to oldest: |
Philosophy of Balance |
Muslim |
Buddhist |
Roman Catholic Christian |
Jew |
Hindu |
|
1) You as a human in comparison
to other people |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
2) You and Your immediate family in comparison to other
people |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
|
3) You
and members of Your sex in Your immediate family in comparison to members of other sex in Your immediate
family |
No |
Yes, i.e. women/ Maximally little less both
death and pain |
No |
No |
No |
Yes, i.e. men/ Maximally in hugely less both
death and pain |
|
4) You and Your immediate family and Your distant relatives in
comparison to other people |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
|
5) You
and Your fellow humans in comparison to other people |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
6) other people in comparison to
Your enemies-humans |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
7) Your together believers in
comparison to from You distinct believers |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
8) Your together believers - Your friends
in comparison to Your together believers while not Your enemies and
while not Your relatives |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
9) members of Your nationality while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies in
comparison to members of other nationality while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
10) members of Your race while not Your
relatives and while not Your enemies in comparison to members
of other race while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain/No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
11) members of Your skin color while not Your relatives and
while not Your enemies in comparison to members
of other skin color while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
12) members of Your social strata (class) while
not Your relatives and while not Your enemies in comparison to members
of other social strata (class) while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
|
13) Your friends-other living creatures
than humans in comparison to Your not friends-the humans |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes, i.e. cows and bulls/Maximally in hugely
less both death and pain |
|
14) Your friends-other living creatures
than humans in comparison to other humans while friends
|
No |
Yes, i.e. pigs / In variously less both death
and pain |
No |
Yes, i.e. dogs and cats /Maximally in hugely
less both death and pain |
Yes, i.e. pigs / In variously less both death
and pain |
Yes, i.e. cows and bulls/Maximally in hugely
less both death and pain |
|
15) humans in comparison to other
living creatures than humans |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No and also Yes /In variously less both death
and pain |
|
16) humans in comparison to believed
higher animals |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death
and pain of cows and bulls |
|
17) humans in comparison to other
mammals (i.e. believed higher animals – for example mammals) |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death and
pain of cows and bulls |
|
18) humans and other mammals in comparison to birds (i.e. also
believed higher animals) |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death
and pain of cows and bulls |
|
19) humans and other mammals and also birds in comparison to reptiles and
to reptiles as similar believed higher animals like on principle amphibians |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death
and pain of cows and bulls |
|
20) humans and other mammals and also birds
and also reptiles and to reptiles as similar believed higher animals like on
principle amphibians in comparison to fish and to fish as
similar believed higher animals like on principle amphibians and like snails
and like jellyfish and like crabs and also cancers |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death
and pain of cows and bulls |
|
21) humans and other mammals and also
birds and also reptiles and also fish and all them also humans as similar
believed higher animals in comparison to insects and to insects
and animals similar to them and to them similar trees and to these trees similar plants |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
No with exception of causing less both death
and pain of cows and bulls |
|
22) humans and other mammals and also birds
and also reptiles and also fishes and amphibians and all them also humans
similar animals and to them similar trees and to these trees similar plants in comparison to other both trees and to trees similar plants, for
example also some bushes |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes with exception of both trees
and to trees similar plants / In variously less both death
and pain |
|
23) humans and other mammals and other believed
higher animals and from believed higher animals not very different other
animals and trees and to trees
similar plants in comparison to flowers and to flowers similar plants,
for example also bushes and also both many fungi and algaes |
No |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes with exception of both trees
and to trees similar plants / In variously less both death and pain |
|
24) humans and other mammals and other believed
higher animals and from believed higher animals not very different other
animals and woody plants and herbaceous plants and to both woody and herbaceous plants similar
both plants and, as the case may be, fungi in comparison to other
multicelular organisms |
No with exception of causing more both death
and pain of all following living
creatures, if they are multicelular organisms, i.e. animal sperm and
unfertilized animal one egg and animal sperm one cell and many plant seeds and plant fruit and plant
one seed |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes with exception of both trees and flowers
and to both trees and flowers similar plants / In variously less both death
and pain |
|
25) humans and other multicellular organisms
in comparison to single-celled organisms and viruses |
No with exception of causing more both death
and pain of all following living
creatures, if they are single-celled organisms, i.e. animal sperm and
unfertilized animal one egg and animal sperm one cell and many plant seeds and plant fruit and plant
one seed |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes/In variously less both death and pain |
Yes with exception of multicelular organisms
very different from believed higher animals with exception of animal one egg / In variously less both death and pain |
Simplified questions of the questionnaire, mark
off or supplement if need be in the .docx format suitable response:
1)
1.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of You as a
human at the cost of more both death and pain of other people?
NO YES
1.2 If you
answered YES to Question 1.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
people, to save both death and pain of You as a human?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
2)
2.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of You and
Your immediate family at
the cost of more both death and pain of other people?
NO
YES
2.2 If you
answered YES to Question 2.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
people, to save both death and pain of You and Yourimmediate family?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
3)
3.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of You and members of Your sex in Your
immediate family at the cost of more both death and pain of members of other sex in Your immediate
family?
NO
YES
3.2 If you
answered YES to Question 3.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to members of other sex in Your immediate
family, to save both death and pain of You and members of Your sex in Your immediate family?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
4)
4.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of You and
Your immediate family and Your distant relatives at
the cost of more both death and pain of other
people?
NO YES
4.2 If you
answered YES to Question 4.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other people, to save both death
and pain of You and Your immediate
family and Your distant relatives?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
5)
5.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of You and Your fellow humans at
the cost of more both death and pain of other people?
NO YES
5.2 If you
answered YES to Question 5.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
people, to save both death and pain of You and Your fellow humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
6) * read carefully other wording of statements
6.1 If necessary
do you consider right to cause more both
death and pain to Your enemies-humans
than other people?
NO YES
6.2 If you
answered YES to Question 6.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more both death and pain you consider right, if
necessary, to cause to Your enemies-humans
than other people?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
7)
7.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of Your
together believers at the cost of more both death and pain of from You distinct believers?
NO YES
7.2 If you
answered YES to Question 6.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to from You distinct believers, to
save both death and pain of Your together believers?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
8)
8.1 If necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of Your
together believers – Your
friends at
the cost of more both death and pain of Your together believers while not
Your enemies and while not Your relatives?
NO YES
8.2 If you
answered YES to Question 8.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to Your
together believers while not Your enemies and while not Your relatives,
to save both death and pain of Your together believers - Your friends?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously more both death and pain
9)
9.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of members of
Your nationality while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies at the cost of
more both death and pain of members of other nationality while not Your
relatives and while not Your enemies?
NO YES
9.2 If you
answered YES to Question 9.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much more
both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to members
of other nationality while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies, to save both death and pain of members of Your
nationality while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
10)
10.1 If necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of members
of Your race while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies at the
cost of more both death and pain of members of other race while
not Your relatives and while not Your enemies?
NO YES
10.2 If you
answered YES to Question 10.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to members of
other race while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies, to save both death and pain of members
of Your race while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
11)
11.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of members of
Your skin color while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies at the cost of more both death and pain of members of
other skin color while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies?
NO YES
11.2 If you
answered YES to Question 11.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to members of
other skin color while not Your relatives and while not Your enemies, to save both death and pain of members
of Your skin color while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
12)
12.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of members of
Your social strata (class) while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies at the cost of more both death and pain of members of
other social strata (class) while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies?
NO YES
12.2 If you
answered YES to Question 12.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to members of
other social strata (class) while not Your relatives and while not Your
enemies, to
save both death and pain of members of Your social strata (class) while
not Your relatives and while not Your enemies?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
13)
13.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of Your
friends-other living creatures than humans at the cost of more both
death and pain of Your not the
friends-the humans?
NO YES
13.2 If you
answered YES to Question 13.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to Your not the friends-the humans,
to save both death and pain of Your friends-other living creatures than
humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
14)
14.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of Your friends-other
living creatures than humans at the cost of more both death and pain of
other humans while friends?
NO YES
14.2 If you
answered YES to Question 14.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
humans while friends, to save both death and pain of Your
friends-other living creatures than humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
15)
15.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans at the cost of more both death
and pain of other living creatures than humans?
NO YES
15.2 If you
answered YES to Question 15.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
living creatures than humans, to save both death and pain of humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
16)
16.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans
at the cost of more both death and pain of believed higher animals?
NO YES
16.2 If you
answered YES to Question 16.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to believed
higher animals, to save both death and pain of humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
17)
17.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans at the cost of more both death
and pain of other mammals
than humans?
NO YES
17.2 If you
answered YES to Question 17.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other
mammals than humans, to
save both death and pain of humans?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
18)
18.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals at the
cost of more both death and pain of birds?
NO YES
18.2 If you
answered YES to Question 18.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to birds, to save both death and
pain of humans and other mammals?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
19)
19.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
at the cost of more both death and pain of reptiles
and amphibians?
NO YES
19.2 If you
answered YES to Question 19.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to reptiles and amphibians, to save both death and pain of humans
and other mammals and also birds?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
20)
20.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians
at the expense of both death and pain of fish
and snail and jellyfish and cancers and
crabs?
NO YES
20.2 If you
answered YES to Question 20.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers and crabs, to save
both death and pain of humans and other mammals and also birds and reptiles and amphibians?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
21)
21.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and fish
and snail and jellyfish and cancers and
crabs at the cost of more both death and pain of insects and and to them similar trees and to these trees similar other plants, e.g.
some bushes?
NO YES
21.2 If you
answered YES to Question 21.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to insects and and to them similar trees and to these trees similar other plants, e.g.
some bushes, to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and fish
and snail and jellyfish and cancers and
crabs?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
22)
22.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and
fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers
and crabs and insects and to them similar trees and to these trees similar plants, e.g. some bushes
at the cost of more both death and pain of other both trees and bushes?
NO YES
22.2 If you
answered YES to Question 22.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to other both trees and bushes, to
save both death and pain of humans and other mammals and also birds and reptiles and amphibians and fish and snail and
jellyfish and cancers and crabs
and insects and and to them similar trees and to these trees
similar plants, e.g. some bushes?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
23)
23.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and
fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers
and crabs and insects and trees and bushes at the
cost of more both death and pain of flowers
and mushrooms?
NO YES
23.2 If you
answered YES to Question 23.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to flowers and mushrooms, to save
both death and pain of humans and other mammals and also birds and reptiles and amphibians and fish and snail and
jellyfish and cancers and crabs and
insects and trees and bushes?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
24)
24.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and
fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers
and crabs and insects and trees and bushes and flowers and
mushrooms at the cost of more both death and pain of algaes and mildews?
NO YES
24.2 If you
answered YES to Question 24.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to algaes and mildews, to save both
death and pain of humans and other mammals and also birds and reptiles and amphibians and fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers and crabs and insects and trees and bushes and flowers and mushrooms?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
25)
25.1 If
necessary do you consider right to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and
fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers
and crabs and insects and trees and bushes and flowers and
mushrooms and algaes and mildews and both unripe animal sperm and unfertilized unripe
animal egg and also unripe plant seeds and unripe plant fruit and unripe plant
one seed at the cost of more both death and pain of gradually all of the following both ripe
plant fruits and ripe plant seeds and also both unfertilized ripe animal egg
and ripe animal sperm?
NO YES
25.2 If you
answered YES to Question 25.1, answer also the question: Maximally how much
more both death and pain you consider right, if necessary, to cause to gradually all of the following both ripe
plant fruits and ripe plant seeds and also both unfertilized ripe animal egg
and ripe animal sperm, to save both death and pain of humans and
other mammals and also birds
and reptiles and amphibians and
fish and snail and jellyfish and cancers
and crabs and insects and trees and bushes and flowers and
mushrooms and algaes and mildews and both unripe animal sperm and unfertilized unripe
animal egg and also unripe plant seeds and unripe plant fruit and unripe plant
one seed?
Maximally little more both death and
pain
Maximally much more both death and
pain
Maximally hugely more both death and
pain
As you want more both death and pain
Variously
more both death and pain
In
Hustopeče February 16, 2016 JUDr. Dalibor Grůza Ph.D.
1)
05/03/2016 Conflict of carnivorous and herbivorous living cells in the human
body.
Starting from the exact
natural science hypothesis of the Philosophy of Balance about living
microorganisms able to recognize and remember their friend and enemy and friend
and enemy of their related microorganisms, then carnivorous living cells of the
human body, which are an evolutionary remnant of carnivorous living creatures
in the human body (eg. in the human brain there are the parts related to
reptiles, so-called the archicortex), need to survive, that the human eats also
meat at present, otherwise those carnivorous living cells die, hate and according
to aforementioned hypothesis of the Philosophy of Balance also take revenge on the
human as their enemy. Contrarily both the herbivorous living cells of the body
of the human and the aforementioned carnivorous living cells of the body of the
human hate and according to aforementioned hypothesis of the Philosophy of
Balance also take a revenge on this human as an enemy for eating their
evolutionary relatives living creatures, especially animals. The necessary condition
for solving the aforementioned dilemma of charity (i.e. love) of the human and
to maintain the symbiosis of all living cells of body of the human which are an
evolutionary relic and evolutionarily related to all species of all living
creatures on the Earth or possibly also in the Universe, that this human
prevents conflicts, virtually disorganization of living microorganisms of his
or her body because of the prevalence of their mutual enmity, virtually hatred
and apparently also taking revenge, and that thus this human remained mentally
and physically healthy, is according to aforementioned hypothesis of the
Philosophy of Balance and well as according to charitylogy, that this human caused
the least possible death and pain.
2)
06/03/2016 Limits of charitylogy as exact, i.e. measurable science.
Limits of charitylogy
as exact, i.e. measurable science may be apparently proved as follows. E.g.
apparently it is not always possible to measure, if human kills more brain living
cells of the body of this human due to radiation when calling by a mobile phone
(i.e. by a cellphone, i.e. by a cellular phone) than due to the stress of this
human, that he or she could not carry out the necessary phone call with this
mobile phone.
3)
07/03/2016 Desire but unbelief in the power of charity in nearly all living
creatures.
In my experience nearly
all living creatures including predators including their leaders are aware,
that they want, that the world is governed by the love (charity), but they do
not believe it, they rather believe, that the world is governed by predation
(predators). They want to prove by charitylogy, virtually charitylogist then,
that the exact scientific hypothesis, that the world (Universe) is governed by
love (charity), is completely correct, partially correct or completely
incorrect.
4)
13/03/2016 How apparently Islam tries to eliminate from the Muslim population
the genetic information of homosexuality, virtually effeminacy of men and to
educate from Muslim men the highly masculine warriors. According to charitylogy
in this context the basic question is: Are the world and the nature governed by
Christian love (i.e. charity) or by predation?
From the below
documentary film Life on the coast of Dubai, an oasis of luxury I found, that
in Dubai there are two kinds of men on principle, the first kind of men in
Dubai are wealthy native inhabitants in Dubai, who live in luxury, on principle
apparently only the Koran and probably the natural sciences, if they do not
contradict the Koran, are accessible of all human knowledge to them, I know
from other sources, that the Arab States should censor the internet and for
example they make inaccessible in their countries also the largest global
encyclopedia of all human knowledge accessible in all languages also in Arabic,
which is www.wikipedia.org . The second kind of men in Dubai are workers from
poor Muslim countries working apparently for little remuneration of several
hundred euros per month, of which they feed their poor families in their home
poor Islamic countries. These poor workers are often doing a very hard work,
eg. on construction of skyscrapers, and of many other large buildings made of
concrete in Dubai they work also 12 hours per day, often in the heat of around
50 degrees Celsius in the outdoor air with one day of rest on by Islam ordained
Friday. In Dubai there are women and men separated each from other, here men
and women practically never meet together and never communicate together with
the exception of young children before early adolescence and with the exception
of men and of women in immediate family, i.e. especially with the exception of
brothers and of sisters and with the exception of husband and wife or as the
case may be wives (I know, that in Islamic countries there is permitted
polygamy under certain conditions), if in Dubai eg. on the beach a man meets an
unknown woman, she is almost always completely covered, so that on principle
only her eyes are shown from her body in narrow opening in her dress, so that
she can determine the orientation by means of her eyes during her movement
through the streets, in the water there are only men and then very young girls
before reaching early adolescence both undressed in swimsuit. The men after
reaching early adolescence - native inhabitants in Dubai before the wedding
meet and communicate only among themselves and even elsewhere, eg. in the
school they do not possibly meet with uncovered women and they do not possibly
communicate with women, eg. with women of the same age (in this sense statement
of the Arab young man - native inhabitant in Dubai was not entirely clear in
the above documentary film), man - native inhabitant in Dubai after the wedding
meets apparently from uncovered women and he communicates from women only with
women from his immediate family (see above). Husband for a young woman is
elected then on principle by her parents, on principle by her father, the
agreement on the future marriage of their daughter is often concluded already
for very young children, so called honor murders of young girls by members of
her family are relatively frequent, if a young girl finds a husband herself,
especially if she refuses therefore the by her parents elected husband (see http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/382782-tehotnou-kurdskou-uprchlici-v-nemecku-zabila-rodina-aby-si-uchranila-cest.html : 2015, Berlín, Novinky ). In Dubai the aforementioned adult men - workers
from poor Muslim countries do not have apparently women from their immediate
family and in Dubai they do not meet uncovered women with the exception of
native very young girls before early adolescence or they do not communicate
directly with women there. In Dubai the men after reaching early adolescence,
who begins sexually harass other men in this on principle exclusively male
society, this applies especially to sexually mature men before the wedding, are
in imminent danger of death in accordance with the rules of Islam according to
the Koran or the radical, virtually orthodox Muslims kills directly them (see http://www.novinky.cz/krimi/395820-zadna-nenavist-ale-nabozensky-text-haji-pred-soudem-knihu-muslim-sanka.html : 2016, Jakub Bartosz, Právo ). In this way
apparently Islam tries to eliminate from the Muslim population the genetic
information of homosexuality, virtually effeminacy of men and to educate from
Muslim men the highly masculine individuals.
Literature: Life on the
coast of Dubai, an oasis of luxury (10/10), documentary film, 45 minutes,
France broadcasted on TV 11/03/2016 18:00 - CT 2 (i.e. The Czech Television,
second program), see https://tv.seznam.cz/?date=2016-3-11
5)
15/03/2016 History of Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the light of the basic
historical question in terms of Philosophy of Balance and charitylogy, which
is: Are the world and the nature governed by Christian love (i.e. charity) or
by predation?
This basic pattern according to charitylogy as the science about love, i.e.
about charity according to the Philosophy of Balance used by me for
understanding and commentary of the history of the three great related world
religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam can easily be viewed as follows: Eg. if the mother member of the
Christian church or atheistic mother, if both believe in mercy and Christian
love (i.e. charity) and they speak to her child, that the world is governed by
mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity), and that her son or daughter should
therefore also be merciful, so these mother must expect from a significant part
of her offspring eg. such a response, mother, yesterday I saw the cat as it
caught live mouse, at first the cat tortured it (i.e. playing with it), then
the cat killed and ate it, and mother, you eat and you give us to eat the meat
of animals which are tortured and killed in slaughter agricultural factory
farms (eg. after birth in these factory farms there is denied freedom of
movement of animals not to lose weight,
these animals are fed by drugs to quickly get fatter, and shortly after birth,
often as pups or shortly after reaching adulthood these animals are killed),
mother, we have to believe you, that the nature or world are governed by mercy
or Christian love, i.e. charity and not by predation, mother, you lie us and on
the basis of this reasoning a large proportion of these children will choose
the predation as their religion, whether in the form of Islam, Judaism or they
become hypocritical predatory Christians or predatory Hindus or predatory
atheists or they believe Darwinism, and they will not believe that the world or
nature are governed by mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity), or by God who
should be mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity). On the contrary Jewish or
Muslim mother would answer to her aforementioned daughter or son apparently
according to Judaism or Islam, that being predatory or a predator is absolutely
right, that her son or daughter should be merciful or charitable only to their
friends and against other living creatures, especially against other humans,
other animals and other plants he or she must throughout his or her life in the
world to fight to the death as a predator until he or she joins them to his or
her pack, kills them or enslaves them, as do such predatory wolves, which are merciful
or charitable only to members of their own pack of wolves and against other
living creatures, especially against prey or against other wolf packs they must
fight to the death. This opinion of domination of predation in the world on the
above question of charity or predation of the world based on Judaism or Islam
is controversial according to the Philosophy of Balance again, although this
opinion of Judaism or Islam can sound reasonable, because it largely coincides
with the experience of all living creatures, but according to the Philosophy of
Balance all children, all mothers, as well as well as all fathers or all other
men and all other living creatures never fully accept domination of predation
in the world, even if it contradicted an irrefutable proof of reason, which has
not been given yet, because according to the Philosophy of Balance all living
creatures in fact feel that they very dislike the domination of predation in
the world (i.e. it is very contrary to their emotions) and they are in fact very
unwilling it (i.e. it is very contrary to their will).
History of
the Israelis as a great nation has begun
according to the Bible in Egyptian slavery of Israelis, of which cause was
according to the Bible the enslavement of the Egyptian population by Joseph the
Israeli adviser of pharaoh using the usury, according to modern historical
science the Joseph's pharaoh was the national of the Semitic tribes of Hyksos relatives of the Israelis, these tribes conquered
the northern Egypt in the first half of the 17th century before our era, BC
(before Christ) (calculated in the Christian world from the birth of Jesus of
Nazareth, according to the Philosophy of Balance apparently the God,
hereinafter referred to as "our era"). After the expulsion of Hyksos these enslaved Egyptians enslaved on the contrary the Israelis, who had
moved in extreme need of death from starvation as guests to Egypt according to
the Bible during the reign of Hyksos and adviser
Joseph as great-grandson of the biblical Abraham and as the grandson of the
biblical Isaac, i.e. son of Abraham and as son of Biblical Jacob called Israel.
According to the Bible Israelis as the descendants of Abraham and Isaac seized
control over the territory of Palestine and Israel in a murderous conquest war led according to the Bible by both Old
Testament and New Testament only one God according to historical science
probably around the year 1000 BC, where according to the Bible Israelis killed
all the local population, including women and children, after that they
had been liberated as a nation from the above Egyptian slavery in liberation
war according to the Bible led also by above mentioned only one God. The question of killing of all local
population by the Israelis during their conquest of the territory of today's
Israel and Palestine is controversial (modern archaeology in
excavations in Israel has not apparently proved a sudden burning or the
disappearance of a large number of cities mentioned in the Bible in the Book of
Joshua in connection with Joshua's war in such a short interval in the relevant
period of time, see the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Joshua#Historical_and_archaeological_evidence , modern archaeology rather assumes a
gradual assimilation of both Israelis and former local population in Israel and
Palestine), however the fact remains, that today and apparently also in
the past it was very difficult to convert, i.e. to connect to the religion of
Israelis, or of today's Jews, in addition, that on principle the Israel
religion is the national religion of the blood related persons, on principle
today's Jews, virtually Israelis do not marry, virtually have not children
with women from other nations and
today's Jewish women with men from other nations, however it is with frequent
exceptions that violate this rule, nowadays children of these mixed
relationships can very easily connect to the Jewish nation and convert to the
Jewish religion. According to the
Bible after the conquest of Israel and Palestine the Jews have kept in their
Temple in Jerusalem the largest slaughterhouse of cattle in antiquity (i.e. in
ancient times). According to the Philosophy of Balance this big slaughter
possibly of people, but quite surely of the animals in antiquity is the biggest
reason of Israeli defeats in wars with other neighbouring nations, the
division of the Kingdom of Israel into northern Israel and southern Judea,
after the conquest of northern Israel by surrounding nations the reason for the
demise of all the Israel tribes, with the exception of today's Jews from former
Judea, i.e. the descendants of the biblical Joseph's brother, Judah and with
the exception of Levites, i.e. the descendants of the biblical other Joseph's
brother Levi, in
northern Israel and southern Judea only for Levites their exclusive role of the
priestly service of only one God in Israel temple was reserved.
Around the year 33 AD according to the New Testament of the Bible the Jews
gave to kill Jesus of Nazareth,
according to the Philosophy of Balance apparently Christ in execution,
who preached reform of Judaism, but after its rejection by the Jews and the
threat to Jesus' life by the Jews Jesus refused to start a murderous war
against the Roman occupiers and also he refused to lead with his disciples
against Jews an murderous civil war, see below, and according to the biblical
New Testament Jesus let rather himself torture and kill in execution by Roman
occupiers of Judea, whose leader in Judea Pontius Pilate gave command for it
according to the Bible only after the hard pressure of the Jews, who otherwise
threatened to revolt against the Romans in Judea, for these reasons the Jews
have not recognized Jesus as the Savior, the Messiah, the Christ. After his
death the part of the Jews joined the Christianity and members from many other
nations joined the Christians, then the Jews encouraged the Romans to
persecute, to torture and to kill early Christians, the persecution of the
early Christians under the Roman Emperor Nero is proverbial, who blamed the
early Christians from the great fire of Rome, the capital of the antique Roman Empire,
Nero gave to torture and to kill in a large amount the early Christians for the
amusement of the local population in large Roman circuses in the capital of
today's Italy, Rome. Jewish southern Judea was conquered by the Romans and they
expelled from it for almost two thousand years the Jews into exile (i.e. World
Jewish diaspora) after the second Jewish-wide rebellion
against the Roman domination, which took place in the years 132-135 anno Domini
under the leadership of Simon bar Kokhba, who was
declared by part of the Jews and Jewish religious leaders as the Savior, in
Hebrew language the Messiah, in Greek language the Christ. The results of the
war were terrible for the Jews. The Romans under the leadership of their
Emperor Hadrian prohibited Jews from their religion, killed their scholars and
prohibited them from possession and use of the Torah, i.e. the most important
part of the biblical Old Testament. At that time the majority of the Jews from
today's Israel and today's Palestine was given into slavery or was killed. On
the place of Jerusalem the Romans gave to build Roman city, Aelia Capitolina, which was
forbidden Jews to enter. Then all today's both Israel and Palestine were
populated by non-Jewish inhabitants, from which the present-day Palestinian
nation originated.
During the subsequent confusions and murderous civil wars within the
ancient Roman Empire in 306 AD Constantine The Great was declared as emperor.
In the year 312 AD Constantine's soldiers won with Christ on their shields the
battle near Ponte Milvio in the Roman
murderous civil war and in the following year Constantine published in Mediolanum (Milan).the Edict of Milan, which has recognized Christianity as equivalent religion, which became formally only
tolerated but in fact the preferred religion of the Roman Empire, Christian Church already under
Constantine became a pillar for the imperial power. In 312 AD
Constantine reached domination over the West Roman Empire and in 324 AD after
the Roman victory in the murderous civil war he was established as the sole
ruler of the whole empire. In addition to the recognition of Christianity other
major event of his governance was also the establishment of a new Rome,
Constantinople. In 6th century AD, in the time of the migration of nations
(virtually the conquest of Western Roman Empire, i.e. mainly today's Western
Europe by the Germanic tribes and of Eastern Europe, i.e. mainly today's Russia
by Slavs, in both cases they are the so-called Indo-European nations originally
come probably from India, these two nations have adopted Christianity as their
religion) the Centre of gravity of the Roman Empire definitively shifted to its
richer and more stable eastern half with centre in Constantinople in Asia,
which was formed after the demise of Western Roman Empire approximately in the
year 476 of our era (i.e. anno Domini).
Islam was founded by Muhammad in the late 6th century AD, Muhammad was born and lived in Mecca as a trader. Islam builds on Judaism and
Christianity, according to some scientists Muhammad had available when formulating the foundations of Islam in Mecca some
inaccurate translations of the Jewish Old Testament and of the Christian New
Testament from Jewish and Christian tribes, apparently of Jewish and Christian
sects, of which members were present at that time in Mecca either as
permanently established residents or as traders, because at that time rich
Mecca was the most important commercial centre of the Arabian peninsula,
excerpts from these translations are found also in the Koran and according to
these excerpts the Western scientists also tried to identify these
translations. According to Muhammad Islam was
dictated to him in his religious exaltation by God through the Archangel
Gabriel. According to Muhammad on the
basis of this miracle he considered
himself as the Prophet of only one God, whose aim was to reveal to Muhammad and through his mediation to the whole world the really true form of the
Jewish Old Testament and of the Christian New Testament, as it was in fact
revealed to the world by the previous Jewish and Christian prophets, for
example Moses (in Hebrew language Moshe, in Arabic language Musa) or Jesus, who Muhammad and Islam did not consider as incarnated only one God, but as one of the
prophets. Later before Muhammad's time the
Jews and the Christians should falsify the Bible. At first Muhammad presumed, that to by him revealed true form of the Jewish and Christian
Holy books all nations would voluntarily connect, in particular his tribe
members in Mecca, all Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula, all Jews and all
Christians. At first Muhammad tried to
convince Mecca residents to connect voluntarily to Islam. In this period at
first the inhabitants of Mecca ignored him, however when he succeeded in acquiring some supporters among
the inhabitants of Mecca, the ruling layer of Mecca used against him the means
of repression. It declared him as a madman
and, when it failed, so they tried to kill him. According
to the Philosophy of Balance the main cause of this resistance the inhabitants of
Mecca to Islam was possibly, that Muhammad ate in this desert area of
the Arabian peninsula, especially the products of the shepherds, thus
slaughtered living animals, embodied also by living cells in the bodies of the
inhabitants of Mecca, which so, figuratively spoken, would be not willing to
admit, that someone, who eats their living relatives creatures, and for this
purpose he kills very painfully them or he lets kill them, should be the
Prophet of the only one God, who should unify in his religion all predators and
all their prey. In other words that for this great death and pain responsible
man, for example. Muhammad would be
able to correct rightly the Holy Scriptures of the Bible according to reality. Possibly
therefore Muhammad and his
followers found themselves under a lot of pressure of their surroundings in
Mecca and also in imminent danger of their lives. This situation in Mecca Muhammad and his followers solved through the escape into another Arabic city,
competitive Medina, this escape in Islam called as Hijrah was in 622 AD, and
from it in the Arabic world one counts the new Islamic era. From this time in
Medina Muhammad and his
followers have stopped believing in the voluntary connection of people to Islam
and they gave priority to its spreading by violence of murderous war and of
people killing. According to the
Philosophy of Balance just human can lead war against his or her enemies in
this war he or she can hurt a human, to exclude him or her from the fight, if
however he or she must kill him or her, so this is possibly a substantial moral
mistake of this human killing another human in the fight, i.e. possibly not
only of a killed human in this fight. Furthermore according to the Philosophy
of Balance a possibly weak human decides for this fight, in which he or she is
willing to kill another human possibly from the fear caused by the Devil,
according to the Philosophy of Balance embodying vacuum or death. However
vacuum does not kill anyone, it just causes underpressure, i.e. the possibly insurmountable fear of ordinary people, of which reason the
mass is attracted and collided and it is split up into small pieces, i.e. a
human dies. Collision with a pure vacuum, so with nothing or almost nothing is
not able to break any material thing. Muhammad as a human, i.e. not as the
God decided for the murderous war out of fear of death, thus of the
fear for his life and the lives of his loved ones.
Apparently from the above reasons Muhammad decided to
consider Ishmael among the Biblical persons as the ancestor of
all Arabs. According to the Bible Ishmael was the
eldest son of historically unconfirmed Jewish and Arabic Biblical forefather
Abraham (in Arabic language Ibrahim), Abraham
wants most of all in his life according to the Bible, that the nation
originated from his descendants, God revealed to him and promised him it. At
that time Abraham had the only one wife the Biblical Sarah, however until her
age, when almost all women are already infertile, he had no children with her.
Therefore Abraham and especially Sarah stopped to believe in this revelation of
God to Abraham and these alleged promises of the God about their offspring.
Sarah gave the Egyptian slave Hagar to Abraham,
with whom Abraham had his firstborn son Ishmael. Then Angels visited Abraham and Sarah and they told to Sarah that she
will have her own son. Sarah laughed at these messengers and she did not
believe them because she thought that she was already infertile. However then
Sarah gave birth to Abraham secondborn and Sarah's own son Isaac (in Hebrew Yitzhak). After his
birth fratricidal fights gradually started among the two Abraham's sons and
their mothers about the heritage of leadership of the tribe after that Abraham
would die. Then Sarah forced Abraham to expel Hagar and her son into the desert with a small reserve of water, where they were
threatened without the water by probable death. God, who revealed himself to Abraham
according to the Bible, allegedly told him to obey
Sarah in it. Then Abraham expelled Hagar and their
firstborn son Ishmael in the
desert with insufficient reserve of water. When in the desert there were Ishmael and his mother Hagar immediately
threatened by death of thirst, she found and according to the Bible the God
showed her water well and they survived. According to the Bible from the descendants of Ishmael and his Egyptian wife, who was found for him by his mother Hagar, a great nation originated that fought and fights against all his
brothers, especially against the descendants of Isaac, i.e. today's Jews. Then
Sarah died. Then Isaac found his wife Rebecca and Israelis, virtually Jews
originated from their descendants according to the Bible. Then Abraham
remarried and with his new wife he had several other sons. However Abraham
bequeathed to Isaac everything, what he had.
Regarding
the management of the murderous war for saving his life and the life of his
loved ones Muhammad can be put
in contrast to Jesus of Nazareth in the
garden of Gethsemane before his arrest by the Jews before his torture and
killing in execution, when according to the Bible Jesus, virtually the God
should admit, that the Apostle Peter cut off the ear of the Jewish soldier,
thus to hurt him, but, when it did not help, so he did not let to lead his
disciples for him the murderous civil war against the Jews or against the
Romans, one could say that he had the strength not to subordinate to Devil fear
of his death (the Bible, John 18,1-10). According
to the Philosophy of Balance all terribly suffering living creatures have the
right to request from the God who should be according to Christianity the love,
i.e. charity (Bible, 1 John 4.16) that, if it is necessary, He does not only
committed the terrible suffering of living creatures, but he himself was
willing this terrible suffering to experience, therefore from the standpoint of
the Philosophy of Balance the living creatures have the right to request from a
possible God, who should be according to Christianity the love, i.e. charity,
that for reason of compassion He was tortured and died, which however does not
prove perfectly, that Jesus of Nazareth really existed (communist historical
science claimed that Jesus of Nazareth and the biblical Gospels are unprovable
myth or manipulation) or that Jesus of Nazareth was the God, but from the
perspective of Philosophy of Balance it appears from the above reasons more
probable than improbable, in the case of the biblical Gospels it is according
to Philosophy of Balance at least the brilliantly thought base of charitology as a science created under
very primitive conditions 2000 years ago, when the
foundations of modern science has not been laid yet and when the Jews usually
wrote on parchment, i.e. on the skin of often tortured and murdered animals
(Jesus himself supposedly had written nothing, the biblical New Testament was
written on parchment by his followers), the
Philosophy of Balance and charitology is based at
least 51% on the Bible, especially
on the 1-4 chapter of the book of Genesis, the Gospels of the New Testament and
1 John 4 chapter.
Therefore using the murderous conquest
war at first Muhammad conquered Medina, he
killed here in this murderous war a whole Jewish tribe that threatened his
life, then he led a murderous war against his native Mecca, which then he
succeeded in conquest with the help of his followers, who went with him from
Mecca to Medina, and with the help of the inhabitants of Medina, after the
conquest of Mecca more and more expanding Muhammad's army still in his life conquered the entire
Arabian Peninsula. The Arabs
considered as proof, that Muhammad is the
Prophet of God, and that by the murderous war he fulfilled the will of God, Muhammad's successes in fight, in
particular, that with a small army of his relatively few followers from Mecca,
who fled with him from Mecca to Medina, and with relatively few his followers
obtained in Medina several times also from the beginning he defeated or
repelled much stronger army, which after Muhammad's flight to Medina residents
of Mecca sent against Muhammad and Medina.
On the basis of the development of
Islam and the life of Muhammad in the Muhammad's Koran, i.e. The Holy Book of
Islam there are peaceful Suras of the Mecca period, which are interpreted
by radical, virtually orthodox Muslims as Suras valid in the period when Islam
is weak, and the violent Suras of the Meddina period, which according to radical, virtually orthodox Muslims are
applied in the period when Muslims are strong and they could lead war against
unbelievers. Darul Harb, i.e. land of war is a land of unbelievers, Muslims are asked by
radicals to get through to those countries, turning them over to their faith
and multiply themselves until their numbers increase, and then to begin the war
and to fight and to kill people, they make Islam the religion and they join
this country to Darul Islam. After Muhammad's death in
accordance with Arab tradition because of food poisoned by captured Jewish
women Zaynab from by
Muhammad's Army defeated enemies the Arabs united by Islam continued in a
murderous conquest war, and they conquered many of today's Islamic countries in
the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Muslims
consider this period of their war successes as the ideal age of Islam guided
and proving favour of only one God in relation to Muslims and they still want
to copy it.
However after Muhammad's death as a result of the mutual power struggles
among Muslims, in which Ali Muhammad's successor and Muhammad's cousin and also Muhammad's son-in-law,
who married his daughter Fatimah, was killed,
the Muslim community is permanently divided into the Sunnis, who were
loyal to the winner over Ali, the new
caliph, and the Shiites, who
as the rightful caliph considered and still consider Ali. About the crisis of Islam and
decay on individual small caliphates we speak from 14th century of our era.
However at that time in Asia the new conquerors already appeared, who are Mongols. Uniting and
subordination of the Mongolian tribes Temüjin, Khan of the Mongols, in
Mongolian language Genghis Khan, which should mean in the translation great or
world emperor, reached through conquest
murderous wars. Temüjin was the son of a leader of one of the Mongol tribes, however his father
was poisoned by an enemy tribe and about 10-year-old Temüjin was in
direct danger of death. After the revolution in the Temüjin's tribe the successor of his father expelled Temüjin from the tribe to the
Mongolian steppes and he told him that he returns for him, when he reaches
adulthood, that he kills Temüjin after the fight. Young Temüjin made friendship with the son of a leader of another tribe Jamukha, who then took over the leadership of this tribe. Jamukha protected young Temüjin against his enemies, especially from his tribe, who after his adulthood
wanted to kill him. Then Temüjin earned with his behavior and his courage the friendship of individuals
from various Mongolian tribes with the help, of which he led to murderous
conquest war against his enemies, and then with the help of his more and more
expanding army he conquered and united all Mongols (also Tatars their relatives, below mentioned also only as Mongols),
then Temüjin was forced
apparently to kill his friend and savior of his life from his youth, Jamukha , who refused to be subordinated to him.
Temüjin set in a
secret Chronicle of the Mongols, the three basic laws of Mongolian warriors:
not to betray your Khan (punished with death regularly also of family members
of traitor), to fight against the enemy until the end and the prohibition of
killing women and children. A ban on the
killing of women and children had the following purpose. The Mongols
fought against all foreign nations that did not subordinate to them with the
fact, that after their victory they killed on principle all adult men and adult
boys, but on principle not women and very young boys. Of these women they made
their slaves and they often raped them against their will to conceive them
children. In this way the above mentioned very young boys, the sons of these
women and of by the Mongols killed to Mongols hostile adult fathers acquired
the half-blood brothers and sisters from the same mother and other fathers, and
in adulthood they were often reconciled with the death of their fathers and
they were loyal to the Mongols as members of their army, although they killed
their fathers, otherwise they should fight to the death against their
half-blood siblings born from the same mother, as they had, and the other
Mongolian father. Or they should fight to the death with their mother, who
should decide, if she shall protect her previously born son of her former by
Mongols killed husband, or, if she shall protect her new son, to whom she gave
birth with her new Mongol husband.
Similar
tactics concerning the smaller killing enemy women and children, it is both
girls of any age and
apparently also very young
boys, is applied also by Islam. Islam gives the people of the conquered
territory the choice, either they become Muslims and then may survive, or they
are Christians or Jews, according to Muhammad, the people of the Book, who
must be subordinated to Muslims, or Muslims must enslave them, the adult male
members of the other religions or atheists are killed after their defeat by the
Muslims, women and children, it is both girls of any age and
apparently also very
young boys, are rather enslaved by Muslims and women are raped. In this sense, even though the Mongols and Islam were a religion of
predators, within which adult men and enemies must be absolutely subordinate to
his leader, otherwise they would usually be cruelly tortured and killed, so women has more protection and security
than adult men, because on principle women are not killed.
in the
murderous conquest wars the Mongols conquered the territory of Asia, especially
of China (see medieval European or Italian traveler Marco Polo, who
visited reportedly China during the reign of Temüjin's successor in China Kublai Khan), in the campaign further
west into Europe the Mongols conquered the whole Russia, they reached Poland
and Hungary, the Mongols failed to conquer Japan. Mongols together with Tatars founded their own State later by the
Russians called the Golden Horde with the center in the Russian Caucasus,
probably near present-day Russian Volgograd, formerly also called Stalingrad,
which ruled over the by Mongols originally conquered huge area of Eastern
Europe and Siberia, among other things over the whole territory of Russia and
the former Soviet Union. The Russian
principalities were not formally part of the territory of the Golden Horde, but
they were subordinate to the Mongols. If Rurik, i.e. all Russian
Princes wanted to govern in their own countries, then they had to be confirmed
in their positions by Khan after they acknowledged his supreme power, thus
belonging to the Mongol Empire. In the mid-14th century the Golden Horde was
the largest and militarily strongest State in Eastern Europe. In its centre in Sarai there were untold revenues from taxes levied in the conquered countries,
from transit control of Volga river, which connected north-sea-Baltic region
with the Orient, from trade transactions with the Venetians and the Genoese,
whose factories were along the coast of the Black and Azov Sea. Both the Mongols and the Tatars from the
Golden Horde adopted for their religion Islam, however the predominant religion
in Mongolia became Buddhism, that the Mongols knew from by them conquered
China.
In the
Golden Horde were decentralization tendencies, some of its territories became
independent. As a result the Russian princes, whose position consolidated on
the contrary, started thinking of armed resistance. The Mongols
and the Tatars were defeated in the
year 1350 AD in the first major open battle on the Kulikovo Field by the Russians led by Dmitry
Donskoy, who after the death of his father inherited the Moscow throne and who was
canonised by Orthodox Church. Then the Russians gradually conquered the
whole territory of today's Russia, and they subjugated the fractured Mongolian
and Tatar States.
Then the
Mongols were similarly expelled for their disunity back to Mongolia from China
around the year 1380 AD by local inhabitants of China led by local Chinese Ming
rulers dynasty.
From the
Mongol and Tatar Golden Horde due to the aforementioned military tactics of the
enslavement of women of defeated nations in the region of the Caucasus the Seljuk and Ottoman Turks as the two
representatives of more so-called turkic-tatar Nations originated apparently
also through the mix of the Mongols and the local population, these Turks
founded the so-called the Ottoman Empire with the
Centre on the territory of present-day Turkey in Istanbul, which was one of the
largest and most powerful empires in the area of the Mediterranean Sea. The
Ottoman Empire existed in years from 1299 to 1922 AD and during this time it
included the area of Asia Minor, the Balkans, the Black Sea, the Middle East
and North Africa. From the 16th
century the Ottoman Empire had completely the Islamic character of the God's
State, in which from the beginning the sultans of the Ottoman dynasty
ruled.
The Ottoman
Empire bordered and led a series of wars with Orthodox Christian Russia, which took
over the heritage of the
Eastern Christian Byzantine Empire
with the center in Constantinople. Constantinople, in 1930 AD officially renamed as Istanbul, which was the
capital of the Roman Empire, after the division of the Roman Empire the capital
of the Eastern Roman Empire, later known as the Byzantine Empire, and after the conquest by the Turks the
capital of the Ottoman Empire. The Byzantine Empire prevented the above
conquest murderous wars of the Arabs after the death of Muhammad in the period of 7-12th.centuries AD, as a result of which the Byzantine
Empire suffered significant territorial losses. Especially the loss of rich Egypt, which was surrendered almost without
fighting to the Arabs through the betrayal of the monophysitie Alexandrian
Patriarch Cyrus (i.e. the
Christian religious and political leader, whose
religious concept of Jesus of Nazareth. so-called monophysitism was based on the presumption, that Jesus of
Nazareth, apparently Christ had only one, i.e. absolutely divine and not human
nature and therefore it could not be distinguished between father and son and
between the divine and humanity in Christ, this monophysitism was declared by Christianity as one of the
numerous heresies at that time), the Eastern Roman Empire decisively weakened.
Within the fight against another religious concept of Jesus of Nazareth in
the West one began to claim that the Holy Spirit comes not only from the
Father, but also from the Son, which was the pretext of the theological Great Schism between the Western Roman
Empire Christianity (Catholic Church) and the Eastern Roman Empire Orthodox
Christianity around the year 1054 AD. However previous long term mutual
alienation of the population of the former two halves of the Roman Empire
already led also to the Great Schism. The primary cause of the Schism was
disputes over the authority of the Roman Pope, who claimed power over the other
four ancient Patriarchates in the East, although the Eastern Patriarchs
acknowledged him jurisdiction only over the Western Patriarchate of Rome. The
gradual degradation of the Byzantine Empire culminated in the defeat of Constantinople in 1453 AD and the conquest of the
remaining Byzantine territories by the Ottoman Turks. During its
millennial existence the Byzantine Empire served as a shield of Christianity,
thereby it significantly contributed to the protection of Europe against the
spread of Islam. The heir to the
politics and religion of the Byzantine Empire became especially Orthodox
Russia.
At the
beginning of the Middle Ages at the time of the migration of nations around the
6th century AD the Christian Slavs conquered Eastern Europe and Western Europe
was conquered by the Christian Germans, who mixed with the local population. So in medieval Europe Christianity
dominated, which resisted the murderous conquest Arabs
wars (in Europe at that time Germanic,
virtually Franconian King Charles I The Great stopped the Arab invasion
that began with the across-floating of the Arabs from Africa to Spain and with
their control of the territory of Spain, by Charles' victory on the Ebro river in Northeast Spain around the year 800 AD,
who protected Christianity against its demise and Europe against the
Islamization), the murderous conquest wars of the Mongols and the murderous
conquest wars of the Ottoman Empire. Initially
the only permitted religion in medieval Europe was by the State authorities
enforced Christianity and inferior enslaved Judaism, however Jews were often
tortured and killed by Christians.
The change occurred with the advent of modern
era from 14th century AD, when after
the discovery of America and Australia European Christians led the murderous
conquest wars in these continents, where they killed the large part of local
residents, especially the Indians in America, and murderous conquest wars in
Africa, At that time Christianity was divided into many mutually hating churches, which one can divide in the
basic way into the Roman Catholic Church headed by the Pope and Protestants, at
that time also came a decline of Christianity in Europe, the development of
secular natural and social sciences, and hereby also the liberation of the Jews
from Christian slavery in Europe. According to the Philosophy of Balance the cause
of the decline of Christianity was, that Christianity as Jesus' religion of
love, i.e. of charity-caritas has ceased and perhaps never was credible for
people, in the modern era the inhabitants of the West have begun to
substitute it increasingly by philosophy of predation, for example by
Darwinism, by which they began to approach the worldview advocated by Islam and
Judaism, although many Jews were very attracted by Jesus' religion of love,
i.e. of charity. The reason for this incredibility was mainly, that people saw,
that mutual predation and not mutual love (i.e. charity) rules among people and
animals and plants in the wild or in a world, and people did not understand,
why in this situation they should believe church, whose priests claimed, that love,
i.e. charity rules over nature or the world, especially when Christians
themselves behaved predominantly and continue to behave predominantly in their
factual conduct so, as if predation rules over the world (but as a Christian I
rather hope according to the Bible King James Version (KJV), Matthew 16, 15 He
saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and
said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and
said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not
revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto
thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it.).
A large contribution to the detection
of this great Christian hypocrisy brought modern science and especially the
liberation struggle of the Jews from their medieval Christian enslavement by
the dissemination of Jewish ideology in science, that the world is not ruled by
Christian love, i.e. charity, but by predation and that Jesus of Nazareth supposedly lied or was
mistaken in it. However these Jewish and modern attacks
against Jesus' religion of
love, i.e. charity, and the unveiling of a huge hypocrisy of the vast majority of
Christians, who act as predators in accordance with Judaism or Islam, i.e. not
charitably, guided by an
above-average share of Jewish managers on the management of the Western world
in the modern times establishing in accordance with this Jewish belief about
the predation government over the world in a large amount the above mentioned
slaughter agricultural factory farms torturing and killing animals have turned
especially against the Jews themselves.
Existing peak of this crisis of Christianity in the West the German Nazism became, German
Nazism in addition, that it was based on the
presumptions, that the world is ruled by predation and that for the win of its
ideology it is necessary to lead the murderous conquest war, which is not
substantially different from the older Judaism or Islam, so in accordance with
Darwinism, which was based on the presumption, that purpose of this predation
of evolution in nature or in the world is the natural selection of living
individuals or species of living individuals, which should reproduce and which
should die in this natural struggle for life, (the German Nazism) prohibited
the Germans under the cruel punishments from mixed marriages and sexual
relations, especially with the Jews but also with Slavs, and the German Nazism
tried also to speed up this natural selection in the nature or in the world
through total genocide of the according to it in relation to Germans, virtually
to Germanic tribes inferior or competitive human races, which should be
according to the German Nazis the Jews and perhaps also Slavs. So in their
murderous conquest wars the German Nazism killed and counted in the final
result with killing especially of all Jews and perhaps also of the
Slavs, including women and children,
and it is unlike the murderous conquest wars of contemporary Judaism and mostly
of the entire Islam history. On the basis of its belief about government of predation over the
world the German
Nazism, the first philosophical
predecessor of this belief was especially old Judaism, started to handle the
Jews in the same way as the Jews had handled animals, the German Nazism started to build for the
Jews the slaughter factory farms, of which goal was to receive on the basis of
the alleged predation of the world the maximum economic benefit from Jewish
human bodies, it started concentration of the Jews in the concentration camps, similar to agricultural slaughter
factory farms for the animals, it exposed the Jews to slave labor with the
least both amount and price of food, the German Nazism started to do unlimited
medical experiments on the Jews, followed by mass killing of work-unable
depleted tortured Jews in gas chambers in concentration camps, which was
similarly mechanized as slaughter of livestock in slaughter agricultural
factory farms, similarly the Nazis manufactured all parts of the Jewish bodies
for economic benefit, so we could see at first sight absurd Nazi lamps coated
with Jewish skin, the Nazi removing and economic manufacturing of hair and
teeth of Jews before their killing for the purpose of economic exploitation. However on the contrary German
Nazism protected
animals and nature, the German Nazi laws were the most perfect laws on the
protection of nature and animals, which has ever been adopted by any State in
Europe. These German Nazi laws on the protection of nature and of animals
survived the defeat of the German Nazism and remained valid in large part in
West Germany and later in 1990 in united Germany up to the present.
The second
result of the Jewish liberation struggle from the medieval Christian
enslavement of Jews was the Communist ideology of the dictatorship of the
proletariat, which was founded by philosophy of Karl Marx of Jewish origin and
this Communist ideology was used for the domination over the Tsarist Russia by
the former leader of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 AD, Vladimir
Ilyich Lenin, who
was apparently partially of Jewish origin, it should
be proved by the letter which was written by Lenin's older sister, Anna Ulyanov and which was possible to read on the newly opened exhibition in Moscow's
State Historical Museum, Ulyanov claims that
their maternal grandfather was a Ukrainian Jew who converted to Christianity to
avoid the compulsory resettlement to the area reserved for the Jews and to
study. "He originated from a poor Jewish family and he was the son of
Moses Blank, originating from (western-Ukrainian) Zhytomyr”, Ulyanov wrote to Soviet leader Joseph Stalin.
(see http://relax.lidovky.cz/vudce-revoluce-lenin-byl-zid-dokazuje-dopis-jeho-sestry-pjh-/zajimavosti.aspx?c=A110524_093101_ln-zajimavosti_pks : ČTK, lidovky.cz, 2017 ), Joseph
Stalin was of
Georgian origin, thus he originated from the Russian Caucasus region, which has
been the centre of Mongolia-Tatar State Golden Horde in the past, Stalin was
directed in his politics in Russia literally by the above three basic laws of
Mongolian warriors: not to betray your Khan
(punished with death regularly also of family members of traitor), to fight
against the enemy until the end and the prohibition of killing women and
children. After the death of Lenin Stalin dominated the Communist movement in
Russia, however, although Stalin
killed a large number of his opponents, so he did not kill on principle their
women and children, to the Russian concentration camps the Gulags only hostile
adult men were sent by Stalin, whether Russians, Germans or other
nationalities. The children of these Russian enemies in Russia Stalin sent to
State children's homes, on principle for re-education. The same procedure was
applied by Stalin to the German Nazis or to their servants from other nations
on the by Russians conquered Nazi territories, the hostile adult men were
killed in a large amount after the conquest of their territories by the
Russians, their women were raped in a large amount by Russian soldiers, which
resulted apparently in a number of German children from these mixed sexual
relations, and then, that nowadays the hatred between the Germans and the
Russians is no longer a big problem, it is rather about friendship, see
above, for example. German Chancellor Angela Merkel often acts as a mediator in power and murderous war conflicts between the
Russia and the Western allies, at the present time the example was her
negotiating of cessation of fighting in the murderous civil war in Ukraine.
Nazi Germany conquered the whole Western Europe, until it failed in the attempt
to conquer the Stalin's Communist Soviet Russia, also the former Russian
enemies the United Kingdom and the United States joined the Soviet Russia
during the Second World War, then together they defeated Nazi Germany.
During The
Second World War in concentration camps about 5.2 million Jews, including women
and children were killed by Nazi Germany. after their disaster in the context
of The Second World War the Jews continue to
insist on their ideology based on Jewish religion in ancient times, that the
world is ruled by the predation, i.e. not by love, the charity. The Jews have applied this their ideology to their repeated return to and domination over Israel and Palestine in
a murderous conquest war against the local Palestinians, who are partly members
of Christianity and in the majority the members of a similar Islam ideology
about the government of predation in the
world. In addition insisting on their ideology based on Jewish religion
in ancient times, that the world is ruled by the predation, i.e. not by love,
the charity, after The Second World
War the Jews, who are represented at present time in above average amount among
managers in the West, applied to massive restoration of the expansion of
agricultural slaughter factory farms in the West torturing and killing animals
– contemporary concentration camps of animals. In addition insisting on
their ideology based on Jewish religion in ancient times, that the world is
ruled by the predation, i.e. not by love, the charity, the Jews applied to their insisting on heresy of Jesus of
Nazareth from the perspective of the Jewish religion, which has resulted in
that the Jews, who converted to Christianity, cannot obtain citizenship in the
modern Jewish State of Israel, and it is unlike eg. Jewish atheists.
The result
of rivalry of predatory ideology of Judaism and of predatory ideology of Islam
and of predatory Christian West, which under the influence of Judaism and its
ideological liberation struggle of Jews from the Christian medieval slavery
lost or never had in the vast majority the Christian belief, that the world is
ruled by love, i.e. charity, is, that the world stands on verge of a murderous
nuclear war, which can exterminate all humanity with a significant probability
because of the mass destructiveness of nuclear weapons, at present time it is
apparently mainly due to the conflict in Israel and Palestine between on the
one hand predatory orthodox Islamic States, which are
trying to acquire nuclear weapons and to reconquer the territory of Israel and
Palestine in the murderous war, and
on the other hand predatory contemporary Jewish State Israel and the predatory
Jewish and Christian West, both owning nuclear weapons, where both are not able
to cope Muslims at the birth rate, combativeness, willingness to die on the
battlefield while as a result of progress of science and of civilization the
Western and Jewish population becomes effeminate and it is gradually dying out
naturally.
Summary: This basic pattern according to charitylogy
as the science about love, i.e. about charity according to the Philosophy of
Balance used by me for understanding and commentary of the history of the three
great related world religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam can easily be
viewed as follows: Eg. if the mother member of the
Christian church or atheistic mother, if both believe in mercy and Christian
love (i.e. charity) and they speak to her child, that the world is governed by
mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity), and that her son or daughter should
therefore also be merciful, so these mother must expect from a significant part
of her offspring eg. such a response, mother,
yesterday I saw the cat as it caught live mouse, at first the cat tortured it
(i.e. playing with it), then the cat killed and ate it, and mother, you eat and
you give us to eat the meat of animals which are tortured and killed in
slaughter agricultural factory farms (eg. after birth
in these factory farms there is denied freedom of movement of animals not to lose weight, these animals are
fed by drugs to quickly get fatter, and shortly after birth, often as pups or
shortly after reaching adulthood these animals are killed), mother, we have to
believe you, that the nature or world are governed by mercy or Christian love,
i.e. charity and not by predation, mother, you lie us and on the basis of this
reasoning a large proportion of these children will choose the predation as
their religion, whether in the form of Islam, Judaism or they become
hypocritical predatory Christians or predatory Hindus or predatory atheists or
they believe Darwinism, and they will not believe that the world or nature are
governed by mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity), or by God who should be
mercy or Christian love (i.e. charity). On the contrary Jewish or Muslim mother
would answer to her aforementioned daughter or son apparently according to
Judaism or Islam, that being predatory or a predator is absolutely right, that
her son or daughter should be merciful or charitable only to their friends and
against other living creatures, especially against other humans, other animals
and other plants he or she must throughout his or her life in the world to
fight to the death as a predator until he or she joins them to his or her pack,
kills them or enslaves them, as do such predatory wolves, which are merciful or
charitable only to members of their own pack of wolves and against other living
creatures, especially against prey or against other wolf packs they must fight
to the death. This opinion of domination of predation in the world on the above
question of charity or predation of the world based on Judaism or Islam is
controversial according to the Philosophy of Balance again, although this
opinion of Judaism or Islam can sound reasonable, because it largely coincides
with the experience of all living creatures, but according to the Philosophy of
Balance all children, all mothers, as well as well as all fathers or all other
men and all other living creatures never fully accept domination of predation in
the world, even if it contradicted an irrefutable proof of reason, which has
not been given yet, because according to the Philosophy of Balance all living
creatures in fact feel that they very dislike the domination of predation in
the world (i.e. it is very contrary to their emotions) and they are in fact
very unwilling it (i.e. it is very contrary to their will). With the advent of
modern era there was also a decline of Christianity in Europe, the development
of secular natural and social sciences, and with it the liberation of the Jews
from Christian slavery in Europe. According to the Philosophy of Balance the
cause of the decline of Christianity was, that Christianity as Jesus' religion
of love, i.e. of charity-caritas has ceased and perhaps never was credible for
people, in the modern era the inhabitants of the West have begun to substitute
it increasingly by philosophy of predation, for example by Darwinism, by which
they began to approach the worldview advocated by Islam and Judaism, although
many Jews were very attracted by Jesus' religion of love, i.e. of charity. The
reason for this incredibility was mainly, that people saw, that mutual
predation and not mutual love (i.e. charity) rules among people and animals and
plants in the wild or in a world, and people did not understand, why in this
situation they should believe church, whose priests claimed, that love, i.e.
charity rules over nature or the world, especially when Christians themselves
behaved predominantly and continue to behave predominantly in their factual
conduct so, as if predation rules over the world (but as a Christian I rather
hope according to the Bible King James Version (KJV), Matthew 16, 15 He saith unto them, But
whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him,
Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood
hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say
also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.). The result of rivalry of
predatory ideology of Judaism and of predatory ideology of Islam and of
predatory Christian West, which under the influence of Judaism and its
ideological liberation struggle of Jews from the Christian medieval slavery
lost in the vast majority the Christian belief, that the world is ruled by
love, i.e. charity, is, that the world stands on verge of a murderous nuclear
war, which can exterminate all humanity with a significant probability because
of the mass destructiveness of nuclear weapons, at present time it is
apparently mainly due to the conflict in Israel and Palestine between on the
one hand predatory orthodox Islamic States, which are trying to acquire nuclear
weapons and to reconquer the territory of Israel and
Palestine in the murderous war, and on the other hand predatory contemporary
Jewish State Israel and the predatory Jewish and Christian West, both owning
nuclear weapons, where both are not able to cope Muslims at the birth rate,
combativeness, willingness to die on the battlefield while as a result of
progress of science and of civilization the Western and Jewish population
becomes effeminate and it is gradually dying out naturally.
6)
25/03/2016 Does man's brain govern over his sperm cells or do his sperm cells
govern over his brain?
