Sponsored images from 
View allAll Photos Tagged Relator
Gov. Neil Abercrombie today signed seven bills related to agriculture, a central component of the state’s economic and environmental sustainability.
“Part of Hawaii’s history and way of life, our agriculture industry keeps money in the local economy and supports thriving rural communities,” Gov. Abercrombie said. “These bills are important to combat harmful pests and invasive species, promote urban gardening, and expand the agriculture industry through programs that support farmers while educating and encouraging youth in pursuing agricultural careers.”
HB353 (Relating to Agriculture) appropriates $550,000 over the fiscal biennium to combat the coffee berry borer, a small beetle harmful to coffee crops worldwide that has infested coffee crops in the Kona and South Kona regions.
HB1263 (Relating to Irrigation) appropriates $75,000 for the East Kauai Irrigation System and $45,000 for the Peekauai Ditch Irrigation System (also known as the Menehune Ditch).
SB593 (Relating to Agriculture) expands livestock feed subsidies to include milking goats, goats raised for meat, sheep, lambs, fish, and crustaceans; and appropriates $1.5 million to the state Department of Agriculture for livestock feed subsidies and the Livestock Revitalization Program.
SB993 (Relating to Agricultural Loans) expands the state’s Agricultural Loan Program by adding farm innovation loan programs and expanding the definition of a new farmer.
HB560 (Relating to Affordable Housing Urban Gardening) authorizes the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation (HHFDC) and the Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA) to develop programs that provide incentives for the development of housing projects that incorporate urban gardening programs.
SB586 (Relating to Agricultural Building Permits) provides certain building code and permit exemptions for nonresidential buildings and structures, including indigenous Hawaiian hale, on commercial farms and ranches located outside the urban district.
SB757 (Relating to Agriculture) appropriates $75,000 to the state Department of Education for the Future Farmers of America to educate and support youth in agricultural careers.
This relates to my blog post
www.heatheronhertravels.com/how-to-eat-well-in-sardinia/
This photo is licenced under Creative commons for use including commercial on condition that you link back to or credit http://www.heatheronhertravels.com/.
See my profile for more detail.
Relates to UNDP-supported LDCF-funded project ‘Enhancing National Food Security in the Context of Global Climate Change’ www.adaptation-undp.org/projects/kiribati-denhancing-nati...
Ganesha, also spelled Ganesh, and also known as Ganapati and Vinayaka, is a widely worshipped deity in the Hindu pantheon. His image is found throughout India and Nepal. Hindu sects worship him regardless of affiliations. Devotion to Ganesha is widely diffused and extends to Jains, Buddhists, and beyond India.
Although he is known by many attributes, Ganesha's elephant head makes him easy to identify. Ganesha is widely revered as the remover of obstacles, the patron of arts and sciences and the deva of intellect and wisdom. As the god of beginnings, he is honoured at the start of rituals and ceremonies. Ganesha is also invoked as patron of letters and learning during writing sessions. Several texts relate mythological anecdotes associated with his birth and exploits and explain his distinct iconography.
Ganesha emerged as a distinct deity in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, during the Gupta Period, although he inherited traits from Vedic and pre-Vedic precursors. He was formally included among the five primary deities of Smartism (a Hindu denomination) in the 9th century. A sect of devotees called the Ganapatya arose, who identified Ganesha as the supreme deity. The principal scriptures dedicated to Ganesha are the Ganesha Purana, the Mudgala Purana, and the Ganapati Atharvashirsa.
ETYMOLOGY AND OTHER NAMES
Ganesha has been ascribed many other titles and epithets, including Ganapati and Vighneshvara. The Hindu title of respect Shri is often added before his name. One popular way Ganesha is worshipped is by chanting a Ganesha Sahasranama, a litany of "a thousand names of Ganesha". Each name in the sahasranama conveys a different meaning and symbolises a different aspect of Ganesha. At least two different versions of the Ganesha Sahasranama exist; one version is drawn from the Ganesha Purana, a Hindu scripture venerating Ganesha.
The name Ganesha is a Sanskrit compound, joining the words gana, meaning a group, multitude, or categorical system and isha, meaning lord or master. The word gaņa when associated with Ganesha is often taken to refer to the gaņas, a troop of semi-divine beings that form part of the retinue of Shiva. The term more generally means a category, class, community, association, or corporation. Some commentators interpret the name "Lord of the Gaņas" to mean "Lord of Hosts" or "Lord of created categories", such as the elements. Ganapati, a synonym for Ganesha, is a compound composed of gaṇa, meaning "group", and pati, meaning "ruler" or "lord". The Amarakosha, an early Sanskrit lexicon, lists eight synonyms of Ganesha : Vinayaka, Vighnarāja (equivalent to Vighnesha), Dvaimātura (one who has two mothers), Gaṇādhipa (equivalent to Ganapati and Ganesha), Ekadanta (one who has one tusk), Heramba, Lambodara (one who has a pot belly, or, literally, one who has a hanging belly), and Gajanana; having the face of an elephant).
Vinayaka is a common name for Ganesha that appears in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. This name is reflected in the naming of the eight famous Ganesha temples in Maharashtra known as the Ashtavinayak (aṣṭavināyaka). The names Vighnesha and Vighneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) refers to his primary function in Hindu theology as the master and remover of obstacles (vighna).
A prominent name for Ganesha in the Tamil language is Pillai. A. K. Narain differentiates these terms by saying that pillai means a "child" while pillaiyar means a "noble child". He adds that the words pallu, pella, and pell in the Dravidian family of languages signify "tooth or tusk", also "elephant tooth or tusk". Anita Raina Thapan notes that the root word pille in the name Pillaiyar might have originally meant "the young of the elephant", because the Pali word pillaka means "a young elephant".
In the Burmese language, Ganesha is known as Maha Peinne, derived from Pali Mahā Wināyaka. The widespread name of Ganesha in Thailand is Phra Phikhanet or Phra Phikhanesuan, both of which are derived from Vara Vighnesha and Vara Vighneshvara respectively, whereas the name Khanet (from Ganesha) is rather rare.
In Sri Lanka, in the North-Central and North Western areas with predominantly Buddhist population, Ganesha is known as Aiyanayaka Deviyo, while in other Singhala Buddhist areas he is known as Gana deviyo.
ICONOGRAPHY
Ganesha is a popular figure in Indian art. Unlike those of some deities, representations of Ganesha show wide variations and distinct patterns changing over time. He may be portrayed standing, dancing, heroically taking action against demons, playing with his family as a boy, sitting down or on an elevated seat, or engaging in a range of contemporary situations.
Ganesha images were prevalent in many parts of India by the 6th century. The 13th century statue pictured is typical of Ganesha statuary from 900–1200, after Ganesha had been well-established as an independent deity with his own sect. This example features some of Ganesha's common iconographic elements. A virtually identical statue has been dated between 973–1200 by Paul Martin-Dubost, and another similar statue is dated c. 12th century by Pratapaditya Pal. Ganesha has the head of an elephant and a big belly. This statue has four arms, which is common in depictions of Ganesha. He holds his own broken tusk in his lower-right hand and holds a delicacy, which he samples with his trunk, in his lower-left hand. The motif of Ganesha turning his trunk sharply to his left to taste a sweet in his lower-left hand is a particularly archaic feature. A more primitive statue in one of the Ellora Caves with this general form has been dated to the 7th century. Details of the other hands are difficult to make out on the statue shown. In the standard configuration, Ganesha typically holds an axe or a goad in one upper arm and a pasha (noose) in the other upper arm.
The influence of this old constellation of iconographic elements can still be seen in contemporary representations of Ganesha. In one modern form, the only variation from these old elements is that the lower-right hand does not hold the broken tusk but is turned towards the viewer in a gesture of protection or fearlessness (abhaya mudra). The same combination of four arms and attributes occurs in statues of Ganesha dancing, which is a very popular theme.
COMMON ATTRIBUTES
Ganesha has been represented with the head of an elephant since the early stages of his appearance in Indian art. Puranic myths provide many explanations for how he got his elephant head. One of his popular forms, Heramba-Ganapati, has five elephant heads, and other less-common variations in the number of heads are known. While some texts say that Ganesha was born with an elephant head, he acquires the head later in most stories. The most recurrent motif in these stories is that Ganesha was created by Parvati using clay to protect her and Shiva beheaded him when Ganesha came between Shiva and Parvati. Shiva then replaced Ganesha's original head with that of an elephant. Details of the battle and where the replacement head came from vary from source to source. Another story says that Ganesha was created directly by Shiva's laughter. Because Shiva considered Ganesha too alluring, he gave him the head of an elephant and a protruding belly.
Ganesha's earliest name was Ekadanta (One Tusked), referring to his single whole tusk, the other being broken. Some of the earliest images of Ganesha show him holding his broken tusk. The importance of this distinctive feature is reflected in the Mudgala Purana, which states that the name of Ganesha's second incarnation is Ekadanta. Ganesha's protruding belly appears as a distinctive attribute in his earliest statuary, which dates to the Gupta period (4th to 6th centuries). This feature is so important that, according to the Mudgala Purana, two different incarnations of Ganesha use names based on it: Lambodara (Pot Belly, or, literally, Hanging Belly) and Mahodara (Great Belly). Both names are Sanskrit compounds describing his belly. The Brahmanda Purana says that Ganesha has the name Lambodara because all the universes (i.e., cosmic eggs) of the past, present, and future are present in him. The number of Ganesha's arms varies; his best-known forms have between two and sixteen arms. Many depictions of Ganesha feature four arms, which is mentioned in Puranic sources and codified as a standard form in some iconographic texts. His earliest images had two arms. Forms with 14 and 20 arms appeared in Central India during the 9th and the 10th centuries. The serpent is a common feature in Ganesha iconography and appears in many forms. According to the Ganesha Purana, Ganesha wrapped the serpent Vasuki around his neck. Other depictions of snakes include use as a sacred thread wrapped around the stomach as a belt, held in a hand, coiled at the ankles, or as a throne. Upon Ganesha's forehead may be a third eye or the Shaivite sectarian mark , which consists of three horizontal lines. The Ganesha Purana prescribes a tilaka mark as well as a crescent moon on the forehead. A distinct form of Ganesha called Bhalachandra includes that iconographic element. Ganesha is often described as red in color. Specific colors are associated with certain forms. Many examples of color associations with specific meditation forms are prescribed in the Sritattvanidhi, a treatise on Hindu iconography. For example, white is associated with his representations as Heramba-Ganapati and Rina-Mochana-Ganapati (Ganapati Who Releases from Bondage). Ekadanta-Ganapati is visualized as blue during meditation in that form.
VAHANAS
The earliest Ganesha images are without a vahana (mount/vehicle). Of the eight incarnations of Ganesha described in the Mudgala Purana, Ganesha uses a mouse (shrew) in five of them, a lion in his incarnation as Vakratunda, a peacock in his incarnation as Vikata, and Shesha, the divine serpent, in his incarnation as Vighnaraja. Mohotkata uses a lion, Mayūreśvara uses a peacock, Dhumraketu uses a horse, and Gajanana uses a mouse, in the four incarnations of Ganesha listed in the Ganesha Purana. Jain depictions of Ganesha show his vahana variously as a mouse, elephant, tortoise, ram, or peacock.
Ganesha is often shown riding on or attended by a mouse, shrew or rat. Martin-Dubost says that the rat began to appear as the principal vehicle in sculptures of Ganesha in central and western India during the 7th century; the rat was always placed close to his feet. The mouse as a mount first appears in written sources in the Matsya Purana and later in the Brahmananda Purana and Ganesha Purana, where Ganesha uses it as his vehicle in his last incarnation. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa includes a meditation verse on Ganesha that describes the mouse appearing on his flag. The names Mūṣakavāhana (mouse-mount) and Ākhuketana (rat-banner) appear in the Ganesha Sahasranama.
The mouse is interpreted in several ways. According to Grimes, "Many, if not most of those who interpret Gaṇapati's mouse, do so negatively; it symbolizes tamoguṇa as well as desire". Along these lines, Michael Wilcockson says it symbolizes those who wish to overcome desires and be less selfish. Krishan notes that the rat is destructive and a menace to crops. The Sanskrit word mūṣaka (mouse) is derived from the root mūṣ (stealing, robbing). It was essential to subdue the rat as a destructive pest, a type of vighna (impediment) that needed to be overcome. According to this theory, showing Ganesha as master of the rat demonstrates his function as Vigneshvara (Lord of Obstacles) and gives evidence of his possible role as a folk grāma-devatā (village deity) who later rose to greater prominence. Martin-Dubost notes a view that the rat is a symbol suggesting that Ganesha, like the rat, penetrates even the most secret places.
