Mr. Killer

I met Mr. Killer several times, but he din`t kill me. He made me just more wiser and stronger.Thank you Mr. Killer. Some people say poison is useful in small amounts. I feel i get just enough of you Mr. Killer. I feel well now. You gave me that that nobody could give me. You made me the person I am. And I appreciate this. Thank you Mr. Killer.
Thank you that you did`t kill me.

Religious freedom

Most people are occupied with religions. Maybe because it is modern or because they search for an answer to the existential problems, which torment only one small amount of people of the population of this nice and beautiful planet. Why religion is so popular or unpopular? We have more interesting things to do than to occupy with religion. But nevertheless we occupy so often with it. Maybe because it was the rule and the order and the truth for so long and we don`t want to be restricted and if restricted to know why, because of what and maybe because religion is the door to the unknown. And we know the unknown so often is very attractive. Secrets are attractive. But the domination of religion in our life recently came to an end. God is dead. Dostoevsky dethroned him. Now we are free, but we want to believe in something. Our mind is thus constructed that it has to be a way, a rule, logic that explains everything. Now we are free to believe in whatever we like and to fell happy. To fell not restricted by someone. Now The New Age is coming. It is a new kind of relation to God. Now we are allowed to speak to him, to be angry at him, to curse him. He will forgive us. Now in that new religion everybody depends on himself and has his own religion and behaves as he likes. (There is term New Age and it is a 21st century religious current). Maybe that`s freedom. And if we must obey the rule of freedom everybody can believe in whatever he wants but not disturbing or manipulating the others. That`s real freedom of belief. The church always wanted to control the masses. Now everyone can choose in what to believe. And the rule of freedom is kept as long as he does not try to manipulate others to make them his followers or slaves, because the option of power often obsesses the minds of people. I am ready to accept even a worship of one flower or tree but if this doesn’t disturb the freedom of others. If somebody wants he can worship a stone or an animal but this must not be developed in religion trying to convince some followers or manipulate peoples` minds, which are so confused living in this hard reality. If somebody believes in something it must be only his decision and he to take the responsibilities of his decisions. He must not try to get followers to become a guru or what ever, to use the suffering of people or to use those, who want to be saved. There are so confused people with so many sufferings and unanswered questions. It is a crime to use their weakness. They just want to be happy but they don’t know how.

I believe in free religion. Everyone to do what he thinks it is good. It is the best religion because you are not afraid of punishment, you just are yourself and if there is Great Power she will accept you because you are its child and it is always ready to forgive as they say. That is why I don`t accept Islam. It is good religion, teaching people to be good, giving some rules, but it is transformed in a device for manipulation. Every man has free will and chance to be unique why we must be restricted by some people, not by religion, but by people? In the Bible is said “Don’t give to the man fish, teach him how to fish.” Why someone has to tell you what to do. Everyone has the right of free will. You can fish, you can decide when to fish, you can not fish at all, you can fish every day several times. The choice is your. The biggest opposition of free will is manipulation. Everybody has his own head. He can precisely decide what is wrong and what is bad. We have such a society, which had given so freedom to everyone of us. Why somebody must tell me how to behave. It is a medieval practice. That is why I openly criticize Islam. For me that religion used in this way gives only pain and blood. The soldiers of Islam, they even don’t know for what they are fighting for. They are zombies. They are used in the plan of their own supreme rulers. For them it is convenient to have such a war, to have such restricting rules. But who suffers - the ordinary man. I worship these warriors who give their life for their sacred deed and beliefs. It is great sacrifice. If you think, this is the greatest sacrifice one man can do - to give up from their own life in the name of others for an idea. Ideas are …..the highest. Materialism has no place here. So people die for ideas and those ideas serve to the materialistic rulers of these countries. The fair fighters and believers are heroes, all these Arab hara-kiri-s. They are God blessed. But unfortunately they are used by the masquerade of their rulers who don’t want educated people who want ignorant zombies in order to make way to their politics and further wealth gaining. Because for them it is never enough – the rule of materialism. They want more and more. And the opposite the idea rule – they don’t want anything. The Arabs are betrayed by their own high - placed rulers. Innocent people die and these tycoons get more and more gold and money. For them it is convenient this separation to Arabs and rest of the World. They make it themselves and use religion for excuse of their deeds and to move the point of importance and truth. They need ignorant people in order to rule the masses as they like. They preach praying to this God who I am sure doesn’t accept what they do. But he is silent. Is he?