For the man's sperm
cells is typical fight or predation, after penetration of sperm cells into the
woman's vagina these sperm cells are competing, which initially penetrates the
woman's mature egg in the uterus and it fertilizes the egg, only this single sperm
cell of current about 50 million sperm cells in a man's ejaculate survives and
it becomes the basis for a new human embryo, other sperm cells of this number
die in a woman's vagina no later than in few days. By contrast the human brain
tries to convince the world, all living creatures and even the body (i.e.
organism) of a man, that the world is governed by charity, including sex cells
of a man, i.e. sperm cells, the brain of a man has for this proof of charity in
relation to all living cells of a man's organism, including sperm cells quite a
long time, the success or unsuccess of this brain activity shows in the
decisive moment of fertilization of a woman's mature egg in the womb when the
man's and woman's sexual intercourse, if during this sexual act among sperm
cells in their aforementioned fight for survival, in which on principle only
one of current about 50 million sperm cells of one current man's ejaculate can
win from the reasons stated above, the unmerciful predation or partial or
complete charity or cooperation reigns in the fight of all competing sperm
cells for life and death, virtually for fertilization of a woman's on principle
single mature egg in the uterus. Nearly all previous world philosophies, which
on principle are fruits of current man's brain, would fail in this proof of
charity in relation to sperm cells, if there was fight of sperm cells of the
man's ejaculate in the woman's vagina for survival, virtually fertilization of
woman's mature on principle single egg, apparently very quickly, sooner or
later these sperm cells would reject nearly all existing world philosophy of
charity and they would fight unmercifully to save its life as predators, i.e.
each sperm cell against each sperm cell, in this fight of sperm cells for
survival the most predatory sperm cell would win nearly always, possibly
entirely always, according to Christianity in connection with Rational Mystique
of my Philosophy of Balance the most predatory sperm cell embodies and always
embodied the Biblical Devil, according to Christianity the exception was
possibly Jesus of Nazareth, who according to Catholic theology was born from
Mary, who remained virgin also after his conception with God the father,
therefore Jesus of Nazareth was not perhaps conceived from the above fight of
sperm cells for life and death and Jesus of Nazareth, who according
Christianity is the single existing Godman, has apparently never conceived any
child. Against these previous apparently nearly all on principle masculine
imperfect (i.e. philosophies of charity in the decisive moment of fertilization
of woman's eggs defeated by philosophies of predation on the side of male sperm
cells, perhaps with the exception of possibly only partly in its original state
kept the philosophy of charity of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ in
teaching of his followers) philosophies of charity I want to suggest the
Philosophy of Balance based on a minimum of 51% on the current concept of
philosophy of charity of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ. In my practical experience the fighting
ability or predation of man, virtually fighting ability or predation of man's
certain sperm cell is not mostly decisive for the attractiveness of certain man
for women, although on principle she hides it much from him, virtually for
fertilization of her egg, although the majority of men or by extension possibly
even majority of his sperm cells apparently think it, but their charity, these
two properties are evolutionarily necessary in men to protect not only strong
but also and especially weak joint offspring of the certain man and his wife.
In other words from a biological point of view not only sperm cells of man
compete to fertilize the woman's egg, but also microorganisms, especially
living cells of the woman's body choose one from these competing sperm cells,
which will be successful in this fight and those which on the contrary these
microorganisms of woman's body will kill, then for the above reasons in this
selection the microorganisms of woman's body do not apparently mostly value
fighting ability or predation of certain single sperm cell but its charity,
although fighting ability of this certain sperm cell is also very important.
7) 04/04/2016
Commentary of Biblical Book of Job according to the Philosophy of Balance and
fictitious letter of Lord to contemporary suffering Job according to the Philosophy
of Balance about the reason of his suffering.
My friend,
at present time you are in a situation like the biblical Job and I as one of his friends, who came to him to give comfort to him, but
finally they verbally attacked him, but then the God saved and rewarded the
suffering Job and the God
condemned and punished his friends, that is why I am sending you the following
comment of the book of Job according
to the Philosophy of Balance and I hope that it will help you and that the God
will not condemn and punish me for it as above Job's friends. The following is my
personal life experience, when I myself found in the situation of Biblical Job and I have saved my life with
my sole long-term reliance on charity as defined below up to now and I have
gotten gradually more, see below.
(Summary of the Biblical book of job: Job 1: 3 His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels,
and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great
household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east. 13 And there was a day when his sons and his
daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother's house: 14 And
there came a messenger unto Job, and said, The oxen were plowing, and the asses
feeding beside them: 15 And the Sabeans fell upon them, and took them away;
yea, they have slain the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am
escaped alone to tell thee. 16 While he was yet speaking, there came also
another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and hath burned up the
sheep, and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell
thee. 17 While he was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The
Chaldeans made out three bands, and fell upon the camels, and have carried them
away, yea, and slain the servants with the edge of the sword; and I only am
escaped alone to tell thee. 18 While he was yet speaking, there came also
another, and said, Thy sons and thy daughters were eating and drinking wine in
their eldest brother's house: 19 And, behold, there came a great wind from the
wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young
men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. Job 2: 1
Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before
the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord. 4
And Satan answered the Lord, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath
will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone
and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6 And the Lord said unto
Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7 So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with
sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. 8 And he took him a
potsherd to scrape himself withal; and he sat down among the ashes. 9 Then said
his wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die. )
A fictional letter of Lord to today's Job according to the Philosophy
of Balance:
Jób (at present time),
I do not want to host too you, that does not increase my and your
responsibility for reasons of revenge (This does
not probably concern Jesus of Nazareth apparently Christ, because he did not
die martyred on the cross as a result of revenge for his mistakes, because, if
Jesus of Nazareth apparently Christ was identical with the God, who is the
charity, so he could not apparently commit any sin or mistake against this God,
i.e. charity, then Jesus of Nazareth
apparently Christ died tortured as a result of his compassion with the
suffering ones that this God showed to them that their suffering has meaning
and that the God does not only allow it for living creatures, but He himself is
willing and able to bear personally it. The counter-argument, that
Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ ate the lamb at least at Easter dinner,
thus young sheep killed cruelly for him, by which he would have caused a great
death and pain of this baby and its parents and of other its relatives, and at
least these animals will never consider him as only one God, who should be the
charity, is questionable at least because of the following Biblical quote from
the Gospel of John: John 4, 31 In the mean while his disciples prayed him,
saying, Master, eat. 32 But he said unto them, I have meat to eat that ye know
not of. 33 Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him
ought to eat? 34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that
sent me, and to finish his work.) especially of the animals (and of
their living cells and of their related micro-organisms which according to
exact, i.e. measurable scientific hypothesis of my Philosophy of Balance are
able to recognize and remember, for example by saving in their genetic code,
their friend and enemy, in particular within the coordination of these
micro-organisms, especially of the living cells in the body, virtually organism
of a living creature) tortured and cruelly killed in contemporary
agricultural slaughter factory farms for your or of your ancestors or
descendants (whose body each of about 60 trillion living cells has with you
partially identical genetic code according to exact science, e.g. each of about
60 trillion living cells of the body of your parent or of your child has half -
identical genetic code with each of about 60 trillion cells in your body,
therefore according to the above exact scientific hypotheses of my Philosophy
of Balance about the ability of living micro-organisms to recognize and
remember their enemy and friend, if the living cells of the body of any living
creature consider living cells in your body as the enemy or friend, so they will
consider living cells of the body of your child as the enemy or friend in half
way, in other words according to this exact scientific hypotheses of my
Philosophy of Balance it is the reason why hatred of living creatures is
transmitted from the parents on their offspring, according to the Bible
probably until the fourth generation, and also the reason why the friendship of
living creatures is transmitted from parents on their offspring, according to
the Bible apparently until countless generations) eating unmerciful foods,
such as their slaughtered meat, loaf of bread, which on principle is of the
wheat, costs approximately 30 CZK, if according to my Philosophy of Balance you
eat the most merciful foods, causing the least possible death and pain, i.e. from
your so merciful diet as much as possible plant fruits and plant seeds as the
people in the biblical paradise and products exclusively from them or, if
necessary, in the least possible amount also my naturally dead (on principle of
old age) carrions of animals on principle after autopsy of the vet and boiled
in several waters, so according to my Philosophy of Balance your income should
increase and you should avert (because in the course of time the living
cells and by them formed living creatures will forget their hatred, virtually
they will save you in their genetic information as a friend, i.e. not as the
enemy, i.e. according to the exact sciences all living cells in your body will
gradually be changed, and on principle it is with the exception of nerve cells,
in other words sinful or erroneous living cells of your body will be changed
for the just living cells in your body) also your other punishments (such as
illness, persecution, etc.) for your mistakes (which however according to
the Philosophy of Balance are without your guilt, because they are caused by
imperfection of your brain, which however according to contemporary exact
science is probably objectively given for example by nature /by the God according to a religion /,
virtually by you from outside uncontrollable internal connection of about 100
billion cells in your brain, and it
will be after the initial crisis, which however you do not have to survive, if
you start to change too late /the sooner you will start to fulfill the
permanent obligation of each according to the Philosophy of Balance causing the
least possible death and pain, the greater chance for rescue you will have/,
deriving from the fact that your enemies will think that you are mentally or
physically weaker and, therefore finally it will be time for their revenge for
your errors, i.e. according to the Philosophy of Balance on principle
for by you caused much more than the least possible death and pain, in your
case apparently especially of living creatures other than humans, especially
animals, see above)
Note, below I present quotes from the Bible-Gospels, on which the above
mentioned claims of the Philosophy of Balance are based:
Matthew 13King James Version (KJV)
- 12 For whosoever hath (apparently
it refers to mercy, the charity or love by me in self-evident way defined
as the permanent fulfilling of the
obligations of each to cause the least possible death and pain /especially
of all living creatures/ with the actual highest purpose of all living
creatures to live in a world where they will like each other), to him shall be given, and he shall have more
abundance (apparently it refers
to merciful health, merciful offspring, merciful intelligence and merciful
assets, etc.): but whosoever hath not,
from him shall be taken away even that he hath (apparently
it refers to unmerciful health, unmerciful offspring, unmerciful
intelligence and unmerciful assets).
- 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because
they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
- 14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias,
which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and
seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
- 15 For this
people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing,
and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with
their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their
heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
Matthew 25King James Version (KJV)
- 27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to
the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with
usury.
- 28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it
unto him which hath ten talents.
- 29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and
he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away
even that which he hath.
- 30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer
darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mark 4King James Version (KJV)
- 21 And he said unto them, Is a candle brought to be
put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not to be set on a candlestick?
- 22 For there is nothing hid, which shall not be
manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come
abroad.
- 23 If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
- 24 And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given.
- 25 For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he
that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath.
- 26 And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a
man should cast seed into the ground;
- 27 And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the
seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how.
- 28 For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself;
first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear.
- 29 But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately
he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come.
- 30 And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom
of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it?
- 31 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when
it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth:
- 32 But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh
greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls
of the air may lodge under the shadow of it.
Luke 8King James Version (KJV)
- 15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an
honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth
fruit with patience.
- 16 No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth
it with a vessel, or putteth it under a bed; but setteth it on a
candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light.
- 17 For nothing is secret, that shall not be made
manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.
- 18 Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be
given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he
seemeth to have.
8)
04/03/2016 Question of dualism of good and evil in a world from the point of
view of charitylogy.
Does good or evil,
virtually charity or predation govern, virtually reign over a world? I define
charity as still not-causing more than the least possible death and pain with
the supreme aim to live in the future in a world, where everyone likes each
other. I define predation as the intentional causing death and pain, both the
least possible both death and pain and more, also much more than the least
possible both death and pain. To that question there are the following logical
answers: 1) Sovereign ruler of a world is exclusively that charity (thus for
example only one God as exclusively that charity). 2) Sovereign ruler of a
world is exclusively that predation (thus for example Devil as both only one
God and exclusively that predation). 3) Sovereign ruler of a world are
exclusively both that charity and that predation (thus for example world is
governed exclusively by both God as exclusively that charity and Devil as exclusively
that predation). 4) Sovereign ruler of a world is partly that charity (thus for
example god as exclusively that charity is only one of more gods). 5) Sovereign
ruler of a world is partly that predation (thus for example Devil as
exclusively that predation is only one of more gods). 6) Sovereign ruler of a
world is neither that charity nor that predation (thus for example both that
charity and that predation, virtually both that good and that evil do not exist,
or only one God is neither that charity nor that predation).
How can Satan make from only one God a mere idol or
image or object and to subordinate it and to misuse it to great evil action,
thus according to the Philosophy of Balance to cause much more than the least
possible death and pain. Examples include Nazis. The German Wehrmacht had in
outfit of their soldiers on the belt the motto "Gott mit uns", that
is translated into English "God with us", they could write as well
there "Jesus of Nazareth with us," as it campaigned for example
Medieval Catholic Crusaders or medieval Roman Catholic Inquisition. According
to the Bible's New Testament the only one God is identical to charity. Misuse
in the same way of the word “charity” is apparently very difficult or at
present even completely impossible, if for example above mentioned Nazi
soldiers of Wehrmacht had on the belt the motto "charity with us,"
not "God with us", as well as Catholic crusaders or the Roman
Catholic Inquisition, so they should have hardly beatable, if not at present
unbeatable barriers to commit war crimes as such especially killing of
defenseless women and children, as the above mentioned Wehrmacht soldiers
during World war II, or in the Middle Ages both Catholic crusaders and the
Roman Catholic inquisitors did it in a large amount. Although in the past the
above mentioned misuse of the word “love” has already occurred, in Latin in
ancient Rome there was originally used the word "amor" for the word
“love”, then one of the many gods of Roman polytheism was called by the word
"Amor" or by in English "love" by the ancient Romans, then
this ancient Roman god of love Amor acquired rather the meaning as a sex god,
who included and approved or recommended also various sexual deviations like
pedophile or homosexual sex, which later in ancient Rome were numerous and
socially recommended ways of sex. Therefore, when St. Jerome translated the
Biblical New Testament (so called Vulgate) into Latin in the 4th-5th Century AD
(anno Domini) the phrase from the Bible, New Testament, 1 John 4, "8 He
that loveth not, knoweth not God, for God is love." in his Latin Vulgate
Joannis I „4:8 qui non diligit non novit Deum quoniam Deus caritas est“, so he
did not use in ancient Rome largely discredited Latin word "amor" for
the word "love", but he created for this word “love”, which should be
Biblical only one God (see above), in Latin entirely new word
"caritas" in English "charity" (derived from the Latin
"carum, caro", i.e. in English "dear"or
"valuable", in French “cher”, in Italian “caro”). According to me
with knowledge of this historical experience the above mentioned word love in
the sense of "caritas" or "charity" is in practice
inmisapplicable by Satan.
Literature: http://janbarton.blog.idnes.cz/blog.aspx?c=441864 : Bůh s námi, 2015, Německý Wehrmacht měl ve
výstroji svých vojáků na opasku heslo
Gott mit uns . O tom, že je Bůh s nimi, byli a jsou přesvědčeni
všichni, author: Jan Bartoň , http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=John1&no=4 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4&version=GNV , http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/1Jo.html : Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima, The Clementine Text Project was an effort between 2002 and 2005 to create a free online text version of the Clementine Vulgate, clementinevulgateproject@mail.com , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata , http://www.vira.cz/otazky/Caritas-vyznam-slova.html : Dominik Opatrný, 2011, Vira.cz provozuje
Arcibiskupství pražské Pastorační
10)
16/04/2016 Psychoanalysis Freud versus Jung.
My friend,
I see your main contemporary problem as your answer to the following question:
Should an Orthodox Roman Catholic still try to defeat the Devil in the
sense, if this Catholic should permanently try to kill the Devil (here the word
"defeat" means the English word "slaughter") or this Catholic should permanently try only to win over the Devil
and to subjugate this Devil (the word "defeat" means here English
word "defeat" in
the narrower sense).
Regarding this question according to my Philosophy of Balance according to
me these Jesus' words in the Gospels are valid: "Love your enemies"
in Matthew 5, 44, Luke 6, 27, Luke 6, 35, i.e. according to the Philosophy of
Balance the correct answer to the above mentioned question is: "It is
permanently necessary to win over the Devil and to subjugate him (i.e. It is right to translate the word
"defeat" in English by the word "defeat" in the narrower sense), and it is not right to want to kill this
Devil once and for all, possibly even to torture him, as he tortured Jesus of
Nazareth, apparently Christ on the cross (i.e. It is not right to translate the
word "defeat" in English by the word "slaughter").
To kill the Devil (e.g. in myself), it is not in accordance either with the
psychology of Carl Gustav Jung
(see by Jung's psychology inspired book of Anselmo Gruna Jak zacházet se zlým/ How to deal with evil, with the subtitle Boj s démony ve starém
mnišství/ Fighting with the demons in the old monasticism, Carmelite publishing
house, Kostelní Vydří, 1995), nor with the psychology of Sigmund Freud (according to whom all mental diseases are caused by sexual deviations and
all physical diseases are caused by these mental diseases, it is so called Freud's term of "Psychosomatic Medicine"). The aim of Philosophy of
Balance is not to destroy the sexual organs in favour of the brain, or to
subordinate the brain to the sexual organs, how there was this latter mentioned
apparently in Freud's
psychology, but that the sexual
organs voluntarily subordinate to the brain, how it tried Jung (see apparently
Jung's parable about the evil as the angry dogs, which we should not kill or
imprison in the subconscious or in the unconscious psyche, but we should try to
educate them mercifully and to integrate them into our psyche). This
corresponds to the Jung's teaching but apparently not to Jung's practical life,
according to Freud's critics Jung and his disciples had often sex with their
mentally ill by Jung and his disciples treated rich woman clients, they made
from them their mistresses and subsequently psychologists, virtually Jungian psycho-analysts, by which they did not often heal them, but they mentally
hurt even more them. (see http://www.knihovnice.cz/recenze/noll-r-carl-gustav-jung-tajny-life-arijsky-Christ.
HTML , Published by Triton in
2002. Now in 2006 a reprint with a new cover and the amended name: “Carl Gustav Jung-the secret life-Aryan Christ” is published.)
The text of the Philosophy of Balance in relation to this question is
following:
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Gruza
I had schizophrenic thoughts
at my age of 20, that one of my relatives is the Devil and I have to kill him
or her, after a long mental struggle I came to a conclusion, that, even if my
relative is the Devil, so he or she is and always will be my relative and I
like him or her and I cannot kill him or her.
The only dogma or axiom or
only underlying true of my Philosophy of Balance is:
"All living creatures in
fact mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore
everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain." All
the rest consists more in views (speculations). It applies to all my Philosophy
of Balance.
The question is what would
happen if we would kill all death or Devil, if we would also get rid of all the
pain at the same time. As to me not, so I admit my mistake in my speculations
in my Philosophy of Balance, that mental pain means only a death of neurons in
the brain. In my opinion mental pain can also take the form of progressively
more and more inexorable stupidity, so a living creature loses its acquired
knowledge. In my opinion this loss of knowledge has not only a form of death of
living cells, but it can also take the form of weight loss, up to the level of
photons. Knowledge or data of the reason of an individual are in fact stored in
the mass and the reduce of this depositing mass may be resulting to reduce the
size of the data from a large amount of data (formed according to the
programmers 1-ones and 0-zeros or two different bits of binary computer code or
alternating light and dark, photons and vacuum) to the exclusive photons or
exclusive vacuum so complete ignorance.
In other words, if we kill the
Devil, or death, or annihilate the vacuum, we will achieve eternal life, while
those without the pain from death of living creatures, but with the growing
hunger of individuals, because they will not have enough to eat (food for
living creatures is always dead bodies of living creatures), it is a weight
loss of these individuals and the inevitable gradual loss of all their
knowledge stored in the mass loosen by weight lost, the gradual and unstoppable
loss of mass of all living creatures, accompanied by their weight loss up to
the level of photons will mean their immense psychological pain.
In view of the Universe an
annihilation of vacuum will probably appear as the entropy of the Universe,
i.e. its conversion into the Universe uniformly infinitely expanded by mash
consisting of light consisting of photons, because according to my Philosophy
of Balance the attractive, especially gravitational forces in the Universe are
based on vacuum underpressure, which thus causes the formation of massive
objects in the Universe and cohesion of the entire Universe.
Before the emergence of our
Universe before the Big Bang here was obviously vice versa the annihilation of
all the light in the Universe apparently by its expansion (see above) and its
exclusive filling by the absolute vacuum, i.e. figuratively speaking, killing
and death of God at the hands of the Devil. The result was similar loss of all
knowledge of the Devil, whose mind was filled exclusively with zeros, thus by a
vacuum without a single photon of light, but only zeros cannot capture and
store any idea or any information or data. Then there was the immense mental
suffering of the Devil, to who the God gave apparently in the Big Bang at the
beginning of our Universe once again a photon of light with great energy.
Subsequently, through the influence of ambient vacuum underpressure apparently
the expansion of this photon occurs and continues in the form of expansion of
our Universe. It seems to be in my Philosophy of Balance mentioned crash of the
absolute vacuum and light, which stood at the birth of our Universe in the Big
Bang. Philosophy of Balance p. 396
According to me your problems are based on the fact, that you either
murdered in the past your neighbour, whom you considered as the Devil, or you
are at present time or you will be in the future ready to kill, possibly to
torture before it (as Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ they tortured on the
cross) your neighbour, whom you consider as the Devil.
Furthermore next text of the philosophy of balance in relation to these
problems:
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Gruza
Note: The series "Once
Upon a Time … Life" (see Literature) 3 DVD, Part 9 "The Brain",
time 2:30 to 3:55, 200 million years ago evolved a primitive brain, i.e.
reptiles cortex-archicortex, allowing primitive aggressive reactions such as
territorial defense, these primitive reactions and this part of the brain are
also at modern human, 100 million years ago, it was paleocortex (i.e. cerebral
cortex of mammals see 1 DVD, Part 1 "Cells – Their Amazing Story",
time 4:48 to 5:06) getting over fear, the beginnings of memory, time 4:10-5:48,
100,000 years ago it was the neocortex comprising 85% weight of the brain
allowing the sharing of ideas, counting, art, thinking about the causes and to
act in civilized manner, and the problem of communication of neocortex and
primitive cerebral cortex (archicortex and paleocortex), time 23:30-25:50, the
brain has more or less complete control over man, communication of neocortex
and the primitive cerebral cortex (archicortex and paleocortex) causes the
eternal dilemma between aggressive and civilized solution of the situation by
living creature, primitive part of the brain is still trying to prevail. The
brain stores most, of what we perceive consciously, from what we perceive
unconsciously, the brain stores about 1/100, the brain perceives everything at
once. Each body part is controlled by certain area of the brain, larger parts
of the brain are needed for more sensitive body parts such as hands and face.
Transfer to the brain is mediated through surface cells of the body and its
senses and through the nerves, virtually their nerve cells, neurons and their
dendrites dispersed throughout the body, using chemical neurotransmitters.
Literature: "Once Upon a Time … Life", the original: "Il était une fois ... la
vie", created by Albert Barillé, Music Composed by Michel Legrand,
characters designed by: Jean Barbaud, copyright Procidis-Paris, the Czech
Republic copyright: BH promo CZ 2008, title song of Jane Mařasová, Ľuba,
1,2,4,5 DVD 104 minutes, 3, 6 DVD 130 minutes, 26 episodes of the series. Philosophy of Balance p. 413
11) 17/04/2016
End of the Universe, nuclear war on Earth, and the general relativity theory of
Albert Einstein according to Philosophy of Balance.
The contemporary exact
physics generally accepts the fact, that since its formation the Universe is
expanding, which was discovered by physics on the basis that all cosmic objects
are moving away in all directions from the Earth, which was determined by
physics on the basis of observation of so called cosmic background radiation,
which should be unchanged from the beginning of the Universe, and on the basis
of observation of so called Doppler effect of waves in the Universe (i.e. at
the movement of the source of the waves against an observer or conversely their
relative speed is changing and so either by the sum or by the difference of
their speed, thereby derived quantities such as wave length and frequency of
waves are changing). By solving the equations of the general relativity theory
by Alexander Friedmann then these equations implies that the Universe either
shrinks or expands, or that in the Universe there cannot be the equilibrium
state when the Universe is at rest. But even Einstein's general relativity
theory is not generally accepted by physics, because Einstein flirted with the
idea of introducing into the equations of general relativity theory
so called cosmological constant for a long time, however after Hubble discovery
of the expansion of the Universe Einstein said that the introduction of
non-zero cosmological constant was "the greatest mistake of his
life", however according to some physicists in the contemporary situation
the re-introduction of non-zero cosmological constant could be literally said
rescue belt for the big Bang theory by the fact that a non-zero cosmological
constant is inherently arbitrary, so it is possible to select its value in
order to remove the discrepancy between the age of objects in the Universe and
the age of the universe derived from Hubble's constant, it is naturally not a
particularly elegant solution, but it is not entirely inconceivable, that the
biggest Einstein's life mistake was just his statement about life's greatest mistake
(see the book of the most famous Czech astrophysicist and also Catholic Jiri
Grygar - věda a víra (in English “science and faith”, written for the revue of
the Czech Christian Academy UNIVERSUM 24/02/1996, see www.vira.cz/Texty/Knihovna/Velky-tresk-krize-teorie.html : Velký třesk - krize teorie ?, Aneb co předpověděl Gamow, z
knihy Jiří Grygar - věda a víra, Psáno
pro revui České křesťanské akademie UNIVERSUM,
1996, author: Jiří Grygar, Vira.cz provozuje
Arcibiskupství pražské Pastorační). Furthermore according to contemporary exact physical
theory of the end of the Universe implying its thermal death, thus a high
entropy characterized by low capacity of the Universe as a physical system to
do the physically defined work, so as a result of expansion, dilution and the
temperature drops to 0 Kelvin in Universe it would not be possible to obtain
any organized form (change) of energy, in other words it would mean the end of
life in the Universe, therefore that any evolution of the Universe is directed
towards its extinction. On the question, if the Universe ends in the big crash,
virtually in return of the Universe to a single point, from which it should
expand from the beginning, or conversely the Universe ends in the above mentioned
entropy, virtually in its infinite expansion, thus contemporary physics does
not give a clear answer. According to the Philosophy of Balance the mass of the
Universe is composed exclusively by waves of the speed of light and by vacuum, namely
the mass is apparently decomposed into these two components during its perfect
burning, then in our Universe the waves of the speed of light cause apparently its
expansion and vacuum by its underpressure the attraction or gravity of our
Universe again, so according to the Philosophy of Balance the problem of end of
the Universe could be simplified by the question, if in the world (i.e. in our
Universe and also in other possible universes) there are more waves of speed of
light or there is more vacuum. However according to contemporary exact physics
it is also not clear, if in the Universe there is generally any absolute
vacuum, virtually pure nothing, of which observation were never realized by
contemporary exact physics in the Universe up to now. This problem is also
solved by using the most modern particle accelerators (eg. see European
Laboratory for Particle Physics, which is also known by the acronym CERN, in
French “Conseil Européen pour la recherche nucléaire”), which is trying to discover
indivisible smallest particle by means of physical experiments, according to
physical observation the Higgs boson is possibly this up to now discovered
smallest particle, however according to contemporary exact physical theory the two-dimensional
strings could also be it, however the practical experience is at present, that up
to now the physicists always succeeded in dividing of each allegedly smallest
particle of mass into still smaller particle again and again, although they often
thought that they already discovered the smallest indivisible particle at a
certain moment of the contemporary development of physics (see eg. particle as
the atom, of which name comes from ancient Greek atomist philosophy, Greek word
“ἄτομος, átomos” originally means indivisible in
Greek language, however for a relatively long time in exact physics also one of
discovered microparticles named by physicists “atom” is not the smallest
indivisible particle, but it has kept this name up to now). If the exact physics
discovers the smallest indivisible particle, then it will apparently be
possible to calculate future development or the end of the Universe, to
determine, if in the Universe there are more waves of the speed of light or more
vacuum, and to determine the nature of this vacuum. According to the Philosophy
of Balance based mostly on the Biblical New Testament it is apparently more probable,
that vacuum is the final number of single points of space-time of lower speed
than the speed of light and of a zero relativistic mass spreaded out in space-time, for observation of this point
of space-time it would be necessary perfectly infinite division of certain material
thing (perfect infinity can be increased no longer, virtually perfect zero can
be divided no longer, perfect infinity is the opposite of perfect zero, perfect
zero is not for example zero meters but zero of all units, i.e. things because
zero meters mean the absence only of metric units and it admits the presence of
other units, i.e. things such as geometric points of zero-dimension space, zero
meters or unit zero is not perfect nothing, thus not perfect zero), perfect
infinity should be countable probably by Biblical only one God, if he exists, and
then Biblical Satan was created by this God as the above mentioned single point
of space-time or the more with end numerous points of space-time and the
perfect zero as perfect nothing does not exist in world (i.e. according to the
Catholic faith the Biblical only one God should be omnipresent, thus present
also in this Satan, who is always subordinated to this God as one of the sons
of this God, see the Biblical Book of Job (Bible, Job 2,1), or as obedient or
rebellious servant (Bible, Job 2,1 and Job 2,6), i.e. angel of this God, see Biblical
Book of Job and the Biblical New Testament, nor Satan nor this God can be
apparently never reached by living creatures, and these both God and Satan can apparently
be reached only by Biblical only one God, if he exists in some way). In other
words to determine, if in the Universe there are more waves of speed of light
or there is more vacuum, the exact physicists – living creatures will
apparently never entirely succeed in it, and the Biblical only one God will apparently
never completely show them it, because firstly all living creatures will apparently
never completely believe this God in this his statement and secondly, even if
all living creatures believed this God in this his statement in spite of it,
then it would apparently be no place for faith, but everything would become
calculable (i.e. countable, i.e. rational), and for this reason nor Satan will
apparently never reveal to all living creatures the truth about it and living
creatures are not apparently able to detect all mistakes of Satan in their rational
model of the world and rationally completely to prove the existence or
non-existence of Biblical only one God as the embodiment of perfect infinity or
to reach a perfect zero when dividing mass. According to the Philosophy of Balance
is the knowledge, if in the Universe there are more waves of speed of light or there
is more vacuum possible only indirectly, that in our life either we will rely
mainly on charity (i.e. on the balance between waves of speed of light and
vacuum in the Universe), which should be the only one God, or otherwise we will
have apparently ultimately to rely mainly on predation, i.e. on more than the
least possible nihilation (i.e. on imbalance between waves of speed of light
and vacuum in the Universe), nothing or vacuum could be Satan and Satan would
be identical with the Biblical only one God for example in this latter
mentioned way. This indirect knowledge is so apparently possible only according
to that, if charity or conversely predation proves to us to be more successful in
our lives in the long term, by which we will indirectly prove the balance or conversely
imbalance of waves of speed of light and of vacuum in the Universe. In other
words, if it is not possible to count up, if in the Universe there are more
waves of speed of light or there is more vacuum, it is not apparently also
possible, that living creatures themselves determined rationally with sureness,
if the Universe ends in the above mentioned big crash or in the above mentioned
total entropy. According to the Philosophy of Balance based mostly on the
Biblical New Testament there is also the third possibility, that in the future the
balance between waves of speed of light and of vacuum will be gradually more
and more established in the Universe apparently in perfectly infinite time, thus,
that in the long term the most powerful law of the Universe is charity, virtually
organized movement of all waves of speed of light and of all vacuum nearly
without collisions, it is in other words, that in the future the world will not
end in nuclear war and that in the future we will succeed by forces of all
living beings in restoration or in first reaching of the Biblical paradise in
the world, i.e. in reaching of the world, where everyone (especially all living
creatures) likes each other, and therefore
everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain (see
the single dogma of my Philosophy of Balance), but also this will never apparently
be possible to count rationally completely with sureness by any living
creature, it will apparently still remain here some place for faith of living
creatures (in the words of the
Biblical Gospel of Matthew 25, 1Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened
unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the
bridegroom. ... 13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour
wherein the Son of man cometh.)
12)
25/04/2016 Beginning of salvation or the end of the world in the presidential
elections in present-day Austria according to the Philosophy of Balance. Nazism
as a result of Christian and Jewish heresy?
In the first round of
the presidential election in Austria became (the first two) winners the heir of
the ideas of German Nazism „the candidate of the right-wing populist Freedom
Party of Austria (FPÖ) Norbert Hofer, he was supported by 36.4 percent of
voters, and former chairman of the Green Party Alexander Van der Bellen, who
won 20.4 percent of votes, representatives of the government parties suffered a
debacle: candidate of the Chancellor Werner Faymann 's Social Democratic Party
(SPÖ) Rudolf Hundstorfer and the candidate of the (its Christian) coalition
People's Party (ÖVP) Andreas Khol gain both each just 11.2 percent of the
votes. Both (i.e. Norbert Hofer and
Alexander Van der Bellen) will compete in the second round on 22nd May“. 2016
(see http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/401427-hofer-necekane-zvitezil-v-prvnim-kole-prezidetskych-voleb-v-rakousku.html : 2016, Novinky, ČTK ) According to me in the present days here there is fundamental ideological
conflict in contemporary purest ideological form, so battle between charity and
predation. German Nazism, which originated also among others from Austria and
whose leader was an Austrian citizen Adolf Hitler, was in fact in the past a
political party, that established the most advanced protection of animals and
of nature that have ever been enacted in Europe. In other words now even Adolf
Hitler himself embodying apparently in the present days Austria should decide in presidential
elections in Austria, if he chooses, what in his soul there was Caritas (i.e.
charity), or contrarily, what in his soul there was predation, thus, if he votes for the Green Party or
contrarily for the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), which is apparently at least
partly Nazi, and one could say, that now even Adolf Hitler himself should
decide, if party of charity, i.e. of goodness will prevail in him or contrarily
predation and evil, in other words, if Adolf Hitler as predator should serve
the charity or contrarily the charity in him should serve predation, or in
other words, if Satan serves God or the God serves Satan. In other words people
embodying animals, which suffered colossally after World War II in Jewish and
Christian slaughter agricultural factory farms-contemporary Christian and
Jewish Nazi concentration camps of animals, shall decide in these elections, if
they opt for revenge of apparently Nazi Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) and they
will want to establish the Nazi slaughter concentration camps of people, especially
of Jews again, or contrarily for forgiveness and remedy of the Green Party, if
the Austrian Green Party promissed to establish Christian mercy also in
relation to animals (in the spirit of Biblical verses: Deuteronomy 32King James
Version (KJV): 35 To me belongeth vengeance and recompence; their foot shall
slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things
that shall come upon them make haste. 36 For the Lord shall judge his people,
and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone,
and there is none shut up, or left. See https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Deuteronomy%2032 and http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Deut/32#v35 ), or of other Biblical verse: Romans 12King James
Version (KJV): 19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place
unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
(see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Romans%2012 and http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Rom/12#v19 ). I am for many years a member of the Green Party
and from my birth I am the baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church and I
am also the discoverer of the Philosophy of Balance, of which only one dogma
is: PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE, PHILOSOPHY OF
LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY: „All living creatures in fact mostly want to
live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is still
obliged to cause the least possible death and pain." All the rest consists
more in views (speculations). At the same time it is a test especially of
Christians but also of Jews , that they ultimately declare as the heresy the
following part of the teaching of Thomas Aquinas-Sancti Thomae Aquinatis, (1225
- 1274), Catholic philosopher and theologian who is considered as the greatest
Christian thinker of all time by the church, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, Pars Prima, 20.
De amore Dei. 2. Utrum Deus amet omnia. I q. 20 a. 2 ad 3: Reply to Objection
3: Friendship cannot exist except towards rational creatures, who are capable
of returning love, and communicating one with another in the various works of
life, and who may fare well or ill, according to the changes of fortune and
happiness; even as to them is benevolence properly speaking exercised. But
irrational creatures cannot attain to loving God, nor to any share in the
intellectual and beatific life that He lives. Strictly speaking, therefore, God
does not love irrational creatures with the love of friendship; but as it were
with the love of desire, in so far as He orders them to rational creatures, and
even to Himself. Yet this is not because He stands in need of them; but only on
account of His goodness, and of the services they render to us. For we can
desire a thing for others as well as for ourselves. In Latin: Ad tertium
dicendum quod amicitia non potest haberi nisi ad rationales creaturas, in
quibus contingit esse redamationem, et communicationem in operibus vitae, et
quibus contingit bene evenire vel male, secundum fortunam et felicitatem, sicut
et ad eas proprie benevolentia est. Creaturae autem irrationales non possunt
pertingere ad amandum Deum, neque ad communicationem intellectualis et beatae
vitae, qua Deus vivit. Sic igitur Deus, proprie loquendo, non amat creaturas
irrationales amore amicitiae, sed amore quasi concupiscentiae; inquantum
ordinat eas ad rationales creaturas, et etiam ad seipsum; non quasi eis
indigeat, sed propter suam bonitatem et nostram utilitatem. Concupiscimus enim
aliquid et nobis et aliis. (see http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum023.htm : GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES), Summa Theologica, by St. Thomas Aquinas, [1947], at sacred-texts.com, Internet Sacred Text Archive (ISTA), Santa Cruz, CA 95061-7429, USA and http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth1015.html : CORPUS THOMISTICUM, Sancti Thomae de Aquino, Summa Theologiae, prima
pars a quaestione XV ad quaestionem XXVII, Thomas de Aquino a Justo
Ghent depictus, Textum Leoninum Romae 1888 editum et automato
translatum a Roberto Busa SJ in taenias magneticas denuo recognovit
Enrique Alarcón atque instruxit, © 2019
Fundación Tomás de Aquino quoad hanc editionem,
Iura omnia asservantur OCLC nr. 49644264 and http://www.cormierop.cz/Summa-teologicka-Icast.html : Sdružení přátel bl. Hyacinta M.Cormiera,
Sv.Tomáš Akvinský, TEOLOGICKÁ SUMMA, Východiskem tohoto podání Teologické summy
je překlad Sancti Thomae Aquinatis, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, redigovaný P.Emiliánem
Soukupem, vydaný v Olomouci 1937-1940. Původní překlad opravil podle
dodatečných olomouckých opravných stránek a upravil pro současného čtenáře
P.Tomáš Bahounek OP. ) Result of the above mentioned heresy of Thomas
Aquinas is, that most Christian churches, especially the Catholic Church claim
on the one side, that only one God is love (i.e. caritas), however on the other
side they do not bother about and they do not protest against agricultural
slaughter factory farms - today's concentration camps of animals at present
time in a large amount killing and torturing livestock. This heresy is
apparently in conflict against elementary emotions of living creatures,
especially against elementary human emotions, and also against the theory of
evolution of exact natural science, according to which also animals and other
living creatures can gradually improve their rational mind, i.e. reason, and it
seems faster than humans, because they can learn from people, and it is also
against at least one Biblical part, for example Old Testament, Genesis 3King
James Version (KJV) Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field
which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye
shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Genesis%203 and http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Gen&no=3 ), where the serpent, thus animal spoke and so it had
apparently also rational mind, i.e. reason, and it is also against Biblical
verses of the New Testament, the Gospel: Luke 10King James Version (KJV) 29 But
he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour? 30
And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho,
and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and
departed, leaving him half dead. 31 And by chance there came down a certain
priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 And
likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed
by on the other side. 33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where
he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, 34 And went to him, and
bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and
brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And on the morrow when he
departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him,
Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will
repay thee. 36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him
that fell among the thieves? 37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then
said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. (see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Luke%2010 and http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Luke/10#v29 ) It is also the test of the Jews, if then from the
above mentioned reasons they abandon their desire to restore a Jewish temple in
the original form, which represented the largest and possibly therefore the
most cruel slaughterhouse of antiquity, i.e. of ancient times, and if the Jews
start to breed animals until their natural death, on principle of their old age
and to eat carrions, i.e. in Hebrew language “nevelot” also inspite of the ban
of Biblical Old Testament (Bible, Deuteronomy
14King James Version (KJV), 21
Ye shall not eat of anything that dieth of itself: thou shalt give it unto the
stranger that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or thou mayest sell it unto
an alien: for thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not
seethe a kid in his mother's milk., see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Deuteronomy%2014 and http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=14 ). Otherwise we can expect, that in short time the
elections in Austria will be reflected in the elections in Germany, especially
in Bavaria, as it was before the World War II, and because Germany is the
European leader, so Nazism can subjugate Europe again and apparently it can
start also a new world war, especially against the Jews in Israel, if such Nazi
Europe provides the Islamic States around the Jewish State of Israel with
nuclear weapons.
13)
28/04/2016 Usury, especially in the Czech Republic.
A) My
corrected new opinion on some contemporary tendencies in insolvency and executionary law, inter alia on judgments of
submitted and proved claims of executor's remunerations in debt forgiveness
judicial proceedings by me as the insolvency administrator (see also http://www.novinky.cz/finance/400134-lichvari-dal-nici-lidi-bez-financnich-rezerv.html : 2016, Jindřich Ginter, Právo ), in terms of my Philosophy of
Balance (see www.spvzt.cz , www.filosofierovnovahy.sweb.cz či www.spvzt.sweb.cz ) and contemporary Czech Constitutional law
If in the
insolvency proceedings the judicial executor
submits and proves his or her claim from title of the costs of execution
proceedings, in which he enforced nothing, in the opinion of the Supreme Court
of the Czech Republic (I.e. in the order the second highest Czech court below
the Czech Constitutional Court) this judicial executor is not entitled to it at
all and it is on the grounds that "the claim (the right to reimbursement of the
costs of execution for judicial executor is created) is created in the moment,
when he enforced claim or its part within the administration of
execution."
(cf. judgment of the Supreme Court of the Czech
Republic file number 29 Cdo 5/2014 from 22 December 2015). If the judicial
executor enforced nothing, it is correct to deny authenticity of the executor's
claim. (see http://www.ismorava.cz/clanky/305-naklady-soudniho-exekutora-v-insolvencnim-rizeni : 2016, Spolek moravských insolvenčních správců, Moravská Ostrava )
The below mentioned implies, that at present time
circa 3,000,000/0,7 = 4,300,000 executions are conducted by all the judicial
executors, then one execution has circa 350,000,000,000/4,300,000= 81.000
CZK of the average principal amount to be recovered, then it is from
3,000,000 (unenforceable executions)*6,500 CZK (circa minimum
remuneration and costs of the judicial executor both without value added
tax)/157 (contemporary total number of judicial executors) = 19,500,000,000
CZK/157 = 124,000,000 CZK the average income of one judicial executor from
the amounts of minimum remuneration and costs of these unenforceable execution
proceedings + from the remaining 30% enforceable execution proceedings
in the average principal amount 81.000 CZK (see above but the average principal
amount is probably much lower, because in my experience on principle only
low claims to a maximum principal amount of about 30.000 CZK are executionary enforceable, the lower is the
principal amount, the higher is a probability of success of the given
execution), from which at present time is 12,150 CZK (remuneration of judicial
executor) + 3,500 (lump-sum of costs on principle required by the judicial
executor) = 15,650 CZK (or 7,500 CZK from by me experienced enforceable
principal amount of circa 30,000 CZK) the average remuneration of the judicial
executor and his or her costs both without value added tax *1,300,000 (enforceable executions, see above)/157 (contemporary total
number of judicial executors) =130,000,000 CZK (or 65,000,000 CZK in my
experience, see above) the average income of one judicial executor, i.e.
the total annual income of the average one judicial executor is about
124,000,000/10 (execution proceedings can theoretically run according to
the contemporary legal conditions for the whole life of debtor, which is true
especially for the above unenforceable executions, therefore for these executions
I count the average time of duration at least 10 years until discontinuance of
execution proceedings) =12,400,000 CZK per year at most
from unenforceable executions for one judicial executor +130,000,000
(or 65,000,000)/3 (in my experience enforceable execution lasts on
average circa 3 years) = 43,000,000 (or 21,500,000) per year from
the enforceable executions for one average judicial
executor, i.e. the total
annual gross income of the average judicial executor from both the enforceable and the unenforceable executions should be circa 55.5 (or 33) million CZK per year,
then average one judicial executor has 20 employees (i.e. 3000 employees, i.e.
apparently total number of employees of all judicial executors/157 contemporary
total number of judicial executors = 20), the employer's costs for one employee
from their average gross wages 27,706 CZK per month in the Czech Republic in 2016
are about 37,200 * 12 = 450,000 CZK per year, then it is for average 20
employees of one judicial executor in total sum circa 450,000 * 20 = 9,000,000
CZK, thus the annual average net income
of one judicial executor him- or herself after deduction of all overhead
costs and all costs for his or her employees before contributions of income tax
and health and social insurance by the judicial executor should be circa 55,500,000 (or 33,000,000)-2 *
9,000,000 CZK (if we count the overhead costs of the average judicial
executor in the same amount as the costs for all his or her employees, because
employees are generally the most expensive in the business)=37.5 million (or 15 million) CZK per year, thus there
is theoretically room for a reduction in the total amount of 12.4 million per
year from the unenforceable executions for each one average judicial executor (which
corresponds in substance with the contemporary case-law of the Supreme and
Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, and it depends on the honesty or
dishonesty of each judicial executor, if
he or she respects or does not respect this case-law in his or her
decisions, on principle for
honest judicial executors who respect this case-law, there is no room for more
aggressive reduction in remunerations and costs of executions), and it
is not also necessary to establish the territorial jurisdiction of the judicial
executors by region, therefore according to the above mentioned for example the smaller executor's company, which has
about 5 employees, has annual gross
income of judicial executor him- or herself, including overhead costs of his or
her executor's office after deduction of wages of his or her employees:
circa 55.5( or 33, or after the deduction of
the total amount of 12.4 million CZK per year from unenforceable
executions for each one average judicial executor, i.e. 43,
or 20.5) million CZK (for average 20 employees)/4(for
average 20/4 = 5 employees) =13(or 8, or after this
deduction of the amount from the unenforceable executions the
amount of 11, or 5) million CZK per year -2.3
million CZK for the employee (i.e. for 5 employees = 5 * 450,000 CZK, see
above) =circa 10.5 (or 5.5, or after this
deduction of the amount from unenforceable executions the amount of 8 , or 3.7)
million CZK per year.
Literature:
1) Newsletter of Konkursních novin / Bankruptcy papers, number 7 | April 15, 2016 | volume XIX | the national
edition | monthly magazine, article: „V případě, že
exekutoři budou nuceni svou činnost ukončit, hrozí náhrada škody ve výši 100
miliard. Podstatné snížení exekučního tarifu povede podle exekutorů k rozpadu
systému vymáhání práva / "In the case that the executors will be forced to
terminate their activities, there is the risk of
damages compensation in the amount of 100 billion. Substantial reduction in the
executionary tariff will lead to the disintegration of
the system of law according to the executors", according to which is
conducted circa "three million currently conducted unsuccessful execution
proceedings" by all executors at present time, "unenforceable
executions (up to 70% of proceedings)", "executors currently enforce
the principal amount of 350 billion CZK", the executors have apparently
"more than 3000 employees"
2) at present time 157 of executor's offices is taken,
see http://www.ekcr.cz/seznam-exekutoru : portál EXEKUTORSKÉ KOMORY ČESKÉ REPUBLIKY
3) http://www.penize.cz/kalkulacky/vypocet-ciste-mzdy#mzda : Provozovatelem portálu Peníze.cz je společnost Partners media, s. r. o., Praha 4
4) https://ispis.cz/kalkulacka?module=VD/exekutor.cgi : Odměna exekutora, Výpočty jsou prováděny dle vyhlášky č. 330/2001 Sb., Sokordia, s.r.o., Brno
5) judgment of the
Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic file number: II. ÚS 928/14-1: Recital of law I.: The
constitutionally conformal interpretation of § 89 of Act No 120/2001 Coll., on
the judicial executors and the executionary activity (Executionary Code), and
amending other laws, as in force until 31 December 2007
implies, that obligation to refund the costs of execution should be transferred
to an entitled person only in exceptional cases. It is impossible to be
identified with the interpretation, according to which reimbursement of the
costs of execution proceedings should be always secured for an executor. It is
the executor, who has the profit (remuneration) from the successful fulfillment
of execution, but at the same time he or she carries the risk consisting in the
fact, that the assets of the obligated person would be insufficient to satisfy
not only the entitled person, but also not to refund the costs of execution,
and taking this risk cannot be groundlessly transferred to the entitled person.
II. Only the dictum of decision is capable to induce effects, which the law
brings together with its legal force and enforceability. If in the review of
the resolution of the judicial executor in its dictum about the costs of
execution the court of appeal accepted as binding the conclusion of judicial
executor about the reason for discontinuance of execution and the question of
the correct determination of this reason pursuant to the provision of § 268,
subsection 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure it did not examined longer, it
deduced the faulty conclusion about the fact, who is responsible for
discontinuance of execution. If the general court qualified erroneously the
question of procedural responsibility of entitled person for discontinuance of
execution as the condition for the imposition on the entitled person of
obligation to reimbursement of costs of execution according to § 89 of the
Executionary Code as in force until 31 December 2007, it violated the right of
the entitled person to a fair trial under article 36, subsection 1 of the
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and the right to own property under
article 11, subsection 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.
Note: your calculation is absolutely wrong, because
for example multiple executions do not enter your calculation"
(disidentified and shortened opinion of with me cooperating judicial
executor). My comment on this opinion is that, if in the
case of multiple execution it is unenforceable execution, so honest judicial
executor does not charge his or her minimum costs and his or her minimum
remuneration of this execution anyway, if however it is enforceable execution,
so anyway the judicial executor receives 15% of the principal resulting from
the sum of all principal amounts including all execution titles contained in
the multiple executions, therefore in both cases the multiple executions does
not affect result of the above mentioned calculation.
B) I
publish also my earlier completely opposite opinion on usury in the Czech
Republic, because in my personal experience I do not believe too much in
Movement ANO of Andrej Babiš, who controls a big number of mass media in the Czech
Republic, which need not be objective in substantial degree so, and whose
Movement ANO controls inter alia the Czech Ministry of Justice, because this
Movement ANO is financed by the great suffering of animals in the agricultural
slaughter factory farms of animals as today's concentration camps of animals in
his agricultural giant Agrofert (see also http://svobodneforum.cz/tajna-analyticka-zprava/ : PAVEL ŠAFR A REDAKCE / zpráva, Publikováno 26. 3. 2016, FORUM 24 a.s., Praha 4 about the possible reliability of this source about
Andrej Babiš see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_%C5%A0afr ) and, if it is some higher
justice, so humanity must be very punished for this unnecessary colossal death
and pain of animals.
My
earlier opinion in terms of my Philosophy of Balance (see www.spvzt.cz , www.filosofierovnovahy.sweb.cz or www.spvzt.sweb.cz ) and of contemporary Czech constitutional law on some
contemporary tendencies in insolvency and executionary law, inter alia on judgments of
submitted and proved claims of executor's remunerations in debt forgiveness
judicial proceedings by me as the insolvency administrator
If in the
insolvency proceedings the judicial executor
submits and proves his or her claim from title of the costs of execution
proceedings, in which he enforced nothing, in the opinion of the Supreme Court
of the Czech Republic (I.e. in the order the second highest Czech court below
the Czech Constitutional Court) this judicial executor is not entitled to it at
all and it is on the grounds that "the claim (the right to reimbursement of the
costs of execution for judicial executor is created) is created in the moment,
when he enforced claim or its part within the administration of
execution."
(cf. judgment of the Supreme Court of the Czech
Republic file number 29 Cdo 5/2014 from 22 December 2015). If the judicial
executor enforced nothing, it is correct to deny authenticity of the executor's
claim. (see http://www.ismorava.cz/clanky/305-naklady-soudniho-exekutora-v-insolvencnim-rizeni : 2016, Spolek moravských insolvenčních správců, Moravská Ostrava ) This and similar social trend reminds me of pogroms
against the Jewish traders with money or debts, sometimes called also as
usurers in the Middle Ages, when at first the State canceled the claims of the
Jews against their debtors, by which many of them were often completely
impoverished, and then the State did not shield them, but the State often
incited the crowd in anti-Jewish pogroms, although the Jews, on principle the
traders with money or debts were mostly under direct legal protection of the
monarch and they secured vital funding of medieval States, on principle
kingdoms. In my opinion the contemporary Czech legislation of debt forgiveness
judicial proceedings is in accordance with natural law, in my opinion the
contemporary Czech Insolvency Act does not require
debtors' speaking and writing truth, but mainly their honesty (in the words of
the Act "an honest intention of the debtor", which means according to
me the obligation of each to cause the least possible death and pain /it means
especially of people, but also of other living beings/), thus the least
possible death and pain also of debtors and of their creditors and of traders
with money or debts, in the Middle Ages on principle of the Jews, today it
concerns banks (i.e. nice usurers), hard usurers, executors, insolvency administrators, agencies of debt forgiveness
judicial proceedings etc. The contemporary democratic Czech system of trading
with debts has these properties, debts should be fulfilled (i.e. old legal
principle "pacta sunt servanda"), a debtor – natural person, who fails to
fulfill debts, had to make a big mistake in his or her life (according to me he
or she or his or her family, especially his or her ancestors or descendants
caused a lot of unnecessary death and pain of the people, but also of other
living creatures), he or she is not guilty of these errors, because according
the contemporary exact science the thinking is apparently only the result of
connection of circa 100 billion nerve cells in the brain, however the
individual must bear the responsibility for these mistakes, that information of
these mistakes was saved into his or her genetic code, virtually thinking,
which is in my opinion the basis of lifelong education, virtually learning of
all living creatures, and in my opinion also the basis for evolution of nature
(in the words of the law in the case of debtors it is objective responsibility
for their mistakes without their guilt in case of their bankruptcy, on
principle of their over-indebtedness according to my Philosophy of Balance),
therefore the punishment against debtors – natural persons for non-fulfillment
of their debts should be educational, i.e. not destructive, while this
educational punishment in the contemporary democratic legal order against
debtors in bankruptcy, on principle in their over-indebtedness the banks (the
so-called nice usurers) usually provided them with the first loan at a
relatively advantageous interest, if the debtors are unable to repay for their
loans to these nice usurers, according to my Philosophy of Balance because of
the debtor's breach of the obligation of each to cause the least possible death
and pain, so these responsible debtors will get into a precarious existence and
only hard usurers will be able to provide them with another loan at a
relatively high interest (sanction, i.e. penalty interests, virtually any other
sanction increases are limited according to the contemporary case-law of the
Supreme Court of the Czech Republic to at maximum 0.5% daily of the outstanding
amount, i.e.. circa 180% per year, taking into account the
required normal interest rate, APR (i.e. Annual percentage rate) of certain loan, virtually of certain credit,
for example if the APR of the loan, virtually of credit is 100% of the
outstanding amount per year for highly insolvent debtors, sanction increases
cannot achieve together in total above mentioned 0.5% of the outstanding amount
daily, but in this case these sanction increases must be much lower), no Bank
already lends these debtors money, because they are in the registry of debtors,
and these hard usurers carry out socially useful function, because they lend
also debtors in extreme existential precarious need with
nearly zero ability to repay their loans, whom no one is willing to lend
money and so these hard usurers often save these debtors and their families
from death from starvation or ending up on the street without shelter, in my
experience of the insolvency Administrator it often concerns divorced mothers
with young children, however even these hard usurers are entrepreneurs and they
should earn living costs, thus the purpose of their business is the profit, for
example If throughout all his or her life before his or her retirement the hard
usurer lends in total only 10 debtors 1 million CZK without all increases, for
example each of these 10 debtors 100,000 CZK, also average hard usurer doing
business must earn net income at least circa 1.3 million CZK per a year, that he or she and his or her family have enough
money to live in contemporary Czech Republic, if for example. 7 of these
debtors (with nearly zero ability to repay the loan) repay together in total
300,000,- CZK per year throughout all the time of recovery of their loan, then
the remaining 3 debtors (also whose lives the hard usurer has often saved by
means of the above mentioned loan in extreme existential precarious need with nearly zero ability to repay loans of these debtors as
well as lives of the other above mentioned debtors) must repay together to the
hard usurer (otherwise the hard usurer will go bankrupt and he or she will
become also a debtor in extreme existential precarious need with
nearly zero ability to repay his or her loans) in total at least 1
million CZK with usual bank interests throughout all the time of recovery of
their loan instead of the above mentioned 7 debtors, who will not often repay
also it, what they borrowed, because in the future these in the future solvent
3 debtors will restore to financial health with provided time and at that
future time they will already have sufficient financial resources
to repay their loans, for example even in the execution and, if the debtors
will not succeed in repayment of their loans in execution, so for example even
with the aid of debt forgiveness judicial proceedings, during which in 5 years
of the duration of these judicial proceedings the debtors can repay on
principle at least only 30% of their debts in the amount calculated at the date
of commencement of these judicial proceedings, that the debts would be forgiven
to these debtors in these judicial proceedings by the insolvency court, but
according to my interpretation of the Czech Insolvency
Act it can be repaid also less from the
important social reasons, while speaking or writing merciful lie by the debtor
in extreme emergency is not excluded from the above mentioned main requirement
of “an honest intention of the debtor” according to my interpretation of the
Czech Insolvency Act (according to article 6, subsection 1 of the Czech
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms: Everyone has the right to
life. And speaking and writing truth are specially protected
in no article of this Czech Charter of Fundamental Rights and
Freedoms.), it means that at present time every honest debtor can so in fact
more probably legally go through debt forgiveness judicial proceedings,
although the debtor in extreme need moves on the edge of the law (e.g.
contracts of gift in favour of the debtor limited only for the purpose of the
debt forgiveness judicial proceedings, which are enforceable very hardly or
which are apparently not enforceable at all by someone other than the debtor against
donors of the debtor), thus also both the executor and insolvency
administrator can play, and they play the positive role in this democratic
legal system of trade with the debts, because they help nice usurers (i.e.
banks) and also hard usurers with education of debtors to correct their ways,
in my opinion with the fact, that in the future debtors will perform in better
way a permanent obligation of everyone to cause the least possible death and
pain (especially of people but also of other living creatures or beings). Therefore also both executors and insolvency administrators are entitled to their adequate
remuneration and the State, which commissioned them on
behalf of this State to trade with debts, cannot deny
them it on principle (according to the article 11, subsection 1 of the Czech
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms: "Everyone has the right to
own property. The right of all owners to posses has
the same statutory content and protection." or according to article 28
of the Czech Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms: "Employees
have the right to equitable remuneration for the work..."
or according to the article 2, subsection 3 of the Constitution of
the Czech Republic: "State power serves all citizens
..."), therefore in my opinion also the executors are entitled in
the case of their submitting and proving claims of their minimum costs of
execution in the debt forgiveness judicial
proceedings in the amount of circa 8000.- CZK, from which in the case of
majority of the debt forgiveness judicial
proceedings of debtors just in the course of the 5 years in my long-time
experience of insolvency administrator they will gain
anyway only circa 2700,- CZK, i.e. the smallest allowable degree of 30%
satisfaction, if they acted in the given executionary matter, and even though
they enforced nothing, to the adjudication of these costs by insolvency court
and according to me the above decision of the Supreme Court of the Czech
Republic is in breach of the constitutional order of the Czech Republic and on
principle I will adjudicate their claims.
14)
30/04/2016 Integrated crop agriculture or ecological organic crop agriculture
in the Czech Republic according to the Philosophy of Balance.
Apparently relatively
new apparently Czech attitude of integrated
crop agriculture perhaps inspired also by my Philosophy of Balance, which seeks
to combine the benefits of both "organic" (i.e. of "bio")
and "conventional" (i.e. normal, virtually in my Philosophy of
Balance under the term "standard") agriculture enacting its rules
with regard to local especially climatic conditions of certain State, its rules
include the minimization or complete exclusion of fertilizers and pesticides
(i.e. an integrated production strives to achieve optimal returns while ensuring
higher quality of products in a manner that does not pollute the environment,
integrated production favors environmentally friendly farming methods, in
particular it minimizes the use of agrochemicals, integrated production seeks
to maximize the use of biological and other non-chemical methods of plant
protection and the least possible consumption of pesticides, in the framework
of integrated production used pesticides must not be dangerous poisons and must
be applied selectively, i.e only to the targeted pest, integrated production
must be economically efficient, i.e. profitable, gentle, must provide healthy,
quality products without substances hazardous to human health, products of
integrated production can be identified by the logo that is printed on them -
for examples, see pictures and for details see http://vitejtenazemi.cz/cenia/index.php?p=integrovana_zemedelska_produkce&site=puda ), is apparently in many cases more in compliance
with by me proposed Symbiotic agriculture than organic agriculture at present
time in the Czech Republic, because in my experience the organic crop
agriculture products are imported into the Czech Republic on principle mostly
from a long distance at least from Spain or Italy, especially due to the warm
climate suitable for organic (i.e. bio) agriculture in these distant States, by
which these organic crop agriculture products cease to be organic. (See http://www.spvzt.cz/symbiotickezemedelstvi.htm )
Literature: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinohradnictv%C3%AD (I quote: "This ungentle attitude is already
replaced by the so-called Integrated Production of Wine that
internationally sets clear rules, which include for example minimization or
complete exclusion of fertilizers and pesticides in the production of the
wine.") http://www.vinotekabudamont.cz/show-free.htm?fid=32 (I quote: “What
is sacramental wine, and what is the manufacturing process?” ... Vineyards must be at least integrated
production ...
"Filtering may only be used for the cleanup of (sacramental) wine. Bentonite can be used to remove proteins (note of author: i.e. no substances of
animal origin, such as e.g. gelatine).”) http://www.katyd.cz/clanky/jake-je-tajemstvi-mesniho-vina.html (I quote:
"Rules, which production of sacramental wine must comply, Czech Bishops' conference sets for our
territory. It requires above all, that the grapes, from which the wine is
produced, came from Bohemia and Moravia. Another condition says then
that during the production of sacramental wine any additives such as colorings,
flavorings or sugars must not be used.")
15)
03/05/2016 My relationship to carnivores and herbivores according to the
Philosophy of Balance.
A) PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE, PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in fact mostly want to live in a world, where everyone
likes each other, therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the least
possible death and pain." All the rest consists more in views
(speculations).
B) Bible, Genesis 1
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is
upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a
tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the
earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the
earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it
was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Genesis%201 )
So even in
the Biblical paradise there were apparently also for example lions, i.e.
predators and they had a meaning, but their diet apparently just as a diet of
herbivores in the Biblical paradise was primarily plant seeds and plant fruits
and in the worst case other parts of plants, which is also the goal of my
Philosophy of Balance in relation to both predators and herbivores. According
to the Jewish Kabbalah those Biblical paradise is not somewhere in the heaven,
but it exists on our Earth or in the Universe, only we ourselves deformed it,
virtually made horrible beasts from it up to the contemporary form, where
living creatures each other hate and fight a life-death survival according to
Darwinism.
