Dr. Blynd: freedumb vs. Phfreedom

• From the book "FUNKTIONARY, THE KEY HOLDERS ENPSYCHLOPEDIA"

Copyright 2004 Chocolate City Press

The Universe of Chocolate City

Resonated & Orchestrated by Dr. Blynd, Ph.F.

freedumb -  the state of unrecognized psychological captivity that sheeple remain in because they don't speak truth to power - and when truth is spoken around them, refrain from being open, or impervious to it. 2) the mindset that proposes "since we are liberated, we are also free." 3) the mindset that operates upon the notion that you can have individuality without accountability or responsibility. 4) the pretence that reality is truth and vice-versa. People cherish and relish their freedumb because they have been socialized into self-censorship along with misidentification with the mind. (See Phreedom). 

Freedumb is just a song to lip sync in your underwear. Don’t connect freedom with independence. Freedom from something and the freedom to do anything you want to do is not true freedom. [The powers that control BET have allowed the above Beyonce video [freeing ass] to be widely re-circulated while they are aggressively scrubbing the complete Jesse Williams speech from the internet as copyright infringement. Wonder why?]  

Phfreedom- the positive, generative, creative and playful aspect of freedom, i.e., freedom for, not freedom from. 2) the total annihilation of the notion of a phenomenal identity as "self" or "me." 3) the impersonal subjective pronoun "I" (the universal impersonal Consciousness) occupying the position vacated by the notional or illusory personal "me." 4) Consciousness in its unidentified, impersonalized, infinitized universality. 5) the overstanding that there is no universe independent of Consciousness. 6) the feeling of the seamless Unicity of nature. 7) release of the imagined bondage of volition (the feeling of not wanting to make a choice or not having to make a decision). 8) 'Thy Will,' i.e., the expression of the funktioning of the Totality sans a "doer." 'Freedom from' is a form of bondage, 'freedom for' is emancipative but not absolute. Phfreedom can only be the release of one's idea of a separate volitional Self. There is no "me" that can be liberated because there is no objective "me" that is in bondage to begin with—purely a case of mistaken identity. 9) the dawning of a love originating out of a profound depth of realization (anterior to the perceiving mind—from Consciousness itself) that seeks the liberation of the whole—light years beyond the pettiness of the "I am" based personal freedom. Phfreedom is impersonal—the vast impersonal Love for the whole, for all beings and all things. It is the realization that you are the undivided whole. 10) the re-awakening that happens when identification with the body-mind-complex ceases. Phfreedom is not something you possess, but something that possesses you. (See: The Self, Freedom, Disidentification, Entitification, Suddenlightenment, Ego, Shadow, "Me," "I," Supreme Self & I Am).

Phfreedom fighters- men and woman who arm themselves with: greatly increased and applied reading skills, listening skills, bullshit filtering systems, psy-war skills, mentallic skills, knowledge scrolling, truth-editing, organizational skills, reality hacktivism, knowledge of adversaries, truth instead of falsehood, reality instead of truth, library cards, law books, his-story and ourstory books, freedom technology, and firearms training. 2) a martyr who has yet to earn his/her permanent status. (See: Gun Control, Freedom Fighters, Knowledge Scrolling, Trickle-Sell Anemia, Mentallic & Rebellion). [MORE]

Jesse Williams' BET Awards complete speech [courageous]

html5 video converter by EasyHtml5Video.com v3.9.1

“The Hereafter is a Hustle” [Waiting, Deferring or Hoping for “Freedom/Change” in the Future [politics] or in the Afterlife [religion] is a bullshit mindgame conducted by the vested interests.]   

There was a glitch in the matrix last Sunday. It occurred during an awards show on BET, a network controlled by elite whites that usually filters out anything real. [The White elite owned media controls what you consume in order to try to control what you think and do.]

At a high point in his career and with much to lose, Jesse Williams left the shore of safety and talked about confronting white supremacy and changing the way we think about ourselves to a national Black audience. Here, he gambled - or risked the known for the unknown. ["only the gamblers know what life is"]

For more on the "invention called whiteness" and race as organization for the purpose of white domination follow the link below:

White supremacy is racism and racism is white supremacy 

Dr. Amos Wilson: 'We empower White People by the nature of our own behavior and attitudes as a people. They cannot be what they are unless we are, what we are. To a good extent, the European is our creation'

Blue Print For Black Power! 

"So we shouldn’t look at consciousness as some abstraction. As I often tell people, the most practical thing you can have is a good theory, is a good concept to guide your behavior, to be used as an instrument, to measure reality, as an instrument, to test reality. A good theory then organizes the world, organizes one’s approach to the world. It permits one to be able to evaluate the world, in terms of where one wants to go, in terms of what one wants to do. To be without theory, is to approach the world on an “ad-hoc” basis, you know just to meet it here and there, and to not approach it in a systematic form, to live “reactionarily,” “always reacting to what other people are doing, always being overwhelmed by events, and overwhelmed by the future, instead of creating events, and creating the future, and making the future.” See when one has then a good theory, and a good concept, one is able to do that. Consciousness… without human consciousness there is no world. It is the presence of human consciousness that brings meaning into the world. Without human beings in this world, conscious human beings in this world, in effect, there would not be a world. We bring the world into being through our consciousness. And through our consciousness, we create the world we live in. Out of the totality of reality our consciousness cuts our world at the fist itself. In other words, the kind of world you exist in reflects the kind of consciousness that you have. And notice if you change your consciousness or values and orientation, you enter into a different world. You interact with different people, people often you didn’t know existed in the world, social situations that you might not have even recognized, until you entered into a new level of consciousness. You see people say for instance, who become addicted, say to crack or something, and now enter into a whole world and enter into a whole social system, that before they became addicted, they hardly noticed, they didn’t know what it was all about, and they picked up new friends, and new relations, hold new ways of acting, hold new purposes in life, they loss with old friends, broke with old families, and all kinds of things, in other words, the consciousness, that addictive consciousness, brought into the world a new foreground, and put other things into the background. 

Therefore, man’s consciousness is a creative act, and the kind of consciousness you have, will determine the kind of world you create. And consequently, when you look at the world that we live in African people, we must recognize to a great extent, it is a world of our own creation, it is a world that has been generated with a type of consciousness we’ve been permitted to be instilled in us as a people. As I told you earlier today on the radio, we talked about the white man as having power, and I want you to recognize that power ultimately has to do with a relationship between people, and that the white man’s so-called power, is to a great extent based upon the nature of the relationship he has with the Black man. We empower him by the nature of our own behavior and attitudes as a people. He can not be what he is, as I said earlier, unless we are, what we are, I’m telling you. To a good extent, the European is our creation … yes, un hunh, un hunh. If we look at our behavior, we will see that to a good extent, it is our behavior, our values, our consciousness, the kind of personalities we’ve established in ourselves, our taste, our desires and needs; that maintains the European in its position. 

We talk about the Civil Rights Movement, and the Apartheid system of the South, when Blacks decided to just get out of the buses and just walk, the system changed, yeah, when they stop sitting behind the white driver, just changing that relationship, changed the nature of power, in that system. When they decided then to walk side by side, when they decided to walk abreast and line themselves up, because they had not walked that way before … for the ends to be fought, the relationship changed. When they kept their monies in their pockets, when they set on the stools and blocked the other people from them, and change the nature of the interactions between themselves and europeans, the nature of the system changed. So therefore we have tremendous Power. It depends upon how we align ourselves as a people, and how we decide to relate to other people in the world, because they can not have what they have, unless we are who we are. And that is why we don’t have to waste a great deal of time always appealing to them, and analyzing them, because we can better appeal to our own sense of self, and our own consciousness, and we waste a lot of time trying to transform them, when through transforming ourselves, they will be transformed automatically. The Power is in our hands. We are not destined to be the servants of white folk, that is not the destiny of Black folk, no way. And we have to change this idea, because many of us are still operating on that concept, as I said earlier, many of us go to these schools to become what, qualified, to work for whom, them. Why do we assume that their going to have the jobs for us …yes, these people are having difficulty making jobs for themselves. The greatest problem that the european is facing today, and the european economies are facing today, is that they are not even generating enough jobs for their own people. And even though America is bragging about the millions of jobs it’s creating, those jobs are part-time jobs, the bulk of them are part-time jobs, low-wage jobs, and jobs that have little or no future. So when people talk about creating jobs, you have to ask, what kind of jobs are being created. That is why of course the system is not investing in Black education. It no longer needs Black people for its employment structure. You see it bringing in people from outside of the nation to be employed. You see it is even hiring in the world itself in other nations and other places. Already it has reached the point where its need for Black males, is pretty much saturated. And it is literally then warehousing us in the jails and prisons, and provoking us to kill each other and to destroy each other out here in these streets. And yet we are still organizing the education of our children, as if the white man still has jobs waiting for them, in multitudes. [MORE PDF] 

yep. that's what they get for not casting Kevin Hart as Cheeta [the chimpanzee]: Box Office Nightmare - Tarzan Tracking Poorly for July 4th Weekend

Can I Coon For You Massah? All day. Coin operated Sniggers dressing like women, jumping, screaming, cooning, crying, shining teeth at us, acting vaginal, cowardly and promoting the ongoing smiling black face. Playing themselves in the white media. Fuck that. Stop supporting White Supremacy.  

Anon asks;

"Who Is Most To Blame? Black Comics Or The Black Audience? If we did not support black entertainers who degrade black people, they could not make money doing it. When our "comedy" ridicules our heroes, like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, our religion, churches, pastors, our beautiful black mommas, and our skin, noses, lips, and hair, WE make it harder for every black man, woman, and child to get respect at home, at work, on the street, in the courts, at the mortgage company, and at the hands of law enforcement.

By supporting and defending black "entertainers" who degrade black people for profit, WE are making life harder for every black male who applies for a job and is denied one because he has been stereotyped as an irresponsible fool before he opens his mouth. WE are making life harder for our black mothers, daughters, wives, and lovers to get the respect they deserve, when they are publicly referred to as "bitches" and "hos" by us. Yet we — black people -- demand respect as "black people" even when it is obvious we DO NOT RESPECT ourselves?" [MORE]

Amos Wilson states: 

"Psychic Violence — The most powerful obstacle against the liberation of Afrikan peoples from White domination and exploitation is not the ability of Whites to use superior military or police firepower or their threat to use it against Afrikan insurgency, but is their ability to engage in unrelenting psychopolitical violence against the collective Afrikan psyche. It is the White monopoly on psychic violence and their devastatingly ingenious use of it against the minds of Afrikan peoples which represent the greatest threat to Afrikan survival. Wrong insightfully points out the nature of this form of violence:

What a surprise. A shitty hollywood movie doing shitty. [T]here is a form of conduct, often described as psychic, psychological or moral force or violence, which does not fit readily under the rubrics of any of the other forms of power. If physical violence involves inflicting damages on the body of a person, how is one to classify the deliberate effort to affect adversely a person's emotions or his feelings and ideas about himself by verbally, or in other symbolic ways, insulting or degrading him? If. . . power includes the production of purely mental or emotional effects and is not confined to the eliciting of overt acts, then the psychic assault of, say, a nagging, browbeating spouse or parent, the defamation of the character of a political foe or even of an entire group, constitute exercises of power. .

Damage to the psyche is surely as real as damage to the body . . . It is plainly not true that 'sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me'. Psychic violence, in which the intended effect of the perpetrator is to inflict mental or emotional harm, is continuous with physical violence.

The ultimate force in the world is the force of mind. When that force is defeated all is lost.

Dominant Whites have used words and symbols to violently and unrelentingly attack oppressed Blacks in a thousand and one nefarious ways, including the projection of dehumanizing stereotypes and caricatures of them; the falsification of their history and culture; the miseducation of Blacks; and the engaging in chronic derisive media attacks on their morals, behavior, intelligence, ways of life, sexuality, physical features, motives and values.

The final end of the violent White-instigated psychic assaults against the collective psyche of Blacks is to induce in them states of false consciousness, self-alienation and self-hatred so as to irreparably impair their capacity to overthrow their White oppressors through the mobilization of their human and material resources.

False consciousness, self-alienation and self-hatred are conjoining states of mind which motivate oppressed Blacks to engage in continuing self-defeating, self-destructive assaults against their own interests and against themselves. Consequently, by these means Blacks are unwittingly manipulated into forming alliances with their oppressors and exploiters in disempowering themselves and in empowering those who dominate and exploit them all the more.

Coercion as Power

The instrumental use of force or the threatened use of force by the power holder to attain the compliance of another is often referred to as coercion. Coercion is therefore a form of power. It is of the utmost importance to note as did Wrong that "a coercer may succeed without possessing either the capability or the intention of using force, so long as the power subject believes he possesses both" [Emphasis added]. That is, the coercive power of the power holder may rest significantly less or not at all on his actual capacity to harm the subject, but may rest more or less completely on the subordinate subject's belief that the power holder can do so. This perspective, commonly referred to as "bluffing," allows us to recognize the fact that in many instances power holders exercise power over their subjects because of the subjects' misperceptions and misunderstandings, or false beliefs about the power holders' ability to restrict their options or possibilities. Wartenberg refers to this situation as the Oz Phenomenon, "for it shows that agents are able to coerce other agents by acting upon their beliefs rather than by controlling their action-environment directly." He further contends

that coercive power relations can be brought into existence by means of the subordinate agent's false understandings about the ability of the dominant agent to harm him. This is an important source of power for a dominant agent so long as her ability to realize her threat is not questioned [and challenged].1 [Emphasis added]

While the ability of the dominant agent to coerce the subordinate subject may rest heavily on the subject's exaggerated misperception of the dominant agent's actual capacity to do him harm, equally and often of greater importance, the ability of the dominant agent to coerce the subject may rest on the subject's misperception and underestimation of his own capacity to successfully thwart the coercive or punitive actions of the dominant agent. The often anemic self-concept of subordinate persons and groups, their low self-esteem, their ignorance of their actual strengths, are more the causes of their subordination than is the actual strength of their oppressors.

The long history of White American domination of Black Ameri­cans — which has been enforced and reinforced by the use of physical force and violence, psychic violence and coercive power — has in effect convinced the majority of Blacks that Whites are invincible. Moreover, this history has undermined the self-confidence of most Blacks, narrowed their vision of their possibilities and power, restricted their aspirations to the narrow confines of racial accommodation and assimilation, to being the paternalistic recipients of White sympathy rather than expanding their aspirations to include the overcoming of White power and achieving full, unfettered self-liberation. The unending maintenance of this self-defeating state of mind in Blacks is the fundamental objective of White power and the keystone upon which the infrastructural facade of White power rests.

We are not arguing here that White power is purely delusional or does not contain truly lethal actualities. However, we are arguing that if Black Americans and Afrikans the world-over do not permit themselves to be "psyched out" by White racist propaganda; if they both recognize and actualize their potential to neutralize White power in either its imagined or actual forms, they can by these means neutralize it. [MORE]

Dr Amos Wilson: The Falsification Afrikan of Consciousness

[MORE]

'He Made Me Do It, I was Barely able to get out of the way, blah blah': Video Contradicts [Unconscious] Liar White Cop [Forest Acres] Trying to Kill Black Teen

Drop Your Beliefs. Killer White Cops Also Tell Lies. From [HERE]. In his police report, white police officer Robert Cooper claims he was "barely able to get out of the way" as a Black teen driver tried to run him over, forcing him to shoot into a moving vehicle. But his own dashcam footage made a liar of him. The undidentified teen was shot once and crashed the vehicle further down the road. Apparently, the teen is recovering. The initial traffic stop was for loud music. This is attempt murder - by the white cop.  

A police video released Thursday by the State Law Enforcement Division of the May 19 shooting of a motorist by a Forest Acres police officer shows the officer firing seven shots into a slow-moving car as the Black motorist began to drive away.

“Stop! Stop! Do not make me shoot you!” yells the officer, who is on foot in front of the vehicle with his weapon drawn and pointed at the car’s windshield. The driver is inside a small sedan and is the car’s only occupant.