ASSOCIATIONS
OBSTACLES
Ganesha is Vighneshvara or Vighnaraja or Vighnaharta (Marathi), the Lord of Obstacles, both of a material and spiritual order. He is popularly worshipped as a remover of obstacles, though traditionally he also places obstacles in the path of those who need to be checked. Paul Courtright says that "his task in the divine scheme of things, his dharma, is to place and remove obstacles. It is his particular territory, the reason for his creation."
Krishan notes that some of Ganesha's names reflect shadings of multiple roles that have evolved over time. Dhavalikar ascribes the quick ascension of Ganesha in the Hindu pantheon, and the emergence of the Ganapatyas, to this shift in emphasis from vighnakartā (obstacle-creator) to vighnahartā (obstacle-averter). However, both functions continue to be vital to his character.
BUDDHI (KNOWLEDGE)
Ganesha is considered to be the Lord of letters and learning. In Sanskrit, the word buddhi is a feminine noun that is variously translated as intelligence, wisdom, or intellect. The concept of buddhi is closely associated with the personality of Ganesha, especially in the Puranic period, when many stories stress his cleverness and love of intelligence. One of Ganesha's names in the Ganesha Purana and the Ganesha Sahasranama is Buddhipriya. This name also appears in a list of 21 names at the end of the Ganesha Sahasranama that Ganesha says are especially important. The word priya can mean "fond of", and in a marital context it can mean "lover" or "husband", so the name may mean either "Fond of Intelligence" or "Buddhi's Husband".
AUM
Ganesha is identified with the Hindu mantra Aum, also spelled Om. The term oṃkārasvarūpa (Aum is his form), when identified with Ganesha, refers to the notion that he personifies the primal sound. The Ganapati Atharvashirsa attests to this association. Chinmayananda translates the relevant passage as follows:
(O Lord Ganapati!) You are (the Trinity) Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa. You are Indra. You are fire [Agni] and air [Vāyu]. You are the sun [Sūrya] and the moon [Chandrama]. You are Brahman. You are (the three worlds) Bhuloka [earth], Antariksha-loka [space], and Swargaloka [heaven]. You are Om. (That is to say, You are all this).
Some devotees see similarities between the shape of Ganesha's body in iconography and the shape of Aum in the Devanāgarī and Tamil scripts.
FIRST CHAKRA
According to Kundalini yoga, Ganesha resides in the first chakra, called Muladhara (mūlādhāra). Mula means "original, main"; adhara means "base, foundation". The muladhara chakra is the principle on which the manifestation or outward expansion of primordial Divine Force rests. This association is also attested to in the Ganapati Atharvashirsa. Courtright translates this passage as follows: "[O Ganesha,] You continually dwell in the sacral plexus at the base of the spine [mūlādhāra cakra]." Thus, Ganesha has a permanent abode in every being at the Muladhara. Ganesha holds, supports and guides all other chakras, thereby "governing the forces that propel the wheel of life".
FAMILY AND CONSORTS
Though Ganesha is popularly held to be the son of Shiva and Parvati, the Puranic myths give different versions about his birth. In some he was created by Parvati, in another he was created by Shiva and Parvati, in another he appeared mysteriously and was discovered by Shiva and Parvati or he was born from the elephant headed goddess Malini after she drank Parvati's bath water that had been thrown in the river.
The family includes his brother the war god Kartikeya, who is also called Subramanya, Skanda, Murugan and other names. Regional differences dictate the order of their births. In northern India, Skanda is generally said to be the elder, while in the south, Ganesha is considered the first born. In northern India, Skanda was an important martial deity from about 500 BCE to about 600 CE, when worship of him declined significantly in northern India. As Skanda fell, Ganesha rose. Several stories tell of sibling rivalry between the brothers and may reflect sectarian tensions.
Ganesha's marital status, the subject of considerable scholarly review, varies widely in mythological stories. One pattern of myths identifies Ganesha as an unmarried brahmacari. This view is common in southern India and parts of northern India. Another pattern associates him with the concepts of Buddhi (intellect), Siddhi (spiritual power), and Riddhi (prosperity); these qualities are sometimes personified as goddesses, said to be Ganesha's wives. He also may be shown with a single consort or a nameless servant (Sanskrit: daşi). Another pattern connects Ganesha with the goddess of culture and the arts, Sarasvati or Śarda (particularly in Maharashtra). He is also associated with the goddess of luck and prosperity, Lakshmi. Another pattern, mainly prevalent in the Bengal region, links Ganesha with the banana tree, Kala Bo.
The Shiva Purana says that Ganesha had begotten two sons: Kşema (prosperity) and Lābha (profit). In northern Indian variants of this story, the sons are often said to be Śubha (auspiciouness) and Lābha. The 1975 Hindi film Jai Santoshi Maa shows Ganesha married to Riddhi and Siddhi and having a daughter named Santoshi Ma, the goddess of satisfaction. This story has no Puranic basis, but Anita Raina Thapan and Lawrence Cohen cite Santoshi Ma's cult as evidence of Ganesha's continuing evolution as a popular deity.
WOSHIP AND FESTIVALS
Ganesha is worshipped on many religious and secular occasions; especially at the beginning of ventures such as buying a vehicle or starting a business. K.N. Somayaji says, "there can hardly be a [Hindu] home [in India] which does not house an idol of Ganapati. [..] Ganapati, being the most popular deity in India, is worshipped by almost all castes and in all parts of the country". Devotees believe that if Ganesha is propitiated, he grants success, prosperity and protection against adversity.
Ganesha is a non-sectarian deity, and Hindus of all denominations invoke him at the beginning of prayers, important undertakings, and religious ceremonies. Dancers and musicians, particularly in southern India, begin performances of arts such as the Bharatnatyam dance with a prayer to Ganesha. Mantras such as Om Shri Gaṇeshāya Namah (Om, salutation to the Illustrious Ganesha) are often used. One of the most famous mantras associated with Ganesha is Om Gaṃ Ganapataye Namah (Om, Gaṃ, Salutation to the Lord of Hosts).
Devotees offer Ganesha sweets such as modaka and small sweet balls (laddus). He is often shown carrying a bowl of sweets, called a modakapātra. Because of his identification with the color red, he is often worshipped with red sandalwood paste (raktacandana) or red flowers. Dūrvā grass (Cynodon dactylon) and other materials are also used in his worship.
Festivals associated with Ganesh are Ganesh Chaturthi or Vināyaka chaturthī in the śuklapakṣa (the fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of bhādrapada (August/September) and the Gaṇeśa jayanti (Gaṇeśa's birthday) celebrated on the cathurthī of the śuklapakṣa (fourth day of the waxing moon) in the month of māgha (January/February)."
GANESH CHATURTI
An annual festival honours Ganesha for ten days, starting on Ganesha Chaturthi, which typically falls in late August or early September. The festival begins with people bringing in clay idols of Ganesha, symbolising Ganesha's visit. The festival culminates on the day of Ananta Chaturdashi, when idols (murtis) of Ganesha are immersed in the most convenient body of water. Some families have a tradition of immersion on the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, or 7th day. In 1893, Lokmanya Tilak transformed this annual Ganesha festival from private family celebrations into a grand public event. He did so "to bridge the gap between the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins and find an appropriate context in which to build a new grassroots unity between them" in his nationalistic strivings against the British in Maharashtra. Because of Ganesha's wide appeal as "the god for Everyman", Tilak chose him as a rallying point for Indian protest against British rule. Tilak was the first to install large public images of Ganesha in pavilions, and he established the practice of submerging all the public images on the tenth day. Today, Hindus across India celebrate the Ganapati festival with great fervour, though it is most popular in the state of Maharashtra. The festival also assumes huge proportions in Mumbai, Pune, and in the surrounding belt of Ashtavinayaka temples.
TEMPLES
In Hindu temples, Ganesha is depicted in various ways: as an acolyte or subordinate deity (pãrśva-devatã); as a deity related to the principal deity (parivāra-devatã); or as the principal deity of the temple (pradhāna), treated similarly as the highest gods of the Hindu pantheon. As the god of transitions, he is placed at the doorway of many Hindu temples to keep out the unworthy, which is analogous to his role as Parvati’s doorkeeper. In addition, several shrines are dedicated to Ganesha himself, of which the Ashtavinayak (lit. "eight Ganesha (shrines)") in Maharashtra are particularly well known. Located within a 100-kilometer radius of the city of Pune, each of these eight shrines celebrates a particular form of Ganapati, complete with its own lore and legend. The eight shrines are: Morgaon, Siddhatek, Pali, Mahad, Theur, Lenyadri, Ozar and Ranjangaon.
There are many other important Ganesha temples at the following locations: Wai in Maharashtra; Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh; Jodhpur, Nagaur and Raipur (Pali) in Rajasthan; Baidyanath in Bihar; Baroda, Dholaka, and Valsad in Gujarat and Dhundiraj Temple in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Prominent Ganesha temples in southern India include the following: Kanipakam in Chittoor; the Jambukeśvara Temple at Tiruchirapalli; at Rameshvaram and Suchindram in Tamil Nadu; at Malliyur, Kottarakara, Pazhavangadi, Kasargod in Kerala, Hampi, and Idagunji in Karnataka; and Bhadrachalam in Andhra Pradesh.
T. A. Gopinatha notes, "Every village however small has its own image of Vighneśvara (Vigneshvara) with or without a temple to house it in. At entrances of villages and forts, below pīpaḹa (Sacred fig) trees [...], in a niche [...] in temples of Viṣṇu (Vishnu) as well as Śiva (Shiva) and also in separate shrines specially constructed in Śiva temples [...]; the figure of Vighneśvara is invariably seen." Ganesha temples have also been built outside of India, including southeast Asia, Nepal (including the four Vinayaka shrines in the Kathmandu valley), and in several western countries.
RISE TO PROMINENCE
FIRST APEARANCE
Ganesha appeared in his classic form as a clearly recognizable deity with well-defined iconographic attributes in the early 4th to 5th centuries. Shanti Lal Nagar says that the earliest known iconic image of Ganesha is in the niche of the Shiva temple at Bhumra, which has been dated to the Gupta period. His independent cult appeared by about the 10th century. Narain summarizes the controversy between devotees and academics regarding the development of Ganesha as follows:
What is inscrutable is the somewhat dramatic appearance of Gaņeśa on the historical scene. His antecedents are not clear. His wide acceptance and popularity, which transcend sectarian and territorial limits, are indeed amazing. On the one hand there is the pious belief of the orthodox devotees in Gaņeśa's Vedic origins and in the Purāṇic explanations contained in the confusing, but nonetheless interesting, mythology. On the other hand there are doubts about the existence of the idea and the icon of this deity" before the fourth to fifth century A.D. ... [I]n my opinion, indeed there is no convincing evidence of the existence of this divinity prior to the fifth century.
POSSIBLE INFLUENCES
Courtright reviews various speculative theories about the early history of Ganesha, including supposed tribal traditions and animal cults, and dismisses all of them in this way:
In the post 600 BC period there is evidence of people and places named after the animal. The motif appears on coins and sculptures.
Thapan's book on the development of Ganesha devotes a chapter to speculations about the role elephants had in early India but concludes that, "although by the second century CE the elephant-headed yakṣa form exists it cannot be presumed to represent Gaṇapati-Vināyaka. There is no evidence of a deity by this name having an elephant or elephant-headed form at this early stage. Gaṇapati-Vināyaka had yet to make his debut."
One theory of the origin of Ganesha is that he gradually came to prominence in connection with the four Vinayakas (Vināyakas). In Hindu mythology, the Vināyakas were a group of four troublesome demons who created obstacles and difficulties but who were easily propitiated. The name Vināyaka is a common name for Ganesha both in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist Tantras. Krishan is one of the academics who accepts this view, stating flatly of Ganesha, "He is a non-vedic god. His origin is to be traced to the four Vināyakas, evil spirits, of the Mānavagŗhyasūtra (7th–4th century BCE) who cause various types of evil and suffering". Depictions of elephant-headed human figures, which some identify with Ganesha, appear in Indian art and coinage as early as the 2nd century. According to Ellawala, the elephant-headed Ganesha as lord of the Ganas was known to the people of Sri Lanka in the early pre-Christian era.
A metal plate depiction of Ganesha had been discovered in 1993, in Iran, it dated back to 1,200 BCE. Another one was discovered much before, in Lorestan Province of Iran.
First Ganesha's terracotta images are from 1st century CE found in Ter, Pal, Verrapuram and Chandraketugarh. These figures are small, with elephant head, two arms, and chubby physique. The earliest Ganesha icons in stone were carved in Mathura during Kushan times (2nd-3rd centuries CE).