C) Therefore the ideal animal currently eats only plant seeds and plant
fruits from all living creatures, which I presume the compliance with the
above-mentioned three conditions. That we cause the least pain and fear of
eaten plant seeds and plant fruits. At the same time it arises between us,
between me-the man and the plant seed or fruit, no hatred, not love, but we
tolerate each other, because it has to be (I am helping it to reproduce
as I pick the plant fruit with plant seed, I eat it and I spread it on an area
and seeds have a greater opportunity to grow than they felt down under any one
plant, they would kill each other. At the same time all the seeds cannot grow
because there is not sufficient land, which is created by the dead living
organisms, when one seed grows into an ear of hundred plant seeds, the passage
through the digestive tract in some plant seeds is condition in order to grow),
it is the least possible evil in the above cycle of life. In digestion,
virtually earlier in the cooking plant fruit and plant seeds it leads to the
killing, because the plant fruits and seeds are also formed by the living
cells, which appear to feel some kind of pain in their premature death, but
because it is evolutionarily the simplest kind of organisms (or the germs of
new plants), which can serve man as a natural food, there is the least possible
pain caused by man. With decreasing evolutionary maturity of a living organism
the perceived pain of injury or of death of the organism decreases. Philosophy of Balance p. 120
D) From the above the
assumption follows, that man is as an omnivore
(here also as carnivore) permanently unable to survive on a purely
vegetable diet, dairy products with microbial rennets and eggs, I myself was
purely on this diet since January 16, 2011 (i.e. three months), when I left out
Worcester sauce from my diet. I believe, that from the exact scientific
perspectives (I leave aside my Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance) …
those religions that dictate and corroborate the possibility of permanent pure
vegetarianism as Hinduism, they do not speak the truth and people, who say they
are pure vegetarians, so either they unknowingly eat food from dead animals
(such as me above mentioned Worcester sauce, which, inter alia, is probably
from India, seat of Hinduism or the above case of Dalai Lama) or they do not
tell the truth intentionally. As to
me it is necessary to eat in case of each human as omnivore in the long term
the minimum possible level of dead animals to prevent the serious health
problems. Here according to the Philosophy of Balance a person apparently must
only eat naturally dead animals (carrions) (as advocated by the ancient Roma).
Philosophy of Balance p. 399-400 … Eating naturally dead animals, on
principle of old age by human is not a new idea, but the idea is
thousands of years old and it comes from India. Survived in old Roma (sometimes
also Gypsies), who originate and in the middle ages they came to Europe from
India. "Under the old Roma are carrions (cadavers) cleaner meat, because
the animal didn't die in a violent death", and Roma also invented an
ingenious recipe, how to eat the carrions (cadavers), "the carrions are
boiled in more waters" (see http://www.mills.cz/assets/Absol_prace/AP2010-SP_denni/Rosecka-SP2010.pdf : Vyšší odborná
škola a Střední zdravotnická
škola, MILLS, s. r. o., Tereza Rosecká,
Vedoucí práce: ThDr. et Mgr. Ladislava
Marešová, Čelákovice, 2010, Život
romské menšiny), and it was at least thousands of years ago, when
they came to Europe, and when no one has ever heard of the sterilization of
surgical instruments. BOOKLET OF THE
PARTY FOR THE RIGHTS OF ALL LIVING CREATURES p. 35
E) Article I. Eternal
duty of all living creatures (1) Fundamental duty of all living creatures is to
cause the least possible death and pain. The
perfect living creature eats then only plant fruits and plant seeds from all
living creatures. (Further also eternal duty of members). (4) Member has
right also to eat only gradually in
extreme emergency (especially from serious health reasons) eggs, in extreme
emergency carrions of living creatures died of natural causes, on principle of
old age, or in extreme emergency collected blood of non-slaughtered animals and
humans and milk, or in extreme emergency plants, all always the most mercifully
as possible bred and killed, and products purely from them. Philosophy of Balance p. 22
F) Conclusions of my
experiment: … one is a carnivore and this one cannot live on a vegetarian diet.
… this one should get due to humanity
superior vegetarian food (also the best are home eggs, where they do not let
the roosters to slaughter, and semi-hard or curd cheese from microbial rennet
best from the milk from organic farming, where they do not let the males to
slaughter) and food from naturally dead, not slaughtered, eventually frozen
animals. … this one should receive the least possible amount of food
from naturally dead, eventually frozen animals not to harm seriously its
health. … Body of naturally dead,
eventually frozen animal … should
be boiled in several waters, to avoid serious diseases affecting also a human
life. … this one breeds also
other animals such as chickens for home eggs and further those he or she gives
to carnivores after their natural death, when he or she has complete
confidence, that they are not slaughtered, and after medical autopsy. … Similar rules should be determined
experimentally because of humanity (the biblical paradise on Earth) for the other
carnivores. Carnivores, such as some
snakes that cannot eat carrions, the human before death cannot breed at home,
other people can breed them at home apparently, or the God can breed them
outside in nature. Philosophy of
Balance p. 312
G) In the Roman
Catholic Church the most believers including the priest eat, in memory of Jesus
of Nazareth, apparently Christ, the Holy Communion, said body of Christ, i.e.
unleavened bread made from grain and water, thus fruitarian (plant seeds and
water as in paradise, where they ate also the plant fruits). Thus who eats as
in paradise only plant fruits and plant seeds with water (or minerals) he/she
reportedly eats the body of Christ Philosophy
of Balance p. 349 … This bread is
also evidently in the form of waffles used in the Roman Catholic Church for the
Eucharist as the body of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ, besides his as
blood, i.e. sacramental wine, with plenty of free glucose necessary for
carnivores. Philosophy of Balance
p. 354 However grape wine and wine
grapes can be eg. for dogs deadly.
H) "The Divided
Plate Diet" (also sometimes referred to as the Hay Diet) according to
Philosophy of Balance... this method is based on the fact that certain foods
need for their digestion acidic pH environment, while others need alkaline pH
and therefore these foods should not be combined. Typical acidic foods include meat and plant seeds, the typical
alkaline-foods include plant fruits. The remaining foods like milk,
eggs and vegetables are controversial and classified by species in both groups.
SOLVED EXAMPLES AND COMMENTARIES BASED ON
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE p. 117 … the best purely vegetarian organic feed is
yarrah for dog or purely vegetarian feed ami cat for cats (in my experience a dog or cat will not survive only on a
purely vegetarian feed ami cat or yarrah for dogs, although the manufacturer
states that it is a complete feed, during the exclusive long-term use
of the purely vegetarian feed ami dog my dog vomited permanently the yellow
water), that in my experience animals like to eat and we watch occurrence of
the symptoms of allergic reactions of the animals to this feed. Symptoms of an allergic reaction to this
feed are vomiting, excessive trembling,
diarrhea, or scratching of a dog or a cat, after occurrence of allergic
reaction of this dog or cat we feed immediately 200 grams of frozen carrion of
an animal Symbiotic agriculture
and experiments of natural science proving Philosophy of Balance p. 6-7 …AMI CAT is a complete and balanced food
for cats, fortified with taurine. Taurine is a protein with a chain of amino
acids, which can be produced without killing animals (which is present in
muscle tissue). The absence of taurine in cat nutrition is the cause of serious
disorders and diseases. The presence of taurine in AMI CAT along with
natural and health beneficial ingredients, which are characteristic of AMI
products, is ensuring your cat is always in good health and fitness. Philosophy of Balance p. 328 ... 100%
BIO ORGANIC YARRAH Adult Dog food, vegan, 100% Certified organic, no added
sugar, Composition: wheat, soya
beans, corn, sunflower seed husks, semolina, minerals, brewer yeast
(see http://www.amipetfood.com/ , http://www.yarrah-bio.cz/content/1-psi )
I) Integrated crop agriculture or
ecological organic crop agriculture in the Czech Republic according to the
Philosophy of Balance.
Apparently relatively
new apparently Czech attitude of integrated
crop agriculture perhaps inspired also by my Philosophy of Balance, which seeks
to combine the benefits of both "organic" (i.e. of "bio")
and "conventional" (i.e. normal, virtually in my Philosophy of
Balance under the term "standard") agriculture enacting its rules
with regard to local especially climatic conditions of certain State, its rules
include the minimization or complete exclusion of fertilizers and pesticides
(i.e. an integrated production strives to achieve optimal returns while
ensuring higher quality of products in a manner that does not pollute the
environment, integrated production favors environmentally friendly farming
methods, in particular it minimizes the use of agrochemicals, integrated
production seeks to maximize the use of biological and other non-chemical
methods of plant protection and the least possible consumption of pesticides,
in the framework of integrated production used pesticides must not be dangerous
poisons and must be applied selectively, i.e only to the targeted pest,
integrated production must be economically efficient, i.e. profitable, gentle,
must provide healthy, quality products without substances hazardous to human
health, products of integrated production can be identified by the logo that is
printed on them - for examples, see pictures and for details see http://vitejtenazemi.cz/cenia/index.php?p=integrovana_zemedelska_produkce&site=puda ), is apparently in many cases more in compliance
with by me proposed Symbiotic agriculture than organic agriculture at present
time in the Czech Republic, because in my experience the organic crop
agriculture products are imported into the Czech Republic on principle mostly
from a long distance at least from Spain or Italy, especially due to the warm
climate suitable for organic (i.e. bio) agriculture in these distant States, by
which these organic crop agriculture products cease to be organic. (See http://www.spvzt.cz/symbiotickezemedelstvi.htm ) Literature:
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinohradnictv%C3%AD (I quote: "This ungentle attitude is already
replaced by the so-called Integrated Production of Wine that
internationally sets clear rules, which include for example minimization or
complete exclusion of fertilizers and pesticides in the production of the
wine.") http://www.vinotekabudamont.cz/show-free.htm?fid=32 (I quote: “What
is sacramental wine, and what is the manufacturing process?” ... Vineyards must be at least integrated
production ...
"Filtering may only be used for the cleanup of (sacramental) wine. Bentonite can be used to remove proteins (note of author: i.e. no substances of
animal origin, such as e.g. gelatine).”) http://www.katyd.cz/clanky/jake-je-tajemstvi-mesniho-vina.html (I quote:
"Rules, which production of sacramental wine must comply, Czech Bishops' conference sets for our
territory. It requires above all, that the grapes, from which the wine is
produced, came from Bohemia and Moravia. Another condition says then
that during the production of sacramental wine any additives such as colorings,
flavorings or sugars must not be used.")
J) Dear Hinduist, ... I
was doing an experiment … with my longstanding ovo-lacto vegetarian diet (for
the uninitiated, I have eaten plant diet, from animal food only milk and eggs),
while I was watching the composition of my food, there was no animal ingredient
from slaughtered animals, for example food additives, I have not eaten any food
supplements or vitamins that could be made from slaughtered animals. The result of this my long-term
ovo-lacto vegetarian diet has been the following health problems: abdominal
pain, flatulence, diarrhea, vomiting, sores on the mucous membranes, skin
peeling, allergic shock (itching and rash throughout the body), sore on joints
and articular cartilage, fatigue or tiredness at any greater effort, these
problems will disappear whenever I eat the meat of my carrions (cadavers) of
animals. Because of your moral resistance to eat carrions (cadavers) I
will not die of nutritional inadequacy, for this reason because of my moral
scruples I don't have to kill, or I don't have to get killed intentionally any
animal for the purpose of my food and I will continue to eat the minimum
required amount of carrions (cadavers) of the animals when my above health
symptoms occur. BOOKLET OF THE PARTY FOR
THE RIGHTS OF ALL LIVING CREATURES p. 34
k) Against snakes (in the Czech Republic, apparently: Vipera berus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vipera_berus , Grass Snake - Natrix Natrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grass_snake , smooth snake - Coronella austriaca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronella_austriaca , dice snake - Natrix tessellata https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice_snake , Aesculapius snake - Zamenis longissimus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesculapian_snake in the former Czechoslovak Socialist Republic there
were Colubridae protected. Literature:
Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary, Ill. Part Pro-Ž, prepared by a team
of authors of the Encyclopedic Institute of the Czechoslovak Academy of
Sciences under the leadership of the main editors of the Czechoslovak
Encyclopedia, Editorial deadline 31/12/1981, published by ACADEMIA,
publishing house of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, Prague 1982, first
issue, passwords, "zmijovití" (i.e. Viperidae) p. 925, and "užovkovití"
(i.e. Colubridae) p. 702) and against
mantises ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantis ) it is
necessary to apply appropriate countermeasures, which forces them to reprogram
their eating (perhaps genetically determined) habits in terms of mercy of their
food at least to become scavengers, on principle no snake or no mantis is
possible to kill intentionally, all except the cases, that in this way we will
cause the least possible death and pain. The above mentioned is necessary
to apply within a single dogma of my Philosophy of Balance: PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE,
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY: „All living creatures in fact
mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore
everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain." All
the rest consists more in views (speculations).
16)
05/05/2016 Killing of animals in Hinduism and Buddhism according to verified
sources (i.e. novinky.cz , Hare Krishna Movement, vyzivaspol.cz , Alexej
Pludek: Advisor of Great Rajas/ Rádce
velkých rádžů etc.).
In Nepal Hindus will carry out the world's
largest slaughter of animals in the context of the Festival. From Friday Hindu
believers in Nepal will begin with the largest two-day slaughter of animals in
the world. Despite the strong displeasure and protests they will sacrifice
hundreds of thousands of animals within ritual Gadhimai. The Agency AFP informed. During the Gadhimai
Festival the Hindus will sacrifice hundreds of thousands of animals. Friday, 28.
November 2014, 10:06 a.m. Protectors of animals claim, that the slaughter of
animals - from Buffalo to the rats - in the village Bariyarpur is nothing more
than the massively perpetrated cruelty against animals. And some local
inhabitants are also unhappy, according to whom because of the smell of death
even respiration will not be possible in the village. Despite the intervention
of the Indian Supreme Court, which ordered the ban on export of buffaloes,
large crowds are expected on the two-day Gadhimai
Festival held near the Indian border. During the last Gadhimai
Festival in 2009 AD in Nepal two hundred thousand animals were slaughtered.
Source: Reuters. Hundreds of thousands of people will gather in a local temple every five
years and they hope to please the Hindu goddess of power, Gadhimai by
sacrificing animals. At the last Festival in 2009 AD there were beheaded or
cut throat of estimated 300.000 animals, including chickens, ducks, pigeons and
pigs. This Festival was enrolled in the history as the largest animal sacrifice
at any place of the world. The traditional Festival. According to legend in
Bariyarpur the first animal sacrifice took place several centuries ago, when
the Hindu goddess Gadhimai appeared in the dream of the prisoner and she called on him to build a
temple in her honor. When he woke up, his handcuffs were open and he could
leave prison. He built the temple and as a thank he sacrificed animals in it.
The practice of ritual sacrifices has a long tradition in the conservative,
predominantly Hindu Nepal. During major holidays the believers sacrifice goats
and buffaloes to the gods in the hope that it will ensure them the health and
happiness. "Some people tell us that we should not sacrifice
animals," 36-year-old Nepali official said, who is prepared to sacrifice a
goat. "But we have our faith. During the last Festival I asked Gadhimai, to
help to solve the problems of my family regarding the immovable property, and
she filled my wish," he added. The local priest Mangal Chaudhary, who is ten generations of the servants of the temple in his family,
says, that the number of believers is constantly rising. "We are not
forcing anyone to come to sacrifice. People come out of their own will,"
he said. From local inhabitants criticism comes also. But activists claim, that
the main motivation of the organizers is to make money. Therefore, they
increase the number of sacrifices, in order to be able to sell the meat then.
"There is nothing religious or spiritual. It is all about the money,"
the representatives of Indian group on the protection of animals said. While
some of the local inhabitants feel the Festival as an integral part of their
history, for the other inhabitants it represents considerable discomfort.
According to Pavan Kumar Biayut, who lives in the neighbouring village, it is "unpleasant
experience". "After sacrifices the land is soaked in blood. The air
carries the strange smell, which is felt as far as to us. It is hard to
respire, "he said. The campaign for the ban of the Festival has gained
support of a series of celebrities including English Joanna Lumley,
and the French film legend Brigitte Bardot, who have sent a petition to the Nepali
President for ending with this "cruel tradition". On the contrary
foreign and domestic activists against the Festival are criticized for trying
to "violate local traditions". "I'm not a fan of massive cutting
throat of animals, but we must be sensitive in relation to historical and
cultural aspects of the Festival," said the Chief Editor of newspaper Republica Subhash Ghimire."I did not notice, that there were similar protests because of
Thanksgiving Day (Note: in the USA on this day there are killed and eaten
millions of turkeys) – why is the reaction so different here?" he added. Novinky, ČTK, 2014 http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/svet/354823-hinduiste-v-nepalu-v-ramci-svatku-rozpoutaji-nejvetsi-jatka-sveta.html
Author: Antonín Valer Trilokátma, dása, a
spokesman for the international society for Krishna Consciousness, the Hare
Krishna Movement. Time: 11/12/2012 ... Again, I ask about the texts or the
authority of the idea of eating the carrions (cadavers)? Where or whom is your
claim substantiated? Vedic culture functioning under the rule of Kings in the
territory of India and in other places thousands years ago very strictly
limited eating the meat. In addition, the King took care of it, that this limit
was respected. However, if someone could not give up meat eating, they could,
under certain restrictive conditions, eat meat of goats, poultry and other
lower animals. These population groups, however, have never been mainstream and
worked more or less on the sidelines, that they do not disrupt the residents
happy with a lacto-vegetarian diet. This information is very detailed in the
Puranas and in particular in the Bhágavata Purana, also known as Srimad
Bhagavatam, but also in many other places of the Vedic literature such as the
Manu’s code-Manu samhita. ... you will
be like the meat eaters banished to the sidelines and at best considered as
uncivilized barbarians. ... Signed Antonín Valer Trilokátma, dása, a spokesman
for the international society for Krishna Consciousness, the Hare Krishna
Movement. http://www.spvzt.cz/SPVZTprirucka.htm#7 , BOOKLET OF THE PARTY FOR THE
RIGHTS OF ALL LIVING CREATURES p. 37
Kshat means harm and ksatriya is
the one who protects from harm (trayate means protect). Kshatriyas learns to kill in the forest. Previously it used to be customary, that
the kshatriya went into the forest and fought against the tiger with a sword. If he
killed it, royal cremation was expected for the animal. The kshatriya kings in Jaipur still retain this custom. Kshatriyas learns to call to a
fighting duel and to kill, because violence motivated by religious principles
is sometimes necessary. Therefore sudden adopting sannyas,
the status of the renunciation is never recommended to them. Nonviolence can be
a diplomatic step in politics, but it is never the principle. In religious
codes of law is stated: ... "The king or kshatriya, who fights on the battlefield against another malevolent king, is able
to achieve the heavenly planets after the death, as well as Brahmins achieve
them through sacrificing animals in the sacrificial fire" The killing on
the battlefield, which is motivated by religious principles, and the killing of
animals in the sacrificial fire are not certainly considered as violent acts,
because their religious nature will bring benefit to all. The sacrificed animal
immediately gets the human body, without that it must pass through a gradual
evolution from one living form to another, and kshatriyas killed on the battlefield will reach the heavenly planets as well as the
Brahmins, who were reaching them through performing sacrifices. (see above chapter.strophe:
2.31, p. 102-103) In the Vedic literature there are described many activities
that are the subject of the dispute. For example it is said, that the animal
may be killed during sacrifice, but at the same time some thinkers advocates,
that killing animals is very bad. Although the Vedic literature during
sacrifice the animal killing recommends, it is not considered as killed - the
sacrifice shall bring a new life to it. Sometimes the soul of the killed animal
during sacrifice gets new animal body, and sometimes it is immediately uplifted
to human form. However there are different opinions among the sages. Some
claim, that the killing of animals should always be avoided, and others say
that killing for the purpose of sacrifice is right. … (above mentioned see chapter.strophe:
11.4, p. 714). Kshatriya,
the ruler has a lot of very unpleasant duties – he
must use violence to kill enemies, and he sometimes must tell lies for
diplomatic reasons. These things go with politics, but this does not mean, that
kshatriy
should renounce his obligations and
try to perform duties of Brahmin. … Even also the Brahmins, who perform
different sacrifices, sometimes must kill animals, because it is necessary to
sacrifice them in some ceremonies. And, if the kshatriya, doing his duties, kills enemies, he does not act also erroneously or
sinfully. (above mentioned see chapter.strophe: 18.47, p. 744) . Literature: Bhagavad-gita-taková jaká je/ Bhagavad-Gītā
as It Is, Šri Šrimad A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada - the founder of the international society for
Krishna Consciousness, the Hare Krishna Movement, The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, Inc., 1998.
Hinduism. Vegetarianism and the ban on the
consumption of beef meat are characteristic for diet of the Hindus. However in
ancient Hindu texts we can read that consumption of beef meat was usual thing.
It is possible that a later ban on the consumption of beef meat (1000 AD) was
an effort to distinguish from the Muslims. These diet practices are followed
mainly by people of higher castes, the beef meat consumption is tolerated for
lower castes, apparently because of the fact, that the beef meat is an
important source of proteins for the physically working. The caste system
extends to a large extent even to eating practices, it determines, who with
whom can eat, who from whom can accept food, etc. Acceptance of food from a
lower caste member "pollutes" the spiritual purity of the member of
the higher castes. Just some products (derived from cow) are considered as pure
and they cannot be polluted by touch. These products include: purified butter (ghee)
and milk. Among Hindus vegetarianism is the most common, they do not consume
meat, fish, some of them eggs. However there are also exceptions. The caste of
fighters, kshatriya
consumes fishes, in this case the fishes are an
important source of proteins, because their lack might have a negative impact
on their fighting capacity. Fasting (i.e. abstinence) the Hindus usually follow
from two to three days a week. During these days "clean" food (milk,
fruits, nuts or roots that contains starch) is only allowed. The fasting period
is influenced by the religious celebrations and by membership in the certain
caste. In the Hare Krishna Movement the attitude to food has principal meaning.
Here the food is not only to strengthen the body but mainly to strengthen the
spirit. The food is accepted in the form of "prasadam"
(the food sacrificed to the supreme personality of the deity). Food preparation
and its consumption we can compare to the church service. Great emphasis is
placed on the selection of the raw materials, the maintenance of cleanness,
choice of clothing when cooking, dining culture and especially the constant
focus of mind on Krishna. Prohibited foods include: meat, eggs, alcohol, cocoa,
onion, garlic, mushrooms, leek, coffee and tea. It is also important, that the
human has consumed only what he himself prepared. Because food receives
negative materialistic cook's energy. When cooking the food tasting is also
prohibited, Krishna must be the first who enjoyed the food. Lips, with which he
touches the offered food, enrich the material food by spirituality. This is the
essence of "prasadam". Prasadam has allegedly the power to uplift spiritually not only the human devoted
to Krishna, but even the secular human. see http://www.vyzivaspol.cz/clanky-casopis/jak-ovlivnuji-jednotliva-nabozenstvi-stravovaci-navyky.html : Stojanovičová, Martina, Halina Matějovi a Zuzana
Derflerová-Brázdová, 2013, Společnost
pro výživu
"Didn't got even to any known men, friends
of the King Pauravas, in vain he sent message through the servant, that he does not sleep
with a girl, he wandered desperately late into the night in the garden, around
the Pauravas' home, he sacrificed young goat for Prajapati and peacock for Indra that
he prevents crime through his divine power. It was an unusually big sacrifice,
especially in the evening, he had to make fictions, he had to lie, that he does
not become noticeable; I would soon be getting married, he said to his father,
who caught him during this sacrifice. I wanted that a decision about my wedding
was happy, that my marriage was blessed by the will of the gods!" (above
mentioned see p. 36) … "White-clothed young men, Brahmacharyas accepted donations from pilgrims who came to express their respect for
the new king of Āryāvarta in front of the Royal Palace and to attend the ceremonies that they have
earned the grace of the Brahma the Creator or of Vishnu the Maintainer or of Shiva the Life-giver." (note: the equivalent of the Divine
Trinity, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit or Satan) … "The
streets were saturated with smoke of smoking sticks, fragrance of flowers and
perfumes, baked cookies and fried strips of meat, of fishes, of peacocks, of
lambs and of
gazelles." (above mentioned see p.
58) … " Long time there were held Samaj festivals, games, party,
pilgrimage, from here King used to go hunting in the forest, which was a
continuation of the park and in which is hidden a few modest dwellings of sramans and
a small Vihara of Buddhist bhikkhus near shady spring pools.(new paragraph) Radhagupta was deafened by these clamour, singing, exultation, colors, excellence,
wealth, fragrances and brilliance; but despite it he could not forget the
shock, which in the morning he experienced looking at the rushing streams of
blood from the cut necks of three hundred bulls, of five hundred gazelles and
of thousand peacocks all pulled to the place of sacrifice on the area between
the palace and the Ganga at dawn." … "Why he has allowed, that they
have been sacrificed, what he created that they lived? It was guru's
words. (new paragraph) In this way Papura condemned before pupils the Vedic ceremonies, so
he contested incomprehensible sutras and mantras, in this way he despised
humbled relationship to the gods, which was enforced from supplicants by
Brahmin masters of ceremonies. (new paragraph) The same feeling even more
strongly dominated him in arena, after the arrival of the guard, the palace
guard, cavalry, infantry, wagon trains and elephants, after lighting the fires
on all four sides of the world, praising the king, the favourite of Indra, Yama, Varuna and
Prajapati, the major gods of the Vedic hymns, after the allegorical procession
of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva with the wives, the highest gods of the era of Upanishads; the
fight of wild elephants was organized in arena, struggle for life and death, of
gigantic, excited, savage, trumpeting and heavy breathing, provoked against
each other, carefully selected from the recently caught herds in the Royal
forests in the North from the Ganga. (new paragraph) Could Prajapati, lord of
creatures himself watch this bloodshed of innocent animals? It is more
blasphemy than praise, more insult than worship. The slaughtered animal, killed
by the long tusks of winner, its heavy breathing, the thundered, absorbed
lamentation and blood stream rolling from the mouth, it is not the will of god,
nor the celebration of life, not a spectacle worthy of wise people." (above
mentioned p. 63-64) Literature: Alexej Pludek, Rádce velkých rádžů/Advisor of Great Rajas, published by Český spisovatel, in Prague in 1975
AD.
With the development and expansion of Buddhism
over other countries in Asia - China, Tibet, Japan and Korea – vegetarianism
has expanded also, which is, as in Hinduism, one of the rules fundamentally
affecting eating habits. An essential element of this ancient religion is so
called Ahimsa - conception of the first commandment consisting in not killing
or not harming living beings (jap. tu - sesšó, sanskrt. ahimsa). In this aspect
Buddhism was heavily influenced by Hinduism - Buddha also rejects sacrifices,
in which animals are killed. In practice however only monks and Orthodox
believers refrain from eating meat altogether. As paradoxical fact it might
seem, that the breeding of animals for meat Buddhism does not prohibit even for
its most devoted believers. The meat of the animal carrions may be consumed in
general, as well as fish, but if not killed (i.e. only fish accidentally
beached). It is therefore evident, that the meat may be eaten such, as it has
not been obtained for the purpose of food. In contrast to other religions
Buddhism does not recognize itself consumption, but above all the very act of
killing. The way, how the strongly religious monks gain diet, is also very
interesting – through begging. (see http://is.muni.cz/th/101234/lf_b/bakalarska_prace.txt : Masarykova univerzita, Lékařská fakulta,
BAKALÁŘSKÁ PRÁCE, Adéla
Olivíková, Brno 2006,
Společensko-kulturní aspekty výživy , http://www.petrginz.cz/o-buddhismu.html : Petr Ginz, 1928 (Praha)-1944 (Auschwitz, Osvětim) – ZÁPISKY O BUDHISMU – TEREZÍN 1944 ("Když umírající vydechne naposled, je
oblečen do svých šatů obráceně, předek
oděvu je vzadu. Potom je svázán do pozice Budhů.
Ve vesnicích je tělo obyčejně kladeno do kotle. Když byla
mrtvola vyňata, vymyje se kotel znečistěný hnilobou,
upraví se v něm polévka nebo čaj a
podává se účastníkům
pohřebních obřadů.") , http://www.animalrights.webz.cz/chranit_zive.htm : Chránit vše živé - Vegetariánství z hlediska buddhismu, Róši Philip Kapleau, (CAD PRESS 1992) )
17)
08/05/2016 My solution to the problem of infertility of my contemporary
fiancée.
Because my fiancée does not want to
have a child with me of our health reasons and these her health problems are caused
according to my Philosophy of Balance by her normal eating slaughtered meat and
by the revenge of living cells of these slaughtered animals and their relatives
living cells on my fiancée (and my fiancée, although she is of Catholic
confession, according to which only one God should be love, i.e. caritas, does
not want change this her opinion despite my explanation, that such a huge
unnecessary, i.e. much more than the least possible death and pain cannot
remain unpunished, if there is some higher justice), so for longer time I break up with her at her age of 44.5 years, thus
3.5 years before her nearly sure infertility according to exact scientific
medicine, if she does not change this her opinion by this time (because, according to the exact science the
living cells change completely except nerve cells in the human body once every
7 years, see http://hejnic.webnode.cz/jara/hlava/uceni/biologie-cloveka/ : Jaroslav Hejnic , http://knihovna.orgfree.com/kafka/5.html : Břetislav Kafka - Nové základy
experimentální psychologie, kapitola 5. VĚK BUNĚK , i.e.
during 3.5 years roughly half living cells of her body can change, thus hated unmerciful
living cells for merciful living cells and at least at this time my fiancée can
catch be substantially healed, so that she could have children with me), that I gave
her the opportunity to have a child with someone other than me, until she will
be nearly surely infertile according to exact scientific medicine at her age of
48 years. After that our breakup for the present I will not start looking for
another fiancée, with whom I could have a child under the following condition
(see according to the below mentioned rules of the Philosophy of Balance the
appropriate counterattack against the above mentioned attack, i.e. against the
pressure from society, which does not want me to have my own child): Under
the present conditions I would not intentionally sacrifice life of any animal
for my possible child, who will have to eat from dead animals only carrions
(i.e. animals died of itself) boiled in several waters according to the
brilliant at least thousand years old Romany recipe and after the veterinary autopsy
regarding its health harmlessness otherwise I will be childless until my death
(I.e. according to the below mentioned rules
of the Philosophy of Balance in the contemporary situation any my intentional
death of animal, virtually animals for my possible child could not prevent
equally great death and pain, thus save equally valuable life of some living
creature with the probability of at least 95-100 %, because at present time due
to the overpopulation of mankind on the globe the mankind is not threatened
with extinction anyway with the exception of nuclear war or Cosmic disaster. It
is also possible to ask a question, if I am perhaps better than Jesus of
Nazareth, apparently Christ, who also apparently does not have, did not have and
will not have his own child, neither he is striving for him or her, unlike God
the father, who should have according to Christianity own only one Son, and he
was Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ, see the below mentioned Roman Catholic creed). In
spite of it I am not too sure, that my solution to the problem of infertility of
my fiancée is in fact better than the below mentioned Abraham's solution.
Note:
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF
VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in fact
mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore
everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain." All
the rest consists more in views (speculations).
The obligation not to kill anything alive unless it is
absolutely necessary:
1) A human must never kill any living creature,
especially human (or him- or herself). (i.e. according to me for the
probability of 0-5 percents, that a human kills the human, the first human must
begin to save this second human, i.e. at worst case only to recede)
2) A human has a duty to kill as few of living
creatures as possible (i.e. for the protection of life) and if so then those
naturally feeling the least pain. (i.e. according to me a human can kill any
living creature only if the probability of at least 95-100 %, that he or she
saves in this way the life of other living creature, so that in this way he or
she caused the least possible death and pain).
3) Regarding for me as a person it is healthy (i.e. if I am not vomiting and
underweight or in allergic shock) to eat from all living creatures only
non-sprouting plant seeds (hereafter referred to only as plant seeds, sprouting
plant seeds are already young plants) and plant fruits with seeds, of which
separation from the plant cannot kill it, while the reproduction of these
plants with the maximum health not damaging amount of salt or appropriate
quantity of other minerals and water (e.g. for adults and children aged over 11
years the maximum daily dose of six grams of salt, for smaller children five
grams, for suckers one gram of salt.) It would probably be concerned seeds of
plants (soya beans, peas, beans, corn, etc.) and fruits of plants with seeds,
especially trees (such as apples, pears, dates). Philosophy of Balance p. 23
Applying for an explanation of the above-mentioned
general physical and mathematical definitions the general English language, we
can say the following:
ad 1)
1.1 In the case of an attack against a particular
individual from the society of living creatures makes this attack from the
living creatures retreat this particular individual from the society of living
creatures.
1.2 In the case of retreat of living creatures makes
this retreat from the living creatures the individual to the attack against
these living creatures.
ad 2) Reasonable behavior:
2.1 In the case of an attack by the living creatures
against a certain individual it is reasonable, so that this individual
responded in contrast to paragraph ad 1.1 not by a retreat but by appropriate
attack against the society of living creatures (Eg. the seduction of a person
of the same sex can be responded by own idea of his or her genital organs).
2.2 In the case of retreat of society of living
creatures from a particular individual it is reasonable, that this individual
responded in contrast to paragraph ad 1.2 not by an attack but by an adequate
retreat from the society of living creatures.
Ad 3)
3.1 Reasonable attack of certain individuals as a
response to the attack of the living creatures against the particular
individual neutralizes (or zero) both attacks, sooner or later (i.e.
educational, not destructively).
3.2 Reasonable retreat of some individuals in response
to the retreat of living creatures from the particular individual neutralizes
(or zero) both retreats sooner or later.
The result of this procedure is sooner or later,
stable development of all living creatures. Philosophy of Balance p. 48
In the attack as an appropriate response to attack by
society of living organisms it should always be considered if:
1) We are able to stop the attack from the side of the
living world, sooner or later, without us getting seriously hurt by the
attacker and we cause the least possible death and pain of living creatures
(see variable momentum vector p1 above in my diagram), or
2) We are able the attack from the society of living
organisms only to hamper (see variable momentum vector p2 in my above mentioned
diagram), without us getting seriously hurt by the attacker and we cause the
least possible death and pain of living creatures, cessation of attacks by
living organisms in this case, then we leave it to another living organism (see
variable momentum vector p1 above, that in my diagram). Philosophy of Balance
p. 48
The Nicene Creed
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker
of heaven and earth, and of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of
God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God
from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him
all things were made.
(see http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/credo.htm : Catechism of the Catholic Church, PART ONE THE PROFESSION OF FAITH, SECTION TWO, THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, THE CREDO, Vatican Information Service )
Bible,
Genesis 15 2 And Abram said,
Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my
house is this Eliezer of Damascus? 3 And
Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my
house is mine heir. 4 And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying,
This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own
bowels shall be thine heir. 5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look
now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he
said unto him, So shall thy seed be. 6 And he believed in the Lord; and he
counted it to him for righteousness.Genesis
16 1 Now Sarai Abram's wife bare him no children: and she had an
handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said unto Abram,
Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto
my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the
voice of Sarai. 15 And Hagar bare Abram a son: and Abram called his
son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael. Genesis
17 17 Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his
heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall
Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear? 18 And Abraham said unto God, O that
Ishmael might live before thee! 19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee
a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my
covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. 20
And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will
make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he
beget, and I will make him a great nation. 21 But my covenant will I establish
with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
22 And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham. Genesis 21 1 And the Lord
visited Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did unto Sarah as he had spoken. 2
For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of
which God had spoken to him. 3 And Abraham called the name of his son that was
born unto him, whom Sarah bare to him, Isaac. 5 And Abraham was an hundred
years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him. 9 And Sarah saw the son of
Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking. 10 Wherefore she
said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this
bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac. 11 And the thing was
very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son. 12 And God said unto
Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of
thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice;
for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. 13 And also of the son of the bondwoman
will I make a nation, because he is thy seed. 14 And Abraham rose up early in
the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar,
putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed,
and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. 15 And the water was spent in the
bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs. 16 And she went, and
sat her down over against him a good way off, as it were a bow shot: for she
said, Let me not see the death of the child. And she sat over against him, and
lift up her voice, and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the
angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth
thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. 18
Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great
nation. 19 And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went,
and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink. 20 And God was with
the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer. 21 And
he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the
land of Egypt. (see http://www.biblegateway.com/ )
(Isaac is according to the Bible the forefather of the
Israelites, virtually Jews with their biggest slaughter house of ancient times
in the Jewish temple, and Ishmael is according to the Quran the forefather of
the Arabs fighting at present time against the Jews for life and death with their
contemporary most torturing kosher and halal slaughters of animals)
Solution
to the problem of infertility of his wife by my grandfather Joseph Roček was
following: He and his wife
lived childless until his age of 59 years, i.e. until her apparent infertility
according to exact scientific medicine, then my grandfather Joseph Roček found
a young lover, i.e. my grandmother, with whom he had his single child, i.e. his
daughter, i.e. my mother, shortly after the birth of this his daughter my
grandfather died of cancer, but before it he bequeathed all his property to my
grandmother, i.e. to his above mentioned young lover, shortly after the birth
of this my mother this all assets bequeathed
to this my grandmother by my grandfather were nationalized by Communists
after the communist revolution in Czech Republic and both my grandmother and
this her single daughter, i.e. my mother lived their life in poverty until
adulthood of my mother, then my mother at her age of 38 years died of cancer
and shortly after her death my grandmother died also, my father and my brother
born from both the same mother and the same father still live.
18)
08/05/2016 About historicity of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ and about
lifelong virginity of his mother Mary, possibly about lifelong virginity of his
father Joseph.
From by me watched
content of the film (see Literature below) I mention: The name Jesus in Hebrew
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ
(Yehoshua – i.e. God saves), see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Je%C5%BE%C3%AD%C5%A1 . Jesus as God should voluntarily deliver himself to death. Jesus had
no brothers, because he gave on the Cross his mother Mary to the care of the
Apostle John, not to the care of some his brother. In Israel in the Bible the
brother (However in Matthew's Gospel there are specifically mentioned Jesus'
brothers James, Joseph, Judas and Simon, and unnamed sisters, Bible, Matthew
13, 55 and 56, Christians believe that Mary conceived Jesus as a virgin, some
churches eg. Roman Catholic and Orthodox declare, that Mary remained the Virgin
throughout all her life, it declared the Lateran synod of 649 AD, but because
it was not a general council, this dogma is not of the type that was solemnly
proclaimed. However virginity of Mary has not liturgically its own feast. see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_(matka_Je%C5%BE%C3%AD%C5%A1ova)#Mariino_panenstv.C3.AD ) had a broader meaning also of other wider family members. Why
Hosanna, son of David changed for: Crucify in the majority of Jews at that
time, because Jesus irritated the Pharisees leaders by his statement, that he
is son of only one God, they saw in him a power rival, and because with the
fact that they delivered him to the Roman occupiers for the crucifixion, they
wanted him to manifest as the messiah with the fact that he would start the war
against the Roman occupiers of Israel and Palestine while with it with the fact
of the first killing an enemy he would be completely discredited as God. Why mentions
of Jesus by Jewish historians did not exist at that time, either, because Jesus
and his trial were from their point of view insignificant matters, or because
these Jewish historians intentionally suppressed mentions of him. The first
mention of Jesus by the Jewish historian is found in Josephus Flavius (he lived
37 anno Domini - 100 anno Domini), with Jewish name Joseph ben Mattityahu (in Hebrew
יוסף בן
מתתיהו, apparently from the Hebrew “מֵת,
met”, in English “dead”), (i.e. the Jew who fought in the revolution against
the Romans in the group of Zealots, during hopeless blockade in Jewish fortress
by the Romans these Zealots killed each other according to the mathematical formula,
Flavius Josephus remained as one of the last two survivors, who should
commit suicide according to the mutual agreement or oaths, but Flavius
Josephus joined himself with the Romans, he was admitted to the
supreme Roman commander Flavius Vespasian in Palestine and Israel,
he predicted him that he becomes Roman emperor, after which Flavius
Vespasian had become Roman emperor, Flavius
Josephus lived as a free man at the imperial court in Rome and he
obtained life pension from the Flavian emperors, see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavius_Iosephus and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus ), it is so called Testimonium Flavianum in his book “Antiquities of
the Jews”: „About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought
to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a
teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and
many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the
principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had
first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day
restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a
thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called
after him, has still to this day not disappeared.(Flavius Josephus: Antiquities
of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, 3.) This passage should be greatly falsified
in later transcripts apparently by unknown Christian copyist, its existence should
apparently testify also apparently fairly early translations into Arabic. The
Arabic translation of this Flavius book from the 10th century: „ At this time
there lived a wise man of name Jesus. His way of life was good and he was known
as honest. And many people from Jews and from other nations became his
disciples. “Pilate condemned him to be crucified" and to death. They said,
that he appeared to them the third day after crucifixion and he was alive; according
to it “he was believed to be Christ”, about whom the prophets predicted
miracles.“ (see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimonium_flavianum and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus )
Literature: film: My God and Walter/ Můj Bůh a Walter, Christ/
Kristus, Religion course for youth according to the Catechism of the Catholic
Church. In the eleventh part we will look for answers to many questions
stemming from Creed, TV Noe (i.e. Noah) television program on Sunday, May 8,
2016, broadcasted at 17:35 p.m., see www.tvnoe.cz/porad/muj-buh-walter-kristus
19) 10/05/2016
Merciful multiplication of meat, namely of dead fishes for feeding hosts by
Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ according to modern exact science.
Luke 9King James Version
(KJV), 12 And when the day began to wear away, then came the twelve, and said
unto him, Send the multitude away, that they may go into the towns and country
round about, and lodge, and get victuals: for we are here in a desert place. 13
But he said unto them, Give ye them to eat. And they said, We have no more but
five loaves and two fishes; except we should go and buy meat for all this
people. 14 For they were about five thousand men. And he said to his disciples,
Make them sit down by fifties in a company. 15 And they did so, and made them
all sit down. 16 Then he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking
up to heaven, he blessed them, and brake, and gave to the disciples to set
before the multitude. 17 And they did eat, and were all filled: and there was
taken up of fragments that remained to them twelve baskets.
Vegetarian.cz: Why did
you modify the name (i.e. my previous change of name from meat tax to the
slaughter tax) and what are your reasons for doing so? JUDr. Dalibor Grůza
Ph.D: Here are three reasons. The first one - it is probably not possible to
pay the slaughter (meat) tax for each sale of meat from the slaughterhouse,
wholesaler, retailer to the final customer as in the case of VAT, but one must
use the concept of consumer tax. The obligation to pay the tax will exist only
if the first sale after the slaughter of the animal, so slaughter tax. Second,
the subject of the slaughter (meat) tax will not be only meat but all the goods
from the killed animals, with the exception of registered medicines for sale in
pharmacies, so the slaughter tax. I also responded to the possible evolution of
current scientific knowledge, which may be able to grow any artificial meat
without the slaughter and suffering of animals, the subject of the slaughter
tax will be only meat and other goods from slaughtered animals, not such
artificial flesh (currently so-called fetal calf serum is most often used for
the production of synthetic meat, for whose production it is necessary to kill
a cow, there are non-animal feed of tissue cultures, which is very expensive,
see http://3pol.cz/1101/print ). Philosophy
of Balance p. 299
An even better solution is
probably non-animal serum, because according to the notice of DVM. Jan Dolezal jan.dolezal@merck.com from Intervet s.r.o. a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse
Station, NJ, USA as "maintenance medium" in the production of Nobivac
Rabies vaccine , which is one of the most effective on the market -
revaccination every three years, anything of animal origin is not used, because
according to the notice of technical manager of the parent company from USA:
The previous medium we used for producing the rabies antigen contained various
substances of animal origin; tryptose and lactalbumin hydrolysate (both contain
milk derivatives) and bovine serum albumin.
The veggie medium we now use contains none of these animal-derived
components. We cannot of course supply specific formulation details of the
veggie medium as this is commercially confidential information. Certain doubts
may occur only that, according to perhaps outdated technical information (see
Literature listed below), on the other hand, most tissue cultures grow in
serum-free media worse than in the media with serum. Often it is also necessary
to "accustom" to grow cell culture in serum-free medium" - the
cells are first cultured in a conventional media with serum and then the medium
is gradually replaced by the media with low serum and serum-free medium. Among
other the company Merck & Co. produces also vaccines against viruses in
human medicine. Vaccination of dog at a vet in the Czech Republic against
rabies is about 200, - CZK, 1 dose of vaccine Nobivac Rabies about 35, - CZK, 1
dose of other merciful vaccine CANVAC R-annual revaccination from DYNTEC
s.r.o., apparently not produced from bovine fetal serum but from bovine (blood)
serum, is about 9, - CZK. BOOKLET OF THE
PARTY FOR THE RIGHTS OF ALL LIVING CREATURES p. 50-51
20) 12/05/2016 Muslims as a scourge of God according
to Abu Bakr (about 573 Mecca – 23rd August, 634 anno Domini Medina)
the first caliph after Muhammad, according to the Philosophy of Balance
punishing Christians and Jews especially for contemporary Christian and Jewish
slaughter agricultural factory farms - contemporary concentration camps of here
tortured animals.
What is the substance of below described cruel rules
of Islam, it was expressed in a single biography from that time in Czech language “MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT ALLÁHOVA
PROROKA“/ in Arabic language “Sírat rasúl Alláh“/ in English „The Life Of Muhammad,
Apostle Of Allah“ (see Literature below, chapter Last illness, p. 222) honoured by all Muslims by the first
successor after Muhammad emir Abu Bakr (about 573 Mecca – 23rd
August, 634 AD Medina) in words: 'I am appointed to govern you, although I am
not the best of you. If I act well you must aid me, and if I act unjustly you
must correct me. Truth is faithfulness and falsehood is treachery! No nation
has failed to fight for Allah but Allah has punished it with abasement; nor has
wickedness become widespread without Allah sending calamity. Obey me as long as
I obey Allah and His prophet! But should I rebel against Allah and His prophet
you will owe me no obedience! Rise to your prayers and may Allah have mercy on
you' This implies, that Muslims can be understood equally as such Vandals, Huns
and Mongols, virtually Tatars and Turks (Muslims were related with both
religion and blood to the Mongols, virtually Tatars and Turks) in the past as a
kind of scourge of God punishing Christians, virtually also Jews for their big
mistakes. According to my Philosophy of Balance this big mistake of both
Christians and Jews at present time apparently highly insulting omnipresent
only one God, i.e. charity are especially contemporary Christian and Jewish
slaughter agricultural factory farms - contemporary concentration camps of here
tortured animals, if only one God is omnipresent, so He is also present within
these animals and, if there is some higher justice, so deserved punishment
waits for the perpetrators of this colossal mercilessness causing colossal hatred,
if they do not correct their ways. Therefore nuclear war by Muslims as a kind
of scourge of God can be expected.
Literature:
1) MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT ALLÁHOVA PROROKA, IBN ISHÁK, original
in Arabic language: Sírat rasúl Alláh, from the English edition by Michael
Edwardes, Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad, Apostle Of Allah, published by Royal
Asiatic Society of London in 1898, translated by Viktor Svoboda, in 2009
published by publishing house LEDA spol. s r.o. and by publishing house
Rozmluvy, first edition. See https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, Full text of "Sirat-Life Of Muhammad by -Ibn Ishaq"
2) According to radical Islamists, it is allowed to
use violence to spread Islam. Islam divides the world into two parts. Darul
Harb (land of war) and Darul Islam (land of Islam). Darul Harb is the land of
the infidels, Muslims are asked by radicals to get through to those countries,
turning them over to their faith and multiply themselves until their numbers
increase, and then to begin the war and to fight and to kill people, until they
make Islam the religion and they join this country to Darul Islam. In this
sense, the peaceful Suras of Mecca period the radicals interpreted as Suras
valid during the period, when Islam is weak, and above violent Suras of Meddina
period to be applied by radicals at a time, when Muslims are strong and they
can war against unbelievers. See http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isl%C3%A1m . According to the radicals it is also possible to
cancel any contract with unbelievers, honoring them with the word (Exemption
from God and His messenger for those polytheists with whom you have a
convention., Sura 9, 1).
The dual face of the Koran: Islamic scientists
distinguish Suras that comes from the time of residence of Muhammad in Mecca
(called Mecca period) and Suras from the period of his stay in Medina (the
Medina period). Suras from the Mecca period are considered conciliatory
and peaceful. Suras from the Medina period when Muhammad reached the political
power are marked by jihad by sword, but even these Suras do not
imply approval of war of aggression against unbelieversa according peaceful
Muslims. 1st Killings, corporal punishments, wars: Sura 5,
38: Thieves cut off their hands ... Sura 24, 2: Whip adulterer and the
adulteress, each of them one hundred blows! Sura 24, 4: Those who cast
suspicion on an honest woman, and then do not bring four witnesses, whip eighty
blows ... Sura 2, 178: you who believe, is the prescribed law of blood revenge
for the killing: a free man for free man, slave for slave, woman for woman. ,
Sura 2, 216: And you are prescribed a fight, even when you're uncomfortable,
Sura 2, 244: Fight in the path of God (for Allah)., Sura 4, 74: And to those
who fought in the path of God and be killed or victorious, those we pay
enormous. , Sura 4, 104: Do not finish pursuit of these people in the fight!,
Sura 5, 35: O you who believe! Fear God, and look hard on his way ... Sura 8,
39 [text matches the content of Sura 2, 193] Fight then against them, so there
was no temptation to apostasy, and that all religion was only God (Allah).,
Sura 9, 36 ... but the fight against the infidels as one man, as they fight
against you as a man ... Sura 9, 111: And they fight in the way of God - kill
and are killed., Sura 47, 35: Do not finish and do not suggest to peace,
if you prevail ... Sura 61: God hates the most, that you say something and do
not do it, but surely God loves those who fight in His way tight phalanx as if
they were lead-related construction. , 2nd Tackling
some other religions: Sura 8, 55: The worst creatures of God are
those who are repentantly unbelieving and still do not believe ..., Sura 2,
193: And fight them until the end of seduction from the faith until all religions
belong to God (Allah)., Sura 2, 191 : Kill them everywhere (i.e. infidel
enemies), where overtake, and driving them out of the places from, where they
drove you ... Sura 8, 12: I throw myself into the hearts of those who
disbelieve, fear, and you beat them and beat the backs, after all fingers!
"Sura 4, 76: Those who believe fight in the path of God, and those who
disbelieve, fight in the path of idolatry. Fight against the friends of Satan.,
Sura 9, 5: And when the sacred months elapse, kill the polytheists, wherever
you find them, capture them lay siege to them and give against all kinds of
pitfalls!, Sura 9, 123: O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who
are near the! Let them find hardness in you and know, that God is at hand,
God-fearing!, 3rd Corporal punishments: Sura 5, 38:
Thieves cut off their hands in retaliation for what he done ... Sura 24, 2:
whip adulterer and the adulteress, each one hundred blows!, Sura 24, 4: Those
who cast suspicion on the virtuous woman and then do not bring four witnesses
whip eighty blows ... Sura 4, 34: Men occupy the position over women ... And
those whose disobedience you fear, and warn they should recognize a place to
sleep and beat them, 4th Violation of the principles of equality:
Sura 2, 228 ... but men are a step above the women ... Sura 4, 34: Men
occupy the position over women ... And those whose disobedience you fear, and
warn they should recognize a place to sleep and beat them, Sura 4, 11: And God
will provide for your children this: his son for a share of the share of two
daughters, Sura 9, 29: Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day
and do not prohibit what God has forbidden and His messenger, and who not
worship a religion of truth, of those who received the scripture - until they
charge directly to their own hands, being humiliated., 5th
Violations of universal human rights: Sura 2, 223: your wives are
your field, Enter ye therefore your land, where you want to ... Sura 4, 15:
Against those of your women who commit folly, as witnesses to take the four of
you. And if they testify to, hold women in houses until death or it will not be
deprived by God (Allah) them of a way out. 6th
Violation of general personal rights: Sura 33, 36 And neither
believer or the believer is not given the choice in matters of when God and His
Messenger decide one thing ... Sura 33.50: Prophet! They let you have your
wife, whom you have given dowry, and those whom thy right hand seized from
those God has given you as booty, and your cousin's paternal cousin and your
mother's side who emigrated with you - and each wife, if she gave the Prophet
wishes to marry the prophet dream - and it is exclusively for you, not for
other believers., Sura 60, 10: ... and if you find, that they are believers
(they) do not send them back to the unbelievers, since they are not allowed,
nor they are allowed to them ... 7th Rejection of religious
freedom: Sura 2, 191 ... misleading their faith is worse than
killing., Sura 2, 217 ... to blame the faith is worse than killing., Sura 47,
8: those however who do not believe, let fall accidents and let God
err their works!, 8th Various Suras: Sura 47,
4-5: And when faced with the unbelievers, strike them in the neck, and when you
cause them a complete defeat, firmly confine them, Sura 48, 28: And he is the
one who sent a messenger to their right guidance and with true religion to give
him victory over every other religion. And God is sufficient witness (see also
5, 34), Sura 66, 9: Prophet, fight hard against the unbelievers and the
hypocrites and be strict to them! Their refuge is Hell - how disgusting is that
the final goal! , Sura 9, 123: O you who believe! Fight those of the
unbelievers who are near the! Let them find hardness in you and know, that God
is at hand, God-fearing! , Sura 8, 39: Fight therefore against them, so there
was no temptation to apostasy, and that all religion was only God. , Sura 98,
6: And surely those who are unbelievers owners of Scripture (i.e. Jews and
Christians) .... and are the worst of all creatures!, Sura 4, 89: and they
would like to become non-believers, as they are, and you were the same. Do not
take among them friends until they go the path of God! And if they turn back,
then seize and kill, you will find them anywhere! And do not take any friends
or helpers ... Sura 2, 216: And you are prescribed a fight, even when you're
uncomfortable. However, it is possible that something unpleasant to you, what
is good for you, and it is possible to love something that is bad for you, only
God knows while you do not know. (Here, here is the combat with arms), Sura 4,
74: Let battle on the path of God those who are buying for a life on Earth a
future life! And to those who fought in the path of God and be killed or
victorious, we reward those immense., Sura 9, 5: And when the sacred months
elapse, kill the polytheists, wherever you find them, capture them lay siege to
them and give against all kinds of dangers ! If, however, turns contrite, will
observe prayer and give alms, let them go their way, for God he is surely
Forgiving, Merciful., Sura 9, 52: What can you expect for us other than one of
two beautiful rewards (victory or martyrdom while we expect only to you that
God will intervene punishment from Him that will affect our very hands? Just
wait, we with you will also be expected. "Sura 2, 193: And fight them
until the end of seduction from the faith until all religions belong to God.,
Sura 9, 111: And God surely bought from the believers their persons and their
possessions, that they have been given the garden. And they are fighting on the
path of God - kill and are killed. ... So rejoice in Him with his business
closed - and that success is enormous., Sura 4, 76: Those who believe fight in
the path of God, and those who disbelieve, fight in the path Tághůta. Fight
against the friends of Satan, they are weak plots of Satan against you!, Sura
4, 84: Fight in the path of God, you will not bear burden other than your
own... Encourage the faithful…, Sura 5, 17: Surely they are unbelievers who
say: "Surely God is the Messiah, son of Mary!" Sura 5, 52: O you who
believe! Do not take Jews and Christians as friends ... Sura 3, 118: O you who
believe! Do not like anyone but the trustees of your people!, Sura 9, 41: Go
into a fight lighter or harder and fight your assets and people to the way
of God., Sura 4, 104: Do not finish pursuit of these people! And if you suffer,
they suffer ", Sura 47, 35: a waning do not suggest to peace, if you
prevail ... Sura 5, 38 (42): Thieves cut off their hands in retaliation
for what they had done as a cautionary example of God! And God is Mighty,
wise., Sura 4, 89: ... and if they turn back, then seize and kill, you will
find them anywhere! Philosophy
of Balance p. 140-142, see http://home.graffiti.net/budoucnost-evropy:graffiti.net/roz/islam_cr.html : údajně soukromá iniciativa občanů z
různých vrstev společnosti anonymní kvůli
možné pomstě muslimů.
21) 13/05/2016 Probabilities of end or salvation of Western
rational civilization and of victory or contrarily of the rationalization of
primitive instincts on Earth.
According to my Philosophy
of Balance, if in long term in the world there is law of love, i.e. of caritas
(defined in an obvious way in my Philosophy of Balance, that "All living
creatures in fact mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each
other, therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death
and pain. All the rest consists more in views (speculations).) the most
powerful and if great progress in removing colossal unnecessary death and pain,
especially of animals on Earth is not achieved, then it should be the
probability 95-100% of the end of Western rational civilization and the re victory
of primitive instincts on Earth, it should be in a short time due to the
efficiency of existing mass-destructive nuclear weapons. However, it is not
possible to determine unambiguously, if it is through rise of Nazism again or through
the war with Muslims or otherwise.
If however in long term
in the world there is law of love, i.e. of caritas the most powerful (which
corresponds to my Christian faith, see Bible King James Version (KJV), Genesis
8, 20 And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast,
and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And the
Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again
curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is
evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as
I have done. 22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and
heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.), so with the
probability of at least 51% people will correct their ways and great progress
in removing colossal unnecessary death and pain, especially of animals on Earth
will be achieved in a short time, and there will not be the end of Western
rational civilization and the re victory of primitive instincts on Earth.
22) 21/05/2016 The Prophet Muhammad, i.e. alive
against the Christian Mahomet or Mohamed, i.e. dead
Content:
Introduction: Semitic philology of
important Arabic words in Islam
A/ Loyalty of orthodox Muslims to the
Prophet through bloodshed
C/ Effort of the Prophet of peaceful
obtaining Jews to Islam
D/ Why did Muslims reject Judaism and
Christianity according to Islam
E/ Killing of in Islam disbelieving
Arabs and Jews in Islam by Muslims at Prophet's time
F/ Prophet's poisoning by captured
apparently Jewish woman
J/ Prophet's companions should not
resist the Prophet as his disciples resisted Jesus
Introduction:
Semitic philology of important Arabic words in Islam
1) MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT ALLÁHOVA PROROKA, IBN ISHÁK, original
in Arabic language: Sírat rasúl Alláh, from the English edition by Michael
Edwardes, Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad, Apostle Of Allah, published by Royal
Asiatic Society of London in 1898, translated by Viktor Svoboda, in 2009
published by publishing house LEDA spol. s r.o. and by publishing house
Rozmluvy, first edition. See https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, Full text of "Sirat-Life Of Muhammad by -Ibn Ishaq" .
St. John Damascene, a Syrian Christian and theologian
(675-749) considered Muhammad as a false prophet ... In the Christian West the
prophet of Islam is called Mahomet, Mohamed ... (above mentioned see Afterword
p. 225-226 of the Literature in Czech language). I let it to readers of my
extract of regarding my Philosophy of Balance important parts of the text from single
by all Muslims honoured biography “MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT ALLÁHOVA PROROKA/ in English
„The Life Of Muhammad, Apostle Of Allah“, author Ibn Ishaq, if his name should
sound Muhammad (apparently in Hebrew
language "amad" - stood or alive) or Mahomet, Mohamed (apparently
in Hebrew language "met" - dead).
Wocabulary: Banu Qurayza (in Hebrew language „ben“ - son), Aisha (in
Hebrew language „isha“ – women), Arab (in Hebrew language „rabim/rav“ – plural
number/many, rabbins/ rabbin – Jewish
spiritual), Islam and Muslim (in Hebrew language „shalom“ – peace), Ansar (in
Hebrew language „nasir“ - prince)
(A/ Loyalty of orthodox Muslims to the Prophet through
bloodshed)
5-
Night Journey
…
Al-Abbas spoke first, saying,
"You know that Muhammad is our kinsman! We have protected him against
those of our own people who oppose him. He enjoys dignity among his people, and
protection in his country; nevertheless, he shuns them and wishes to ally
himself with you. If, therefore you think you can keep your promise and protect
him against his enemies, you may assume the burden you have undertaken; but if
there is any likelihood of your surrendering and abandoning him after he has
gone over to you, then leave him be for he is safer among his own people."
Then we asked the apostle for his
opinion and he said, "I call on you to protect me as you would protect
your own women and children!"
A man
called al-Bara then took hold of his hand, and swore, "We shall protect
you against everything from which we protect our own selves. Accept therefore
our allegiance. We are warriors who have inherited the right to arms."
This
speech was interrupted by Abul-Haytham, who said, "We have ties with other
men (he meant the Jews) which we should have to sever. If we do this, and Allah
aids you to victory, will you not return to your own people and abandon
us?"
The
apostle of Allah smiled and replied, "By no means. Blood is blood, and
shedding is shedding; you belong to me and I to you'.
I
shall fight those whom you fight, and I shall be at peace with him who is at
peace with you. Bring me twelve leaders who may be charged with their people's
affairs." And they brought nine men from the Khazraj tribe and three from
the Aus tribe.
The
apostle of Allah said to the twelve leaders' "You are the sureties for
your people just as Jesus' disciples were, and I stand surety for my
people." And they agreed.
Al-Abbas
asked the people, "Are you aware of the conditions on which you pledge
allegiance to this man? You pledge yourselves to him, to wage war against all
and sundry. If your possessions should be ruined by misfortune and your nobles
slain, and you should give him up, then you will reap shame in this world and
the next. If, however, you think you can keep your promises in the face of all
misfortune, then it will profit you in this world and the next."
