Hypocrisy

It’s a very common word. It’s been defined as it’s been used in many ways. But I think it needs explained once again because I think I have slightly different views. I rather give it simple supplementary explanation.

Once I learned about three common hypocrisies:

1.      Aging: everyone is a subject of aging and gradually getting older and certainly has become or will become an old person – the closer to death, the less physical beauty. By knowing the fact, whether with negligence or denial, if someone loathes an old person, then this is hypocrisy.

2.      Illness: it’s same as above. Everyone is a subject of illness and pain. Whether getting a severe disease or a simple headache or even lighter illness such as skin rush or just mosquito bite, all living things are equal for this reason. By knowing this fact, whether by negligence or denial, if a person loathes an ill person, this is also hypocrisy.

3.      Death: everyone fears of pain. The reality is death is also a pain. We’re all going to die one day – even if young now. Yet some people tend to loathe the dead body. This is also hypocrisy if not comparing with one’s own body and loathing it also. We know a living body keeps dying every moment and the hair, the finger nails, toe nails, dead skin, fat (or oil), and all sort of evidences are always indicating the truth.

These three are from the Buddha Himself. Maybe I’ve missed some information which is also important. Perhaps there is the forth: dirtiness caused by wastes coming out of the body. But I rather give my own points of view based on what I’ve learned so far.

We cannot be free from hypocrisy because of emotions – the human nature of psychology. Greed, anger, delusion, pride and jealousy are the very reasons because they make us to overlook ourselves.

Someone becomes greedy because of something valuable. Otherwise, that person would be normal – although that person has not abandoned greed completely. That is the way how greed appears, comes out of its domain, and does its activity. But we, with little ignorance, know greed is bad and will definitely oppose others for their greed yet we can become greedy. At the moment when greed is present, a person is hypocrite. 

Anger, pride and ignorance appear, come out of their own domains, and do their activities – just that way too. But we know, with little ignorance, how bad anger is. When we get angry, we’re both angry and hypocrite.

Ignorance is the very reality we cannot avoid. Nobody can know everything when we do something. Ignorance itself doesn’t make us hypocrite directly but it supports greed, anger, pride and jealousy and so there is hypocrisy.

All conscious living organisms are not free from these realities. If we get greedy or angry and do not dislike ourselves and correct our minds, that is a practice of hypocrisy.

Here jealousy and envy are also hypocrisy. They are based on selfishness so they’re selfish hypocrisy – sounding much worse. More than that, covetousness is a real problem as it’s about wanting others’ properties – any or all of money, wealth, position, love, just anything at all. Here healthy competition itself falls into this category as raising/fixing the price to make bigger profit can be immoral covetousness.

So is there anything left which is not hypocrisy? Of course just remove the selfishness and delusion; anything can be done without hypocrisy this way. Whatever action taken from the self perspective, like I do it, I want it, etc. can be tainted with hypocrisy because immoral self-interest could be there; otherwise it’s moral and not hypocrisy.

Fire burns because it gets fuel. Material things are fuel for greed, anger, pride, jealousy and ignorance. If someone doesn’t consider these realities and loathe others for their greed, anger, pride, jealousy and ignorance, then that’s hypocrisy. When one has yet to have abandoned these hypocrisies, disliking others for having any hypocrisy, one is obviously hypocrite.

Why should a person who has greed of his/her own criticise someone else for having/showing greed? Why can a person criticise others’ anger, pride, jealousy and ignorance?

We want to be intelligent, smart, have everything, famous, loved, cared, looked after, followed, safe, moral, satisfied, pleased, happy, want to be treated well and nicely, and all sort of good quality of life are wanted. Why can one harbour such bad emotions if one is not totally lacking self-control and hopelessly ignorant?

Criticising, judging others, and not criticising and judging oneself, it’s a way of practicing hypocrisy. But it’s better to judge and analyse oneself because one can improve oneself this way.