VEDIC AND EPIC LITERATURE
The title "Leader of the group" (Sanskrit: gaṇapati) occurs twice in the Rig Veda, but in neither case does it refer to the modern Ganesha. The term appears in RV 2.23.1 as a title for Brahmanaspati, according to commentators. While this verse doubtless refers to Brahmanaspati, it was later adopted for worship of Ganesha and is still used today. In rejecting any claim that this passage is evidence of Ganesha in the Rig Veda, Ludo Rocher says that it "clearly refers to Bṛhaspati—who is the deity of the hymn—and Bṛhaspati only". Equally clearly, the second passage (RV 10.112.9) refers to Indra, who is given the epithet 'gaṇapati', translated "Lord of the companies (of the Maruts)." However, Rocher notes that the more recent Ganapatya literature often quotes the Rigvedic verses to give Vedic respectability to Ganesha .
Two verses in texts belonging to Black Yajurveda, Maitrāyaṇīya Saṃhitā (2.9.1) and Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (10.1), appeal to a deity as "the tusked one" (Dantiḥ), "elephant-faced" (Hastimukha), and "with a curved trunk" (Vakratuņḍa). These names are suggestive of Ganesha, and the 14th century commentator Sayana explicitly establishes this identification. The description of Dantin, possessing a twisted trunk (vakratuṇḍa) and holding a corn-sheaf, a sugar cane, and a club, is so characteristic of the Puranic Ganapati that Heras says "we cannot resist to accept his full identification with this Vedic Dantin". However, Krishan considers these hymns to be post-Vedic additions. Thapan reports that these passages are "generally considered to have been interpolated". Dhavalikar says, "the references to the elephant-headed deity in the Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā have been proven to be very late interpolations, and thus are not very helpful for determining the early formation of the deity".
Ganesha does not appear in Indian epic literature that is dated to the Vedic period. A late interpolation to the epic poem Mahabharata says that the sage Vyasa (Vyāsa) asked Ganesha to serve as his scribe to transcribe the poem as he dictated it to him. Ganesha agreed but only on condition that Vyasa recite the poem uninterrupted, that is, without pausing. The sage agreed, but found that to get any rest he needed to recite very complex passages so Ganesha would have to ask for clarifications. The story is not accepted as part of the original text by the editors of the critical edition of the Mahabharata, in which the twenty-line story is relegated to a footnote in an appendix. The story of Ganesha acting as the scribe occurs in 37 of the 59 manuscripts consulted during preparation of the critical edition. Ganesha's association with mental agility and learning is one reason he is shown as scribe for Vyāsa's dictation of the Mahabharata in this interpolation. Richard L. Brown dates the story to the 8th century, and Moriz Winternitz concludes that it was known as early as c. 900, but it was not added to the Mahabharata some 150 years later. Winternitz also notes that a distinctive feature in South Indian manuscripts of the Mahabharata is their omission of this Ganesha legend. The term vināyaka is found in some recensions of the Śāntiparva and Anuśāsanaparva that are regarded as interpolations. A reference to Vighnakartṛīṇām ("Creator of Obstacles") in Vanaparva is also believed to be an interpolation and does not appear in the critical edition.
PURANIC PERIOD
Stories about Ganesha often occur in the Puranic corpus. Brown notes while the Puranas "defy precise chronological ordering", the more detailed narratives of Ganesha's life are in the late texts, c. 600–1300. Yuvraj Krishan says that the Puranic myths about the birth of Ganesha and how he acquired an elephant's head are in the later Puranas, which were composed from c. 600 onwards. He elaborates on the matter to say that references to Ganesha in the earlier Puranas, such as the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas, are later interpolations made during the 7th to 10th centuries.
In his survey of Ganesha's rise to prominence in Sanskrit literature, Ludo Rocher notes that:
Above all, one cannot help being struck by the fact that the numerous stories surrounding Gaṇeśa concentrate on an unexpectedly limited number of incidents. These incidents are mainly three: his birth and parenthood, his elephant head, and his single tusk. Other incidents are touched on in the texts, but to a far lesser extent.
Ganesha's rise to prominence was codified in the 9th century, when he was formally included as one of the five primary deities of Smartism. The 9th-century philosopher Adi Shankara popularized the "worship of the five forms" (Panchayatana puja) system among orthodox Brahmins of the Smarta tradition. This worship practice invokes the five deities Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, and Surya. Adi Shankara instituted the tradition primarily to unite the principal deities of these five major sects on an equal status. This formalized the role of Ganesha as a complementary deity.
SCRIPTURES
Once Ganesha was accepted as one of the five principal deities of Brahmanism, some Brahmins (brāhmaṇas) chose to worship Ganesha as their principal deity. They developed the Ganapatya tradition, as seen in the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana.
The date of composition for the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana - and their dating relative to one another - has sparked academic debate. Both works were developed over time and contain age-layered strata. Anita Thapan reviews comments about dating and provides her own judgement. "It seems likely that the core of the Ganesha Purana appeared around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries", she says, "but was later interpolated." Lawrence W. Preston considers the most reasonable date for the Ganesha Purana to be between 1100 and 1400, which coincides with the apparent age of the sacred sites mentioned by the text.
R.C. Hazra suggests that the Mudgala Purana is older than the Ganesha Purana, which he dates between 1100 and 1400. However, Phyllis Granoff finds problems with this relative dating and concludes that the Mudgala Purana was the last of the philosophical texts concerned with Ganesha. She bases her reasoning on the fact that, among other internal evidence, the Mudgala Purana specifically mentions the Ganesha Purana as one of the four Puranas (the Brahma, the Brahmanda, the Ganesha, and the Mudgala Puranas) which deal at length with Ganesha. While the kernel of the text must be old, it was interpolated until the 17th and 18th centuries as the worship of Ganapati became more important in certain regions. Another highly regarded scripture, the Ganapati Atharvashirsa, was probably composed during the 16th or 17th centuries.
BEYOND INDIA AND HINDUISM
Commercial and cultural contacts extended India's influence in western and southeast Asia. Ganesha is one of a number of Hindu deities who reached foreign lands as a result.
Ganesha was particularly worshipped by traders and merchants, who went out of India for commercial ventures. From approximately the 10th century onwards, new networks of exchange developed including the formation of trade guilds and a resurgence of money circulation. During this time, Ganesha became the principal deity associated with traders. The earliest inscription invoking Ganesha before any other deity is associated with the merchant community.
Hindus migrated to Maritime Southeast Asia and took their culture, including Ganesha, with them. Statues of Ganesha are found throughout the region, often beside Shiva sanctuaries. The forms of Ganesha found in Hindu art of Java, Bali, and Borneo show specific regional influences. The spread of Hindu culture to southeast Asia established Ganesha in modified forms in Burma, Cambodia, and Thailand. In Indochina, Hinduism and Buddhism were practiced side by side, and mutual influences can be seen in the iconography of Ganesha in the region. In Thailand, Cambodia, and among the Hindu classes of the Chams in Vietnam, Ganesha was mainly thought of as a remover of obstacles. Today in Buddhist Thailand, Ganesha is regarded as a remover of obstacles, the god of success.
Before the arrival of Islam, Afghanistan had close cultural ties with India, and the adoration of both Hindu and Buddhist deities was practiced. Examples of sculptures from the 5th to the 7th centuries have survived, suggesting that the worship of Ganesha was then in vogue in the region.
Ganesha appears in Mahayana Buddhism, not only in the form of the Buddhist god Vināyaka, but also as a Hindu demon form with the same name. His image appears in Buddhist sculptures during the late Gupta period. As the Buddhist god Vināyaka, he is often shown dancing. This form, called Nṛtta Ganapati, was popular in northern India, later adopted in Nepal, and then in Tibet. In Nepal, the Hindu form of Ganesha, known as Heramba, is popular; he has five heads and rides a lion. Tibetan representations of Ganesha show ambivalent views of him. A Tibetan rendering of Ganapati is tshogs bdag. In one Tibetan form, he is shown being trodden under foot by Mahākāla, (Shiva) a popular Tibetan deity. Other depictions show him as the Destroyer of Obstacles, and sometimes dancing. Ganesha appears in China and Japan in forms that show distinct regional character. In northern China, the earliest known stone statue of Ganesha carries an inscription dated to 531. In Japan, where Ganesha is known as Kangiten, the Ganesha cult was first mentioned in 806.
The canonical literature of Jainism does not mention the worship of Ganesha. However, Ganesha is worshipped by most Jains, for whom he appears to have taken over certain functions of Kubera. Jain connections with the trading community support the idea that Jainism took up Ganesha worship as a result of commercial connections. The earliest known Jain Ganesha statue dates to about the 9th century. A 15th-century Jain text lists procedures for the installation of Ganapati images. Images of Ganesha appear in the Jain temples of Rajasthan and Gujarat.
WIKIPEDIA
Clemant Voule, Relator Especial das Nações Unidas sobre os Direitos à Liberdade de Reunião Pacífica e de Associação, compareceu a evento no Centro de Artes da Maré, com organizações e coletivos para formalização de relatório. | Foto: Douglas Lopes
This relates to my concentration idea, because this was while my mom was in labor (labor isn't the pushing part fyi). During this specific time she was in a lot of pain, but she was trying to rest to get ready to start pushing and to welcome the baby into this world.
ONE OF MY ALL TIME FAV SONGS IN THE WHOLE WORLD!!!! I RELATE TO IT VERY WELL!!!!!!
I tear my heart open, I sew myself shut
My weakness is that I care too much
And my scars remind me that the past is real
I tear my heart open just to feel
Drunk and I'm feeling down
And I just wanna be alone
I'm pissed cause you came around
Why don't you just go home
Cause you channel all your pain
And I can't help you fix yourself
You're making me insane
All I can say is
I tear my heart open, I sew myself shut
My weakness is that I care too much
And our scars remind us that the past is real
I tear my heart open just to feel
I tried to help you once
Against my own advice
I saw you going down
But you never realized
That you're drowning in the water
So I offered you my hand
Compassion's in my nature
Tonight is our last stand
I tear my heart open, I sew myself shut
My weakness is that I care too much
And our scars remind us that the past is real
I tear my heart open just to feel
I'm drunk and I'm feeling down
And I just wanna be alone
You shouldn't ever come around
Why don't you just go home?
Cause you're drowning in the water
And I tried to grab your hand
I left my heart open
But you didn't understand
But you didn't understand
Go fix yourself
I can't help you fix yourself
But at least I can say I tried
I'm sorry but I gotta move on with my own life
I can't help you fix yourself
But at least I can say I tried
I'm sorry but I gotta move on with my own life
I tear my heart open, I sew myself shut
My weakness is that I care too much
And our scars remind us that the past is real
I tear my heart open just to feel
I tear my heart open, I sew myself shut
My weakness is that I care too much
And our scars remind us that the past is real
I tear my heart open just to feel
You will feel very excited when you see something which can relate to your good memories.
I went to Lake Side to take some photos of Chinese Garden for my designers this morning. The weather was perfect for photo shooting; sunny with blue sky. When I was ready … and click… cannot fire… What’s wrong? … Check… no SD card… WTF. I forgot put the SD card back to camera after transferring photos to computer last night. I remembered to take the card before leaving home. Unfortunately a client called me while I was preparing to leave. After the conversation, I left home without taking SD card…
Hiyo…
Anyway, I decided to go back home and take the card. Otherwise we will not finish the design in time. When I get back to Lake Side the weather changed. It became cloudy. What the luck? I was disappointed as my effort to come here early was wasted. Anyway I took some shots of Lake and temples and HDB and so on…
I walked along the jogging track beside the lake… and I found a tamarind tree and I was so excited. It has new leaves and buds. I was happy taking photos of tamarind leaves.
It really makes me to remember my home town, my mom and my mom’s cooking. She would make a salad with those tamarind buds, butter bean and onion. That salad is very simple yet very delicious.
I miss you, mom… and your delicious home cooking.
Relating to the Guildford Student Protest, the letter apologies to the inconvenience to Printing students, as they are 'taking over' the space for discussions
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Houston is a city of beauty and at night it is a city of lights. Beneath all the beauty and
lights it is a city full of people who are striving to survive, who have lost all hope
with the system and only find strength in those who can relate or those who are in the same situation or predicament and find comfort in knowing that they are not alone
no matter how lost, lonely or forgotten they may be.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
This color relates to the imagination and spirituality. It stimulates the imagination and inspires high ideals. It is an introspective color, allowing us to get in touch with our deeper thoughts.
The difference between violet and purple is that violet appears in the visible light spectrum, or rainbow, whereas purple is simply a mix of red and blue. Violet has the highest vibration in the visible spectrum.
While the violet is not quite as intense as purple, its essence is similar. Generally the names are interchangeable and the meaning of the colors is similar. Both contain the energy and strength of red with the spirituality and integrity of blue. This is the union of body and soul creating a balance between our physical and our spiritual energies.
Purple or violet assists those who seek the meaning of life and spiritual fulfillment - it expands our awareness, connecting us to a higher consciousness. For this reason it is associated with transformation of the soul and the philosophers of the world are often attracted to it.