I believe in religion tolerance. Why we can live with Buddhists, Confucians and Protestants and Orthodox followers and Catholics and we can not live with Islam? Why in 21st century we have religious wars like in the middle ages? Maybe that is convenient for someone. For whom I don’t know. But I advocate for religious tolerance, because all we are humans and suffer equally and are happy equally. Why we must destroy each other for so dogmatic principles? God as we know him is long time ago dead. God transformed as our society transformed he as a clever man doesn’t go far behind, he renews himself to answer to the problems of the 21st century man. God is smart and rules smart. This what is operating in the Islam world is one machine which wants by old dogmatic and undemocratic rules to dominate. Everyone can believe in whatever he wants and whatever makes him happy and better man but he must not try to convince people to follow him or to manipulate them using them for his own interests. Religion is for the good, not for war. It is to make us better, to help us in our development. So believe in flower, believe in wind, believe in sea, be good, keep your inner spirit calm, do the best you can but not try to manipulate others, do not try to convince them to do something for you. Vice versa do something good for them. You are free. Make other free too. Give them the option to reach their own truth. Don’t manipulate, don’t use people. God said he is ONE. In all religions he says he is ONE and ONLY. This is the simple answer. All religions, preaching one and the same in fact are one religion and their God is ONE. He himself gave us the key. The key - religious tolerance. He is in us, we are in him and he is us and we are him. We are small Gods, we create, we imagine, we make art, we make and the beauty and the ugliness. We can make everything what he did on this planet. We can reach the skies and be angels and we can go to the hell and become demons. All is about us. And we must not deny the church. It was useful but no any more. It must transform either. You saw that in the 2000 year nothing happened. The church was one old, scarecrow. But it is not useful now. It is dieing institution. It has to coin new political and philosophical line. People are on a higher level now and they don’t need scarecrows anymore. They are developing and now they must struggle with their own conscious and themselves and with others. Every man knows enough now to make his free choice and to bear his punishment. Everything is in our hands and we must rule well ourselves. The punishment comes in this life. If you think about this a bit you will see. You can’t deny that there is no justice here on Earth. Think what you do and what will follow because the punishment is here and now. You can not be bad all your life and to expect good, except if you are a lucky person. But those are so few. So think wise. Do what you think it must be done, what is good and what will be in synchrony with your soul. Be your own judge and your own saver.

Everyone must do what his soul thinks it is right to do. Try to make your own rules with which to feel comfortable. Not messing with others. Not greedy for power. Because the highest devotion is self-denying, rejecting of your own ego in the name of others. The same Christ gave us this example. Life is a theater – said the old thinkers. Now we can say that life is a PC game or matrix. Both may be true. Some don’t realize it, other do. But nobody knows why we are here. Maybe to reject our ego and to do good to others not waiting gratitude. Why people so rare say "Thank you!"? Why, when they are so happy when they receive this so rarely given "Thank you!"? So be kind and tolerant and try to make people happy although you will hear this "Thank you!" very rarely.

Ode to Romanticism

Romanticism
Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822) is one of the most significant poets in all times. His poetry, revolutionary or loving, remains deep marks in the mind with its ideas and in in the soul with its great expressions and picturesque images and in heart with its striking emotions and deep sentiments. Percy Bysshe Shelley is outstanding representative of the late Romantic poets from the late 18th and the beginning of the 19th century.

Romanticism has some typical characteristics which determine its essence. In the first place it is its medievalism, longing to the past and fascination with the glamour of the middle ages. Escapism is very often met in the poetry of Romantic poets. They want to escape from reality, to take refuge in the glorious past, in utopian future, or in a distant exotic present. They want to save themselves from the industrial cities, to go to oasis, where harmony exists.

Romanticists believe in progress although they don’t like the reality and its modern face. They assume that destiny of man is dynamic, evolutionary, progressive. They are sure that there is development from the negative to the positive. They believe in the man. They are rebels and protest against dogmatism of the church, scientific impersonality and inhumanity. They deny rationalism. In fact the Romantic school is reaction to the Enlightenment, which main feature is the cult of reason.

As a political orientation and sight for the order of life they are republicans. They have hostility towards monarchical structure. This idea of human equality and democracy they take from John Locke and the Age of Reason and fill it with emotional fervor. But the sense of freedom is accompanied with sense of pessimism, which leads them to despair, world grief and pain.

Inherited the idea of equality of man Romantics believe in the inherent worth of every man and his uniqueness. This belief shows them as great humanists. They believe in the human hearth. They preach that the hearth, the emotion, the goodness and humanity are more important than intellect. Evil is associated with intelligence.