But we should pardon the nature of politics because we need a peaceful society in which political activities must exist healthily. If politicians have the condition to practice their best and serving the common interests, then what will we say?- it’s what we actually want as a society.

If a person practices hypocrisy willingly than that person is immoral. It’s hard to control the mind but it’s good to have not sped and crushed. We cannot expect animals and other organisms to practice morality. But as intelligent beings, we humans can know and have conscience. It’s always great to increase conscience.

Ignorance is actually the predominant factor of all existence and occurrence. The dark shadow of ignorance casting by all individual living organisms is so vast that we have to live in the dark most of the time. This way we actually affect one another with borrowed ideas. That shadow is the great shadow of life. We each casts a little shadow and make it big blanketing black shadow of oneness so fearsome that it engulfs everyone. That’s actually our own contribution as a global society of the world. Whatever we do, act, say... is not free from our ignorance – meaning we’re not perfect and our actions cannot be perfect ideologically even when the action is the only right thing to do; still we do it with delusion more or less. The contribution of our ignorance we make to one another is what we actually have in common. Not all of us are just like that though. Sometimes sages come and shine the light of truth. Whenever such a sage appears, we rather not miss his/her teachings. 

Future of Burma as Multicultural Society In Light of Buddhism and Global Enlightenment

No! I'm not against the religious freedom! 

Freedom of faith is actually everything in this very world. Humans are the being of faith and it's impossible to separate us from what we believe in. Whether a belief to last or not, whether it's realistic to have such a faith, whether it's a religious ideology or something against religions, we humans cannot exist without having something as a belief. This is not conditional but a universal truth for all living beings small or large. It's a universal truth because perception is made of memories, such as images, voices, words, thoughts and ideas. All beings are with perception to perceive information from their immediate surroundings with the five sensory organs and also from their ideas of the past and future with their mind. Whether a belief is a small one such as a cat has claws, or a big one like a religion, the basic is the same. Hence, no living organism can exist without a belief. 

A belief can be anything. It can be fantasy. A cat has claws but the cat itself is merely a form of a living thing. The core reality is hidden within the cat. But we are usually with the appearance. And here I have made a statement of my belief. I know there is no restriction upon this kind of random beliefs but religious restriction is what we generally consider with the freedom of faith. 

It's impossible to restrict people from their thoughts, whatever might be, but the visible part is what restricted for reasons as in political oppression, religious discrimination, racial discrimination and cultural discrimination. There can be other reasons too such as freedom thought and freedom of speech – i.e. oppression on intellectual expression and the practice of conscience. In brief, that is the practice which is restricted in practice – either by the law or without law. Different people have different views. It's possible that everyone has a different opinion on anything they know. Different levels of prejudgement, disagreement, discrimination and expectation are inevitable; however, the obvious level is what is considered as lack of respect, oppressive and anti-freedom in which different opinions and practices are forced to conform to the accepted ways with violent means and/or nonviolent discriminations. It’s not about a letter to the editor, resume, news, a paper should be able to write in any style or format; conformity is in everything too.

Iranian female soccer team has been seeking recognition from the world about their headscarfs. It’s a difficult issue for sure from both sides: the players in the team and the world body of soccer. The female players are trying to change the rule of soccer for women. At the same time, they’re not able to appear outside without their headscarfs. Both sides are not wrong to keep their identity. But soccer is now global. So I hope the soccer body would manage to make it global identity bringing all tother into the peaceful common ground as special events of sport and expression of prosperity. One day, I hope the world soccer games could be played in Iran too.