In the meaning of colors, purple and violet represent the future, the imagination and dreams, while spiritually calming the emotions. They inspire and enhance psychic ability and spiritual enlightenment, while, at the same time, keeping us grounded.
The color violet relates to the fantasy world, and a need to escape from the practicalities of life. It is the daydreamer escaping from reality.
From a color psychology perspective, purple and violet promote harmony of the mind and the emotions, contributing to mental balance and stability, peace of mind, a link between the spiritual and the physical worlds, between thought and activity. Violet and purple support the practice of meditation.
The color violet inspires unconditional and selfless love, devoid of ego, encouraging sensitivity and compassion. Violet can be sensitive to all the different forms of pollution in the world today, whether it be air pollution, noise pollution, visual pollution or the pollution in our food chain. This sensitivity makes violet susceptible to illness and allergies, vulnerable to its everyday surroundings.
Violet encourages creative pursuits and seeks inspiration and originality through its creative endeavors. It likes to be unique, individual and independent, not one of the crowd. Artists, musicians, writers, poets and psychics are all inspired by violet and its magic and mystery.
Violet is the color of the humanitarian, using its better judgment to do good for others. Combining wisdom and power with sensitivity and humility, violet can achieve a lot for those less fortunate.
The color purple is specifically associated with royalty and the nobility, creating an impression of luxury, wealth and extravagance.
Purple has power. It has a richness and quality to it that demands respect. Purple is ambitious and self-assured, the leader.
Oh, sun drenched French girls wont relate to
A frozen girl from the northern state
Dreamin about happy babies kicking ladies in the metro now
And the mirrors wont sing back to..
Chopping your air or you're choppin the line
But you lap that up and laugh back up and smile
Whoo! Alright, lets fall apart and the clock starts here and now
Tick tick tick tick tick tick, ow!
She said your allegory is far too blunt
I said this aint no laboratory, you're the cunt
She said I'm punching the distance, it doesnt rhyme
Or resonate brilliance in its time
But is it lyrical genius or crap rock poetry?
I say the linear drums more sin Patti Smith than me
Maybe the reason we're so uninspired
Cos we're hours late and the bodies are tired,
I think everybody here can agree
That the party aint wank cos the booze is free
No, free spirits aint setting no one's spirit free
Yeah, uh huh, I'm fallin apart and the clock starts here and now
Tick tick tick tick, ow
Wind it up now!
People don't dance no more, (what!)
They just stand there like this, (uh huh)
They cross their arms and stare you down and drink and moan and piss (that's right!)
People don't dance no more (uh huh)
They just stand there like this (yeah!)
They cross their arms and stare you down and drink and moan and piss (ok!)
People don't dance no more, (what!)
They just stand there like this, (that's right!)
They cross their arms and stare you down and drink and moan and piss (ok now!)
People don't dance no more
They just stand there like this
They cross their arms and stare you down and drink and moan and piss
Y'all ready girls? (uh huh, yeah)
Break!
Bishop Patrick Rooke related the Disestablishment of the Church of Ireland to contemporary challenges in his presidential address to Tuam, Killala and Achonry Diocesan Synod last Saturday (21st September).
‘I am conscious that our meeting this year is being held against the backdrop of the 150th anniversary of the Irish Church Act which brought about the Disestablishment of the Church of Ireland on 1st January 1871,’ Bishop Rooke remarked. ‘No event in the history of our country has played a more crucial role in shaping the Church of Ireland as it is today.’
In a recent foreword in his diocesan magazine, the bishop had ‘dared to contrast the positive outcome for the Church of Ireland, after a few turbulent years,’ with the Church’s present concerns with the outworking of Brexit ‘and all it might imply for the people of Ireland; not least for those of us in the West.’
His address referred to the fear – in the short term – around how a hard Brexit, in particular, will affect the diocese and not least the farming community and people on lower incomes: ‘A no–deal Brexit will undoubtedly have serious economic, social and political implications and we trust that political reality and sensitivity will prevail. So let us pray, and pray fervently, for the leaders and institutions of government across the European Union at this time.’
Bishop Rooke also recognised fears with regard to the arrival of refugees and asylum seekers in communities, which was ‘an important element’ in the UK’s 2016 referendum and has been manifested recently in Oughterard. He reaffirmed his statement on the issue: ‘Many fears are overcome when local people have the opportunity to meet with those who may come to live alongside them … and to hear their stories.’
He has visited and enjoyed meeting with the residents of the Direct Provision Centre in Ballaghaderreen, also located within the diocese, and found how they have appreciated local welcome and support.
‘I would encourage the State to provide opportunities for meeting and listening,’ he commented. ‘For a new influx of people to be properly catered for, government should be planning, in parallel, to provide extra services and facilities above and beyond those that already exist. Such an undertaking would also, I believe, go a long way towards allaying the local community’s concerns.’
This informative book is written in a narrative that is easy flowing, allowing readers to understand it better. The examples are compelling; with the various examples written in there, it is impossible not to relate to one of them. This conflict of personalities not only happens between husband and wife, but also between parent and child, at work and play, and in all other types of relationships. This book can give you many examples of these problems that cover different areas of life, from the way we cook to the way we dress. If you have persistent problems with someone in your life, whether your parents or your significant other, this book can help you. || ReadersMagnet
There seem to be so many sidetracks in relating to our life-situations, sidetracks of all kinds by which we are seduced: "Food, gas, lodging, next exit." We are always promised something if we turn right at the next exit as we travel down our highway. There are so many colorful advertisments. We never want to be just where and what we are; we always want to be somewhere else. We can always turn at the next exit, even though we really know we are stuck on our highway anyway, that we really have no choice about it. Where we are is embarrassing, and so we would like to hear somebody say that there is an alternative whereby we do not have to be ashamed of ourselves: "I'll provide a mask, just put it on." Then you can get off at that exit and you are "saved" by pretending to be what you are not. You think people see you as a different person, the one wearing the mask of what you would like to be.
Buddhism promises nothing. It teaches us to be what we are where we are, constantly, and it teaches us to relate to our living situations accordingly. That seems to be the way to proceed on our highway without being distracted by the sidetracks and exits of all kinds. The signs say: "Tibetan Village, next exit;" "Japanese Village, next exit;" "Nirvana, next exit;" "Enlightenment, next exist--instant one;" "Disneyland,next exit." If you turn right, everything is going to be OK. You get what you are promised. But after having gone to Disneyland or having taken part in the Nirvana Festival, then you have to think about how you are going to get back to your car, how you are going to get home. This means you have to get back on the highway once more. It is unavoidable. I am afraid that this portrays our basic situation, the process in which we are constantly involved.
I am sorry not to be presenting any glamorous and beautiful promises. Wisdom happens to be a domestic affair. Buddha saw the world as it is and that was his enlightenment. "Buddha" means "awake", being awake, completely awake---that seems to be his message to us. He offered us a path to being awake, a path with eight points, and he called it "the eightfold path".
The first point the Buddha made has to do with "right view". Wrong view is a matter of conceptualization. Someone is walking toward us---suddenly we freeze. Not only do we freeze ourselves, but we also freeze the space in which the person is walking toward us. We call him "friend" who is walking through this space or "enemy". Thus the person is automatically walking through a frozen situation of fixed ideas---"this is that", or "this is not that". This what Buddha called "wrong view". It is a conceptualized view which is imperfect because we do not see the situation as it is. There is the possibility, on the other hand, of not freezing that space. The person could walk into a lubricated situation of myself and that person as we are. Such a lubricated situation can exist and can create open space.
Of course, openness could be appropriated as a philosophical concept as well, but the philosophy need not necessarilly be fixed. The situation could be seen without the idea of lubrication as such, without any fixed idea. In other words, the philosophical attitude could be just to see the situation as it is. "That person walking toward me is not a friend, therefore he is not an enemy either. He is just a person approaching me. I don't have to prejudge him at all". That is what is called "right view".
The next aspect of the eightfold path is called "right intention". Ordinary intention is based upon the process we have just described. Having conceptually fixed the person, now you are ready either to grasp or attack him. Automatically there is an apparatus functioning to provide either a waterbad or a shotgun for that person. That is the intention. It is a thought process which relates thinking to acting. In your constant alertness to relate the situation to your security, the intention is worked between two jaws. The emotional element, concerned with pleasure or pain, expansion or withdrawal, is one jaw; the heavy, physical aspect of the situation is the other. Situations keep you chewing your intention constantly, like gristle. Intention always has the quality of either invitation or attack.
But according to Buddha there is also "right intention". In order to see what this is, we first must understand what Buddha meant by "right". He did not mean to say right as opposed to wrong at all. He said "right" meaning "what is", being right without a concept of what is right. "Right" translates the Sanskrit samyak, which means "complete". Completeness needs no relative help, no support through comparison; it is self-sufficient. Samyak means seeing life as it is without crutches, straightforwardly. In a bar one says, "I would like a straight drink". Not diluted with club soda or water; you just have it straight. That is samyak. No dilutions, no concoctions---just a straight drink. Buddha realized that life could be potent and delicious, positive and creative, and he realized that you do not need any concoctions with which to mix it. Life is a straight drink---hot pleasure, hot pain, straightforward, one hundred percent.
So right intention means not being inclined toward anything other than what is. You are not involved in the idea that life could be beautiful or could be painful, and you are not being careful about life. According to Buddha, life is pain, life is pleasure. That is the samyak quality of it---so precise and direct; straight life without any concoctions. There is no need at all to reduce life situations or intensify them. Pleasure as it is, pain as is---these are the absolute qualities of Buddha's approach to intention.
CHOGYAM TRUNGPA / The Myth of Freedom / Shambhala Publications
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Visualize Exercise to Get More from a Workout
Snack on Some Watermelon — Today’s Greatist Tip
Eat Protein Post-Workout –Today’s Greatist Tip
Use Coconut Oil — Today’s Greatist Tip
Try Krav Maga — Today’s Greatist Tip
Beware of Overeating With Friends — Today’s Greatist Tip
Unfreeze Your Brain — Today’s Greatist Tip
Part of a set of images relating to the Mass Trespass that took place at Pangdean Bottom in the Sussex downs on 24th July 2021.
www.instagram.com/landscapesoffreedom/
Part of a rich english tradition - see: Mass trespass of Kinder Scout
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_trespass_of_Kinder_Scout
The linoprint illustrations featured are by Nick Hayes:
www.instagram.com/nickhayesillustration/
folioart.co.uk/illustrator/nick-hayes/
The police were outnumbered by film crews and Radio 4!
#right2roam #righttoroam #freeroamers #masstrespass #access2land #accesstoland #linoprint #redkite #birdofprey #meatismurder #streetart #art #satire #landscapesoffreedom
Information relating to the aircraft is on the Cessnock Aerodrome - Hunter Valley Vintage Wings website at www.huntervalleyjoyflights.com.au
This photograph was taken by Mr Barry Howard who has kindly given Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, access to his collection and allowed us to publish the images.
This image can be used for study and personal research purposes. If you wish to reproduce this image for any other purpose please obtain permission by contacting the University of Newcastle's Cultural Collections.
Please contact Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, if you are the subject of the image, or know the subject of the image, and have cultural or other reservations about the image being displayed on this website and would like to discuss this with us.
If you would like to comment on the photograph, please contact Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, or leave a comment below.
Then negativity simply becomes food, pure strength. You no longer relate to negativity as being good or bad, but you continually use energy that comes out of it as a source of life so that you are never really defeated in a situation. Crazy wisdom cannot be defeated. If someone attacks or if someone praises, crazy wisdom will feed on either equally. As far as crazy wisdom is concerned, both praise and blame are the same thing because there is always some energy occurring ... a really terrifying thought.
Crazy wisdom could become satanic, but somehow it doesn't. Those who fear crazy wisdom destroy themselves. The negative destruction they throw at it bounces back at them, for crazy wisdom has no notion of good or bad or destruction or creation at all. Crazy wisdom cannot exist without communication, without a situation with which to work: whatever needs to be destroyed, it destroys; whatever needs to be cared for, it cares for. Hostility destroys itself, and openness also opens itself. It depends on the situation. Some people may learn from destruction, and some people may learn from creation. That is what the wrathful and peaceful deities, the mahakalas and the buddhas symbolize.
The four arms of the mahakala represent the four karmas. The whole structure of the image is based on energy and complete compassion devoid of idiot compassion. The first left arm represents pacifying. It holds a skull cup of amrita, the intoxicating nectar of the gods that is a means of pacification. Another arm holds a hooked knife, which symbolizes enriching, extending your influence over others, feeling the texture of the ground and the richness. The hooked knife is also regarded as the scepter of the gods. The third arm, on the right, holds a sword, which is the tool for gathering energies together. The sword need not strike, but just through its being waved around, energies come together. The fourth arm holds the three-pronged spear, which symbolizes destruction. You do not have to destroy three times, but with one thrust of this spear, you make three wounds, the ultimate destruction of ignorance, passion, and aggression simultaneously.