With Romantics comes the worship of originality and individualism. The poet for Romanticists is the man gifted with creative imagination and originality. The major subject of the Romanticists is himself, the individual, his confessions, his emotions, his feelings. They enjoy emotion for its own sake. They fall in bottomless emotional depths in their poems.

They see the purpose of art as purgative and artist as one who must be purified trough art. Art is seen as necessary relief after the sufferings and terror, a final result after the purgation of the artist as Aristotle claimed.

In their poems they show love towards the wild and the picturesque, towards nature, which they depict vividly and with strong emotion. Their hatred towards civilization is obvious as their love to nature. In their poetry often are praised beautiful and unforgettable images of nature, which impress with their reality and lyricism.

Percy Bysshe Shelley
Percy Bysshe Shelley was the son of a prosperous squire. He entered Oxford in 1810, where readings in philosophy led him toward the study of the empiricists and the modern skeptics, notably William Godwin. In 1811 he and his friend Thomas Jefferson Hogg published their pamphlet, „The Necessity of Atheism”, which resulted in their immediate expulsion from the university. The same year Shelley eloped with 16-year-old Harriet Westbrook, by whom he eventually had two children, Ianthe and Charles.
Supported reluctantly by their fathers, the young couple traveled through Great Britain. Shelley’s life continued to be dominated by his desire for social and political reform, and he was constantly publishing pamphlets. His first important poem, „Queen Mab”, privately printed in 1813, set forth a radical system of curing social ills by advocating the destruction of various established institutions.
In 1814 Shelley left England for France with Mary Godwin, the daughter of William Godwin. During their first year together they were plagued by social ostracism and financial difficulties. However, in 1815 Shelley’s grandfather died and left him an annual income. „Laon and Cynthna” appeared in 1817 but was withdrawn and reissued the following year as „The Revolt of Islam”. It is a long poem in Spenserian stanzas that tells of a revolution and illustrates the growth of the human mind aspiring toward perfection.
After Harriet Shelley’s suicide in 1816, Shelley and Mary officially married. In 1817 Harriet’s parents obtained a decree from the lord chancellor stating that Shelley was unfit to have custody of his children. The following year Shelley and Mary left England and settled in Italy. By this time their household consisted of their own three children and Mary’s half-sister Claire Claremont and her daughter Allegra (whose father was Lord Byron). On July 8, 1822, Shelley was drowned while sailing in the Bay of Spezia, near Lerici.

Ode to the West Wind
Percy Bysshe Shelley composed the poem "Ode to the West Wind" in 1819 and published it in 1820. Some have interpreted the poem to be an expression of the speaker lamenting his current situation, but at the same time rejoicing in the fact his/her written works will have influence over people in the same situation. More than anything else, Shelley wanted his message of reform and revolution spread, and the wind becomes the trope for spreading the word of change.
The poem “Ode to the West Wind” consists of five cantos written in tetra rime. The Ode is written in iambic pentameter. The poem begins with three cantos describing the wind's effects upon earth, air, and ocean. The last two cantos are Shelley speaking directly to the wind, asking for its power, to lift him like a leaf, or a cloud and make him its companion in its wanderings. He asks the wind to take his thoughts and spread them all over the world so that the youth are awoken with his ideas.
The poem can be divided in two parts: the first three cantos are about the qualities of the ‘Wind’; the fact that these three cantos belong together can visually be seen by the phrase ‘Oh hear!’ at the end of each of the three cantos. Whereas the last two cantos give a relation between the ‘Wind’ and the speaker, there is a turn at the beginning of the fourth canto; the focus is now on the speaker, or better the hearer, and what he is going to hear.

First Canto
The first stanza begins with the alliteration ‘wild West Wind’. The reader gets the impression that the wind is something that lives, because he is ‘wild’ – it is a kind of personification of the ‘wind’. Even after reading the headline and the alliteration, one might have the feeling that the canto might somehow be positive. The first few lines consist of a lot of sinister elements, such as ‘dead leaves’. The inversion of ‘leaves dead’ in the first canto underlines the fatality by putting the word ‘dead’ at the end of the line so that it rhymes with the next lines. The sentence goes on and makes these ‘dead’ leaves live again as ‘ghosts’ that flee from something that panics them. The colorful context makes it easier for the reader to visualize what is going on – even if it is in an uncomfortable manner. ‘Yellow’ can be seen as the ugly hue of ‘pestilence-stricken’ skin; and ‘hectic red’, though evoking the pace of the poem itself, could also highlight the pace of death brought to multitudes. There is also a strange synchronous in the color ‘black’ and the adjective ‘pale’ (ominous symbols).