As being in Australia, I would be hypocrite if I oppose Burma accepting other religious groups. I’m here practising my way of faith without any supervision of any authority. Australia is a multicultural although its parliamentary debate generally starts with a religious tradition these days. Burma is naturally multicultural. It’s never been intolerant against different faiths although different individuals have different response to different faiths and beliefs. Burma never fought religious war in any religious name although partial religious wars did happen in defence of Buddhism which were actually racial wars among different ethnics. I wonder the future multicultural Burma wouldn’t be any different at all although the Buddhists are the majority – but made of the minorities whose cultural identities have been oppressed in racial ground. Buddhism is not more important than other rights they have lost because the ways they practised Buddhism have been oppressed too. Christianity, Hindu, Islam and other religions of different ethnics of Burma should be seen in the same condition. The main thing is making the country to exist in prosperity. Everything else is up to individuals whatever they want to do with their freedoms in harmony with all others. There will be no prosperity if there is oppression on freedom of faith, freedom of speech and freedom of thought. If Buddhism is practised correctly, there are no such oppressions. Buddhism comes from India via Sri Lanka to Burma. Buddhism is for all but oppression. Actually Buddhism is used for ego-expression of ethnicity – i.e. racial discrimination. Buddhism was never spread with violence because Buddhism is not aligned with violence. If Buddhism is used for ego-expression, it’s only a way to make it become pseudo-Buddhism that you can find in many a place. The Buddha said do everything good, avoid all evil action. Nobody can identify themselves as Buddhist if doing everything bad and evil. Being a Buddhist is not an identity – not acceptable identity. Buddhism is not for identity. A pseudo-Buddhist is not an actual Buddhist. Buddhism doesn’t belong to any group, nor is for any identity. The way of the Aryans, the Noble Eightfold Path, is for achieving the freedom from identity.

Of course I remember a protest during the colonial era against the officials who entered the religious places such as pagodas. We do want respect so we do need to show respect. This kind of respect is deserved by everyone, every group in the world. It’s not hard to understand. Well, let’s see what will be in the future in Burma. Rather expect all good and just do for that. The polite world has been promoting tolerance, peace and prosperity. We all should have a share in such promotion – of course for our own sake!

Of course I only like seeing the good images of the world! I’m more than aware of the ugly images as the society I come from is much of the parts of such images. It’s a worst country, a poorest country, exporting bad news, a burden of neighbouring countries, hosting the longest civil war... If Buddhism can survive in a country like this, it can survive anywhere else too although it has yet to take a good foothold elsewhere outside the traditional, historical region. I wonder how the people of Burma managed to succumb to their nightmare, actually a nightmare of the world which was not remembered by world when it was waken. As Burma needs the world for cultural development and economic opportunity, it must adapt world standards in both practice and ideology, and it will be a way of expressing a Buddhist attitude and group think. 

Burma is a society with many problems - conservatism in cultural issues will be the main problem as it is today. A decade ago, the long haired singers were banned (wtf!) as though short-haired style was Burman style! No, Burmans didn't have short hair, it was Mon and Thai people who cut their hair short. And they wanted soldier-short I guess! Being too conservative is too egocentric. Certainly women have been subject for ridicule. They are not allowed to wear whatever they want. Men were generally the trouble makers in this and women themselves were so horny to hurt each others. Maybe it is genetic problem that we are so sensitive and extreme in jealousy. Perhaps it's our education that shaped us to behave the way we do. Nature and nurture give each other a hand in enslaving our society. Do I need to say more? 

Iranian Women’s Soccer Team Banned

 Women AtForefront Of Iranian Protests  

Iranian Female Soldiers

Female Soldiers

Amazonian

 

U.S. Female Soldiers in Afghanistan Encouraged to beSubservient to Males

Aryan: 

"honourable, respectable, noble"

♠ Aryan disciple and The Uposatha Observance

♠ a brief history of (the word) Aryan  

♠ a blog: 

Sabbe dhamma anatta (Dhammapada 279)–”All phenomena are not-self.”  Dhamma here covers both mundane and supramundane phenomena, meaning nothing–not evennibbana–can be considered as Self or soul.  If you don’t believe me, take a three-month course of vipassana meditation and you’ll know this directly–no need to read about it.) 