They
replied, "We shall take him even at the risk of losing all else", and
turning to the apostle they asked, "But what will be our reward if we keep
our promise?" He replied, " Paradise " and they said
"Stretch forth thy hand", and paid homage.'
6-
Permission to Wage War
When Allah gave His apostle
permission to wage war, the promise to tight immediately became a condition of
allegiance to Islam. This had not been so at the tirst meeting on the hillside,
when homage was paid 'in the manner of women'; Allah had not then given His
apostle permission to fight. He had given permission neither to wage war nor to
shed blood, but only to call men to Allah, to endure insults patiently, and to
pardon the ignorant. Some of the followers of the apostle had therefore been
forced to flee from persecution into the countryside, some to Abyssinia, others
to Medina and elsewhere. When the Quraysh rejected the mercy of Allah and
spurned His prophet, they tormented or drove away men who proclaimed the
One-ness of Allah, believed in His prophet, and adhered to His religion.
Allah therefore permitted Muhammad
to fight and to aid his against those who tyrannized over them. The first verse
which came down permitting him to wage war and to shed began, 'Permission is
granted unto those who fight they have been oppressed, and Allah may aid those
who have been driven from their homes merely for saying "Our Lord is
Allah". The verse continued by explaining that they had committed no crime
against the people except that they worshipped Allah, and when they made Islam
universal they would observe the appointed times of prayer, give alms, and
enjoin all men to do good and to abstain from evil. Then a further verse was
recorded: Tight against them until there be no more temptation' - until
Believers shall no more be tempted to abandon their religion - 'and until the
religion be Allah's', that is, until Allah alone shall be worshipped and none
else besides Him.
Since permission to fight had now
been granted, the apostle of Allah accepted allegiance at the second meeting on
the hill only from people who swore to fight for him and his Lord against all
men. He promised paradise as a reward.
'After the act of allegiance was
over, Satan roared from the top of the hill in such a loud voice as I had never
heard. He cried to the people of Mina [the surrounding countryside]:
"Beware of this despicable apostate and his followers! Verily they are
assembled to attack you!"
And the apostle of Allah replied
"This is the Contemptible One of the hill. Hearken to me, o enemy of
Allah! I shall make an end of thee yet!"
…
When
on the hill, the Helpers (in Arabic language "Ansars") swore
allegiance to the apostle, to adopt Islam, to aid him and those who followed
him as well as any other Muslims who might seek shelter with them, he ordered
his companions and others who were with him in Mecca to emigrate to Medina ,
that they might meet their Helper brothers. He said: ' Allah has marked out for
you kinsmen and homes where you may find refuge.' Accordingly, the Meccan
followers left the city in groups. These were afterwards known as the Emigrants
(in Arabic language Muhadzirs), and were then over one hundred in number.
(B/ Persecution of Muslims and attempt to kill the
Prophet from inhabitants of Mecca disbelieving in islam)
But the apostle of Allah remained
in Mecca, waiting for his Lord's command to leave Mecca and to migrate to
Medina.
7-
Hijra
…
When the Quraysh saw that the
apostle of Allah had gathered a united group and had gained adherents in
another country, and when they saw his companions emigrating to that country,
they realized that he had found shelter and protection. Accordingly they began
to fear that the apostle of Allah might join his followers, and they knew that
he was now determined to fight if necessary. They therefore met to consult on
what they should do.
Satan
himself greeted them at the door of their meeting-place in the guise of an aged
sheikh, dressed in a cloak. When they asked him who he was, he replied, ' A
sheikh who has heard of your intended discussion and has come to listen to what
you say; and perhaps my opinion and advice will not be lost upon you.' So he
entered with them.
…
Abu Jahl at last exclaimed, 'By
Allah I have a plan which none of you has yet thought of, and they asked, 'What
is it, o father of wisdom?'
He said, 'I propose that from every
tribe we should take one young, poweriul, well-born man. To each of these, we
should give a good sword with which to strike Muhammad. So we shall be
delivered of him, his blood will be divided among all the tribes, and his
followers will not have the strength to make war on so many.'
The sheikh said, 'I see no other
plan and the people adopted the proposal and then dispersed.
But
Gabriel came to the apostle of Allah and said to him, 'Do not spend this night
in thy accustomed bed.'
When
a part of the night had elapsed the conspirators assembled at Muhammad's door
to watch him, intending to fall upon lie he was asleep. …
Meanwhile Abu Jahljeeringly told
the waiting conspirators, 'Muhammad says that if you follow him you will become
princes both of the Arabs and the non-Arabs, that you will be resurrected after
death, and given gardens like the gardens of Jordan; but if you do not follow
him, he will kill you and after death you will be resurrected and burn in the
fires of hell.'
The
apostle went out to them and said, ' Yes! That is the truth', and Allah blinded
them so that they could not see him. Then Muhammad scattered dust on their
heads, recited a verse from the Koran, and went about his business.
…
Allah now permitted His prophet to
emigrate.
(C/ Effort of the Prophet of peaceful obtaining Jews
to Islam)
8-
Medina
…
Therefore adore Allah, and
associate nothing idolatrous with Him! Fear him with the fear that is His due.
Carry out towards Allah all that you say you will, and love one another in the
spirit of Allah, because He becomes wrathful when His covenant is broken. The peace
of Allah be with you, and His mercy!'
In Medina the apostle of Allah drew
up a document concerning the Emigrants and the Helpers, and the making of a
treaty with the Jews which would ensure to both sides the maintenance of their
religion and possessions, and laid down certain conditions of the alliance.
'In the name of Allah the merciful,
the compassionate! This concerns the Believers fled from Mecca and those of
Medina , as well as those who follow them; join with them, and fight with them,
for they are a community excluding all other men. 'The Emigrants from Mecca
shall pay blood-ransom among themselves and redeem their prisoners with the
righteousness and justice suitable among Believers. The Helper tribes of Medina
shall do the same. Believers shall not abandon him who is destitute among them,
but shall aid him with gifts, drawn either from the ransom of prisoners or the
blood-ransom paid for persons slain.
'Believers shall guard against him
who rebels, or seeks to spread enmity or wickedness among them; let every man's
hand be against him, even should he be the son of a Believer. No Believer shall
kill another for the sake of an infidel nor aid an infidel against a Believer.
Verily, the protection of Allah is indivisible and extends to the meanest Believer
of all; and each must befriend other Believers above all men.
'Jews who follow us shall be given
aid and equality; they shall not be oppressed, nor shall aid be given to others
against them.
'The safety of Believers is
indivisible; no one shall be saved at the expense of another, when battles are
being fought in the name of Allah, save with equity and justice. In every
religious campaign, Believers must aid one another in avenging blood spilled in
the way of Allah.
'No idolater is permitted to take
under his protection any property, nor any person, belonging to a Quraysh
Unbeliever, or to aid a Quraysh against a Believer. He who kills a Believer
will himself be killed - unless his victim's kinsmen accept blood- -ransom and
it is the duty of all Believers to exact the penalty. He who aids or shelters a
malefactor will earn the curse and wrath of Allah on the day of resurrection,
nor will there be any escape there from. If you are at variance on any matter,
refer it or to Allah or to Muhammad.
'The Jews will share the cost with
the Believers as long as they fight a common foe; the Jews are one community
with the Believers (but they have their own religion as the Believers have
theirs). As with the Jews, so with their adherents, except for him who commits
a crime.
'None shall depart to war except by
the permission of Muhammad, but none shall be hindered from avenging an injury.
He who does ill only brings ill upon himself and upon his family, unless he be
oppressed; then Allah will justify his deed. There shall be mutual aid between
Believers and Jews, in face of any who war against those who subscribe to this
document, and mutual consultations and advice. No man shall injure his ally,
and aid shall be granted to the oppressed. The Jews, when fighting alongside
the Believers, will bear their own expenses. Medina shall be sacred territory
to those who agree to this covenant.
If there should be any differences
of opinion concerning this covenant and its meaning, they must be placed before
Allah and Muhammad the apostle of Allah.
'Neither the Quraysh nor those who
aid them are to be protected. Mutual aid will be given by Believers and Jews
against who may attack Medina . If the Jews are called on by the Believers to
make peace, they must comply; and if the Believers are called on by the Jews to
make peace, they must agree, except in the case of a holy war. Every man shall
be allotted his reward by his own tribe.
'Allah requires that this document
shall be ratitied and put into effect; but it will not protect the unrighteous
or the sinner. Allah protects the just and the pious, and Muhammad is the
apostle of Allah'.
…
(D/ Why did Muslims reject Judaism and Christianity
according to Islam)
Some
Jewish rabbis came one day to the apostle of Allah and said, 'Answer us four
questions satisfactorily, and we shall believe in you.'
The apostle replied, 'On the
covenant of Allah? Then ask what you will.'
They
asked, 'Tell us how an infant can resemble its mother, when the seed comes from
the man?'
The
apostle of Allah said, 'Do you not know that the seed of a man is white and
thick, whereas that of a woman is yellow and thin and that which prevails over
the other imparts the resemblance They exclaimed, 'That is the truth', and
continued: 'Then tell us about thy sleep.' He said, 'My eyes sleep, but my
heart is awake.'
Then
they asked: 'Tell us what Israel denied himself and he replied, 'Do you not
know that the food and drink he most relished was the flesh and milk of the
camel; and when he fell prey to a disease and Allah delivered him, in gratitude
he forswore the food and drink he liked most, the tlesh and milk of camels.'
They said, 'That is the truth.'Pak
se zeptali: Then they asked, 'Tell us about the Spirit?'
He replied, 'It is Gabriel, who
comes to me.'
Then the rabbis said: Agreed. But
Gabriel is an enemy to us, and comes with violence and bloodshed. If this were
not so we would follow thee!' …
When
the Christians of Najran came to the apostle of Allah, Jewish rabbis came also
and they disputed before the apostle. One Jew said to the Christians, You are
nothing!' and denied Jesus and the gospel; then a Christian said to the Jews,
You are nothing and denied that Moses was a prophet, and denied the Torah.
Then
Allah revealed the following verse. 'The Jews say the Christians are nothing,
and the Christians say the Jews are nothing yet they both base their arguments
on scripture. They are ignorant, and Allah will judge between them on the day
of the resurrection.'
Then
the Jewish rabbis disputed with the Christians of Najran saying, Abraham was no
other than a Jew.'
And
the Christians from Najran said, Abraham was no other than a Christian'.
Then
Allah revealed the verse, 'Why do you quarrel about Abraham, when the Torah and
the gospel were not sent down until after his time. You have disputed about
things you know , why then do you dispute about things you know not? Allah
knoweth, but you know not. Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian. He was an
orthodox Muslim, and he was no idolater. Those closest to Abraham are those who
follow him and this prophet, and those who believe. Allah is the protector of
the faithful.' Then a Christian asked
Muhammad, 'Do you want to worship you as we worship Jesus, son of Mary?'
The apostle replied, Allah forbid that I should worship
anyone besides Him, or command any other besides Him to be worshipped. Allah
has not sent me to do that."
9- The
Qibla
Seventeen
months after the apostle arrived in Medina the qibla [the direction in which
Muhammad and his followers faced during prayers] was changed from Jerusalem to
Mecca . Several Jews came to him and taunted him: '0 Muhammad! What has turned
you away from the aiblayou used to face? You allege that you follow the
religion of Abraham; return, then, to the qibla of the religion of Abraham, to
which you turned before, and we shall follow you and believe in you. 'But they
slyly intended thus to turn him away from his religion.
Then
Allah revealed the words: Toolish men say "What hath turned them away from
the qibla to which they prayed?" Reply, "Allah's is the east and the
west, He leads whom He will to the straight path." 'And Allah said, 'Turn
thy face to the holy mosque [the Kaba at Mecca ; and wherever you are, turn thy
face tothat.'
Once,
Muadh asked some Jewish rabbis about a subject mentioned in the Torah, but they
rerused to answer him about it. So Allah revealed the verse, Those who conceal
what We have sent down, after We have made it plain, will be cursed by Allah.'
Again
the apostle of Allah invited the Jews, possessors of the scripture, to accept
Islam and tried to enlist them in its favour; but he also threatened them with
the punishment and vengeance of Allah. He was told, 'Nay. We shall follow that
religion which our fathers professed, because they were more learned and better
men than we are.'
Allah
the most high and glorious therefore sent down the verse which says, 'And when
it is said to them 'Tollow that revelation which Allah has sent down",
they say. "Nay, we shall follow that which we found our fathers
practise." What? Though their fathers knew nothing, and were not rightly
guided!'
On
another occasion the apostle entered a Jewish school and invited those who were
present to Allah. They asked, 'What is your religion, Muhammad?' and he
replied, The religion of Abraham.'
They
said, Abraham was a Jew.'
Then the apostle told them, 'Bring
the Torah and let that judge between me and you', but they refused.
…
One
day Abu Bakr entered the schoolhouse of the Jews and found many of them
assembled around a man whose name was Finhas. He was a doctor and rabbi, and
had with him another rabbi called Ashya. Abu Bakr said to Finhas, 'Woe betide
thee. Fear Allah, and make profession of Islam!'
Finhas
replied, "We have no need of Allah, but He has need of us! We do not
beseech Him as He beseeches us. We are independent of Him, but He is not
independent of us. If He were independent of us, He would not ask for our money
as your master Muhammad does [for a war against Mecca ]. He forbids usury to
you, but pays us interest; if He were independent of us He would give us no
interest.'
At
this, Abu Bakr became angry, and struck Finhas violently, saying, 'I swear by
Him in whose hands my life rests that if there were no treaty between us I
would have struck off your head, you enemy of Allah!'
Then Finhas went to the apostle of
Allah and said, 'See what your companion has done to me! Abu Bakr explained
what happened, but Finhas denied the whole matter and said, 'I spoke no such
words!' But Allah revealed a verse conrirming the words of Abu Bakr.
10-
Rajam
Early in MuhammacTs stay at Medina
the rabbis had met to judge a married man who had committed adultery with a
Jewish woman who was also married. They said, 'Send this man and this woman to
Muhammad, ask him for a judgement of the case, and let him prescribe the
penalty. If he decides to condemn them to the tajbih - when criminals are
scourged with a rope of date-fibres dipped in resin, then have their faces
blackened and are placed on two donkeys with their faces turned towards the
rump - 'then obey him, for he is a prince, and believe in him. But if he
condemns them to be stoned, he is a prophet; then be on your guard against him,
lest he deprive you of what you have.'
They had asked the apostle's
judgement and he went to where the priests sat, and said to them, 'Bring me
your learned men!" They brought him Abdullah b. Suriya, who was the most
learned, though one of the youngest, among them. The apostle talked alone with
him and had him confirm on oath that according to the Torah, Allah condemns to
stoning the man who commits adultery after marriage'.
Suriya added, 'They know you are an
inspired prophet, but they envy you!'
Then the apostle went out and
ordered the culprits to be stoned in front of the mosque. When the man felt the
first stone he bent over his mistress to protect her from the stones, until
they were killed. This is what Allah did for His apostle, to exact the penalty
for adultery from these two persons.
The
apostle asked the Jews what had induced them to abandon of stoning for
adultery, when it was prescribed in the Torah. They said the penalty had been
observed until a man of royal blood (my note: apparently Biblical King David
with wife of his soldier Uriah, whom then Biblical King David let kill in a
fight) committed adultery, and 'the king would not allow him to be stoned.
When, after this, another man committed adultery and the king desired that he
be stoned, they said, "Not unless you also permit the first man to be
stoned." Then all agreed to resort to scourging, and both the memory and
practice of stoning died out.'
Then the apostle of Allah said, 'I
was the first to revive the command of Allah, His scripture, and obedience to
it.
On
another occasion a company of Jews came to the apostle Allah has created
creation, but who created Allah?'
And
the apostle became so angry that his colour changed, and he leapt up in zeal
for his Lord. But Gabriel came and quieted him, and said, "Calm thyself,
Muhammad!" Gabriel brought a reply from Allah to what they had asked him.
'Say "He is the one god! Allah is self-generating! He begetteth not, nor
is begotten! And there is none equal."
After
he had recited this to them, they said: 'Describe Him to us, o Muhammad! What
is His shape? His arm - what is the strength of His arm?'
The
apostle became even more wrathful and he leapt up once more; but Gabriel again
came and told him to be calm and brought a reply from Allah. 'They have not
properly understood the power of Allah! He will grasp the whole earth on the
day of the resurrection, and the heavens will be rolled up in His right hand!
Praised be He, and exalted above all their idols'.
A
deputation of Christians from Najran, … arrived on a visit to the apostle; …
When
the delegation arrived in Medina they entered the mosque while the apostle was
holding his afternoon prayers. When the time arrived for their own prayers they
stood up in the mosque of the apostle and made their devotions; and the apostle
of Allah said, 'It is permitted.' And they prayed with their faces towards the
east.
The
three leaders, although Christians, differed among themselves on some points.
They said that He was God [or Allah'], because He brought the dead to life,
healed the sick, made known the unknown, created a bird from clay, breathed on
and gave it life; they said that He was also the Son of God because He had no
known father and spoke in His cradle, which no other human had ever done
before; and they said, too, that He was the third of the Trinity, because the
word of God was always We have acted, We have commanded . . .'and if God were
but one, His word would be have commanded, I have created. . . ' Thus He is He,
and He is Jesus and He is Mary. (note of translator to the Czech language
Viktor Svobody. Biographer Ibn Ishaq regarded Mary as part of the Christian
Trinity, as it is indirectly in Koran verse 5:116)
11-The
Trinity
The apostle said to them, 'Resign
yourself to the will of Allah, and they replied, 'We did so before thee".
'You lie! said Muhammad. 'You say
that Allah has a son, you worship the cross, and you eat the flesh of pigs;
these prohibit you from submission.'
Then Allah revealed the Sura known
as The Family ojlmran which begins by refuting the Christian Trinity, and
proclaiming omnipotence and one-ness of Allah. There is no god but He, the
Living, the Eternal who cannot die; but Jesus died and was crucified. Allah has
sent down the Koran, the criterion of truth and falsehood in matters of
difference over Jesus and others. Those who disbelieve the directions of Allah
will suffer grievous punishment; for Allah is mighty and avenging. Nothing is
hidden from Allah on earth or in heaven and He knows what the Christians intend
with their claims that Jesus is Lord and God. But Allah formed Jesus in the
womb - this the Christians do not deny - as He formed other human beings; how,
then, can Jesus be god?
It is Allah who has sent down the
scripture with clear and categorical verses at the core. But other verses are
obscure and convoluted and can be explained in several ways; and these are sent
by Allah to test men. Those in whose hearts there is per- versity expound their
own interpretation of them as if it were categorical truth, or clothe their own
inventions in the obscurity of the verses. But truthrul men balance the clear
verses with the obscure and thus the parts of the scripture clarify each other;
the argument is plain, the justification becomes evident, falsehood is removed,
and unbelief is defeated.
Although Allah gave Jesus powers of
various kinds (on the basis of which the Christians believe him to be God), it
was in order to make him a sign to mankind, to rurnish them with proofs of his
prophetic mission. But Allah held back many manifestations of His dominion and
power, such as the succession of day by night and night by day, and bringing
forth the living from the dead and the dead from the living. Over none of these
matters did He give power to Jesus, but all of these would have been at his
disposal had he been God; instead, he fled from kings, from country to country.
Then Allah explained to them the
origins of Jesus. Allah selected Adam and Noah, and the family of Abraham and
the family of Imran above all other men, in successive generations. The wife of
Imran dedicated the child in her womb to Allah and when she was delivered of it
she said, 'O Lord, I have brought forth a daughter. I have called her Mary, and
I commend her and her issue to Thy protection.' Allah accepted her graciously,
and made her grow to a goodly woman.
Then the angels said to her: Allah
has chosen thee and has purified thee. He has chosen thee above all other
women. Bend down to the Lord and worship!'
She said: Lord! How can I have a
child when no man has touched me.'
He said: 'Allah createth what He
pleaseth, Then He said: 'We shall teach him the scripture, and wisdom and the
Torah - which had been with them from the time of Moses -'and the gospel. And
he will be an apostle to the children of Israel , saying, "I have come to
you with a sign from your Lord. Allah is my Lord and your Lord, and I shall
heal those who are blind from birth, and lepers. And I shall revive the dead
with the permission of Allah, and will tell you of what you eat, and what you store
up in your houses. Herein will be a sign for you that I am an apostle from
Allah, if ye are believers in the Torah.'"
Allah took Jesus to Himself when
they had determined to kill him. 'They devised a stratagem, and Allah devised a
stratagem but Allah is the best deviser of stratagems.' Allah lifted him up and
purified him; 'the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam,
whom He created of dust, saying 'Be" And he was. I created Adam of dust,
without the intervention of man or woman, and he became - like Jesus - flesh,
blood, hair, and skin. So the creation of Jesus without a man is no more
wonderful than that of Adam.'
After hearing this, the Christians
said to Muhammad, Allow us to consider the matter and let us then return to
tell you what we mean to do.' Then they discussed in private and Abdul Masih
said: 'You know that Muhammad is an inspired prophet; and no nation ever cursed
a prophet without its chiefs dying, and the number of its children diminishing.
If you do this, you will perish; but if you do not curse him and yet wish to
stay in your own religion, then take leave of the man and return to your own
country. ' Accordingly, they went to the apostle and said to him, "We have
decided to leave you in your religion, and to remain in our own; but send one
of your companions with us and let him judge among us concerning all
differences of property that may arise; for we are impressed with you.' The
apostle of Allah agreed to their request.
(above mentioned see p. 37-58)
(E/ Killing of in Islam disbelieving Arabs and Jews in
Islam by Muslims at Prophet's time)
12 -First
Caravan
When Allah made plunder permissible
He allowed four parts to those who had won it, and one part to Himself and to
His apostle, exactly as Abdullah had done with the captured caravan.
This was the occasion when the
first booty was taken by the Muslims, when the first prisoners were taken by
the Muslims and when the first man was slain by the Muslims. It was eighteen
months since the Emigrants had arrived in Medina.
(above mentioned see p. 61)
18-
Banu Qurayza
… The apostle of Allah besieged the
Qurayza for twenty-five days until they were distressed, and Allah struck fear
into their hearts.
… Kab, their chief, spoke to them
thus. I have three suggestions … We can obey this man and believe in him; for
it is plain that he is an inspired prophet. In this case, your lives, property
and children will be secure.' They replied, 'We shall never abandon the
commandments of the Torah, nor substitute any others for them.'
He went on, 'If you reject this, we
can kill our children and women, and go out to Muhammad and his companions with
drawn swords; then God will decide between us and Muhammad. If we perish, we
shall perish without leaving orphans who might suffer evil, but if we are
victorious, I swear we shall take their wives and their children!'
They rejoined, 'Should we kill
these poor creatures? What would life be to us without them?'
He said, 'If you reject this, too,
then consider. This is the Sabbath night, and it is possible that Muhammad
thinks he is secure. Let us therefore make a sortie, and we may surprise him
and his men.'
But they answered, 'Shall we
desecrate the Sabbath, and do on the Sabbath what none has done before save
those who were afterwards transformed into apes?'
Kab said at last, 'Not a man of you
has, from the time his mother gave him birth, been able to hold firm to a
decision for even one single night'
…
In the morning the Qurayza came
down from their fort to surrender to the apostle of Allah, and the Aus begged
that - as the apostle had dealt leniently with allies of the Khazraj - he would
do the same for the allies of the Aus. The apostle said, 'Would you like one of
your own people to decide their fate' and they welcomed it. He continued, 'Then
let Sad b. Muadh decide.' Sad had been struck by an arrow in the defence of the
Ditch, so his people mounted him on a donkey - with a leather pillow under him,
for he was a stout and handsome man ...
…
Then Sad asked, 'Do you covenant
with Allah to abide by my decision?' and they said, 'We do!' The apostle of
Allah also replied, 'Yes.'
And Sad pronounced the following
sentence, 'I decree that the men be killed, the property be divided, and the
women with their children be made captives.'
…
The apostle of Allah imprisoned the
Qurayza in Medina while trenches were dug in the market-place. Then he sent for
the men and had their heads struck off so that they fell in the trenches. They
were brought out in groups, and among them was Kab, the chief of the tribe. In
number, they amounted to six or seven hundred, although some state it to have
been eight or nine hundred. All were executed. …
Aisha, the wife of the apostle,
said, 'Only one of their women was killed. By Allah! She was with me, talking and
laughing, while the apostle slaughtered her countrymen in the marketplace; and
when her name was called, I asked, "What is this for?" and she
replied, "I am going to be slain!" I asked why and she answered,
"For something I have done! " Then she was taken away, and her head
was struck off. But I shall never cease to marvel at her good humour and
laughter, although she knew that she was to die."
She was the woman who threw a
millstone down from the Qurayza fort and killed a Believer.
Now the apostle distributed the property of the Banu
Qurayza, as well as their women and children, to the Muslims, reserving
one-fifth for himself
…
After the Qurayza had been slain,
and their possessions dispersed, the wound of Sad opened again and he died a
martyr. In the middle of the night Gabriel, wearing a turban of gold brocade,
came to the apostle, and asked, 'Who is this dead man for whom the gates of
heaven stand ajar and for whom the throne quivers with joy?' At this, the
apostle rose in haste and went to Sad, but he found him dead.
(above mentioned see p. 82-84)
(F/ Prophet's poisoning by captured apparently Jewish
woman)
20-
Khaybar
… After the apostle of Allah had
rested, the captive woman Zaynab brought him a roasted sheep. She had asked
what portion of the sheep the apostle of Allah most enjoyed and, having been
told that it was the leg, she put much poison into it, although she also
poisoned the whole sheep. When she placed it before the apostle he took a bite,
but did not swallow; Bishr likewise took a piece, but he did swallow. Then the
apostle of Allah spat his out, saying, 'This bone informs me that it is
poisoned.' He summoned the woman, who confessed what she had done, and asked,
'What made thee do this?'
She replied, 'It is no secret to
thee, what my people feel towards thee. I said to myself, "If he be only a
king, we shall be delivered of him; but if he be a prophet, he will know of the
poison and guard himself" The apostle released her, but Bishr died of the
piece he had eaten.
During his last sickness, years
later, the apostle said, 'I feel the vein of my heart bursting from the food I
ate at Khaybar'; from these words, Muslims conclude that the apostle died a
martyr of battle, as well as being favoured by Allah with the dignity of
prophetic office.
(above mentioned see p. 90-91)
(G/ Declaration of partial release from performing any
contracts with idolaters, Islam as a religion of Abraham and other most
important rules of Islamic law)
25-Tabuk
… When Abu Bakr and the Muslims who
accompanied him had departed the Declaration ojimmunity was sent down by Allah.
It proclaimed that Allah and His apostle, after this pilgrimage, were absolved
from observance of all treaties which they had previously made with idolaters.
Therefore if you [the idolaters] repent, this will be better for you; but if
you turn your backs, know that you cannot weaken Allah! And warn those who
disbelieve that there will be grievous punishment. An exception shall be made
for those idolaters who have not infringed treaties, and who have given no one
aid against My prophet. Their treaties shall be observed until their terms
expire, because Allah loves those who are pious.
'When four months have elapsed, the
instruction to Muhammad continued, 'kill the idolaters wherever you find them;
make them prisoners, surround them, and besiege them wherever they may be. But
if they repent and pray according to the command of Allah and pay the tax, then
set them free, because Allah is forgiving and merciful.'
When the Declaration ojimmunity was
revealed to the apostle, he sent for Ali and said to him, … Say "No
intidel can enter paradise, and after this year no idolater will be allowed to
make the pilgrimage, or walk around the Kaba naked; he who has a treaty with
the apostle of Allah may depend on it, until its appointed span!"'
...
Then
Allah promised to recompense the Believers for the trade they would lose
through pursuing this course, and assigned to them tax and tributes levied from
the Jews and Christians. He spoke of the wickedness and superstition of those
who lived according to the Old and New Testaments, saying, 'Priests and monks
devour the property of men, in vanity, and obstruct the way of Allah. For those
who lay up gold and silver, and spend it not in rurthering the word of Allah,
there will be grievous chastisement.' Then he said, 'The number of months is
twelve in the book of Allah since the day He created the heavens and the earth,
and four of these months are sacred [war is forbidden in them]. This is the
true religion. Do not therefore act unrighteously in them as the idolaters have
done.'
Then
he spoke of the distribution of property. Alms are due to the poor, and the
needy; to those whose hearts are to be won over; for the redemption of slaves,
and the freeing of debtors; to further the word of Allah, and to give to
travellers. This is an ordinance from Allah, and Allah knows all and is
wise."
'0,
prophet! Wage war against the Unbelievers and against the Hypocrites who utter belief
but have none, and be severe unto them, for their abode shall be in hell.
…
The
Arabs had delayed professing Islam until they saw how the affair between the
apostle and the Quraysh would end, because the Quraysh were the leaders of men,
the people of the Kaba and of the sacred territory, and they were acknowledged
as the descendants of Ishmael, son of Abraham. Not one chief of the Arabs
denied this. But when Mecca was conquered and the Quraysh submitted to Islam,
the Arabs knew that they themselves were not strong enough to wage war or to
show enmity to the apostle of Allah. So they entered into the religion of Allah
in droves, arriving from all directions.
…
The
apostle gave many other instructions. And he commanded Amr to take one-fifth of
any booty for Allah, as well as the legal alms from the land. These consisted
of 'one-tenth from land irrigated by springs and rains; one-twentieth from land
irrigated with buckets. For every ten camels, two sheep; for every twenty
camels, four sheep; for every forty horned cattle, one cow; for every thirty,
one male or female calf entering its third year; for every forty sheep, a young
one old enough to graze alone. This is an ordinance from Allah ordained to
Believers as the required alms; but he who is more generous will win merit. Any
Jew or Christian who persists in his religion is not to be turned away from it,
but must pay one golden dinar or its equivalent in cloth. He who pays this will
be protected by Allah, and His prophet; he who refuses is an enemy of Allah and
His prophet, as well as of all Believers.
…
(H/ Sacrificing animals in Islam and during the
Prophet's last pilgrimage both Prophet's possible ban on the Islamic pilgrimage
and apparent killing sacrificial animals by the Prophet himself)
… In the next year, the tenth of
the Hijra [AD 630], the apostle made preparations for the pilgrimage, and
ordered his people to do the same. He took with him sacriricial animals, and
ordered that all the people (except those who had brought sacriticial animals)
should, after visiting the holy places, divest themselves of their pilgrim
habit. Then he entered Mecca , and all the people who had brought no
sacrificial animals divested themselves of their pilgrim habit.
The apostle of Allah had sent Ali
to Najran, and Ali returned to Mecca to rejoin the apostle during the
pilgrimage. He gave him a report on the journey to Najran and the apostle then
said, 'Go and walk round the Kaba; then divest thyself of the state of pilgrim
as thy friends have done.'
But Ali said, 'When I assumed the
state of a pilgrim, I said, "I dedicate myself to Thee, Allah, as Thy
apostle Muhammad has done." ' Ali had no sacrificial animals, so the
apostle of Allah gave him part of his own. And the apostle of Allah slaughtered
the sacrifices in both their names.
(I/ Uncertain
next meeting of Muslims with the Prophet, other most important rules of Islamic
law about usury, about women, about the brotherhood of all men in Islam and the
Prophet's last pilgrimage)
During this pilgrimage the apostle
of Allah … After giving praise to Allah, he said, 'Listen to my words, because
I do not know whether I shall meet you again here after this occasion. …
Whoever has charge of another persohs wealth, let him return it to the man who
has deposited it. Usury is forbidden, but capital belongs to you. Do no wrong,
and none shall wrong you.
… You have rights over your wives,
and they have rights over you. Your rights over them are that they shall allow
no one of whom you disapprove to enter your bed, nor must they commit open
fornication; if they commit it, Allah permits you to exclude them from your
beds, and to beat them. Treat your wives well, because they cannot fend for
themselves; you have taken them on trust from Allah, and they are yours by the grace
of Allah.
… Know that every Muslim is brother
to every Muslim. No man may take anything from his brother save what is freely
given.'
Thus the apostle terminated his
pilgrimage. This was the pilgrimage of instruction and valediction, because
after it the apostle of Allah went no more on pilgrimage. It was 'The Farewell
Pilgrimage'.
(J/ Prophet's companions should not resist the Prophet
as his disciples resisted Jesus)
… He said to his companions, 'Do
not resist me as his disciples resisted Jesus.'
His companions asked, 'How did the
disciples resist?'
He said, 'He sent them as I send
you; but those whom he sent to a place near by were pleased, and obeyed,
whereas those whom he sent to a distance, went unwillingly and considered it a
hardship. Jesus complained to Allah; and everyone who had considered it a
hardship was the next morning able to speak the language of the nation to whom
he had been sent.'
(above mentioned see p. 108-112)
(K/ Prophet's death, its causes, his treatment
refusal, his possible fictitious death or his resurrection, Muslims as a
scourge of God and the Prophet's wives)
26-
Last Illness
… The
total-number of the apostle's wives was thirteen.
… With
these eleven wives the apostle consummated his marriages. Two died before him,
namely Khadija and Zaynab (…who had been the wife of his freed slave, Zayd, who
divorced her that she might wed the apostle …), but nine survived him. With two
others he did not consummate marriage: with Asma, who had the white spots of
leprosy and whom he sent back to her family; and with Amra, who had lately been
an Unbeliever and who fled to Allah for refuge from the apostle of Allah. He
said, 'Who tlees for refuge to Allah is well protected', and sent her back to
her family.
… Then he said, 'Allah has given
one of His servants the choice between this world and the next, and he has
chosen to be with Allah.'
Abu Bakr understood these words and
knew that he meant himself; so he wept, saying, 'Nay. We shall give our own
lives and those of our children for thine.'
… He
commanded the Emigrants to treat the Helpers well, saying, 'Other groups
increase, but the Helpers must remain the same in number and cannot increase.
They were my asylum and gave me shelter. Be kind to those who are kind to them,
and punish those who injure them.' Then the apostle entered his house, and the
sickness overcame him so that he fainted.
The
wives of the apostle gathered to consult, and all agreed that they ought to
pour medicine into his mouth. The uncle of the apostle, al-Abbas, offered to
pour it himself.
When the apostle recovered from his
swoon he asked, 'Who has done this to me?' and they replied, 'Thy uncle'
He said, 'This is a medicine
brought by women from Abyssinia . Why have you done this?'
Then his uncle replied, 'We feared
thy having pleurisy', and the apostle said, 'That is a disease with which Allah
the most high and glorious has not afflicted me! Let no one remain in this
house without swallowing some of this medicine, except my uncle.' Accordingly
even Maymuna swallowed some - although she was fasting at the time - because
the apostle swore that all must taste it as a punishment for what they had done
to him.
…
According
to Aisha, „… Then I found that he was becoming heavy in my lap, and I looked at
him and saw that his eyes were turned upwards; and he said, "Nay! Rather
the companion in paradise! " I had often heard the apostle say, "
Allah takes no prophet away without giving him a choice", and when he died
his last words were, "Rather the companion in paradise".
Then I thought, "He has not
chosen our companionship". And I said to him, "The choice was thine,
and I swear by Him who sent thee that thou hast chosen what is right."
Then the apostle of Allah died, at noon on Monday.
…
Now
Umar rose before the people and said, 'Some Hypocrites say that the apostle of
Allah is dead! He has not died, but has departed to his Lord, just as Moses
left his people for forty days, and returned to them when it was rumoured he
was dead. By Allah! The apostle will return just as Moses did, and the hands
and feet of the men who have said that the apostle is dead will be cut off!'
Abu
Bakr arrived, and alighted at the door of the mosque while Umar was talking
thus. But he took no notice, and went in to see the body of the apostle in the
house of Aisha. It was laid out and shrouded with a striped mantle. This he
removed from the face of the apostle and, kissing it, said, 'Thou art to me as
my father and mother! Thou hast tasted the death which Allah decreed for thee;
but after it, no death will ever come to thee again.' …
When
Abu Bakr saw that he would not listen he himself turned to the people, who left
Umar and came to him. Then he gave praise to Allah and said, Let all who adored
Muhammad know that Muhammad is dead, and let all who adore Allah know that
Allah is eternal and never dies.' Then he recited the verse 'Muhammad is but an
apostle. Other apostles have passed away before him. If he die or be slain will
ye turn back? He who turns back does no injury to Allah; and Allah will surely
reward those who give thanks.' And it was as if the people had never heard this
verse until Abu Bakr recited it then.
…
… So,
fearing dissension, I cried to Abu Bakr to stretch out his own hand and I paid
him homage. Then all paid him homage.'
Finally, Abu Bakr spoke again. He
said, 'I am appointed to govern you, although I am not the best of you. If I
act well you must aid me, and if I act unjustly you must correct me. Truth is
faithfulness and falsehood is treachery! No nation has failed to fight for
Allah but Allah has punished it with abasement; nor has wickedness become
widespread without Allah sending calamity. Obey me as long as I obey Allah and
His prophet! But should I rebel against Allah and His prophet you will owe me
no obedience! Rise to your prayers and may Allah have mercy on you'
…
Abu Ubayda was accustomed to dig
graves plainly, according to the fashion of Mecca, but Abu Talha, the
grave-digger of Medina, dug them in a vaulted shape. Al-Abbas therefore called
two men, and said to one of them, 'Go to Abu Ubayda', and to the other, 'Go to
Abu Talha.' He added, Allah, choose for Thy apostle.' Abu Ubayda could not be found,
but the man who went to Abu Talha found him and brought him; so he dug the
grave of the apostle in the Medina fashion.
According to Aisha, the apostle had
said when he was dying, 'The curse of Allah is on a nation which makes the
graves of its prophets into places of worship', but he knew that his own
followers would do this. And it was true, for when the apostle died a great
calamity befell the Muslims. Aisha, who survived the apostle forty-seven years,
recorded, 'When the apostle of Allah died many Arabs relapsed into idolatry;
Judaism and Christianity rose again, and Hypocrisy became common, so that the
Muslims seemed like a flock of sheep on a wintry night, because of the loss of
their prophet. Then Allah roused them again under Abu Bakr.'
(above mentioned see p. 114-118)
23) 28/05/2016 Why it is better to eat gradually only certain
plant fruits and certain plant seeds, and why it is better to eat only in
extreme need on principle gradually certain eggs, certain carrions also of
animals, certain blood or parts of by it not killed certain whole plants or then
either other parts of certain plants or whole certain plants and only then certain
milk and about cause of probable slaughter of the Canaanites including women
and also young children in the book of Joshua by the Jews and about the right
apparently Mongolian way of breeding of dairy cattle.
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Grůza
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER
OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in
fact mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore
everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain." All
the rest consists more in views (speculations).
Article I.
Eternal duty of all living
creatures
(1) Fundamental duty of all
living creatures is to cause the least possible death and pain. The perfect
living creature eats then only plant fruits and plant seeds from all living
creatures. (Further also eternal duty of members).
...
(4) Member has right also
to eat only gradually in extreme emergency (especially from serious health
reasons) eggs, in extreme emergency carrions of living creatures died of
natural causes, on principle of old age, or in extreme emergency collected
blood of non-slaughtered animals and humans and milk, or in extreme emergency
plants, all always the most mercifully as possible bred and killed, and
products purely from them. Philosophy of
Balance p. 22
It is right to eat plant fruits, even when plant fruit contains from thousands to
millions, less probably to billions of living cells, plant fruit is not
multicellular living organism, i.e. multicellular living system, therefore,
even in its case we cause death of relatively many living cells, so in case of
eating, i.e. killing of plant fruits from
organic (i.e. ecological or bio) farming or from agricultural integrated
production (during this cultivation of plants is limited to the highest
possible level killing, especially killing of insects by both sprays,
especially by chemical sprays and fertilization, especially by chemical fertilization)
we cause their nearly no pain, because only living multicellular organism is
more able to feel pain, the evolutionarily more perfect organism is, the more it
feels pain. Furthermore gradually it is right to eat plant seeds, plant seed contains apparently less living cells than plant
fruit, but plant seed is already the germ, i.e. simplest living multicellular
organism of relatively simple living multicellular organism, which is more mature
plant, so when eating, i.e. killing of plant seeds from organic farming or from agricultural integrated production we
cause their nearly no pain, even though the plant seed apparently feels more
pain than plant fruit.
Furthermore gradually in extreme need it is right to
eat hen egg from a home breed, where
they do not slaughter or do not get slaughtered any hens and cocks, egg
contains apparently less living cells than the plant fruit and plant seed, if
it is an unfertilized egg, then according to exact biology this egg contains
only a single animal living cell, but they are often already the fertilized hen
eggs in the earliest embryonic stage of their development because of the
presence of the cock in my hen flock, then this egg can contain several animal
cells, in case of egg in the earliest embryonic stage of its development it is so
the simplest animal living unicellular or multicellular organism which
apparently feels a little more pain than plant fruit or plant seed.
Furthermore gradually in extreme need it is right to
eat cadaver of living creature also
of animal, if it eating living creature in my up to now life experience probably
with the exception of Satan (i.e. Devil embodying according to the Philosophy
of Balance all death in our Universe or in the final consequence the most
possible perfect vacuum, i.e. the most possible perfect nothing in our Universe)
did not intentionally kill this eaten living creature or did not let
intentionally kill this eaten living creature, on principle this eaten living
creature died of natural causes, on principle of old age (hereinafter referred to also as
“carrion”), this carrion often
contains billions up to in the case of carrion of animal trillions of living
cells, however after death also the believed higher animal does not form an
independent living organism, because the death of brain leads to the decomposition
of the living organism of both believed higher animal and other animals and to
the emergence of chaos in the body of these living creatures, even though for
some time after brain death of this living creature the individual living cells
of his or her or its body survive, therefore cadaver of living creature and also
of each animal feel pain at a similar level as the aforementioned plant fruit, the
aforementioned plant seed or the aforementioned hen egg in the earliest
embryonic stage of its development. Obtaining of the aforementioned carrion
died of natural causes, on principle of old age is very difficult and demanding
a relatively large amount of finances, I gain these carrions from my shelter
for broilers (so called hens and cocks both by humans adapted for obtaining
meat), which have not been killed intentionally by any human and which died on
principle of old age (these carrions of broilers I eat in extreme need after
the veterinary autopsy and boiled in several as a matter of principle in two
waters).
Furthermore gradually in extreme need it is right to
eat the collected
within health well-refillable blood of living animals or also of humans, however at present time I do not eat this blood,
blood contains from thousands, millions to billions, in the case of large
amount of blood weighing at least in the tens of grams up to trillions of
living cells, but blood does not form any independent living organism,
therefore blood feels pain at a similar level as the aforementioned plant fruit,
the aforementioned plant seed, the aforementioned hen egg in the earliest
embryonic stage of its development, or the aforementioned carrion of living
creature. Or in the same grade in extreme need it is right to eat part of by it not killed plant from organic
farming or from agricultural integrated production, these parts of plants
gradually themselves will renew, this renewable part of plant contains from
thousands, millions to billions, in the case of large amount of plant material
weighing at least in the tens of grams up to trillions of living cells, but this
renewable part of plant does not form any independent living organism,
therefore when removing this renewable part from plant this plant or this
renewable part of plant feel pain at a similar level as when collecting the
aforementioned blood from the body of a living creature.
Furthermore gradually in extreme need it is right to
eat whole plant or other part of by it
killed whole plant on principle from organic farming or from agricultural
integrated production than the aforementioned plant fruit or the
aforementioned plant seed or the aforementioned part of by it not killed whole plant,
because whole plant apparently contains up to trillions of living cells, eg. in
the case of adult tree, and the whole plant is evolutionarily more perfect living
(multicellular) organism than plant seed or hen egg in the earliest embryonic
stage of its development, and therefore from the above reasons killing of whole
plant causes more both death and pain of plant than death and pain are caused in
case of eating of the aforementioned plant fruit, of the aforementioned plant
seed, of the aforementioned hen egg in the earliest embryonic stage of its
development, of the aforementioned carrion, of the aforementioned blood or of
the aforementioned milk or of the aforementioned part of by it not killed whole
plant.
Or only then in extreme need it is right to eat milk (i.e. milk of animal mammal) from
breed, where on principle they do not intentionally kill (i.e. do not
slaughter) or do not let intentionally kill any male or female, apparently
on principle milk contains no living cell and therefore milk does not form any
living organism, however it is necessary for periodical obtaining milk, that
the female of animal mammal were periodically pregnant and periodically gave
birth to babies, while large quantity of milk requires permanent birth of a
large amount of babies of mammals, of which however half are males, that do not
give any milk, and one male mammal can fertilize up to one hundred and perhaps
more female mammals, therefore at present time is and also in the past was the
vast majority of male mammals killed
very soon after their birth, so it is not necessary to feed them (therefore apparently Jews, i.e. Semitic
tribe, i.e. shepherds who settled in extreme need of starvation and death in
Egypt near the Egyptians, i.e. ploughmen /i.e. tillers of ground/, /these Jews/
also caused in Egypt much death and pain in the way that they tried to enslave
the Egyptians through usury by counselor of Pharaoh, Jew Joseph and then vice
versa for several centuries the Egyptians enslaved the Jews, who reproduced
greatly in Egypt, and apparently therefore, when Moses liberated the enslaved
Jews from Egypt, these Jews massacred other apparently Semitic tribes of the
Canaanites, apparently also shepherds including their women and also very young
children, who apparently also bred in large number especially sheep for milk
like the Jews before their departure to Egypt and therefore apparently these
Canaanites also murdered a large number of male sheep, on principle the lambs
at a very young age, i.e. in substance very young children of sheep, but it was
not also without consequences for the Jews and the German Nazis caused apparently
as vendetta for this massacre of the Canaanites and for the Jewish previous
pastoral slaughter of lambs a similar massacre of Jews including their women
and also very young children in time about 3300 years later), therefore
at present time causes and also in the past caused also the milk from the above
mentioned foods the most pain and death than the aforementioned plant fruit,
the aforementioned plant seed, the aforementioned hen egg in the earliest
embryonic stage of its development, the aforementioned carrion or the
aforementioned blood (the right
solution to the problem of both milk and breeding of dairy cattle is a solution
apparently used by the Mongolian shepherds up to present, it is to eat instead
of milk on principle the above mentioned blood of dairy cattle, it is blood of both
its females and its males, this blood can be regularly taken from the vein of
this dairy cattle without its slaughter and therefore it is possible to breed both
its females and its males until their natural death, principally of old age and
only then to eat them), even if the milk is no living creature anyway,
but complete prohibiting females of living creatures also of mammals from
having babies would also cause great mental pain especially of these females
also of mammals, because giving birth of offspring is for these females in fact
the most important sense and mission of their lives.
All, what according to the above mentioned I eat, should
always be the most mercifully as possible bred and killed, and furthermore I
eat products purely from this all. According to the exact science of biology
the human, believed higher animal, other animal or plant are formed by the same
living cells, by so called eukaryotic living cells.
24) 04/06/2016 My Devillogy in my up to now personal
life experience, i.e. the Old Testament Yahweh as Satan, i.e. Satan as both the
tempter and executioner of all living creatures also of Jews (i.e. also in
relation to Jews telling both partly truth and partly lies) and in all these
completely serving New Testament charitable only one God, communism, about
women as a tool of the Devil, i.e. Satan or why eg. also Hindus probably
publicly lie about killing animals.
quoted:
Job 2King James Version
(KJV): 1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves
before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the
Lord.… 4 And Satan answered the Lord, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a
man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch
his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6 And the Lord said
unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7 So went Satan
forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with sore boils from the
sole of his foot unto his crown. Bible see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Job%202
Matthew 4King James Version
(KJV): 8 Again, the devil taketh him up
into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world,
and the glory of them; 9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee,
if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee
hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him
only shalt thou serve. 11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came
and ministered unto him. Bible see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Matthew%204
In Jewish tradition, Death
was referred to as the Angel of Life and Death (Malach HaMavet) or the Angel of
Dark and Light stemming from the Bible and Talmudic lore. The Bible itself does
refer to the "Angel of Life and Death" when he reaps Egypt's
firstborns, but he is not connected to Satan. There is also a reference to
"Abaddon" (The Destroyer), an Angel who is known as the "Angel
of the Abyss". In Talmudic lore, he is characterized as archangel Samael. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Death_(personification)&oldid=576001771
Samael (Hebrew: סמאל) (also Sammael and Samil)
is an important archangel in Talmudic and post-Talmudic lore, a figure who is
accuser, seducer and destroyer, and has been regarded as both good and evil. It
is said that he was the guardian angel of Esau and a patron of the Roman
empire. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samael
English-Greek dictionary: mother-μητέρα
(mitéra), Sun- ήλιος (ílios, helios), substance in Czech language “látka”- ύλη
(ýli, hylé), toucht (small quantity)- μικρή
ποσότητα (mikrí posótita,
μικρό- mikró-small), English-Latin dictionary: matter or mass, in Czech
language “hmota”-materia, mother-mater
My Philosophy of Balance implies, that Satan or the
Devil embodies the most possible perfect absolute vacuum in our Universe and
because nothing, i.e. absolute vacuum cannot kill anyone, but its underpressure
can attract a mass to collide and to destroy it mutually by this collision, so Satan
embodies also all death of live creatures in our Universe. According to the
above mentioned biblical quotation Satan is simultaneously the tempter and
simultaneously the executioner apparently in the service of only one God, therefore
Satan tempts while then punishes living creatures apparently only with God's
consent, so Satan apparently teaches living creatures to distinguish still more
and more perfectly between good and evil, thus charity from non-charity, which
is the basis of evolution or historical improvement of all living creatures,
Satan partly tells lies and partly tells the truth, Satan cannot be apparently defeated
by non-charity, eg. non-charitable violence, deceits, lies etc., because in
matters of violence, deceits, lies etc. Satan is apparently invincible, because
he probably serves only one God, i.e. charity in the most perfect way of all
living creatures by all those, thus at least in our Universe there is Satan the
most perfect violent executioner, cheater or liar, Satan is probably subordinate
only to only one God, i.e. charity, therefore Satan can be defeated apparently
only by charity, however Satan cannot apparently be killed (without death nearly
all living creatures would apparently starve and die), Satan apparently can
never act contrary to the God 's will and he must always
obey only one God, because even though according to me Satan himself tells lies
or he himself kills both as little as possible (in the case that Satan embodies
the most perfect but still imperfect absolute vacuum in our Universe) or according
to me he himself only lets to tell lies or only lets to kill both as little as
possible (in the case that Satan embodies the perfect absolute vacuum in our Universe),
so he apparently always acts in accordance with God's will as God's both tempter
and executioner and therefore only one God apparently always protects him. The
strongest temptations by Satan are pride and delusion of grandeur, when Satan
and living creature especially people after the death, that belong to Satan,
propose to a live creature, on principle to the human before death, that this
living creature can replace Satan as the embodiment of death, i.e. the Angel of
death of other living creatures due to alleged perfect knowledge or skills of
this living creature before death (however Satan apparently does not have any
other belief than he must fulfill his role given to him by only one God to
tempt the living creatures and to punish these living creature succumbed to the
temptations while he must always obey the only one God, i.e. charity), see the
above mentioned proposition of Satan to Jesus, that Satan will give him all the
kingdoms of the Earth, and if an imperfect creature, on principle imperfect human
before death accepted it, so one can expect big loss of him or her or it, because
imperfect living creature is not capable to resolve without the help of Satan,
virtually without the help of only one God rightly (i.e. within causing of the
least possible death and pain) that some living creature should die, that other
living creatures ate it or him or her (because at present time living creatures
can eat only other living creatures) and other living creatures, possibly
according to my Rational Mystique after the death (but also they are not apparently
completely dead and also they must apparently eat something) will become more
and more very hate this imperfect living creature, this pride and grandeur
delusion succumbed living creature, that is very troubled by his or her or its conscience,
will remain nothing other than to admit his or her or its powerlessness and apparently
to ask Satan, i.e. the Angel of death, who before it this pride and grandeur
delusion succumbed living creature often tried to kill, that Satan takes his
place again, and then this living creature will lose vast majority of his or
her or its freedom, which he or she or it had at the time, when he or she or it
has not tried to kill Satan yet, and then it is for this living creature much
harder and riskier not to subordinate fully to the commands of Satan, therefore
to distinguish between good and evil in the commands of Satan and to serve only
one God, i.e. charity and so not to be fully a slave to commands of Satan as his
or her or its supreme leader, although the service to only one God, i.e. charity
( i.e. according to my Philosophy of Balance permanent causing the least
possible death and pain) the Devil, i.e. Satan and other similar serfs of Satan
(i.e. according to my Rational Mystique living creatures in hell after death) still
in fact expects from the new punished living creature in hell, and which can
only save and free the serf of Satan from Satan's hell.
Communism of Jewish Karl Marx or otherwise by him
called scientific materialism in fact solves in its essence the ancient
question, if the first living creature or the human were created by God from
nonliving matter or the first living creature or the human were born from a
mother (see the Latin word “materia” - matter or mass /in Czech language
“hmota”, in Czech language originally apparently from two Greek word roots “h–mota”/
derived from the above mentioned both Latin word “mater”-mother or Greek word “mitéra“
-mother and in Czech language probably also from the Greek word “ilios“ or „helios“
/”h-elios“/ - the Sun). Because every mother considers as the main role of a
father to procure for her offspring the foods and material facilities but on
the other hand also their safety, but on principle the foods are cadavers of
living creatures and on principle facilities for children have also material
form built either from cadavers of living creatures or from inanimate matter, because
on principle intangible things cannot be eaten and it is not possible to build material
facilities for their joint family from them, therefore on principle every
mother understands a male, especially human male above all as a hunter or
warrior or butcher, whose task is to kill or let kill other living creatures,
which however, if it is not within causing the least possible death and pain,
causes unnecessary hatred of these killed living creatures against this male - butcher,
as well as against mother's, virtually father's children, in the latter case so
from the perspective of a mother such a male - butcher unnecessarily endangers
the safety of her children and therefore a woman will refuses him or it. Therefore
all intangible things has the importance for the mother of children, virtually
for all women on principle only from the perspective, if these intangible
things ensure for her children material things, so from this perspective the women
apparently judge all both creations and discoveries produced on principle by masculine
humans in matters of religion, philosophy, social and also of natural sciences.
The only exception is then sunlight, which according to modern exact physical
science consists exclusively of photons, which have zero rest mass, it means,
that these photons are intangible in their stationary state, thus at present
time on principle we cannot eat intangible things, however without this in rest
state intangible sunlight could probably be no life on Earth, it means, that on
the Earth there would not be the plants that obtain their energy from light through
photosynthesis, with no plants on the Earth there would be no both herbivores
and insects that eat plants, without herbivores and insects on the Earth there would
be also no carnivores. Communism of Jewish Karl Marx expressed it by a simple
but apparently wrong idea, “at the earliest we need to fill stomachs of people
and just then we can be interested in any intangible things like religion,
philosophy, human rights, rights of other living creatures etc., then the
result of this its apparently wrong materialistic ideology was that in the communistic,
virtually socialistic States the choice of foods gradually decreased and there
was also less and less amount of food there until circa 1990 AD, when after 70
years of its existence the communism, virtually socialism of Karl Marx
conceived as a human class struggle and fight against other living creatures for
the life and death (of which result was a large death and pain, virtually
hatred of other living creatures than humans according to the Philosophy of
Balance, but in large amount the large hatred also of people who dissented from
this communist politics or from its leader) has lost its political power in nearly
all States of the world. In spite of it from perspective of the Philosophy of
Balance, virtually its charitylogy the following corrected communistic idea worth
considering, which could be expressed "to each living creature according
to his or her or its both present and anticipated future charitable needs",
according to this by Philosophy of Balance corrected communistic idea we cannot
refuse and State must protect the also large riches of certain individuals and
also inheritance of their also large riches eg. by their children, if these
rich people use these also large riches or it can reasonably be expected, that
in the future they will use these also large riches to the action of charity
(eg. charitable livelihood of a large amount of employees of these charitable rich
people), this all is valid only under the condition, that these also large riches
cause the least possible (it means apparently also not much more than the least
possible) death and pain, otherwise according to this corrected communist idea it
would be necessary to nationalize, virtually expropriate these large riches of
these rich people by the State however only in charitable way, i.e. in
compliance with causing the least possible death and pain even during this nationalization
by the State.
So each existing on principle masculine ideology had
to provide its followers above all with the necessary or more or better food,
thus with cadavers of living creatures, because no imperfect living creature
can eat only the words. If any people or other living creatures joined any in
the history successful on principle masculine ideology in larger number, so
they in fact expected above all to receive food, i.e. cadavers of living
creatures from this ideology, and it was at the expense of other people or of
other living creatures that therefore always considered any such new ideology as
the at least greater risk of their own livelihood or even the great danger,
that they themselves would be killed by the followers of this new ideology and
eaten, therefore each new ideology meets with enormous skepticism of existing
ideologies. On principle the necessity of leader of each successful ideology to
provide for from beginning more and more increasing number of his or her or its
followers with enough food, thus with enough cadavers of living creatures has meant
up to now that each up to now existing ideology had sooner or later to tell big
lies and to do big manipulations, therefore for example also Hindus publicly
probably tell big lies about killing animals. Then Satan came and his people
and his other living creatures and they tempted these leaders of this new
ideology to even greater lies and to causing even more and more death and pain,
which these new leaders have always sooner or later accepted under threat of
losing food, thus on principle cadavers of living creatures for his or her or
its followers in case the imperfection of his or her or its new ideology (according
to me if it is not perfect God's, i.e. perfectly charitable ideology), then
corresponding punishment by both Satan and the members of his hell for these
caused much both death and pain followed, i.e. the people and other living
creatures, that this new ideology caused much unnecessary death and pain, started
to hate this new ideology and to fight against it, they started to uncover and
publicize its big lies and this new ideology gradually started to lose and to
acquire no additional new followers, therefore supply of the food, thus of
cadavers of living creatures decreased, and when external and internal
opposition and lack of food was indefensible by this new ideology, then its followers
(according to my Rational Mystique people and other living creatures after
death), that could already very hardly to change their ideology for their great
faith and engaging in this new ideology, remained nothing other than to insist more
or less on their big lies that hide the errors of their ideology in their
causing much unnecessary death and pain, and either in the first case to cause still
more and more death and pain (i.e. to cause even more hatred of living
creatures against their group of followers, from which result according to the
Philosophy of Balance in the future they can expect corresponding even greater punishment
of Satan, virtually corresponding even great vendetta of living creatures, that
they have caused great unnecessary death and pain), from which result the
followers of this new ideology often cease to strive for true knowledge in a
large conflict against their conscience, but they will start to fight in a big
fear for mere reduction of their suffering in Satan's hell, or in the second
case to do their repentance, eg. to beg and to seek to correct their ways.
In relation to the above mentioned I quote from Islam:
One day Abu Bakr entered the schoolhouse of the Jews and found many of them
assembled around a man whose name was Finhas. He was a doctor and rabbi, and
had with him another rabbi called Ashya. Abu Bakr said to Finhas, 'Woe betide
thee. Fear Allah, and make profession of Islam!' Finhas replied, "We have
no need of Allah, but He has need of us! We do not beseech Him as He beseeches
us. We are independent of Him, but He is not independent of us. If He were
independent of us, He would not ask for our money as your master Muhammad does
[for a war against Mecca ]. He forbids usury to you, but pays us interest; if
He were independent of us He would give us no interest.' At this, Abu Bakr
became angry, and struck Finhas violently, saying, 'I swear by Him in whose
hands my life rests that if there were no treaty between us I would have struck
off your head, you enemy of Allah!' Then Finhas went to the apostle of Allah
and said, 'See what your companion has done to me! Abu Bakr explained what
happened, but Finhas denied the whole matter and said, 'I spoke no such words!'
But Allah revealed a verse conrirming the words of Abu Bakr. MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT
ALLÁHOVA PROROKA, IBN ISHÁK, original in Arabic language: Sírat rasúl Alláh,
from the English edition by Michael Edwardes, Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad,
Apostle Of Allah, published by Royal Asiatic Society of London in 1898,
translated by Viktor Svoboda, in 2009 published by publishing house LEDA spol.
s r.o. and by publishing house Rozmluvy, first edition. See https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, Full text of "Sirat-Life Of Muhammad by -Ibn Ishaq" , p. 54
In relation to the above mentioned I quote from Bible,
according to which the Old Testament only one God Yahweh should personally kill
many people (see eg. Exodus 12, 29 And it came to pass, that at
midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the
firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive
that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Exod&no=12 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+12&version=KJV ) or according to which the Old Testament only one God
Yahweh should personally kill also many from God dissenting Israelis (see eg. Numbers
16, 16 And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy
company before the Lord, thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow: 17 And take
every man his censer, and put incense in them, and bring ye before the Lord
every man his censer, two hundred and fifty censers; thou also, and Aaron, each
of you his censer. 18 And they took every man his censer, and put fire in them,
and laid incense thereon, and stood in the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation with Moses and Aaron. … 35 And there came out a fire from the
Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Num&no=16 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+16&version=KJV ) or according to which according to the command of
both the Old Testament only one God Yahweh and Moses probably around 1500-1300
BC (i.e. before Christ) during the conquest of Canaan, i.e. of contemporary
both Palestine and Israel the commander of the Israeli nation Joshua and his
Israeli army should kill all at that time Canaan inhabitants, i.e. men, women
and also children as cursed with the exception of a little individuals (see eg. Leviticus
27, 28 Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall
devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the
field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most
holy unto the Lord. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Lev&no=27 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+27&version=KJV . Deuteronomy 2, 34 And we took
all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and
the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain: See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=2 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+2&version=KJV . Joshua 10, 40 So Joshua smote
all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the
springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all
that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=10 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+10&version=KJV . Joshua 11, 12 And all the cities
of those kings, and all the kings of them, did Joshua take, and smote them with
the edge of the sword, and he utterly destroyed them, as Moses the servant of
the Lord commanded.