In the word ‘chariotest’ the ‘est’ is added to the verb stem ‘chariot’, probably to indicate the second person singular, after the subject ‘thou’ . The ‘corpse within its grave’ in the next line is in contrast to the ‘azure sister of the Spring’ – a reference to the east wind – whose ‘living hues and odors plain’ evoke a strong contrast to the colors of the fourth line of the poem that evoke death. The last line of this canto (‘Destroyer and Preserver’) refers to the west wind. The west wind is considered the ‘Destroyer’ because it drives the last signs of life from the trees. He is also considered the ‘Preserver’ for scattering the seeds which will come to life in the spring.

Second Canto
The second canto of the poem is much more fluid than the first one. The sky’s ‘clouds’ are ‘like earth’s decaying leaves’. They are a reference to the second line of the first canto (‘leaves dead’). Through this reference the landscape is recalled again. The ‘clouds’ are ‘Shook from the tangled boughs of Heaven and Ocean’. This probably refers to the fact that the line between the sky and the stormy sea is indistinguishable and the whole space from the horizon to the zenith is covered with storm clouds. The ‘clouds’ can also be seen as ‘Angels of rain’. In a biblical way, they may be messengers that bring a message from heaven down to earth through rain and lightning. These two natural phenomena (ocean and sky) bring a transformation – a storm is emerging to evoke the change.

Line 21 begins with ‘Of some fierce Maenad ...’ and again the west wind is part of the second canto of the poem; here he is two things at once: first he is ‘dirge/Of the dying year’ and second he is “a prophet of tumult whose prediction is decisive”; a prophet who does not only bring ‘black rain, and fire, and hail’, but who ‘will burst’ it. The ‘locks of the approaching storm’ are the messengers of this bursting.

Shelley in this canto “expands his vision from the earthly scene with the leaves before him to take in the vaster commotion of the skies”. This means that the wind is now no longer scatter only the leaves but has risen, getting more destructive, promising storm.

Third Canto
The question that comes up when reading the third canto at first is what the subject of the ‘blue Mediterranean’. It is said that ‘he lay, / Lulled by the coil of this crystalline streams, /Beside a pumice isle in Baiae’s bay, / And saw in sleep old palaces and towers’. This is obviously a slight ironical remark of the exotic and perfect place for escape, where the loving feelings overtake the poet, which Shelley often visits. He doesn’t want anymore the safe place of illusions and beauty. He comes to reality and depicts the world with all its harshness. The ‘wind’ – ‘saw’ the city, which may lead to the association of the human civilization and its glorious past with its great palaces and towers, symbol of power and strength, which now are mere reflection in the water.

The ‘wind’ appears as something that plays the role of a Creator and of a changing power. It comes and transforms the world, bringing the new and the truthful, the new birth of the Spring. It creates the new beginning and the desired change, blowing away the old and exhausted.

Whereas Shelley had accepted death and impending storm in the first and second canto, he now turns to the fear which the awaited change evokes. From line 26 to line 36 he gives an image of nature. Line 36 begins with the sentence ‘So sweet, the sense faints picturing them’. And indeed, the picture Shelley gives us here seems to be ‘sweet’. ‘The sea-blooms’ are probably the plants at the bottom of the ocean and give a peaceful picture of what is under water. But if we look closer at line 36, we realize that the sentence is not what it appears to be at first sight. This shows that the idyllic picture is not what it seems to be and that the harmony will certainly soon be destroyed. A few lines later, Shelley suddenly talks about ‘fear’. This again shows the influence of the west wind which announces the change of the season.

Fourth Canto
The fourth canto shows – in comparison with the previous cantos – a turning-point. Whereas the cantos one to three begin with ‘O wild West Wind’ and ‘Thou...’ and are clearly directed to the wind, there is a change in the fourth canto. The focus is no more on the ‘wind’, but on the speaker who says ‘If I...’ Until this part, the poem has appeared very anonymous and was only concentrated on the ‘wind’ and its forces so that the author of the poem was more or less forgotten. It becomes more and more clear that what the author talks about now is himself. That this must be true, shows the frequency of the author’s use of the first-person pronouns ‘I’, ‘my’ and ‘me’. These pronouns appear nine times in the fourth canto. Certainly the author wants to dramatize the atmosphere so that the reader recalls the situation of canto one to three. He achieves this by using the same pictures of the previous cantos in this one. Whereas these images, such as ‘leaf’, ‘cloud’ and ‘wave’ have existed only together with the ‘wind’, they are now existing with the author. The author thinks about being one of them and says ‘If I were a ...’ Shelley here identifies himself with the wind, he wants to be liberated from the gloomy lot. He wishes he was young, filled with hope and faith. He says ‘Oh, lift me up as a wave, a leaf, a cloud’. He knows that this is something impossible to achieve, but he does not stop praying for it. He says: ‘I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!’ He confesses he is damaged by life and unable to fight (he is bleeding), but also confesses that once he was like the Wind (“one too like thee: tameless, and swift, and proud.”).