The officer fires seven shots, rapidly and from a close distance – perhaps less than 10 feet away – as the car moves slowly, turns toward the officer and then appears to try to go around the officer. The motorist then pulls away from the scene and moves out of range of the officer’s dash-cam, which recorded the event. [MORE]

After the event the cop says over and over and over for nearly 20 minutes to other white cops '"I was barely able to get out of the way" 'he tried to run me over,' ''there was nothing I could do,' 'I can't believe he made me do that' and blah blah and all contradicted by his own video. No doubt he has probably been lying about what happened from May 19th until today. Or did he really believe this? 

Mind is a motherfucker. You can't always trust it. Know that whatever you do, whoever you are, if you do it without awareness or unconsciously it will be stupid. You must watch your own mind - see what it is thinking about and see what it is feeling. If you cannot do this you will be easily blown away by whatever comes your way. Play with the cobra [your mind] at your own risk but if you do so you may open the gates of hell, like cop Cooper did. When you are unconscious and then act out of your unconsciousness you are capable of doing anything, including lying or murdering. 

White cop above is unconscious. Why? His mind must have got carried away when he saw a Black teenager. All his thoughts are clouded with smoke and he could no longer physically see things as they are. His mind blocked it. From birth he has been programmed to believe all sorts of idiocy about non-whites [dangerous, inferior beasts doing this and that]. "A mind that is filled with belief is a mind which can project anything according to the belief. When you see things always remember this."  If he is an unaware person, in the presence of non-whites his mind is blown, full of smoke. Anything he does in this sleeping state will be stupid and dangerous b/c he has a belt full of weapons, the power of the state and he is licensed to kill. Here, this dumb mf sees only what his mind allowed him to see. Is he intentionally lying or unconscious? His racist mind has deceived him so badly that he is even out of breath as if he had been running somewhere - yet he had only been driving.  

During an interaction with a white cop this is what you may be dealing with. A psychopath where race is the variable - so you must be aware. Guides and codes will be of no help to you in the present moment of such a confrontation. In fact, blind belief in memorized formatted rules may get you killed. You must be aware of what your mind is thinking and feeling before you also act unconsciously. "Heaven and hell are not geographical. If you go in search of them you will never find them anywhere. They are within you, they are psychological. The mind is heaven, the mind is hell, and the mind has the capacity to become either." [MORE]

Dr. Blynd explains, "awareness is the fundamental force of change for the Self and the natural result of abandoning illusion." [MORE] 

Unfortunately, in a system of white supremacy most judges, jurors, prosecutors, other white police, elected officials and the white mainstream media will believe almost anything a white cop says. Listen to the other white cop in the video - just preaching to the choir - he witnessed nothing and has no first hand knowledge of anything - but he is a ready made and eager believer - having a strong faith in his white supremacy programming; he would be a good witness for the prosecution, believable to white jurors and 'other directed' non-whites. See white Forest Acres police chief's press conference in video below. 

Even now after the video is released some unconscious white folks will begin to rationalize what they think they see in the video [think Tamir Rice].

Bhagwan on Vipassana Meditation

By Osho 

From "The Everyday Meditator" 

Twenty-five centuries ago Gautam Buddha gave this method of inner witnessing to his thousands of disciples, many of whom became enlightened. Vipassana is simply a way of witnessing.

It is an invitation to watch yourself- your mind, your emotions, your body, your environment -without reacting to what you observe. It is an invitation to get to know yourself honestly and sincerely, to make friends with yourself, and to realize that the witnessing self is not identified with what is being seeing. Success and failure are not part of meditation, and nothing special is supposed to happen. There is nothing to expect.

Mind is tricky, and is not used to being observed at work and play. Excuses not to meditate, not to sit, not to have time, not to be comfortable will arise at first. It helps to meditate at a regular, pre¬selected time and place. But anytime is better than no-time, and anywhere is better than nowhere.

Sitting with a friend makes things easier. Remember that silence does not mean you can't enjoy, and having a group of friends meditate together is a beautiful experience.

Vipassana is the meditation that has made more people in the world enlightened than any other, because it is the very essence. All other meditations have the same essence, but in different forms; something non-essential is also joined with them. But Vipassana is pure essence. You cannot drop anything out of it and you cannot add anything to improve it.

Vipassana is such a simple thing that even a small child can do it. In fact, the smallest child can do it better than you, because he is not yet filled with the garbage of the mind; he is still clean and innocent. Vipassana can be done in three ways - you can choose which one suits you best.

The first is: awareness of your actions, your body, your mind, your heart. Walking, you should walk with awareness. Moving your hand, you should move with awareness, know¬ing perfectly that you are moving the hand. You can move it without any consciousness, like  a  mechanical  thing...   you  are  on  a morning walk; you can go on walking without being aware of your feet.

Be alert of the movements of your body. While eating, be alert to the movements that are needed for eating. Taking a shower, be alert to the coolness that is coming to you, the water falling on you and the tremendous joy of it - just be alert. Any of these activities should not go on happening in an unconsc¬ious state.

And the same about your mind. Whatever thought passes on the screen of your mind, just be a watcher. Whatever emotion passes on the screen of your heart, just remain a witness - don't get involved, don't get identified, don't evaluate what is good, what is bad; that is not part of your meditation.

The second form is breathing, becoming aware of breathing. As the breath goes in, your belly starts rising up, and as the breath goes out, your belly starts settling down again. So the second method is to be aware of the belly: its rising and falling. Just the very aware¬ness of the belly rising and falling... and the belly is very close to the life sources because the child is joined with the mother's life through the navel. Behind the navel is his life's source. So, when the belly rises up, it is really the life energy, the spring of life that is rising up and falling down with each breath. That too is not difficult, and perhaps maybe even easier because it is a single technique.

In the first, you have to be aware of the body, you have to be aware of the mind, you have to be aware of your emotions, moods. So it has three steps. The second approach is a single step: just the belly, moving up and down. And the result is the same. As you become more aware of the belly, the mind becomes silent, the heart becomes silent, the moods disappear.

And the third is to be aware of the breath at the entrance when the breath goes in through your nostrils. Feel it at that extreme - the other polarity from the belly - feel it from the nose. The breath going in gives a certain coolness to your nostrils. Then the breath going out... breath going in, breath going out.

That too is possible. It is easier for men than for women. The woman is more aware of the belly. Most of the men don't even breathe as deep as the belly. Their chest rises up and falls down, because a wrong kind of athletics prevails over the world. Certainly it gives a more beautiful form to the body if your chest is high and your belly is almost non-existent. Man has chosen to breathe only up to the chest, so the chest becomes bigger and bigger and the belly shrinks down. That appears to him to be more athletic.

These are the three forms. Any one will do. And if you want to do two forms together, you can do two forms together; then the effort will become more intense. If you want to do all the three forms together, you can do all three forms together. Then the possibilities will be quicker. But it all depends on you, whatever feels easy. Remember: easy is right.

As meditation becomes settled and mind silent, the ego will disappear. You will be there, but there will be no feeling of "I". Then the doors are open.

Just wait with a loving longing, with . welcome in the heart for that great moment -the greatest moment in anybody's life - I enlightenment.

It comes... it certainly comes. It has neva delayed for a single moment. Once you are i the right tuning, it suddenly explodes in you transforms you. The old man is dead and i new man has arrived.

Sitting meditation

Find a place where you can sit comfortably undisturbed, without sleeping for 40-60 mint Although this is the ideal time you can also ! just 20 minutes - anywhere, anytime. Your and head should be straight. If needed it is fine use a chair. Your eyes are best closed, and your breathing should be as it usually is; easy is right. Stay as still as you can, moving only if it is really necessary. If you move, notice how and why you are moving.

While sitting the primary object of attention is the rise and fall of your belly -just above the navel - caused by breathing in and out. It is not a concentration technique, so when other things come into the field of your awareness, while watching your breath, these too are part of your meditation. Nothing is a distraction in Vipassana. When something takes your attention go with it. Place your whole attention on it, whatever it is. When your attention is free, then go back to your breathing.

It is the process of watching which is the meditation, not what you are watching. Remember not to become identified with, or lost in whatever comes up: thoughts, feelings, judgments, body sensations, impressions from outside, and the whole world which constantly snatches your attention from yourself.

If questions or problems arise which require an answer, let them remain a mystery until your meditation time is over.

Walking meditation

In this technique you bring your whole attention to your feet as they touch the ground. Walk slowly, ordinarily, with your awareness focused on your feet as they touch the earth.

Walk in a circle or a straight line, indoors or outdoors, it doesn't matter. Do whatever you enjoy most. Keep your eyes lowered so that you can only see the ground a few steps ahead. If other things take your attention, notice them, give them all your awareness. When they have lost their attraction return your attention to your feet.

As in sitting, witnessing is the process, but the primary objects are the feet as they walk, not the belly as it breathes. The period for walking should be 20-30 minutes or it can be combined with 45 minutes of sitting followed by 15 minutes of walking.

General awareness meditation

Anything can become your primary object for witnessing. Slowing down, doing one thing at a time you can become aware of what you are doing, while you are doing it. This can include not only actions but intentions too. Everything in your daily routine: eating, washing up, cleaning the house, smoking, telephoning, chatting over a cup a tea, dancing, flirting, reading, everything can become a meditation; all you need is awareness. Meditation can be fun and can enrich the quality of ordinary life.

 Zazen

Zazen is deep unoccupiedness, it is not even meditation, because when YOU meditate you are trying to do something: remembering being God or even remembering yourself. These efforts create ripples.

You can sit anywhere, but whatsoever you are looking at should not be too exciting. For example things should not be moving too much. They become a distraction. You can watch the trees - that is not a problem because they are not moving and the scene remains constant. You can watch the sky or just sit in the corner watching the wall.

The second thing is, don't look at anything in particular - just emptiness, because the eyes are there and one has to look at some¬thing, but you are not looking at anything in particular. Don't focus or concentrate on any¬thing -just a diffuse image. That relaxes very much. And the third thing, relax your breath¬ing. Don't do it, let it happen. Let it be natural and that will relax even more.

The fourth thing is, let your body remain as immobile as possible. First find a good pos¬ture - you can sit on a pillow or mattress or whatsoever you feel, but once you settle, re¬main immobile, because if the body does not move, the mind automatically falls silent. In a moving body,  the mind also continues to move, because body-mind are not two things. They are one... it is one energy.

In the beginning it will seem a little difficult but after a few days you will enjoy it tremen¬dously. You will see, by and by, layer upon layer of the mind starting to drop. A moment comes when you are simply there with no mind.

Bodhidharma sat for nine years just facing the wall, doing nothing -just sitting for nine years. The tradition has it that his legs withered away. To me that is symbolic. It simply means that all movements withered away be¬cause all motivation withered away. He was not going anywhere. There was no desire to move, no goal to achieve - and he achieved the greatest that is possible. He is one of the rarest souls that have ever walked on earth. And just sitting before a wall he achieved everything;  not doing anything,  no  technique, no method, nothing. This was the only technique. When there is nothing to see, by and by your interest in seeing disappears. By just facing a plain wall, inside you a parallel emptiness and plainness arises. Parallel to the wall another wall arises - of no-thought.

Dr. Blynd on the Radio on 9/3/14

[MORE]

Na'im Akbar: Racism... A Mental Disorder

Neely Fuller: "The Whole World has been Made a Prison and all Non-White are in that Prison. The Prison Masters are all of the White People Who Believe in & Practice White Supremacy"

Neely Fuller on the Radio on 6/15/16

Bhagwan Rajineesh- The Death Penalty: Not Punishment but Revenge

3 March 1985 pm in Lao Tzu Grove

BELOVED OSHO,

WOULD YOU PLEASE COMMENT ON THE DEATH PENALTY?

The death penalty is a degrading proof of man’s inhumanity to man. It shows that man is still living in the barbarous age. Civilization still remains an idea – it has not become a reality.

The death penalty is so idiotic that you will have to look from all the aspects to understand why such an idiotic thing has continued in all the civilizations, cultures, nations. Even in a few countries where it was dropped it has been adopted again. In a few other countries where it has been dropped, it has been replaced by life imprisonment – which is worse than the death penalty itself. It is better to die in a single moment than to go on dying slowly for fifty years, sixty years.

Changing from the death penalty to a life sentence is going not towards civilization, it is going still deeper into barbarous, inhuman darkness, unconsciousness.

The first thing to remember is that the death penalty is not really a punishment. If you cannot give life as a reward, you cannot give death as a penalty. This is a simple logic, there cannot be two opinions about it. If you cannot give life to people, what right have you to take their life?

I am reminded of a true story. It happened that two criminals were in search of a treasure that was hidden in a castle. Many people had tried but had not found the way; somehow these criminals stumbled upon the treasure. The treasure was so vast that one of the two was not willing to divide it. The only way was to kill the other, but in killing the other he might get caught. There was danger, and now he could not take any risk because the whole treasure was in his hands.

He managed a very cunning way. He disappeared and spread the rumor that he had been murdered, and he left all the evidence that would prove that his friend was the murderer. The friend was caught with all the proofs: his revolver was there; two bullets were missing, and his fingerprints were on the revolver. His handkerchief with his name embroidered on it had fallen .... And only he knew the place where the friend was hiding in the jungles against the police, because they had done other crimes also, and there was a price on both of them to be caught alive or dead.

He could not prove his innocence; there was no way – everything went against him. He was given the death penalty. He knew he had not murdered his friend; he knew that this whole thing was a plot. His friend was not dead; it was just to keep the whole treasure, that the friend had removed him in a legal way, out of the way.

But he escaped from the prison before he was executed. After twelve years he came into the court, dragging the dead body of a very famous politician, a rich man of the city, and he told the court – it was the same judge – ”I have murdered this man, and I dare you to punish me. But first let me tell you the whole story. I am the man who twelve years ago you had sentenced to death. I escaped from the prison because I was absolutely innocent, but I had no proof.”

In fact innocence has never any proof. Proofs are for the crime or against the crime, but innocence has no proof.

He said, ”Now I have murdered the man you charged me twelve years ago for having murdered – this is the man. If your first judgment was right then you cannot punish me again for the same murder because that man was murdered twelve years ago. And if your first judgment was not right, how can you be sure that your second judgment is going to be right?”

Can you punish a man for murdering the same man twice? It is really very difficult to decide.

He said, ”The only crime I have committed is escaping from the jail, but can you call it a crime? When you punish an innocent man with death, who is the criminal – you or me?

”And this man plotted the whole thing; he managed all those proofs because he had my revolver, he had my handkerchief. He managed all those proofs, escaped from there with the treasure that we had both found, became a rich man, famous. He changed his name, his personality, shaved off his beard, changed his hair-do, and became respectable; he opened a hospital, a school, made a temple. And this is the man who managed the plot to show he had been murdered.

”In that way he was saved from the punishment for other crimes for which the police were searching for him; now he has been murdered – so that file is closed. He killed two birds by one stone: he killed me, not directly, but through a legal procedure. He used all you idiots to kill me, so that he would become the whole owner of the treasure – and he did. By the same strategy he removed all crimes against him. The file was closed, the man was dead – of course, his body was not found. The murderer had been very clever, because he was a known criminal.”

The story has many implications. The man asked, ”If I was sentenced to death and I had not escaped and was executed, what would have been the case now? If it had come to be known that the man thought to be murdered is alive, would you be able to give me my life back? If you cannot give my life back, what right have you to take it away?”

It is said the judge resigned, apologized to the man and said, ”Perhaps I have done many crimes in my life.”

A strange thing all over the world is that unless you are proved innocent, you are guilty. This goes against all humanitarian ideals, democracy, freedom, respect for individuality; it goes against all. The rule should be: unless you are proved guilty you are innocent. Yes, it is said in words, but in reality the case is just the opposite.

For example, this city, Rajneeshpuram, is, in the opinion of the attorney general of Oregon, illegal. It is just an opinion. He is not a judge; he has to go before the court to prove it. Unless he proves that the city is guilty of being illegal, the city is legal, we are innocent. Until guilt is proved, innocence needs no proof. But this is not the case.