The mahakala sits on the corpses of demons, which represents the paralysis of ego. This is very interesting and relates to what we have already discussed. You must not make an impulsive move into any situation. Let the situation come, then look at it, chew it properly, digest it, sit on it. The sudden move is unhealthy, impulsive, and frivolous rather than spontaneous.
Spontaneity sees situations as they are. You see, there is a difference between spontaneity and frivolousness, a very thin line dividing them. Whenever there is an impulse to do something, you should not just do it; you should work with the impulse. If you are working with it, then you will not act frivolously; you want really to see it and taste it properly, devoid of frivolousness. Frivolousness means reacting according to reflex. You throw something, and when it bounces back, you react. Spontaneity is when you throw something and watch it and work with the energy when it bounces back at you. Frivolousness involves too much anxiety. Once you are emotionally worked up, then too much anxiety is put into your action. But when you are spontaneous, there is less anxiety, and you just deal with situations as they are. You do not simply react, but you work with the quality and structure of the reaction. You feel the texture of the situation rather than just acting impulsively.
The mahakala is traditionally surrounded by flames, representing the tremendous unceasing energy of anger without hatred, the energy of compassion. The skull crown symbolizes the negativities or emotions that are not destroyed or abandoned or condemned for being "bad". Rather, they are used by the mahakala for his ornaments and crown.
CHOGYAM TRUNGPA / The Myth of Freedom / Shambhala Publications
Foto: Miha Skerlep / Design: Alan Hranitelj
立法會發展智慧城市事宜小組委員會參觀香港國際機場
立法会发展智慧城市事宜小组委员会参观香港国际机场
LegCo Subcommittee on Matters Relating to the Development of Smart City visits the Hong Kong International Airport (8.8.2022)
La ministra de Justicia, Javiera Blanco, recibió a Maina Kiai, relator especial de Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho a la Libertad de Reunión Pacífica y de Asociación. 21.09.2015
Foto:Claudia Basaure P.
Relates to UNDP-supported LDCF-funded project ‘Enhancing National Food Security in the Context of Global Climate Change’ www.adaptation-undp.org/projects/kiribati-denhancing-nati...
Another picture relating to the Steed family of Stanton Suffolk. Named after his father Arthur John he was known as Jack He was born in Stanton in around 1894. .His records show that he married an Ethel Denney in Diss in Aug 1918 and was a Wesleyan. 5ft 9 inch tall.
The back of the card lists Christmas wishes from jack Steed and his wife Ethel (Denny) and his 1st daughter Peggy born in 1923 but not the 2nd Cynthia born 1929 . So this must date to between these dates.
Photograph taken by Mr & Mrs G Swain of Norwich 1867-1933. George Edwin Swain was based at 2a Davey Place and Mrs G Swain at 25 St Giles St.
Part of a a big collection of several hundred photos which were unwanted by any one at an auction sale.Rather than see them go in the bin I rescued them.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Part of a set of images relating to the Mass Trespass that took place at Pangdean Bottom in the Sussex downs on 24th July 2021.
www.instagram.com/landscapesoffreedom/
Part of a rich english tradition - see: Mass trespass of Kinder Scout
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_trespass_of_Kinder_Scout
The linoprint illustrations featured are by Nick Hayes:
www.instagram.com/nickhayesillustration/
folioart.co.uk/illustrator/nick-hayes/
The police were outnumbered by film crews and Radio 4!
#right2roam #righttoroam #freeroamers #masstrespass #access2land #accesstoland #linoprint #redkite #birdofprey #meatismurder #streetart #art #satire #landscapesoffreedom
立法會動物權益事宜小組委員會視察位於西貢的流浪牛遷移地
立法会动物权益事宜小组委员会视察位于西贡的流浪牛迁移地
LegCo Subcommittee to Study Issues Relating to Animal Rights visits a site in Sai Kung for relocated stray cattle (2017.11.14)
Finally, another HBO series I can get totally hooked into. And not just 'cuz of the sex. (I mean, REALLY... does anyone want to see Jane Alexander naked, giving head, really?)
It's extremely well written and acted (primarily a female writing staff), and really groundbreaking in looking at dysfunctional relationships through the prism of unflinching portrayal of sex.
Last night (we're a couple of weeks behind, watching it On Demand) we finally got to see Tim DeKay's weenie, just a little. I still think Carnivàle was the best thing that's ever been done on TV (DeKay was in it), so I was eager to see what he'd do in this show.
Turns out he and his wife, despite clearly loving each other, have a sex life that has completely fallen apart, and by ignoring the problem, dancing around it, avoiding it, etc., have now gone for over a year without having sex. While there are plenty of dissimilarities, there are enough parallels between this story and my recent history that it's both fascinating to watch... and a little strange to be watching it with Tom... then, true to form, never discussing how it relates to our own past.
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
rockin the boom bap on a buried entrance ramp, well there stairs i think but so badly worn away its more or lass a ramp
Dundalk overwhelm Bangor in All Ireland Final
by Roger Corbett
Bangor’s amazing run in the All Ireland Junior Cup came to an abrupt end when they were comprehensively beaten by Dundalk, eventually losing by 55-5.
Where do you start when trying to relate and absorb the events of Saturday’s final at Chambers Park? Firstly, congratulations to worthy winners Dundalk who nullified the Bangor attack, then went on to produce some stunning plays which racked up no less than 8 tries, each by a different player. For Bangor’s part, they were unable to respond to the intensity of Dundalk’s game, and lacked the cutting edge which their opponents used to great effect.
The day started full of promise, as the strong support from North Down made their way to Chambers Park in Portadown, knowing Bangor would be fielding their best team. Once again, the pundits had Bangor as the underdogs – just as they had done so in the previous three rounds! In confounding the experts earlier, Bangor produced some awesome performances against top quality opposition to get to the final. Dundalk had produced some convincing wins in the early rounds of the competition, but had struggled to get past CIYMS in the semi-final, just managing to squeeze ahead at the second time of asking. However, with a number of key players returning to the side in time for this game, they were now back at full strength and would be a formidable force to contend with.
Having won the toss, captain Jamie Clegg elected to play into the stiff wind in the first half. For the first 5 minutes, Bangor doggedly retained possession and tried to play their way into Dundalk’s half through a series of determined forward moves. However, little ground was made and, when possession was finally lost, the Dundalk back line produced a burst that simply cut through the Bangor defence resulting in an easy touch down under Bangor’s posts for a 7-0 lead.
Bangor stuck to their plan and slowly, but patiently, got their attack moving forward, eventually winning a penalty to the left of Dundalk’s posts, but Mark Widdowson’s kick into the wind drifted just wide of the mark.
The contrast in play between the two teams was becoming clear, with Bangor trying to keep the ball close while Dundalk were throwing it wide. The latter strategy was proving to be the more effective as, with 20 minutes gone, a quick back line move with players looping around resulted in an overlap on the right wing which gave a clear run in to again, score under the posts. A further 9 minutes later, they did it again and, although the Bangor defence had sensed the danger and moved across to cover it, their tackling let them down allowing Dundalk to get over in the right hand corner, taking their lead to 19-0.
By now, Bangor were trying to hang on until half time when they could regroup and come out with the wind at their backs. Dundalk, on the other hand were anxious to press home their advantage and give them a more comfortable lead. To Bangor’s credit, although camped on their own line for lengthy spells, they dug in and managed to hold on until the referee’s half time whistle.
As the teams reappeared from the dressing rooms, it was obvious Bangor were ringing the changes, particularly in the backs. With the wind advantage having lessened considerably, Bangor got the second half underway. It was now Dundalk’s turn to adopt the slow, steady approach, just as Bangor had done earlier. However, their more confident off-loading and support play was, once again, taking play deep into Bangor’s territory. Frustration at not being able to gain possession and take play out of their danger area eventually resulted in a yellow card for Clegg after a succession of penalties. Dundalk kicked the penalty to touch, won their lineout and drove for the line. Although initially held up by the Bangor defence, Dundalk’s repeated drives were eventually rewarded with another converted score, extending their lead to 26-0.
From the touchline, the Bangor faithful had felt that if their players had managed to score first in the second half, they may have been able to mount a fight-back and close the gap to their opponents. As it was, this Dundalk score simply bolstered their confidence and pushed Bangor deeper into trouble. With Bangor still a man down, Dundalk added to the score with a penalty and then another score in the corner. Everything was now working for the Leinster men, as even the difficult touchline conversion into the biting wind successfully split the posts, bringing the score to 36-0.
As the game entered the final quarter, and with Dundalk all but holding the cup, Bangor were now on the ropes. By contrast, the Dundalk players were in almost total control, and were not going to slow down now. In a 10 minute spell, they ran in a further 3 tries, making the scoreline 55-0. By now, any sense of dejection the Bangor supporters may have been feeling was now moved to feelings of sympathy for their players. However, pride was at stake and once again Bangor rallied as the game entered its final minutes. At last, the forwards got within striking distance of the Dundalk line and, although their repeated attacks were repelled, they finally managed to do what their opponents had done so effectively, and quickly passed the ball wide to Davy Charles. Even though they were 55 points ahead, the Dundalk defence made Charles work hard to drive through the tackles and score Bangor’s consolation try, bringing the final score to 55-5.
From Bangor’s point of view, the final score doesn’t tell the whole story of this competition. While the final may have resulted in a sad anti-climax for Bangor, the remarkable journey to get there will be remembered for some time. On the day, Dundalk were by far the better side, and Bangor would have to concede that their game was not up to the usual standard. However, there is no doubt the experience of competing at this level is something to relish and the goal now will be to secure a top four place in the league and try again next year.
Everybody at the club has nothing but the highest respect and praise for what has been achieved this year by not just the 1sts, but all the senior teams, and one poor result isn’t going to change that – the welcome at Upritchard Park for the returning players is testament to that. With that in mind, the players now need to put this disappointment behind them and provide the best possible response against a struggling Portadown side at home in the league next Saturday.
Bangor side: J Leary, A Jackson, P Whyte, F Black, G Irvine, R Latimer, J Clegg, C Stewart, R Armstrong, K Rosson, D Charles, M Aspley, M Weir, M Widdowson, C Morgan
Subs: S Irvine, O McIlmurray, D Kelly, M Rodgers, C Harper, D Fusco, M Thompson
Bangor scores: D Charles (1T)
Dundalk Storm To Title Dundalk 55 v Bangor 5 from KnockOn.ie
Dundalk Scorers: Christopher Scully, Owen McNally, Jonathan Williams, John Smyth, Ultan Murphy, Tiernan Gonnelly, James McConnon and Stephen Murphy 1 try each. Ultan Murphy 6 cons, 1 pen.
Bangor Scorers: David Charles 1 try.
In front of a big crowd at Chambers Park on Saturday afternoon Dundalk delivered a stunning and ruthless display to see off the challenge of Bangor and capture the All Ireland Junior Cup title for the very first time.
Three first half tries had them firmly in control at 19-0 ahead having played with the elements at the Portadown venue during the first half and while the wind dropped somewhat after half time the Dundalk intensity most certainly didn’t as they cut loose scoring five more tries.
Dundalk returned to a heroes welcome at their Mill Road clubhouse on Saturday night after a display of pure brilliance throughout the afternoon.
Precision, pace and skill from the Louth men from start to finish left Bangor playing second fiddle for long periods.
Documents from the early 1990s relating to blood plasma transfusion by Henan provincial government and military blood plasma collection stations that led to the spread of HIV to many people who sold blood. The blood collection stations were closed in the mid 1990s though some continued this very profitable business underground.
HIV Blood Transfusion Disaster Documents For more information see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_Economy The Wound by He Aifang on the history of blood disaster museums.cnd.org/CND-Global/CND-Global.01-01-25.html
Links to US Embassy website mentioned at the end of the report above are archived on the Internet Archive web.archive.org/web/20010809150226fw_/http://www.usembass...
See also article Dr. Gao Yaojie Human Rights China at www.hrichina.org/content/4754
Information relating to the aircraft is on the Cessnock Aerodrome - Hunter Valley Vintage Wings website at www.huntervalleyjoyflights.com.au
This photograph was taken by Mr Barry Howard who has kindly given Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, access to his collection and allowed us to publish the images.
This image can be used for study and personal research purposes. If you wish to reproduce this image for any other purpose please obtain permission by contacting the University of Newcastle's Cultural Collections.
Please contact Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, if you are the subject of the image, or know the subject of the image, and have cultural or other reservations about the image being displayed on this website and would like to discuss this with us.
If you would like to comment on the photograph, please contact Cultural Collections at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia, or leave a comment below.
A half filled album of photos relating to the Kroos Family from Holland . There are photos of Amsterdam , Arnhem and Eindhoven .