At the end of the canto the poet tells us that ‘a heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed’. This may be a reference to the years that have passed and ‘chained and bowed’ the hope of the people for the change. Confronting that, the West Wind becomes the opposite. The wind is the ‘uncontrollable’ who is ‘tameless’.

One more thing that one should mention is that this canto sounds like a kind of prayer or confession of the poet. This confession does not address God but beside this sounds very personal.

Shelley also changes his use of metaphors in this canto. In the first cantos the metaphors are frequent. Now the metaphors are only weakly presented – ‘the thorns of life’. Shelley also leaves out the fourth element: the fire. In the previous cantos he wrote about the earth, the air and the water. The reader now expects the fire – but it is not there. This leads to a break in the symmetry of the poem because the reader does not meet the fire until the fifth canto.

Fifth Canto
Again the wind is very important in this last canto. The wind with his ‘mighty harmonies’ becomes an artist or a Creator of sounds. At the beginning of the poem the ‘wind’ was only capable of blowing the leaves from the trees – a small storm, enlarging gradually through the poem; it receives its climax in the fifth canto.


Everything that had been said before was part of the elements – wind, earth and water. Now the fourth element comes in: the fire. In this way the poem is accomplished and gives the feeling of wholeness and completeness of the meanings. The “ashes and sparks” incline that the fight will start soon, after the Wind scatters the words of the poet among the mankind.

It is also necessary to mention that the first-person pronouns again appear in a great frequency; but the possessive pronoun ‘my’ predominates. Unlike the frequent use of the ‘I’ in the previous canto that made the canto sound self-conscious; this canto might now sound self-confident. The canto is no more a request or a prayer as it had been in the fourth canto – it is a demand.

The poet becomes the wind’s instrument – his ‘lyre’. This is a symbol of the poet’s participation towards the wind; he becomes his musician and the wind’s breath becomes his breath. The poet’s attitude towards the wind has changed: in the first canto the wind has been an ‘enchanter’, now the wind has become an ‘incantation’.

And there is another contrast between the two last cantos: in the fourth canto the poet had articulated himself in singular: ‘a leaf’, ‘a cloud’, ‘A wave’ and ‘One too like thee’. The last canto differs from that. The poet in this canto uses plural forms, for example, ‘my leaves’, ‘thy harmonies’, ‘my thoughts’, ‘ashes and sparks’ and ‘my lips’. By the use of the plural, the poet is able to show that there is some kind of multitude that brings safety and certainty. It even seems as if he has redefined himself because the uncertainty of the previous canto has been blown away. The ‘leaves’ merge with those of an entire forest. The ‘Will’ is ushered by “mighty harmonies”. The use of this ‘Will” is certainly a reference to the future. That something new will come with the transcendent will and world-shattering spirit of the wind.

At last, Shelley again calls the Wind in a kind of prayer and even wants him to be ‘his’ Spirit: he says: ‘My spirit! Be thou me, impetuous one!’ Like the leaves of the trees in a forest, his leaves will fall and decay and will perhaps soon flourish again when the spring comes. That may be why he is looking forward to the spring and asks at the end of the last canto ‘If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?’ This is of course a rhetorical question because spring does come after winter and another renewal – spring - will come anyway. Thus the question has a deeper meaning and does not only mean the change of seasons, but is a reference to death and rebirth as well. It also indicates that after the struggles and problems, there would always be a new beginning. But the most powerful call to the Wind are the lines: "Drive my dead thoughts over the universe/Like withered leaves to quicken a new birth!" Here Shelley is imploring - or really chanting to - the Wind to blow away all of his useless thoughts so that he can be a vessel for the Wind and, as a result, awaken the Earth.