Although America goes on claiming to be the greatest democracy in the world, it is sheer bullshit. The Supreme Court of America goes on declaring that unless a person is proved guilty, he is innocent. Innocence needs no proof; otherwise it would be impossible for anybody to live. If everybody has to prove his innocence; otherwise he is a guilty man and he should be thrown into jail because he cannot prove his innocence ....

How do you prove your innocence? Innocence is not an act, it leaves no traces behind, no evidence. So the Supreme Court says, ”This is our standpoint: Unless a man is proved guilty, he is innocent.” But this is only said, because our city is already being regarded by the state government, by the federal government, as illegal – without it having been proved before a court.

The case is still in the court. The court is theirs, but they cannot wait even for the court to decide. The federal government has stopped giving the money that was due to the city; not only that, the federal government has asked that the money that they have given for the past two years should be returned. For two years the city was legal. And what support have they given? – two hundred and sixty-five dollars!

I would like the mayor of your city to return the money with interest. Such a poor government, giving such a great support to the city, certainly needs at least bank-rate interest on the great sum of two hundred and sixty-five dollars.

These nuts think they are democratic.

The state government has stopped giving their share. The attorney general has been forcing the police authorities to declare our city’s police also illegal. This is strange. You have not proved us guilty, you cannot prove us guilty; in fact your own court has incorporated the city with all legalities fulfilled. For two years your governments – state and federal both – have been accepting the city, training the police, having its police department in the city. You arrange the elections for the mayor, for the council.

Everything proves that the city is legal. Just one man who wants to rise in political power, who wants to become the next governor, is in need of us. Without our support in Oregon nobody can become the governor. But our support is a strange kind of support: anybody who wants to win an election has to be against us. Just being against us is enough to gain the support of all the bigots, of all the Christians, of all the orthodox, conventional people, of all those who think that Oregon is their property. Just to be against us ....

Without proving in a court – and even if you prove in one court that does not mean that you have proved it. We can appeal. The case will not be decided for at least twenty to thirty years – not before that. It will have to go up to the Supreme Court of the United States.

We are not going to be humiliated in any way. And when the law is in our favor, the whole democratic concept is behind us, all the values that democracy cherishes are in our support, there is no reason at all .... But they have started accepting us as illegal.

This is how man goes on saying one thing and goes on doing just its opposite. He talks about being civilized, cultured – he is not civilized, not cultured. The death penalty is a proof enough.

This is the rule of a barbarous society: An eye for an eye, and a head for a head. If somebody cuts off one of your hands, then in a barbarous society, this is a simple law: one of his hands should be cut off.

The same has been carried down the ages. The death penalty is exactly the same law: An eye for an eye. If a man is thought to have murdered somebody, then he should be murdered. But it is strange: if killing somebody is a crime, then how can you remove crime from society by committing the same crime again? There was one man murdered; now there are two men murdered. And it is not certain that this man murdered that man, because to prove a murder is not an easy thing.

If murder is wrong, then whether it is committed by the man or by the society and its court, makes no difference.

Killing certainly is a crime.

The death penalty is a crime committed by the society against a single individual, who is helpless. I cannot call it a penalty, it is a crime.

And you can understand why it is committed: it is a revenge. Society is taking revenge because the man did not follow the rules of the society; the society is ready to kill him. But nobody bothers that when somebody murders, it shows that man is psychologically sick. Rather than sending him to imprisonment or to be executed, he should be sent into a nursing home where he can be taken care of – physically, psychologically, spiritually. He is sick. He needs all the compassion of the society; there is no question of penalty, punishment.

Yes, it is true, one man is murdered; but we cannot do anything about it. By murdering this man do you think the other will come back to life? If that were possible, I would be all in support of this man being removed – he is not worth being part of the society – and the other should be revived.

But that does not happen. The other is gone forever; there is no way to revive him. Yes, you can do one thing, you can kill this man too. You are trying to wash blood with blood, mud with mud. You are not aware of what has happened in history in many cases.

Three hundred years ago, in many cultures the madman was thought to be pretending. In many other cultures he was thought to be possessed by ghosts. In other cultures he was thought to be mad, but treatable by punishment. And these were the three ways mad people were taken care of.

They were treated by beatings – strange treatment! – and by taking their blood out. Now you give blood transfusions; they used to do just the opposite – they used to take the blood out of the man. It was thought that he had too much energy. Naturally when his blood was taken out he became weak; he started showing signs of weakness because so much blood was taken out, and it was thought they had cured him of his madness.

By beating a man, naturally once in a while it used to happen that the man came to his senses. It is almost as if a man is asleep and you start beating him and he wakes up. A madman has fallen out of his conscious mind. If you beat him too hard, once in a while it may happen that he wakes up into his consciousness again. That became a proof that beating is the right treatment. But is used to happen only once in a while; ninety-nine percent of the cases were unnecessarily beaten. But that one exception was the rule.

It was thought that he was possessed by spirits, ghosts; then too beat him, because if he is possessed by ghosts the beating will reach the ghost, not him. You are not beating him, you are really beating the ghosts who are possessing him, and because of the beating they will escape. And once in a while, but just once in a while, that is one percent, no more than that ....

I have been in one place – it was very famous for mad people. Hundreds of mad people were brought to that place. It was on the bank of a river, a temple, and the priest must have been a butcher for at least a few hundred lives. He looked like a butcher and he gave a good beating. The mad people were chained, given a good beating, no food, and very strong laxatives. And I have seen that once in a while a person came to his senses.

Strong laxatives for a few days with no food cleaned his inner system. Beatings brought him back a little consciousness. No food, hunger – a hungry man cannot afford to be mad because his body is in such torture. To be mad you need a little bit of comfort in your life situation.

You can see it: the more comfortable a society, the more luxurious, affluent a culture, the more people go mad. The more poor a society – starving, hungry – the less people go mad. Madness needs, in the first place, a mind. But a hungry person has no nourishment for the mind. He is undernourished: his mind is not in a situation to go nuts. For that the mind needs more energy than ordinarily is involved in life.

Madness is a rich man’s disease. The poor man cannot afford it.

So when you keep a person hungry and give him laxatives, it cleanses his inner system, makes him so hungry that he becomes bodily-oriented. He forgets the mind, the question is the body. He is no longer interested in mind and mind games.

Madness is a mind game.

So once in a while I have seen people being cured there, but that one percent cured would spread the rumor all around, and hundreds of people were coming there. The temple became very rich. I had gone there many times to see it but only once did I meet a man who had been cured; others went back to their homes just beaten, hungry, starved, more sick, more weak. Many died through that priest’s treatment.

But in India if the treatment is being given in a temple, a sacred place, by the priest, it is not a crime if you die; in fact you are fortunate that you are dying in a sacred place. You will be born on a higher level of consciousness; so it is not a crime.

But I spoke against the man wherever I went and I said, ”This is absolutely criminal. What authority has he or what medical qualifications has he? Is he a psychiatrist, physiologist? – he is only a priest.” But priests have been treating mad people for centuries, in the same way, all over the world.

Now we know that a mad person cannot be treated this way. Mad people were put into prison, in isolated cells. Still that is happening around the world because we don’t know what to do. Just to hide our ignorance we put the mad person into jail, so we can forget about him; at least we can go on ignoring that he exists.

In my town one of my friends’ uncles was mad. They were rich people. I used to go in their house often, but even I became aware only after years that one of his uncles was kept in an underground basement, chained.

I said, ”Why?”

They said, ”He is mad. There were only two ways: either we keep him in our own house, chained .... And of course we cannot keep him chained in the house; otherwise people will be coming and everybody will feel worried and concerned. And his children, his wife, watching their father, their husband .... And it is against our family’s reputation to send him to prison, so we found this way: we have imprisoned him underground. His food is being taken to him by a servant; otherwise nobody goes to see him, nobody goes to meet him.”

I persuaded my friend, ”I would like to meet your uncle.”

He said, ”But I cannot come with you – he is a dangerous man, he is mad! Although he is chained he can do anything.”

I said, ”He can at the most kill me. You just remain behind me so if I am killed you escape, but I would like to go.”

Because I insisted, he managed to get the key from the servant who used to take the food. In thirty years I was the first person from the outside world, other than the servant, who had met him; and that man may have been mad – I cannot say – but now he was not mad. But nobody was ready to listen to him because all mad people say, ”We are not mad.”

So when he said this to the servant, ”Tell my family that I am not mad,” the servant simply laughed. He even told the family but nobody took any note of it.

When I saw the man, I sat with him, I talked with him. He was as sane as anybody else in the world – perhaps a little more, because he said one thing to me: ”Being here for thirty years has been a tremendous experience. In fact I feel fortunate that I am out of your mad world. They think I am mad – let them think that, there is no harm – but in fact I am fortunate that I am out of your mad world. What do you think?” he said to me.

I said, ”You are absolutely right. The world outside is far madder than when you left it thirty years before. In thirty years there has been great evolution in everything – in madness too. You stop saying to people that you are not mad; otherwise they will take you out. You are living a perfectly beautiful life. You have enough space to walk ....”

He said, ”That’s the only exercise I can do here – walking.”

And I started to teach him vipassana. I said, ”You are in such perfect conditions to become a buddha: no worries, no botherations, no disturbances. You are really blessed.”

And he started practicing vipassana. I told him, ”You can practice it sitting, you can practice it walking” – and he was my first disciple as far as vipassana is concerned. And you will be surprised that he died a sannyasin – died in the basement.

But the last time I had gone to my village, I went to see him. He said, ”I’m ready; now you initiate me. My days are numbered, and I would like to die as your sannyasin. I’m your disciple; for twenty years you have been my master and whatever you had promised is fulfilled.”

And you could see from his face, from his eyes, that he was not the same person – a total transformation, a mutation ....

Mad people need methods of meditation so that they can come out of their madness.

The criminals need psychological help, spiritual support.

They are really deep-down sick, and you are punishing sick people. It is not their fault. If somebody murders, that means he has carried a tendency to murder in him for a long time. It is not that somewhere, out of nowhere, suddenly you murder somebody.

In one of the existential novels there is a story: a man is caught – in fact it is not right to say ”caught” because he never tried to escape. He killed a stranger who was sitting on the beach. He came from behind and killed him with a dagger; the man died on the spot. The man was absolutely a stranger; the murderer had never seen his face even, because he killed him from the back. Even after the murder he had not seen his face; he had no idea whom he had murdered.

It was a very strange case – existentialism has been of great help in bringing strange cases to light. The court asked the man, ”We cannot understand why you murdered the man.”

He said, ”It is not a question of ‘why’ – I simply wanted to. There are people who try to find excuses to do something that they want to do. I am a simple person: why bother about an excuse? – just do it if you want to do it.”

Now he is saying a truth of tremendous importance. People try to find an excuse: for example, they are angry with you – they think they are angry with you; that is not true.

They were carrying that anger – it was boiling within them, they were sitting on a volcano. They were just waiting for somebody to give them an excuse: you gave the excuse, and they exploded. It seems you are responsible for the explosion. No, you are only an accidental excuse, you are not responsible. Somebody else would have done if you had not. It is just coincidence that you happened to pass by; otherwise, somebody else ....

This murderer says to the court, ”I am a simple man; I don’t bother about rationalizations and excuses – I simply wanted to kill. And it was really an exciting experience. When I forced the dagger into the back of that man whom I don’t know, who has not done any wrong to me, when the blood dashed out from his back I had the greatest, the most exciting experience in my life.

”I am perfectly happy: you can give me any punishment that you want. I am not going to say that I have not done it, I have done it. I wanted to do it for a long time, and it is good that I did it.”

Now, what do you want to do with this man? Is he a murderer, or a psychiatric case who has been prevented from having any excitement in his life? Perhaps he has never known love, because if you ask Sigmund Freud, he will say that the dagger is nothing but a symbol of the male’s sexual organ, and dashing it into the back of the man is just an effort – perverted, but an effort – to have some entry into another body. That’s what people are doing all over the world. Making love is entering another’s body.

This man is certainly not in the right shape, things are upside down, but what he is doing is simply a sexual act; it has nothing to do with murder. The murder happened; that is just a by-product.

And why does a man want to enter the body of a woman? – because every implication has its own implications. It is because the man is born out of woman’s body. He has come out of the woman’s body, and he has never been so comfortable again, and he wants to be back in the womb of the mother.

Every man is searching for his mother’s womb. These murderers are also searching for the mother’s womb – of course in a wrong way, unnatural, but they are not responsible for it: your society is responsible for it. If a murder happens then the society should be punished, then the whole society should have to pay the penalty.

Why did it happen in this society? What have you done with the man that he had to commit a murder? Why did he become destructive? – because nature gives everybody energy which is creative. It becomes destructive only when it is obstructed, when no natural flow is allowed. Whenever energy goes towards the natural it is prevented by society, it is crippled; it is directed into some other direction.

Soon the man is in a confusion. He does not know what is what. He does not know what he is doing, why he is doing it. The original reasons are left far behind. He has taken so many turns that he has become a jigsaw puzzle.

Nobody needs the death penalty, nobody deserves it. In fact, not only the death penalty, no other kind of punishment is right, because punishment never cures the person.

Every day the number of criminals goes on growing; every day you build more prisons. This is strange. It should not be so. Just the opposite should be the case, because with so many courts and so many punishments and so many prisons, crimes should be less, criminals should be less, slowly, slowly prisons should be less, courts should be less. But that is not happening.

I am reminded that in Great Britain, just one hundred years ago, corporal punishment for stealing was the common thing. And the punishment had to be given in a public square so people could see what happens when you steal – just to teach them. It would be a lesson to them, that if you steal this happens: a public humiliation. The person had to be naked and lashed till blood started oozing from his body.

But what happened – just one hundred years ago – was that the punishment had to be dropped because it was found that when the crowd was there ... and thousands gathered to see – it was not a good sign. When thousands of people come to see such an ugly scene it shows something in them is wrong. Perhaps they also want to beat someone naked, but they don’t have the guts; at least they can see it being done.

That’s what you are doing everywhere. You love football: you don’t play – there are professional players – you watch. You become identified with a certain team of football players and you are so excited, as if you are participants. Just look at the crowd in a stadium: thousands of people so excited, as if their life and death is in question – shouting, screaming, throwing their caps, their hats, fighting with each other because the person by their side is giving encouragement to the party they oppose.

The football players are playing their games, and the thousands of spectators – what are they doing? They are also, in a psychological way, participants – perhaps more excited than the real players. The real players are professionals, that is their business, and these idiots are unnecessarily becoming so hot.

And this is not the whole crowd; the real crowd is sitting by their television sets, millions of them – listening to commentaries on their radios.

I had a friend in the university; he was a professor, but a fan of hockey matches – in India, football is not so hot. One day I was sitting in his room and he was listening to the commentary on his small transistor that he used to carry continuously, keeping it close to his ear so he did not miss anything.

I was sitting there and I told him, ”I have come to say something to you.”

He just told me, ”Keep quiet!” and went back to his commentary. And then something happened: he threw the transistor and it broke into pieces.

I said, ”What happened?”

He said, ”My team, they failed me! I had so much hope for them.”

”But,” I said, ”if your team failed, why did you destroy the transistor?”

He said, ”You won’t understand. I was in such anger that you should feel fortunate that I did not hit you with the transistor.”

”But this would have been too much! First you destroyed the transistor, and I am just sitting waiting here for you to get finished with your transistor, and you wanted to hit me with it,” I said.

”Yes, I was so angry,” he said, ”I could have hit you. For a moment I was just going to and then I changed my mind.”

I said, ”This is good – next time I will never be around anyone listening to the commentary on hockey matches. This is dangerous, even to be around.”

Now this man is so much involved .... The whole world has become a world of spectators.

What are you seeing in a movie? I don’t think you are seeing a movie, you become part of it, you become identified with some character in it. When he falls in love, you fall in love; when he kisses his girlfriend, you are kissing his girlfriend. This is sheer nonsense, but you cannot expect anything more from the humanity that you have got around.