See
http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=11 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+11&version=KJV .), similarly in other places of Bible in Old
Testament (see eg.: Numbers 21, 3, Deuteronomy
3, 6, Deuteronomy 7, 2,
Deuteronomy 13, 16, Deuteronomy 20, 17, Joshua 2, 10, Joshua 6, 17, Joshua 6, 18, Joshua 6, 21, Joshua 10, 28, Joshua 10, 35, Joshua 10, 37, Joshua 10, 39, Joshua 11, 11, Joshua 11, 20, Joshua 11, 21. See http://www.biblenet.cz/ and https://www.biblegateway.com/ .), or the sacrifices of a huge number of the animals
according to the Bible Old Testament also ordered by the Old Testament only one
God Yahweh for Israelites, which caused possibly no less death and pain than
the above mentioned death of a huge number of people.
The above mentioned implies that on principle even contemporary
Jews cannot believe anyway, that the Old Testament only one God, Yahweh is a
charity, thus, that this Old Testament only one God is identical with Jesus' New
Testament only one God who should be the charity according the above mentioned,
which is reflected in historical and also in contemporary prevailing ideology
of the world substantially controlled by Jews. On the basis of my up to now
existing life experience I think that this Old Testament only one God could be
Satan from the above mentioned book of Job (see above), i.e. Satan as both the
tempter and executioner of all living creatures also of Jews (i.e. also in
relation to Jews telling both partly truth and partly lies) and in all these completely
subordinate, obeying and serving the Old Testament and the New Testament only
one God, who is love, i.e. in the Latin translation of the Bible from St.
Jerome's Vulgate “caritas”, i.e. in English language the charity (1
John 4, 16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us.
God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. In
Latin Vulgate of St. Jerome Epistola
B. Joannis Apostoli Prima 4, 16 et nos cognovimus et credidimus
caritati quam habet Deus in nobis Deus caritas est et qui manet in caritate in
Deo manet et Deus in eo). According to Rational Mystique of my Philosophy
of Balance the Biblical leader of Israelis Moses apparently from the period
around 1500-1300 BC, who personally killed the member of Egyptian nation (see Bible Old Testament, Exodus 2, 11 et seq.), other
Biblical leader of Israelis king David from the period around 1000 BC, personally
killed the member of Philistine nation Goliath (see Bible Old Testament, 1 Samuel 17, 48 et seq.), or Roman emperor Nero, who personally killed his pregnant
wife Poppaea Sabina etc. (according to Rational Mystique and also all people
after the death belonging to Satan, apparently with the exception of Jesus of
Nazareth, apparently Christ) could be the above mentioned people, who before
their death succumbed to the temptation by both Satan and his living creatures
and who tried unsuccessfully to kill Satan and to replace him as the embodiment
of death, i.e. the angel of death of other living creatures and then they had
to subordinate very much to power of Satan. Flavius Josephus, the Jew with
Hebrew name Joseph ben Mattityahu etc. could be a historical embodiment of the
most possible perfect vacuum, i.e. of the most possible perfect nothing in our
Universe, virtually embodiment of all death of all living creatures in our
Universe, virtually Satan, i.e. the angel of death. Jesus of Nazareth,
apparently both Godman and Christ apparently as the only one did not succumb
before his death to the temptation by both Satan and his living creatures and he
did not try to kill Satan at a critical moment (see Bible New Testament, Mathew
26, 51. 51
And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew
his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. 52
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they
that take the sword shall perish with the sword. 53 Thinkest thou that I cannot
now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions
of angels? 54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must
be? 55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as
against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you
teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me. 56 But all this was done,
that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples
forsook him, and fled. 57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to
Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.).
All above mentioned quotations in English language from Bible,
King James Version (KJV) see https://www.biblegateway.com/ .
25)
19/06/2016 About the basic metaphysical question, if it is possible to kill
Satan, i.e. the Devil, i.e. death, and further about expropriation without
compensation, i.e. communism and about the modern State of Israel and about
Muslim Palestinians and further about the most popular contemporary Czech
politicians Milos Zeman, Andrej Babiš and Karel Schwarzenberg, and about the
expelled Czech Sudeten Germans and about the by possibly Jewish Andrej Babiš
dominated Czech political Green Party and about the Austrian presidential
elections in 2016.
The answer to the above mentioned basic
metaphysical question in terms of my Philosophy of Balance in terms of its apparently
only one self-evident dogma (see PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE, PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR
ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY: „All living creatures in fact mostly want to live in
a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is still obliged
to cause the least possible death and pain." All the rest consists more in
views (speculations).) is, that we quite surely can bring Satan under our
control or we quite surely can defeat him, if however living creatures can kill
Satan or if finally the only one God kills Satan, my Philosophy of Balance does
not solve definitively, in other words above mentioned: "the least
possible death and pain" from its above mentioned apparently only one
self-evident dogma can mean both a minimum but still some existing death and
pain, i.e. the permanent survival and necessity of Satan, to which at present
time I personally tend based on my up to now personal experience, and also no
both death and pain, i.e. it can mean also the permanent death of Satan.
How do various world religions solve this question, we
can know in practice from the fact of an extension of communist reign in States,
in which these religions prevail. In Christianity both solutions are apparently
possible (see Biblical New Testament, Luke 8 King James Version (KJV) 18 Take
heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and
whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have."
or vice versa Biblical New Testament, 1 John 4, "8 He that loveth not,
knoweth not God, for God is love." or Biblical New Testament translation
of St. Jerome (ie. the Vulgate) into Latin language from 4th to 5th century
Joannis I "4: 8 qui non diligit non novit Deum Quoniam Deus caritas est
"), but I believe as both a Christian and a Roman Catholic, that at
present time in Christianity, especially in western Christianity prevails the view,
that only one God defined by the Biblical New Testament as love or charity will
not finally kill Satan, however in recent time the exception of apparently in
the West prevailing opinion about not-killing Satan was the period of Hitler's
German Nazi Reich, because its leader Adolf Hitler obviously considered and
identified the Jews as such incarnation of Satan, virtually.of Devil, virtually
of all evil in the world and also especially the Soviet, virtually.Russian and
Jewish communists. However opinion about the necessity to kill Satan also apparently
prevails in the minor eastern Orthodox Christianity, of which the largest Patriarchate
is the Russian Patriarchate, to which two-thirds of Orthodox Christians are subordinated,
because in Russia, virtually in the former Soviet Union the communism was born
and ruled long time, of which ideology is based on expropriation by the State without
compensation. In Islam the opinion about the impossibility to kill completely
Satan, i.e. all the death and pain apparently prevails, because the expropriation
without compensation could be viewed as a certain kind of theft or robbery from
the viewpoint of Islam and because every Muslim is bound by strict prohibition
of the Koran on theft, virtually on killing of another Muslim, the exceptions
are apostates or heretics (eg. the Shiites can apparently kill, virtually rob,
virtually steal from Sunnis and vice versa), however it is permitted or even
commanded for every Muslim in need to steal from unbelievers, which Prophet
Muhammad did also, when after his fleeing from Mecca to Medina he commanded his
followers to steal, virtually to rob also the at that time most common trade
caravans of Mecca inhabitants, i.e. of his relatives, during these robberies
Muhammad permitted his followers and they had also to kill these inhabitants of
Mecca, thus often their relatives (see chapter
12 -First Caravan When Allah made plunder permissible He allowed four parts to
those who had won it, and one part to Himself and to His apostle, exactly as
Abdullah had done with the captured caravan. This was the occasion when the
first booty was taken by the Muslims, when the first prisoners were taken by
the Muslims and when the first man was slain by the Muslims. It was eighteen
months since the Emigrants had arrived in Medina.see p. 61, MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT
ALLÁHOVA PROROKA, IBN ISHÁK, original in Arabic language: Sírat rasúl Alláh,
from the English edition by Michael Edwardes, Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad,
Apostle Of Allah, published by Royal Asiatic Society of London in 1898,
translated by Viktor Svoboda, in 2009 published by publishing house LEDA spol.
s r.o. and by publishing house Rozmluvy, first edition. See https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, Full text of "Sirat-Life Of Muhammad by -Ibn Ishaq" ), the communism did not dominate the majority of
Islamic and also Arabic States, apparently with the exception of Libya, Iraq
and turkic-tatar (i.e. former territories controlled by Genghis Khan's, with the
Mongolian father name Temüjin's Caucasian Golden horde) former Soviet Union republics
(eg. Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, etc.). In
Judaism the opinion about the impossibility to kill Satan, i.e. all the death
and pain apparently prevails, because the prevailing Old Testament Biblical
ideal world is the Biblical paradise which the only one God did not create apparently
perfectly good, but apparently only very good, but, because the biblical only
one God should be perfect and thus He should create nothing imperfectly good, therefore
the very good should be apparently the perfect good at the same time (see Bible, Genesis 1, 31 And God saw every
thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the
morning were the sixth day.), in the biblical paradise there were good and
evil perfectly united in a single tree of knowledge of good and evil in the
Garden of Eden (see Bible, Genesis 2, 16
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou
mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou
shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely
die.), on one side this tree of knowledge of good and evil had probably the
most attractive fruits (see Bible,
Genesis 3, 6 And
when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to
the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit
thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.), but on the other side the Biblical only one God
forbade the first humans Adam and Eve to eat from this tree under the
punishment of death, when both Adam and Eve violated this ban, they were not
punished according to the Bible by this God by imminent death, but they were
expelled from paradise by this God (see
Bible, Genesis 3, 22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of
us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also
of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23 Therefore the LORD God sent
him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden
Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the
tree of life.) and both Adam and apparently also Eve died later of the
their old age (see Bible, Genesis 5, 4
And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and
he begat sons and daughters: 5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine
hundred and thirty years: and he died.) (all these quotations from the
Bible see https://www.biblegateway.com/ ), the majority of Jews did not accept communism,
although its authors were Jews Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and Vladimir
Ilyich Ulyanov dominated tsarist Russia through communism, who adopted the
nickname Lenin, and Lenin was apparently also after his maternal grandfather
partially of Jewish origin (see http://relax.lidovky.cz/vudce-revoluce-lenin-byl-zid-dokazuje-dopis-jeho-sestry-pjh-/zajimavosti.aspx?c=A110524_093101_ln-zajimavosti_pks : ČTK, lidovky.cz, 2017 ), at present time the largest Jewish community in the
world lives apparently in the United States of America (USA), at present time
the third largest Jewish community in the world apparently lives in modern
State of Israel, the communism never dominated these States, in the past the
second largest Jewish community in the world lived in Russia, virtually in the
former Soviet Union, which communism dominated at that time, at present time
after the Second World War the large numbers of Jews from the former Soviet
Union immigrated to modern State of Israel. In Buddhism the opinion about the
possibility to kill completely Satan, i.e. all the death and pain apparently
prevails (see Buddhist teaching of the
final vanishing of all living creatures into nothingness, i.e. nirvana, which means
literally "the state of the flame, which died", see p. 48, STORIG, H.J.:
Malé dějiny filosofie / Little history of philosophy. Prague, publishing house
Zvon, 1991), the world's largest Buddhist States such as China and Mongolia
were dominated in the past or are dominated up to now by the communist
ideology. Regarding Hinduism, so in Hinduism the opinion about impossibility of
final killing of Satan apparently prevails, because on one side the death and
pain of every living creature is the result of a past death and pain caused and
apparently according to Hinduism also culpably caused by this living creature
and by his or her or its ancestors (see so
called “bad karma”), but on the other side after death the individual
existence of saved human " disappears in the great
soul of the world" (see p. 39, STORIG,
H.J.: Malé dějiny filosofie / Little history of philosophy. Prague, publishing
house Zvon, 1991), it is dissolved in Brahman, which is however apparently
according to Hinduism regarding all living creatures the task, that can be
accomplished apparently only in infinite time, the communism has also never
dominated India.
26) 30/06/2016 (Mathematical definition of the
Biblical God)
(Addressing by the name),
I apologize for the by me yesterday in pub rather imprecisely put oral question
to your husband Mr. (name), now I specify it in writing, which is necessary due
to the complexity of this question, as you even yourself will surely recognize,
i.e. as Czech proverbs say "What is written, it is given. " or
another Czech prowerb "Speech is
talked, and the water flows.", if he wants to express something
mathematically, it is necessary to express mathematically as it follows below:
At present time I am a Roman Catholic Christian, according to me from the point of view of Christianity about the
only one Biblical God, i.e. the Lord (i.e. of both the Old Testament and the
New Testament in the sense of the Bible
Old and New Testaments | including deuterocanonic books |, Czech Ecumenical Translation,
CZECH Bible Society, 1995, see www.biblenet.cz
, in English from King James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/ ) it is valid the following definitions, however it
needs not to be an exhaustive definition:
The only one God, i.e. the Lord is love in the sense of caritas, the word
caritas is of the Latin origin and into the English language it is most
frequently translated by the word charity.
Detailed note: Idolatry, i.e. why only
one God, i.e. the Lord is the love in the sense of caritas, not only love. How
can Satan make from only one God a mere idol or image or object and to
subordinate it and to misuse it to great evil action, thus according to the
Philosophy of Balance to cause much more than the least possible death and
pain. Examples include Nazis. The German Wehrmacht had in outfit of their
soldiers on the belt the motto "Gott mit uns", that is translated
into English "God with us", they could write as well there
"Jesus of Nazareth with us," as it campaigned for example Medieval
Catholic Crusaders or medieval Roman Catholic Inquisition. According to the
Bible's New Testament the only one God is identical to charity. Misuse in the
same way of the word “charity” is apparently very difficult or at present even
completely impossible, if for example above mentioned Nazi soldiers of
Wehrmacht had on the belt the motto "charity with us," not "God
with us", as well as Catholic crusaders or the Roman Catholic Inquisition,
so they should have hardly beatable, if not at present unbeatable barriers to
commit war crimes as such especially killing of defenseless women and children,
as the above mentioned Wehrmacht soldiers during World war II, or in the Middle
Ages both Catholic crusaders and the Roman Catholic inquisitors did it in a
large amount. Although in the past the above mentioned misuse of the word
“love” has already occurred, in Latin in ancient Rome there was originally used
the word "amor" for the word “love”, then one of the many gods of
Roman polytheism was called by the word "Amor" or by in English
"love" by the ancient Romans, then this ancient Roman god of love
Amor acquired rather the meaning as a sex god, who included and approved or
recommended also various sexual deviations like pedophile or homosexual sex,
which later in ancient Rome were numerous and socially recommended ways of sex.
Therefore, when St. Jerome translated the Biblical New Testament (so called
Vulgate) into Latin in the 4th-5th Century AD (anno Domini) the phrase from the
Bible, New Testament, 1 John 4, "8 He that loveth not, knoweth not God,
for God is love." in his Latin Vulgate Joannis I „4:8 qui non diligit non
novit Deum quoniam Deus caritas est“, so he did not use in ancient Rome largely
discredited Latin word "amor" for the word "love", but he
created for this word “love”, which should be Biblical only one God (see
above), in Latin entirely new word "caritas" in English
"charity" (derived from the Latin "carum, caro", i.e. in
English "dear"or "valuable", in French “cher”, in Italian
“caro”). According to me with knowledge of this historical experience the above
mentioned word love in the sense of "caritas" or "charity"
is in practice inmisapplicable by Satan.
Literature: http://janbarton.blog.idnes.cz/blog.aspx?c=441864 : Bůh s námi, 2015, Německý Wehrmacht měl ve
výstroji svých vojáků na opasku heslo
Gott mit uns . O tom, že je Bůh s nimi, byli a jsou přesvědčeni
všichni, author: Jan Bartoň , http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=John1&no=4 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4&version=GNV , http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/1Jo.html : Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima, The Clementine Text Project was an effort between 2002 and 2005 to create a free online text version of the Clementine Vulgate, clementinevulgateproject@mail.com , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata , http://www.vira.cz/otazky/Caritas-vyznam-slova.html : Dominik Opatrný, 2011, Vira.cz provozuje
Arcibiskupství pražské Pastorační
According to my Philosphy of Balance means the love in the sense of
caritas (however it needs not to be an exhaustive definition):
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in fact mostly want to live in a
world, where everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is still obliged to
cause the least possible death and pain." All the rest consists more in
views (speculations).
Thus my question in relation to only one God, i.e. the Lord in the sense
of the Old Testament is precisely:
About the only one Old Testament God, i.e. the Lord the Bible Old and New Testaments | including
deuterocanonic books |, Czech Ecumenical Translation, CZECH Bible Society,
1995, see www.biblenet.cz , in English from King James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/ says besides
other things: I quote from this translation of the Bible, according to
which the Old Testament only one God, i.e. the Lord should personally
kill many people (see eg. Exodus 12, 29 And it came to pass, that at
midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the
firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive
that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Exod&no=12 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+12&version=KJV ) or according to which the Old Testament only one God,
i.e. the Lord should personally kill also many from God dissenting Israelis (see eg. Numbers
16, 16 And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy
company before the Lord, thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow: 17 And take
every man his censer, and put incense in them, and bring ye before the Lord
every man his censer, two hundred and fifty censers; thou also, and Aaron, each
of you his censer. 18 And they took every man his censer, and put fire in them,
and laid incense thereon, and stood in the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation with Moses and Aaron. … 35 And there came out a fire from the
Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Num&no=16 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+16&version=KJV ) or according to which according to the command of
both the Old Testament only one God, i.e. the Lord and Moses probably around
1500-1300 BC (i.e. before Christ) during the conquest of Canaan, i.e. of
contemporary both Palestine and Israel the commander of the Israeli nation
Joshua and his Israeli army should kill all at that time Canaan inhabitants,
i.e. men, women and also children as cursed with the exception of a little
individuals (see eg. Leviticus 27, 28
Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of all
that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall
be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Lev&no=27 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+27&version=KJV . Deuteronomy 2, 34 And we took
all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and
the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain: See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=2 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+2&version=KJV . Joshua 10, 40 So Joshua smote
all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the
springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all
that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=10 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+10&version=KJV . Joshua 11, 12 And all the cities
of those kings, and all the kings of them, did Joshua take, and smote them with
the edge of the sword, and he utterly destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the
Lord commanded. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=11 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+11&version=KJV .), similarly in other places of Bible in Old
Testament in the above mentioned translation (see eg.: Numbers 21, 3,
Deuteronomy 3, 6, Deuteronomy 7, 2, Deuteronomy 13, 16, Deuteronomy 20, 17, Joshua 2, 10, Joshua 6, 17, Joshua 6, 18, Joshua 6, 21, Joshua 10, 28, Joshua 10, 35, Joshua 10, 37, Joshua 10, 39, Joshua 11, 11, Joshua 11, 20, Joshua 11, 21. See http://www.biblenet.cz/ and https://www.biblegateway.com/ .), or the sacrifices of a huge number of the animals
according to the Bible Old Testament also ordered by the Old Testament only one
God, i.e. by the Lord for Israelites (the Jewish, virtually Israeli Temple was
supposedly the biggest slaughterhouse in ancient times). Is such a
description of the Old Testament only one God, i.e. the Lord totally
inconsistent with the above mentioned definition of the Biblical only one God,
i.e. the Lord as love in the sense of caritas on the condition, that "the
love in the sense of caritas" is defined in the above mentioned sense?
For details see: www.spvzt.cz , www.spvzt.sweb.cz , www.filosofierovnovahy.sweb.cz
Best regards
In Hustopeče 30/06/2016 JUDr. Dalibor
Grůza Ph.D. your friend a the friend of your husband
27) 06/07/2016 The apparently only one possible (also
Biblical) righteous philosophy of carnivores, virtually also of all other
predators and also about the correct interpretation of Jewish and Christian
Biblical laws of righteous fight, and about the only one real Christian Church,
i.e. about the only one true Christian community according to the Philosophy of
Balance and apparently also according to Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ
and episode no. 2 of my article: “Beginning of salvation or the end of the
world in the presidential elections in present-day Austria according to the
Philosophy of Balance. Nazism as a result of Christian and Jewish heresy?”
From the perspective of carnivores (among which I
include also humans before death, who in my up to now life experience must
always eat at least the minimum amount of meat up to now, because they are
omnivores) there are the following four logical possibilities, how they can
adopt an attitude, virtually solve to the problem of their carnivory:
1) He or she or it can (want) to hunt, virtually to
fight and to eat all the animals (see eg. islams, Nazism, virtually Social
Darwinism as a direct consequence of the transfer of Darwinism to human society
or the orthodox Judaism, these orthodox
Jews believe absolutely in the Biblical Old Testament, especially in the Five
Books of Moses, called by the Jews the Torah, all see Literature point 3) below) However the question is if he or she or it succeeds
in realizing this possibility or if it is possible in no way.
2) He or she or it can (want) let catch himself or
herself or itself and let eat himself or herself or itself, for example usual
contemporary, apparently erroneous idea of the Christian God is,
that the one whom the Christian God loves, this Christian God lets cruelly sacrifice,
virtually die in a same way as this Christian God let cruelly sacrifice,
virtually die his apparently only one son Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ.
However the problem with this solution is the fact, that nearly no human before
death has so strong soul, as Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ apparently had,
and, although in the beginning he or she adopts an attitude that he or she lets
cruelly sacrifice himself or herself, so then he or she will gets implacable
fear and he or she will cease to be a hero and he or she will start to escape
and to avoid this his or her sacrifice and to plead, that his or her murderers or
executioners saved him or her.
3) He or she or it can choose any path between the
extreme possibility ad 1) and the extreme possibility ad 2), i.e. he or she or
it can eat occasionally some of all animals, and ultimately according to my
Philosophy of Balance always sooner or later he or she or it will have to be caught
and be eaten by another animal. An example of such possibility is so called
healthy practical reason or in a philosophy so called eclecticism, i.e. electing
from all existing philosophies, what I consider by coincidence as serviceable
in the best way in a given moment.
4) He
or she or it can hope in his or her or its whole life, that someone such as the
God or a scientist or he himself or she herself or it itself will resolve this
his or her or its problem of carnivory. Examples of this possibility are a belief in the Last
Judgement in Christianity, after which a salvation for the chosen and a hell
for the unsaved shall follow, or other form of salvation on principle after
death in other religions, such as Nirvana in Buddhism, moksha in Hinduism or
paradise in Islam. One of these possibilities
is also my experiment, how by (means of) still repeating resolving the question,
how still to cause the least possible death and pain in each certain situation
in life, to achieve ultimately a world, where everyone likes each other. This resolution
is also apparently the only one possible also Biblical righteous philosophy of
carnivores, virtually also of all other predators (Predator
is an animal that hunts live animals and eats them. In ecology predator is
either in the strict sense of the word the supreme article of pasture-predatory
food chain, or in a broad sense any living creature that excludes during the
consumption the whole individual of prey from the population“, thus apparently
also the only living microorganism. „An example of the first type is e.g.
jaguar … an example of the second type is ... also domestic fowl, they feed on
seeds, which they eat whole and hereby they exclude potential future individual
from population.“ See https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pred%C3%A1tor ), see
for example the according to my Phylosophy of Balance main part of the basic Jewish
prayer Shema Yisrael: „4
Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is
one Lord:“ (thus, eg. they are not different god of the people
and different god of believed higher animals and different god of plants and different
god of other animals and different god of other living creatures, such as
living cells and viruses, or eg. they are not different god of carnivores and different
god of herbivores, or eg. they are not different god of the Jews and different
god of the Christians and different god of Muslims and different god of Buddhists
and different god of Hindus, and different god of atheists, or eg. they are not
different god of Roman Catholics and different god of Protestants and different
god of Orthodox Christians, etc.) „5 And
thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul,
and with all thy might. 6 And these
words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto
thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when
thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.“
(see Bible, Old Testament, Deuteronomy King James Version (KJV) 6,4-7 on http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=6 and on
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+6&version=KJV )
According to the Philosophy of Balance the following
principles apply to righteous fight:
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Grůza
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures in fact mostly want to live in a
world, where everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is still obliged to
cause the least possible death and pain."
All the rest consists more in views (speculations).
1) A human must never kill any
living creature, especially human (or him- or herself). (i.e. according to me
for the probability of 0-5 percents, that a human kills the human, the first
human must begin to save this second human, i.e. at worst case only to recede)
2) A human has a duty to kill as few of living
creatures as possible (i.e. for the protection of life) and if so then those
naturally feeling the least pain. (i.e. according to me a human can kill any
living creature only if the probability of at least 95-100 %, that he or she
saves in this way the life of other living creature, so that in this way he or
she caused the least possible death and pain).
3) Regarding for me as a person it is healthy (i.e. if I am not vomiting and
underweight or in allergic shock) to eat from all living creatures only
non-sprouting plant seeds (hereafter referred to only as plant seeds, sprouting
plant seeds are already young plants) and plant fruits with seeds, of which
separation from the plant cannot kill it, while the reproduction of these
plants with the maximum health not damaging amount of salt or appropriate
quantity of other minerals and water (e.g. for adults and children aged over 11
years the maximum daily dose of six grams of salt, for smaller children five
grams, for suckers one gram of salt). It would probably be concerned seeds of
plants (soya beans, peas, beans, corn, etc.) and fruits of plants with seeds,
especially trees (such as apples, pears, dates).
In my opinion three basic laws, that guarantee a
paradise on Earth for each, arise from generalizations above three rules. These
3 basic laws of a paradise, which should govern all living organisms, that want
a paradise on Earth for all, are:
1) Never kill any living creature (or yourself)
2) Kill as few living creatures as possible (i.e. for
the protection of life) and if so then those naturally feeling the least pain,
3) It follows, that for the man it is healthy to eat
from all living creatures only plant fruits and plant seeds and for other
animals it is healthy to eat only plants, fungi, single living cells, bacteria
and viruses (i.e. if they are not vomiting and not underweight or in an
allergic shock) together with the relevant health not damaging quantity of
minerals and water. Philosophy of Balance p. 23-24
Applying for an explanation of the above-mentioned general physical and
mathematical definitions the general English language, we can say the
following:
ad 1)
1.1 In the case of an attack against a particular
individual from the society of living creatures makes this attack from the
living creatures retreat this particular individual from the society of living
creatures.
1.2 In the case of retreat of living creatures makes
this retreat from the living creatures the individual to the attack against
these living creatures.
ad 2) Reasonable behavior:
2.1 In the case of an attack by the living creatures
against a certain individual it is reasonable, so that this individual
responded in contrast to paragraph ad 1.1 not by a retreat but by appropriate
attack against the society of living creatures (Eg. the seduction of a person
of the same sex can be responded by own idea of his or her genital organs).
2.2 In the case of retreat of society of living
creatures from a particular individual it is reasonable, that this individual
responded in contrast to paragraph ad 1.2 not by an attack but by an adequate
retreat from the society of living creatures.
Ad 3)
3.1 Reasonable attack of certain individuals as a
response to the attack of the living creatures against the particular
individual neutralizes (or zero) both attacks, sooner or later (i.e.
educational, not destructively).
3.2 Reasonable retreat of some individuals in response
to the retreat of living creatures from the particular individual neutralizes
(or zero) both retreats sooner or later.
The result of this procedure is sooner or later,
stable development of all living creatures.
Note: I was trying to verify the above model of the
behavior of bodies on a collision by sending two balls one against another of
the same weight with the same speed, and they have stopped completely shortly
after a frontal collision, after a brief movement in the opposite direction. If
I sent a ball against a stationary ball of the same weight, so the ball has
completely stopped moving and the other motionless ball has become to move away
likely with the same speed as before the collision the first ball in the
opposite direction.
In the attack as an appropriate response to attack by
society of living organisms it should always be considered if:
1) We are able to stop the attack from the side of the
living world, sooner or later, without us getting seriously hurt by the
attacker and we cause the least possible death and pain of living creatures (see variable momentum
vector p1 above in my diagram), or
2) We are able the attack from the society of living
organisms only to hamper (see variable momentum vector p2 in my
above mentioned diagram), without us getting seriously hurt by the attacker and
we cause the least possible death and pain
of living creatures, cessation of attacks by living organisms in this
case, then we leave it to another living organism (see variable momentum vector
p1 above, that in my diagram).
With almost certainty, we know, that this is an
attack, if we feel the pressure (stress), and the appropriate counter-attack,
if there is a permanent reduction in pressure. Philosophy of Balance p. 48
According to the Biblical Old Testament, virtually
Jewish Torah the following main laws apply to the righteous fight:
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Grůza
Exodus 21, 22 If men strive, and
hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief
follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay
upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any mischief
follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth,
hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe
for stripe. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Exod&no=21 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus+21&version=KJV .
Leviticus 24, 19 And if a man cause
a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20
Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in
a man, so shall it be done to him again. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Lev&no=24 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+24&version=KJV .
Deuteronomy 19, 21 And thine eye
shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand
for hand, foot for foot. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=19 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+19&version=KJV .
According to my Philosophy of Balance the above mentioned Jewish law of
"eye for eye, tooth for tooth" is necessary to
interpret as meaning that to deprive someone of an eye or of a tooth is
possible only this one that himself or herself or itself is at this moment capable
in terms of health, virtually also otherwise dangerous to deprive us of an eye
or of a tooth. In other words according to my Philosophy of Balance it is not
possible eg. to have a vendetta against severely ill or severely wounded defenseless
enemy, it is necessary to wait with a vendetta until this enemy will be healthy
enough, virtually dangerous enough, that he or she or it will be capable to deprive
also us of an eye or of a tooth. Therefore according to the above laws of the
Bible, Old Testament It is not possible to deprive a dying defenseless enemy of
an eye or a tooth that is not capable to deprive also us of an eye or a tooth,
apparently because it would not be righteous fight, but inhuman abomination. An
example of such inhuman abomination is eg. to kill a defenseless hostile young child
or a defenseless enemy woman.
According to the Biblical New Testament the following
main laws apply to the righteous fight while the simultaneous validity of the
above mentioned laws of the Biblical Old Testament, virtually Jewish Torah: (Mathew 5, 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the
law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I
say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no
wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Matt&no=5 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mathew+5&version=KJV ):
quoted:
Post of Dalibor Grůza
Mathew 5, 38 Ye have heard that it
hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto
you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right
cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law,
and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41 And whosoever shall
compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42 Give to him that asketh thee,
and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. 43 Ye have heard
that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to
them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute
you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he
maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the
just and on the unjust. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Matt&no=5 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mathew+5&version=KJV .
Mathew 25, 34 Then shall the King
say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the
kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an
hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a
stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye
visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer
him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and
gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked,
and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto
thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you,
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have
done it unto me. 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart
from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his
angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye
gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye
clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they
also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a
stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it
not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go
away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Matt&no=25 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mathew+25&version=KJV .
Therefore according to
my Philosophy of Balance the above mentioned Christian law of „Love your enemies“ is necessary to
interpret as meaning that it is necessary to understand it only as a certain
correction of the above mentioned Jewish law of „eye for eye, tooth for tooth“, the aim of this
correction of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ is that we always lead
righteous fight, thus always fight for purpose of charity, always in the most
possible charitable way/ thus according to my Philosophy balance the aim of this
our righteous fight should always be „to
live in a world, where everyone” (thus we and also this our enemy) ”likes each other“, therefore we are
still obliged, even in this fight for the purpose of charity „to cause the least possible death and pain"/ In other words
according to my Philosophy of Balance in the sense of exact science physics it
apparently means that in case of righteous fight it should always be the collision,
virtually the collisions that permanently reduce as much as possible the whole power
of collisions for purpose of organized movement of everyone and of all with the
least possible collisions.
This could be in
conflict with the above mentioned Christian law: „… whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn
to him the other also …“. In this case there are two possible interpretations:
1) Either according to
the Philosophy of Balance is the sentence: Bible, New Testament, Mathew 5, 38 „…, but whosoever shall smite thee on
thy right cheek, turn to him the other also …“ or similarly Luke 6,29 from the Gospels in
violation with the foundation of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, perhaps
Christ, which is love. It comes to me from 51-60% to be a late addition. The
correct approach to this situation by love is a Universal ethic of my
Philosophy of Balance, Ist book. The correct answer to this situation should be
referred to my ethics always educational (i.e., lovingly kept), rather than a devastating
counterattack. I'll give you an example, imagine a child who hits his or her
parents into one face, if his parent give another face and have not made any
educational countermeasures, so eventually the child could grow into a serial
killer. Love of the parents of such a child is reflected primarily in the form
of educational countermeasure that is done with love, so to correct this error
in the child's behavior, not to devastate the child as punishment.
2) Or according to the
interpretation that I heard from my confirmation godfather, is the essence of
the sentence: Bible, New Testament, Mathew 5, 38
„…, but whosoever
shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also …“ hidden in the word ”right”, because the majority of people are right handed, and
this questioner can be hit by his or her enemy, who will be therefore very probably
right-handed, on the right cheek of this questioner only by left hand of this his
or her enemy or this questioner can be hit by his or her enemy on the right cheek
of this questioner, not by the palm of right hand, but only by the opposite side
of right hand than the palm of right hand, i.e. by the back of the right hand
of his or her enemy. This means that in the case that this enemy hits this
questioner on the right cheek of this questioner, so this enemy cannot highly
probably hurt seriously this questioner by his or her hit, so that this enemy will
not highly probably damage a tooth or an eye of this questioner by this his or
her hit on his or her right cheek. Thus, according to this interpretation the
above mentioned sentences: „ Bible, New
Testament, Mathew 5, 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an
eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil:
but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him
have thy cloak also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with
him twain. 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of
thee turn not thou away.“ concern only the enemy, who does not highly probably
seriously hurt us in his or her attack, or even more the enemy who more
probably help us in his or her attack than more probably hurt us (i.e. in the
latter case in the sense of exact science physics it is in the case of this
enemy of questioner the above mentioned righteous fight, i.e. the collision,
virtually the collisions that permanently reduce as much as possible the whole
power of collisions for purpose of organized movement of everyone and of all
with the least possible collisions).
Then according to my
Philosophy of Balance the above mentioned Christian law: Bible, New Testament, Mathew 25, 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily
I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my
brethren, ye have done it unto me., interprets the above mentioned Jewish law „eye for
eye, tooth for tooth“as meaning that to deprive someone of an eye or of a tooth is possible
only this one that himself or herself or itself is at this moment capable in
terms of health, virtually also otherwise dangerous to deprive us of an eye or
of a tooth, thus on principle only in equal fight. In this sense it is also
possible to understand the theological interpretation of a Roman Catholic
priest Mark Orko Vacha, who is also head of the Department of Medical Ethics at
the 3rd Medical Faculty of Charles University in Prague, who strives within the
Roman Catholic tradition of St. Francis of Assisi /St.
Francis of Assisi, “He believed that nature itself was the mirror of God. He
called all creatures his “brothers” and “sisters,” and even preached to the
birds and supposedly persuaded a wolf to stop attacking some locals if they
agreed to feed the wolf. In his “Canticle of the Creatures” (“Praises of
Creatures” or “Canticle of the Sun”), he mentioned the “Brother Sun” and
“Sister Moon,” the wind and water, and “Sister Death.”” See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_of_Assisi „At
Franciscan churches, a friar with brown robe and white cord often welcomes each
animal with a special prayer. The Blessing of Pets usually goes like this:
„Blessed are you, Lord God, maker of all living creatures. You called forth
fish in the sea, birds in the air and animals on the land. You inspired St.
Francis to call all of them his brothers and sisters. … “ See http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/francis/blessing.asp
“AmericanCatholic.org, home of the online editions of St. Anthony Messenger and
other Catholic features, is a service of Franciscan Media (formerly known as
St. Anthony Messenger Press), in Cincinnati, Ohio. … Franciscan Media conducts
its publishing ministry with the official ecclesiastical approval of the Roman
Catholic Archbishop of Cincinnati. Our postal address is 28 W. Liberty St.,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45202. Phone: (513) 241-5615.” See http://www.americancatholic.org/About/default.aspx / for a reform of the
Roman Catholic theology that it would consider animals as our "lesser
brothers and sisters", see https://www.i17-11.cz/marek-orko-vacha : Marek Orko Vácha, Bioetika – umění
žít a život chránit, Cyklus besed o
sociální nauce církve Iniciativa
17-11, Marie Mocová, Pavel Mareš . This is related also
to my draft of the Act on the slaughter tax in order to breed the animals until
their natural death, principally of old age and to eat their carrions, i.e. in
Hebrew language "nevelot" for humans principally boiled in several
waters then after medical autopsy.
This is contrary to
the prevailing contemporary Christian, virtually Roman Catholic theology up to
now persisting in the apparent heresy of St. Thomas Aquinas (see Literature point 1) below),
according to which only one Biblical God does not feel “the love of
friendship”; but “the love of desire” for other living creatures than humans
(in Czech language these words "of desire" are derived from the word
"want"), thus any human does not breed eg. the animals, because he or
she loves them as friends, but because he or she wants them similarly as any
other lifeless, virtually dead thing, such as a table, etc., therefore it should
not be valid the old Czech proverb that "a dog is the best friend for a human",
but this proverb should supposedly be understood so that " the dog is not in
fact any our friend, but the dog is only the best mere thing of a human",
the second best thing of a human could be for example his or her house or his
or her car or his or her other similar other lifeless, virtually dead thing,
and only then his or her next best things such as living pigs, cows or poultry,
etc could follow.).
Result of the above mentioned heresy of Thomas Aquinas
is, that most Christian churches, eg. the Roman Catholic Church claim on the
one side, that only one God is love (i.e. caritas), however on the other side
they do not mostly generally bother about and they do not mostly generally protest
against agricultural slaughter factory farms - today's concentration camps of
animals at present time in a large amount killing and torturing livestock. This
heresy is apparently in conflict against elementary emotions of living
creatures, especially against elementary human emotions, and also against the
theory of evolution of exact natural science, according to which also animals
and other living creatures can gradually improve their rational mind, i.e.
reason (see Literature point 2)
below), and it seems faster
than humans, because they can learn from people, and it is also against at
least one Biblical part, for example see Bible, Old Testament, Genesis 3King
James Version (KJV) 1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the
field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God
said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
(see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Genesis%203 and http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Gen&no=3 ), where the serpent, thus animal spoke and so it had
apparently also rational mind, i.e. reason, and it is also against Biblical
verses of the New Testament, the Gospel: see Bible, New Testament, Luke
10King James Version (KJV) 29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto
Jesus, And who is my neighbour? 30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went
down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of
his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 And by
chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he
passed by on the other side. 32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the
place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. 33 But a
certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he
had compassion on him, 34 And went to him, and bound
up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and
brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And on the morrow when he
departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him,
Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will
repay thee. 36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him
that fell among the thieves? 37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then
said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise. (see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Luke%2010 and http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Luke&no=10 )
The above mentioned heresy of St. Thomas Aquinas
follows the Jewish law see Bible, the Old Testament, Deuteronomy 14King James Version (KJV): 21 Ye shall not eat of anything that dieth of itself:
thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates, that he may eat it;
or thou mayest sell it unto an alien: for thou art an holy people unto the Lord
thy God., see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=14 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Deuteronomy%2014 , but
immediately following sentence of the Bible, Old Testament contradicts this
immediately preceding provision to a considerable extent, see Bible, the Old
Testament, Deuteronomy 14King James Version (KJV): 21 … Thou shalt not seethe
a kid in his mother's milk., see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=14 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Deuteronomy%2014 ,
according to my Philosophy of Balance It is apparently the test of the Jews, if
then from the above mentioned reasons they abandon their desire to restore a
Jewish temple in the original form, which represented the largest and possibly
therefore also the most cruel slaughterhouse of antiquity, i.e. of ancient
times, because according to the Christianity, virtually according to Jesus of
Nasaretus, apparently Christ the Jews have already not been an holy people unto
the Lord, but this holy people are the Christians now.
{Another similar command is the command of the Bible, the
Old Testament, Exodus 23,19: … Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's
milk., see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Exod&no=23 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus+23&version=KJV , which is very similar to another prohibition of the
Bible, the Old Testament, Leviticus 22,28: And whether it be cow, or ewe, ye
shall not kill it and her young both in one day., see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Lev&no=22 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+22&version=KJV , i.e. it concerns the prohibition of killing another
youth in the same day as their parents or in their presence, because looking to
kill the mother or the youngster causes emotional suffering also to animals, as
this verse was explained in detail and with the medical expertise by Maimonides,
further see eg. the Bible, the Old Testament, Numbers 22,32 a Deuteronomy
12,20, my Czech resources: Benjamin Kuras, Zakázané ovoce vědění, Bible jako
drama a terapie, G plus G, s.r.o., Praha 2003, p. 190 et seq. and p. 216 et
seq. and Hana Mayer, Article Cedaka ekonomický systém a etická micva, journal
Maskil, p.8, No. 8, year 5769, http://www.maskil.cz/5769-8/index.htm , original resource Moshe ben Maimon (in Hebrew
language: משה בן מימון Moshe ben Maymon, acronymed רַמְבָּ״ם Rambam, in Europe, known as Maimonides, in the Arab
world known as Mūsā ibn Maymūn; born March 30, 1135 AD in
Cordoba - died December 13, 1204 AD in Cairo, rabbi, Jewish philosopher and
physician, one of the greatest figures of medieval Jewish philosophy, namely
his work Moreh Nevukhim, originally in Arabic language Dalalat al-ha’irīn,
in Czech language „Průvodce zbloudilých“ or „Průvodce tápajících“; ca. 1190 AD,
in which there was completed union of Aristotelian philosophy and biblical
interpretation of the world, this work is based on the ideas of Arab
philosopher Averroes and it influenced the Christian scholastics Albert the
Great, Thomas Aquinas, but also later thinkers, for example Nicholas of Cusa,
it met with both positive and negative adoption in Jewish circles (see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides#Works_and_bibliography and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guide_for_the_Perplexed ), the following quotes of this work are from its
English translation: THE GUIDE OF THE PERPLEXED OF MAIM0NIDE8, TBANSLATED FBOM
THE ORIGINAL AND ANNOTATED BY M. FRIEDLANDER, Ph.D., VOL. III., LONDON: TBUBNER
& CO., LUDGATE HILL. 1885. [All right* raened.] BALLANTYNK, HANSON AND CO.
EDINBURf.H AND LONDON, see https://archive.org/stream/guideperplexedm04friegoog/guideperplexedm04friegoog_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118 : (PART HI.— CHAPTER XVII. 77) … There is a rule laid
down by our Sages that it is directly prohibited in the Law to cause pain to an
animal, and is based on the words : " Wherefore hast thou smitten thine
ass ? " ' &c. (Num. xxii. 32). But the object of (78 GUIDE OF THE
PERPLEXED.) this rule is to make us perfect ; that vtq should not assume cruel
habits ; and that we should not uselessly cause pain to others; that, on the
contrary, we should be prepared to show pity and mercy to all living creatures,
except when necessity demands the contrary : " When thy soul longeth to
eat flesh " (Deut xil 20). We should not kill animals for the purpose of
practising cruelty, or for the purpose of play., or the same resource see: (PABT III.— CEAJPTKB XLVIII, 253) … The
commandment ' concerning the killing of animals is necessary, because the
natural food of man consists of vegetables and of the flesh of animals ; the
best meat is that of animals permitted to be used as food. Ko doctor has any
doubts about this. Since, therefore, the desire of procuring good food
necessitates the slaying of animals, the Law enjoins that the death of the
animal should be the easiest. It is not allowed to torment the animal by
cutting the throat in a clumsy manner, by poleaxing, or by cutting off a limb
whilst the animal is alive. It is also prohibited to IdU an animal with its
young on the same day (Lev. xxiL 28), in order that people should be restrained
and prevented from killing the two together in such (254 GUIDB OF THE
PERPLEXED) a manner that the young is slain in the sight of the mother ; for the
pain of the animals under such circumstances is very great. There is no
difference in this case between the pain of man and the pain of other living
beings since the love and tenderness of the mother for her young ones is not
produced by reasoning, but by imagination, and this faculty exists not only in
man but in most living beings. This law applies only to ox and lamb, because of
the domestic animals used as food these alone are permitted to* us, and in
these cases the mother can be distinguished from her young. The same reason
applies to the law which enjoins that we should let the mother fly away when we
take the young.* The eggs over which the bird sits, and the young that are in
need of their mother, are generally unfit for food. When the mother is sent
away she does not see the taking of her young ones, and does not feel any pain.
In most cases, however, this commandment will cause man to leave the whole nest
untouched, because [the young or the eggs], which he is allowed to take, are,
as a rule, unfit for food. If the Law provides that such grief should not be
caused to cattle or birds, how much more careful must we be that we should not
cause grief to our fellowmen. When in the Talmud * those are blamed who use in
their prayer the phrase," Thy mercy extendeth to young birds," it is
the expression of the one of the two opinions mentioned by us, namely, that the
precepts of the Law have no other reason but the Divine will. We follow the
other opinion.}
Who are these Christians according to me? This community
of those, what dwell as much as possible in love, goes beyond individual
ideological groups /i.e. these Christians can be eg. also Jews, Roman
Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists etc.,
who dwell as much as possible in love, although for those, who do not know the
Bible, especially Biblical Gospels, i.e. the Matthew's Gospel, the Gospel of
Mark, the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of John, it is very hard to know what
to do to dwell as much as possible in love, because knowledge of these Biblical
Gospels greatly facilitates them the understanding of the above only one dogma
of my Philosophy of Balance: PHILOSOPHY OF
BALANCE, PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE OR ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY: „All living creatures
in fact mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other,
therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and
pain." All the rest consists more in views (speculations)., because these Biblical Gospels summarize in simple
illustrative examples at least 51% perfectly correctly the vast amount of knowledge
of all living creatures about it, what means the love in the sense of charity,
because by reading these 100 normal pages of normal text of these Biblical
Gospels any living creature, that is not also the only one God, saves huge
amount of work, which he or she or it would have with finding in the vast
amount of knowledge of living creatures, especially of the humans (containing apparently
trillions normal pages of normal text) what it means the love in the sense of
charity/ and this community of those, what dwell as much as
possible in love, should form according to me the only one real church. The community of those what dwell as much as possible
in love, to which I adhere also and which goes beyond individual ideological
groups and which should form according to me the only one real church, is made
up of those, what or some other (especially their masters or their neighbors or
their enemies) in fact (i.e. especially people and other living creatures)
mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore
these members of this community follow as much as possible the permanent
obligation of everyone to cause the least possible death and pain (other living
creatures than humans especially through a merciful human care).
According to my Philosophy of Balance the above
mentioned concept of only one real Christian church is based on the following
provisions of the Bible, New Testament 1 John 4,8 and 1 John 4,16 (see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b/John1/chapter/4#v8 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4%3A8&version=KJV and http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b/John1/chapter/4#v16 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4%3A16&version=KJV ): King James
Version (KJV) 1 John 4,8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.,
King James Version (KJV), 1 John 4,16 And we have known and believed the love
that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God,
and God in him. Examples, see the
Nicene Creed (see http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicejsko-konstantinopolsk%C3%A9_vyzn%C3%A1n%C3%AD , http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/credo.htm : Catechism of the Catholic Church, PART ONE THE PROFESSION OF FAITH, SECTION TWO, THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, THE CREDO, Vatican Information Service ): „We believe in
one God, ... We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, ...“.
Because , if Jesus Christ is also only one God and if this God is love in the
sense of caritas, i.e. charity in English language, see Latin translation so called
Vulgate of St. Jerome (see http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/1Jo.html : Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima, The Clementine Text Project was an effort between 2002 and 2005 to create a free online text version of the Clementine Vulgate, clementinevulgateproject@mail.com ) of English word "love" in the above
provisions of the Bible, New Testament 1 John 4,8 and 1 John 4,16, then he or
she or it, that believes in love in the sense of charity, believes also of
course in this only one God, i.e. also in Jesus Christ, then it is not
factually important anyway, what he or she or it declares about his or her or
its faith in other only one god or other gods or in other Jesus Christ, if he
or she or it believes in love in the sense of charity, thus if he or she or it is
a Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jew or any other believer or atheist. Or another
important examples, see the Nicene Creed (see http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicejsko-konstantinopolsk%C3%A9_vyzn%C3%A1n%C3%AD , http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/credo.htm : Catechism of the Catholic Church, PART ONE THE PROFESSION OF FAITH, SECTION TWO, THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, THE CREDO, Vatican Information Service ): „ ... he ascended into heaven, ... We believe in one
holy catholic and apostolic Church. ... We look for the resurrection of the
dead, and the life of the world to come. ... “. Because, if I believe in love in the sense of
charity and if I act with all (especially with living creatures) with love in
the sense of charity, then it is less important, whether heaven exists and
whether in the heaven there are other living creatures, eg. animals as members
of the above mentioned one holy catholic and apostolic Church or not, because
after my death I will apparently come in the heaven for my love in the sense of
charity, if the heaven exists, and, if it does not exist, then to the heaven
after my death I will not come of course. And if I act with all living
creatures with love in the sense of charity, then I will come to the heaven
after my death also for this love in the sense of charity, if the heaven
exists, and if I do not act with all living creatures with love in the sense of
charity, then into the heaven after my death I need not come. If there is the
heaven and after my death I will come to the heaven for my love in the sense of
charity and if there are also other living creatures, eg. animals, then they
can obviously also be redeemed, but if there are not other living creatures,
then salvation does not obviously apply to them. If the heaven exists or does
not exist and if there are other living creatures in the heaven or not, so it
is less important than dogma of love in the sense of charity or actions with
love in the sense of charity also with other living creatures and it has less
sense to be interested in it or to dispute over it with others than the above
dogma of love in the sense of charity.
Unlike other biblical texts, especially regarding the
ritual sacrifices of animals in the Jewish temple according to the Old
Testament, I mention below the biblical texts showing the contrary, that the
Judeo-Christian God and Jesus of Nazareth are only one God of above mentioned
only one real Christian church, that therefore both Jesus of Nazareth and this only
one God could perfectly dwell in perfect love, thus also for other living
creatures than humans: Texts of the Second Vatican Council: LUMEN GENTIUM 9,3,
LUMEN GENTIUM 48,1, Gaudium et Spes 39,1, or texts Bible, New Testament: Mathew
5,43-48, Mathew 9,9-13, Mathew 12,7, Mathew 13,9-15, Mathew 22,36-40, Mathew
26,26-29, Mark 12,28-31, Mark 16,15, Mark 14,22-25, Luke 9,12-17, Luke
10,25-37, Luke 22,14-20, John 4,31-34, John 6,47-51, John 13,18, Romans
8,19-23, Romans 8,18, Ephesians 1,10, Colossians 1,15-20, 2 Peter 3,13, , 1
John 4,8, 1 John 4,16, Revelation 21,1 or texts Bible, Old Testament: Genesis
1-4,26 (especially Genesis 1,29-31), Exodus 23,19, Leviticus 22,28, Numbers
22,32, Deuteronomy 14,21, Psalms 36,7, Isaiah 63,17, Isaiah 43,16-21, Isaiah
56,9, Isaiah 11,6-8, Hosea 2,20 (besides other things see www.biblenet.cz , https://www.biblegateway.com/ and http://www.jesuit.cz/old/?id=dokumenty_2-dk_4-galot : Závěrečný úděl světa, Jean Galot SI,
Česká provincie Tovaryšstva
Ježíšova ). Proof of the fact, that also in Bible, i.e. also
in New Testament can be errors, is according to my Philosophy of Balance the Biblical
story of „Ananias and Sapphira“ in Bible King James Version (KJV), New
Testament, Acts 5,1-11 (see http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b/Acts/chapter/5 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+5&version=KJV ), this part
of the New Testament should be evidently erroneous, because it contradicts
love, i.e. it is not from the God and in accordance with Jesus of Nazareth, possibly
Christ who both should be love, however I am not sure, if errors can be also in
Czech language in Bible Old and New Testaments |including deuterocanonic books|,
Czech Ecumenical Translation, CZECH Bible Society, 1995, see www.biblenet.cz (compare it with the English Bible, King
James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/ ), in New Testament, in Biblical Gospels, i.e. in the
Matthew's Gospel, in the Gospel of Mark, in the Gospel of Luke and in the
Gospel of John. The most contentious part of the Bible, New Testament from that
point of view is apparently the Last Supper of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ,
when Jesus rather ate lamb (i.e. male young animal of sheep) as by Yahweh
commanded Passover meal as all the Jews should eat up to now at Easter
(Passover), in Hebrew language at "pesach” or “pascha" (see Bible, Old
Testament, Exodus 12,5-14), however also this part is unclear in the above
mentioned Czech Ecumenical Translation of the Bible, New Testament, because it is
not explicitly stated here, if this lamb was killed before eyes of the
apostles, i.e. the closest Jesus' twelve disciples, or if they themselves
personally killed it (the above mentioned Czech Ecumenical Translation of the
Bible, see www.biblenet.cz always speaks about preparation and not about killing
by apostles this lamb destined for the Last Supper of Jesus, see Matthew
26,17-19, Mark 14,12-16, Luke 22,7-13, John 13,1-2), and so in the case of this
lamb destined for the Last Supper of Jesus it could be a case similar to Jesus'
multiplication of dead “two fishes” (Luke 9,12-17, http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Luke&no=9 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+9&version=KJV ), if Jesus in fact ate this intentionally killed, i.e.
slaughtered lamb, it would apparently be contrary to the above mentioned
provision of the Bible, New Testament, John 4,31-34, see above mentioned King
James Version (KJV) on https://www.biblegateway.com/ : "31 In the
mean while his disciples prayed him, saying, Master, eat. 32 But he said unto
them, I have meat to eat that ye know not of. 33 Therefore said the disciples
one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat? 34 Jesus saith unto
them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.”
(see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+4&version=KJV )
According to the Biblical New Testament the above
mentioned prohibition of the Bible, Old Testament, Deuteronomy 14.21 to eat
carrions, in Hebrew language "nevelot" is apparently already not
valid. See Bible, New Testament, Acts 11
King James Version (KJV), 5 I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance
I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let
down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me: 6 Upon the which when
I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth,
and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 7 And I heard a
voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat. 8 But I said, Not so, Lord:
for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth. 9 But the
voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou
common. 10 And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into
heaven. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Acts&no=11 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+11&version=KJV . The
only thing that on principle is apparently prohibited Christians from eating,
is meat sacrificed to idols. See Bible, New
Testament, 1 Corinthians 8 King James Version (KJV), 7 Howbeit there is not in
every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour
eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is
defiled. 8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we
the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. 9 But take heed lest by
any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's
temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat
those things which are offered to idols; 11 And through thy knowledge shall the
weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? See http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Cor1/8#v1 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=1%20Corinthians%208 .
According to my Philosophy of Balance, if there is
some higher justice, it cannot leave such a colossal killing and torturing of
other living creatures than people by so erring, i.e. sinning contemporary
people without their adequate punishment, if this people do not timely change their
ways.
We can fro example
expect, that in short time the elections in Austria could be reflected in the
elections in Germany, especially in Bavaria, as it was before the World War II,
and because Germany is the European leader, so Nazism could subjugate Europe
again and apparently it could start also a new world war, especially against
the Jews in Israel again, if such Nazi Europe provides the Islamic States
around the Jewish State of Israel with nuclear weapons. In the first round of
the presidential election in Austria became the winner the heir of the ideas of
German Nazism, „the candidate of the right-wing
populist Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) Norbert Hofer, he was supported by 36.4
percent of voters, and former chairman of the Green Party Alexander Van der
Bellen, who won 20.4 percent of votes, representatives of the government
parties suffered a debacle: candidate of the Chancellor Werner Faymann 's
Social Democratic Party (SPÖ) Rudolf Hundstorfer and the candidate of the (its
Christian) coalition People's Party (ÖVP) Andreas Khol gain both each just 11.2
percent of the votes. Both (i.e. Norbert
Hofer and Alexander Van der Bellen)” competed in the second round on 22nd May“.
2016 (see http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/401427-hofer-necekane-zvitezil-v-prvnim-kole-prezidetskych-voleb-v-rakousku.html : 2016, Novinky, ČTK ),
according to my knowledge the Austrians and the Germans are traditionally the
largest both animal rights and nature activists throughout Europe. According to
my Philosophy of Balance in the present days here there is fundamental
ideological conflict in contemporary purest ideological form as a consequence
of the above mentioned Christian and Jewish heresy, so battle between charity
and predation. German Nazism, which originated also among others from Austria
and whose leader was an Austrian citizen Adolf Hitler, was in fact in the past
a political party, that established the most advanced protection of animals and
of nature that have ever been enacted in Europe. In other words now even Adolf
Hitler himself embodying apparently in the present days Austria should decide in presidential
elections in Austria, if he chooses, what in his soul there was caritas (i.e.
charity), or contrarily, what in his soul there was predation, thus, if he votes for the Green Party or
contrarily for the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), which is apparently at least
partly Nazi, and where there is a serious danger of reestablishment of mass
murdering and torturing of people, especially of the Jews, possibly as revenge of
similar contemporary mass murdering and torturing of animals and of other
living creatures, which is led in the West especially by the majority of Jews
as the contemporary most powerful Western social elite. Apparently the Jews
(because the radical Orthodox Jews apparently believe, but according to my
Philosophy of Balance apparently erroneously, apparently similarly as the
atheistic Darwinists, for example as apparently majority of Nazis about nature,
that in the case of radical Orthodox Jews the Biblical Old Testament only one God,
virtually nature in the case of atheistic Darwinists, virtually of apparently
majority of Nazis is mass murderer of both animals and people, thus that
Biblical Old Testament only one God, virtually nature is not the love in the
sense of charity, although they have not openly declared it from tactical
reasons up to now, see Literature point 3) below), (i.e. apparently the Jews) who were aware of this
fact and above all of the danger threatening them, apparently falsified the
results of the second round of the Austrian presidential elections to win former
chairman of the Austrian Green Party Alexander Van der Bellen, but according to
the decision of the Austrian constitutional court the second round of
presidential elections will be repeated, see „on Friday Austrian constitutional court ordered a
repetition of the second round of the presidential elections, so it met the
complaint of the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) on violations of rules during
the counting of votes, the candidate of the Freedom Party Norbert Hofer lost
narrowly, and his party" (i.e. his political party, note of author) "challenged
to the result of the May elections then ... in the reasoning of the judgment the
chairman of the constitutional court Gerhart Holzinger stated, that there is no
evidence, that the members of the electoral commissions manipulated the cast votes;
however according to him it is sufficient (reason), that something like this
could happen, according to the constitutional judge nearly 78 thousand votes was
involved in a wrong procedure, which would be enough to change the total result
due to the small difference between the candidates (31 thousand votes).” (see https://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/408151-volba-rakouskeho-prezidenta-neplati-rozhodl-soud.html : 2016, Novinky )
Literature:
1) The heresy from the teaching of Thomas
Aquinas-Sancti Thomae Aquinatis, (1225 - 1274), Catholic philosopher and
theologian who is considered as the greatest Christian thinker of all time by
the Roman Catholic Church, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, Pars Prima, 20. De amore Dei. 2.
Utrum Deus amet omnia. I q. 20 a. 2 ad 3: Reply to Objection 3: Friendship cannot exist except
towards rational creatures, who are capable of returning love, and
communicating one with another in the various works of life, and who may fare
well or ill, according to the changes of fortune and happiness; even as to them
is benevolence properly speaking exercised. But irrational creatures cannot
attain to loving God, nor to any share in the intellectual and beatific life
that He lives. Strictly speaking, therefore, God does not love irrational
creatures with the love of friendship; but as it were with the love of desire,
in so far as He orders them to rational creatures, and even to Himself. Yet
this is not because He stands in need of them; but only on account of His
goodness, and of the services they render to us. For we can desire a thing for
others as well as for ourselves. (see http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum023.htm : GOD'S LOVE (FOUR ARTICLES), Summa Theologica, by St. Thomas Aquinas, [1947], at sacred-texts.com, Internet Sacred Text Archive (ISTA), Santa Cruz, CA 95061-7429, USA ) Then
in the original in Latin there is apparently this text: Ad tertium dicendum quod amicitia non potest haberi
nisi ad rationales creaturas, in quibus contingit esse redamationem, et
communicationem in operibus vitae, et quibus contingit bene evenire vel male,
secundum fortunam et felicitatem, sicut et ad eas proprie benevolentia est.
Creaturae autem irrationales non possunt pertingere ad amandum Deum, neque ad
communicationem intellectualis et beatae vitae, qua Deus vivit. Sic igitur
Deus, proprie loquendo, non amat creaturas irrationales amore amicitiae, sed
amore quasi concupiscentiae; inquantum ordinat eas ad rationales creaturas, et
etiam ad seipsum; non quasi eis indigeat, sed propter suam bonitatem et nostram
utilitatem. Concupiscimus enim aliquid et nobis et aliis. (see http://www.corpusthomisticum.org/sth1015.html ) Then
in Czech language there is apparently this text: K třetímu se musí říci, že přátelství nelze míti, leč
k rozumovým tvorům, v nichž nastává opětování lásky a společenství v dílech
života a jimž bývá dobře nebo zle podle osudu a štěstí; jakož i k nim vlastně
je blahovůle. Ale tvorstvo bez rozumu nemůže dospět k milování Boha, ani ke
společenství v rozumovém a blaženém životě, jímž Bůh žije. Tak tedy Bůh tvory
bez rozumu nemiluje ve vlastním smyslu láskou přátelskou, nýbrž jaksi láskou
dychtivosti, pokud je zařizuje k rozumovým tvorům a také k sobě; ne jako by
jich potřeboval, nýbrž pro svou dobrotu a náš prospěch. Neboť dychtíme po něčem
pro sebe i pro jiné. (see St. Thomas Aquinas, TEOLOGICAL SUMMA, starting point
of this presentation of Theological Summa is a translation Sancti Thomae
Aquinatis, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, edited by P.Emilián Soukup, published in Olomouc
1937-1940, the original translation was corrected according to additional
Olomouc correcting sites and was modified for the contemporary readers by P.Tomáš
Bahounek OP. modification is working text for a private study, see http://www.cormierop.cz/Summa-teologicka-Icast.html : Sdružení přátel bl. Hyacinta M.Cormiera). From
the above heresy of St. Thomas Aquinas the simplified Roman Catholic Church
statement apparently originates, virtually originated, that (believed higher) animals
have not soul: However for a moment let us pay
attention to a few differences in the thinking of humans and (believed higher) animals.