Ode to the West Wind

Percy Bysshe Shelley

I

O wild West Wind, thou breath of Autumn's being,
Thou, from whose unseen presence the leaves dead
Are driven, like ghosts from an enchanter fleeing,

Yellow, and black, and pale, and hectic red,
Pestilence-stricken multitudes: O thou,
Who chariotest to their dark wintry bed

The wingèd seeds, where they lie cold and low,
Each like a corpse within its grave, until
Thine azure sister of the Spring shall blow

Her clarion o'er the dreaming earth, and fill
(Driving sweet buds like flocks to feed in air)
With living hues and odors plain and hill:

Wild Spirit, which art moving everywhere;
Destroyer and preserver; hear, oh, hear!

II

Thou on whose stream, 'mid the steep sky's commotion,
Loose clouds like earth's decaying leaves are shed,
Shook from the tangled boughs of Heaven and Ocean,

Angels of rain and lightning: there are spread
On the blue surface of thine airy surge,
Like the bright hair uplifted from the head

Of some fierce Maenad, even from the dim verge
Of the horizon to the zenith's height,
The locks of the approaching storm. Thou dirge

Of the dying year, to which this closing night
Will be the dome of a vast sepulchre,
Vaulted with all thy congregated might

Of vapours, from whose solid atmosphere
Black rain, and fire, and hail will burst: oh, hear!

III

Thou who didst waken from his summer dreams
The blue Mediterranean, where he lay,
Lulled by the coil of his crystalline streams,

Beside a pumice isle in Baiae's bay,
And saw in sleep old palaces and towers
Quivering within the wave's intenser day,

All overgrown with azure moss and flowers
So sweet, the sense faints picturing them! Thou
For whose path the Atlantic's level powers

Cleave themselves into chasms, while far below
The sea-blooms and the oozy woods which wear
The sapless foliage of the ocean, know

Thy voice, and suddenly grow grey with fear,
And tremble and despoil themselves: oh, hear!

IV

If I were a dead leaf thou mightest bear;
If I were a swift cloud to fly with thee;
A wave to pant beneath thy power, and share

The impulse of thy strength, only less free
Than thou, O uncontrollable! If even
I were as in my boyhood, and could be

The comrade of thy wanderings over Heaven,
As then, when to outstrip thy skiey speed
Scarce seemed a vision; I would ne'er have striven

As thus with thee in prayer in my sore need.
Oh, lift me as a wave, a leaf, a cloud!
I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!

A heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed
One too like thee: tameless, and swift, and proud.

V

Make me thy lyre, even as the forest is:
What if my leaves are falling like its own!
The tumult of thy mighty harmonies

Will take from both a deep, autumnal tone,
Sweet though in sadness. Be thou, Spirit fierce,
My spirit! Be thou me, impetuous one!

Drive my dead thoughts over the universe
Like withered leaves to quicken a new birth!
And, by the incantation of this verse,

Scatter, as from an unextinguished hearth
Ashes and sparks, my words among mankind!
Be through my lips to unawakened earth

The trumpet of a prophecy! O Wind,
If Winter comes, can Spring be far behind?

Lilith - demon or a feminist?

In our days it is known that the name "Lilith" comes from Jewish "Lil" - night, mist, darkness. But in the historical resources Lilith appears much more back in time, in the Sumerian mythology from 5000 years. She was an assistant of the goddess Inane - The Sky Queen, with whom they both in some time during the year dropped down to men on the Earth for ritual ceremonies.

But most wide-spread is the Jewish story about Lilith. Lilith was the first woman at all and the first woman of Adam. On the sixth day God decided to create the man in his own image. The word “adam" comes from "adamah" (dust) and is referred as for men and for women. Adam wanted to dominate in the relationship with Lilith and to keep her in submission. Lilith was disobedient and loved freedom, so she escaped and hid around the Red Sea and joined the low demons. In this way Lilith became the first feminist in the world.

Provoking..

Provoke....
Provoking....
Provoked......
Provoking life...
Provoking you...
Provoked by you....

Please, provoke me!

Trying to turn the ICEBERG upside down..

Biscuit Monster

She was thinking about him. The serial. He was awful, disgusting, nasty. He was a jerk. Did she love him? Maybe the same question was the desired answer. She wanted to know what he was thinking. But she knew she had lost him. The serial. How to allure him, how to keep him? Did she love him? Maybe she was in love with this other guy, his friend. She was not sure. It did not matter any more. Hum, this biscuit was cool.

She was seeing what her eyes wanted to see and she was hearing what she wanted to hear. Most of the time it was unpleasant. Long time ago she had lost her objectivity. Long time ago something has made her sightless. She was very tense. In her head she was feeling tension. Maybe because of that that she had made a lot of forbidden things. Did her consciousness torment her? Maybe she was trying all the time to lie herself she was good. Maybe that was the root of her tension. It was hard and often she was lying herself to find a little peace but all this was purchasing her. She was afraid of punishment. Was she excusing herself? Sure. She could not stand herself but she did not confess that and often she was proud with herself. Hum, yummy biscuit.