立法會改善環境衞生及市容事宜小組委員會視察元朗垃圾收集及鼠患監察設施
立法会改善环境卫生及市容事宜小组委员会视察元朗垃圾收集及鼠患监察设施
LegCo Subcommittee on Issues Relating to the Improvement of Environmental Hygiene and Cityscape visits refuse collection and rodent surveillance facilities in Yuen Long (2021.04.26)
Let us remember how Genesis, written by Moses, alchemically explains what we call initiation.
The word Mitsrayimah מצרימה or מצרים Misrahim, which in English is translated as Egypt, is a word that hides the mysteries of initiation.
If we visualize the land of Egypt in Africa, which in Hebrew relates to the word Mitsrayimah מצרימה or מצרים Misrahim, we will then discover that its main element is המים Mayim, the waters, which points precisely to the River Nile and the delta which empties into the Mediterranean sea. As we already explained in previous lectures, those waters relate to the fluids of our central nervous system.
When we read the bible we find that the founder of Judaism, whose name according to Genesis is Abraham, was the prophet who came from the city of Ur, which is written אור Aur, pronounced Or and means “light”; as it is written:
“I am יהוה that brought thee out of אור Ur of the כשדים Kashaddaim, to give thee this earth to inherit it.” - Genesis 15: 7
Abraham represents the sephirah Chesed of the Tree of Life that emanates from the Logoic triangle or Holy Trinity, which is one with the Ain Soph Aur or third aspect of the Absolute. So, from a kabbalistic, alchemical point of view, Abraham, Chesed, our Innermost, our inner Being, emanated from the celestial city of אור Ur of the כשדים Kashaddaim.
“And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south. And there was a famine in the earth: and Abram went down into Mitsrayimah מצרימה Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the earth.” - Genesis 12: 9, 10
From אור Aur of the כשדים Kashaddaim, Abram went towards the south, down into the land of Egypt, which in Hebrew is Mitsrayimah מצרימה.
Mitsrayimah מצרימה contains the word צר tzar, “form,” between מי Mi and מה Mah. Mi (“who”) and mah (“what”) contain the letter Mem, which represents the upper and lower waters of Genesis. The word המים Ha-Mayim means “the waters.”
The word מרים Miriam, which is the Hebrew name for the mother of Jesus, is hidden in the word Mitsrayimah מצרימה Hebrew for Egypt. Mitsrayimah מצרימה represents the sephirah Malkuth.
The word Tzadik, meaning “righteous” and Tzedek “justice” are symbolized in the letter Tzaddi of Mitsrayimah מצרימה.
So, המים Ha-Mayim, מרים Miriam, and Tzadik or Tzedek are words hidden in Mitsrayimah מצרימה. The waters המים Ha-Mayim and מרים Miriam hold Tzaddi “righteousness” and “justice.” They comprise the meaning of the lecture, which we are going to talk about.
The letter צ tzaddi relates to chastity and justice; it is the letter that relates to Tzadik, the righteous being, the just initiate, the alchemist. The Tzedek, Tzadik, the righteous, the just, is not a fornicator. It is an alchemist. This is why it is written:
“The righteous shall inherit the earth, and shall dwell therein for ever.” - Psalm 37: 29
Malkuth, Mitsrayimah, מצרימה Egypt belongs to the just. Malkuth relates to our physicality and to the land or tissue that we have in our central nervous system. Mitsrayimah מצרימה is called Egypt in English. The waters of the Nile represent the fluids upon which our brain and spinal medulla are floating. These waters or fluids flow into “the Mediterranean sea” or the sexual fluids that we have in “the middle of our terra” or physicality.
Imagine the Mediterranean sea and the River Nile, and picture the central nervous system of a human alchemist. In front of that human being is Arabia, which is by the red sea. Obviously the first word that we find or land that we find after Egypt is what we call the mount of Sinai in Arabia. From that point of view, in order to go to the land Arabia or Sinai (which is what the bible talks about in Exodus), we have to be alchemists. This is why when we enter into initiation, we enter first into the mysteries of Egypt.
It is not as many people think, that a certain race went out from certain lands of Chaldea with Abraham, etc., and finally they stopped in Egypt, and there their descendants built the pyramids of Egypt. That is indeed a literal interpretation of Genesis. Such conception has nothing to do with the archetypical, alchemical description that Moses wrote. Genesis is an alchemical guidance for the alchemists; we are talking about alchemy through the different precepts which we are addressing. The Bible is full of archetypical statements related with this science of alchemy that unfortunately people ignore. But we know them, and this is why we are giving these explanations, in order for all of us to know how to enter into initiation.
If we enter into initiation then we enter as the letter צ tzadi into the land of Mitsrayimah מצרימה, Egypt, in order to work with the waters of the river Nile and Mediterranean sea, living symbols of our central nervous system, which is the throne of Abraham.
Abram has to journey from the north (Chesed) towards the south (Geburah) in order to acquire צדיק Tzedek (justice). Thus, as a צדיק Tzadik (righteous), he went down as the letter צדי Tzaddi into the waters of Mitsrayimah מצרימה Malkuth, Egypt. Such is precisely the initiatic descent of the spirit into our physicality in order to start manipulating המים Ha-Mayim, the waters of מרים Miriam. Chesed is precisely the Ruach Elohim that in the beginning, according to Moses, was hovering upon the face of המים Ha-Mayim, the waters. We repeat: המים Ha-Mayim, the waters, are represented by the fluids in our central nervous system and in the sexual glands. Those are המים Ha-Mayim, the creative sexual waters of מרים Miriam that our spirit Chesed, the צדיק Tzadik has to control from within.
According to the writings of Moses, Brith Esh ברית אש is the pact of fire that begins with Chesed, the inner Abraham of the alchemist, who in the triangle of ethics (Chesed-Geburah-Tiphereth), through Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire, develops his archetypes, namely Isaac and Jacob.
“At the birth of Isaac, (צדק Tzedek) justice (Geburah) became united to (חסד Chesed) mercy; these divine attributes, symbolized by the patriarchs Isaac and Abraham, became blended in the person of Jacob, their offspring; and, therefore, it is written, 'Thou art my servant, oh Israel, in which I will be (תפארת Tiphereth) glorified.’” (Isaiah 49: 3). - Zohar
Then, at the level of the triangle of priesthood (Netzach-Hod-Yesod) the צדיקים Tzadikim, alchemists, develop their inner Joseph and subsequently their inner Aaron and Moses. Thus, when the צדיק Tzadik or alchemist within his causal body or inner Moses reaches the sixth dimension, the summit of Eloha Va Daath (Tiphereth, the fifth initiation of major mysteries), he beholds, in Daath, the almighty Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei, who tells him.
“I am the god of thy father (your Monad, namely), the god of Abraham (Chesed), the god of Isaac (Geburah), and the god of Jacob (Tiphereth)…
“I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in (Malkuth) Mitsrayim מצרים Egypt...
“And I am come down (within you) to deliver them out of the Iod of (Malkuth, the tenth sephirah) Mitsrayim מצרים Egypt, and to bring their (Iod) up out of the (tridimensional) earth unto a good earth and a large, unto a (tetradimensional) earth flowing with milk and honey…" - Exodus 3: 6, 7, 8
Thus, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (our Inner Monad) along with Moses (the Causal Body) beholds the two ways, namely, the direct and spiral paths, and has to decide which of the two ways to follow. Moses wrote about these two paths in a symbolic manner.
Let us understand that once the just (the righteous alchemist) reaches Tiphereth (the human soul, the fifth initiation of major mysteries) the alchemist in the sixth dimension is facing the dilemma of following the spiral path or the direct path. This is precisely what we call the second aspect of the Exodus.
The Three Selections
Master Samael Aun Weor stated that the heavenly hierarchies have to make three selections.
The first selection is when initiates through Brith Esh ברית אש (the pact of fire, sexual alchemy) enter into initiation. In order to comprehend Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire, the students have to receive lectures. They have to comprehend the doctrine of alchemy. They have to decide to walk on the path of the science of alchemy. This is how they enter into initiation, this is how they enter into Mitsrayimah מצרימה, Egypt, in order to control the waters of their Nile and their “Mediterranean waters” in themselves. Remember that Mediterranean means “the middle of the earth,” so the waters or fluids in “the middle of our terra” or physicality are the cerebral spinal and genital fluids where our spirit is hovering. So, those are the sexual waters that the initiates, the alchemists of the first selection have to control in order to achieve the first, second, third, fourth and fifth initiations.
Then when his inner Moses and inner Abraham (his Innermost) reaches the fifth initiation of major mysteries, he has to decide upon which of the two paths he will continue his alchemical work. The alchemist has to decide whether or not to follow the second selection, meaning the second selection of the Exodus, which is a very high work that the alchemist has to perform after reaching mastery. These two paths are represented in Genesis by the charitable life of Abraham. Regarding the former statement let us read the following quotation, written by this great alchemist and kabbalist Paul of Tarsus:
“Tell me you whose will is to be under the law, do you not hear [how] the law [is applied]? For it is written, that Abraham [Chesed] had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free-woman.
“But the one who was of the bondwoman was born after the [law of reincarnation in the] flesh; but he of the free-woman was by the promise [in Daath].
“Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants [of fire]; the one from the Mount Sinai, which [through the spiral path] engenders to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children [the Pratyeka buddhas]. But Jerusalem which is above [in Daath] is free, which is [Elah-Yam] the mother of all of us [the Bodhisattvas].
“For it is written: “Rejoice, O barren she who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in [physical] labor! For the children of the desolate [in Malkuth] will be more than those of she who has a husband [in Daath].”
“Now we, brethren [צדיק Tzadik alchemists], as Isaac was, are the children of the promise [in Daath].” [“Isaac, who is on (Geburah) the left hand (below the sephirah Daath), presides over the Beth Din or tribunal of (צדק Tzedek) Justice, whence are issued decrees and judgments.” - Zohar]
“But as then the one who was born after the [law of reincarnation in the] flesh (Malkuth) persecuted the one who was born [in Geburah-Daath] after the [Holy] Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what says the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her children: for the children of the bondwoman shall not be heirs [of Chokmah as] with the children of the free woman. So then, brethren, we [Bodhisattvas] are not children of the bondwoman, but children of the free.” - Galatians 4: 21-31
Paul of Tarsus is addressing initiates, alchemists, not believers. The quotation is not concerned with what people think or believe or something of the sort, but with the will of those who are already doing the sexual alchemical work.
Notwithstanding, most of the alchemists who reach the fifth initiation of major mysteries choose to be under the law of reincarnation. What is the law? It is the law of karma. Those of the spiral path reincarnate periodically in Malkuth in order to pay what they karmically owe and in order to annihilate their egos. Slowly they go up towards the Absolute through many cosmic days.
The initiate that chooses the path of sacrifice for humanity engenders Isaac, the son of Geburah from the free woman. Sarah, the free woman, represents Aima Elohim in Daath. Agar is Malkuth, the wheel of Samsara that relates with the law of evolution and devolution; this is the wheel where many Buddhas Pratyekas reincarnate because they are still with ego. These are the צדיקים Tzadikim, alchemists that developed themselves under the law. As long as the צדיקים Tzadikim have defects, vices, and errors, they are under the law of karma, since the law of karma controls the ego. Karma controls the negative forces of Geburah. Yet, the free woman, who precisely represents Aima Elohim, the supreme forces of the Divine Mother, is represented in this allegory by Sarah the wife of Abraham, who is the one that begat Isaac.
Isaac represents צדק Tzedek (justice, Geburah, the spiritual soul) that became united to חסד Chesed (mercy, the Spirit), and whose divine attributes or archetypes (symbolized by Israel) became blended in Jacob (their offspring or human soul), who represents the initiate that creates the causal body (Moses). Thus, Moses descends with all of the powers of Jehovah Elohim in order to liberate Israel by means of the performance of the great alchemical work. Israel is liberated by means of the annihilation of all of the defects and vices, which are represented in the exodus by the people who serve the mechanical laws of Malkuth. This is done in order to achieve the complete self-realization by means of the total annihilation of פה-רע Phe-Ra (pharaoh, “the evil mouth,” the ego), in order to be completely clean from karma.
Yes, in order to be completely clean from karma we have to annihilate the ego, because the ego is under the law. But there are many thousands of initiates who prefer to go on the easier spiral path. They do not follow the direct path because it is very strict and demanding. Initiates from the direct path include Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, etc. They always show and teach how to kill, how to annihilate, our defects, vices, and errors. Their methods are written in books in a symbolic manner, as for instance the Mahabharata, which only the alchemists know how to read. In it Krishna talks to Arjuna about his relatives or psychological aggregates that we carry within our psyche, which are our egos. So that is precisely the point in this matter related to Abraham and Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire.