From THE DEBATE OF KING MILINDHA pdf

In the Mahàparinibbàna Sutta the Buddha predicted that the city of Pàñaliputta, which was founded shortly before his death, would become a great city, “ânanda, among the towns and cities that are centres of congregation and commerce of people of the Aryan race, this new town will become the greatest city, called Pàñaliputta, a place where goods are unpacked, sold and distributed, but it will be in danger from flood, fire and internal dissension”.8 The Magadha Kingdom, of which Pàñaliputta (modern Patna) was the capital, gradually became the most powerful in all India.

Sakharov Prize 

for Freedom of Thought

freedom of thought, conscience and religion

LOL

In ancient time, there was a special place near palace from which the king could be informed by anyone protesting for/against something by shouting. The place was marked with a post and known in Burmese as Hit-Taine - Shouting Post and was located close enough to be heard from.

Some Fact?  White propaganda   

fREEDOM OF tHOUGHT

Just Don't Think beyond what you see - SOMETIMES!

Spacious, Smooth, Swift Reforms?

I knew there was a condition/style of check&balance in the Myanmar parliament - no accidental. Generally there must be a group made of different individuals with different views; hence, whoever supporting the reformists can be extremists too. What I mean is any of the groups at all in the military must naturally have different individuals - unlike how it is in the parliament one side extremists (or the conservatives) and another moderate (or the reformists). That's the style of  the Myanmar parliamentary formations (grouping) as I see.

I suspected such deliberate set-up was made for a purpose - we know what it is.

As the need of reforming all sectors of the country, I rather assume both sides (conservatives and reformists) will go for that - as we see how popular the reformists have become and how they have improved the image of the military. But the conservatives are supposed to drag the legs of the reformists - like the metal shackles used in Burma prisons. You all know what the shackles do to the prisoners. The shackles formed with the metal bars and metal chains are very famous because of their role in Burma.

With above view, I expect the reform will go on but with slow pace and even often U-turns. We have not yet seen any U-turn in recent politics but in the way the military treat the ethnic minorities and the agreements it had with them.

The same ideology, divide and rule, is applied to the ethnics and the military is trying to take advantage of the agreements and ceasefire it has had or will have with some of the ethnic armed groups.

As long as such different conditions applied on politics and the ethnic minorities, the mode of the military might not be committed 100% wholeheartedly to its promised reforms - simply the spacious, smooth, swift reforms cannot be expected yet. But time will tell. Sooner than later the true image of the military, the government and the parliament will be revealed - cannot be hidden for long.

What should be expected is the swift reforms for economy and education. They are crucial for the people of Burma/Myanmar. They should be done as soon as possible. All sides should emphasize on these issues as deal with them - as the platform or meeting place for all sides so that they can also keep dealing with other issues: political reform, the reforms for the rights of ethnic minorities.

The way that should be settled is through negotiation of course. If negotiation is the best way to settle the differences, it should be applied in every dispute ...

Is Burma Changing?

Daw Suu did say she believed Burma (Myanmar) is changing toward democracy. We can see there is some democratic reform taken place. Comparing with earlier years, 2011 looked quite better - as the first step toward better future for the peoples of Burma. Hopefully, the second step will occur in 2012.

As the first step, Daw Suu was freed from house arrest. Many prisoners of conscience were free and allowed to speak - although cautiously they spoke and wrote. Obviously freedom of media is seen part of the first step. 

Allowing NLD to contest in coming by-election is also seen part of the first step but rather becoming part of the second step - but it must happen the way it is promised, and expected, to happen. Here the freedom of speech and media freedom will be part of reform and they must be as free as necessary to be seen as genuine reform. The remaining political prisoners must be freed too and allowed to involved in political events such as gathering at private places. 

As politics is the core of reform, political developments will be judged whether they are sufficient or not. As part of the political process, the participation of political activists and ethnic minorities will be seen as the broader reform. The depth of reform will be the constitution itself but it will take some time - except the obvious ones that blocking the path toward broader reform. Should we expect the constitution itself being retouched - let it be the minor ones as part of second step. 

Economy and education will be part of second step too because they are also as important as politics. Without expecting a quick fix, some significant policy shift toward reform will be expected. What will the government do? 