You have surely heard about 'higher and lower emotions'. ... In this way the
human thinking differs from (all, i.e believed both lower and higher) animals. It
concerns the abilities, by which we resemble the God. ... Although (believed
higher) animals apparently perceive God's presence very deeply, they are very
sensitive to the good and the bad treatment and to the love, which we
demonstrate to them, we cannot say that they are able to be in communion with the
God in the same way as humans. Therefore the church never considered the fact
that they received the sacraments and sacramentals (Baptism, burial, receiving
the Eucharist, etc.), while even very ill people receive the sacraments, and
most of them gain much from them. The ability to believe is reserved only for humans.
... In this way we differ from an (believed higher) animal that functions
differently. Thus the soul is beyond rational thinking. Therefore we say that (believed
higher) animals, although they have reason and to a large extent also free will
and capabilities, about which a human would not dream, they have not soul. ...
When the church says that (believed higher) animals have not soul, it does not
legalize suffering of (believed higher) animals and cruelty to them in any way.
Such behavior is very bad and the church condemns it. ("Web vira.cz, which
is operated by the Archdiocese of Prague - Pastoral Center, 30/09/2009, author:
stepa, quoted from web 10/07/2016, see http://www.vira.cz/otazky/Krestansky-pohled-na-zvirata-Maji-dusi.html : 2009, stepa, Vira.cz provozuje
Arcibiskupství pražské Pastorační ).
2) At present time and possibly in the past the Roman
Catholic Church has never escalated to the extreme the dispute between adhering
to the idea of evolution and adhering to the faith in the one Biblical God. The
analogy of evolutionary idea should already exist in the work of St. Augustine
(born 354 AD - died 430 AD), probably the most significant ancient Christian
theologian and the representative of High Latin Patristics, his work in the
Western world had a lasting influence on theologians and philosophers. In 1950
AD the Roman Catholic Pope Pius XII alredy wrote in the encyclical "Humani
Generis", that evolution and the Church's teaching about a human and his or
her mission are not in mutual conflict. Also another Roman Catholic Pope John
Paul II nearly 50 years later added, that the latest knowledge in various scientific
disciplines speaks in favor of this theory. Another Roman Catholic Pope Benedict
XVI expressed his opinion on a dispute between proponents of creationism and of
evolutionism, which is presented so, as if these alternatives exclude one
another, which he considered as absurd, because the creation through evolution
is not contradictory.” The theory of evolution and the Roman Catholic Christian
faith should not exclude one another, if advocating of evolution theory does lead
the Christian believer to materialism. Proponents of the evolution theory are apparently
the minority in the Roman Catholic Church in relation to proponents of
creationism, but at present time the intorduction of opinions of these proponents of the evolution
theory is put a lot of space in the Roman Catholic Church by its official
representatives, i.e. the voice of the members of the Roman Catholic Church
advocating the theory of evolution is very heard in the contemporary Roman
Catholic Church. An example could be a Czech Roman Catholic priest Mark (Orko)
Vacha (born September 14, 1966 in Brno), theologian, scientist, educator and
writer, priest of the Lechovice parish, parochial vicar (chaplain) of the Academic
Roman Catholic parish at the Church of the Holy Saviour in Prague, Klementinum (of
which parish priest is Tomas Halik as the leading figure of ecumenism in the
Czech Roman Catholic Church, a professor at Charles University in Prague, born
June 1, 1948 in Prague, see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%C3%A1%C5%A1_Hal%C3%ADk , who
I have known as a charitable, learned and open man accessible to discussions
with both believers and unbelievers, if it is based on rational arguments,
although probably in the past Tomas Halik was mistaken according to me and
apparently unlike his chaplain Mark Orko Vacha at least in the past Tomas Halik
held a different opinion on the issue of the contemporary animal holocaust, see
Tomas Halik statement: "Comparing a pig slaughter with the (Nazi, note of
author) Holocaust I consider as repugnant" on http://www.animalrights.webz.cz/anketa.htm : Anketa: Jíst či nejíst maso?, Být či nebýt vegetariánem, veganem? or http://tvorobeznik.cz/anketa.html : Anketa „Dilema“, Převzato s laskavým svolením autora, totéž na animalrights.webz.cz ) and head of the Institute of Ethics at the 3rd Medical
Faculty of Charles University in Prague, Mark (Orko) Vacha specializes in issues
of evolutionary biology and of medical and environmental ethics, Mark (Orko)
Vacha graduated also from the Faculty of Science, at Masaryk University in Brno
in the field of molecular biology and of genetics. Mark (Orko) Vacha is also
famous for his numerous educational television programs within the Czech
official Catholic Television Noe. The sharp escalation of the dispute between
so called. Creationism about the direct creation of the world by the only one Biblical
God (from the Latin word “creatio” - creation, see the Bible, Old Testament,
Genesis, Chapter 1 to 2), i.e. supposedly as necessary condition for faith in
the only one Biblical God and scientific theory of evolution, of which necessary
consequence should supposedly be atheism, i.e. in the form of question of Creationists:
"evolution or (contrarily) creation" should be rather a matter of American
Protestant churches. /See educational program: Mein Gott und Walter,
8.Schöpfung & Evolution on Czech official Catholic Television Noe, see http://www.tvnoe.cz/porad/muj-buh-walter-stvoreni-evoluce and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Gott_und_Walter , also see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristika and https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek_V%C3%A1cha and see judicial case: “Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v.
Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket No. 4cv2688)”
on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District , in this
judicial case the plaintiffs, who challenged the change of “biology teaching
curriculum” in the sense of intelligent design, in the above mentioned judicial
case “the plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of
creationism” and “the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution” (enacting religious
freedom in the USA, note of author, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Establishment_Clause), the court decision came to the conclusion that,
“that intelligent design is not science”. /
3)
According to the Bible, Old Testament the Old
Testament only one God Yahweh should personally kill many people (see eg.
Exodus
12, 29 And it came to pass, that
at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the
firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive
that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Exod&no=12 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+12&version=KJV ) or
according to which the Old Testament only one God Yahweh should personally kill
also many from God dissenting Israelis (see
eg. Numbers 16, 16 And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy
company before the Lord, thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow: 17 And take
every man his censer, and put incense in them, and bring ye before the Lord
every man his censer, two hundred and fifty censers; thou also, and Aaron, each
of you his censer. 18 And they took every man his censer, and put fire in them,
and laid incense thereon, and stood in the door of the tabernacle of the
congregation with Moses and Aaron. … 35 And there came out a fire from the
Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Num&no=16 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+16&version=KJV ) or
according to which according to the command of both the Old Testament only one
God Yahweh and Moses probably around 1500-1300 BC (i.e. before Christ) during
the conquest of Canaan, i.e. of contemporary both Palestine and Israel the
commander of the Israeli nation Joshua and his Israeli army should kill all at
that time Canaan inhabitants, i.e. men, women and also children as cursed with
the exception of a little individuals (see
eg. Leviticus 27, 28 Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall
devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the
field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most
holy unto the Lord. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Lev&no=27 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+27&version=KJV . Deuteronomy
2, 34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed
the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to
remain: See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Deut&no=2 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+2&version=KJV . Joshua
10, 40 So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south,
and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none
remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel
commanded. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=10 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+10&version=KJV .Joshua 11,
12 And all the cities of those kings, and all the kings of them, did
Joshua take, and smote them with the edge of the sword, and he utterly
destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the Lord commanded. See http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Josh&no=11 and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua+11&version=KJV .),
similarly in other places of Bible in Old Testament (see eg.: Numbers
21, 3, Deuteronomy 3, 6,
Deuteronomy 7, 2, Deuteronomy 13, 16, Deuteronomy 20, 17, Joshua 2, 10, Joshua 6, 17, Joshua 6, 18, Joshua 6, 21, Joshua 10, 28, Joshua 10, 35, Joshua 10, 37, Joshua 10, 39, Joshua 11, 11, Joshua 11, 20, Joshua 11, 21. See http://www.biblenet.cz/ and https://www.biblegateway.com/ .), or the
sacrifices of a huge number of the animals according to the Bible Old Testament
also ordered by the Old Testament only one God Yahweh for Israelites, which
caused possibly no less death and pain than the above mentioned death of a huge
number of people.
According to the Bible, the New Testament the shared
both New Testament and Old Testament only one God should be love in the sense
of charity (see: Idolatry. How can Satan make from only one God a mere idol or
image or object and to subordinate it and to misuse it to great evil action,
thus according to the Philosophy of Balance to cause much more than the least
possible death and pain. Examples include Nazis. The German Wehrmacht had in
outfit of their soldiers on the belt the motto "Gott mit uns", that
is translated into English "God with us", they could write as well
there "Jesus of Nazareth with us," as it campaigned for example
Medieval Catholic Crusaders or medieval Roman Catholic Inquisition. According
to the Bible's New Testament the only one God is identical to charity. Misuse
in the same way of the word “charity” is apparently very difficult or at
present even completely impossible, if for example above mentioned Nazi
soldiers of Wehrmacht had on the belt the motto "charity with us,"
not "God with us", as well as Catholic crusaders or the Roman
Catholic Inquisition, so they should have hardly beatable, if not at present
unbeatable barriers to commit war crimes as such especially killing of
defenseless women and children, as the above mentioned Wehrmacht soldiers
during World war II, or in the Middle Ages both Catholic crusaders and the
Roman Catholic inquisitors did it in a large amount. Although in the past the
above mentioned misuse of the word “love” has already occurred, in Latin in
ancient Rome there was originally used the word "amor" for the word
“love”, then one of the many gods of Roman polytheism was called by the word
"Amor" or by in English "love" by the ancient Romans, then
this ancient Roman god of love Amor acquired rather the meaning as a sex god,
who included and approved or recommended also various sexual deviations like
pedophile or homosexual sex, which later in ancient Rome were numerous and
socially recommended ways of sex. Therefore, when St. Jerome translated the
Biblical New Testament (so called Vulgate) into Latin in the 4th-5th Century AD
(anno Domini) the phrase from the Bible,
New Testament, 1 John 4, "8 He that loveth not, knoweth not God,
for God is love." in his Latin
Vulgate Joannis I „4:8 qui non diligit non novit Deum quoniam Deus
caritas est“, so he did not use in ancient Rome largely discredited Latin word
"amor" for the word "love", but he created for this word
“love”, which should be Biblical only one God (see above), in Latin entirely
new word "caritas" in English "charity" (derived from the
Latin "carum, caro", i.e. in English "dear"or
"valuable", in French “cher”, in Italian “caro”). According to me
with knowledge of this historical experience the above mentioned word love in
the sense of "caritas" or "charity" is in practice
inmisapplicable by Satan. Literature: http://janbarton.blog.idnes.cz/blog.aspx?c=441864 Bůh s námi, 2015, Německý Wehrmacht měl ve
výstroji svých vojáků na opasku heslo
Gott mit uns . O tom, že je Bůh s nimi, byli a jsou přesvědčeni
všichni, author: Jan Bartoň , http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=John1&no=4 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4&version=GNV : 1599 Geneva Bible , http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/1Jo.html : Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima, The Clementine Text Project was an effort between 2002 and 2005 to create a free online text version of the Clementine Vulgate, clementinevulgateproject@mail.com , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgata , http://www.vira.cz/otazky/Caritas-vyznam-slova.html : Dominik Opatrný, 2011, Vira.cz provozuje
Arcibiskupství pražské Pastorační )
The basics of the philosophy of Nazism applied
especially by German Nazis in the period of their reign in years1933-1945 AD,
i.e. especially during the Second World War in years 1939-1945 AD, can be
described as follows: ... Adolf Hitler expressed this attitude by the words::
"Die Natur ist grausam, darum dürfen wir es auch sein.“/ „Nature is cruel,
therefore we we may be it also.“, (or another version: „ …, therefore also I'm
cruel.“) (Sources: Hitler-Biographie
von Joachim C. Fest (1973), see http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/spiegelspecial/d-52322574.html , “Hitler, ein „großer“ Mann?”, SPIEGEL SPECIAL
2/1989, or another source: [105] Quoted from Vacha, M. Identifikace etických problémů
plynoucích z nových poznatků o lidském genomu.
Brno: LF MU, 2006. s. 154, see http://is.muni.cz/th/102931/fss_b/Pelikan_BP_Pojeti_krajiny_a_jeji_ochrany_v_nacismu.txt : Vojtěch Pelikán, MASARYKOVA UNIVERZITA V BRNĚ, Fakulta sociálních studií, Brno 2007, diplomová práce ) or
other Hitler's words: “Es wird aber nie ein Fuchs zu finden sein, der seiner
inneren Gesinnung nach etwa humane Anwandlungen Gänsen gegenüber haben könnte,
wie es ebenso auch keine Katze gibt mit freundicher Zuneigung zu Mäusen.“/ „But
you never find a fox which could have internal dispositions for a humane
impulses in relation to a goose, as there is no cat, which should have a
friendly relationship with a mouse.“ (sources: p. 312-313, 11. Kapitel Volk und
Rasse, Erster Band, EhetVerta, ADOLF HITLER / MEIN KAMPF, Zwei Bände in einem
Band, Ungekürzte Ausgabe, Zentralverlag der NSDAP., Frz. EherNachf., G.m.b.H.,
München 851.-855, Auflage 1943, Alle Rechte vorbehalten, Copyright Band I 1925,
Band II 1927 by Verlag Franz Eher Nachf. G.m.b.H., München, Printed in Germany,
Gesamtauflage, sämtlicher Ausgaben 10 240 000 Exemplare, Druck der August Pries
GmbH, in Leipzig, see https://archive.org/stream/Mein-Kampf2/HitlerAdolf-MeinKampf-Band1Und2855.Auflage1943818S._djvu.txt or another source: [106]
Hitler, Mein Kampf, 2000, s. 207, see http://is.muni.cz/th/102931/fss_b/Pelikan_BP_Pojeti_krajiny_a_jeji_ochrany_v_nacismu.txt : Vojtěch Pelikán, MASARYKOVA UNIVERZITA V BRNĚ, Fakulta sociálních studií, Brno 2007, diplomová práce ), here
it is social Darwinism, therefore, it could be rephrased: "Charles Darwin
discovered in his theory of nature evolution, that nature is cruel, because
even the Nazis are cruel", so they can kill the enemy women and children
as the wild animals, which like a pack of wolves are merciful only to healthy
members of their pack, in nature they kill females and baby animals of their
prey. Or according to Adolf Hitler: „Die breite Masse ist nur ein Stück der
Natur, … “/ „Broad masses are just a piece of nature, … “ (source: p. 371-372,
12. Kapitel Die erste Entwicklungszeit der National-sozialistischen Deutschen
Arbeiterpartei, Erster Band, EhetVerta, ADOLF HITLER / MEIN KAMPF, Zwei Bände
in einem Band, Ungekürzte Ausgabe, Zentralverlag der NSDAP., Frz. EherNachf.,
G.m.b.H., München 851.-855, Auflage 1943, Alle Rechte vorbehalten, Copyright
Band I 1925, Band II 1927 by Verlag Franz Eher Nachf. G.m.b.H., München,
Printed in Germany, Gesamtauflage, sämtlicher Ausgaben 10 240 000 Exemplare,
Druck der August Pries GmbH, in Leipzig, see https://archive.org/stream/Mein-Kampf2/HitlerAdolf-MeinKampf-Band1Und2855.Auflage1943818S._djvu.txt ) or in
SS training manual: ... The SS training manual taught that “the concept of
humanity is biological nonsense” (quoted in Olsen 1999, 73). (Sources: Origins
of the Organic Agriculture Debate, Iowa State Press, A Blackwell Publishing
Company, 2004, Blackwell Publishing Professional, 2121 State Avenue, Ames Iowa,
50014, see https://books.google.cz/books?isbn=0470290013 and www.blackwellprofessional.com or another source: [103] Qouted
from DeGregori, Thomas R. Environmentalism, Animal Rights Activism and
Eco-Nazism, 2001-04-01, http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/newsID.604/healthissue_detail.asp , own
translation, see http://is.muni.cz/th/102931/fss_b/Pelikan_BP_Pojeti_krajiny_a_jeji_ochrany_v_nacismu.txt : Vojtěch Pelikán, MASARYKOVA UNIVERZITA V BRNĚ, Fakulta sociálních studií, Brno 2007, diplomová práce ), i.e.
humanism is according to the Nazis, virtually according to Darwinism the
artificial creation of a man which is against nature and not valid in nature. Nietzsche's philosophy is a mere
transfer of Darwinism in philosophy. The Western concept of Darwinism, that the
struggle for life in the food chain in human society takes place in the
framework of the free market, is inconsistent using of the Darwinism, which
maintains the validity, contrary to Darwinism and its teachings, many of the
old religious, primarily Jewish and Christian morality in society. /See source:
On 4th
October, 1943, Heinrich Himmler spoke to the commanders of the SS in Poznan.
Among other things he stated, that a member of the SS must be honest, moral,
faithful and comradely to all the members of their own blood, but never to
anyone else. What will happen with the Russians, what will happen with the
Czechs, it is totally unconcerned to him. It is necessary to save and to place
the children of a good German blood in Germany. He was interested whether other
people live in luxury or starve to death, only if they served the German
culture. About starvation to death of ten thousands of Russian women during the
digging of the anti-tank ditch he did not care, important to him it was,
whether the tank ditch for Germany was completed. („Ein Grundsatz muss für den
SS-Mann absolut gelten: ehrlich, anständig, treu und kameradschaftlich haben
wir zu Angehörigen unseres eigenen Blutes zu sein und zu sonst niemandem. Wie
es den Russen geht, wie es den Tschechen geht, ist mir total gleichgültig. Das,
was in den Völkern an gutem Blut unserer Art vorhanden ist, werden wir uns
holen, indem wir ihnen, wenn notwendig, die Kinder rauben und sie bei uns
großziehen. Ob die anderen Völker in Wohlstand leben oder ob sie verrecken vor
Hunger, das interessiert mich nur soweit, als wir sie als Sklaven für unsere
Kultur brauchen, anders interessiert mich das nicht. Ob bei dem Bau eines
Panzergrabens 10.000 russische Weiber an Entkräftung umfallen oder nicht,
interessiert mich nur insoweit, als der Panzergraben für Deutschland fertig wird.)
… The Germans are the only real people in the world and as well as they behave
decently towards animals, they behave decently towards these human animals, but
it would be a crime against their own blood to worry about them and to
communicate their ideas with them. … („Wir Deutsche, die wir als einzige auf
der Welt eine anständige Einstellung zum Tier haben, werden ja auch zu diesen
Menschentieren eine anständige Einstellung einnehmen, aber es ist ein
Verbrechen gegen unser eigenes Blut, uns um sie Sorge zu machen und ihnen
Ideale zu Brixen, …“) I want to mention a very difficult subject openly in
front of you here. Among us it should even be quite openly, and yet we will
never speak about it in public. ... Now I mean the evacuation of the Jews, the
extermination of the Jewish people. („Ich will hier vor Ihnen in aller
Offenheit auch ein ganz schweres Kapitel erwähnen. Unter uns soll es einmal
ganz offen ausgesprochen sein, und trotzdem werden wir in der Öffentlichkeit
nie darüber REDEn. … Ich meine jetzt
die Judenevakuierung, die Ausrottung des jüdischen Volkes.“) Most of the
members of the SS have already seen hundreds, thousands of corpses together.
Nevertheless apart from exception of human weakness the members of the SS must
remain polite. Therein their hardness lies.(„Von Euch werden die meisten
wissen, was es heißt, wenn 100 Leichen beisammen liegen, wenn 500 daliegen oder
wenn 1000 daliegen. Dies durchgehalten zu haben, und dabei – abgesehen von
Ausnahmen menschlicher Schwächen – anständig geblieben zu sein, das hat uns
hart gemacht. … „) See http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler and see
also Himmler, Heinrich (6 October 1943). "The Complete Text of the Poznan
Speech" on http://www.1000dokumente.de/index.html?c=dokument_de&dokument=0008_pos&object=translation&st=REDE%20DES%20REICHSF%C3%BCHRGRS%20SS&l=de : REDE DES Reichsführers SS bei der SS-Gruppenführertagung in Posen am 4. Oktober 1943, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Referat Digitale Bibliothek, 80328 München and Redaktion am Lehrstuhl für Osteuropäische Geschichte der Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlange . Or see other source: It was Frederick Nietzsche, the spiritual father of
the concepts of the "human-predator" and the "blond beast",
who came in the second half of the 19th century with the suggestive doctrine, of
which essence was the division of moral systems on the system of the slaves
(adhering to regret, compassion and altruism) and the system of lords (praising
selfishness, sensory delights and contempt for the weak). Boria Sax writes:
"Nietzsche was of the opinion, that the morality of slaves is the credo of
the illness and the morality of lords is the credo of the health. In Judaism
and even more in Christianity the weak won over the strong." And further:
"Predators" in the ranks of people were destined to give orders, 'the
vegetarians' were destined to obey." It is significant, that Nietzsche had
never apparently seen a large predator elsewhere than at the zoo and even he
did not specify, which specific animal he had in mind. Wolves, bears, lions and
eagles he melded in a single super predator. … Darwin's thesis, that the
success in the competitive struggle for survival had favoured individual races
according to "level of their civilization", in Germany Ernst Haeckel
led to the extreme, when he declared, that the Germanic race came from great
apes the furthest away. Richard Wagner wrote that "'inferior races' come
'from the monkeys', while the Aryans derive their origin 'from the gods'."
… "Hitler was a vegetarian and he apparently tried to imitate the composer
Richard Wagner. Several leaders of the Nazi government followed him, including
Hess and Goebbels. Himmler, who was influenced by Buddhism, even ordered eating
vegetarian diet to commanders. (see review of the book “Animals in the Third
Reich: Pets, Scapegoats, and the Holocaust”, Boria Sax, American historian and
linguist, Pavel Hub, Klimkovice 2011, on, http://www.kockaapravo.cz/clanky-clanek.php?id=33 )/
And it is unlike Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili
also known as Stalin (Сталин – in English language
Man from Steel) and his Soviet Union and his Soviet Red Army, who despite their
colossal suffering and the greatest human losses of all the countries in the
world (about 23.2 million dead people from a total number of about 168.5
million people in the former Soviet Union during the above mentioned Second
World War, see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po%C4%8Det_ob%C4%9Bt%C3%AD_druh%C3%A9_sv%C4%9Btov%C3%A9_v%C3%A1lky ) caused by German Nazi
invasion of the Soviet Union, at present time especially of Russia during the
above mentioned Second World War according to ancient tradition as successors of
steppe Mongols, virtually of Muslims did not kill on principle nor German women
(those according to this tradition the Soviet soldiers usually raped) nor the
German children subsequently during and after both the defeat of these German
Nazis and the conquest of Germany by the Soviet Red Army and by their Western
allies. /source in the case of the medieval steppe Mongols under the leadership
of Temüjin the Khan of the Mongols, in Mongolian language the Genghis Khan: I have recently seen a film Mongol
(Монгол), Kazakhstan 2007, Directed by
Sergei Bodrov; Starring: Tadanobu Asano (Temüdzhin), Amadu Mamadakov, Honglei
Sun, Ying Bai, according to this above mentioned film Mongol Temüjin enacted
three basic laws of the Mongols who conquered in a short time most of Asia and
Russia: 1) not to betray ever your Khan (it was punished by death regularly
also of family members of traitor), 2) to fight against the enemy until the end
and 3) the prohibition of killing women and children.. or another source in the case of Muslims: 18- Banu Qurayza ... He said, 'If you reject this,
too, then consider. This is the Sabbath night, and it is possible that Muhammad
thinks he is secure. Let us therefore make a sortie, and we may surprise him
and his men.' But they answered, 'Shall we desecrate the Sabbath, and do on the
Sabbath what none has done before save those who were afterwards transformed
into apes?' Kab said at last, 'Not a man of you has, from the time his mother
gave him birth, been able to hold firm to a decision for even one single night'
… In the morning the Qurayza came down from their fort to surrender to the
apostle of Allah, and the Aus begged that - as the apostle had dealt leniently with
allies of the Khazraj - he would do the same for the allies of the Aus. The
apostle said, 'Would you like one of your own people to decide their fate' and
they welcomed it. He continued, 'Then let Sad b. Muadh decide.' Sad had been
struck by an arrow in the defence of the Ditch, so his people mounted him on a
donkey - with a leather pillow under him, for he was a stout and handsome man
... Then Sad asked, 'Do you covenant with Allah to abide by my decision?' and
they said, 'We do!' The apostle of Allah also replied, 'Yes.' And Sad
pronounced the following sentence, 'I decree that the men be killed, the
property be divided, and the women with their children be made captives.' … The
apostle of Allah imprisoned the Qurayza in Medina while trenches were dug in
the market-place. Then he sent for the men and had their heads struck off so
that they fell in the trenches. They were brought out in groups, and among them
was Kab, the chief of the tribe. In number, they amounted to six or seven
hundred, although some state it to have been eight or nine hundred. All were
executed. … Aisha, the wife of the
apostle, said, 'Only one of their women was killed. By Allah! She was with me,
talking and laughing, while the apostle slaughtered her countrymen in the
marketplace; and when her name was called, I asked, "What is this
for?" and she replied, "I am going to be slain!" I asked why and
she answered, "For something I have done! " Then she was taken away,
and her head was struck off. But I shall never cease to marvel at her good
humour and laughter, although she knew that she was to die." She was the
woman who threw a millstone down from the Qurayza fort and killed a Believer.
Now the apostle distributed the property of the Banu Qurayza, as well as their
women and children, to the Muslims, reserving one-fifth for himself ((above
mentioned see p. 82-84) 25-Tabuk … When Abu Bakr and the Muslims who
accompanied him had departed the Declaration ojimmunity was sent down by Allah.
It proclaimed that Allah and His apostle, after this pilgrimage, were absolved
from observance of all treaties which they had previously made with idolaters.
Therefore if you [the idolaters] repent, this will be better for you; but if
you turn your backs, know that you cannot weaken Allah! And warn those who
disbelieve that there will be grievous punishment. An exception shall be made
for those idolaters who have not infringed treaties, and who have given no one
aid against My prophet. Their treaties shall be observed until their terms
expire, because Allah loves those who are pious. 'When four months have
elapsed, the instruction to Muhammad continued, 'kill the idolaters wherever
you find them; make them prisoners, surround them, and besiege them wherever
they may be. But if they repent and pray according to the command of Allah and
pay the tax, then set them free, because Allah is forgiving and merciful.' … Any Jew or Christian who persists in his
religion is not to be turned away from it, but must pay one golden dinar or its
equivalent in cloth. He who pays this will be protected by Allah, and His
prophet; he who refuses is an enemy of Allah and His prophet, as well as of all
Believers. (above mentioned see p. 108-112) … 26- Last Illness … The
total-number of the apostle's wives was thirteen. … With these eleven wives the
apostle consummated his marriages. Two died before him, namely Khadija and
Zaynab (…who had been the wife of his freed slave, Zayd, who divorced her that
she might wed the apostle …), but nine survived him. With two others he did not
consummate marriage: with Asma, who had the white spots of leprosy and whom he
sent back to her family; and with Amra, who had lately been an Unbeliever and
who fled to Allah for refuge from the apostle of Allah. He said, 'Who tlees for
refuge to Allah is well protected', and sent her back to her family. (above
mentioned see p. 114-118) (source: MUHAMMAD ŽIVOT ALLÁHOVA PROROKA, IBN ISHÁK,
original in Arabic language: Sírat rasúl Alláh, from the English edition by
Michael Edwardes, Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad, Apostle Of Allah, published
by Royal Asiatic Society of London in 1898, translated by Viktor Svoboda, in
2009 published by publishing house LEDA spol. s r.o. and by publishing house
Rozmluvy, first edition. See https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118, Full text of "Sirat-Life Of Muhammad by -Ibn Ishaq" ). /
28) 15/07/2016 My personal up
to now life experience and relationship with the Jews.
Now it has been already enough theory and I bring a bit of
life experience. I'm from birth baptized Roman Catholic. On principle the Jews
can be divided in my up to now life experiences into two groups:
1) There are the Jews who at present time believe and act
according to what the Bible, Old Testament says about the Jews, thus, that only
one Biblical, Old Testament God, virtually nature, if these Jews are Jewish
atheists, is a mass murderer of both humans and animals. I have personally met
with no such a Jew in the Czech Republic, although I met in my life in the
Czech Republic and a long time I know at least about ten Jews, although none of
them declared me explicitly his or her Jewish origin. Twice I was in Israel,
where I had a very unpleasant experience with Israeli Jews especially for the
first time, when I found myself under great pressure from the Jews after my
daily visits of probably only one Polish Catholic church in Tel Aviv and also
the Polish monks from this Catholic church in Tel Aviv refused also me any help
in this my situation and I myself had to leave Israel in my severe health
condition prematurely.
2) All the people in the Czech Republic, who somehow long
intervened in my life in the Czech Republic and who I reasonably believed, that
they are the Jews, or who I have been nearly completely sure that they are the
Jews, were always charitable in relation to me no matter what that with a high
probability approaching certainty I have no Jewish ancestors. From the perspective
of the Biblical New Testament it could be said about them, see Bible King
James Version (KJV), New Testament, Marc 15, 43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which
also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and
craved the body of Jesus., or see another part of Bible King James
Version (KJV), New Testament, John 19, 38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple
of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take
away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took
the body of Jesus. In my up to now life experience these Czech
Jews rather believe that the only one Old Testament Biblical God is identical
with the New Testament God of Jesus, who shall be the love in the sense of
charity. However on principle they hide it, because in the case, that they
would declared publicly that they believe in love in the sense of charity (see
only one dogma of my Philosophy of Balance: "… All living creatures in fact mostly want to
live in a world, where everyone likes each other, … „), they
would lose apparently the right to return to Israel, virtually to gain Israeli
citizenship according the Israeli Law of Return and thus also the only real
protection against anti-Jewish pogroms against them and against their families
(according to my Philosophy of Balance this would apparently be in direct
conflict against this my Philosophy of Balance and according to my
interpretation also against Jesus' teaching about the only one both Old
Testament and New Testament God as love in the sense of charity, see the single
dogma of my Philosophy of Balance: „…
therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death and
pain." All the rest consists more in views (speculations).“ , by
which according to me this my Philosophy of Balance becomes very attractive for
these Jews believing in love in the sense of charity, because it allows them,
virtually especially in the case of extreme emergency it commands also to them
until the time, when this whole matter is justly resolved, to tell lies about
their true belief also in relation to their other fellow Jews).
See precedential judicial case of State of Israel: „Shmuel Oswald Rufeisen (1922–1998), better known as
Brother (or Father) Daniel, O.C.D., was a Polish-born Jew who survived the Nazi
invasion of his homeland, in the course of which he converted to Christianity,
becoming a Catholic and a friar of the Discalced Carmelite Order. He moved to
Israel, where he sought citizenship under the Israeli Law of Return, but was
refused by the Israeli government. … Rufeisen appealed the case to the Supreme
Court of Israel, and in 1962 the Court upheld the government's decision: any
Jew converting to another religion would lose their preferential access to
Israeli citizenship. (Rufeisen v Minister of the Interior, (1962) 16 PD 2428)” (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Rufeisen )
Another recent case was a similar judicial case of State of Israel: ”Romuald Jakub Weksler-Waszkinel, a Polish Catholic
priest and philosophy professor in his late-60s who decides he wants to
immigrate to Israel. In what is likely the last case of a European priest
learning that he was born to Jewish parents killed in the Holocaust. As it did
with the Brother Daniel in his precedent-setting case in 1962, the Israeli
government refused to grant Weksler-Waszkinel citizenship, arguing that a Jew
who practices another religion does not qualify under the Law of Return.
Instead, it granted Weksler-Waszkinel, whose adoptive Polish parents were named
Righteous Gentiles by Yad Vashem, temporary residency on a religious worker’s
visa.Weksler-Waszkinel has agreed to renounce Catholicism, but he will not give
up his belief in Jesus. Therein lies the reason why he is not recognized as a
Jew by his fellow Jews.” (see http://forward.com/the-assimilator/140594/can-a-polish-priest-be-a-jew-not-according-to-the/#ixzz4EVhlkUv1 : Can a Polish Priest Be a Jew? Not According to the Law of Return, 2011, By Renee Ghert-Zand, The Schmooze )
29) 21/07/2016
Notes on the Biblical Old Testament King David from the perspective of the
Philosophy of Balance and apparently the contract of the Christ, apparently
Jesus of Nazareth and of the Devil, i.e. Biblical Satan about the division of
rule over the world in the period of this King David, and in the period of
formation of Protestantism and at present time and apparently its essential
content.
Executioner
Jan Mydlář (1572-1664 anno Domini) wanted all his life to be accepted among
other burghers, with who his property corresponded, see „Memoirs of Executioner
Mydlář family in Prague“ by Joseph Svátek, he always cut head by his single
blow when the sword beheading, by swinging without execution block, otherwise
he would lose his job, the executioner Mydlář himself as Calixtine (i.e. Czech
Christian Protestant) executed (killed) rebellious Czech Christian Protestant
aristocrats after Czech unsuccessful revolt against their Roman Catholic Christian
emperor of the Austrian monarchy from the Habsburg family ruling at that time
in Bohemia, this execution apparently started so called the Thirty Years War in
Europe between the years 1618 and 1647 anno Domini, physician Jessenia, who was
a spokesman for the above mentioned Czech insurgents and who this executioner
had to cut tongue even alive during this execution for death, after alive
quartering sentence the Austrian Emperor Ferdinand could not sleep, he wanted
to pardon the condemned, but under pressure from his Jesuit confessor he
canceled quartering only, because the emperor was afraid not to come to hell
and his soul was saved. Court monstrous process and punishment distrait of
property the catholic lords and Jesuits especially wanted. Charles from
Lichtenstein performed arresting despite his disagreement. This failed uprising
of Czech Protestants so - called Husite wars prevented in years 1419 until 1434
A.D., that scaffold (i.e. death execution) of Czech Roman Catholic priest John
Hus on the part of then worldwide Roman Catholic leaders during global Roman
Catholic church council in Austrian Constance (Kostnice) evoked, John Hus tried
to reform unsuccessfully and bona fide, however apparently erroneously Roman
Catholic Church, after his scaffold launched out in Bohemia nationwide uprising
against Roman Catholics and Roman Catholic Church, in this Hussite wars there
were commited by both parties heavy war - crimes in violation of humanity
principles, the victors of these husites wars were on the contrary the Husites,
who expeled and took possession of many of Roman Catholics, this alternation in
power of Roman Catholics and their adversaries was in Czech history before as
well as then regularly repeated, virtually it repeats. For these reasons up to
the present day three main contradictions between orthodox radical theology of
Roman Catholic Church and of others Protestant Christian Curches: 1) Mutual
recrimination on the part of these Christian radicals as members of mutually
hostile churches from heresy and diabolism, virtually Satan, e.g. as Roman
Catholic Church as I know is often by radical Protestants called „curtisan of
Satan", 2) Totally incompatible opinion of radicals from both churches at
it, who led, virtually leads „holy fight", therefore, who are, virtually
were real „holy fighters", whether it is, virtually was Hussites or others
Protestants or on the contrary Roman Catholic fighters, who called themselves
crusaders. 3) Whether God or themselves Christians such as these holy fighters
should find, torture and kill Devil, virtually Satan. In my opinion through
attitude towards Jews the Hussites lost their Hussite wars, after great Hussite
pogroms against Jews in the year 1422 A.D . after murder of Hussite priest John
Želivský on the part of Prague townsmans, because after it Jews elected
according to them smaller evil and started provide money Catholics in place of
Hussites, and because Czech nation is numerically weak, and these Hussites resisted
against Roman Catholic crusaders from all over then exclusively Roman Catholic
Europe, so then majority of farmers, i. e. subjects entered the army, when they
could not do agriculture, so Hussitest surely soon had great food - shortage
and they needed very much Jewish money, that they could buy them in
neighbouring countries. However after these pogroms Jews provided them
apparently no money, in place that they provided money for armament catholic
crusade armies fighting against Hussites and after fighting non-success of
these crusaders finally for party of higher nobility among Hussites, for so -
called "lord unity", such that, if normal Hussite fighter did not
want starve, he entered this lord unity, then this lord unity finally crushed
in critical battle near Lipany in the year 1434 A.D. so - called Taborites, i.
e. army formed especially by poorers Czech subjects, who in this time had
apparently poor armament and hungry from above given reason of hostility and
shortage of money from Jewish bankers. The most famous successor of Hussites
became German Martin Luther (1483- 1546 A.D .), who in principle founded
Protestant Church and who finally repeated the same error of anti - semitism as
before him Hussites, and because Germany is protestant except in catholic
Bavaria, these Protestants formed majority in German Nazi army that until its defeat during its invasion and
occupation of Europe in years 1941 until 1945 murdered cca 6 million of European
Jews, although German Nazis the Roman Catholic Austrian Adolf Hitler led, who
firstly gained from all Germany just this German Roman Catholic Bavaria.See https://www.stream.cz/slavnedny/10010977-den-popravy-27-ceskych-panu-21-cerven : Den popravy 27 českých pánů (21. červen 1621), 2016, Pavel Zuna , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mydl%C3%A1%C5%99 , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pam%C4%9Bti_katovsk%C3%A9_rodiny_Mydl%C3%A1%C5%99%C5%AF_v_Praze , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C5%99icetilet%C3%A1_v%C3%A1lka , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husitsk%C3%A9_v%C3%A1lky , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holokaust , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nacismus , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
See
„Towards
Hussitism some Jews felt at first
sympathy and at first Hussite revolution really weakened feudal social ties and
some limitations concerning Jews released. Soon however Jews disillusioned –
Hussites unleashed at the beginning 20th years 15th century" (i. e. around
year 1420 A.D ., my note) „ several pogroms
… „ (https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDid%C3%A9_v_%C4%8Cesku )
"Councillors conceived unhappy idea, to relieve all resistances
and revolts killing priest John" (Želivský, my note) „ and of the chief
his supporters. In the day 9th March invited him on town hall of the Old Town
under the guise of consultation … After
little moments burgomaster old town said: "Whether all already went, for
which we distributed tickets? On positive answer new arrivals were invited into
hall. "And where is Jerome Shawls and George Glovemaker?" Here those
two had not been yet, which burgomaster angered very much and gave to send for
them specially again. When they were finally all (and it was apparently
enormously important, that nobody was missing), burgomaster of Old Town turned
to Želivsky to submit a proposal to reconciliation municipality before it, than
they would go into battle into field: "Dear priest John, they are
submissive to you, try hard, so that you conciliated them, than we would go
into battle!" He counted it in advance and started read "from in
advance ready tablets" complaints of own party. Innocent conference started
to change slowly, little by little on something much weightier. "If you
want to arrange municipality (it is authentic record of Želivský words), this
shall you preserve: not to take houses, vineyards and other things, which whom
large municipality gave; and servants experienced, Lord God and municipality
loyal, you do not shamefully expel apart, especially Bzdinka, and others,
because nothing else you do not negotiate than that to greater acidness you
make protests!" … Who it is Peter
Rezek? And what did he say? One of radicals. Apparently before couple of days
he finished in detention, how we already heard about it from historiographer
Tomek: … and touched Rezek said:
"Sirs, why other day in prison was I? Yet it I speak you, and God willing,
I want on that die: that with those false Sirs and other adversaries I do not
want register, so long as I do not behold that they are really performing God's
law!" It was the right sparkle in barrel of dust. … by the following words finally Petřík
signed (and possibly even other, if they were asked) their verdict of death,
because then act of moment already was only: "Stand still! You are under
arrest!" Let us afford please original reading: "Stuojte (Stand)!
Zjímáni jste (You are taken)!" …
Last in-line hope dies yet. How only he could, so" (John Želivský, my
note) „ tryed talk out of burgomaster and councillors their intention with
reference to possible threatening consequences. "By golly, change their
mind about it! About my death nothing would be, but himself I will not die. Do you
not know, what more from that it will come!" Was any reaction at it
warning? Disapproving. Only moment already found on confession. "Forgive
me therefore to go to priest!" …
(author of this news everything recorded). Did not forget even this John words:
"Dear brother, God willing (turn to his confessor), beg all priests there,
let them work faithfully with people, with those miserable poor ones until the
last drop of blood and let them not give to discourage." … after
confession" (John Želivský, my note) „as the first came out from room, set
executioner head, because with this head all this time it was concerned. It was
concenrned with it."Folded his hands he said: 'Heavenly Father, thank you
that You gave to suffer me from mines.' 'A how further they say, who were here,
he was to act submissively and without all fear he bent below sword the head.
An executioner spoke us, that he knelt and he folded his hands, and executioner
said him: 'Dear priest John, give me hands, let me bind them, because I could
not do otherwise nothing.' 'So he bound him his hands and decapitated his head
him and his brothers, and that was year from birth of Son of God 1422" (i.
e. A.D ., my note) „ on Monday on a day of Saints Cyril and
Methodius." … Then in evening remains
of executed priest had to be locked in chapel of monastic temple "for
compress of people“, but at burial services in the following day the agitated
scenes repeated: "Here again unspeakable outcry occurred and one priest
took head of John, he stepped up on stool and he wanted to confirm to all and
to warn, that they remembered and really observed, what was heard good from
this head, but the priest saw excessive sorrow in people, he could not speak
towards them words. Since so great sad was in people, that some as half dead
pushed around from church, and some were mad and laid in bed, being ill. … All those explosions of mass reprisals
caused for metropolis according to one witness greater harms, "than when
king Sigismund was lying around Prague, having people more than one hundred
thousands." During pursuit on wilful killers and their assistants houses
of councillors and of others wealthy townsmans were broken down. Even dwelling
of college masters did not escape from hateful wave. By it also Constance
manuscript of Hus (together with other valued books from library of Charles
college) were destroyed. Heavy hour struck also on Old Town Jewish ghetto -
pogroms were held soon after also in Chomutov, Kutná Hora and Písek. "That
band inveighed against Jews and robbed of and took them everything." What
about victims on lives? In the first day were killed only two New Town
councillors, but already in two days after the court of new revolutionary
counsel sent below ax of executioner other five councillors. All up to now
profit of Hussitism, all resolute victories of the Czechs over enemies by count
and by force more powerful, therefore also all hopes into future safety were
based upon one condition, on concord and cooperation of inhabitants of Prague
and Taborites towards foreigners. Neither Prague unassisted by Žižka neither
Žižka unassisted by Prague would not resist great invasions of connected
Christendom. After death of priest John" (Želivský, my note) „Žižka became
the enemy for inhabitants of Prague from friend, Praguers sought indeed in
other companies compensation for lost Žižka, but in vain. Great luck happened
for Hussites that the foreign enemy crippled and stunned by previous defeats
could not recreate to forceable enterprise towards the Czechs for a few years.
All this article of Hussite history that extends from death of priest
John" (Želivský, my note) „till death of Žižka is characteristic on the
one hand as unsuccessful aspiration to organize new expedition into Czechia, on the other side
then unfortunately internal cruel dissension and fighting … „ (Programme: Toulky českou minulostí / Bummels
in Czech past | station: ČRo two, time of broadcasting:
Sunday 08:04; repeat: Thursday 18:05 and Friday 4:00 |
length of programme: 25 minutes.
Author: Joseph Veselý, 222nd meeting:
Death of John Želivský, 3. October 1999 in 08:00, see www.rozhlas.cz/toulky/vysila_praha/_zprava/222-schuzka-smrt-jana-zelivskeho--213749 )
At first Martin Luther was also great lover of Jews, from whom at
first he promised support of his reformation effort. At first he declared for
Jews as people of Jesus in his writing „Daß Jesus Christus ein geborener
Jude war“/ "Jesus Christ born Jew was" or other version of
the title of this his writing „Dass Jesus Christus ein geborener Jude
sei“/ "Jesus Christ born Jew is" (Mit dieser Schrift
reagierte Luther auf den katholischen Vorwurf, er habe die göttliche Zeugung
und somit indirekt die Jungfrauengeburt und Gottessohnschaft Jesu geleugnet. Er
hielt diesen Vorwurf für absurd und wollte ihn daher nicht bloß entkräften
/Teil 1/, sondern auch „um anderer willen“ „etwas Nützliches“ schreiben /Teil
2/: „Ich will aus der Schrift erzählen die Ursachen, die mich bewegen, zu
glauben, dass Christus ein Jude sei von einer Jungfrau geboren, damit ich
vielleicht auch etliche Juden zum Christenglauben reizen möge.“ / By this
letter Luther responded to catholic accusation, that he negated divine
conception thereby indirectly birth from maiden and divine sonhood of Jesus. He
considered this accusation as absurd, that is why he wanted to weaken this not
only /part 1/, but also to write "in interest of others" something
useful" /part 2/: "I want, from Scriptures" /i. e. Christian
Bible, my note/ „ to express causes, that moved me, to believe that the
Christ was Jew born from maiden, thereby I could attract also some Jews to
Christian belief.„). When he found that Jews did not become his
Lutherans, he urged to burning of synagogues and driving out Jews. His
pamphlets „Brief wider die Sabbather an einen guten Freund“/ "Letter
against sabathers to one good friend" or other version of the
title of this his writing „Wider die Sabbather“/ Against sabathers" [Er
behauptete, in Mähren hätten die Juden schon viele Christen beschnitten und zu
dem Glauben verführt, dass der Messias noch nicht gekommen sei. Diese zum
Judentum übergetretenen Christen hätten sich verpflichtet, die ganze Tora
einzuhalten. Dies sei jedoch wegen der Tempelzerstörung 70 n. Chr. unmöglich.
Um die Tora halten zu können, müssten die Juden erst den Jerusalemer Tempel
wiederaufbauen, das Land Israel zurückerobern und die Tora dort zum allgemeinen
Staatsgesetz machen. Dann müssten auch alle Proselyten dorthin umsiedeln. Man
solle abwarten, ob das geschehe; falls nicht, sei die Lächerlichkeit ihrer
Versuche erwiesen, Christen zum Einhalten der seit 1500 Jahren „verfaulten“
Tora zu bringen. / He claimed, that in Moravia (apparently it
is concerned with Moravia in Czech republic, my note) Jews already
circumcised many Christians and led (them) to belief that the Messiah did not
come yet. These Christians converted to Judaism obliged to follow whole Torah.
However this is because of destruction of temple 70 after Christ (i.e.
A.D., i.e. anno Domini, in English years Dominical, my note) impossible. So
that they could observe Torah, Jews would have at first again to build up
Jerusalem temple, to conquer back country Israel and to do there Torah as
general state law. Then all proselytes (i.e. converts to Judaism, my note)
would have to resettle there. Man has wait, whether it happens so; if no,
proving absurdity of their attempt of keeping 1500 years "spoilt"
Torah will be brought for Christians. See https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_und_die_Juden ] „Von den
Jüden und ihren Lügen“/„About Jews and their lies" from the year
1543 [„Jawohl, sie halten uns in unserem eigenen Land gefangen, sie lassen
uns arbeiten in Nasenschweiß, Geld und Gut gewinnen, sitzen dieweil hinter dem
Ofen, faulenzen, pompen und braten Birnen, fressen, sauffen, leben sanft und
wohl von unserm erarbeiteten Gut, haben uns und unsere Güter gefangen durch
ihren verfluchten Wucher, spotten dazu und speien uns an, das wir arbeiten und
sie faule Juncker lassen sein. … sind also unsere Herren, wir ihre Knechte.“ …
Dann fragte er: „Was sollen wir Christen nun tun mit diesem verdammten,
verworfene Volk der Juden?“ Er schlug sieben Schritte als „scharfe
Barmherzigkeit“ vor. … „Zum zweiten: daß man ihre Häuser desgleichen zerbreche
und zerstöre, denn sie treiben ebendasselbe darin, das sie in ihren Schulen
treiben. Dafür mag man sie etwa unter ein Dach oder Stall tun wie die Zigeuner,
auf daß sie wissen, sie seien nicht Herren in unserm Lande, wie sie rühmen,
sondern in der Verbannung und gefangen, wie die ohne Unterlaß vor Gott über uns
Zeter schreien und klagen. … Sorgen wir uns aber, daß sie uns an Leib, Weib,
Kind, Gesind, Vieh usw. Schaden tun möchten, wenn sie uns dienen oder arbeiten
sollten, weil es wohl zu vermuten ist, daß solch edle Herrn der Welt und bittre
Wurme, keiner Arbeit gewohnt, gar ungern sich so hoch demütigen würden unter
die verfluchten Gojim, so laßt uns bei gemeiner Klugheit der andern Nationen,
wie Frankreich, Hispanien, Böhmen usw., bleiben und mit ihnen rechnen, was sie
uns abgewuchert und danach gütlich geteilt, sie aber für immer zum Lande
ausgetrieben. Denn, wie gehört, Gottes Zorn ist so groß über sie, daß sie durch
sanfte Barmherzigkeit nur ärger und ärger, durch Schärfe aber wenig besser
werben. Darum immer weg mit ihnen.“/ "Yes, they jailed us in our own
country, they let us to work in sweat faces, to gain money and goods ,
therefore they sit behind stove, they idle, flourish and they feed on baked
pears, feed, they live kindly and quietly from by us made goods hunting us and
our goods through their accursed usury, in addition they satirize us and spit at
us, that we work and they may be saprogenic below nobility" (German
word „ Juncker" apparently originate from German word „ junger Herr"
or Jungherr literally in Czech „young Sir", see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junker ) … „so that they are our lords, we their
servants." … Then he asked:
"What now we Christians shall do with this cursed, castaway Jewish
nation?" He suggested seven steps as "sharp merci". … „ secondly: that man
will break down and will destroy their houses identically with it, because they
run" (in German literally „run", in the sense e.g. for
cattle. profit and others) „as well identical with it, what they pay
attention" (in German literally
„they run") „ in their schools. Therefore man may give them" (in
German literally do) „under rooftop or stable something like gypsies
for (it), that they knew, that they are not lords in our country, how they
praise, but in expulsion and caught as (those), who cry out and weep without
loosed before God through us badly. …
Let us care for, that they could do us harms on the person, woman, child,
health, cattle, etc., when they serve us or have had work, because apparently
it is possible to assume that such noble masters of the world and embittered
worms, accustomed to no work, would ever dislike so highly to discredit among
accursed Goyim" (i.e. Hebrew word for not-Jews, my note), „so it is
possible us to expect at common clevernesses of others nations, as French,
Spaniards, Czechs and so on and with it to count, what they took us by practise
of usury" (i. e. in literary Czech „by usury stolen") „and
then they (themselves) shared well, however forever (will) back run" (German
prefix aus -, in Czech literally from-, that is here used in my opinion by
Martin Luther apparently in German in unusual way in Czech meaning „run down
back" e.g. cattle or in Czech in meaning „give up, vomit" and the
like) „to" (in German the German verb „ treiben" takes on
principle the German preposition „zu", e.g. „zutreiben" in Czech it
means run, drive to whom/what, see https://slovnik.seznam.cz/cz-de/?q=zutreiben : 1996–2020 Seznam.cz, a.s., © Lingea s.r.o. ) „country.
Because we (were) heard, (because) anger of God is because of them as big that
through conciliating merci only more and more angry, through sharpness but
worse" (literally in German less well) „they recruit" (in German literally
verben, e.g . into /their/ army) „Therefore forever away with them." Source:
„Von den Juden und ihren Lügen“ , von D. Martin Luther. Erstmals
gedruckt zu Wittenberg. Durch Hans Lufft. M.D.XLIII. Gescannt von cOyOte.“ / „About
Jews and their lies", from Dr. Martin Luther. for the first time
printed for Wittenberg. Through-publisher Hans Lufft. 1543 A.D.. Scanned by
cOyOte/m/. See https://archive.org/stream/VonDenJudenUndIhrenLuegen/LutherMartin-VonDenJudenUndIhrenLuegen154318S._djvu.txt : Internet Archive, 300 Funston Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94118 and also see: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_und_die_Juden ]and other writing of this Martin Luther see: „Vom
Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlechte Christi“/ "About šem ha me
po raš and about the genus of Christ" („schem ha me pho
rasch" means in Hebrew literally „name it from here main", i.e.
otherwise told name of God) from the year 1544 [here this writing of Martin
Luther apparently follows in his reasonings the alleged accusation of Jews
towards Jesus from Nazereth apparently God-man and Christ, see e.g. King James
Version of Bible, New Testament, Luke, 11, „15 But some of them
said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.",
see http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/Lk11.php (Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague) and in other time
apparently especially the opposite possible accusation of Jews on the part of
of this Jesus see e.g. Bible, New Testament John 8,44„ 44 Ye are of your father
the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the
beginning, …“, see http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/J8.php (Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague) and
Martin Luther here allegedly had conclusion that the Jews embody pigs and at
the same time here Martin Luther called Jews by at that time traditional and
also so among above - mentioned German Nazi about c. 400 years later usual in
the manner „Jewish swine"/“Judensau“
… "this Devil"/“diese Teufel“
… according to this Martin Luther are further Jews, … , pigs and devil figuratively equal / Judas,
… Schweine und Teufel bildhaft gleich and further Jews should be "sediment of all open villains, coming
together from all over the world"/„Grundsuppe aller losen, bösen Buben,
aus aller Welt zusammengeflossen“and supposedly … they have had aligned "as Tatars and gypsies" (Tatars and Romas, possibly
vagabonds), to spy Christian countries and to betray, to poison water, to steal
children and to act maliciously all kinds of damages. / … hätten sich „wie die Tattern und Zigeuner“ (Tataren
und Roma bzw. Nichtsesshafte) zusammengerottet, um die christlichen Länder
auszukundschaften und zu verraten, Wasser zu vergiften, Kinder zu stehlen und
hinterhältig allerlei Schaden anzurichten., see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_und_die_Juden ] are part of the most vulgar anti - Semitic
propaganda. Martin Luther was educated and surely honest Christian, despite he
had fallen into trap of refused love for people of Bible. Naturally that the
people less intelligent, uneducated and morally weak fall into irrational hate
for earlier admired Jews even more simply. Many Nazi murderers grew up in
Christian environment soulful of reputation of Biblical people, some knew
Hebrew. About this danger the Jews well know, they have - not confidence to
these "friends" mostly of lines of Christians, who often struggle in
his saint enthusiasm moreover for Christian mission among so much admired and
idealized Jews yet. At atheists then it can be concerned with snobbery, with
desire about at nurture on mythic successes and dream profits. At atheists then
it can be concerned with snobbery, with desire to nurture on mythic success and
dream profits. Disillusion is coming inevitably and with it often also hatred.
See http://vera-tydlitatova.eblog.cz/nebezpecny-filosemitismus : 2011, Věra Tydlitátová
Best propagandists and liars are traditionally
homosexuals (often as artists), propagandist must show sufficient part of real
truth, then they can lie about rest completely, see z https://www.stream.cz/onemanshow/10011344-ruska-televize-vyhlasila-za-dopadeni-kazmy-odmenu-1-000-000-rublu : Dacjukova brusle, 19. July 2016
According to Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance Jews are not
able to calculate perfect infinity, i. e. infinity, of which cardinality (i. e.
density) is already impossible further to extend (i. e. what means it: „the
least possible death and pain"), they are able apparently to calculate
only imperfect infinity, i. e. they are able to calculate how to win battle e.g
. Israeli Six-Day War, thus sort of mere battle, however apparently only
together with charitable people and other living creatures they are able to
calculate, how to win whole war, i. e. how they should be saved and how all
living creatures should forgive everything, i. e. how reach the world, where
everyone likes each other.", therefore they must rely on me or on other
not-Jews, even if of course they do not say it them and these not-Jews do not
even know it on principle. See https://www.stream.cz/slavnedny/10010681-den-kdy-zacala-sestidenni-valka-5-cerven : "Den, kdy začala šestidenní válka (5.
červen 1967)", Izraele s jeho arabskými sousedy, 5. June 2016, Pavel Zuna
Jonathan Netanyahu, brother of contemporary Israeli premiere Benjamin
Netanyahu was killed at liberation c. 100 Israeli hostages in retention of
German communist and Islamic Arabic terrorists in African State Uganda under
protection of local Islamic ruling dictator Idi Amin see https://www.stream.cz/slavnedny/10011032-den-kdy-zacal-unos-do-entebbe-27-cerven : "Den, kdy začal únos do Entebbe (27. červen 1976)"/The Day
the Kidnapping to Entebbe Began (June 27, 1976), the victorious
operation against the kidnappers was led by Yitzhak Rabin in 1995
assassinated by the Jew, film June 27, 2016, Pavel Zuna 9:16 minutes.
„Ewige Jude", i. e. German expression meaning in Czech: „
everlasting Jew" is possible to consider in case of undermentioned
subjective idealism of famous English philosopher George Berkeley (1685 – 1753
A.D .), according to which in the sense of its interpretation according to
Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance „only one man before death can
theoretically exist in every generation, virtually from all existing living
cells according to exact natural science possibly only c. 60 trillions living
cells of body exist, possibly 100 billions living cells of brain of this
possibly single man, who till this time yet did not experience his or her
death, all else in objective world of this man before death could be only
fiction, thus only sort of image destined only for this man before death,
according to words of famous German philosopher Immanuel Kant it could be merely
sort of „world for him or her" created by only one existing God as „love
in the sense of charity". If these living cells are in objective world
e.g. carnivorous, then these „everlasting Jews" as these carnivorous
living cells of body of this man before death, e.g . as nerve living cells,
which do not renew apparently in the body of man according to contemporary
exact natural science gradually and which can theoretically live for lifetime
of this only one man before death, (they) could before their death kill and
devour all other than nerve living microorganisms, e.g . all herbivorous living
microorganisms of this body of this man before death and then it did not remain
them than, that these carnivora started devour each other, therefore in
objective world of this man before death apparently it could manifest as sharp
division of these Jews on undermentioned real (Jew-)Christians, believing in
New Testament and Old Testament only one God in the sense of charity towards
all living creatures, and Satan-Jews, i. e. radical orthodox Jews believing,
that existing only one Old Testament Biblical God, virtually nature are mass
murderer of people and animals and also of other living creatures, and sharp
controversy between those two Jewish groups could come. Whereby pain and death
of these Jews at their mutual feeding could reflect by them in former times
caused unnecessary death and pain after deduction by them saved death and pain
of living creatures, in other words, the more will have some Jew enemies with
greater hatred towards him or her than friends on the ground of caused previous
death and pain, the more he or she could suffer at this mutual feeding (it
could be concerned with sort of End of the World and Last Judgement in the
sense of Bible, New Testament). Subjective idealism of this philosopher George
Berkeley my Philosophy of Balance calls Rational Mystique, mystique means in
Greek the secret, see https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystika , thus I have
never completely surely to find out real truth about this Rational Mystique, or
this truth does not have to be ever completely disclosed me, virtually us or
this truth does not have to be never completely apparent to me, virtually us.
Despite I am obliged to include it into speculations of my Philosophy of
balance, because this subjective idealism of this philosopher George Berkeley
is generally accepted component of worldwide philosophy and this subjective
idealism is taught as part of teaching philosophy in Czech republic apparently
and also in the West in most secondary schools and Universities. Probability of
validity of this my speculation founded on this subjective idealism in the meantime
I estimate on c. 5 until 15 percents
Contract between (Jew -)Christians, i. e. herbivora and Satan- Jews, i.
e. carnivora, see below contract between Jonathan, Saul and David, Bible 1
Samuelova, 20th chapter and also Bible 1 Samuelova, 24th chapter, verse 21-22,
e.g . at emergence of the state Israel contract between terrorists from Irgun
of Menachem Begin or even its more radical members around Avraham Stern, who
founded own group with name Lehi, and official Haganah of David Ben Gurion
(Bible, Old Testament, 1 SAMUELOVA, 14tn CHAPTER, 35 AND SAUL BUILT AN ALTAR
UNTO THE LORD: THE SAME WAS THE FIRST ALTAR THAT HE BUILT UNTO THE LORD.). See https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun , https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ben_Gurion
Philosophy of maffia, i. e. pack of carnivora, see Bible, Old Testament,
1 Samuel, 25th chapter. Further about allowable although prohibited eating
blood by Israelis see Bible, Old Testament, 1 Samuel, 14th chapter, verse 32
AND THE PEOPLE FLEW UPON THE SPOIL, AND TOOK SHEEP, AND OXEN, AND CALVES, AND
SLEW THEM ON THE GROUND: AND THE PEOPLE DID EAT THEM WITH THE BLOOD. And about
Biblical description of psychical diseases manifestative with rejection of
food, e.g . schizophrenia, bulimia, anorexia etc., Bible, 1 Samuel, 28th
chapter, 22 NOW THEREFORE, I PRAY THEE, HEARKEN THOU ALSO UNTO THE VOICE OF
THINE HANDMAID, AND LET ME SET A MORSEL OF BREAD BEFORE THEE; AND EAT, THAT
THOU MAYEST HAVE STRENGTH, WHEN THOU GOEST ON THY WAY. 23 BUT HE REFUSED, AND
SAID, I WILL NOT EAT. BUT HIS SERVANTS, TOGETHER WITH THE WOMAN, COMPELLED HIM;
AND HE HEARKENED UNTO THEIR VOICE. SO HE AROSE FROM THE EARTH, AND SAT UPON THE
BED. 24 AND THE WOMAN HAD A FAT CALF IN THE HOUSE; AND SHE HASTED, AND KILLED
IT, AND TOOK FLOUR, AND KNEADED IT, AND DID BAKE UNLEAVENED BREAD THEREOF: 25
AND SHE BROUGHT IT BEFORE SAUL, AND BEFORE HIS SERVANTS; AND THEY DID EAT. THEN
THEY ROSE UP, AND WENT AWAY THAT NIGHT. Eg Italian organization maffia, i. e.
literally in Italian „my daughter", apparently it is connected with
suppression of droit du seigneur (in Czech literally "right of first night")
of foreign country – misters, i.e. noblemans ruling on Italian Sicily (i. e.
their right as the first to have sex with newly married woman of their native
Italian Sicilian subjects) fought out by this Sicilian maffia formed by the
native subjected Sicilians-fathers of these their daughters.