The Pact of Fire
The word Barashyth בראשית, that is translated in the bible as Genesis, is an anagram that has been explained in many lectures and in different ways. Thus, the main point in this lecture is Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire, is another anagram of Barashyth בראשית. It relates to circumcision. The pact of fire that all of us have to follow is chastity. The main point in circumcision or the elimination of that flesh, that prepuce or foreskin that cover the head of the male organ, is to understand the meaning of chastity which is what we are explaining here as sexual alchemy. Circumcision in alchemy means to eliminate the animal or desire sensation from the sexual organ. Thus, in the sexual act we must eliminate desire sensation and replace it for willpower sensation; this is done when we learn how to transmute the sexual energy.
At this point we have to understand what Brith Esh ברית אש, the pact of fire, precisely means. It is related to the letter י Iod, the tenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet.
The letter י Iod in the Hebrew alphabet is a dot that represents the sephirah Kether, the first emanation of the Ain Soph Aur, the abstract absolute light. Kether is a point in space. This is why the holy name of god יהוה Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei begins with י Iod. If we count the sephiroth from Kether down to Malkuth (without counting the sephirah Daath that represents the tree of good and evil) we count ten. So, the number ten represents the letter Iod. So if we look at the letter Iod as Kether, it represents the phallus, yet we must also know that Malkuth which is the sephirah number 10 represents IO, Ram-Io, the letter Iod of אדני Adonai.
“Let there be light” יהי אור Yehi Aur.
“The word יהי Yehi is composed of three letters, namely Iod being the first and third letters, and Hei coming between them. The Iod represents the male and the female principles. The full word is therefore a symbol of the divine Father (Kether) and Mother (Malkuth), the final Iod being the same as the first in order to show that all the three aspects or forms as stated, under which the Ain Soph (אור Aur) operated in the creation and production of the universe, were only the manifestations of one and the same divine (androgynous) Being.” - Zohar
The former quotation in accordance to letters and numbers. So the letter Iod hides many mysteries that we have to comprehend. As it is written:
“For as the lightning that comes out of the east (Kether), and shines even unto the west (Malkuth); so shall also the coming of (Abraham) the Son of (Adam Kadmon, the) man be.” - Matthew 24: 27
The former quotation alchemically means that the light, the ray of creation that emerges from within the Iod of Kether that in the tree of life descends “as the lightning from the East, and shines (in the North, Chesed and descends to the south, Geburah) even unto the West” (Malkuth), is the same אור Aur, light or Iods, or horns of יהי Yehi, the תיש Tayish of Barashyth ברא-שית (the ברא-תיש, the Iod of the שית Tayish of Abraham or the Iod or light of ביום B'Iom day of B'Hebaram בהבראם of Genesis 2: 4), and the light of יהי אור ויהי־אור Yehi Aur Va-Yehi Aur “Let there be light and there was light.” of Genesis1: 3
When that light or Iod reaches Malkuth, it continues to be the Iod, the light in the Vav, our spine. That light is the Iod of the Hei, Malkuth. That Iod is the tenth, one tenth, or what we call “the tithe.” Alchemically speaking the Iod is the 10% of the energy of Christ from the unknowable divine in the physical plane within our sexual energy.
So, kabbalistically and alchemically speaking, the Iod of יהוה Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei represents the lingam, and the Hei represents the yoni. Vav represents the man and Hei represents the woman. The letter Hei is very important, since it is written twice in the spelling of the holy name of God. So the letter Hei also represents Malkuth or Assiah, the fourth of the four worlds of the tree of life, namely Atziluth, Briah, Yetzirah and Assiah. The fourth letter of the holy name of God is Hei. Thus, when we are addressing Malkuth, we are also addressing Assiah and likewise we are addressing Hei. That Hei is Malkuth, our physicality.
Yet when we address the letter Iod alchemically speaking, we are addressing the shakti potential of our physicality. In other words, if we want to find the most potent energy in our physicality, we find it represented by the letter Iod, which is precisely the one tenth or the tithe, the solar Christic energy within ourselves. This is very important to comprehend in order to understand the precepts of alchemy. It is written:
“In the ancient book of Enoch, the course of [Nahera נהרה] the celestial river of life [better said, heavenly river of light] is described as resembling the letter Iod י (or creative shakti potential) which enters into the composition of the seventy-two divine names [of Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei] imprinted on the body of a child at time of birth, and denotes its purity.
“The first letter Iod [or fiery shakti potential] opens [Yesod, the foundation of the tree of life, the spine] as it were the womb of the second, the Hei, by means of which the Iod [the fiery shakti potential] becomes fruitful [along the tree of life, the Vav, the spine].” - Zohar
The book of Enoch describes the river that comes from Kether, the head of the ancient of days down into Malkuth as a river of life or river of light, in other words, the extension of the letter Iod or heavenly river of light becomes the letter Vav of ויהי־אור Va-Yehi Aur, the Iod, the light that descends from the crown of our head throughout the medullar canal and becomes the Iod of יסוד Yesod, in our sexual organs. This is why Jehovah said unto Moses:
“Sanctify me every first-born, opening any womb among the children of Israel, among Adam and among the beast; it is mine.” - Exodus 13: 2
Alchemically, we translate the former paragraph as follow:
“Sanctify me in every forge, that [shakti potential, or Iod, of the sperm] which cleaves the womb [of every woman-slave-Malkuth] among [the Alchemists, that is to say] the children [archetypes] of Israel [who are trapped in מצרים Misrahim], among Adam [in Tiphereth, the heart] and among בהמה Behemah [sexual bestial potency]; it is mine.” - Exodus 13: 2
The former quotation teach us how to free and return in the forge of Vulcan (the Holy Spirit, the Theomertmalogos) the light of the Iod of יסוד Yesod (sex), the light of the Iod of Chai חי (life), the light of the Iod of our Yam ים (sea), the light of the two Iods or male and female principles of Chaim חיים (divine life) from our sexual gonads, back to the Ain Soph Aur or Solar Absolute.
So, in other words, “Sanctify me in every forge.” What forge? The forge of Vulcan, the sexual act, where male and female work with fire. Alchemically speaking, it means, “sanctify my covenant in every sexual act, give to me that fiery sexual shakti potential which is within the sperm and ovum.” Since usually in the sexual animal act what the organism of the couple crave is to reach the physiological animal orgasm, and through the orgasm man and woman lose their fire, which is the fiery sexual shakti potential that nature and cosmos stored through metabolism in their sexual glands. Thus, when we read in the book of Exodus “Sanctify me in every forge,” namely, in every sexual act, “that which cleaves the womb,” namely, the fiery sexual shakti potential, understand that what cleaves the womb in every ordinary sexual act is the sperm that the male ejaculates. Thus, the sperm cleaves the womb, the uterus of the female, in order to create physical life.
Yet, alchemically speaking, when in the sexual act, we transmute the sperm into energy, then the energy or fiery sexual shakti potential cleaves a womb, but a spiritual womb which we all have; this is the spinal medulla. In alchemy the spinal medulla is a womb, where the fiery sexual shakti potential of the Holy Spirit arises; in Sanskrit this fiery sexual shakti potential is called Kundalini. In the book of Numbers Moses named this fiery sexual shakti potential the serpent of brass. Moses wrote:
“And יהוה Jehovah sent הנחשים השרפים the Nahashim Seraphim, fiery serpents (fiery sexual shakti potential) among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.”
They died because Moses, in the book of Genesis wrote:
“And (נחש Nahash) the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, has Elohim said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, Elohim hath said, You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.” - Genesis 3: 1-3
“Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against יהוה Jehovah, and against thee; pray unto יהוה Jehovah, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And יהוה Jehovah said unto Moses, Make thee a (שרף Seraph) fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole (spinal medulla): and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looks upon it, shall live. And Moses made a (נחש נחשת Nahash Nahashoth) serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole (spinal medulla), and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld (נחש נחשת Nahash Nahashoth) the serpent of brass, he lived.” - Numbers 21: 6-9
In Hebrew, נחש Nahash means one serpent and נחשת Nahashoth means brass, yet, since נחשת Nahashoth is written in feminine plural, it indicates two serpents; thus, together נחש נחשת Nahash Nahashoth denotes three serpents. The first serpent is נחש Nahash, which is the outcome of נחשת Nahashoth, the amalgamation of the other two serpents upon a cross, since the early letter ת Tav of the word נחשת Nahashoth, which grammatically indicates two serpents, was represented by a cross. This is why נחש נחשת Nahash Nahashoth indicates three serpents upon a pole. Thus, the שרף Seraph, fiery serpent, that Jehovah commanded Moses to make and set it upon a pole, means, to set a שרף Seraph upon the Sushumna canal, within the spinal medulla. The שרף Seraph is the outcome of the brass or alchemical amalgamation of two metallic elements, namely copper and zinc, red and blue, Yin and Yang, Ida and Pingala, Ob and Od, etc. So, the serpent of brass is actually the serpent from the brass, the outcome of the alloy of two metals, masculine and feminine. The serpent from the brass represents the fiery sexual shakti potential that cleaves the womb, but the spiritual womb, which is the spinal medulla or pole, Caduceus of Mercury. This is why Moses sets the serpent from the brass upon a pole. To that end, the serpent of brass is the (שרף Seraph) fiery serpent or fiery sexual shakti potential, the Divine Presence, the שכינה Schekinah, the outcome of נחשת Nahashoth, the brass, which is the sexual alloy of man and woman, Adam and Eve.
Comprehend this alchemical symbol, since נחש נחשת Nahash Nahashoth, the serpent of brass is what gives birth to the firstborn, Isaac, who opens the womb (our spiritual womb, the pole, the spinal medulla) among the children of Israel who are trapped in Malkuth.
Alchemically we wrote: “opening any womb of every woman slave in Malkuth,” because, alchemically speaking, whether we are male or female, our physicality is called “the woman.” Thus, “the woman” (our physicality) is slave of the sexual creative forces of nature or of what Moses called the הנחשים השרפים the Nahashim Seraphim, which in our physicality are the more subtle forces that represent our fiery sexual craving, our sexual potency in Yesod.
Also, our fiery sexual craving is “among Adam” so we have to also transmute the fiery sexual crave that is among Adam in Tiphereth (the heart).
“For from within, out of the heart of Adam, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders.” - Mark 7: 21
“And among the beasts,” among בהמה Behemah, who represent the sexual bestial craves ב-המה Be-Hamah “that roar” in our belly; remember that it is written:
“And נחש Nahash, the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim had made.” - Genesis 3: 1
So, the הנחשים השרפים the Nahashim Seraphim is not only related to Yesod (sex) but also to Adam (Tiphereth, the heart), and to בהמה Behemah, which is the inferior emotional center or solar energy in Hod; our solar plexus relates to the animal cravings of Behemoth. Indeed Behemoth squanders the solar forces, the manna from heaven. The archetypes of Israel, the Israelites, lived in the wilderness, nourishing themselves with that manna for forty years. Alchemists do likewise when they know how to transmute their physical bestial appetites and their main and more subtle force that is the sexual energy.
In that way we understand what the Zohar states about…
“…the letter Iod י or creative shakti potential which enters into the composition of the seventy-two divine names of Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei imprinted on the body of a child at time of birth, and denotes its purity.” –Zohar
We already explained how the 72 names of God are related to the four worlds of Kabbalah. These names are represented by the holy letters of יהוה the holy name of God. 10 is Iod in Atziluth. 15 is Iod Hei in Briah. 21 is Iod Hei Vav in Yetzirah. 26 is Iod-Hei Vav-Hei in Assiah-Malkuth. Thus, by adding the values of the letters of יהוה Iod-Hei-Vav-Hei we have 26, which further is reduced as 2 + 6 = 8, ∞, the sign of the infinite. By adding the values of the letters of each of the four worlds, namely, 10 + 15 + 21 + 26 = 72 names of God. Then 7 + 2 = 9. The 72 names of God are synthesized in Yesod יסוד, the ninth sephirah. When adding the value of the letters of Yesod יסוד we have 10 + 60 + 6 + 4 = 80 = 8, ∞, the sign of the infinite. This is how “the letter Iod י in Yesod יסוד enters in the composition of the seventy-two divine names of God, which are imprinted on the body of the child” Isaac at time of his birth in Geburah, which denotes its sexual purity. This is done by extracting the letter ס Samech (“the Ouroboros”) from the letters that spell the word Yesod יסוד, which becomes the word יוד Iod (י). The ס Samech (“the Ouroboros”) is the fiery sexual shakti potential, the שכינה Schekinah, the שרף Seraph from הנחשים השרפים the Nahashim Seraphim, or solar forces hidden within the יוד Iod (י), which we have in יסוד Yesod our sexual organs. Thus, Yesod יסוד is what we have to sanctify.