The media should emphasize on both economy and education too that there must be some constructive criticism. The obstacle can be the government itself. The culture of tolerance should gradually be built as part of the reform. 

Also what will happen to federalism? Traditionally federalism is seen separatism based on the word 'Burma' (in English) or 'Myanmar' (in Burmese). Myanmar means the nation of a single ethnic Burman - i.e. the empire of the Burman established by the Burman kings. By sharing the power of the Burmans to the minority ethnics, that is the separatism ordividing of the domination of the Burmans. Historically, cultures and languages of the minorities have been suppressed and replaced with the culture and language of the Burman which is Burmese. To develop genuine federalism and futuristic reform, the traditional view of federalism must be changed.  

Media Freedom in Burma Will Make the People Dignified

When we talk about dignity, we cannot avoid the freedom of speech for those who understand about responsibility and have much knowledge of life. Here the ones I'm mentioning are: the elderly, the studious, the knowledgeable, the experienced, the wise, the travelled, the one who can see and have seen, the one with conscience, the one who has something to share ... as idea or as news - in one word, the people!

Newspaper, magazines, and all that belong to media should reach all walks of life - in Burma. People must be able to read and have their own opinions. They must be informed by all sorts for their own judgement. In freedom of media, media adjusts media and balances between right and wrong, gossip,rumour and opinion. And as end result, the right will stands as the wrong falling.

But dictators, cronies, power mongers, potentates, the unjust... hate such state of freedom of media. They hate it because they live on people with lies and misinformation. Hence, they screw the news and manipulate the truths and guide the people as herds of animals ... dignity of animals is no match for dignity of humans. The people of a free country look so different from the country from oppressed country - just because of dignity.

That's how important is the freedom of speech and media.

Of course, the education of the people is important - of course!!!!! Education must be also about how to possess conscience. Making people into robotic beings is so sinful, evil and undignified. No matter how great a dictator look, his/her actions speak louder than his/her presentation. Lie is never adored by any dignitaries smiling with lips and laughing at them with their hearts.

They know that too - they know that because they're cleaver enough to know - and control the people by manipulation of information - LIARS!

Yes, freedom of speech and media are the must for the independent people living in a independent country. Freedom of media will change Burmese people and free them from decades long deprivation of dignity.

Elephant in Australia?

Yes!!!
Because in my opinion, it can be really good for pest (invasive plant species) control and fertilizing the land.

This is the story: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/expert-advises-big-fix-for-jumbosized-problem-20120202-1qtzb.html

Elephant in Australia will be for good. They will certainly eat grass and small plants but I doubt they'd eat the gum trees with too much oil. Researchers can feed them different types of plant species and just find out. This is about a grand plan - saving Australia or Australian rare species. There should be some funding for the research and quite simple enough to be done within a month. Just get a few elephants and give them variety of plants and grasses and just find out.

 They will pursue for easy food (grass) rather than forcing the trees down - unless very desirably tasty, or no easy meal found. Water might be a problem for them if water holes are rare and that could be a problem for the native animals too.

Generally elephants are peaceful herd (social) animals. They are smart and kind - except for the bulls when being threatened or during their musth.

Here in Australia, you can try an old mowing strategy - using goats or sheep. Now use elephants and employ some mahouts from India, Burma and Thailand. For the mission, either Asian elephants or African elephants or both will be fine.

Well, I'm not suggesting wild elephants to be released unattended by the experts. In this case, about a thousand elephants would be just fine. Just put the elephants in missions for pest control and they will look after themselves. Place them in different locations in several herds and everything would be fine...

Fire in Space

"Thus far, the most surprising thing we've observed is continued apparent burning of heptane droplets after flame extinction under certain conditions," Williams said. "Currently, this is entirely unexplained."
http://www.livescience.com/17236-international-space-station-flex-fire-research.html

As we're certain that space is not empty, there could be fire sources in it other than dark matters. We know there are different types of dusts in space - one of them can be anything as fire particles. 