So those spectators in Great Britain, what were they doing? They were so involved in watching that there were pickpockets all around, cutting their pockets. It was brought to the notice of the parliament: ”What kind of lesson are you teaching, because exactly there, where the crowd has gathered to learn the lesson, there are people who are cutting others’ pockets.” And it is easy because those people are so involved they have completely forgotten themselves and their pockets. And that man is being beaten almost to death, and those pickpockets ....

Your whole reasoning is wrong. You cannot teach by punishment.

That’s what your jurists, legal experts, politicians, have been saying down the ages: ”If we don’t punish people, then how are we going to teach them? Then everybody will start committing crime, so we have to go on punishing so people remain afraid.”

They think that fear is the only way to teach – and fear is not the way to teach them at all. What punishment teaches is, it makes people acquainted with fear, so the original shock is no longer there. They know what can happen: ”At the most you can beat me. And if one person can take it, I can also take it. And out of a hundred thieves you can catch only one or two persons.”

Now, if you are not ready even to take that much risk – ninety-eight percent success, two percent failure – then what kind of man are you?

Nobody learns from any punishment. The very person who is being punished, he also does not learn what you want him to learn. Yes, he learns something else: he learns how to become a thick-skin.

Once a person goes into prison, prison becomes his home, because there he finds people of a like mind. There he finds his real society. Outside he was a foreigner; there he is in his own world. They all understand the same language, and there are experts. You may be just an amateur, an apprentice; it may be your first term.

I have heard: one man enters a prison; in the dark cell he sees an old man, resting. The old man asks him, ”For how long are you going to be here?”

He says, ”For ten years.”

The old man says, ”Then you can stay close to the door. Just ten years! You seem to be new. I am going to be here for fifty years. You just remain close to the door. Soon the years will be gone and you will be out.”

But when you are with experts for ten years, of course you learn all their techniques, strategies, methods, their experience. You will find your jail almost a certain kind of university where crime is taught at government expense. You will find professors of crime, deans of the crime faculty, vice-chancellors, chancellors – all kinds of people who have done every kind of crime that you can imagine; certainly the newcomer starts learning. And one thing is in the air of every prison .... I have been to many prisons.

It happened that in Madhya Pradesh when I was a professor there, one old man, Mangaldas Pakvasa, was governor of Madhya Pradesh. He was very much interested in me, so much so that although I went on telling him, ”Kaka” – he was known to everybody as kaka, uncle – ”I don’t believe in God,” he said, ”Whether you believe it or not, just when you reach, tell God something for this Mangaldas Pakvasa, because I am an old sinner. Being in politics, you know, I have done everything that I should not have done. Now I am getting old.”

”But,” I said, ”you will be dying first, Kaka. Can’t you see a simple thing: you will be reaching first. So if you want, you can help me, but I cannot help you; I am not going that early!”

”But,” he said, ”I suspect that I will never be going to heaven. Governors and prime ministers and presidents – I don’t think any of them are going there. This whole company is going to hell!”

He was a very simple and good man. Because he was governor, I had immense dimensions open for me. I asked him, ”You give me a general permission: if I want to visit any jail I should be allowed.”

He said, ”That is no problem.” And the biggest jail was in Jabalpur itself; it was the central jail of the whole state – three thousand diehard criminals. So I used to go almost every Sunday; while he remained governor I continued to go there. And what I saw – this was the climate, and in other jails also. I went in smaller jails also but the climate was essentially the same.

The climate was that it is not crime that brings you to jail, it is being caught, so if you know right ways to do wrong things .... It is not a question of doing right things; the question is doing wrong things in a right way. And every prisoner learns the right way of doing wrong things in jail. In fact I have talked with prisoners and they said, ”We are eager to get out.”

I said, ”For what?”

They said, ”You are a friend, and we don’t hide anything from you: we want to get out as soon as possible because we have learned so much, we want to practice. Just the practicals were missing, it was all theoretical knowledge. For practicals you need the society.”

Once a person becomes a jailbird, then nowhere will he find himself at ease; sooner or later he will be coming back to jail. And slowly slowly jail becomes his alternative society.

It is more comfortable, he feels more at home; nobody looks down on him, nobody thinks that he is superior and you are inferior. Everybody is a criminal. Nobody is a priest and nobody is a sage and nobody is a holy man: all are poor human beings with all the weaknesses and frailties.

Outside he finds that he is rejected, abandoned.

In my town there was a permanent jail-goer. He was a very beautiful man; his name was Barkat Mian. He was a Mohammedan. Mian is a Mohammedan respectful word exactly like ”sir” or the Indian, Hindu, ji. If you simply say, ”Gandhi” it will not look respectful; you have to say ”Gandhiji.” For Mohammedans mian is simply equivalent to ji or ”sir”.

It was strange that Barkat Mian was a permanent jail-goer, almost nine months in jail, three months outside; and in those three months also, every week he had to go to report to the police station to show that everything was okay and he was here.

But I had a great friendship with that man. My family was very angry; they said, ”Why do you keep company with Barkat?” My family used to say to me, ”A man is known by his company.”

I said, ”I understand you: that means Barkat will be known by me, and to give a man a little respectability is not anything bad.”

They said, ”When will you see things in the right way?”

I said, ”I am seeing it exactly the right way. Rather than Barkat degrading me, I am upgrading Barkat. You think his evil is more powerful than my goodness? You don’t trust my integrity; you trust Barkat’s integrity.” I said, ”Whatever your opinion, I trust myself. Barkat cannot do any harm to me. If any harm is going to be done it will be done to Barkat by me.”

He was really a beautiful man, nice, and he used to tell me, ”You should not be around me. If you want to meet me and talk to me, we can manage to meet somewhere outside the town, by the riverbank.”

He himself lived near the Mohammedan cemetery where nobody goes unless one dies: one goes only once. He was not allowed to live in the town. In the town nobody was ready to give him a house to rent. Whatsoever rent he was ready to pay, nobody was ready to take it, nobody was going to take him in.

There on the Mohammedan cemetery was a house – nothing but a shelter for the rainy season, summer. People die in all kinds of climates, not bothering about anybody – that it is raining and they could wait a little, there is no hurry. But people are people: if they can harass you, they will harass you. They will die when it is raining dogs and cats, or is it cats and dogs? But it makes no difference; when it is raining who is first and who is second does not matter.

So that shelter was just for certain times; people could sit there. But in a small place people don’t die every day, only once in a while; so Barkat used to live in that shelter. He said, ”You always are welcome in my house” – that shelter he used to call his house. And of course there was no fear because nobody could steal anything from Barkat. Nobody could even dare to go in the night near Barkat Mian because he was a dangerous man.

Just by the side of my father’s store was a big shop, a kind of general store, having all kinds of things. He stole from that. One night he told me, ”Tonight I am coming to Mody’s shop” – that was the name of the shop. And he came and he did a good job: he took out all the ornaments and everything, and managed to escape but finally was caught. Not that day – after two months, in another robbery he was caught, and there it was found that one watch he was wearing was from Mody’s store.

So it was worked out and he was forced to confess from where the watch had come to him. And he confessed that it was from Mody’s store because that was the only store in the town that had watches to sell. From where else could it come? Everybody’s watch came from Mody’s store!

But other things were also found in his home, in that shelter where he used to keep his suitcase and things; and a few things he had sold – so he was sentenced to six months. After six months – this I call a real gentleman – after six months, when he was released from the jail .... The jail was in a district which was nearabout sixty miles away. He came in a taxi, stopped the taxi before Mody’s store and went in.

Mody stood up, afraid that now there was going to be trouble; this man has been released. Barkat said, ”Pay the taxi – I don’t have any money. And you know for six months you have kept me unemployed, so, some money for my pocket.”

I was just present there because Mody’s store was just next to my father’s shop. Mody had to pay the taxi and give Barkat a few rupees. He told Barkat, ”Don’t come every day,” and Barkat said, ”Till I manage something I will have to come, because six months you kept me unemployed. You are responsible.”

He continued to come every day, and I said to Mody, ”Modyji, you go on giving money to Barkat.”

He said, ”What to do? He can cut my throat – he is a dangerous man! You don’t see: when he comes inside the shop, he shows me a knife. Nobody sees it from the outside because of so many things in the shop. With one hand he asks for the money, with the other hand he shows me a knife, so everybody thinks I am giving the money happily. You think I am giving it happily?”

I said, ”No, I know about the knife because Barkat Mian is my friend and he tells me everything.” I asked Barkat, ”How did you become a thief?”

He said, ”The first time I was jailed I was absolutely innocent, but I was poor, I could not hire an advocate; and the people who wanted me to be forced into jail had some vested interest.

”My father and mother died when I was very young, fourteen or fifteen, and my other relatives wanted to capture the whole family’s possessions – house, land – and they wanted to remove me out of their way. They simply managed it. They put something into my bag in my house. And there was no way to get out of it: the thing was found in my bag, and I was sent to jail.

”When I came back, my land was gone, my house was sold, my relatives had managed to disperse everything and distribute everything. I was just on the streets.

”So, first, I was innocent when I went in, but when I came out I was not innocent, because I had come with a certain graduation. I told everybody in jail what had happened to me – I was only seventeen. They said ‘Don’t be worried, these nine months will be soon finished, but in nine months we will also give you the finishing touches. And you will be able to take revenge on everybody.’

”And I started to take revenge on all the relatives – this was simply tit for tat. They had forced me to become a thief, and I proved that, okay, now I am a thief. I destroyed this whole gang of my relatives; I stole everything that they had. But by and by I became more and more involved.

”You can have ten cases in which you are saved but in the eleventh you are caught. As you grow older and more efficient, you are caught less. But now there is no problem; in fact imprisonment proves a relaxing place, a holiday from work and worry and all kinds of things.

”A few months in jail are good for health – a disciplined life: an exact time to get up, to go to work, an exact time to go to sleep. Just enough food to keep you alive; more than that makes you sick.”

He said, ”I am never sick in jail, unless I pretend and want to be in hospital to escape; otherwise I am never sick. Outside I fall sick, but never inside. And outside is a foreign world and everybody is superior and I am inferior. Only in jail I feel a freedom.”

Strange! When he said that, I said, ”You say in jail you feel freedom?”
He said, ”Yes, only in jail I feel freedom.”
What kind of society is this, in which people in jail feel freedom, and outside they feel imprisoned?

And this is almost the story of every criminal. A small thing in the beginning – maybe he was hungry, maybe he was cold, needed a blanket and just stole a blanket – small necessities which should be fulfilled: otherwise the society should not produce these people. Nobody asks it to produce them.

On the one hand you go on producing people more and more and more, and there are not enough things for them, neither food nor clothes nor shelter. Then what do you want? You are putting people in a situation where they are bound to become criminals.

The world population has to be cut to one third – if you want crime to disappear.

But nobody wants crime to disappear because the disappearance of crime means the disappearance of your judges, of your advocates, of your law experts, of your parliaments, of your policemen, of your jailers. It will create a big unemployment problem; nobody wants anything to change for the better.

Everybody says things should change for the better, but everybody goes on making things worse, because the worse things are, the more people are employed. The worse things are, the more chances you have to feel good. Criminals are needed for you to feel that you are such a moral, respectable person.

Sinners are needed for saints to feel that they are saints. Without sinners, who will be the saint? If the whole society consisted of good people, do you think you will remember Jesus Christ for two thousand years? For what? It is the criminal society that remembers Jesus Christ for two thousand years.

It is a simple thing to understand. Why do you remember Gautam Buddha? If there were millions of buddhas, awakened people in the world ... what speciality did Gautam Buddha have? He would have been lost in the crowd. But twenty-five centuries have passed and he stands like a pillar, a mountain peak far above you and your heads.

In fact Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Mahavira, are not giants – you are pygmies. And every giant has an investment in your remaining a pygmy; otherwise he won’t be a giant. This is a great conspiracy. I am against this whole conspiracy. I am neither a giant nor a pygmy; I have no vested interest at all. I am just myself.

I don’t compare myself with anybody, so nobody is lower than me and nobody is higher than me. Because of this simple fact I can see directly; there is no vested interest creating diversions to my vision. And this is my immediate response to the question: the death penalty is simply a proof that man still needs to be civilized, needs to be cultured, needs to know human values.

In this world nobody is a criminal, never has been. Yes, there are people ... they need compassion, not imprisonment, not punishment. All prisons should be transformed into psychological nursing homes. 

This Week's SNL Minstrel Show Starring SNigger Taraji Henderson [all about Blacks' acceptance & behavioral compliance with racist interpretations of reality, value judgments, prescriptive suggestions & commands.]

Get it? You are the Punchline. SNL = White Folks and Black Jokes. In contrast to the white media's reaction to Chris Rock's instagram revelations that he [like all Black and Latino men] has been pulled over too many times by cops for trivial bullshit, (specifically he said 3 times in the past 7 weeks) white folks and their media praised Taraji Henderson after she kissed the white cop's ass who pulled her son over. Cops everywhere use local traffic laws arbitrarily to target Black and Brown men who drive on a regular basis- like her son [see Walter Scott]. His 4th Amendment rights were ignored by idiotic white cops who searched his person, backpack, car and trunk looking for one pill of Ritalin during 40 minute "routine traffic stop." [have you seen the entire video? was the pedestrian in the middle of the street? only white "journalists" see it]. But SNigger Taraji thanked them because they were "kind" to him in the process [MORE]. Perhaps another reward from this scripted response was an opportunity to host the racist show, SNL this week. Like all their shows, last night's SNL was more racist nonsense for your mental consumption or as Amos Wilson explained, "psychic violence." Stop supporting white supremacy. 

Like white cop said, Pedestrian on the far right "was in the Middle of the Street," - "almost hit" by Henderson's son [MORE]

More from Mr. Wilson below; 

"The long history of White American domination of Black Ameri­cans — which has been enforced and reinforced by the use of physical force and violence, psychic violence and coercive power — has in effect convinced the majority of Blacks that Whites are invincible. Moreover, this history has undermined the self-confidence of most Blacks, narrowed their vision of their possibilities and power, restricted their aspirations to the narrow confines of racial accommodation and assimilation, to being the paternalistic recipients of White sympathy rather than expanding their aspirations to include the overcoming of White power and achieving full, unfettered self-liberation. The unending maintenance of this self-defeating state of mind in Blacks is the fundamental objective of White power and the keystone upon which the infrastructural facade of White power rests.

We are not arguing here that White power is purely delusional or does not contain truly lethal actualities. However, we are arguing that if Black Americans and Afrikans the world-over do not permit themselves to be "psyched out" by White racist propaganda; if they both recognize and actualize their potential to neutralize White power in either its imagined or actual forms, they can by these means neutralize it. [MORE]

The Productivity of Coercion — We can recall from our prior discus­sion that the use of force is essentially socially negative, expensive and prone to provoke overt resistance to its application by those subjected to it. We also intimated that force is essentially restrictive and preventative in character, more effective in obstructing people's behavior than in causing them to behave in certain productive ways (from the power holder's point of view). Coercion, in contrast to the use of raw force, permits the power holder to benefit rnore readily from the subordinate subject's actions and reactions. According to Wartenberg, "Unlike force, coercive power actually functions by getting an agent to do something. The logic of the threat is precisely its positing an action that an agent is able to forestall by acting in an appropriate manner." For Wartenberg, coercive power is productive in that (1) it produces action on the part of the subordinate subject, and (2) because the actions of the subordinate subject elicited by coercive threat may actually produce something of value or of benefit to the coercive power holder. The scope of coercive power, particularly in its political and institutional forms, is, as argues Wrong, "at least in the short run . . . undoubtedly the most effective form of power in extensiveness. comprehensiveness and intensity."