So, do not look for יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim outside of you. Binah, יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim, is the creator in Yesod (sex), thus יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim is energy. Jehovah Elohim יהוה אלהים is the creative force in each one of us and also outside of us. Jehovah Elohim יהוה אלהים is everywhere. Therefore, if you want to take advantage of the force of Jehovah Elohim, then learn the practical science of alchemy. This explanation is very important in order to comprehend the twelfth precept of alchemy. According to the book of Tarot or Torah, the hanged man is the twelfth.
The Twelfth Precept
The twelfth precept concerns the tithes [the tenths, the Iods or seeds] on fruit trees, as it is written:
“And every tree in which is the fruit of a tree sowing seed, to you it is for food.” - Genesis 1: 29
When people read Genesis 1:29 literally, without any alchemical explanation, they think, “Well, according to Genesis, if I am in this physical world, I am willing to eat the fruits from any tree in order to feed my physicality.” That is a good thought but it doesn’t need to be written in scripture. There are many animals that know how to eat the fruits from many trees and they don’t need to read Genesis in order to do it. Monkeys do it. Yet, they don’t even have the slightest idea of what alchemy is, which is what we are talking about here. Thus, alchemically we say:
“And (the Chaiah חיה life, that is the Iod, the soul of Binah, the Holy Spirit, the soul of the mercury or shakti potential of) every tree (of knowledge), in which is the fruit of a tree yielding (זרע zera, semen in Hebrew, or brute mercury or solar) seed; to you (during sexual alchemy) it shall be for food.” - Genesis 1: 29
So, alchemically, we are addressing the זרע zera, the semen, the seed. Remember that alchemically speaking we are trees pleasant to the sight. It is written:
“And out of האדמה ha-Adamah, the ground, made יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim to grow (every physicality, which alchemically is) every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food. And the tree of life בתוך bethuk “within” the garden (our physicality), and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.” - Genesis 2: 9
So, there are two trees inside our physicality that make it pleasant to the sight. The tree of life, which represents the spinal medulla, and the tree of good and evil, which are the sexual organs. The Iod of these the two trees that are within us is what we have to take care of. These trees contain the Iod, which this commandment is addressing. This means that from the seeds of those two trees we can eat. But unfortunately people that don’t know alchemy don’t eat from those trees. They don’t know how to put in an activity the chakras for instance which are in the spinal column in order to eat the solar light and to awaken other senses and thus to comprehend the universal life. When they go to the sexual act instead of transmuting the sexual energy as an alchemist they enjoy reaching the orgasm of the beasts. In that way Christians, Jews, Muslims, Brahmans, Buddhists, etc. will never awaken their consciousness. The Iod is the food of the human soul, the soul (which in alchemy and in the bible is called Israel). Thus, if we want to feed Israel inside of us, we have to eat the Iod, the seed of those two trees. To eat that seed means to transmute the Iod. We should not eat it as the animals do. It is written:
“And יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim took Adam (the human soul), and put him into the garden of Eden (the physicality) to dress it and to keep it. And יהוה אלהים Jehovah Elohim commanded Adam (the human soul), saying, Of every tree of the garden (your physicality) you mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (your sexuality), you shalt not eat of it (like a beast): for in the day that you eatest thereof (like a beast) you shall surely die.” - Genesis 2: 15-17
Or, in other words:
“…though it is unlawful [according to the cosmic common trogo-auto-egocratic law] to keep what is consecrated to me [the Ain Soph Aur] I permit you to eat [better said, to sexually transmute] of the tenth [the Iod or shakti potential] of the products of the earth [your physicality], whether of grains [semen] or [of the] trees [of life and knowledge], in order that they may serve as [a spiritual] food to you [better said, to your consciousness] and not to future generations [in other words, not to generate through fornication, since people utilize the sexual force in order to generate as animals]. - Zohar
“Therefore, the tithe [the tenth, the Yod] becomes a practical and necessary complement of the dynamic principle which emanates from the profound study of the Tenth Commandment, in other words: (you should not covet your neighbors goods): We must consider the mysterious Iod which is hidden in the middle of the central delta (the central nervous system) of the sanctuary of our Being, as a fountain, spring, and spiritual providence of all the interior and divine centers of our [Chaiah חיה] life...
“Behold here the Twelfth Arcanum of the [Torath] Tarot. Behold here the union of the cross with the triangle. Behold here Sexual Magic. Behold here the realized work, the living human being that does not touch the earth [Malkuth], but only with thought.” - Samael Aun Weor
So, in other words, in order not to touch the earth but “only with thought” in the very sexual act, we have to be very gentle and control the mind and to transmute the Iod to your brain, to your head. If you transmute the Iod and Shakti Potential of your sexual energy, without spilling a single drop on your sexual force, you are then “touching the earth only with your thoughts.” This is the alchemical meaning of it.
“Therefore [in the sexual alchemical copulation] shall the Ish איש [the י Iod, the tithe, the shakti potential, of the fire אש] leave [ יה Jah] his father and his mother [sperm and ovum, their physical receptacles], and [up along the spine] shall [the י Iod, the tithe, open the womb, the spine and] cleave to [the head as Hei or אשה Isha, the Kundalini, the Serpent of Brass] his wife: and they [Ish and Isha, איש ו אשה , the fire of יה Jah, Abba and Aima Elohim] shall be one [fire in the ו Vav of husband and wife, that is, in the spinal medulla of their Hei, their] flesh [their physicality]. - Genesis 2: 24
The twelfth precept is to first by means of sexual alchemy bring up your spine the shakti potential of the fruits of Daath (tree of knowledge) and thereafter radiate the Light — that is, the fruits of Chaim, the tree of life — in all the areas of our life, as a true blessing for all humanity. Thus, in the evening, we perform the positive sexual connection of יה Jah with our חוה Chavah, for such an alchemical transmutation will be the seed given force for the rest of the day, given that the evening and the morning are one day; therefore:
יום ליום יביע אמר ולילה ללילה יחוה דעת
"Day after day utter a speech, and night after night experience knowledge.” - Psalm 19: 2
What the former psalm states is our alchemical duty. Since this is what we alchemists do, day after day we utter the doctrine, and when we go and practice sexual alchemy night after night, we experience knowledge (daath, gnosis).
“What, in fact, does man know? Nothing, and at the same time he is allowed to ignore nothing. Devoid of knowledge, he is called upon to know all. Now, knowledge supposes the duad – a being who knows and an object known. The duad is the generator of society and of law: it is also the number of Gnosis. The duad is unity multiplying itself in order to create, and hence in sacred symbolism Eve issues from the inmost bosom of Adam. Adam is the human tetragram, summed up in the mysterious IOD, type of the kabbalistic phallus. By adding to this IOD the triadic name of Eve, the name of Jehovah is formed, the Divine Tetragram, which is eminently the kabbalistic and magical word, יהוה, being that which the high-priest in the temple pronounced IODCHAVAH.” - Eliphas Levi
Iod-Chavah יחוה is a very important word that we must comprehend. Iod-Chavah יחוה is spelled Iod-Chet-Vav-Hei and pronounced Jahchavah, which means “to experience.” We have to experience knowledge night after night. Daath is knowledge; the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Iod-Chavah יחוה means to experience sexual alchemy night after night.
Day after day intuitive Kabbalists utter knowledge. This is what is called רצון לתת Ratzon L’tet, “the will to give.” And night after night we experience, the will to receive, רצון לקבל Ratzon L’kabel, we learn, we receive from Chokmah in Daath.
Comprehend, if during the night we receive and don’t give during the day, then there is no harmony in our solar work. This is why we are giving this knowledge. We need to give it. This is רצון לתת Ratzon L’tet, the will to give. In the night we experience רצון לקבל Ratzon L’kabel, the will to receive the Iod, the light, from Malkuth, our Chavah, our physicality and the Iod from Yesod, our sexuality. The genitalia is also call Chavah, Eve, either in the male or the female.
So, night after night husband and wife receive the tenth, the tithe, the Iod, the light. The tithe, the Iod of the light, belongs to Kether, because according to the Cosmic Common Trogo Autoegocratic Law everything that descends from above (the Ain Soph Aur, the Solar Absolute) has to return to the Solar Absolute. To give and to receive is a cosmic solar cycle. All of the universe is under that solar law; this is how the life of the universe is sustained.
Our physicality works under that solar law. We receive solar energy; the sun nourishes us through the mouth, the nose, through impressions that we receive through the senses. We fill the genitalia of our physicality with that solar sexual force. Thus mechanically speaking, our physicalities receive and transform that solar energy and give to the earth to be nourished, and the earth returns that solar energy to the solar absolute. That is how the universe is sustained alchemically speaking. So, the solar energy that we are talking about is the solar Iod Kether, that belongs to the light of the Ain Soph Aur.
“So, what profit has the man (who fornicates) of all his labour which he takes under the sun? One generation passes away, and another generation comes: Yet, the earth to the age is standing. And the sun arises, and the sun goes down, and hastes to his place (the Ain Soph Aur) where he arose.” - Ecclesiastes 1: 3-5
This is why the twelfth commandment relates to the twelfth precept that concerns the tithes (the tenths, the Iods or seeds) on fruit trees, as it is written:
“And every tree in which is the fruit of a tree sowing seed, to you it is for food.” - Genesis 1: 29
So, take the tenths, to you it is for food. What is the tenths? Somebody might interpret it literally and say: that is the 10% of your income; yet, alchemically it means: Take for your enlightenment the Samech, the Ouroboros, the solar light that is hidden in the יוד Iod of יסוד Yesod, your sexual organ; yes, the Iod, which is the tenth letter, in Malkuth, your physicality.
Now let us talk about Jesus, Mary his mother, and John his disciple, since they relate to the twelfth precept or commandment that states:
“Thou shalt make thy light shine.”
This is how we will learn how to accomplish with certain steps of the stations of the cross. One of the stations of the cross is when Jesus talks to his mother Miriam and his disciple John.
So, through the alchemical cross Adam (our brain) will know חוה Chavah (our sex) his wife, who will say:
“I have gotten a man from יהוה Jehovah God.” - Genesis 4:1
Other translations say, “a man from the Lord.”
Yet alchemically we say:
“I have gotten an Ish איש (a י Iod, or shakti potential, of the fire אש) from Iod-Chavah יחוה.” - Genesis 4: 1
This means that the alchemist will eventually create Isaac within himself from the alchemical cross, meaning, from Iod-Chavah יחוה.
Thus, by not ejaculating Chaiah חיה life, the life of יה Jah, the alchemist makes the light of the Ain Soph Aur his own light, which blooms in his heart as wisdom and knowledge. This wisdom and knowledge is Iohannes Ra, the son of חוה Chavah, the mother of חי Chai, all living. Iohannes Ra is the outcome of our sublimated חיה Chaiah, the soul of Binah or soul of the mercury that through sexual alchemy we take from our sexual seed, the Iod or brute mercury.
“Therefore, when יהשוה Yeshua (the Shin, the fire of Chokmah) saw his mother (Aima Elohim in Daath), and his disciple (the human soul) standing by, whom he loved, he said unto his mother, (אשה Isha, Fiery) Woman, behold thy son (the human soul in Tiphereth)!
“Then he said to his disciple, Behold thy mother (Elah-Yam, אלה-ים the Sea Goddess in Daath)! And from that hour that disciple (or Bodhisattva) took her (the Brazen Serpent) into his own heart.” - John 19: 26, 27
That is precisely the mystery of that saying of master Jesus on the cross.
In Christianity they talk about the fourteen steps of the cross. In alchemy the cross is important: the vertical beam represents the lingam (masculine sexual organ), and the horizontal represents the yoni (feminine sexual organ). When they are united, they form a cross and perform the 14 steps of alchemy between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, which relate to the alchemical precepts that in the book of Zohar are explained in an alchemical kabbalistic manner, but that are also shown in the Gospels of the Lord.
The Divine Mother or the Blessed Mother Mary or Mariam in Hebrew represents אלה-ים Elah-Yam, the goddess of the sea. Even in this day they worship the mother of Jesus as the virgin of Carmel, the virgin of the sea. This in order to alchemically point that she represents the female aspect of the forces of אלהים Elohim; which is precisely אלה-ים Elah-Yam, “the sea goddess,” in Hebrew.
So, when the initiate reaches the fifth initiation of major mysteries, and chooses to follow the direct path, he becomes John, Iohannes Ra, or Johannan, because he receives a gift from Ra, God.
Then Osiris Ra, Christ says to the human soul: behold your mother and he says to the mother, the free woman, behold your son. Thus, Christ, Osiris Ra, reincarnates in the human soul, and John, the human soul, becomes one with Osiris Ra, meaning John becomes Iohannes Ra. This is a mystery of alchemy that we are learning through these alchemical precepts.
Now let us enter into the study of the thirteen precept.
glorian.org/learn/courses-and-lectures/precepts-of-alchem...