She was blind. She was seeing distorted reality. It was inimically. For so long she was not objective. She was lying herself. That’s how she was keeping going. She was insane. Were the subjective people insane? To what extend subjectivity is normal? Was she insane? Will she get insane? This question often tormented her. And this permanent headache. But all that was for an instant. In most of the time she was sure in her correctness and beside that she was hiding her real face (maybe deep in her soul she knew it was not for showing) and was playing the role of good, pleasant and smiling. But this smile was a grimace. Was she guilty? She was playing the role of nice and pleasant but she was not and that’s why that role didn’t satisfy her. It is like if you want a coffee and you have a cup of tea. Again she unsuccessfully was lying herself. But NO! She could not be herself. Her consciousness often broke her sleep that’s why she preferred to get tired to death and to be always busy and not thinking. But that was hard burden. She was excusing herself and often she was thinking that she was doing good to people and to the world. She will do good and to the next biscuit…

She wanted to get it all. She was greedy. In her wish to receive she was loosing all but didn’t realize it. She didn’t know the reason for all that. Maybe she thought she deserved something more, but maybe she was just gluttonous. She often had a bite of biscuits. She was wanting a lot, more and more, many. She was greedy, gluttonous. As the food she was swallowing and men. She was gourmet. For breakfast, for lunch, for dinner for hors d`oeuvre and as a desert. She was stuffing herself and she was always unsatisfied. Did he love her? This was important. Biscuits…

She was insensible, but she thought she had feelings and often was showing with them. But her deeds were proof for the opposite. Her heart was on her sleeve, but this was her greatest delusion, maybe part of her madness. She was playing the role. She thought she was sly but she was unhappy. Always trying to outmaneuver, always fighting with imaginable enemies, always trying to manipulate situations in order to get the desired. Almost every time loosing. She was confused and she was keeping eating biscuits and she was sure in her rightness.

P.S. The story was written under the influence of Hemingway and was a try to turn the iceberg upside down.

Mr. Killer\Karizma

What is Astrology?

Several months ago I started an Astrology course, Natal Astrology. Doing that I started to make horoscopes to several people around me...Some were inclined to believe, others denied saying it is all imagination, some just listened not knowing what to say. I had questions like: "Is your teacher a magician? Is she a soothsayer?..No she is an ordinary woman and astrology is not a magic it is something like a science...ancient science, coming from ancient Egypt and now developing every day. It is very close to psychology. Even Carl Yung a great psychologist was also and astrology researcher. Astrology is coming from Egypt and about this ancient civilization is known that had some science given from the sky or alien mind. Astrology was invented before the invention of the telescope. There is a statement that the east people get the knowledge from the inside from the core to the outside and the west from the periphery to the core. Two different approaches. So for me Astrology is science from the core to the out, it is close to the essence of life and maybe someday we the west people will appreciate it and will see its truthfulness. I don`t know what the ancient Egypt priests thought about Astrology but I`ll say you what i believe. One man who I made horoscope said: "Hey the starts are so far away from us that they can not influence us." Is he right? For me yes...
I believe as all astrologists in reincarnation and that every soul comes to this world to learn its lessons and to pay its debts in its way to perfection. But for me there is a big reasonable Energy or Power which rules and controls all this operation. You may call it God or whatever you like but it is here. And for me the way of the soul is to go through all its lives and they are many and are predestined. In fact this Great Power predestined our lives and just because it is clever wrote on the sky the codes of our lives. So planets don`t influence us they just show our lives in codes. This Great Power puts us on Earth in the real hell and above in the skies it gave us the map. Maybe we are in one big Matrix or in some unreal or so real PC strategy game. This world is made for something, look how precisely it is working. The nature, the animals and even the humans...
It is like big machine, we humans are part from it. Our lives and the map is in the stars, the creator is full of romanticism;] The beautiful stars which we often look at are the codes to our sufferings here...
So what is astrology? A map to my person and a map of my life.....
You will say: "So you are astrologist. Why don`t you say me what will happen with me..?" I can do that to one extend, but I can not do it perfect..and look - what is perfect? Nothing is perfect. The science is developing. It can not answer to many questions. Astrology is developing too and soon it will come more clear what is astrology and it will prove that it works and not that planets influence us but that they are part from this machine showing us the might of ONE POWER.