However, despite its efficiency and productivity relative to force, the exercise of coercive power like the exercise of force may be expensive, socially and politically costly, and provokes resistance from those subjected to its application. Because the subjects of coercive power are aware of its application against them and realize that freedom to act has been threatened or restricted, they resent such an imposition and may attempt to break or thwart the power holder's coercive power over them. The use of coercive power as its chief means of control often means that the dominant group must maintain constant surveillance and must constantly keep itself fully informed as to the thoughts, attitudes and activities of its subjects. Consequently, to the costs of acquiring and maintaining the means of production (if they are an owning class) the cost of procuring, maintaining and deploying the means of force and violence must be added the costs of information-gathering and espionage operations (Wrong). The relative inefficiency, counter-productivity and costliness of exercising force and coercive power as the primary means for dominating other groups serve to motivate powerholding groups to develop other more effective but less obvious or intrusive ways of exercising coercive force and power so as to reduce, if not eliminate altogether, the reactive resentment and resistance of their subordi­nate subjects. This end is accomplished when power holders discover and utilize ways and means of obscuring or hiding the use of coercion by inducing misperceptions and misunderstandings among their subjects about whether they are actually being coerced (Wartenberg) or are being subjected to a "power play." The other forms of power we shall discuss below have in good part been developed and are utilized to obscure the actual nature of the coercive power relationship between power holders and their subjects. However, we should note at this juncture that the ability of power holders to obscure their coercive and exploitative actions from their subjects will be critically successful to the degree that their subjects have not developed and utilized their own analytical/critical, perceptive, and creative capacities to see through and subvert the hidden coercive machina­tions and intentions of their oppressors.

Influence as Power

Influence occurs when a person acts in compliance with the wishes or directions or suggestions of another, based on his sheer positive regard for love and admiration of the other, or based on a desire to please or serve the other because of the other's personal significance to him. Influence is achieved when the subject's behavioral compliance is attained without the influential party having to possess or use force, coercion, material rewards or making appeals to authority. This is especially the case when the subject complies with the wishes, suggestions, or commands of the other while engaging in no relevant, independent or deliberate thinking, reasoning, or rational processes whatsoever; or when the subject complies out of a "conditioned habit of obedience" in regard to the other. [in photo, racist suspect, Lorne Michaels, the producer of SNL.] 

Wartenberg mentions two important types of influence with which we are familiar: rational persuasion and personal persuasion. (He also mentions a third, expertise, which we discuss as "competent author­ity," presently.) In the first instance the subject retains the use of his critical or rational faculties but is led to reassess his understanding or perception of a situation or of reality, or to accept as reasonable or correct the conclusions reached and recommendations suggested by the other as the result of the other's apparently logical argumentation or reasoning. In the second instance the subject's behavioral compli­ance, the argumentation or demands of the other occur essentially because he wishes to satisfy the desires of the other as he perceives them to exist. As Wartenberg posits, "The central feature of influence via personal persuasion is that the influenced agent does not make her choices on the basis of reasons that she can present in the form of rational argument, but rather on the basis of the desires of the influencing agent." Another form of persuasion might be referred to as propagandists persuasion, wherein through various media and forms of indoctrination techniques the subject is influenced to accept certain opinions or beliefs which lead him to think that he is acting in his own interests when this really is not the case.

Influence as power involves the power holder's ability to gain his subordinate subject's "voluntary" acceptance of and behavioral compliance with the power holder's interpretations of reality, value judgements, prescriptive suggestions and commands, based on the power holder's perceived status, resources, personal/social attributes, competence, expertise, or legitimate authority. When power holders as a group possess a monopoly of the positions of influence due to historical and other social factors, they may use their influence as a means to secure and obscure their possession of other types of power, and at times render unnecessary the naked use offeree and coercion.

Influence requires that the subject subordinates his judgement to that of the other, that he is guided by the judgement of the other. As such, influence is a more secure and "hidden" form of power in that the influenced subject complies with the demands of the power holder either without questioning the role or motives of the power holder or after being persuaded by the power holder's apparently logical argumentation. Consequently, influence as a type of power, as a type of rational, personal, propagandistic persuasion, may serve to render the possession and exercise of other types of power unnecessary and more secure, or to obscure them altogether. Thus, influence may itself function as an exceedingly potent or subtle form of power.

To a very significant extent White domination of Blacks, which initially and until relatively recently was expressed in terms of physical force coercion, the threatened use of force along with its occasional use, now expresses itself as influence. By means of the various forms of influence we have discussed, Whites dominate Blacks without appearing to deliberately do so and without having to revert to the sheer use of force and coercion. Consequently, they convince or persuade many Blacks to behave in ways compatible with maintaining White power, and incompatible with generating Black Power, while Blacks self-deceptiveiy think that such behavior on their part is purely "voluntary," reasonable, or obligatory. This situation devolves from Blacks having accepted Eurocentric frames of reference and perceptions of reality. Only by choosing to accept and live by an Afrocentric frame of reference will Blacks escape the dispowering White influence and, correspondingly, enhance their own power.  [MORE]

['will the Next Gunning Down Happen tonight? Get Your Teddy Bears and Signs and Police Tape Ready'] Funeral held for Black man [allegedly] Murdered by SC white cop; minister calls shooting racist [Amen]

"We're all in this together" & "Use the Ballot" and other solid gold nonsense sprayed by White Media. From [HERE] The death of a black man shot in the back while fleeing from a white police officer was the act of a racist cop, a Black minister told hundreds who gathered Saturday for the funeral of Walter Scott. The white media thinks this is quite a revelation sandwich, who are the fools? [In photo, Pallbearers carrying the casket of Walter L. Scott, who was fatally shot  by a white cop, from  the W.O.R.D. Ministries Christian Center in Summerville, S.C., on Saturday. The white media has been running all these sappy, Blacks should go vote and pray stories the past few days. For instance, a NY Times video quoted a white lady saying "we're all in this together." MORE]

"All of us have seen the video," the Rev. George Hamilton, the minister at W.O.R.D. Ministries Christian Center, told an overflow congregation. "There is no doubt in my mind and I feel that Walter's death was motivated by racial prejudice." "This particular cop was a racist. You don't Tase a man and then shoot," the minister said. But he added "we will not indict the entire law enforcement community for the act of one racist." [MORE]

Anyway, how come their prayers haven't been answered? Oh well, pray harder and vote harder? More funeral coverage [HERE]

The Black Fear of Confronting White Supremacy. [MORE] The protests have not produced justice. In a state of complete attachment to the racial stupidity of whites, Black people are victims of their own emotions. Praying, singing, burning candles and posting up teddy bears do not fight the power of white supremacy.  And trusting racist cops to properly operate bodycams or asking racist prosecutors 'to please be fair' or telling racist jurors that 'our lives matter' is some gullible shit. You must want to be deceived - and so it will be done. Racists are the most provocative people in the world and they know how to push our buttons. They love it - watch them watch. 

If this is a "movement" it has been a movement of circular thought or an "other directed" struggle. There will be no political fallout from politicians ignoring the concerns of Black & Brown people about police brutality. There will be no real trouble. The Democrat and Republican parties are both white parties dominated by rich white people. Stop pretending. Belief that we have this kind of illusionary power is actually submission to and/or cooperation with white supremacy. Belief in this system and the belief in somehow changing white people has lead to suffering, it is your prison. Drop it, let pharaoh go. [MORE]

"You cannot do anything about the deceivers so don't be worried, let them be themselves. But you can do something about yourself, that is the point." [MORE] 

White People Fear Dropping their Racist Mind ["the master of silence"]

An excerpt from "The Grass Grows by Itself"

The "Master of Silence"

Bhagwan Shree Rajineesh speaking on 25 February 1975 a.m. in Buddha Hall

There was a monk who called himself “The Master of Silence.”

 Actually he was a fraud and had no genuine understanding.

To sell his humbug Zen he had two eloquent attendant monks

to answer questions for him,
but, as if to show his inscrutable silent Zen,
he himself never uttered a word.

One day, during the absence of his two attendants,

a pilgrim came to him and asked:
Master, what is the Buddha?

Not knowing what to do, or how to answer,

he looked desperately around in all directions

for his missing mouthpieces.

The pilgrim, apparently pleased and satisfied,

thanked the master, and set out again on his journey.

On the road the pilgrim met the two attendant monks

on their way home.
He began telling them enthusiastically
what an enlightened being this Master of Silence is.

He said: I asked him what Buddha is
and he immediately turned his face to the east and to the west

implying that human beings are always looking for Buddha
here and there, but actually,
Buddha is not to be found in any such directions.
Oh what an enlightened master he is,

and how profound his teachings!

When the attendant monks returned,

the Master of Silence scolded them thus:

Where have you been all this time?

A while ago I was embarrassed to death and almost ruined

by an inquisitive pilgrim. 

Life is a mystery.

The more you understand it, the more mysterious it becomes.

The more you know, the less you feel that you know.

The more you become aware of the depth, the infinite depth,

the more it becomes almost impossible to say anything about it.

Hence silence.

A man who knows remains in such awe,

such infinite wonderment that even breathing stops.

Standing before the mystery of life, one is lost completely.

But there are problems,

and the first problem with the mystery of life

is that there is always the possibility of frauds,

people who can deceive others, people who can cheat.

In the world of science that is not possible.

Science moves on a plain ground with infinite caution -

logical, rational. If you utter something nonsensical,

immediately you will be caught,

because whatsoever you say can be verified.

Science is objective, and any assertion, any statement,

can be verified in experiments in the laboratories.

With religion everything is inner, subjective, mysterious,

and the path is not on a plain. It is a hilly track.

There are many ups and many downs,

and the path moves like a spiral.

Again and again you come to the same place,

maybe a little higher.

And whatsoever you say cannot be verified,

there is no criterion of verification.

Because it is inner, no experiment can prove or disprove it;

because it is mysterious, no logical argumentation can decide this way or that.

That's why science is one,

but there exist almost three thousand religions in the world.

You cannot prove any religion false. Neither can you prove

any other religion to be true or authentic.

That is not possible, because no empirical test is possible.

A Buddha says that there is no self inside.

How to prove this or how to disprove this?

If somebody says, "I have seen God", and he sounds sincere,

what to do? He may be a deluded lunatic,

he may have seen a hallucination,

or he may really have seen the reality of existence.

But how to prove or disprove?

He cannot share his experience with anybody, it is inner.

It is not like an object you can place in the middle

and everybody can watch it, and everybody can experiment

and dissect it. You have to take it in faith.

He may sound absolutely sincere, and may be deluded:

he may not be cheating you, trying to cheat you,

he may be himself deceived. He may be a very true person

but he has seen a dream and thinks it is real -

sometimes dreams have the quality that they look more real

than the reality itself. Then dreams look like visions.

He has heard the voice of God

and he is so filled with it, so thrilled. But what to do?

How to prove that he has not gone mad,

that he has not projected his own mind and idea?

There is no possibility.

If there is one genuine religious man,

there are ninety-nine others all around him.

A few of them are deluded: poor, simple fellows, good at heart,

not trying to harm anybody, but still they harm.

Then there are a few cheats, robbers, deceivers:

cunning, clever people who are knowingly doing harm.

But the harm pays. You cannot find

a better business in the world than religion.

You can promise, and there is no need to deliver the goods,

because the goods are invisible.

I have heard an anecdote - in America

they invented invisible hair-pins for ladies.

One lady was purchasing them at a supermarket

and the salesman gave her a packet of invisible hair­pins.

She looked in the box and she couldn't see any.

Of course, they were invisible, so how can you see?

And she said: "But I don't see anything in it."

The man said: "They are invisible, so how can you see?"

So the lady asked: "Really? Are they invisible?"

The man said: "You are asking me? For seven days

we have been out of stock, and still we are selling them.

They are absolutely invisible."

When things are invisible,

you can go on selling, promising.

There is no need to deliver the goods,

because in the first place they are invisible,

so nobody can ever detect them.

And you cannot find a better business than religion,

because the goods are invisible.

I have seen many people being deceived, many people deceiving.

And the thing is so subtle

that nothing can be said for or against.

For example, I know a man who is a simple, plain, stupid man. But stupidity has its own qualities. Particularly in religion, a stupid man can look like a PARAMAHANSA. Because he is stupid, his behavior is unexpected, just like an enlightened man. The similarity is there. Because he is stupid, he cannot utter a single rational statement -just like an enlightened man. He is foolish, he doesn't know what he is saying, how he is behaving. Suddenly he can do anything: and this sudden doing seems to be as if he belongs to another world. He has epileptic fits, but people think he is going into samadhi. He needs electric shock treatment! Suddenly he will go into a fit and swoon, and the followers will beat their drums and they will sing to the glory of God, that their master has gone into great samadhi, ecstasy. And his mouth starts foaming, and his saliva flows out - he is simply in a fit. He has no intelligence. But that is a quality, and there are deceivers around him who go on spreading things about the "baba".

And many things happen near him: that is the miracle. Many things happen, because many things happen of their own accord. The baba is in a swoon, and many people will feel their kundalini rising. They are projecting. There is a certain phenomenon: if you sit quietly for a long period, the body accumulates energy, and then the body starts moving, feeling restless. Sudden jerks start coming - they think this is kundalini. Kundalini is rising and when it rises in one person, how can you lag behind? Then others start. Then it is just like if one person goes to the toilet, then others feel the urge: if one person sneezes, others have a tremendous sneeze coming to them. It becomes infectious. But with so many things happening, the baba must be in samadhi. He is simply in a fit. In the East it has been my observation that only one genuine person exists, ninety-nine are false - either themselves deceived, simple, poor people; or deceivers, cunning, clever people.

This can go on, because the whole phenomenon is invisible. What to do? How to judge? How to decide? Religion is always dangerous. It is dangerous because the very terrain is mysterious, irrational. Anything goes, and there is no outer way to judge it. And there are people with their gullible minds, always ready to believe something, because they need some foothold. Without belief they feel unanchored, uprooted; they need somebody to believe in, they need somewhere to go and feel anchored and rooted.

Belief is a deep need in people. Why is it a deep need? Because without belief you feel like a chaos; without belief you don't know why you exist; without belief you cannot feel any meaning in life. No significance seems to be there. You feel like an accident with no reason at all to be here. Without belief, the question arises: Why are you? Who are you? From where are you coming? Where are you going? And there is not a single answer - without belief there is no answer. One feels simply without any meaning, an accident in existence, not needed at all, not indispensable. You will die and nobody will bother; they will all continue. You feel something is lacking, a contact with reality, a certain belief. That's why religions exist - to supply beliefs, because people need them.

A person without belief has to be very, very courageous. To live without belief is to live in the unknown, to live without belief is a great daring. Ordinary people cannot afford that. With too much daring, anguish comes in, anxiety is created. And this has to be noted: to me a real religious person is without belief. Trust he has, but not belief, and there is a vast difference between the two.

Belief is intellectual. You need it, that's why you have it. It is there because you cannot live without belief. Belief gives you a support to live by; it gives you a certain meaning, howsoever false; it gives you a certain blueprint for life, how to move, where to move. You are on the highway, not lost in the forest. Belief gives you a commodity, there are other believers just like you; you become a part of the crowd. Then you need not think on your own, then you are no longer responsible for your own being and what you are doing. Now you can throw the responsibility on the crowd.

An individual Hindu is never as bad as a Hindu crowd. An individual Mohammedan is never as bad as a Mohammedan crowd. What happens? Individuals are not bad, crowds are simply mad - because, in a crowd, nobody feels responsible. You can commit murders in a crowd easily, because you know the crowd is doing it and you are just a wave in it, you are not the deciding factor, so you are not responsible. Individual, alone, you feel a responsibility. You will feel guilty if you commit something. It is my observation that sin exists through crowds; no individual is ever a sinner. And individuals, even if they commit something wrong, can be taken out of it very easily; but crowds are impossible, because crowds have no souls, no centers. To whom to appeal?

And in all that goes on in the world - the devil, the evil forces - the crowd is in fact responsible. Nations are the devil; religious communities are the evil forces. Belief makes you a part of a bigger crowd than you, and there is a feeling of elation when you are a part of something bigger, a nation - India, or America, or England. Then you are not a tiny human being. A great energy comes to you and you feel elated. Euphoria is felt. That's why, whenever a country is at war, people feel very euphoric, ecstatic. Suddenly their life has a meaning - they exist for the country, for the religion, for the civilization; now they have a certain goal to be achieved, and a certain treasure to be protected. Now they are no longer ordinary people, they have a great mission. Belief is the bridge from the individual to the crowd.