If the inside of the International Space Station is clean and no such penetration of such dusts could happen, or at least they must not exist that much inside the space station to burn that way, then there must be very small particles that can penetrate steels and feed the flame. 


I think it's as simple as that - the flame was kept by some type of fire source. By seeing the flame, we must be convinced that there is fire - in space waiting for fuel. But it seems the particles are so weak to start a fire of their own - but it must be because ethanol and heptane are not found in space naturally.  


Then what about other types of fuel which are not oil or gas but carbon - e.g. charcoal? 


Are these unknown particles (sort of a type of) dark matters? Another 21st century question!


Stars could be fed with these unknown  particles. Once I read the core of comet was heated and some chemical reactions where happening. Are these particles responsible for that heat in that comet? And newly hatched stars too? Yeah! Must be!!!! 


The quote above mentions - 'even after the flame was extinguished the fuel kept burning' - does it mean fire somehow can penetrate the steel cover that was supposed to stop the flame? 


Space flames can also burn at a lower temperature and with less oxygen than fires on Earth. 
What if the fuel burns without oxygen at all? Maybe not! So the law of fire is not changed - fire needs oxygen to burn. 


But I wonder what if the fire gets some kind of gases that react as extinguisher? If fire in space can be extinguished with nitrogen or whatever, we could assume a reason why the earth is not too hot and supporting life.  

HOW THE UNIVERSE WAS FORMED AND OPERATES

I got five key words from what I watch on TV (SBS2) last night:

1.      Big Bang

2.      Inflation

3.      Dark matter

4.      Dark energy

5.      Dark flow

BB is a theory at defensive post. There the uniformity of energy distribution is explained with theory of inflation. Yet the problem is the physicists had to add dark matters in order to make sense of 75% of universe. There they got dark energy due to the behaviour of black holes at the centres of the galaxies and later someone found out dark flow a hint for multiverse.

That is from ‘IS EVERYTHING WE KNOW WRONG?’

Multiverse!!!

Yes, I like that sure!!! I simply do not believe BB is reality – I know it didn’t happen. The reason is the formation of universe doesn’t have to go through the BB and inflation. But the universe can form just the way galaxies form. This is on the same side of ‘multiverse’.

What I believe is –

There was galactic clouds everywhere that never crunched into singularity. Say they were the Universal Couds (UCs). They come from renewed energy*. They condensed into a giant body of cloud that started forming celestial bodies. These massive condensations of cloud were local but were falling into the centre of the universe**. Local Condensations (LCs) might explain the creation of early smaller galaxies which had no stars but only the formation of giant bodies of clouds.

Also these LCs at smaller local area might be forming early solar systems and planets because the celestial bodies must start from smaller objects toward larger objects; however, they must be in different sizes at the same time depends on available clouds. Herein they gradually formed into Universal Condensation and eventually the universe was born. Hence, smaller objects came first locally and started forming ever larger objects and celestial systems and eventually an entire universe.  

Smaller objects formed a system with larger objects. So the universe then was completely different from what we see now.

In this case, the whole universe is a Giant Galaxy (GG) of galaxies*** Gradually the condensation started spinning to make its clouds to condense more and more, faster and faster. During that time, there was no light but the movements of Universal Clouds only and only completely dark.

Here comes the second phase of a universe. The more the universe condensed the more it became with gaps – now gaps are everywhere between every celestial objects where once filled with clouds.

In this case, dark particles could be the decay or remain of energy. The universe might be emitting them out of its system whilst gaining more incoming recharged particles from outside. In this case, one way out for dark matters and one way in for renewed/recharged particles. Hence the universe can sustain itself beyond predictable lifespan. Also the growth of universe could be possible all along as expansion.

At the third phase, the universe must be destroyed by either overheating or running out of energy or a condition of imbalance in different forces.  

*   Not dead energy but renewed and recharged and afresh to restart a new universe in a vacuum of space – but probably were not coming from other nearby universes. These clouds can be very fine particles to be forming into very fine objects like molecules etc. The clouds could be born out of darkness from pure energies which could be of different types. Energy could come as different kinds each having different property that others do not. It could form forces from such differences.