The Fight

Often God and the Devil are represented as two opposite powers fighting each other on Earth via us, people. One is influencing us and the other too, in our thoughts, deeds and decisions. The BIG FIGHT on Earth about our souls. But is this in that way? Maybe not. If God and Devil were equal, all bad people, doing bad things, having big and many sins will go to Hell and there they would have a big prize for that because they helped the Devil in his fight. But it is not like that the big sinners go to Hell to be tormented, to pay for their evil deeds. So Devil helps God. He punishes the sinners. So the Devil is subordinate to God and helps him to teach us people to do Good. The Devil is the strict and bad teacher who if we make the wrong step punishes us. He is the power which correct the situation. So the Devil is a servant to God, his helper and coworker in our education. The Education of our souls. The education which we gain every day in our life by our decisions. So the Fight between the good God and bad Devil in fact is not a Fight, it is a cooperation.
We, our souls, we must go trough this to gain perfection and to learn to be good. The bad is here only to show us the difference. If there are not bad people we would never know what is Good and we would never appreciate it. The Bad is here to help us in our way to the supreme perfection.

And about the Fight, it is just made up in the ancient times to help the ancient people to realize the world and to help them to go through the way of their life. This ancient people were more ignorant than us, that's why they needed some hellish ideology to help them to complete the aim of their lives and the Aim is to learn and to be good. They were frightened. They feared of God. They feared of Devil. They were frightened with punishments. These ancient people were like animals, ignorant. They could understand only with the help of punishments and threats. Now we are more intelligent and self aware and we can be free from these dogmas and religions and alone to decide our way. Of course, in our irreligious times there are a lot of atheists. Among them there are also good people, but also very bad, believing they can have what they want and like. But they often are punished in life. Maybe from this Devil, the coworker of God. I don`t deny the fight i don`t deny God and Devil. For me they are two powers - one gives, other gets. In fact maybe they are one and the same power. Maybe they are one and the same energy, which rules this World.

Thinking of Adam and Eve

Thinking of Adam and Eve legend and again thinking on the contrary on the Darwin`s theory I just get lost one evening. I really realize how wrong are both. And I even don`t realize how people get lost believing in them both although they don`t have a slice of logic. Logic is one of the basic principles which construct our life and thinking. For centuries people believed in two unlogic assertions. Do u believe that from 2 humans can rise the whole nation of humans with its all variety? Do you believe that an Indian, Chinese and Afro American are children of one and the same parents and they are Adam and Eve? The Bible is written maybe when America as a continent was not discovered so there is no Indians in its explanations? But they existed. It is proven. So in the legend of Adam and Eve there is a big mistake. They missed half of the humans. It is obvious that Adam and Eve are white so they can not create an Afro American. It is gene. How white person will create Afro American. From the point of genetic it is impossible. So who are the parents of Afro Americans or Afro Africans, who are the parents of Chinese people or of the Indians? May be they don`t have parents. Very unlogic. Here comes the Darwin`s theory. It seems it will give us the answer. I watched one movie based on Darwin`s theory and there they pointed that their investigations lead them to think that the first man had lived I don`t remember when but in east Africa around Kenya and he was black, Afro African. Adam and Eve were Afro Africans? In fact, do you believe in the thing with the amoeba? That we came here because of it transforming from animal to animal? I don`t. But look if the first man is a Kenya Afro African - black, with small bones, typical Afro man, then from where does the big white blond blue eyed Scandinavian appear?
The logic says we must look at the genes. Can a black man with genes of a black man to transform into a Scandinavian man with Scandinavian genes? Maybe the science will say yes. But I will ask if there is so big transformation why we don`t transform now? Why the other animals don`t transform into creatures with mind? Why other monkeys don`t transform to humanlike creatures? So for somebody there is transformation and for the other no transformation and evolution. For me both theories are unlogic and untrue. But when you get both of them together you will see that they complete one another and maybe something logic may appear.

For me the truth, it is my truth. Somebody, I don`t know who, had let some creatures on earth like Adam and Eve but not the same, different and various and many Adams and Eves. They were different - some black, some white, some yellow, some red. They were no monkeys and not so human as we now for me that were the first humans. They took the stone, made the first instruments of labor and so on and the evolution started. We have proofs for the Homo Erectus but he was not a monkey. The monkeys also go on 2 legs but they are not Homo Erectus. And why we don`t have the chain who was before Homo Erectus? They say a monkey. But they don`t have it. There is not discovered relic. So somebody had putted some humanlike groups on our mother earth different with different genes and evolution started. I think now and Darwin and the Bible writers will be satisfied.