Trust is totally different.

Trust is not an intellectual concept.

Trust is a quality of the heart, not of the head.

Belief is a bridge between the individual and the crowd,

and trust is a bridge between the individual and the cosmos.

Trust is always in God, and when I say "God",

I don't mean any belief in God. When I say God, I simply mean the whole.

Trust is a deep understanding that you are simply a part,

a note in a great symphony, just a small wave in the ocean. Trust means you have to follow the whole, flow with the whole, be in accord with the whole. Trust means: I am not here as an enemy, I am not here to fight; I am here to enjoy the opportunity that has been given to me; I am here to be grateful and celebrating. Trust is not in a doctrine: you need not be a Hindu, you need not be a Mohammedan, you need not be a Jain or a Sikh. Trust is a commitment between the individual and the whole. Trust makes you religious - not Hindu, not Mohammedan, not Christian - simply religious. Trust has no name. Belief makes you a Hindu, Mohammedan, Christian. Belief has names, millions of names; there are thousands of beliefs - you can choose. Trust has only one quality: the quality of surrender into the whole; the quality of moving in accord with the whole; the quality of not forcing the whole to follow you, but simply allowing yourself to move with the whole. Trust is a transformation; trust has to be attained; belief is given by birth. Nobody is born in trust, everybody is born in belief: you are born a Hindu, or a Jain, or a Buddhist. Belief is given by society, because belief is the bridge between you and society.

If society doesn't give you a belief, there is a fear - you may become rebellious. In fact it is certain that if the belief is not given, you will become rebellious, and society doesn't want that, can't afford that. Society, before you become aware, gives you deep beliefs. Into your blood it goes - with the milk of your mother the poison of belief seeps into your being. By the time you become aware of what has happened you find you are already a Hindu, or a Mohammedan, or a Christian. The straitjacket is already there: you are imprisoned.

And it is very difficult to get out of it because it gets into your unconscious; it becomes your very foundation. Even if you get out of it, even if you go against it, it will remain in the foundation, because to cleanse the unconscious is very difficult. Consciously you can't do it.

I have heard, it happened that Mulla Nasrudin became an atheist. And he was dying, so the priest came. The priest said: Mulla, now this is the last moment and the last opportunity. Still there is time left, you confess your sin and you confess that you went wrong by becoming an atheist. Become a theist and die believing in God.

Mulla Nasrudin opened his eyes and said: "Thank God I am not a theist."

Even if you are not a theist, you will thank God. Deep down it remains in the unconscious, it becomes a foundation. Whatsoever you have learned in your childhood before the age of seven has become your foundation. To uproot it, very great effort and meditation is needed. You will have to move back, only then can it be wiped out. You can create anti-beliefs, they won't help, they cannot help. You can become a theist. You can be a Hindu in your childhood, then you can be converted to a Christian, but you will remain a Hindu - your Christianity will be coloured by your Hinduism. You may become a communist, but, deep down, the unconscious is there and it will colour your communism. A deep meditation is needed to cleanse the unconscious.

Trust is totally different. Trust is not in words, in scriptures. Trust is towards life - the very energy that moves the whole. You trust it and you float with it. If it takes you down in the whirl, you go down in the whirl. If it takes you out in the swirl, you come out in the swirl. You move with it, you don't have your own mind about it. If it makes you sad, you become sad. If it makes you happy, you become happy. You simply move with it, with no mind of your own, and suddenly, you come to realize that now you have achieved a point where bliss is going to be eternal. In your sadness also you will be blissful, because it is none of your business. The whole is doing it that way and you are moving with it. Happiness - okay. Sadness - okay. You simply "okay". Everything is Okayed. This is what a religious man is: he has no mind of his own. Belief has a very strong mind of its own.

It is said about a great saint, Tulsidas that he was invited into a Krishna temple in Mathura, and he was a believer in Ram. He went there, but he would not bow down, because the statue was of Krishna with a flute on his lips. It is said that he said to Krishna: "I can bow down only to Ram, so, if you want me to bow down, you take the bow of Ram in your hand. When I see that you have become Ram, only then will I bow down."

This is the mind of belief. Otherwise, what is the distinction between Ram and Krishna? And what is the distinction between a flute and a bow?

And the story goes on: it says that the statue changed, it became the statue of Ram, and then Tulsidas bowed down very happily.

Now the problem is, what must have happened? My understanding is that the statue must have remained the same, because statues don't bother. They don't bother whether you bow down or not. But the mind of a believer can create things. Tulsidas must have projected: it must have been a projection; it must have been a hallucination. He must have seen that's certain. He must have seen, otherwise he would not have bowed down: that's certain. The possibility is that his own mind created, and when you are too filled with belief you can create. You can see things which are not there, and you can miss things which are there. A mind that is filled with belief is a mind which can project anything according to the belief. When you see things, always remember this.

People come to me.... If somebody is a believer in Krishna and he meditates, immediately Krishna starts coming to him. Visions. But Christ never comes to him. A Christian starts meditation - then Krishna never disturbs his meditation, only Christ comes. To a Mohammedan, neither Krishna nor Christ comes; and Mohammed cannot come because Mohammedans have no pictures of Mohammed. They don't know what he looked like, so they cannot project.

Whatsoever you believe, you project. Belief is a projection. It is just like a projector in a movie film-house: you see something on the screen which is not there. The projector is hidden behind, but you never look at the projector, you look at the screen. The projector is at the back, and the whole game is going on there, but you look at the screen. The whole game is going on in your mind, and a mind filled with belief always goes on projecting things in the world, it sees things which are not there. This is the problem. The mind which believes is always vulnerable and always provides an opportunity to be exploited by the cheaters - and the cheaters are all around. The whole path is filled with robbers, because no map exists.

Moving into religion is moving into the uncharted, into the unmapped. Robbers can flourish there very easily, they can wait for you - and they are waiting. And sometimes, even if the person is not deceiving you, you want to be deceived. Then you will be deceived. Nobody can deceive you if, deep down, you are not ready to be deceived.

Just a few days before, a man came to me and he said: A baba has deceived me, and he is a great yogi. I asked him: And what has he done? He said: He can make gold out of any metal. He has shown me and I have seen it happening with my own eyes. Then he said that I should bring all my gold and he would make it tenfold. So I collected all my ornaments and he has simply escaped with them. He has deceived me.

Everybody will think that he had deceived him, but I told this man: It is your greed that has deceived you. Don't throw the responsibility onto anybody else. You are simply foolish. Greed is foolish. You wanted your ornaments to be made tenfold. That mind has deceived you; the other person has simply used the opportunity. He is just a clever person, that's all. You are the real problem. If he had not deceived you, somebody else would have.

So who deceives it not the question. It has been my observation that if somebody deceives you, it shows a certain proneness in you to be deceived. And if somebody can lie to you, it means you have a certain affinity with lies. A man of truth cannot be deceived. A man who lives in truth cannot become a victim of liars. Only a liar can be deceived by another liar; otherwise there is no possibility. There are millions of people who are ready to be deceived, who are simply waiting for someone to come and deceive them - because of their beliefs, because of their vicious desires, because of their greed. And remember well that greed is greed, whether it exists in the material world or in the spiritual makes no difference. The quality of it remains the same. You would like somebody to increase your gold tenfold - this is greed. Then somebody says, "I will make you an enlightened person", and you fall in line immediately. That too is greed.

And I tell you: It is possible to increase gold tenfold very easily, but it is almost impossible to make any other person enlightened. Because that is no game. The path is arduous. In fact nobody ever makes you enlightened - you yourself become enlightened; the other may be a catalytic agent at the most, nothing more. But in fact everything happens within you; the other's presence may have helped, that's all. And if you are really sincere, even that is not needed. If you are sincere, those who can help will seek you, if you are insincere, you will seek those who can harm. That is the difference. When a disciple seeks a master, there is almost always going to be something wrong. When a master seeks a disciple, only then something authentic is going to happen.

How can you seek a master? Whatsoever you may think will be your mind, and you are completely ignorant, you are a sleepwalker. You will seek somebody according to you. YOU will be the criterion. Then you will go and seek somebody who is doing a miracle.

You may go and seek Satya Sai Baba, because that will be a deep fulfilment of your greed. You will see: here is the man. If he can produce things out of air, he can do anything. Now your greed is provoked. Now a deep affinity happens immediately. That's why you will see thousands of people around Satya Sai Baba. If a Buddha exists, you will not see multitudes there, because there is no affinity. Satya Sai Baba has an appeal deep inside you: your greed is provoked. Now you know this is the right man. But you are wrong. How can you decide who is the right man? You create your deceivers, you give them the opportunity. You follow magicians, not masters.

If you really want to seek a master, drop greed and drop your beliefs. Go to a master completely nude in the mind, with no beliefs; as if you are a tree in the fall with no leaves, naked, standing against the sky. You go and seek a master with a naked mind, with no leaves, with no beliefs. Only then, only then, I say, will you be able to see without projection; only then will something penetrate into your life from the above. Then nobody can deceive you.

So don't be bothered and don't condemn the deceivers: they fulfil a need. Because you need them, they are there. Nothing exists without any cause. People exist all around you, because you need them. Thieves exist, robbers exist, exploiters exist, deceivers exist, because you need them. You will be nowhere if they all disappear; you will be simply unable to live your life if they are not there.

This story is beautiful, and has to be understood deeply.

THERE WAS A MONK WHO CALLED HIMSELF "THE MASTER OF SILENCE". ACTUALLY HE WAS A FRAUD AND HAD NO GENUINE UNDERSTANDING.

You can pretend, and in religion you can pretend more than anywhere else. Because people are clever in their worldly ways but they are completely innocent as far as religion is concerned. You may be able to know everything that goes on in the market, you have lived there, you know the tricks and the ways and everything - you have yourself been doing those things. You are wise as far as the world is concerned, but when you move into the world of a monastery, from the market to the monastery, there is a great difference. In the monastery you are completely innocent, like a child. You may be very old, sixty or seventy years of age, but in a monastery, in a temple, you are just like a small child. You have not lived there, and the same things exist there also. Again it is a market.

When Jesus entered the temple of Jerusalem, he entered with a whip and he started beating people, because many shopkeepers had entered the temple and many money-lenders. He turned their tables upside down and he said: "You have made my God's temple a market. You traders - you get out!" This is really something - one single man, and the whole crowd of traders escaped.

Truth has a strength of its own. When something is true, you immediately become weak, because you are a liar and you immediately understand: That's right. Those shopkeepers didn't fight; those money-lenders could have killed Jesus; he was alone and they were many. But simply at the truth of it they escaped outside. And only when they reached outside did they start planning what to do with this man - and it was their planning that finally crucified Jesus.

In the monasteries, in the temples, in the ashrams, another world exists. You don't know the laws of it, the rules of the game. You can be deceived there very, very easily. And pretenders abound because it is so easy.

This has been my feeling: two types of people move towards religion. One is the man who has lived in the world, lived it through and through, and has come to understand that it is futile, useless, a wastage of life. It is just like a dream, and that too not a beautiful dream, but a nightmare. This is one type, the genuine type, the authentic, who has lived through the world and found it useless, a desert, with no oasis in it, and has turned away. His turning is total. He will not look back. There is nothing to look back to. Buddha used to ask his disciples: "Have you really turned completely or would you like to have a little of your mind always looking back, a part of you always looking back?" This is the first type who is really genuine, who has lived in the world and found it just a frustration. That's why he has moved towards religion.

Then there is another type which is completely opposite. The first type is one per cent; the second type is ninety-nine per cent. These people are very much attracted towards religion. This type is those people who couldn't succeed in the world, who couldn't succeed in their ambitions, who could not become important. They would have liked to have become prime ministers and presidents, but they couldn't. They were simply not made that strong to fight there. They are people who would have liked to have become Rockefellers, or Fords, but could not because the competition was too great and they were not made of the right strong metal. They were lacking, because life is a struggle and they were simply inferior. They didn't have that much intelligence, or that kind of strength to fight through and to fulfil their ambitions. These people also turn towards religion.

These are the great deceivers. They will become the problem for religion and for people who seek religion. They will be deceivers all around the temple; they will make the temple a trade-house because their desires are still there lurking. They have turned to religion as politicians - of course, politicians who have failed in politics. You go all over the country -around gurus everywhere you will find politicians who have failed. Ex-ministers will always be found coming to some guru - people who wanted too much in the world and couldn't get it, they turn towards religion, because there things are easier. Competition is not much, and you can pretend, and you can believe easily that you are a very superior being. And there is no competition. You can simply say, "I have become enlightened", and nobody can deny it, and nobody can disprove it. There simply exists no criterion to judge it, and you can always find foolish people to follow you.

Even a Muktanand can get followers. Once I passed Muktanand's ashram, and just to see what was happening there, I went in. I have never seen such an ordinary man becoming a great religious leader of people. No potential, no achievement, no insight - if you saw him walking in the street you would not recognize that there is something there. Just plain ordinary - and not ordinary in the sense of Zen - just plain ordinary. But even he can find followers.

In the world, millions of fools exist; and they are always ready to believe, always ready, ready to fall into the trap of anybody. In fact, sometimes there is no trap at all, but they fall, because they would like to believe that something is happening. Man is so imaginative, and, because of his imagination, he starts believing that something is happening. These people know at least this much about what to do.

Somebody comes to me and says: "I have a certain pain in my backbone." Now, if I say that this is simply a pain, go to a doctor, he simply turns away from me and never comes back, because he had not come for that. He had come for an approval. If I say: "Yes your kundalini is rising", he will be happy. These fools will always find their Muktanands.

And not very ordinary people, sometimes very intelligent people come. Just a few days before, a film producer came to me - a well-known name all over India. His blood sugar has gone beyond all ordinary limits; it has reached five hundred. He should really be dead by now. He is a drunkard, and a great food eater, obsessed with eating, but still he continues and continues eating sweets and drinking alcohol. Now, because of so much blood sugar, his whole body is trembling. It has to, because his whole body is ill, every fibre of it is ill, and there is a deep trembling inside. He was sitting there when I was talking to others, and he was trembling. Then he asked me: "What do you think? What is it - is it kundalini rising?"

Now what to do with these people? These are the victims, and these are participants in creating deceivers; they are also half responsible. And I know this man also belongs to Muktanand's group.

Now the problem arises for me - what to do? If I say: "Yes. It is Kundalini rising and this is your last life. Soon, within days, you will be enlightened," he will bow down, touch my feet and will go away very happy. He will be happy, I will be happy, and everything is settled. And he will go around talking about me, that this is the right, the greatest master that he has come to know. It is good business. Simple. But then I am deceiving him, and not only deceiving. I am killing him, I am a murderer, because I know that he is dying of diabetes, and the diabetes has gone beyond all limits. If I say, "This is kundalini and enlightenment is coming, and this is like samadhi, that's why you are trembling; it is God descending into you," or, "You are rising towards the Divine," or "The Divine is descending in you," he will be very happy, everybody is happy, there is no problem. He will work for me and until he dies he will go on talking about me.

But the moment I said: "This is nothing to do with any enlightenment. This is simple - too much sugar in the blood. Your whole body is feverish. You don't waste time, you go to the doctors and listen to them," immediately I could see the change in his face. It changed: "This man is not a master at all. How can he be a master, and enlightened, when he cannot understand such simple phenomenon that is happening in me?"

It actually happened. A man, very well-known in the West, Franklin Jones, was a disciple of Muktanand - and then his kundalini arose. Muktanand approved: "You have become a SIDDHA." Not only did he approve, he gave a written certificate. I simply cannot believe what foolishnesses go on - a certificate that you have become a SIDDHA, enlightened! So of course the man became a SIDDHA and he changed his name. He was Franklin Jones, now he is Bubba Free John, and he has many followers of his own.