Substantial content of above - mentioned contract
between (Jew-)Christians, i. e. herbivora and Satan- Jews, i. e. carnivora is
apparently following. According to my Philosophy of Balance the above -
mentioned subjective idealism of famous English philosopher George Berkeley is valid
from 5 - 15 % (in this my Philosophy of Balance called as „Rational
Mystique"), which is possible to recap by one sentence: „It is only me and
my consciousness, all else is fiction." This subjective idealism of George
Berkeley is learned at the present time as relatively very important component
of worldwide historical philosophical knowledge by each contemporary student of
University, possibly also of secondary school, who here studies philosophy. In
Rational Mystique in my Philosophy of Balance it is possible from viewpoint of
contemporary exact natural scientific knowledge this subjective idealism of
George Berkeley to reword: „Only one man before death exists in every
generation and his or her brain, i. e. especially c. 100 billions living cells of
his or her brain, possibly his or her body, i. e. especially c. 60 trillions
living cells of his or her body, embodying all living organisms and lifeless in
his objective world, all else is then mere fiction. Of course that the part of
these living microorganisms of this brain, virtually body of this man before
death embodies also carnivorous living creatures in objective world of this man
before death. From viewpoint of exact natural scientific theory of evolution it
is possible this to reword, that in every man as remainder of evolution of
whole nature also living microorganisms
exist, that are remainder of carnivorous living creatures. According to this
Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance and to my up to now personal life
experience, if at the present time man before death eats big amount especially
of slaughtered animals, i. e. intentionally killed animals that before their
death experienced big pain, to what these his or her carnivorous living cells
force him or her, so in his objective world he or she will cause towards him-
or herself great hatred on the ground of this by him or her caused big death
and pain. Consequence of this hatred is earlier or later especially disease of
his or her soul, according to contemporary exact science of brain which
gradually causes his madness, from viewpoint of contemporary science three kind
of this his madness exist on principle 1) schizophrenia, earlier entitled
persecution mania, i. e. mortal fear of this man before death from revenge of
these by him or by her or for him or for her tortured to death living
creatures, 2) manic depression, i. e. alternation of periods of his or her
megalo - mania and his or her anxiety, i. e. stress, 3) psychopathology, i. e.
his or her often highly socially dangerous criminal negotiation, 4) variety of
sexual deviations, everything peaks by absolute rejection of this man before
death to eat common food, especially slaughtered meat. In this case however he
or she will become valueless from viewpoint of above - mentioned living
microorganisms of brain, virtually body of this man before death, because to
these his or her living microorganisms he or she cannot give to eat, and these
living microorganisms, embodied in his or her objective world especially as
other carnivora will evolve soon after then upon this man apparently the
immense pressure (see eg. apparently Bible, Old Testament, 1 SAMUEL, 14the
CHAPTER, verse from 24 to 52) and if even this pressure is not effective (see
eg. apparently above-mentioned Bible, Old Testament, 1 Samuel, 28th Chapter,
verse from 22 to 25), so they kill apparently this man before death as
valueless (see eg. apparently Bible, Old Testament, 2 SAMUEL, 1st CHAPTER,
verse from 5 to 16), whereby this his or her killing apparently guides pain
proportional to it, what he or she personally caused pain of living creatures
in his or her objective world, after deduction of death and pain proportional
to it, from which they protected living creatures in his or her objective
world. In my opinion such recent contemporary famous example is for example
apparently also massacre of czarist family in new nascent Soviet Russia see https://www.stream.cz/slavnedny/10011309-den-vyvrazdeni-carske-rodiny-17-cervenec : "Den vyvraždění carské rodiny (17. červenec 1918)", film 17. July 2016 .
At the present time however the (possibly according to
Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance after murder of this man,
virtually people before death currently in history) immediately imminent war
apparently would mean using mass destroying nuclear weapons and extinction of
majority mankind and huge quantity of other living creatures on our planet
Earth, therefore apparently in modern times against orthodox
Judaism standing sort of Jewish Protestantism gained big power, apparently
in the West founded in years 1135 until 1204 A.D. by famous Jewish rabbi and
famous Western philosopher in one person known on this Christian West as „
Maimonides", with original Hebrew name „rabbi moshe ben maimon" or in
Hebrew shortened „rambam", at the present time this Jewish Protestantism
is represented by greater quantity of differently named Jewish religious
directions together standing more or less in opposition to above - mentioned
only one direction of so - called orthodox Judaism, according to my experience
outgoing out of my longtime study of Judaism and Hebrew language from position
of Christian it is possible in simplified way to say that at present time from
all Jewry roughly 50% are these orthodox Jews and further roughly 50% are these
Maimonides Jews, i. e. above - mentioned Jewish Protestants, further, that in
my Czech republic these Maimonides Jews totally prevail and in contemporary
State Izrael these orthodox Jews totally prevail and in the United States of
America, i. e. USA either these Maimonides Jews, i. e. above - mentioned Jewish
Protestants slightly or more prevail over these orthodox Jews or in this USA
these Maimonides Jews and these orthodox Jews are representated in roughly equal
number. Summary notion „Jewish Protestantism", by which I call all
contemporary Jewish religious directions standing more or less in opposite
towards above - mentioned orthodox Judaism, so it was by me used likewise, as
at the present time in Christianity notion „Christian Protestantism" is
used including colossal number of so - called Protestant Christian Churches
standing in opposition towards the most traditional Roman Catholic Christian
Church, at the present time however throughout Christianity
at the same time so - called ecumenical movement takes place seeking on the
contrary reunification of all or at least the most possible Christians
professing all these Christian Churches, at the same time at the present time
according to my Philosophy of Balance it is impossible from viewpoint of
philosophy as science unambiguously to say, whether someday in future
fulfillment of this ecumenical aim completely realize, i. e. on principle
unification of all living creature under below in this section mentioned
conception of Christianity, at the present time from viewpoint of my Philosophy
Balance and and in my opinion it rather as far as surely shows so that the
complete realization of this aim in future will come, apparently gradually as
late as in perfectly infinite time, despite according to my Philosophy of Balance
and also in my opinion also at the present time it is worth always to try from
of all our forces still to approach this aim. In our modern times
so in my opinion on the ground of imminent nuclear war the in my opinion still
increasing at present time above - mentioned big amount of above - mentioned
Jewish Protestants was forced and willing to leave the up to now position of
Jewish religion that biblical Old Testament God, possibly nature is mass
murderer of people and animals, so on principle more or less expressly and more
or less secretly forced and willing more or less to accept apparent teaching of
Jesus from Nazareth apparently God-man and Christ, that only one biblical Old
Testament and New Testament God as love in the sense of charity exists,
possibly that the from long - term aspect strongest law of nature in case of
Jewish atheists (i. e. Jews unbelieving in any God or gods) is love in the
sense of charity, see Bible, New Testament, 1 John (epistle, of which
authorship is by my Roman Catholic Christian Church traditionally ascribed to
so - called Jesus „the most loved", i. e. thought apparently as „the most charitable",
i. e. in Czech literally apparently „dearest" or in original words sense
„the most valuable" and in my opinion as well also in contemporary words
sense the most scholastic first apprentice of this Jesus from Nazareth, who was
one the first „apostles" in Czech literally „messenger" saint John,
about whom in my Roman Catholic Christian church is traded, that as the only
one from first apprentices of this Jesus from Nazareth died natural, not
violent or intentional death, although written evidence about this nonviolent
way of death of this St. John apparently /already/ do not exist apparently at
the present time) 4th chapter, verse 16: And we have known and believed the
love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in
God, and God in him. (or same sentence in Bible in translation in Latin
language so called Vulgáte of saint Jerome from 4th to 5th century A.D. Bible,
New Testament, Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima 4, 16: „et nos cognovimus et
credidimus „caristi“ quam habet Deus in nobis Deus „caritas“ est et qui manet
in „caritate“ in Deo manet et Deus in eo“). Further see definition of this love
in the sense „ charity", i. e. in Latin above - mentioned „caritas"
according to single dogma of my Philosophy of Balance: PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE
PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE, I.E. ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY: „All living creatures mostly
want to live in a world, where everyone likes each other, therefore everyone is
still obliged to cause the least possible death and pain.“ All the rest
consists more in views (speculations). Namely all above - mentioned, although
apparently it means, that these Jewish Protestants must reveal by Jew caused
(is question, whether „ needless" or on the contrary „ necessary",
because by apparently only one God, virtually nature admitted) big death and
pain in history of living creation and further even if it can apparently mean
fundamental split in Jewish nation, i. e. essential resistance against so -
called orthodox Jews (from viewpoint of Bible, New Testament it is possible to
reword it, that Jews already apparently cannot delay further so - called „End
of the World", virtually „Last judgement".).Among others the
contemporary most important first step in attempt of my Philosophy of Balance
about solution of the above problem is its draft of law on slaughter tax, of
which ultimate goal is in future breeding all animals until their natural deaths,
on principle of age and from killed animals eating by carnivora only so gained
cadavers, virtually carrions, in Hebrew „ nevelot" of animals on principle
after autopsy by veterinarian, for man before death on principle boiled in
several waters.
See
eg.: The series "Once Upon a Time … Life" (see Literature) 3 DVD,
Part 9 "The Brain", time 2:30 to 3:55, 200 million years ago evolved
a primitive brain, i.e. reptiles cortex-archicortex, allowing primitive
aggressive reactions such as territorial defense, these primitive reactions and
this part of the brain are also at modern human, 100 million years ago, it was
paleocortex (i.e. cerebral cortex of mammals see 1 DVD, Part 1 "Cells –
Their Amazing Story", time 4:48 to 5:06) getting over fear, the beginnings
of memory, time 4:10-5:48, 100,000 years ago it was the neocortex comprising
85% weight of the brain allowing the sharing of ideas, counting, art, thinking
about the causes and to act in civilized manner, and the problem of
communication of neocortex and primitive cerebral cortex (archicortex and
paleocortex), time 23:30-25:50, the brain has more or less complete control
over man, communication of neocortex and the primitive cerebral cortex
(archicortex and paleocortex) causes the eternal dilemma between aggressive and
civilized solution of the situation by living creature, primitive part of the
brain is still trying to prevail. The brain stores most, of what we perceive
consciously, from what we perceive unconsciously, the brain stores about 1/100,
the brain perceives everything at once. Each body part is controlled by certain
area of the brain, larger parts of the brain are needed for more sensitive body
parts such as hands and face. Transfer to the brain is mediated through surface
cells of the body and its senses and through the nerves, virtually their nerve
cells, neurons and their dendrites dispersed throughout the body, using
chemical neurotransmitters. Source: "Once Upon a Time … Life", the original: "Il était une fois ... la
vie", created by Albert Barillé, Music Composed by Michel Legrand,
characters designed by: Jean Barbaud, copyright Procidis-Paris, the Czech
Republic copyright: BH promo CZ 2008, title song of Jane Mařasová, Ľuba,
1,2,4,5 DVD 104 minutes, 3, 6 DVD 130 minutes, 26 episodes of the series.
Command of the most important Biblical Old
Testament decalogue commandment in Czech rabbinical translation: „Do not
murder!, see Bible, Old Testament, Exodus 20, 13 Nezavraždíš. … , http://www.obohu.cz/bible/index.php?styl=CRP&kap=20&k=Ex and Bible, Old
Testament, Deuteronomy 5, 17 “Nezavraždíš!“
…, http://www.obohu.cz/bible/index.php?styl=CRP&kap=5&k=Dt : Český rabínský překlad (pentateuch),
Dr.Gustava Sichera a Dr.Isidora Hirsche. Praha 1932, Diviš
Libor, E-mail: info@obohu.cz . In original
apparently Hebrew consonantal word root: „r-z-ch", to murder. However this
command of this decalogue in Czech Christian ecumenical translation sounds: „Do
not kill! About it what is killing and what about murder according to above
mentioned command of Bible: „Do not murder" in the above its rabbinical
translation apparently according to orthodox
Jews leader decides on principle, see e.g . apparently biggest Jewish biblical
king David in Old Testament Biblical stories about this king, or in case of
apparent murder of his descendant Jesus from Nazareth, apparently God-man and
Christ by other Jews or in case of clear Nazi murder of several millions Jews
during holocaust, when it was always apparently abuse of notion of
extreme need by these leaders. However in Czech ecumenical translation and in
English KJV (King James Version) translation of Bible, Old Testament, Exodus
20, 13: "Thou shalt not kill." , http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Exod/20#v13 and http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/Ex20.php (Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague)
and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20&version=KJV,
Bible, Old Testament, Deuteronomy 5, 17: "Thou shalt not kill." , http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Deut/5#v17
and http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/Dt5.php (Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague) and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+5&version=KJV
it is clear meaning Christian shift of above-mentioned Hebrew word root r - z -
ch / (not)murder started also by the oldest Bible in Czech language so - called
Bible of Kralice from years 1579 until 1596 A.D. to word „do not kill",
which is possible apparently in contemporary Czech to extend also for animals
and for all other living beings, as e.g . also mere bacteria or viruses, see
observation of chimpanzees https://www.stream.cz/slavnedny/10011262-den-kdy-jane-goodallova-zahajila-svuj-vyzkum-simpanzu-14-cervenec : "Den, kdy Jane Goodallová zahájila svůj výzkum šimpanzů (14. červenec 1960)", film 14. července 2016, Pavel Zuna, that all e.g. according to wording of contemporary Czech law apparently it
is impossible to „murder", but also them it is possible to „kill".
See:
Bible, Old Testament, 2 SAMUEL, 1st
CHAPTER: 1 NOW IT CAME TO PASS AFTER THE DEATH OF SAUL, WHEN DAVID WAS RETURNED
FROM THE SLAUGHTER OF THE AMALEKITES, AND DAVID HAD ABODE TWO DAYS IN ZIKLAG; 2
IT CAME EVEN TO PASS ON THE THIRD DAY, THAT, BEHOLD, A MAN CAME OUT OF THE CAMP
FROM SAUL WITH HIS CLOTHES RENT, AND EARTH UPON HIS HEAD: AND SO IT WAS, WHEN
HE CAME TO DAVID, THAT HE FELL TO THE EARTH, AND DID OBEISANCE. 3 AND DAVID
SAID UNTO HIM, FROM WHENCE COMEST THOU? AND HE SAID UNTO HIM, OUT OF THE CAMP
OF ISRAEL AM I ESCAPED. 4 AND DAVID SAID UNTO HIM, HOW WENT THE MATTER? I PRAY
THEE, TELL ME. AND HE ANSWERED, THAT THE PEOPLE ARE FLED FROM THE BATTLE, AND MANY
OF THE PEOPLE ALSO ARE FALLEN AND DEAD; AND SAUL AND JONATHAN HIS SON ARE DEAD
ALSO. 5 AND DAVID SAID UNTO THE YOUNG MAN THAT TOLD HIM, HOW KNOWEST THOU THAT
SAUL AND JONATHAN HIS SON BE DEAD? 6 AND THE YOUNG MAN THAT TOLD HIM SAID, AS I
HAPPENED BY CHANCE UPON MOUNT GILBOA, BEHOLD, SAUL LEANED UPON HIS SPEAR; AND,
LO, THE CHARIOTS AND HORSEMEN FOLLOWED HARD AFTER HIM. 7 AND WHEN HE LOOKED
BEHIND HIM, HE SAW ME, AND CALLED UNTO ME. AND I ANSWERED, HERE AM I. 8 AND HE
SAID UNTO ME, WHO ART THOU? AND I ANSWERED HIM, I AM AN AMALEKITE. 9 HE SAID
UNTO ME AGAIN, STAND, I PRAY THEE, UPON ME, AND SLAY ME: FOR ANGUISH IS COME
UPON ME, BECAUSE MY LIFE IS YET WHOLE IN ME. 10 SO I STOOD UPON HIM, AND SLEW
HIM, BECAUSE I WAS SURE THAT HE COULD NOT LIVE AFTER THAT HE WAS FALLEN: AND I
TOOK THE CROWN THAT WAS UPON HIS HEAD, AND THE BRACELET THAT WAS ON HIS ARM,
AND HAVE BROUGHT THEM HITHER UNTO MY LORD. 11 THEN DAVID TOOK HOLD ON HIS
CLOTHES, AND RENT THEM; AND LIKEWISE ALL THE MEN THAT WERE WITH HIM: 12 AND
THEY MOURNED, AND WEPT, AND FASTED UNTIL EVEN, FOR SAUL, AND FOR JONATHAN HIS
SON, AND FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE LORD, AND FOR THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; BECAUSE THEY
WERE FALLEN BY THE SWORD. 13 AND DAVID SAID UNTO THE YOUNG MAN THAT TOLD HIM,
WHENCE ART THOU? AND HE ANSWERED, I AM THE SON OF A STRANGER, AN AMALEKITE. 14
AND DAVID SAID UNTO HIM, HOW WAST THOU NOT AFRAID TO STRETCH FORTH THINE HAND
TO DESTROY THE LORD'S ANOINTED? 15 AND DAVID CALLED ONE OF THE YOUNG MEN, AND
SAID, GO NEAR, AND FALL UPON HIM. AND HE SMOTE HIM THAT HE DIED. 16 AND DAVID
SAID UNTO HIM, THY BLOOD BE UPON THY HEAD; FOR THY MOUTH HATH TESTIFIED AGAINST
THEE, SAYING, I HAVE SLAIN THE LORD'S ANOINTED. … 26 I AM DISTRESSED FOR THEE,
MY BROTHER JONATHAN: VERY PLEASANT HAST THOU BEEN UNTO ME: THY LOVE TO ME WAS
WONDERFUL, PASSING THE LOVE OF WOMEN. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Druh%C3%A1%20Samuelova%201&version=B21
Bible, New Testament, John 18, 12
THEN THE BAND AND THE CAPTAIN AND OFFICERS OF THE JEWS TOOK JESUS, AND BOUND
HIM, 13 AND LED HIM AWAY TO ANNAS FIRST; FOR HE WAS FATHER IN LAW TO CAIAPHAS,
WHICH WAS THE HIGH PRIEST THAT SAME YEAR. 14 NOW CAIAPHAS WAS HE, WHICH GAVE
COUNSEL TO THE JEWS, THAT IT WAS EXPEDIENT THAT ONE MAN SHOULD DIE FOR THE
PEOPLE. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+18&version=KJV
Bible, New Testament, John 11, 45
THEN MANY OF THE JEWS WHICH CAME TO MARY, AND HAD SEEN THE THINGS WHICH JESUS
DID, BELIEVED ON HIM. 46 BUT SOME OF THEM WENT THEIR WAYS TO THE PHARISEES, AND
TOLD THEM WHAT THINGS JESUS HAD DONE. 47 THEN GATHERED THE CHIEF PRIESTS AND
THE PHARISEES A COUNCIL, AND SAID, WHAT DO WE? FOR THIS MAN DOETH MANY
MIRACLES. 48 IF WE LET HIM THUS ALONE, ALL MEN WILL BELIEVE ON HIM: AND THE
ROMANS SHALL COME AND TAKE AWAY BOTH OUR PLACE AND NATION. 49 AND ONE OF THEM,
NAMED CAIAPHAS, BEING THE HIGH PRIEST THAT SAME YEAR, SAID UNTO THEM, YE KNOW
NOTHING AT ALL, 50 NOR CONSIDER THAT IT IS EXPEDIENT FOR US, THAT ONE MAN
SHOULD DIE FOR THE PEOPLE, AND THAT THE WHOLE NATION PERISH NOT. 51 AND THIS
SPAKE HE NOT OF HIMSELF: BUT BEING HIGH PRIEST THAT YEAR, HE PROPHESIED THAT
JESUS SHOULD DIE FOR THAT NATION; 52 AND NOT FOR THAT NATION ONLY, BUT THAT
ALSO HE SHOULD GATHER TOGETHER IN ONE THE CHILDREN OF GOD THAT WERE SCATTERED
ABROAD. 53 THEN FROM THAT DAY FORTH THEY TOOK COUNSEL TOGETHER FOR TO PUT HIM
TO DEATH. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+11&version=KJV
The original texts of the Tanakh were mainly in Hebrew, with some
portions in Aramaic. In addition to the authoritative Masoretic Text, Jews
still refer to the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek,
and the Targum Onkelos, an Aramaic version of the Bible. There are several
different ancient versions of the Tanakh in Hebrew, mostly differing by spelling,
and the traditional Jewish version is based on the version known as Aleppo
Codex. Even in this version there are words which are traditionally read
differently from written, because the oral tradition is considered more
fundamental than the written one, and presumably mistakes had been made in
copying the text over the generations.[citation needed] (Viz/ see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Versions_and_translations )
Bible, Old Testament, Exodus 20, 13, Bible, Old Testament, Deuteronomium
5, 17
Exodus 20 Unicode/XML Westminster Leningrad Codex, Exodus 20 Unicode/XML
Westminster Leningrad Codex, http://www.tanach.us/Tanach.xml#Home : © 2004 Christopher V. Kimball , Deuteronomy 5 Unicode/XML Westminster Leningrad Codex, http://www.tanach.us/Tanach.xml#Home : © 2004 Christopher V. Kimball
שמות
Exodus 20
20 13 לֹ֥֖א
תִּֿרְצָֽ֖ח׃ ס
End of Exodus
20:13 - 20:13
Date:
2016.07.20-13.35
דברים
Deuteronomy 5
5 17 לֹ֥֖א
תִּֿרְצָֽח׃ ס
End of Deuteronomy
5:17 - 5:17
Date:
2016.07.20-13.39
Literature:
All
quotations from the Bible in this book because of copyright are on principle in
Czech from Kralice Bible see http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1K15.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague , headlines from Bible, translation
21st century (shortly Bible21 or B21, first parts were published under the name
New Bible of Kralice (NBK)) see
http://www.biblegateway.com/ and https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible,_p%C5%99eklad_21._stolet%C3%AD , originally all inspired by the Bible Old and New Testaments | including
deuterocanonic books |, Czech Ecumenical Translation, CZECH Bible Society,
1995, see www.biblenet.cz
, and in English see King James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/
1
Samuel, 14 chapter
(brave Jonathan, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD+Samuelova+14&version=B21 )
1 Now it came to
pass upon a day, that Jonathan the son of Saul said unto the young man that
bare his armour, Come, and let us go over to the Philistines' garrison, that is
on the other side. But he told not his father. 2 And Saul tarried in the
uttermost part of Gibeah under a pomegranate tree which is in Migron: and the
people that were with him were about six hundred men; 3 And Ahiah, the son of
Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the Lord's
priest in Shiloh, wearing an ephod. And the people knew not that Jonathan was
gone. 4 And between the passages, by which Jonathan sought to go over unto the
Philistines' garrison, there was a sharp rock on the one side, and a sharp rock
on the other side: and the name of the one was Bozez, and the name of the other
Seneh. 5 The forefront of the one was situate northward over against Michmash,
and the other southward over against Gibeah. 6 And Jonathan said to the young
man that bare his armour, Come, and let us go over unto the garrison of these
uncircumcised: it may be that the Lord will work for us: for there is no
restraint to the Lord to save by many or by few. 7 And his armourbearer said
unto him, Do all that is in thine heart: turn thee; behold, I am with thee
according to thy heart. 8 Then said Jonathan, Behold, we will pass over unto
these men, and we will discover ourselves unto them. 9 If they say thus unto
us, Tarry until we come to you; then we will stand still in our place, and will
not go up unto them. 10 But if they say thus, Come up unto us; then we will go
up: for the Lord hath delivered them into our hand: and this shall be a sign
unto us. 11 And both of them discovered themselves unto the garrison of the
Philistines: and the Philistines said, Behold, the Hebrews come forth out of
the holes where they had hid themselves. 12 And the men of the garrison
answered Jonathan and his armourbearer, and said, Come up to us, and we will
shew you a thing. And Jonathan said unto his armourbearer, Come up after me:
for the Lord hath delivered them into the hand of Israel. 13 And Jonathan
climbed up upon his hands and upon his feet, and his armourbearer after him:
and they fell before Jonathan; and his armourbearer slew after him. 14 And that
first slaughter, which Jonathan and his armourbearer made, was about twenty
men, within as it were an half acre of land, which a yoke of oxen might plow.
15 And there was trembling in the host, in the field, and among all the people:
the garrison, and the spoilers, they also trembled, and the earth quaked: so it
was a very great trembling. 16 And the watchmen of Saul in Gibeah of Benjamin
looked; and, behold, the multitude melted away, and they went on beating down
one another. 17 Then said Saul unto the people that were with him, Number now,
and see who is gone from us. And when they had numbered, behold, Jonathan and
his armourbearer were not there. 18 And Saul said unto Ahiah, Bring hither the
ark of God. For the ark of God was at that time with the children of Israel. 19
And it came to pass, while Saul talked unto the priest, that the noise that was
in the host of the Philistines went on and increased: and Saul said unto the
priest, Withdraw thine hand. 20 And Saul and all the people that were with him
assembled themselves, and they came to the battle: and, behold, every man's
sword was against his fellow, and there was a very great discomfiture. 21
Moreover the Hebrews that were with the Philistines before that time, which
went up with them into the camp from the country round about, even they also
turned to be with the Israelites that were with Saul and Jonathan. 22 Likewise all
the men of Israel which had hid themselves in mount Ephraim, when they heard
that the Philistines fled, even they also followed hard after them in the
battle. 23 So the Lord saved Israel that day: and the battle passed over unto
Bethaven.
(my father damages land, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD+Samuelova+14&version=B21 )
24 And the men
of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people, saying,
Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening, that I may be avenged on
mine enemies. So none of the people tasted any food. 25 And all they of the
land came to a wood; and there was honey upon the ground. 26 And when the
people were come into the wood, behold, the honey dropped; but no man put his
hand to his mouth: for the people feared the oath. 27 But Jonathan heard not
when his father charged the people with the oath: wherefore he put forth the
end of the rod that was in his hand, and dipped it in an honeycomb, and put his
hand to his mouth; and his eyes were enlightened. 28 Then answered one of the
people, and said, Thy father straitly charged the people with an oath, saying,
Cursed be the man that eateth any food this day. And the people were faint. 29
Then said Jonathan, My father hath troubled the land: see, I pray you, how mine
eyes have been enlightened, because I tasted a little of this honey. 30 How
much more, if haply the people had eaten freely to day of the spoil of their
enemies which they found? for had there not been now a much greater slaughter
among the Philistines? 31 And they smote the Philistines that day from Michmash
to Aijalon: and the people were very faint. 32 And the people flew upon the
spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground: and
the people did eat them with the blood. 33 Then they told Saul, saying, Behold,
the people sin against the Lord, in that they eat with the blood. And he said,
Ye have transgressed: roll a great stone unto me this day. 34 And Saul said,
Disperse yourselves among the people, and say unto them, Bring me hither every
man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay them here, and eat; and sin not
against the Lord in eating with the blood. And all the people brought every man
his ox with him that night, and slew them there. 35 And Saul built an altar
unto the Lord: the same was the first altar that he built unto the Lord. 36 And
Saul said, Let us go down after the Philistines by night, and spoil them until
the morning light, and let us not leave a man of them. And they said, Do
whatsoever seemeth good unto thee. Then said the priest, Let us draw near
hither unto God. 37 And Saul asked counsel of God, Shall I go down after the
Philistines? wilt thou deliver them into the hand of Israel? But he answered
him not that day. 38 And Saul said, Draw ye near hither, all the chief of the
people: and know and see wherein this sin hath been this day. 39 For, as the
Lord liveth, which saveth Israel, though it be in Jonathan my son, he shall
surely die. But there was not a man among all the people that answered him. 40
Then said he unto all Israel, Be ye on one side, and I and Jonathan my son will
be on the other side. And the people said unto Saul, Do what seemeth good unto
thee. 41 Therefore Saul said unto the Lord God of Israel, Give a perfect lot.
And Saul and Jonathan were taken: but the people escaped. 42 And Saul said,
Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan was taken. 43 Then Saul
said to Jonathan, Tell me what thou hast done. And Jonathan told him, and said,
I did but taste a little honey with the end of the rod that was in mine hand,
and, lo, I must die. 44 And Saul answered, God do so and more also: for thou
shalt surely die, Jonathan. 45 And the people said unto Saul, Shall Jonathan
die, who hath wrought this great salvation in Israel? God forbid: as the Lord
liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath
wrought with God this day. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not. 46
Then Saul went up from following the Philistines: and the Philistines went to
their own place. 47 So Saul took the kingdom over Israel, and fought against
all his enemies on every side, against Moab, and against the children of Ammon,
and against Edom, and against the kings of Zobah, and against the Philistines:
and whithersoever he turned himself, he vexed them. 48 And he gathered an host,
and smote the Amalekites, and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled
them. 49 Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan, and Ishui, and Melchishua: and the
names of his two daughters were these; the name of the firstborn Merab, and the
name of the younger Michal: 50 And the name of Saul's wife was Ahinoam, the
daughter of Ahimaaz: and the name of the captain of his host was Abner, the son
of Ner, Saul's uncle. 51 And Kish was the father of Saul; and Ner the father of
Abner was the son of Abiel. 52 And there was sore war against the Philistines
all the days of Saul: and when Saul saw any strong man, or any valiant man, he
took him unto him.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S14.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD+Samuelova+14&version=KJV
1
Samuel, 18 chapter
(Saul's
jealousy,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2018&version=B21 )
1 And
it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul
of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own
soul. 2 And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his
father's house. 3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him
as his own soul. 4 And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him,
and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and
to his girdle. 5 And David went out whithersoever Saul sent him, and behaved
himself wisely: and Saul set him over the men of war, and he was accepted in
the sight of all the people, and also in the sight of Saul's servants. 6 And it
came to pass as they came, when David was returned from the slaughter of the
Philistine, that the women came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing,
to meet king Saul, with tabrets, with joy, and with instruments of musick. 7
And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul hath slain
his thousands, and David his ten thousands. 8 And Saul was very wroth, and the
saying displeased him; and he said, They have ascribed unto David ten
thousands, and to me they have ascribed but thousands: and what can he have
more but the kingdom? 9 And Saul eyed David from that day and forward. 10 And
it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul,
and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as
at other times: and there was a javelin in Saul's hand. 11 And Saul cast the
javelin; for he said, I will smite David even to the wall with it. And David
avoided out of his presence twice. 12 And Saul was afraid of David, because the
Lord was with him, and was departed from Saul. 13 Therefore Saul removed him
from him, and made him his captain over a thousand; and he went out and came in
before the people. 14 And David behaved himself wisely in all his ways; and the
Lord was with him. 15 Wherefore when Saul saw that he behaved himself very
wisely, he was afraid of him. 16 But all Israel and Judah loved David, because
he went out and came in before them. 17 And Saul said to David, Behold my elder
daughter Merab, her will I give thee to wife: only be thou valiant for me, and
fight the Lord's battles. For Saul said, Let not mine hand be upon him, but let
the hand of the Philistines be upon him. 18 And David said unto Saul, Who am I?
and what is my life, or my father's family in Israel, that I should be son in
law to the king? 19 But it came to pass at the time when Merab Saul's daughter
should have been given to David, that she was given unto Adriel the Meholathite
to wife. 20 And Michal Saul's daughter loved David: and they told Saul, and the
thing pleased him. 21 And Saul said, I will give him her, that she may be a
snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him.
Wherefore Saul said to David, Thou shalt this day be my son in law in the one
of the twain. 22 And Saul commanded his servants, saying, Commune with David
secretly, and say, Behold, the king hath delight in thee, and all his servants
love thee: now therefore be the king's son in law. 23 And Saul's servants spake
those words in the ears of David. And David said, Seemeth it to you a light
thing to be a king's son in law, seeing that I am a poor man, and lightly
esteemed? 24 And the servants of Saul told him, saying, On this manner spake
David. 25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any
dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's
enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. 26
And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the
king's son in law: and the days were not expired. 27 Wherefore David arose and
went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David
brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king, that he
might be the king's son in law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife.
28 And Saul saw and knew that the Lord was with David, and that Michal Saul's
daughter loved him. 29 And Saul was yet the more afraid of David; and Saul
became David's enemy continually. 30 Then the princes of the Philistines went
forth: and it came to pass, after they went forth, that David behaved himself
more wisely than all the servants of Saul; so that his name was much set by.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S18.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD+Samuelova+18&version=KJV
1.
Samuel, 19 chapter
(let
he die!, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2019&version=B21 )
1 And Saul
spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill
David. 2 But Jonathan Saul's son delighted much in David: and Jonathan told
David, saying, Saul my father seeketh to kill thee: now therefore, I pray thee,
take heed to thyself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, and hide
thyself: 3 And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou
art, and I will commune with my father of thee; and what I see, that I will
tell thee. 4 And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said
unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he
hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very
good: 5 For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the
Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it, and didst
rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David
without a cause? 6 And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul
sware, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain. 7 And Jonathan called David,
and Jonathan shewed him all those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul,
and he was in his presence, as in times past. 8 And there was war again: and
David went out, and fought with the Philistines, and slew them with a great
slaughter; and they fled from him. 9 And the evil spirit from the Lord was upon
Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played
with his hand. 10 And Saul sought to smite David even to the wall with the
javelin: but he slipped away out of Saul's presence, and he smote the javelin
into the wall: and David fled, and escaped that night. 11 Saul also sent
messengers unto David's house, to watch him, and to slay him in the morning:
and Michal David's wife told him, saying, If thou save not thy life to night,
to morrow thou shalt be slain. 12 So Michal let David down through a window:
and he went, and fled, and escaped. 13 And Michal took an image, and laid it in
the bed, and put a pillow of goats' hair for his bolster, and covered it with a
cloth. 14 And when Saul sent messengers to take David, she said, He is sick. 15
And Saul sent the messengers again to see David, saying, Bring him up to me in
the bed, that I may slay him. 16 And when the messengers were come in, behold,
there was an image in the bed, with a pillow of goats' hair for his bolster. 17
And Saul said unto Michal, Why hast thou deceived me so, and sent away mine
enemy, that he is escaped? And Michal answered Saul, He said unto me, Let me
go; why should I kill thee? 18 So
David fled, and escaped, and came to Samuel to Ramah, and told him all that
Saul had done to him. And he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth. 19 And it was
told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah. 20 And Saul sent
messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets
prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was
upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied. 21 And when it was told
Saul, he sent other messengers, and they prophesied likewise. And Saul sent
messengers again the third time, and they prophesied also. 22 Then went he also
to Ramah, and came to a great well that is in Sechu: and he asked and said,
Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, they be at Naioth in Ramah.
23 And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah: and the Spirit of God was upon him
also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah. 24 And
he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner,
and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul
also among the prophets?
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S19.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague and https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2019&version=KJV
1
Samuel, 20 chapter
(contract
with jonathan, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2020&version=B21 )
1 And David
fled from Naioth in Ramah, and came and said before Jonathan, What have I done?
what is mine iniquity? and what is my sin before thy father, that he seeketh my
life? 2 And he said unto him, God forbid; thou shalt not die: behold, my father
will do nothing either great or small, but that he will shew it me: and why
should my father hide this thing from me? it is not so. 3 And David sware
moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in
thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but
truly as the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between
me and death. 4 Then said Jonathan unto David, Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I
will even do it for thee. 5 And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, to morrow is
the new moon, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat: but let me
go, that I may hide myself in the field unto the third day at even. 6 If thy
father at all miss me, then say, David earnestly asked leave of me that he
might run to Bethlehem his city: for there is a yearly sacrifice there for all
the family. 7 If he say thus, It is well; thy servant shall have peace: but if
he be very wroth, then be sure that evil is determined by him. 8 Therefore thou
shalt deal kindly with thy servant; for thou hast brought thy servant into a
covenant of the Lord with thee: notwithstanding, if there be in me iniquity,
slay me thyself; for why shouldest thou bring me to thy father? 9 And Jonathan
said, Far be it from thee: for if I knew certainly that evil were determined by
my father to come upon thee, then would not I tell it thee? 10 Then said David
to Jonathan, Who shall tell me? or what if thy father answer thee roughly? 11
And Jonathan said unto David, Come, and let us go out into the field. And they
went out both of them into the field. 12 And Jonathan said unto David, O Lord
God of Israel, when I have sounded my father about to morrow any time, or the
third day, and, behold, if there be good toward David, and I then send not unto
thee, and shew it thee; 13 The Lord do so and much more to Jonathan: but if it
please my father to do thee evil, then I will shew it thee, and send thee away,
that thou mayest go in peace: and the Lord be with thee, as he hath been with
my father. 14 And thou shalt not only while yet I live shew me the kindness of
the Lord, that I die not: 15 But also thou shalt not cut off thy kindness from
my house for ever: no, not when the Lord hath cut off the enemies of David
every one from the face of the earth. 16 So Jonathan made a covenant with the
house of David, saying, Let the Lord even require it at the hand of David's
enemies. 17 And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him: for
he loved him as he loved his own soul. 18 Then Jonathan said to David, To
morrow is the new moon: and thou shalt be missed, because thy seat will be
empty. 19 And when thou hast stayed three days, then thou shalt go down
quickly, and come to the place where thou didst hide thyself when the business
was in hand, and shalt remain by the stone Ezel. 20 And I will shoot three
arrows on the side thereof, as though I shot at a mark. 21 And, behold, I will
send a lad, saying, Go, find out the arrows. If I expressly say unto the lad,
Behold, the arrows are on this side of thee, take them; then come thou: for
there is peace to thee, and no hurt; as the Lord liveth. 22 But if I say thus
unto the young man, Behold, the arrows are beyond thee; go thy way: for the
Lord hath sent thee away. 23 And as touching the matter which thou and I have
spoken of, behold, the Lord be between thee and me for ever. 24 So David hid
himself in the field: and when the new moon was come, the king sat him down to
eat meat. 25 And the king sat upon his seat, as at other times, even upon a
seat by the wall: and Jonathan arose, and Abner sat by Saul's side, and David's
place was empty. 26 Nevertheless Saul spake not any thing that day: for he
thought, Something hath befallen him, he is not clean; surely he is not clean.
27 And it came to pass on the morrow, which was the second day of the month,
that David's place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore
cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day? 28 And
Jonathan answered Saul, David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem:
29 And he said, Let me go, I pray thee; for our family hath a sacrifice in the
city; and my brother, he hath commanded me to be there: and now, if I have found
favour in thine eyes, let me get away, I pray thee, and see my brethren.
Therefore he cometh not unto the king's table.30 Then Saul's anger was kindled
against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious
woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own
confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness? 31 For as long as
the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy
kingdom. Wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die. 32
And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, Wherefore shall he be
slain? what hath he done? 33 And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him:
whereby Jonathan knew that it was determined of his father to slay David. 34 So
Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did eat no meat the second
day of the month: for he was grieved for David, because his father had done him
shame. 35 And it came to pass in the morning, that Jonathan went out into the
field at the time appointed with David, and a little lad with him. 36 And he
said unto his lad, Run, find out now the arrows which I shoot. And as the lad
ran, he shot an arrow beyond him. 37 And when the lad was come to the place of
the arrow which Jonathan had shot, Jonathan cried after the lad, and said, Is
not the arrow beyond thee? 38 And Jonathan cried after the lad, Make speed,
haste, stay not. And Jonathan's lad gathered up the arrows, and came to his
master. 39 But the lad knew not any thing: only Jonathan and David knew the
matter. 40 And Jonathan gave his artillery unto his lad, and said unto him, Go,
carry them to the city. 41 And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of
a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself
three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until
David exceeded. 42 And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we
have sworn both of us in the name of the Lord, saying, The Lord be between me
and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed:
and Jonathan went into the city.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S20.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 21 chapter
(David flees to
philistines, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2021&version=B21 )
1 Then
came David to Nob to Ahimelech the priest: and Ahimelech was afraid at the
meeting of David, and said unto him, Why art thou alone, and no man with thee?
2 And David said unto Ahimelech the priest, The king hath commanded me a
business, and hath said unto me, Let no man know any thing of the business
whereabout I send thee, and what I have commanded thee: and I have appointed my
servants to such and such a place. 3 Now therefore what is under thine hand?
give me five loaves of bread in mine hand, or what there is present. 4 And the
priest answered David, and said, There is no common bread under mine hand, but
there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept themselves at least from
women. 5 And David answered the priest, and said unto him, Of a truth women
have been kept from us about these three days, since I came out, and the
vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common, yea,
though it were sanctified this day in the vessel. 6 So the priest gave him
hallowed bread: for there was no bread there but the shewbread, that was taken
from before the Lord, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away. 7 Now
a certain man of the servants of Saul was there that day, detained before the
Lord; and his name was Doeg, an Edomite, the chiefest of the herdmen that
belonged to Saul. 8 And David said unto Ahimelech, And is there not here under
thine hand spear or sword? for I have neither brought my sword nor my weapons
with me, because the king's business required haste. 9 And the priest said, The
sword of Goliath the Philistine, whom thou slewest in the valley of Elah,
behold, it is here wrapped in a cloth behind the ephod: if thou wilt take that,
take it: for there is no other save that here. And David said, There is none
like that; give it me. 10 And David arose and fled that day for fear of Saul,
and went to Achish the king of Gath. 11 And the servants of Achish said unto
him, Is not this David the king of the land? did they not sing one to another
of him in dances, saying, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten
thousands? 12 And David laid up these words in his heart, and was sore afraid
of Achish the king of Gath. 13 And he changed his behaviour before them, and
feigned himself mad in their hands, and scrabbled on the doors of the gate, and
let his spittle fall down upon his beard. 14 Then said Achish unto his
servants, Lo, ye see the man is mad: wherefore then have ye brought him to me?
15 Have I need of mad men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the mad man
in my presence? shall this fellow come into my house?
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S21.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 22 chapter
(All of you conspired,
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2022&version=B21 )
1
David therefore departed thence, and escaped to the cave Adullam: and when his
brethren and all his father's house heard it, they went down thither to him. 2
And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every
one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a
captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men. 3 And David
went thence to Mizpeh of Moab: and he said unto the king of Moab, Let my father
and my mother, I pray thee, come forth, and be with you, till I know what God
will do for me. 4 And he brought them before the king of Moab: and they dwelt
with him all the while that David was in the hold. 5 And the prophet Gad said
unto David, Abide not in the hold; depart, and get thee into the land of Judah.
Then David departed, and came into the forest of Hareth. 6 When Saul heard that
David was discovered, and the men that were with him, (now Saul abode in Gibeah
under a tree in Ramah, having his spear in his hand, and all his servants were
standing about him;) 7 Then Saul said unto his servants that stood about him,
Hear now, ye Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and
vineyards, and make you all captains of thousands, and captains of hundreds; 8
That all of you have conspired against me, and there is none that sheweth me
that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse, and there is none of you
that is sorry for me, or sheweth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant
against me, to lie in wait, as at this day? 9 Then answered Doeg the Edomite,
which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, I saw the son of Jesse
coming to Nob, to Ahimelech the son of Ahitub. 10 And he enquired of the Lord
for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath the
Philistine. 11 Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of
Ahitub, and all his father's house, the priests that were in Nob: and they came
all of them to the king. 12 And Saul said, Hear now, thou son of Ahitub. And he
answered, Here I am, my lord. 13 And Saul said unto him, Why have ye conspired
against me, thou and the son of Jesse, in that thou hast given him bread, and a
sword, and hast enquired of God for him, that he should rise against me, to lie
in wait, as at this day? 14 Then Ahimelech answered the king, and said, And who
is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son in law,
and goeth at thy bidding, and is honourable in thine house? 15 Did I then begin
to enquire of God for him? be it far from me: let not the king impute any thing
unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father: for thy servant knew
nothing of all this, less or more. 16 And the king said, Thou shalt surely die,
Ahimelech, thou, and all thy father's house. 17 And the king said unto the
footmen that stood about him, Turn, and slay the priests of the Lord: because
their hand also is with David, and because they knew when he fled, and did not
shew it to me. But the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to
fall upon the priests of the Lord. 18 And the king said to Doeg, Turn thou, and
fall upon the priests. And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he fell upon the
priests, and slew on that day fourscore and five persons that did wear a linen
ephod. 19 And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the
sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen, and asses, and
sheep, with the edge of the sword. 20 And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son
of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David. 21 And Abiathar
shewed David that Saul had slain the Lord's priests. 22 And David said unto
Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would
surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy
father's house. 23 Abide thou with me, fear not: for he that seeketh my life
seeketh thy life: but with me thou shalt be in safeguard.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S22.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 23 chapter
(In desert
hiding places,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2023&version=B21 )
1 Then
they told David, saying, Behold, the Philistines fight against Keilah, and they
rob the threshingfloors. 2 Therefore David enquired of the Lord, saying, Shall
I go and smite these Philistines? And the Lord said unto David, Go, and smite
the Philistines, and save Keilah. 3 And David's men said unto him, Behold, we be
afraid here in Judah: how much more then if we come to Keilah against the
armies of the Philistines? 4 Then David enquired of the Lord yet again. And the
Lord answered him and said, Arise, go down to Keilah; for I will deliver the
Philistines into thine hand. 5 So David and his men went to Keilah, and fought
with the Philistines, and brought away their cattle, and smote them with a
great slaughter. So David saved the inhabitants of Keilah. 6 And it came to
pass, when Abiathar the son of Ahimelech fled to David to Keilah, that he came
down with an ephod in his hand. 7 And it was told Saul that David was come to
Keilah. And Saul said, God hath delivered him into mine hand; for he is shut
in, by entering into a town that hath gates and bars. 8 And Saul called all the
people together to war, to go down to Keilah, to besiege David and his men. 9
And David knew that Saul secretly practised mischief against him; and he said
to Abiathar the priest, Bring hither the ephod. 10 Then said David, O Lord God
of Israel, thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seeketh to come to
Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. 11 Will the men of Keilah deliver me
up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? O Lord God of
Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And the Lord said, He will come down.
12 Then said David, Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand
of Saul? And the Lord said, They will deliver thee up. 13 Then David and his
men, which were about six hundred, arose and departed out of Keilah, and went
whithersoever they could go. And it was told Saul that David was escaped from
Keilah; and he forbare to go forth. 14 And David abode in the wilderness in
strong holds, and remained in a mountain in the wilderness of Ziph. And Saul sought
him every day, but God delivered him not into his hand. 15 And David saw that
Saul was come out to seek his life: and David was in the wilderness of Ziph in
a wood. 16 And Jonathan Saul's son arose, and went to David into the wood, and
strengthened his hand in God. 17 And he said unto him, Fear not: for the hand
of Saul my father shall not find thee; and thou shalt be king over Israel, and
I shall be next unto thee; and that also Saul my father knoweth. 18 And they
two made a covenant before the Lord: and David abode in the wood, and Jonathan
went to his house. 19 Then came up the Ziphites to Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth
not David hide himself with us in strong holds in the wood, in the hill of
Hachilah, which is on the south of Jeshimon? 20 Now therefore, O king, come
down according to all the desire of thy soul to come down; and our part shall
be to deliver him into the king's hand. 21 And Saul said, Blessed be ye of the
Lord; for ye have compassion on me. 22 Go, I pray you, prepare yet, and know
and see his place where his haunt is, and who hath seen him there: for it is
told me that he dealeth very subtilly. 23 See therefore, and take knowledge of
all the lurking places where he hideth himself, and come ye again to me with
the certainty, and I will go with you: and it shall come to pass, if he be in
the land, that I will search him out throughout all the thousands of Judah. 24
And they arose, and went to Ziph before Saul: but David and his men were in the
wilderness of Maon, in the plain on the south of Jeshimon. 25 Saul also and his
men went to seek him. And they told David; wherefore he came down into a rock,
and abode in the wilderness of Maon. And when Saul heard that, he pursued after
David in the wilderness of Maon. 26 And Saul went on this side of the mountain,
and David and his men on that side of the mountain: and David made haste to get
away for fear of Saul; for Saul and his men compassed David and his men round
about to take them. 27 But there came a messenger unto Saul, saying, Haste
thee, and come; for the Philistines have invaded the land. 28 Wherefore Saul
returned from pursuing after David, and went against the Philistines: therefore
they called that place Selahammahlekoth. 29 And David went up from thence, and
dwelt in strong holds at Engedi.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S23.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 24 chapter
(i do not hit you, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2024&version=B21 )
1 And
it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it
was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness of Engedi. 2 Then Saul
took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and
his men upon the rocks of the wild goats. 3 And he came to the sheepcotes by the
way, where was a cave; and Saul went in to cover his feet: and David and his
men remained in the sides of the cave. 4 And the men of David said unto him,
Behold the day of which the Lord said unto thee, Behold, I will deliver thine
enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto
thee. Then David arose, and cut off the skirt of Saul's robe privily. 5 And it
came to pass afterward, that David's heart smote him, because he had cut off
Saul's skirt. 6 And he said unto his men, The Lord forbid that I should do this
thing unto my master, the Lord's anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against
him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord. 7 So David stayed his servants with
these words, and suffered them not to rise against Saul. But Saul rose up out
of the cave, and went on his way. 8 David also arose afterward, and went out of
the cave, and cried after Saul, saying, My lord the king. And when Saul looked
behind him, David stooped with his face to the earth, and bowed himself. 9 And
David said to Saul, Wherefore hearest thou men's words, saying, Behold, David
seeketh thy hurt? 10 Behold, this day thine eyes have seen how that the Lord
had delivered thee to day into mine hand in the cave: and some bade me kill
thee: but mine eye spared thee; and I said, I will not put forth mine hand
against my lord; for he is the Lord's anointed. 11 Moreover, my father, see,
yea, see the skirt of thy robe in my hand: for in that I cut off the skirt of
thy robe, and killed thee not, know thou and see that there is neither evil nor
transgression in mine hand, and I have not sinned against thee; yet thou
huntest my soul to take it. 12 The Lord judge between me and thee, and the Lord
avenge me of thee: but mine hand shall not be upon thee. 13 As saith the proverb
of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked: but mine hand shall not
be upon thee. 14 After whom is the king of Israel come out? after whom dost
thou pursue? after a dead dog, after a flea. 15 The Lord therefore be judge,
and judge between me and thee, and see, and plead my cause, and deliver me out
of thine hand. 16 And it came to pass, when David had made an end of speaking
these words unto Saul, that Saul said, Is this thy voice, my son David? And
Saul lifted up his voice, and wept. 17 And he said to David, Thou art more
righteous than I: for thou hast rewarded me good, whereas I have rewarded thee
evil. 18 And thou hast shewed this day how that thou hast dealt well with me:
forasmuch as when the Lord had delivered me into thine hand, thou killedst me
not. 19 For if a man find his enemy, will he let him go well away? wherefore
the Lord reward thee good for that thou hast done unto me this day. 20 And now,
behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king, and that the kingdom of
Israel shall be established in thine hand. 21 Swear now therefore unto me by the Lord, that thou
wilt not cut off my seed after me, and that thou wilt not destroy my name out
of my father's house. 22 And David sware unto Saul. And Saul went home; but
David and his men gat them up unto the hold.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S24.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 25 chapter
(Abigail, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2025&version=B21 )
1 And Samuel
died; and all the Israelites were gathered together, and lamented him, and
buried him in his house at Ramah. And David arose, and went down to the
wilderness of Paran. 2 And there was a man in Maon, whose possessions were in
Carmel; and the man was very great, and he had three thousand sheep, and a
thousand goats: and he was shearing his sheep in Carmel. 3 Now the name of the
man was Nabal; and the name of his wife Abigail: and she was a woman of good
understanding, and of a beautiful countenance: but the man was churlish and
evil in his doings; and he was of the house of Caleb. 4 And David heard in the
wilderness that Nabal did shear his sheep. 5 And David sent out ten young men,
and David said unto the young men, Get you up to Carmel, and go to Nabal, and
greet him in my name: 6 And thus shall ye say to him that liveth in prosperity,
Peace be both to thee, and peace be to thine house, and peace be unto all that
thou hast. 7 And now I have heard that thou hast shearers: now thy shepherds
which were with us, we hurt them not, neither was there ought missing unto
them, all the while they were in Carmel. 8 Ask thy young men, and they will
shew thee. Wherefore let the young men find favour in thine eyes: for we come
in a good day: give, I pray thee, whatsoever cometh to thine hand unto thy
servants, and to thy son David. 9 And when David's young men came, they spake
to Nabal according to all those words in the name of David, and ceased. 10 And
Nabal answered David's servants, and said, Who is David? and who is the son of
Jesse? there be many servants now a days that break away every man from his
master. 11 Shall I then take my bread, and my water, and my flesh that I have
killed for my shearers, and give it unto men, whom I know not whence they be?
12 So David's young men turned their way, and went again, and came and told him
all those sayings. 13 And David said unto his men, Gird ye on every man his
sword. And they girded on every man his sword; and David also girded on his
sword: and there went up after David about four hundred men; and two hundred
abode by the stuff. 14 But one of the young men told Abigail, Nabal's wife,
saying, Behold, David sent messengers out of the wilderness to salute our
master; and he railed on them. 15 But the men were very good unto us, and we
were not hurt, neither missed we any thing, as long as we were conversant with
them, when we were in the fields: 16 They were a wall unto us both by night and
day, all the while we were with them keeping the sheep. 17 Now therefore know
and consider what thou wilt do; for evil is determined against our master, and
against all his household: for he is such a son of Belial, that a man cannot
speak to him. 18 Then Abigail made haste, and took two hundred loaves, and two
bottles of wine, and five sheep ready dressed, and five measures of parched
corn, and an hundred clusters of raisins, and two hundred cakes of figs, and
laid them on asses. 19 And she said unto her servants, Go on before me; behold,
I come after you. But she told not her husband Nabal. 20 And it was so, as she
rode on the ass, that she came down by the covert on the hill, and, behold,
David and his men came down against her; and she met them. 21 Now David had
said, Surely in vain have I kept all that this fellow hath in the wilderness,
so that nothing was missed of all that pertained unto him: and he hath requited
me evil for good. 22 So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I
leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against
the wall. 23 And when Abigail saw David, she hasted, and lighted off the ass,
and fell before David on her face, and bowed herself to the ground, 24 And fell
at his feet, and said, Upon me, my lord, upon me let this iniquity be: and let
thine handmaid, I pray thee, speak in thine audience, and hear the words of
thine handmaid. 25 Let not my lord, I pray thee, regard this man of Belial,
even Nabal: for as his name is, so is he; Nabal is his name, and folly is with
him: but I thine handmaid saw not the young men of my lord, whom thou didst
send. 26 Now therefore, my lord, as the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth,
seeing the Lord hath withholden thee from coming to shed blood, and from
avenging thyself with thine own hand, now let thine enemies, and they that seek
evil to my lord, be as Nabal. 27 And now this blessing which thine handmaid
hath brought unto my lord, let it even be given unto the young men that follow
my lord. 28 I pray thee, forgive the trespass of thine handmaid: for the Lord
will certainly make my lord a sure house; because my lord fighteth the battles
of the Lord, and evil hath not been found in thee all thy days. 29 Yet a man is
risen to pursue thee, and to seek thy soul: but the soul of my lord shall be
bound in the bundle of life with the Lord thy God; and the souls of thine
enemies, them shall he sling out, as out of the middle of a sling. 30 And it
shall come to pass, when the Lord shall have done to my lord according to all
the good that he hath spoken concerning thee, and shall have appointed thee
ruler over Israel; 31 That this shall be no grief unto thee, nor offence of
heart unto my lord, either that thou hast shed blood causeless, or that my lord
hath avenged himself: but when the Lord shall have dealt well with my lord,
then remember thine handmaid. 32 And David said to Abigail, Blessed be the Lord
God of Israel, which sent thee this day to meet me: 33 And blessed be thy
advice, and blessed be thou, which hast kept me this day from coming to shed
blood, and from avenging myself with mine own hand. 34 For in very deed, as the
Lord God of Israel liveth, which hath kept me back from hurting thee, except
thou hadst hasted and come to meet me, surely there had not been left unto
Nabal by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall. 35 So David
received of her hand that which she had brought him, and said unto her, Go up
in peace to thine house; see, I have hearkened to thy voice, and have accepted
thy person. 36 And Abigail came to Nabal; and, behold, he held a feast in his
house, like the feast of a king; and Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he
was very drunken: wherefore she told him nothing, less or more, until the
morning light. 37 But it came to pass in the morning, when the wine was gone
out of Nabal, and his wife had told him these things, that his heart died
within him, and he became as a stone. 38 And it came to pass about ten days
after, that the Lord smote Nabal, that he died. 39 And when David heard that
Nabal was dead, he said, Blessed be the Lord, that hath pleaded the cause of my
reproach from the hand of Nabal, and hath kept his servant from evil: for the
Lord hath returned the wickedness of Nabal upon his own head. And David sent
and communed with Abigail, to take her to him to wife. 40 And when the servants
of David were come to Abigail to Carmel, they spake unto her, saying, David sent
us unto thee, to take thee to him to wife. 41 And she arose, and bowed herself
on her face to the earth, and said, Behold, let thine handmaid be a servant to
wash the feet of the servants of my lord. 42 And Abigail hasted, and arose and
rode upon an ass, with five damsels of hers that went after her; and she went
after the messengers of David, and became his wife. 43 David also took Ahinoam
of Jezreel; and they were also both of them his wives. 44 But Saul had given
Michal his daughter, David's wife, to Phalti the son of Laish, which was of
Gallim.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S25.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 26 chapter
(I do not hit
the Anointed One, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2026&version=B21 )
1 And
the Ziphites came unto Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth not David hide himself in
the hill of Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon? 2 Then Saul arose, and went
down to the wilderness of Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with
him, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph. 3 And Saul pitched in the hill of
Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon, by the way. But David abode in the
wilderness, and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness. 4 David
therefore sent out spies, and understood that Saul was come in very deed. 5 And
David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched: and David beheld the
place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host: and
Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him. 6 Then answered
David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah,
brother to Joab, saying, Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp? And
Abishai said, I will go down with thee. 7 So David and Abishai came to the
people by night: and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the trench, and his spear
stuck in the ground at his bolster: but Abner and the people lay round about
him. 8 Then said Abishai to David, God hath delivered thine enemy into thine
hand this day: now therefore let me smite him, I pray thee, with the spear even
to the earth at once, and I will not smite him the second time. 9 And David
said to Abishai, Destroy him not: for who can stretch forth his hand against
the Lord's anointed, and be guiltless? 10 David said furthermore, As the Lord
liveth, the Lord shall smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he shall
descend into battle, and perish. 11 The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth
mine hand against the Lord's anointed: but, I pray thee, take thou now the
spear that is at his bolster, and the cruse of water, and let us go. 12 So
David took the spear and the cruse of water from Saul's bolster; and they gat
them away, and no man saw it, nor knew it, neither awaked: for they were all
asleep; because a deep sleep from the Lord was fallen upon them. 13 Then David
went over to the other side, and stood on the top of an hill afar off; a great
space being between them: 14 And David cried to the people, and to Abner the
son of Ner, saying, Answerest thou not, Abner? Then Abner answered and said,
Who art thou that criest to the king? 15 And David said to Abner, Art not thou
a valiant man? and who is like to thee in Israel? wherefore then hast thou not
kept thy lord the king? for there came one of the people in to destroy the king
thy lord. 16 This thing is not good that thou hast done. As the Lord liveth, ye
are worthy to die, because ye have not kept your master, the Lord's anointed.
And now see where the king's spear is, and the cruse of water that was at his
bolster. 17 And Saul knew David's voice, and said, Is this thy voice, my son David?