Thus, I like the assumption of multiverse. Infinity is beautiful – rather so beautiful that the amount of energy is infinite and the universes can always borrow energy from elsewhere once they have consumed their own. Hence, a new universe can be reborn when the old one is destroyed when its energy runs out and bursts like a supernova but in universal scale. And space is a condition that has to be infinite.

** This needs a finding of the centre of universe.  

*** call it a Great God of gods – but not about religions.

Note: In Buddhism, space is not empty. Space is filled with dark particles or fire elements which are visible as shadow and shade. 

EVIL! wHAT iS iT?

Evil is the act of a deliberate cause for self-failure by means of: pursuing a short termed goal, or pursuing short termed pleasure, or pursuing negligible desires.

Evil is the act of self-failure, with shortsightedness.

Evil is self failing when short termed rise is to cause long termed fall. It's like throwing up a stone into the air above a cliff that it's fall will be far deeper than its rise.

There are many ways to the long termed fall/failure. Generally speaking: silliness, ignorance, delusion, shortsightedness, misunderstanding, belief in foul promises (gullibility), negligence, laziness are the main causes of nullification and thus self-failure.

Evil doesn't bring happiness.

Evil doer can feel very good at the peak of evil heights. At he evil fall, nobody is laughing.

Nobody is falling if we all know how to rise only.

Evil comes from evil act. Evil act comes from evil act - there is no ending of evil if not stopping it with willpower.

The development of the willpower only to oppose evil and evil act is the only tool we have to fight evil. We cannot really fight evil with other means - violence or non-violence doesn't matter.

But be careful not to misunderstand 'evil is the act of self-failure'. Don't take it out of context.

Strange Dream

You may have faith but don’t let faith have you! If a faith devours its followers, isn’t it the same to a lion devours its preys?
That thought came to me yesterday as reading how HIV patients died in believing and did what they were told “believe in God and stop taking the medication”. I did think about how faith and cults can be as dangerous as the demons that eat people.

I was about to ask that question on Yahoo Answer but I gave the idea up.

But there have been demon worshipers who clearly know how the demons eat people. They’d feed their demons anyway?!

I didn’t go to bed with that thought though. But I dreamed about three people me, someone who wore like Jesus Christ and a third person I didn’t notice properly. There was a person who had a lion, rather an invisible lion that appeared, commanded his lion to chase the one who looked like Jesus Christ and there we three had to run from the lion chasing us.

I didn’t know how we three could climb a hill quite high but not tiring and it was rocky. There I (alone) met a few people sitting on a bench waiting for bus to come – that was a bus stop looked very much modern and the design was quite unique and high class. I told those people about the lion coming and they laughed and I could clearly see they later saw the lion themselves and they might get panicky – not sure if it was my wishing thought happened in that dream. I didn’t know where or which direction the other two went but they disappeared from the dream completely. I didn’t see they got trouble or out of trouble.

The bus stop was on my left-hand side. There was a low wall behind the bus stop which I climbed over and continued running down that hill. There I saw some buildings at the other side of the hill and a stairs to climb down the hill. I ran down that stairs where I saw a broken landing (the only one) made of jade. I safely landed on the edge of that landing and kept running. I noticed the lion was not after me. I didn’t know the fates of the other two and those waiting for a bus at the bus stop.

And the dream ended there as I woke up. It was about 4:46AM.

A fact is I do believe Jesus existed as a revolutionist opposing the Romans’ occupation of his land. But I believe him not as a god or son of god. I also believe he (his image) has been used by some people in the past for their own purpose. Maybe my dream has something to do with my views.

When I woke up from the dream, I immediately thought that the stairs and landing might be Buddhism which can be a little broken but safe enough for me. As I’m writing about the hill, I recall I also read an article about a hill and stones. I don’t know if anything to do with it.

20 October 2011
Min Khin Kyaw