Now the trouble came in, because he had become more enlightened than Muktanand ever expected, and he had become a guru in his own right. No he wanted - he came again just a few months ago - now he wanted another certificate. Now he wanted to show: "There is no need for me to belong to any master, because now I am a master myself, and my karmas with you, with Muktanand, are fulfilled. So, give me a certificate that I am absolutely free."

Now Muktanand hesitated - this was going too far. So he denied; he would not give another certificate. But the thing had already gone too far. The man returned home, wrote a book, and said: "Of course Muktanand helped me a little on my way, but he is not an enlightened man and I dissolve all my links with him. He is an ordinary man."

This is how things go. He was an enlightened man because he gave the certificate; he was the greatest master in the world. Now he is no longer. He is an ordinary man - "I dissolve all my links with him."

These things go on. Remember this, because you can become a part in such a game yourself. Never believe in yourself too much. Remain aware. When you come to me I will say exactly what is happening. Many have gone from me because I will not support their egos and I will not fulfill their wishes, and I will not say what they want me to say. And once they go away, they are against me, they have to be. These are the traps. Not only do the deceivers create them, you help to create them. Don't be a participant in any deception, be very, very alert.

This monk, who was a fraud and had no genuine understanding, called himself "The Master of Silence". That's very beautiful, because if you utter something you can be caught. It is simply beautiful to remain silent; then nobody can catch you. They say it is good for two kinds of persons to be silent: the very, very wise have to be silent, because what they know cannot be said; and the very, very foolish, because if they are not silent, they will be caught. So this man, who was a fraud, used to call himself "The Master of Silence". He would not utter a single word. But if you don't utter a word you cannot sell anything. If a salesman is silent, how will he sell things? So he devised a plan.

TO SELL HIS HUMBUG ZEN HE HAD TWO ELOQUENT ATTENDANT MONKS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR HIM - BUT, AS IF TO SHOW HIS INSCRUTABLE SILENT ZEN, HE HIMSELF NEVER UTTERED A WORD.

ONE DAY, DURING THE ABSENCE OF HIS TWO ATTENDANTS, A PILGRIM CAME TO HIM AND ASKED: "MASTER, WHAT IS THE BUDDHA?"

This is one of the Zen questions. It means: what is DHARMA, what is religion? It means: what is awareness? It means: what is an awakened being? It is one of the most fundamental questions in Zen - What is the Buddha? What is that utterly enlightened state of being that we call Buddha?

NOT    KNOWING   WHAT    TO    DO,    OR    HOW    TO    ANSWER,    HE    LOOKED DESPERATELY AROUND IN ALL DIRECTIONS FOR HIS MISSING MOUTHPIECES. THE PILGRIM, APPARENTLY PLEASED AND SATISFIED, THANKED THE MASTER AND SET OUT AGAIN ON HIS JOURNEY.

ON THE ROAD THE PILGRIM MET THE TWO ATTENDANT MONKS ON THEIR WAY HOME. HE BEGAN TELLING THEM ENTHUSIASTICALLY WHAT AN ENLIGHTENED BEING THIS MASTER OF SILENCE IS.

He projected, of course. He must have heard that those who know remain silent. He must have read it in the scriptures where it is said millions of times that one who knows, never says; one who says, has not known yet.

But these are very, very paradoxical things. Lao Tzu says in the very beginning of "Tao Te Ching", that truth cannot be uttered, and that which can be uttered is not true. But Lao Tzu uttered this - so what to think about it? Is it true, or not? It is the uttered word, it has been said. Now you will be in very deep trouble, Lao Tzu says that truth cannot be said, but this much he is saying. So is this saying true or not? If it is not true that will mean that truth can be uttered; if it is true then even this cannot be uttered.

Religion is full of paradoxes and that's the problem. This man must have read many Zen masters saying that truth cannot be said. This is right: truth cannot be said. But this much can be said, many things can be said, millions of things can be said which will be helpful to find that which cannot be said. Many things can be indicated, and that which cannot be said can at least be shown. The whole meaning is only this: that the truth is greater than the words. It is greater than the silence also. Truth is so vast that it cannot be forced into the capsule of words and it cannot be forced into silence either. In fact, silence exists in truth, and words also exist in truth. Truth is the very sky, the very space.

This master pulled a trick. Thinking that truth cannot be said, the best way is to keep silent - but then no one will be attracted to you. So he had two attendants to talk about him -mouthpieces. That is a good arrangement, because if they say something wrong, he is not involved, if they say something right - so far, so good. But one day he was caught. You can deceive people for the time-being, but you cannot deceive people for ever. Some day, somewhere, you will be caught. You cannot make an arrangement of lies which can go on for ever. The truth will erupt. Ninety-nine per cent of the time you may succeed, but one per cent you will fail. And that one per cent will bring the whole success to failure. It will destroy the whole thing.

One day a pilgrim came and asked: "What is the Buddha?" The master desperately looked this way and that in all directions for his missing mouthpieces. This was the truth; he had no answer to give. And by looking in all directions, he was looking for something else - not for truth, not for Buddha, not to indicate anything by a gesture. But the pilgrim projected. By his looking in all directions, the pilgrim thought that he was really a Zen master, a great master. He would not utter words, but he was showing that you can look in every dimension, in every direction, and you will not find Buddha there, because Buddha is inside. You can seek and search and you will not find, because he is in the seeker himself. This was the projection, and this is what you can do easily. This is how people are deceived - they have their own minds and beliefs and concepts and theories, and they project.

Many times it has happened to me. People project. A man came. He came with a bag. I didn't know what he had in the bag. He touched my feet and the bag was in his hand, so the bag also touched my feet. I thought it was just accidental. But the man had a bottle with water in it inside the bag, and it was not accidental. He wanted my feet to touch the bottle, and I was completely unaware of what he was doing. Then, after a few days, he came and he thanked me, and he was very, very grateful. He said: "You cured my illness." I asked: "What illness? I don't know your illness." He said: "I had a severe headache for many years, a sort of migraine, and the water I brought last time I came, you touched it with your feet." I said: "I never touched it with my feet." He said: "Whatsoever is the case, you touched the bottle and I drank it for a few days and the headache is completely gone."

Now what to do? If I say that this is simply his own magic, he has done it, it is an auto-hypnosis, then there is a possibility that the headache may come back; because you cannot believe in yourself, you always believe somebody. You cannot believe in yourself - but if you cannot believe in yourself, how can you believe in anybody? But this goes on. You feel impotent inside: you cannot believe in yourself. You seek somebody, and through somebody's belief, your own magic, your own auto-hypnosis starts working. This man was cured. In the first place, his headache must have been created by himself - because a real headache cannot be cured in such a way, only a false headache, a psychological one - in the first place the headache was a hypnosis; in the second place, he had cured it. But this man is dangerous, because if you can create a headache you can also create cancer. Projecting things...

Once it happened that a man stayed with me and we were sleeping in the same room. In the night I must have gone to the toilet and he must have been very sleepy, half awake, half asleep. So he looked at my bed and I was not there. Then he must have fallen asleep for a few seconds. When I came back and he must have looked again -1 was there! So he thought that for those few seconds I had disappeared. He jumped out of the bed, caught my legs and said: "Just tell me - you have done the miracle - but tell me how you did it? Now I will never leave you. You are the right master!" So I told him: "It is okay. You will not leave me; but at least give me a chance also to say whether I would like you to be with me always, or not - because you are simply a fool." But the man said: "No, you don't try to escape. I am not going to leave you. I have seen the miracle: for this I was waiting. I will choose the master who can disappear. You have done it. I have seen it with my own eyes!"

Mind is a very subtle game. You can hear things I am not saying; you can go through things I am not doing; you can deceive yourself. So it is not necessary that somebody should deceive you. You can deceive yourself. You are a self-deceiver.

The man, seeing the silent master looking desperately all around, thought that this was the right man, a great enlightened man, indicating that the Buddha cannot be found anywhere. So, satisfied, well pleased, he thanked the master and set out again on his journey.

ON THE ROAD THE PILGRIM MET THE ATTENDANT MONKS ON THEIR WAY HOME. HE BEGAN TELLING THEM ENTHUSIASTICALLY WHAT AN ENLIGHTENED BEING THIS MASTER OF SILENCE IS.

HE SAID: "I ASKED HIM WHAT BUDDHA IS AND HE IMMEDIATELY TURNED HIS FACE TO THE EAST AND TO THE WEST, IMPLYING THAT HUMAN BEINGS ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR BUDDHA HERE AND THERE, BUT ACTUALLY, BUDDHA IS NOT TO BE FOUND IN ANY SUCH DIRECTIONS. OH, WHAT AN ENLIGHTENED MASTER HE IS, AND HOW PROFOUND HIS TEACHING!"

WHEN THE ATTENDANT MONKS RETURNED, THE MASTER OF SILENCE SCOLDED THEM THUS: WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN ALL THIS TIME? A WHILE AGO I WAS EMBARRASSED TO DEATH AND ALMOST RUINED BY AN INQUISITIVE PILGRIM.

Remember this story well, because it can be your story also on the path. And this should not be so - this story should not become your story. I am telling these stories and talking about them to make you aware of certain things. I love these stories, because they indicate so simply and so directly and so immediately certain phenomena which are possible for every pilgrim to meet on the path. How to avoid them so that you are not deceived? Nothing can be done about the deceivers. What can you do? They are there and the whole allows them also - that far it is good. You cannot do anything about the deceivers, so don't be worried, let them be themselves. But you can do something about yourself, that is the point.

I don't want you to become revolutionaries and go and hunt babas. No. Leave them to themselves. I'm telling you, not to become revolutionaries, but to become more aware so that such things don't happen to you, that's all. Babas will continue, always and always, because fools are there, and they need them; they fulfil a particular need.

So what is to be done? You can do only one thing. You drop that need within you. Don't project. Don't allow beliefs to settle in your mind. Clean the mind every day, as one cleans the house; dust gathers the whole day, in the evening you clean it, and again in the morning. In the night you have done nothing, but even in the night dust settles, so in the morning you clean again. Continuously clean your mind of beliefs, concepts, theories, ideas, ideologies, philosophies, doctrines, scriptures. You simply clean your mind of verbal chattering and you try to look at reality without any mind inside. Just look, a pure look, stare naked. Tilopa says: "Stare naked and MAHAMUDRA will be yours." You will attain to the highest enlightenment possible to human consciousness. Stare naked. Let your eyes be clean of all concepts. Then the reality will be revealed to you, because you will not distort it and you will not project it and you will not put anything into it.

What did this pilgrim do? He had some ideas and he put these ideas into the gesture of the master who was looking all around for his mouthpieces. Into that situation he put his own ideas. He must have read somewhere that the Buddha cannot be found in any direction. That was projected.

Don't be a projector, don't be an active mind. Let your mind be completely passive, receptive. Don't bring anything from the mind into the reality, otherwise you will distort it. Simply allow the reality to enter the mind and you be a passive watcher, a passive witness. Then, whatsoever the case is, you will know. Then that which is will be revealed to you, and only that can lead you to maturity, to growth, and to the final flowering.

Drop the mind if you want to know the real. Put aside the mind if you want to penetrate into the truth. The truth is always there, but your mind is standing just in-between. Put aside the mind, make a window and look, and everything, the very mystery of life, becomes unveiled before you. With the mind nobody has ever been able to know the truth. Without the mind anybody can know the truth, because the mind is the only barrier. The mind must cease for the truth to be.

And you have nothing else but mind, so it is difficult, very difficult to put it aside -arduous, but it happens if you go on trying. In the beginning only a few seconds of glimpses will be there. But even those will give you a new dimension. For seconds mind stops, and suddenly, as if there is lightning, the whole world of mind disappears and the world of the real is revealed. These lightnings will happen to you, and then, by and by, you will get settled into the state of no-mind. Then there is no need for lightning, the sun has arisen. Now it is the morning, all darkness disappears.

A religious person is a person of no mind, no belief. A religious person is a person of trust.

After braiding a white man's hair, what's next for SNigger Kevin Hart? the Cream of Wheat Box?

Bending over for coin & Promoting the Ongoing Smiling Face. HA HA. The joke is on us! [Ain't the devil happy.] According to Anon, 'a grinning negro is a safe negro. The real appeal of clown-like, smiling, cowardly, and never angry [at whites] Black man is not that he is entertaining but that he is reassuring. More on "Fighting the Poltergeist" [Here] or this "mind shampoo." [MORE] and [MORE]

In a white supremacy money grab SNigger Hart here seems to have formed a partnership with the oppressor to sell us racist propaganda and psychic violence. Almost once a month, role after role this idiot pops up on your screen jumping, smiling, cooning and shining teeth for us. Stop supporting White Supremacy. 

Anon asks;

"Who Is Most To Blame? Black Comics Or The Black Audience? If we did not support black entertainers who degrade black people, they could not make money doing it. When our "comedy" ridicules our heroes, like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks, our religion, churches, pastors, our beautiful black mommas, and our skin, noses, lips, and hair, WE make it harder for every black man, woman, and child to get respect at home, at work, on the street, in the courts, at the mortgage company, and at the hands of law enforcement.

By supporting and defending black "entertainers" who degrade black people for profit, WE are making life harder for every black male who applies for a job and is denied one because he has been stereotyped as an irresponsible fool before he opens his mouth. WE are making life harder for our black mothers, daughters, wives, and lovers to get the respect they deserve, when they are publicly referred to as "bitches" and "hos" by us. Yet we — black people -- demand respect as "black people" even when it is obvious we DO NOT RESPECT ourselves?" [MORE]

According to Dr. Blynd; 

SNigger -- a sold-out smiling Sambo-Negro. 2) a South-Bender offender. Snigggers smile for nothing except an empty mind. They typically have an intellectual base yet are devoid of intelligence, thus promoting the on-going smiling face. They also often giggle and have a frivolous conception of society and scant knowledge of the vestiges of the trans-Atlantic slave trade that brought their sorry ass to shore. Sniggers are traitors and pawns of the oppressors. Watch the company you keep! Don't cross-over unless you are ready to bend over! (See: Straw Boss, Sambo & Criss-Crossover). [MORE]

and According to Amos Wilson, 

"Psychic Violence — The most powerful obstacle against the liberation of Afrikan peoples from White domination and exploitation is not the ability of Whites to use superior military or police firepower or their threat to use it against Afrikan insurgency, but is their ability to engage in unrelenting psychopolitical violence against the collective Afrikan psyche. It is the White monopoly on psychic violence and their devastatingly ingenious use of it against the minds of Afrikan peoples which represent the greatest threat to Afrikan survival. Wrong insightfully points out the nature of this form of violence:

[T]here is a form of conduct, often described as psychic, psychological or moral force or violence, which does not fit readily under the rubrics of any of the other forms of power. If physical violence involves inflicting damages on the body of a person, how is one to classify the deliberate effort to affect adversely a person's emotions or his feelings and ideas about himself by verbally, or in other symbolic ways, insulting or degrading him? If. . . power includes the production of purely mental or emotional effects and is not confined to the eliciting of overt acts, then the psychic assault of, say, a nagging, browbeating spouse or parent, the defamation of the character of a political foe or even of an entire group, constitute exercises of power. .

Damage to the psyche is surely as real as damage to the body . . . It is plainly not true that 'sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me'. Psychic violence, in which the intended effect of the perpetrator is to inflict mental or emotional harm, is continuous with physical violence.

The ultimate force in the world is the force of mind. When that force is defeated all is lost.

Dominant Whites have used words and symbols to violently and unrelentingly attack oppressed Blacks in a thousand and one nefarious ways, including the projection of dehumanizing stereotypes and caricatures of them; the falsification of their history and culture; the miseducation of Blacks; and the engaging in chronic derisive media attacks on their morals, behavior, intelligence, ways of life, sexuality, physical features, motives and values.

The final end of the violent White-instigated psychic assaults against the collective psyche of Blacks is to induce in them states of false consciousness, self-alienation and self-hatred so as to irreparably impair their capacity to overthrow their White oppressors through the mobilization of their human and material resources.