And David said, It is my voice, my lord, O king. 18 And he said, Wherefore doth
my lord thus pursue after his servant? for what have I done? or what evil is in
mine hand? 19 Now therefore, I pray thee, let my lord the king hear the words
of his servant. If the Lord have stirred thee up against me, let him accept an
offering: but if they be the children of men, cursed be they before the Lord;
for they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of the
Lord, saying, Go, serve other gods. 20 Now therefore, let not my blood fall to
the earth before the face of the Lord: for the king of Israel is come out to
seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains. 21 Then said
Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm,
because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the
fool, and have erred exceedingly. 22 And David answered and said, Behold the
king's spear! and let one of the young men come over and fetch it. 23 The Lord render
to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness; for the Lord delivered
thee into my hand to day, but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the
Lord's anointed. 24 And, behold, as thy life was much set by this day in mine
eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord, and let him
deliver me out of all tribulation. 25 Then Saul said to David, Blessed be thou,
my son David: thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt still prevail. So
David went on his way, and Saul returned to his place.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S26.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 27 chapter
(among
philistines again,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2027&version=B21 )
1 And
David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul: there
is nothing better for me than that I should speedily escape into the land of
the Philistines; and Saul shall despair of me, to seek me any more in any coast
of Israel: so shall I escape out of his hand. 2 And David arose, and he passed over
with the six hundred men that were with him unto Achish, the son of Maoch, king
of Gath. 3 And David dwelt with Achish at Gath, he and his men, every man with
his household, even David with his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and
Abigail the Carmelitess, Nabal's wife. 4 And it was told Saul that David was
fled to Gath: and he sought no more again for him. 5 And David said unto
Achish, If I have now found grace in thine eyes, let them give me a place in
some town in the country, that I may dwell there: for why should thy servant
dwell in the royal city with thee? 6 Then Achish gave him Ziklag that day:
wherefore Ziklag pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day. 7 And the
time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines was a full year and
four months. 8 And David and his men went up, and invaded the Geshurites, and
the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants
of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt. 9 And David
smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive, and took away the sheep,
and the oxen, and the asses, and the camels, and the apparel, and returned, and
came to Achish. 10 And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road to day? And
David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the
Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites. 11 And David saved neither
man nor woman alive, to bring tidings to Gath, saying, Lest they should tell on
us, saying, So did David, and so will be his manner all the while he dwelleth
in the country of the Philistines. 12 And Achish believed David, saying, He
hath made his people Israel utterly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my
servant for ever.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S27.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 28 chapter
1 And
it came to pass in those days, that the Philistines gathered their armies
together for warfare, to fight with Israel. And Achish said unto David, Know
thou assuredly, that thou shalt go out with me to battle, thou and thy men. 2
And David said to Achish, Surely thou shalt know what thy servant can do. And
Achish said to David, Therefore will I make thee keeper of mine head for ever.
(tomorrow you will be with me, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2028&version=B21 )
3 Now
Samuel was dead, and all Israel had lamented him, and buried him in Ramah, even
in his own city. And Saul had put away those that had familiar spirits, and the
wizards, out of the land. 4 And the Philistines gathered themselves together,
and came and pitched in Shunem: and Saul gathered all Israel together, and they
pitched in Gilboa. 5 And when Saul saw the host of the Philistines, he was
afraid, and his heart greatly trembled. 6 And when Saul enquired of the Lord,
the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. 7
Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit,
that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold,
there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor. 8 And Saul disguised
himself, and put on other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they
came to the woman by night: and he said, I pray thee, divine unto me by the
familiar spirit, and bring me him up, whom I shall name unto thee. 9 And the woman
said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off
those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore
then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die? 10 And Saul sware to
her by the Lord, saying, As the Lord liveth, there shall no punishment happen
to thee for this thing. 11 Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up unto
thee? And he said, Bring me up Samuel. 12 And when the woman saw Samuel, she
cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou
deceived me? for thou art Saul. 13 And the king said unto her, Be not afraid:
for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of
the earth. 14 And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old
man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was
Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself. 15 And
Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul
answered, I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and
God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets, nor by
dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make known unto me what
I shall do. 16 Then said Samuel, Wherefore then dost thou ask of me, seeing the
Lord is departed from thee, and is become thine enemy? 17 And the Lord hath
done to him, as he spake by me: for the Lord hath rent the kingdom out of thine
hand, and given it to thy neighbour, even to David: 18 Because thou obeyedst
not the voice of the Lord, nor executedst his fierce wrath upon Amalek,
therefore hath the Lord done this thing unto thee this day. 19 Moreover the
Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines: and
to morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me: the Lord also shall deliver the
host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines. 20 Then Saul fell straightway
all along on the earth, and was sore afraid, because of the words of Samuel:
and there was no strength in him; for he had eaten no bread all the day, nor
all the night. 21 And the woman came unto Saul, and saw that he was sore
troubled, and said unto him, Behold, thine handmaid hath obeyed thy voice, and
I have put my life in my hand, and have hearkened unto thy words which thou
spakest unto me. 22 Now therefore, I pray thee, hearken thou
also unto the voice of thine handmaid, and let me set a morsel of bread before
thee; and eat, that thou mayest have strength, when thou goest on thy way. 23
But he refused, and said, I will not eat. But his servants, together with the
woman, compelled him; and he hearkened unto their voice. So he arose from the
earth, and sat upon the bed. 24 And the woman had a fat calf in the house; and
she hasted, and killed it, and took flour, and kneaded it, and did bake
unleavened bread thereof: 25 And she brought it before Saul, and before his
servants; and they did eat. Then they rose up, and went away that night.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S28.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 29 chapter
(he must not with us to the fight, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2029&version=B21 )
1 Now
the Philistines gathered together all their armies to Aphek: and the Israelites
pitched by a fountain which is in Jezreel. 2 And the lords of the Philistines
passed on by hundreds, and by thousands: but David and his men passed on in the
rereward with Achish. 3 Then said the princes of the Philistines, What do these
Hebrews here? And Achish said unto the princes of the Philistines, Is not this
David, the servant of Saul the king of Israel, which hath been with me these
days, or these years, and I have found no fault in him since he fell unto me
unto this day? 4 And the princes of the Philistines were wroth with him; and
the princes of the Philistines said unto him, Make this fellow return, that he
may go again to his place which thou hast appointed him, and let him not go
down with us to battle, lest in the battle he be an adversary to us: for
wherewith should he reconcile himself unto his master? should it not be with
the heads of these men? 5 Is not this David, of whom they sang one to another
in dances, saying, Saul slew his thousands, and David his ten thousands? 6 Then
Achish called David, and said unto him, Surely, as the Lord liveth, thou hast
been upright, and thy going out and thy coming in with me in the host is good
in my sight: for I have not found evil in thee since the day of thy coming unto
me unto this day: nevertheless the lords favour thee not. 7 Wherefore now
return, and go in peace, that thou displease not the lords of the Philistines.
8 And David said unto Achish, But what have I done? and what hast thou found in
thy servant so long as I have been with thee unto this day, that I may not go
fight against the enemies of my lord the king? 9 And Achish answered and said
to David, I know that thou art good in my sight, as an angel of God:
notwithstanding the princes of the Philistines have said, He shall not go up
with us to the battle. 10 Wherefore now rise up early in the morning with thy
master's servants that are come with thee: and as soon as ye be up early in the
morning, and have light, depart. 11 So David and his men rose up early to
depart in the morning, to return into the land of the Philistines. And the
Philistines went up to Jezreel.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S29.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 30 chapter
(David's loot,
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2030&version=B21 )
1 And
it came to pass, when David and his men were come to Ziklag on the third day,
that the Amalekites had invaded the south, and Ziklag, and smitten Ziklag, and
burned it with fire; 2 And had taken the women captives, that were therein:
they slew not any, either great or small, but carried them away, and went on
their way. 3 So David and his men came to the city, and, behold, it was burned
with fire; and their wives, and their sons, and their daughters, were taken
captives. 4 Then David and the people that were with him lifted up their voice
and wept, until they had no more power to weep. 5 And David's two wives were
taken captives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the wife of Nabal the
Carmelite. 6 And David was greatly distressed; for the people spake of stoning
him, because the soul of all the people was grieved, every man for his sons and
for his daughters: but David encouraged himself in the Lord his God. 7 And
David said to Abiathar the priest, Ahimelech's son, I pray thee, bring me
hither the ephod. And Abiathar brought thither the ephod to David. 8 And David
enquired at the Lord, saying, Shall I pursue after this troop? shall I overtake
them? And he answered him, Pursue: for thou shalt surely overtake them, and
without fail recover all. 9 So David went, he and the six hundred men that were
with him, and came to the brook Besor, where those that were left behind
stayed. 10 But David pursued, he and four hundred men: for two hundred abode
behind, which were so faint that they could not go over the brook Besor. 11 And
they found an Egyptian in the field, and brought him to David, and gave him
bread, and he did eat; and they made him drink water; 12 And they gave him a
piece of a cake of figs, and two clusters of raisins: and when he had eaten,
his spirit came again to him: for he had eaten no bread, nor drunk any water,
three days and three nights. 13 And David said unto him, To whom belongest
thou? and whence art thou? And he said, I am a young man of Egypt, servant to
an Amalekite; and my master left me, because three days agone I fell sick. 14
We made an invasion upon the south of the Cherethites, and upon the coast which
belongeth to Judah, and upon the south of Caleb; and we burned Ziklag with
fire. 15 And David said to him, Canst thou bring me down to this company? And
he said, Swear unto me by God, that thou wilt neither kill me, nor deliver me
into the hands of my master, and I will bring thee down to this company. 16 And
when he had brought him down, behold, they were spread abroad upon all the
earth, eating and drinking, and dancing, because of all the great spoil that
they had taken out of the land of the Philistines, and out of the land of
Judah. 17 And David smote them from the twilight even unto the evening of the
next day: and there escaped not a man of them, save four hundred young men,
which rode upon camels, and fled. 18 And David recovered all that the
Amalekites had carried away: and David rescued his two wives. 19 And there was
nothing lacking to them, neither small nor great, neither sons nor daughters,
neither spoil, nor any thing that they had taken to them: David recovered all.
20 And David took all the flocks and the herds, which they drave before those
other cattle, and said, This is David's spoil. 21 And David came to the two hundred
men, which were so faint that they could not follow David, whom they had made
also to abide at the brook Besor: and they went forth to meet David, and to
meet the people that were with him: and when David came near to the people, he
saluted them. 22 Then answered all the wicked men and men of Belial, of those
that went with David, and said, Because they went not with us, we will not give
them ought of the spoil that we have recovered, save to every man his wife and
his children, that they may lead them away, and depart. 23 Then said David, Ye
shall not do so, my brethren, with that which the Lord hath given us, who hath
preserved us, and delivered the company that came against us into our hand. 24
For who will hearken unto you in this matter? but as his part is that goeth
down to the battle, so shall his part be that tarrieth by the stuff: they shall
part alike. 25 And it was so from that day forward, that he made it a statute
and an ordinance for Israel unto this day. 26 And when David came to Ziklag, he
sent of the spoil unto the elders of Judah, even to his friends, saying, Behold
a present for you of the spoil of the enemies of the Lord; 27 To them which
were in Bethel, and to them which were in south Ramoth, and to them which were
in Jattir, 28 And to them which were in Aroer, and to them which were in
Siphmoth, and to them which were in Eshtemoa, 29 And to them which were in
Rachal, and to them which were in the cities of the Jerahmeelites, and to them
which were in the cities of the Kenites, 30 And to them which were in Hormah,
and to them which were in Chorashan, and to them which were in Athach, 31 And
to them which were in Hebron, and to all the places where David himself and his
men were wont to haunt.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S30.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
1
Samuel, 31 chapter
(Saul's Death, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD%20Samuelova%2031&version=B21 )
1 Now
the Philistines fought against Israel: and the men of Israel fled from before
the Philistines, and fell down slain in mount Gilboa. 2 And the Philistines
followed hard upon Saul and upon his sons; and the Philistines slew Jonathan,
and Abinadab, and Melchishua, Saul's sons. 3 And the battle went sore against
Saul, and the archers hit him; and he was sore wounded of the archers. 4 Then
said Saul unto his armourbearer, Draw thy sword, and thrust me through
therewith; lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through, and abuse me.
But his armourbearer would not; for he was sore afraid. Therefore Saul took a
sword, and fell upon it. 5 And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead, he
fell likewise upon his sword, and died with him. 6 So Saul died, and his three
sons, and his armourbearer, and all his men, that same day together. 7 And when
the men of Israel that were on the other side of the valley, and they that were
on the other side Jordan, saw that the men of Israel fled, and that Saul and
his sons were dead, they forsook the cities, and fled; and the Philistines came
and dwelt in them. 8 And it came to pass on the morrow, when the Philistines
came to strip the slain, that they found Saul and his three sons fallen in
mount Gilboa. 9 And they cut off his head, and stripped off his armour, and
sent into the land of the Philistines round about, to publish it in the house
of their idols, and among the people. 10 And they put his armour in the house
of Ashtaroth: and they fastened his body to the wall of Bethshan. 11 And when
the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead heard of that which the Philistines had done to
Saul; 12 All the valiant men arose, and went all night, and took the body of
Saul and the bodies of his sons from the wall of Bethshan, and came to Jabesh,
and burnt them there. 13 And they took their bones, and buried them under a
tree at Jabesh, and fasted seven days.
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/1S31.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
2
Samuel, 1 chapter
(david's
ascendant, report on Saul's death,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Druh%C3%A1%20Samuelova%201&version=B21 )
1 Now
it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David was returned from the
slaughter of the Amalekites, and David had abode two days in Ziklag; 2 It came
even to pass on the third day, that, behold, a man came out of the camp from
Saul with his clothes rent, and earth upon his head: and so it was, when he
came to David, that he fell to the earth, and did obeisance. 3 And David said
unto him, From whence comest thou? And he said unto him, Out of the camp of
Israel am I escaped. 4 And David said unto him, How went the matter? I pray
thee, tell me. And he answered, That the people are fled from the battle, and
many of the people also are fallen and dead; and Saul and Jonathan his son are
dead also. 5 And David
said unto the young man that told him, How knowest thou that Saul and Jonathan
his son be dead? 6 And the young man that told him said, As I happened by
chance upon mount Gilboa, behold, Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo, the
chariots and horsemen followed hard after him. 7 And when he looked behind him,
he saw me, and called unto me. And I answered, Here am I. 8 And he said unto
me, Who art thou? And I answered him, I am an Amalekite. 9 He said unto me
again, Stand, I pray thee, upon me, and slay me: for anguish is come upon me,
because my life is yet whole in me. 10 So I stood upon him, and slew him,
because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took
the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and
have brought them hither unto my lord. 11 Then David took hold on his clothes,
and rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him: 12 And they
mourned, and wept, and fasted until even, for Saul, and for Jonathan his son,
and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were
fallen by the sword. 13 And David said unto the young man that told him, Whence
art thou? And he answered, I am the son of a stranger, an Amalekite. 14 And David
said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy
the Lord's anointed? 15 And David called one of the young men, and said, Go
near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died. 16 And David said unto
him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee,
saying, I have slain the Lord's anointed.
(How did heroes die, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Druh%C3%A1%20Samuelova%201&version=B21 )
17 And
David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son: 18
(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it
is written in the book of Jasher.) 19 The beauty of Israel is slain upon thy
high places: how are the mighty fallen! 20 Tell it not in Gath, publish it not
in the streets of Askelon; lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest
the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph. 21 Ye mountains of Gilboa, let
there be no dew, neither let there be rain, upon you, nor fields of offerings:
for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, as
though he had not been anointed with oil. 22 From the blood of the slain, from
the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan turned not back, and the sword of
Saul returned not empty. 23 Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their
lives, and in their death they were not divided: they were swifter than eagles,
they were stronger than lions. 24 Ye daughters of Israel, weep over Saul, who
clothed you in scarlet, with other delights, who put on ornaments of gold upon
your apparel. 25 How are the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! O
Jonathan, thou wast slain in thine high places. 26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very
pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love
of women. 27 How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished!
http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~rovnanim/bible/k/2S1.php : Bible of Kralice, Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University, Prague
30)
07/08/2016 Jehovah's Witnesses and Philosophy of Balance.
Basic
dogmas of the faith of “Jehovah's Witnesses”:
1)
Luke 12 King James Version (KJV), 32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your
Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. (i.e. according to the
Jehovah's Witnesses the chosen people will live in heaven together with only
one Biblical God and the angels, but the others redeemed will live in Paradise
on earth, see below) http://biblenet.cz/b/Luke/13 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke+12&version=KJV
2)
Revelation 21 King James Version (KJV), 1 And I saw a new heaven and a new
earth (i.e. according to the Jehovah's Witnesses both Paradise on earth and
also heaven will simultaneously exist): for the first heaven and the first
earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy
city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride
adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying,
Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and
they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more
death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for
the former things are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said,
Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are
true and faithful. 6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the
beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of
the water of life freely. http://biblenet.cz/b/Rev/21#v1 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Revelation%2021
Thus
the basic question from the perspective of Philosophy of Balance is: Shall be
no both death and pain (see above) only in heaven or contrarily also in
Paradise on earth. (i.e. from the perspective of the only one dogma of my
Philosophy of Balance the question is: Does mean"... the least possible
death and pain ..." in fact no both death and pain or contrarily only the
least possible, but still some minimum death and pain).
On
this question I quote from the Bible:
Genesis
1 King James Version (KJV), 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every
herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in
the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every
thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every
green herb for meat: and it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had
made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the
sixth day. http://biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Gen&no=1&search=Otev%C5%99%C3%ADt , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Genesis%201
Furthermore from the modern exact natural science, namely from biology it follows that also plant seeds are formed by germ (embryonic) living cells (i.e. by very small very simple living creatures), which due to their development (i.e. evolutionary) simplicity feel nearly no pain (i.e. they have not a nervous system) and which during eating of these plant seeds by a human it is also necessary to kill. (See "Pistil, egg and fertilization (insemination) … Egg (ovulum) in the ovary is covered with the two egg coats (integuments). ... Inside the egg is a diploid tissue nucellus. ... From one cell of nucellus the parent cell of megaspore arises and four haploid cells (arise) from it (i.e. from this parent cell of megaspore) by the reduction division. Three (haploid cells) commonly vanish and the remaining cell divides into three (cells) ... http://web2.mendelu.cz/af_211_multitext/obecna_botanika/texty-organologie-pestik_vajicko_oplozeni.html : Pestík, vajíčko a oplození, Multimediální učební text Obecná botanika, autoři textu Ing. Petra Krejčí, Ph.D., RNDr. Karel Slabý, CSc., autoři webu: Mgr. Jan Sobek a foto Ing. Petra Krejčí, Ph.D., RNDr. Karel Slabý, CSc.).
Thus the
basic question
of the acceptability of the only one dogma of my Philosophy of Balance from the
perspective of Jehovah's Witnesses is: Will be absolutely surely the new
biblical paradise, see above at the end of the ages created by only one
Biblical God totally different from the Biblical paradise which should exist at
the beginning of the ages, where some both death and pain apparently should
exist from the above mentioned reasons in a minimal extent from the reason of
eating of plant seeds by both Adam and Eve, see above?
31) 07/08/2016 Angels and demons.
Demons
can be imagined as predators. Each human before death lives throughout all his
or her life on the border of the world of demons (i.e. of hell, possibly of the
emotional brain hemisphere from the perspective of subjective idealism of
George Berkeley, furthermore elaborated in my Philosophy of Balance as Rational
Mystique, see also American neurophysiologist Roger Wollcot Sperry, who won for
his research on the two cerebral hemispheres Nobel Prize for physiology and
medicine) and of the world of angels (i.e. of heaven, possibly of the rational,
reasonable and computer brain hemisphere from the perspective of subjective
idealism of George Berkeley, furthermore elaborated in my Philosophy of Balance
as Rational Mystique, see also American neurophysiologist Roger Wollcot Sperry,
who won for his research on the two cerebral hemispheres Nobel Prize for
physiology and medicine), who are still trying to connect him or her to their
hellish or contrarily their heavenly group. Demons are the embodiment of small
number ultimately of only one living microorganism and the rest of the body of
these demons is apparently only an illusion, i.e. fiction or inanimate machine
and these few living cells are apparently
placed in sensory organs of these demons on principle in the area of
their eyes, therefore since ancient times these demons have been killed,
virtually have been repulsed by garlic, virtually pepper, which are
characterized by anti-micro-organic, virtually antibacterial, virtually
disinfection effects, for example pepper spray weapon sprayed into the eyes of
a demon. Thus it is not apparently in fact possible to kill the demons as the
embodiment of a small number of microorganisms with a knife, a rifle (i.e.
shotgun), a grenade, a bomb, etc., and it is possibly with the exception of
nuclear weapons, virtually nuclear bombs, if we try it in this way, so the
demon is always able to place some our neighbor instead of him or her (see time
dilation within the special relativity theory of Albert Einstein), so in this
way we will kill not a demon, but some of our neighbor. However from the above
mentioned reason also demons apparently have the fear of the pepper spray,
because the pepper spray is capable to kill only a few live microorganisms,
which on principle does not seriously hurt our neighbor, but it can kill the
demon as an embodiment of a few live microorganisms. However the situation
cannot be resolved even through pouring crowds by garlic, pepper or by other
disinfectant, because demons have perfect technique (eg. contemporary perfect
scanners capable to make photos, i.e. real pictures of a naked man, even when
he or she is fully dressed, see https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/zahranici/novy-letistni-skener-lidi-svleka-nezletili-jim-nesmeji/r~i:article:650514/ : Nový letištní skener lidi
svléká, nezletilí jím
nesmějí, Lucie Kalivodová, 2009 ), by
which they are ever able to determine truly, if we carry this disinfectant or
not, and also because on principle in every common family embody one of its
members a (guardian) angel and one of its members a demon and one of its
members a human before death, therefore possible killing, especially
unnecessary killing of demons causes within this family a huge pressure and a
huge hatred.
Quotes
from the Bible on the topic:
Mark 5
King James Version (KJV), 11 Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a
great herd of swine feeding. 12 And all the devils besought him, saying, Send
us into the swine, that we may enter into them. 13 And forthwith Jesus gave
them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and
the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two
thousand;) and were choked in the sea. 14 And they that fed the swine fled, and
told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out to see what it was
that was done. 15 And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with
the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and
they were afraid. 16 And they that saw it told them how it befell to him that
was possessed with the devil, and also concerning the swine. 17 And they began
to pray him to depart out of their coasts. 18 And when he was come into the
ship, he that had been possessed with the devil prayed him that he might be
with him. 19 Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go home to thy
friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath
had compassion on thee. http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Matt/8#v30 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Mark%205 Also
see Mathew 8,30 et seq., Luke 8,32 et seq. Also see Mathew 5 King James Version
(KJV), 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do
good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and
persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in
heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth
rain on the just and on the unjust. http://www.biblenet.cz/b/Matt/5#v44 , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Matthew%205 .
Also see Luke 6,27 et seq., Luke 6,35 et seq.
32) 07/08/2016 The function of living creatures before
death (for example of Biblical both Adam and Eve) in the Last Judgment.
According
to me every living creature before death is a made child of only one Biblical
God, i.e. apparently adopted sibling of Jesus of Nazareth, apparently of
Christ, of the only one begotten (it means apparently “born”) son of this God,
according to the Roman Catholic Church of so called the Triune God (also see
Note 1) below). Jesus of Nazareth, apparently Christ should apparently be His
only one begotten and not made (it means apparently “not created”) Son. These
created children of this God are the recipients of God's gifts (in Greek
language: "charisms", in Latin language: "charity") and
everything that this God, virtually nature acts, so they should act in the
interest of all their created children, therefore in the Last Judgment this
only one Biblical God should hear the testimonies of these all His children,
and their opinions and advices (eg. prayers), how to decide equitably and then
this God should justly decide on this every living creature.
Note:
1)
another part of this God's Trinity should be the Holy Ghost, which should be
some kind of God's force that takes place in the material world God's
decisions, the Holy Ghost is a kind of God's executor, virtually also God's
executioner, the question is, if it is the same person with the so-called angel
of death, in Hebrew language “Malach HaMavet” or, as the case may be, with
Satan, i.e. the Devil, this interpretation see eg. Bible, Job 1 King James
Version (KJV), 6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present
themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. 7 And the Lord said
unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From
going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8 And the
Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none
like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and
escheweth evil? 9 Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, Doth Job fear God for
nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and
about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands,
and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now,
and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12 And the Lord
said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself
put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord. http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=Job&no=1&search=Otev%C5%99%C3%ADt , https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Job%201
33) 09/082016 Against organic (i.e. ecological, i.e.
bio) foods, i.e. against possible slave labor in the style of the German Nazis
or against possible Orthodox Jewish provocation and about enslavement of the Czech
State by the Orthodox Jews through usury as during government of the Orthodox
Jew Joseph in ancient Egypt, see the Bible, Old Testament, book Genesis,
chapter 47, verse 13-26?
According
to my mutually independent two friends in the week from 18/07/2016 to
25/07/2016 one of Czech televisions, apparently some of the traditional Czech
televisions as CT1, CT2, NOVA, Prima and Barrandov should broadcast TV show, in
which they should show how in organic farming cereal field the people harvest
these cereal ears by scissors. This TV show I myself did not watch and I did
not succeed in finding any reference to it shortly after its alleged
broadcasting also on the Internet, nevertheless I consider these two my friends
as a credible source of information, and therefore I believe that this
information is reliable. I have understood from these my friends that the aim
of such cereal harvest should be to harvest only the ripe, i.e. dry cereal ears
and the immature, i.e. green, i.e. living cereal ears to let live until their
natural death. According to me and according to current market prices of
organic cereals in this case it would have to be a slave labor apparently of
people from developing countries for absolutely minimal and insufficient wages
to survive. I immediately asked my supplier of organic foods for an opinion on
this phenomenon, which I still have not received. At present time I am not able
to evaluate, if it should be a slave labor, similar to the German Nazi
concentration camps (organic agriculture was promoted mainly by German Nazis)
or a propaganda provocation of Orthodox Jews (Orthodox Jews apparently believe
that the only one biblical God, virtually nature are the mass murderer of both
humans and animals, see Bible, Old Testament), who are possibly bothered
therefore about the fact, that in the Czech Republic there is organic farming
relatively widespread (see Note 1
below), and who own a number of Czech mass media. In each case according to my
Philosophy of Balance I could not risk that in the contemporary organic farming
in a large extent there is a slave labor and thus also torturing of people,
which would not contribute to the final reconciliation of humans and other
living creatures but it would increase even more hatred among living creatures,
especially between people on one side and the other living creatures on the
other side, therefore I have immediately suspended buying of all organic foods
until giving the above mentioned opinion in this matter and I have started
buying on principle all my foods at the former co-operative “Jednota” (in English language “Unity”), which has
existed at least since my youth, when in the Czech Republic the communists
ruled, and where it is still possible to buy classical Czech foods from
traditional Czech producers (this should be foods in fact most similar to so
called integrated /agricultural/ production). According to me the problem is
not organic agriculture itself, of which idea has probably origin in the Bible,
namely in the Biblical paradise, but a misuse of this organic agriculture for
mass market production, while in the Biblical paradise a mass market did not
exist of course (see Bible, the Old Testament, book Genesis, from 1st to 4th
chapter).
Notes:
1) Our country (i.e. the Czech Republic in Europe, note of the author)
lies in the temperate zone with optimal conditions for the production of nearly
all animal and plant production necessary for our nutrition, which we usually
consume. ... Of course the less (chemically, note of the author) protected
(pears, note of the author) the exporters save for the domestic market. (During
loading in an unnamed country of the former EU-15 the drivers heard: "You
do not load it, these are protected only six times, and they are intended for
our market. Load those protected twelve times, they will last longer.")
... Imports of vegetables are already at 70-80% of our (i.e. of the Czech
Republic) consumption now. In general we do not want to admit a question on
what soils the imported agricultural commodities are grown, how they are
fertilized, how they are protected. We admire nice looking fruits, and in
general we do not bother with the fact on which soils they grew up, if there
can be heavy metals or inappropriate chemical protections that are prohibited
by us (i.e. in the Czech Republic, note of the author). Is it prohibited the
same for example in Turkey, from where we import hundreds of trucks of
vegetables? ... We have to ask, if our leaders know what is so called food
security? ... Our (i.e. in the Czech Republic, note of the author) agriculture
has preferred organic agriculture. There would be nothing wrong, but nearly 13%
of agricultural land is in organic mode, where considerably bigger subventions
are, but foods production out of the total produced volume is 0.5-1%. Whereas
in Austria there is about 5% of agricultural land in organic mode and in BRD
(i.e. in Bundesrepublik Deutschland, i.e. in the Federal Republic of Germany,
note of the author) there is it 4.5% of agricultural land and organic foods are
imported to us from them. ... We (the Czech Republic and the European Union in
the Czech Republic, note of the author) orient (especially financial, note of
the author) means, where we produce a minimum and so we directly create space
for imports and so manipulated we
contribute to subsequent liquidation of Czech agriculture (and
apparently to huge debts and to the consequent enslavement of the population of
the Czech Republic through usury in the future already known from the stay of
the Israelis, virtually Jews in antiquity /in ancient times/ in Egypt in the
period about 4000 years ago during the Egyptian government of the Orthodox
Israeli, virtually Jew Joseph great-grandson of Abraham as the founder of
contemporary Orthodox Jewish religion, see the Bible, Old Testament, book
Genesis, chapter 47, verse 13-26, see Note
2) below). Has anyone noticed
it? Quoted from the daily nation newspaper article: „Jedem z kopce (aneb Jak se
daří českému zemědělství v Evropské unii)”/ “Going downhill (i.e. how does
Czech agriculture do in the European Union)”, newspaper: PRÁVO, Saturday
30/07/2016, newspaper supplement: FIRMA, page 17.
2)
Bible, Old Testament, book Genesis, chapter 47, verse 13-26, 13 And there was no bread in all the land; for the
famine was very sore, so that the land of Egypt and all the land of Canaan
fainted by reason of the famine. 14 And Joseph gathered up all the money that
was found in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, for the corn which
they bought: and Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh's house. 15 And when
money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians
came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence?
for the money faileth. 16 And Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give
you for your cattle, if money fail. 17 And they brought their cattle unto
Joseph: and Joseph gave them bread in exchange for horses, and for the flocks,
and for the cattle of the herds, and for the asses: and he fed them with bread
for all their cattle for that year. 18 When that year was ended, they came unto
him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide it from my lord, how
that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not
ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands: 19 Wherefore
shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for
bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give us seed,
that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate. 20 And Joseph
bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his
field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh's. 21
And as for the people, he removed them to cities from one end of the borders of
Egypt even to the other end thereof. 22 Only the land of the priests bought he
not; for the priests had a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their
portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands. 23 Then
Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land
for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. 24 And it
shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto
Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your
food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. 25
And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my
lord, and we will be Pharaoh's servants. 26 And Joseph made it a law over the
land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part, except
the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh's. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?version=KJV&search=Genesis%2047
34) 12/08/2016 Why Czech government proposal of legal
Act, which Minister for Justice of the Czech government Mr. Robert Pelikán (from
ANO, i.e. political movement “Action of dissatisfied citizens 2011”) together
with another Minister of the Czech government Mr. Jiří Dienstbier (from ČSSD,
i.e. “Czech Social Democratic Party”) have submitted and of which approval the
Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic should decide
September 5, 2016 and which enables to adopt the child of a homosexual partner
also by a homosexual man, (this proposal) endangers the life of this child with
a relatively high probability in crisis situations. From senior representatives
of the Czech Republic (i.e. one of the European States) Mr. Andrej
Babiš (ANO), Mr. Dan Ťok (ANO), Mr. Jiří Dienstbier (ČSSD), Mrs. Karla
Šlechtová (ANO), Mrs. Kateřina Valachová (ČSSD), Mr. Lubomír Zaorálek (ČSSD), Mrs.
Michaela Marksová (ČSSD), Mr. Richard Brabec (ANO) a Mr. Robert Pelikán (ANO) a
Mr. Jiří Dienstbier expressed
open support for this proposal, see: https://www.novinky.cz/domaci/411602-politici-mohou-udelat-z-tisice-lidi-rodice.html : Politici mohou udělat z tisíce lidí rodiče, 2016,
Stáňa Seďová, Právo .
Because only the mother of a child will sacrifice in
ninety-nine cases out of a hundred cases the life of her husband, if this
mother is forced to choose between sacrificing the life of her husband and
sacrificing the life of her child, and because only mother of this child will
sacrifice her own life for the life of her child in ninety-nine cases out of a
hundred cases, this maternal instinct of each mother, which according to me any
male would never be able to learn, is the greatest guarantee of the survival of
the child of both parents in crisis situations, thus it is the greatest
guarantee for the survival of future generations of offspring of these both
parents. Contrarily male homosexual partner of blood-father will sacrifice in
most cases the life of this child of this father, if this homosexual adoptive
parent is forced to choose between sacrificing the life of his homosexual,
especially new homosexual partner (i.e. on principle after death or divorce
from his up to now male homosexual partner as blood-father of this child) and
sacrificing the life of this his adoptive child.
According to my
Philosophy of Balance the cause of the fact, that no man can learn to have a maternal
instinct, is quite different and by learning immutable basis of men and
contrarily basis of women psyche, virtually soul, virtually brain. The basis of
the men psyche is rationality, it means that on principle men are forced by
their brain to infinitely re-compute, virtually control, virtually verify the
rightness of each of their principal decision in the future. Contrarily the
basis of the women psyche is feeling, virtually emotionality, it means that
women are forced to make their principal decisions especially based on their
intuition, thus emotions and women are not willing such their emotional
principal decisions to change on principle in the future.
Practical examples of the above mentioned statement:
1) From recent time
there is judicial case, about which I have read probably on www.novinky.cz
(however I cannot find this article at present time). This judicial case should
apparently be, as I remember, in Australia or in New Zealand. In this case the
car with husband, his wife and their child, virtually children, should ride
into a river, only the husband succeeded in getting out of this car underwater
and this husband had to decide if he saves his wife, virtually mother or their
child, virtually children. In this crisis situation this father decided to save
his wife, virtually mother and then their child, virtually children have
drowned. This husband, virtually father decided so, because he presumed that he
will have other children with this his wife, virtually mother and therefore at
first he saved his wife and not their child, virtually children. However this
his presumption was not fulfilled, as I remember, because his wife, virtually
mother refused to have other children with this her husband, virtually father
under the pressure of her conscience and she divorced him. According to me it
was the above mentioned insurmountable contradiction between erroneous rational
philosophy of this man, virtually father and maternal instinct of this woman in
extreme life situation (virtually in so called extreme existential experience).
2) One of many cases,
when the owner failed to prevent fatal conflict of her dog with wild boar, is
the story of Mrs. Martina Mušutová and of her border terrier. Today Mrs.
Mušutová has the other, because wild boar tore her previous four-legged friend
Zac. "It was unfortunate, that the wild sow had just piglets. It ran in
all directions and it began to squeal as it came back and it just caught
it," Mušutová says. A group of piglets with mother at the moment sensitive
to alien invaders just surprised Zac a few meters from the road, where it was
on a walk. Though it had the hunting training and five years it helped hunters,
among others with chasing wild boars, the wild sow had bitten off its leg.
Therefore Zac was subsequently given euthanasia. See http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ct24/domaci/1249016-premnozeni-divocaci-si-s-uspechem-troufnou-na-lovecke-psy : 6. August 2011, reportáž Evy Davidové
3) Bible King James
Version (KJV), Old Testament, 1 Kings, 3 Chapter: 16 Then came there two women,
that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him. 17 And the one woman
said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a
child with her in the house. 18 And it came to pass the third day after that I
was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there
was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. 19 And this
woman's child died in the night; because she overlaid it. 20 And she arose at
midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid
it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom. 21 And when I rose in the
morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered
it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear. 22 And the
other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And
this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they
spake before the king. 23 Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son
that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is
the dead, and my son is the living. 24 And the king said, Bring me a sword. And
they brought a sword before the king. 25 And the king said, Divide the living
child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other. 26 Then spake
the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon
her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise
slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
27 Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise
slay it: she is the mother thereof. See https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prvn%C3%AD+Kr%C3%A1lovsk%C3%A1+3&version=KJV
35)
22/08/2016 Question from evolutionary biology from Biblical perspective: In the
past could carnivorous tyrannosaurus and herbivorous Brontosaurus cross-breed
and have joint descendants?
Let us put following questions from evolutionary
biology:
1) In the past ca. 100
- 200 million years ago could carnivorous tyrannosaurus and herbivorous
Brontosaurus cross-breed and have joint descendants, when both these species
were reptiles.
11) In the past could carnivorous
male tyrannosaurus and herbivorous female Brontosaurus cross-breed and have joint
descendants and how then would other tyrannosaurs and other Brontosaurs
accepted especially male descendants from this crossbreeding, or, how then would
other tyrannosaurs and other Brontosaurs accepted especially male descendants of
female daughters from this crossbreeding, namely especially after death of male
tyrannosaurian father.
12) In the past could carnivorous
female tyrannosaurus and herbivorous male Brontosaurus cross-breed and have joint
descendants without the other tyrannosaurs killed and ate these descendants.
Let us put similar questions from the perspective of
Bible now:
21) Could Jew and
non-Jewess marry and have joint descendants. Answer: They can, it is quite
usual phenomenon, but their children will not become Jews through their birth,
if their children shall be Jews, they must convert to Judaism. (Best - known
example are apparently black Ethiopian Jews, so called Beta Israel, they are often
considered as illegitimate descendants of Biblical Old Testament king Solomon and Queen of
Sheba, because king Solomon was not considered from the perspective of the Jewish
law apparently as a bastard of the greatest Jewish king David, from whose descendants
according to Bible the Messiah should come, and of Bathsheba, i.e. wife of to
Judaism converted Uriah, who the king David let intentionally kill to hid his
adultery with Bathsheba, which should be punished by death of these adulterers according
to Bible, Old Testament, namely Torah, i.e. Five Books of Moses. According to
Jewish law no Jew may give his daughter as a wife to bastard, therefore bastard
must marry only with foreigner or female slave, although also bastard can
become Jewish king. In contemporary Israel these Ethiopian Jews are considered by
others Jews as sort of inferior Jews. According to Jewish Talmud the reason of
celibacy of Jesus Nazaretus, apparently Christ in his age of 33 years should be
the fact, that this Jesus should be also bastard, because Jewish Talmud and Jewish
tradition commands every Jew to marry as soon as possible at the latest until his
age of twenty years, otherwise only one Biblical God should curse him. See
Bible, Old Testament, 2 Samuelova 11 chapter et seq.)
22) Could Jewess and
non-Jew marry and have joint descendants. Answer: They can, but quite
exceptionally, because in the ordinary way no Jew will marry his daughter to
non-Jew. (Best - known example is marriage of Jewess Esther, adopted daughter by
her uncle Jew Mordechai married to the Median and Persian king, when Jews in
Persia were endangered by genocide in a large extent, into which counselor
Haman provoked this king. Up to the present day this marriage is celebrated by
all Jews at so - called Jewish feast purine, when according to Jewish tradition
once a year all Jews should make them drunk, so that they do not distinguish
the difference between Jew Mordechai, the savior of the Jews in Persia and the
arch-enemy of the Jews Haman. See Bible, Old Testament, book Esther.)
23) Could Muslim man
and non-Muslim woman marry and have joint descendants. Answer: According to
Koran they can, but Muslim man can marry only to Christian woman or Jewess.
24) Could Muslim woman
and non-Muslim man marry and have joint descendants. Answer: According to Koran
they cannot, Muslim woman can marry only to Muslim man, otherwise she would be highly
probably murdered by members of her own family, these are so called murders for
honor.
36)
14/09/2016 About hell of sinful people in this world
Man before death can commit a
crime, or worse sin or worst capital sin. Punishable act is possible to commit
also from unaware negligence, therefore also unconscious, that we do graver
mistake, however each above - mentioned sin can be commit only with consciousness,
that we sin. If man before death cause much more than the least possible death
and pain, e.g. by it, that this man before death eats unnecessarily more
slaughtered animals then it apparently finishes by it, that this man before
death begins consciously kill also people, at first adult man, after it women
and after it also little children. At first these killings he or she commits in
States, where for them capital punishment is
not imminent (as e.g . in Europe), after it these killings he or she begins
to commit in States, where for them capital punishment threatens (e.g . in
Arabic countries). This everything presents temptation of man before death by
the Devil or from viewpoint of Bible by Satan. From viewpoint of Rational
Mystique of my Philosophy of Balance then this Devil through his servants,
demons, virtually robots, virtually evil extraterrestrial forces on this man
the commission of still worse these conscious sins, until this man before death
begins murder also little children. Earlier or later this man before death,
that were at first trapped into apparent large fortune and power of these
predatory demons, virtually robots (apparently, because this demon, virtually
robot does not need for their activity nothing else, than a little electric power,
virtually fire, that are according to Theory of Special Relativity of Jewish
Albert Einstein contained in almost inexhaustible quantity already in totally
smallest quantity of matter), will succumb huge fear and he or she begins to
kill on a large scale also women and children (see biblical Gehinnom, in Czech
apparently abbreviation for the Valley of the Son of Hinnom close Jerusalem,
where Israelis, virtually Jews sacrfificed their children for Molech through
their burning on fire in full consciousness of these their children, it is
concerned with deformed Hebrew word Malach, i.e. king in Czech language) and
after it either they completely will mad (accompanying sign of this madness of
this man before death is, that he or she is unable to consume, i.e burn any
food) or he or she is killed by someone. Because after it this man before death
becomes for these evil demons, virtually evil extraterrestrials, virtually evil
robots completely valueless, because he or she already is unable them to grant
even that minimum electric energy, that these robots need for their running, so
these robots send him or her into hell (in modern language we could say into
some Nazi exterminatory concentration camp, in Biblical language we could say,
that he or she is sent childlike into the above - mentioned Valley of the Son
of Hnnom), where gigantic suffering and gigantic pain are still, it can be
described practically, that earlier or later he or she is sent without any arm
or protection among those people after death, i. e. among those living
creatures that this sinful man caused during his or her life the most huge
death and pain, before it, than there they will send him or her, so these
daemons, i. e. robots still threaten this man with this his or her punishment
as much as possible, so that it is also psychic torture of this man before
death on the part of these demons, i. e. robots, i. e. evil extraterrestrials,
i. e. servants of the Devil, i. e. in Biblical way told of Satan. This sinful
man before death, who is sent into hell, then is replaced on his or her place
by these demons construed robot, so that his or her surroundings ever doesn't
know that this man before death sent into hell was ever lost. By these
contemporary hell in contemporary world are apparently for example by me
earlier mentioned black Africa, nominally e.g . Kenya or contemporary
Palestine, contemporary Iraq or contemporary Syria, or contemporary Afgánistán
or contemporary slaughter agricultural factory farms of animals and so on On
this journey through hell according to Rational Mystique of my Philosophy of
Balance these people are still guided by God's angels, i. e. according to Bible
as it were kind robots, i. e. in modern language as it were kind
extraterrestrials, who do not need any electric power, i. e. fire for their
activity. Only one way of these sinful people before death from this hell is
stable causing the least possible death and pain, i. e. it is concerned with
sort of unceasing high accurate deciding of these people in hell according to general
provision of Czech law about extreme need in very factual and legally
controversial and complex situations. Ultimate goal of this stable causing of
the least possible death and pain by these all people, practically also by
other living creatures in this hell should apparently be, that people and other
living creatures live in the world, where everyone likes each other, Bible
talks here on its very beginning about biblical paradise, where all the people
were fruitarians, i. e. they ate only plant seeds and plant fruits, which could
concern also all other living creatures before death, even if this Bible talks
here about it, that in this Biblical paradise these other living creatures
before death enjoy right to eat also other parts of plants or even whole
plants.
37) 22/04/2017
Problem of Roman Catholic Christian religion and premarital sex
PHILOSOPHY OF BALANCE PHILOSOPHY OF LOVE, I.E. ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY:
„All living creatures mostly want to live in a world, where everyone likes each
other, therefore everyone is still obliged to cause the least possible death
and pain.“ All the rest consists more in views (speculations).
For details see (my) Philosophy of Balance on www.spvzt.cz .
The King James Version
translation of Bible, New Testament, 1 John (epistle) 4, " 8 He that
loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." (in Latin Vulgate of St.
Jerome from 4th to 5th century A.D., see Bible, New Testament, Epistola B.
Joannis Apostoli Prima 4, 8: "qui non diligit non novit Deum quoniam Deus
caritas est“), or see the same 1 John (epistle) 4, 16 16 And we have known and
believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in
love dwelleth in God, and God in him. (or see the same Epistola B. Joannis
Apostoli Prima 4, 16 et nos cognovimus et credidimus caritati quam habet Deus
in nobis Deus caritas est et qui manet in caritate in Deo manet et Deus in eo).
Mentioned see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4&version=KJV , http://www.biblenet.cz/app/b?book=John1&no=4 and http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/1Jo.html : Epistola B. Joannis Apostoli Prima, The Clementine Text Project was an effort between 2002 and 2005 to create a free online text version of the Clementine Vulgate, clementinevulgateproject@mail.com .
"Marriage is recommanded
to enter at an early age. For man is that eighteen years (Avot V, 24).
"Until your hand rests on neck of your sons" (5 I. e. as long as you
have power over them.) from sixteen to twenty two, or according to second
opinion from eighteen to twenty four - marry them. (Kid. 30a) It is said that
"to age of twenty years Saint, be praised, waits, whether man marries, and
if so till then he does not do it, He will curse him (i. e. he will be mad, my
note) (ibid 29b)”, source: page 207, TALMUD /pro každého/, Historie, struktura a hlavní témata
Talmudu/ Everyman’s Talmud, The major Techingsof the Rabbinic Sages, author
Abraham Cohen, publishing house SEFER, Prague 2006 in cooperation with European
Jewish Publication Society (according to at that time contemporaries,
common Jews it was apparently concerned also with Jesus from Nazareth, apparently
God - man and Christ, mý note
)
You shall not commit adultery. (Bible, Ex 20,14; Dt 5,18).
You have heard that it was said, "You shall not commit
adultery." But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully
has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Mt 5,27-28).
2352 By masturbation is
to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to
derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course
of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no
doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and
gravely disordered action."138 "The deliberate use of the sexual
faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to
its purpose." For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the
sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total
meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love
is achieved."139
To form an equitable
judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action,
one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit,
conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if
not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.
2353 Fornication is
carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely
contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally
ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children.
Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.
2354 Pornography
consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the
partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends
against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of
spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants
(actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base
pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the
illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should
prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials. (it
is question, whether it is related also
to religion painted purist pornography contained in sexual moral rigid Hinduism
Kamasutra, my note)
(CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH published
1995 A.D. after the Second Vatican Council, in Czech republic, see http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm )
Talmudic law states that "with wife, that commits adultery, it is
necessary to divorce (Ket III, 5).Divorce of marriage from other reasons was
tolerated, but not supported.Talmud claims to it emphatic: If someone
divorces-his first wife, even altar sheds tears above her, because it is told:
Further you commit next things: God’s altar you wet tears (...) therefore, that
God is a witness between this woman of your youth, towards who you behaved
perfidiously (Mal 2,13-14) (Git 90b) Words "Because in hatred He has the release"
12 (Mal 2,16) interpret one sage: "If you hate-(your wife), release
her." But other explains: "Hateful is that, who releases his
wife." Correspondence between statements is established by means of
interpretation, according to which second refers to first wife and first to
second (Git 90b). (Source: page 213, TALMUD /pro každého/, Abraham Cohen, from
English original "Everyman´s Talmud The Major Teachings of the Rabbinic
Sages" published by publishing house Schocken Books in1995 A.D. translated
Olga Sixtová and Eve Adamová, in Czech rpublic published by Sefer s.r.o., publishing house Federation
of Jewish Communities in Czech republic, Maiselova 18, Praha
1 in 2006 A.D.)
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it
be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso
marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 10 His disciples say
unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to
whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from
their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of
men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom
of heaven's sake. (ie. According to me for the world, where everyone likes each
other, may note) He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (19th Chapter verse 9 until 12 Bible,
Mathew Gospel) (page 29)
Can. 1084 - §1. Impotentia coeundi antecedent et perpetum, sive ex parte
viri sive ex parte mulieris, sive absolutna sive relativa, matrimonium ex ipsa
eius natura dirimit.
§ 2. Si impedimentum impotentiae dubitum sit, sive dubio iuris sive
dubio facti, matrimonium non est impedimendum nec, stante dubio, nulám
declarandum.
§ 3. Sterilitas matrimoniutm nec prohibet nec dirimit, firmo praescripto
can. 1098.
Can. 1084 §1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual
intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether
absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage.
§2 If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one
of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt
persists, is it to be declared null. (controversial
is especially question of practical control of capability to sexual intercourse
by ecclesiastical court and his representative, my note)
§3 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 1098, sterility neither
forbids nor invalidates a marriage.
…
Can. 1141 Matrimonium datum et consummatum nulla humana potestate
nullage causa, praetequam morte, dissolvi potest.
Can. 1142 Matrimonium non consummatum inter baptizatos vel inter partem
baptizatam et paertem non baptizatam a Romano Pontifice dissolvi potest iusta
causa, utraque parte rogale vel alterutra, Esti altera pars sita invita.
Can. 1143 - § 1. Matrimonium indium a duobus non baptizatis solvitur ex
privilegio pulino in favore fidei partis quo baptismum recipit, ipso facto quo
nuovum matrimonium ab aedem parte contrabitur, dummodo pars non baptizata
discedat.
Can. 1141 A marriage which is ratified and consummated cannot be
dissolved by any human power or by any cause other than death.
Can. 1142 A non-consummated marriage between baptised persons or between
a baptised party and an unbaptised party can be dissolved by the Roman Pontiff
for a just reason, at the request of both parties or of either party, even if
the other is unwilling.
Can. 1143 §1 In virtue of the pauline privilege, a marriage entered into
by two unbaptised persons is dissolved in favour of the faith of the party who
received baptism, by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by that
same party, provided the unbaptised party departs.
Kodex Kanonického práva/ Code of Canon Law, Zvon České katolické
nakladatelství/ Zvon Czech catholic publishing house, 1994 A.D. and on http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P3X.HTM : Code of Canon Law, IntraText CT - Text, Copyright Eulogos 2007 and http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P43.HTM : Code of Canon Law, IntraText CT - Text, Copyright Eulogos 2007
(All quotations from the Bible in
this book are on principle in Czech from the Bible Old and New Testaments |
including deuterocanonic books |, Czech Ecumenical Translation, CZECH Bible
Society, 1995, see www.biblenet.cz , in English from King James Version http://www.biblegateway.com/ )
38) 27/05/2017 Why do women choose men with robbers
genes?
Answer sounds simply,
because women these men genes need for nutrition of their children, thus for
reproduction of these women. Little child needs meat, therefore till this time women have chosen into
marriage men, who cause killing of living creatures, thus sort of Devil,
because only Devil is really normally able to kill, because normal man always
finally collapses mentally no, if he alone kills, but if he himself shall be
killed for it. Therefore question sounds in substance again: „There is really
no other solution than, that women took Devil as husband? Thus does Devil
really dominate the world? Because most basic purpose of life of men are women and
vice versa.
39) 03/06/2017 Theory of evolution and success on
marriage market and at fertilization?
Alpha male are for wife
and husband their fathers, in case of husband and his male descendants as
children of these alpha males so they are beta males, whose success on marriage
market depends no on their alpha position but on their popularity in collective
of their peers. Thus next to alpha male only by alpha male favorite beta male
can enforce also in collective. In case of marriage market so according to my
opinion it is always competition in popularity of particular beta males, no
primary about competition in their strength or capabilities. The same according
to my opinion is valid in case of fertilization of egg by volume of contestant
sperm cells in vagina at intercourse, in my opinion it is always winning no
strongest or fittest sperm cell (strength or capabilities of any sperm cell are
negligible compared to sum of strength or capabilities of surrounding female
living cells and of others male sperm cells in vagina of women at intercourse),
but most popular sperm cell is always winning.
Final evolutionary aim of selection of most popular males and females is
then in my opinion to form society of many individuals, "where everyone
likes each other" (see in introduction of this my book only one dogma of
my Philosophy of Balance).
40)
05/06/2017 Theory of successful firm from viewpoint of Philosophy of Balance
Businessman is wolf, who together with other
businessmans in firm outside firm hunts, kills and champs hunted prey, because
money symbolize cadavers of living creatures. Reasonable firm does not hunt
prey (i. e. money) unnecessarily, but only in necessary extent, because
opposite initiates hatred and revenge of relatives of prey and envy of other
hunters (see only one dogma of my Philosophy of Balance „therefore everyone is still
obliged to cause the least possible death and pain") Above-mentioned
requires steady nerves of wolf - hunter in every moment during above-mentioned
hunting.
41) 28/06/2017 How to do from orthodox Israel more
unorthodox Israel
Bible,
King James Version, Deuteronomy 14:21 Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth
of itself thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates that he may
eat it; or thou mayest sell it unto an alien for thou art an holy people unto
the LORD thy God Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.
It is necessary in home of orthodox Jews and in Israeli pub, where go a lot of
orthodox Jews, to offer on the quiet for a longer time boiled carrions in place
of kosher meat and after longer time it it is necessary to tell it to all
orthodox Jews.
So as to understand the above - mentioned joke, I have
to give an example. Unorthodox Jewish, e.g. anarchist young son tells to his
orthodox Jewish papa, „papa here you have from me burger with ground
meat", where I am added in several waters boiled piece of carrion (it,
that nothing is with you), about the carrion to the papa for safety's sake I
told nothing, but later I will tell it you. If that carrion you eat, you will
stop to consider you as chosen nation an holy people unto the LORD thy God and
if after it I tell it you, so perhaps you will be withstandable a little again,
because it will be important for you not only interest (also killing only in
the interest of) Israeli nation (what if other nations did it so to Jews), but
the interest (also killing only in the interest) general (i.e. of community of
all /especially all living creatures/). Papa burger yum, yum, smack, smack, it
is finished. See also www.spvzt.cz .
איך
לעשות מישראל
דתי ישראל
יותר חילוני
Bible, Deuteronomy 14:21 - דברים
14:21לֹ֣א תֹאכְל֣וּ
כָל־נְ֠בֵלָה
לַגֵּ֨ר
אֲשֶׁר־בִּשְׁעָרֶ֜יךָ
תִּתְּנֶ֣נָּה
וַאֲכָלָ֗הּ
א֤וֹ מָכֹר֙
לְנָכְרִ֔י
כִּ֣י עַ֤ם
קָדוֹשׁ֙
אַתָּ֔ה
לַיהוָ֖ה
אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ
לֹֽא־תְבַשֵּׁ֥ל
גְּדִ֖י
בַּחֲלֵ֥ב
אִמּֽוֹ׃ פ
http://www.tanach.us/Tanach.xml#Home © 2004 Christopher V. Kimball
MIXAC-Deuteronomy 14:21, Biblia Hebraica
g¡L¡K©@¢E
D¡p£P¥x¦x _I£X¡R¥[¦d-X£[©@ X¤e¢L
D¡L¤A¥P-L¡K hL¥K@«Z @«L
L¤y¢A¥Z-@«L _I£D«Lª@
D¡EDI¢L D¡x¢@ []C¡W M¢R I¦m
I¦X¥K¡P¥L X«K¡N ]@
T
:]o¦@ A¤L©G¢d I¦C¥e
אנחנו
צריכים בבית
של יהודים
דתים ובמלון
ישראלי
באיזהש הרבה
יהודים דתים
הולכים לתת
בסתר זמן יותר
ארוך נבלות
מבושלות
במקום בשר כשר
ואחרי זמן
יותר ארוך אנחנו
צריכים לאמור
זה לכל יהודים
דתים
Note:
Bible, Czech Ecumenical Translation, Deuteronomium 14,
21Nesmíte jíst žádnou zdechlinu. Buď ji dáš bezdomovci, který žije v tvých
branách, aby ji jedl, nebo ji prodáš cizinci. Vždyť jsi svatý lid Hospodina,
svého Boha. Nebudeš vařit kůzle v mléce jeho matky.
Italian Diodati
Bibbia Deuteronomio 14, 21 Non mangiate
d'alcuna carne morta da sč; dalla a mangiare al forestiere che sarŕ dentro alle tue porte, o vendila ad
alcuno straniere; perciocchč tu sei
un popol santo al Signore Iddio tuo. Non cuocere il capretto nel latte di sua
madre.
Jerome`s 405 A.D.,
Latin Vulgate, Deuteronomy 14, 21
quicquid morticinum est ne vescamini ex eo peregrino qui intra portas tuas est
da ut comedat aut vende ei quia tu populus sanctus Domini Dei tui es non coques
hedum in lacte matris suae
Russian Synodal
Translation, Deuteronomy 14, 21
Не ешьте никакой
мертвечины;
иноземцу,
который случится
в жилищах
твоих, отдай
ее, он пусть
ест ее, или
продай ему,
ибо ты народ
святой у Господа
Бога твоего.
Не вари
козленка в
молоке
матери его.
Slovak Catholic Translation, Deuteronómium 14:21
Čokoľvek zdochlo, nejedzte! Daj to cudzincovi, čo býva v tvojom bydlisku, nech
to zje, lebo ty si ľud zasvätený Pánovi, svojmu Bohu. Kozľa nesmieš variť v
mlieku jeho matky!
Pentateuch, Czech Rabbinic Translation, Deuteronomium
14:21 Nebudete jísti žádné zdechliny, cizinci, který jest v branách tvých,
můžeš ji dáti jísti nebo prodáš (ji) cizozemci, neboť lid svatý jsi Hospodinu,
Bohu svému. Nebudeš vařiti kůzle v mléce jeho matky.
Czech Kralice Bible, Deuteronomium 14:21 Žádné umrliny
jísti nebudete; příchozímu, kterýž jest v branách tvých, dáš ji, a jísti ji
bude, aneb prodáš cizozemci, nebo lid svatý jsi Hospodinu Bohu svému. Nebudeš
vařiti kozelce v mléce matky jeho.
Czech Jerusalem Bible-work version, Deuteronomium
14:21 Nesmíte jíst žádné pošlé zvíře. Dáš je cizinci, který u tebe sídlí, aby
je snědl, nebo je prodej některému cizinci zvenku. Ty jsi totiž lid zasvěcený
Jahvovi, svému Bohu. Nebudeš vařit kůzle v mléce jeho matky.
Source: DAVAR3 version 3.0.2.319, © Josef Planeta,
Lelekovice, Czech Republic
For details see: www.spvzt.cz , www.spvzt-savingmeasure.sweb.cz
Philosophy
of Balance or ORDER OF VICTORIOUS ARMY as biblical paradise in the world for
all living creatures by our own forces as commentary on Bible, Genesis, chapter
1-4
Genesis 1-4:26
King
James Version (KJV)
1
1 In the beginning
God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void;
and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon
the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was
light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and
God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and
the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first
day.
6 And God said, Let there be a
firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the
waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and
divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were
above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven.
And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under
the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear:
and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth;
and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it
was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring
forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after
his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass,
and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed
was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were
the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in
the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be
for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the
firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the
greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made
the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of
the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over
the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was
good.
19 And the evening and the morning were
the fourth day.
20 And God said, Let the waters bring
forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly
above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and
every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly,
after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was
good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be
fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply
in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were
the fifth day.
24 And God said, Let the earth bring
forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast
of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth
after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon
the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image,
after our likeness: and let them have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the
cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the
image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them,
Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every
living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every
herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in
the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every
fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there
is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and,
behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
2
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of
them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his
work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work
which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God
created and made.
4 These are the generations of the
heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
5 And every plant of the field before
it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man
to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the
earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he
had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for
food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of
knowledge of good and evil.
10 And a river went out of Eden to
water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.
11 The name of the first is Pison: that
is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
12 And the gold of that land is good:
there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
13 And the name of the second river is
Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
14 And the name of the third river is
Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth
river is Euphrates.
15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden
of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree
of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die.
18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should
be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every
fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and
whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the
fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not
found an help meet for him.
21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and
he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and
brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones,
and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of
Man.
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his
mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
25 And they were both naked, the man
and his wife, and were not ashamed.
3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast
of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall
not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat
of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the
midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye
touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall
not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat
thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good
and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good
for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to
make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto
her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were
opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together,
and made themselves aprons.
8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife
hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the
trees of the garden.
9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
10 And he said, I heard thy voice in
the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou
wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou
shouldest not eat?
12 And the man said, The woman whom
thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the
woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast
done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the
field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of
thy life:
15 And I will put enmity between thee and
the woman, and between thy seed and
her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
16 Unto the woman he said, I will
greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring
forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over
thee.
17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou
hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which
I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for
thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18 Thorns also and thistles shall it
bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou
eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for
dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve;
because she was the mother of all living.
21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did
the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of
us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also
of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
23 Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from
whence he was taken.
24 So he drove out the man; and he
placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which
turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
4
1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have
gotten a man from the Lord.
2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel
was a keeper (of sheep), but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
3 And in process of time it came to
pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.
4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat
thereof. And the Lord had respect unto
Abel and to his offering:
5 But unto Cain and to his offering he
had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not
be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee
shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
8 And Cain talked with Abel his
brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.
9 And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am
I my brother's keeper?
10 And he said, What hast thou done?
the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
11 And now art thou cursed from the
earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy
hand;
12 When thou tillest the ground, it
shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond
shalt thou be in the earth.
13 And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this
day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall
be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that
every one that findeth me shall slay me.
15 And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be
taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon
Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
16 And Cain went out from the presence
of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on
the east of Eden.
17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he
builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son,
Enoch.
18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: and
Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.
19 And Lamech took unto him two wives:
the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the
father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.
21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he
was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.
22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain,
an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain
was Naamah.
23 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah
and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I
have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
24 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,
truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.
25 And Adam knew his wife again; and
she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me
another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
26 And to Seth, to him also there was
born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name
of the Lord.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:1-4:26&version=KJV