False consciousness, self-alienation and self-hatred are conjoining states of mind which motivate oppressed Blacks to engage in continuing self-defeating, self-destructive assaults against their own interests and against themselves. Consequently, by these means Blacks are unwittingly manipulated into forming alliances with their oppressors and exploiters in disempowering themselves and in empowering those who dominate and exploit them all the more.

Coercion as Power

The instrumental use of force or the threatened use of force by the power holder to attain the compliance of another is often referred to as coercion. Coercion is therefore a form of power. It is of the utmost importance to note as did Wrong that "a coercer may succeed without possessing either the capability or the intention of using force, so long as the power subject believes he possesses both" [Emphasis added]. That is, the coercive power of the power holder may rest significantly less or not at all on his actual capacity to harm the subject, but may rest more or less completely on the subordinate subject's belief that the power holder can do so. This perspective, commonly referred to as "bluffing," allows us to recognize the fact that in many instances power holders exercise power over their subjects because of the subjects' misperceptions and misunderstandings, or false beliefs about the power holders' ability to restrict their options or possibilities. Wartenberg refers to this situation as the Oz Phenomenon, "for it shows that agents are able to coerce other agents by acting upon their beliefs rather than by controlling their action-environment directly." He further contends

that coercive power relations can be brought into existence by means of the subordinate agent's false understandings about the ability of the dominant agent to harm him. This is an important source of power for a dominant agent so long as her ability to realize her threat is not questioned [and challenged].1 [Emphasis added]

While the ability of the dominant agent to coerce the subordinate subject may rest heavily on the subject's exaggerated misperception of the dominant agent's actual capacity to do him harm, equally and often of greater importance, the ability of the dominant agent to coerce the subject may rest on the subject's misperception and underestimation of his own capacity to successfully thwart the coercive or punitive actions of the dominant agent. The often anemic self-concept of subordinate persons and groups, their low self-esteem, their ignorance of their actual strengths, are more the causes of their subordination than is the actual strength of their oppressors.

The long history of White American domination of Black Ameri­cans — which has been enforced and reinforced by the use of physical force and violence, psychic violence and coercive power — has in effect convinced the majority of Blacks that Whites are invincible. Moreover, this history has undermined the self-confidence of most Blacks, narrowed their vision of their possibilities and power, restricted their aspirations to the narrow confines of racial accommodation and assimilation, to being the paternalistic recipients of White sympathy rather than expanding their aspirations to include the overcoming of White power and achieving full, unfettered self-liberation. The unending maintenance of this self-defeating state of mind in Blacks is the fundamental objective of White power and the keystone upon which the infrastructural facade of White power rests.

We are not arguing here that White power is purely delusional or does not contain truly lethal actualities. However, we are arguing that if Black Americans and Afrikans the world-over do not permit themselves to be "psyched out" by White racist propaganda; if they both recognize and actualize their potential to neutralize White power in either its imagined or actual forms, they can by these means neutralize it. [MORE]

'I'll Say Anything to Keep Getting this White Supremacy $Money though': Coin Operated Actress Taraji Henson says White Cops Were Not [Pa]trolling the 4th Amendment's Outer Frontier During Traffic Stop of her son

You are either with them or on the White Supremacy Shit List. Actress Taraji Henson was on their shit list and apparently she is trying to work her way off. She has apologized for claiming her son was racially targeted by white Glendale cops during a 40 minute traffic stop last fall. After the incident occurred she vowed to send him to a Black college, Howard University in Washington D.C. instead of USC. "I’m not paying $50K so I can’t sleep at night wondering is this the night my son is getting racially profiled on campus.” That statement was much too much to take for racist white folks from an Emmy and Academy Award nominated Black actress on a highly visible tv show. She had to make up for that.  

So Henson retracted her accusations Friday, and publicly apologized to the Glendale Police Department. Sounding Hollywood scripted, the coin operated negro said in a post on Instagram, 

"A mother's job is not easy and neither is a police officer's. Sometimes as humans we overreact without gathering all of the facts. As a mother in this case I overreacted and for that I apologize. Thank you to that officer for being kind to my son." [MORE]

If you watch the entire 40 minute cop episode [below] you will know that this is idiotic. At best the stop was questionable and nothing to apologize about. But for real: the stop was all that; racist, arbitrary and unlawful. And she is wrong, a racist cop has a very easy job, especially if the people he victimizes go along with it. First a few preliminary matters. 

Have you checked your local traffic code lately? It is deeper than Atlantis - covering things you would expect like changing lanes without signaling to prohibitions on having items like parking stickers or scent trees hanging from your rear view mirror or tiny burned out light bulbs in your rear tag. "Very few drivers can traverse any appreciable distance without violating some traffic regulation." As pointed out by the Supreme Court, "total compliance with traffic and safety rules is nearly impossible, a police officer will almost invariably be able to catch any given motorist in a technical violation. This creates the temptation to use traffic stops as a means of investigating other law violations, as to which no probable cause or even articulable suspicion exists." The "multitude of applicable traffic and equipment regulations is so large and so difficult to obey perfectly that virtually everyone is guilty of violation, permitting the police to single out almost whomever they wish for a stop." [MORE] 

Since the 1980's police departments have co-opted local traffic codes as a major weapon to be used in the alleged "war on drugs." Making stops whose sole legal justification is traffic regulation in order to seek out drugs when grounds are lacking to detain for a narcotics investigation. [MORE]

Many folks have finally come to understand that the so-called war on drugs was/is really a war against Black people. Now that crime has significantly declined and the drug trade is far removed from the open air market, violent, Rayful Edmond money-making days of the late 80's - 90's, you can really see what these traffic codes are really about – fucking with Black people. Thousands of mostly white cops from overbudgeted police departments, armed to the teeth, bored out of their minds with no real crime going on, target Blacks - pulling them over for any insubstantial thing. With the "war on drugs" policy justification losing credibility, the racist logic is plain to see; "there is no innocent Black male, just Black male criminals who have not yet been detected, apprehended or convicted." [MORE]

Law enforcement officers are granted official, discretionary authority to stop you or not. Does the cop enforce the traffic code the same way on white people? In a system of vast unequal power between whites and blacks, what happens when white cops abuse their authority and arbitrarily target Blacks?? Are they any repercussions? 

As recent episodes in Ferguson and NYC have taught us in a system of white supremacy/racism you can be legally executed by a white cop anytime, anyplace in front of cameras and non-white witnesses. This same white cop also has the unconstrained and standardless discretion to pull you over and fuck with you too. Can he get away with it? What is white collective power? It is when a white cop pulls over a non-white person for some trivial bullshit, ignores all his rights (Constitutional, local and human) and his fellow white officers, white union reps, white media, white prosecutors, white judges & jurors and white politicians and voters support and finance that white officer's right to target you. How do we neutralize this vast unequal power that is racism/white supremacy? Police brutality is just a symptom of the problem. 

The white media has made much about Henson's apology. The 5 minute clip shown by the media is edited, chopped and de-contextualized and about as real as the programming on the show Empire -also made by white folks. If you have 40 minutes to kill watch the entire traffic stop and consider the following.   

Pedestrian was in the Middle of What Street? Why did the white cop pull him over for this nonsense? The cop says "she was actually like in the middle of the road there. I don't want you to hit someone." He then later repeats it to another officer, "the pedestrian was in the middle of the road." See above. Funny nonsense from an idiot. In a state of attachment to their racial stupidity, White folks see what they want to see. The pedestrian who looks like a white man, actually had one foot in the crosswalk and one foot on the sidewalk as he entered on the far right of the picture [see above]. For real, he pulled him over because he was Black and he was bored. Again, there is very little real crime going on - the cop is not in a rush to get to some real crime fighting; this is it. The LA Times wrote that Johnson's "race was not apparent in the video as he was driving." [MORE] How mindless of this white writer; the cop is watching him with his own eyes not through a cop dashcam lens.  

A Routine 40 Minute Traffic Stop for failure to yield to a pedestrian. Really? This is not "routine" for whites. For white folks, the bare essentials of a "routine traffic stop" consist of causing the vehicle to stop, explaining to the driver the reason for the stop, verifying the credentials of the driver and the vehicle, and then issuing a citation or a warning. Have a nice day buddy. 

For Black Folks the bare essentials of a traffic stop are a records check via radio or computer regarding the criminal history of those stopped and any outstanding arrest warrants for those individuals; (2) interrogation of those stopped directly on the subject of drugs or about the nature and purpose of their travels; (3) seeking (and often obtaining) consent to conduct a full search of the stopped vehicle and the driver/passengers; and (4) using a drug-sniffing dog to detect the presence of any drugs in the stopped vehicle. Don't believe BW? Go out tonight and drive around for an hour. Most likely, you will see this identical scene. All Black men who drive on a regular basis are being pulled over because they are Black (not because of their so-called class - like this wealthy kid. The LA Times should have said the white cop could not tell what "class" he was!). No need for statistics, ask a Black man. 

Are the Cop's Questions Related to the Purpose of the Stop - for Failure to Yield to Pedestrian? No. In general the Supreme Court has said an officer may only ask questions concerning the purpose of the stop and related to the investigation of the stop. But even when unrelated questions are permissible it is unconstitutional for the cop to ask questions which would allow the detainee to give an incriminating answer or which would lead directly to a search. Which is exactly what the white cop does here - so politely too. After the cop takes his license and registration and before he leaves to go do his records checking, he says "Do you have anything illegal in the car?" He is practicing racism. The cop is told he has a little bit of marijuana. Then the searches begin. 

Is there Any Reason for the Cops to Believe He is Engaged in Crime? He is pulled over for failing to yield to a pedestrian. The first things he asks Johnson are "where are you going?" "how old are you?" "have you ever been arrested before? are you on parole or on probation?" Then the cop asks again, "are you sure you've never been arrested? so when I go back and run your name its not gonna come back that you have been arrested right?"  Do you think he asks white men and women this question? The cop has been given no reason to believe that this young man is engaging in crime. Failure to yield is not conduct related to criminal activity or any criminal record. It is just more stupid questioning unrelated to the stop, probing him and unlawfully prolonging this detention. Courts have said that a criminal record, even if previously denied by the violator, counts for very little but yet may lead to interrogation that is "intense, very invasive and extremely protracted." [MORE] And that must be the point. 

The warrant check and awaiting the return are also not activities that are directed at resolving the traffic offenses which authorized the stop in the first place." The "scope of a lawful, routine traffic detention should be limited to what is necessary to investigate the traffic infraction itself." [MORE] Who cares about legalities anyway? Like an officer says on the video 'our judges won't throw it out!'

"Ve vant to zee your papers." Nazi style. The cop is also intrusively wanting to know "where are you going? where are you coming from what are you doing tonight?" Again this has nothing to do with a failure to yield ticket. Probing, investigating him looking for an inconsistent, weird answer that might raise suspicion to broaden and justify further inquiry. People say all the time - you can refuse to answer the cop's questions. Easier said than done in the present moment of a one on one encounter with a cop. Even the most knowledgable advocate or judge may only "react"  and not respond in this racist moment. [MORE] And, when is the last time you did that for real? This is just coercion; the cop has his shit - his license and registration and it is clear that he is not free to go. This young man in a state of forced control probably is probably only reacting robotically in this valley of decision and is already programmed to say things not in his own self interest - and that is the cop's objective anyway. [To his credit and contrary to what the LA Times implied Johnson never voluntarily mentioned anything about the celebrity status of his mother]. 

Looking for one pill of Ritalin in the trunk? After asking him an incriminating question unrelated to the stop, the tricky, yet polite, cops get their "legal justification" for searching the car, his person and his backpack for a small amount of marijuana - which these dumb mf's never even found.  Johnson found it for them in his bag and voluntarily gave it to them. Was the search of the trunk a new search requiring a new legal justification? Cops claimed to be looking for one pill. One pill loose in a trunk? Definitely sounds like more bullshit - but not to the white media of course. After ransacking the trunk the cops also never found any Ritalin. They found some Claratin. Oh well bro. Here, this "consent inquiry" of "do you have anything illegal in the car" went way beyond the scope of the initial reason for traffic stop - at least by white folks standards as they apply the Constitution to themselves. Ransacking his trunk while he watches on the side of the road "is [also] highly invasive of the dignitary interests of individuals." [MORE]. But what to expect from racist suspects? 

Why did the cops subject him to field sobriety testing? Not shown on the dashcam another white cop pops up (among others who are also appear bored and out patrolling for non-whites no doubt) and makes Johnson do field sobriety testing - which usually consists of an eye or HGN test, the one leg stand test and the walk and turn test. Where was the evidence of impairment to justify the administration of these tests? In the video Johnson drove an appropriate speed, properly signaled to change lanes, responded immediately to the cop's signal to pull over. He did not straddle or drift in the lane and pulled over properly to the curb. He speech was not slurred or inarticulate, he did not have any unusual trouble providing documents to cop, he responded appropriately to several questions, he complied with orders without hesitation, he had no problem exiting the car, balancing and walking to the curb when ordered to do so. Importantly the cop who made the stop never requested an alcohol certified officer to the scene. In other words, there appeared to be no 4th Amendment basis to order him to do field sobriety testing - at least as the 4th Amendment is applied to white folks. He passed the FST's - there was no evidence of impairment because he was not impaired.

He was Polite. Yes and that too is used as a tactic by cops.  The white cop's tactic is too make the entire unlawful stop and search seem as routine and natural as possible. Talking about "hey man," this and that. Cops are also prone to say, "I just have a few questions to ask, " "if you comply things will be fine," "this won't take long and you'll be on your way," "you should make things easy," "just one more thing" and other phrases could be signs that a white cop is getting ready to practice racism on you like he did on Johnson. Never take legal advice from cops while they are doing their job - investigating you, looking for a problem. 

In the end these dummies finally figured out they had not pulled over a drug kingpin. After interrogating him, searching him, his bag and car, FST testing him and terrorizing him the white cop gives him "a break" by  letting him go with a traffic ticket and marijuana citation for possession. Thanks master. 

At its core the 4th Amendment is not about manners, politeness and respect. It is trickery to even conceive of your so-called rights in this manner. The Supreme Court has explained that the "central concern of the Fourth Amendment has to do with protecting liberty and privacy against arbitrary governmental interference." In the context of the traffic stop the 4th Amendment is said to "protect the travelling public from arbitrary action." [MORE] We know this is illusory nonsense when it comes to non-white people. 

Don't play yourself with this "respect" nonsense. Neely Fuller said if you want some respect look in the mirror and give yourself some. Did cops respect Taraji Henson's son's 4th Amendment rights? Does stop and frisk or "papers please" become less Unconstitutional because a white cop is polite as he stops you for an arbitrary reason? It is a tactic of white supremacy to give you something you already have and pretend it is something new. Steve Cokely calls this, "whitenology." He says "never play for your own sandwich." Cokely is referencing the old Larry Bird vs. Michael Jordan McDonald's commercial wherein they play each other for a sandwich - Michael Jordan's sandwich. Jordan walks into the gym with his bag of food that he just bought. Bird challenges him to a game of one on one basketball; if Bird wins he gets Jordan's sandwich -- and if Jordan wins then he gets...? 

An Overreaction? When will We Respond? The white media has shadowboxed Ms. Henson using her to send us the message that we also may be overacting to the conduct of cops and that this traffic stop is normal and routine -- so that when it happens to you it should appear natural to you - and not what it really is; racist bullshit. That is a goal of the white media, to make white people's domination and control over all things involving non-whites seem natural [MORE] enabling you to participate and cooperate with your own subjugation - like Taraji Henson. Racists depend on this reaction from us.  

Amos Wilson explained, "power ultimately has to do with a relationship between people, and the white man’s so-called power, is to a great extent based upon the nature of the relationship he has with the Black man. We empower him by the nature of our own behavior and attitudes as a people. He cannot be what he is unless we are, what we are. To a good extent, the European is our creation. If we look at our behavior, we will see that to a good extent, it is our behavior, our values, our consciousness, the kind of personalities we’ve established in ourselves, our taste, our desires and needs; that maintains the European in its position." [MORE]