mekkadonmusic.com/practice-standard-for-work-breakdown.php It understands the nothingness of things through a properly improper form of thinking, a paradoxically intellectual pushing of thought outside of itself from within the parameters of rational reflection and self-immanence. Mystical apophasis is not only unknowing but also the active and restless affective drive be- yond knowing, which is the ground of unknowing itself. And my thoughts are as bitter as tears. Every- thing then has a bitter taste, there is in me a devilish, monstrous bitterness that renders even death insipid.
Cosmic pessimism is a negative in- tensification that discloses the inferior reality and non-identity of the intellectual via a feeling that forces consciousness outside of thought by means of contradiction with the inexplicable affective materiality of intellection. The in- commensurability of thought and being, the impossibility of their proper relation, is the sorrow-filled space of cosmic pessimism.
As a result, "at once his fame spread everywhere throughout all the surrounding region of Galilee. Dunn Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, As this part of the book is in the second type it can be used for the Historicity of the person of Iesous and not for the event ascribed to him. Writing in the year C. Disciples Envious of a Rival Exorcist. Cut to the quick, the cosmos darkly bleeds a divinely oc- cult will, demonstrating in a kind of blind yet self-opening seizure that everything indeed wants to be, firstly, because it does not.
From this perspective, the truth of cosmic pessimism lies not in doctrine but in the conscious disowning of the comprehensiveness of knowledge, in the name of an ineradicable gap between science and its event, between knowing and the capacity to know. Cos- mic pessimism perforce fails itself wherever it becomes prescriptive e. Cosmic pessimism is not properly an -ism, but an act of showing, outside the param- eters of formal proof, the non-philosophizability of the universe. Modulating between the impersonal obscurity of the cosmos and the all-too-personal impossibility of individuated existence, the dispersonally passion- ate voice of the cosmic pessimist gives objective and generalized expression to the affective un-ground of modern philosophy.
We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. Like the contemplative who finds himself raised up by what he seeks or the divinely bewildered who finds his own being inseparable from the multiplicative movement of the One, this cosmic pessimist plunges into a new order of the pessi- mal, one that is far worse than whatever is worst for him, a more perfect worst that could not be better.
Where the former signals a reappreciation of the intellectual unmasterability of the universe, the latter signals a reinvention of the cosmocentric subject. The work of this sorrow is to pierce the bubble of subjectivity and expose consciousness to complicity with the spheres. Filling this three-hour interim, the dark- ness, like a universal veil over the very heart of the divine passion, occurs in the position of a mysterious non-mediating medium be- tween the truths of these antipodal statements. On the basis of this connec- tion, the crucifixion darkness appears as the durational moment when the cosmos becomes wholly exterior, a universal outside.
During this excruciating phase, the world itself assumes the dimen- sions of a real spectacle or material revelation whose sense is both gnostic and apocalyptic, a self-showing of the cosmos in its in- evitable ending and extreme distancing from the divine Light.
Yet, by virtue of this very exteriorization, the universe is now simulta- neously revealed as the most profound interior, a domain where nothing is without inherent and immediate contact with the inef- fable source of everything. Like the purest form of luminous trem- bling or flash, an infinitesimal yet thoroughly extended light show- ing nothing other than that there is something one does not see, the crucifixion darkness exposes the cosmos to be a meta-topological coincidence of the pessimal and the optimal.
It becomes a strange place where the only way to discern where you are with certainty is to see that you are hopelessly lost. Medieval interpretation of the crucifixion as an event of univer- sal sorrow magnifies the interior and affective aspect of this dark- ness. For when he was in paine, we ware in paine, and all creatures that God hath made to oure servys, the firmamente and erth, failed for sorow in their kind [nature] in the time of Cristes dying.
For it longeth kindly [naturally] to ther properte [order] to know him for ther lorde, in whom all ther vertuse [powers] stondeth. And when he failed, then behoved nedes [it was necessary] to them for kindnes [because of their nature] to faile with him, in as moch as they might, for sorow of his paines. I mene of two maner people that knew him not, as it may be understond by two persons. That one was Pilate, that other person was Saint Dionisy of France, which was that time a paynim.
Wherfor it was that they that knew him not were in sorow that time. Thus was oure lord Jhesu noughted for us, and we stonde alle in this maner noughted with him, and shalle do tille that we come to his blisse. In keeping with the mystical intimacy of separation from the Omnipresent, these harmonized principles communicate the immanence of a positively negative affective pole of experience that marvelously converts privation into surplus and dereliction into home. How does sorrow, as the very substance of this dark- ness, overcome the opposition between the pessimal and the opti- mal?
For Augustine, the Roman legend, in connection to its aspect of sorrow, provided figurative precedent and pretext for apologetic affirmation of the supernatural darkness of the crucifix- ion. In these terms, late antique interpretation of the crucifix- ion darkness transmutes the pathetic fallacy of solar sorrow into cosmo-theological fact.
The sun hid its face so as not to see him when he was crucified. It retracted its light back into itself so as to die with him. The element of sorrow is thus a kind of essential commentar- ial supplement that simultaneously protects the event against re- duction to portent or wonder, thus preserving the intrinsic, divine openness of its significance. In order to be saved from the meta- phoricity of its legendary precedent and participate formally in its own truth, the crucifixion darkness must in a real yet strangely un- specifiable way be sorrow. Sorrow is the darkness of the universal darkness, amid its not being named as sorrow.
Here we must posit, as a poetic inevitability of the tradition, that the non-reference to sorrow in the Gospel accounts is intrinsic and even intentional, both a rhetorical and apologetic necessity with respect to the nar- rative task of repeating without repetition the ancient motifs of cosmically portentous death i. Crucially, this affective paradox of the crucifixion darkness is cosmically scaled and thus expressible in the generalized form of a negatively hyper-literal anagogic sense: the present absence of sorrow in the originary representation of the cosmic darkness event is the universality of sorrow itself.
Seen in these intensive terms, the crucifixion darkness bleeds into a universal auto-affective domain that is invisible, seeming- ly impossible, and properly free from the operation of efficient causes.
Via this radically immanent hidden space, this visible tem- poral world is shown to be the shadow of that invisible eternal one. While the Creator was hanging on the gallows, all creation [universa creatura] groaned [congemuit], and all the elements at the same time felt the nails of the cross. Nothing was free from that punishment [supplicio]. The world owed this witness to its own Creator, so that in the fall of its Maker all things should want to come to an end.
Cut to the quick, the cosmos darkly bleeds a divinely oc- cult will, demonstrating in a kind of blind yet self-opening seizure that everything indeed wants to be, firstly, because it does not.
The crucifixion darkness is not only a revelation of the incredi- ble fact of the incarnate God but also a revelation of the mystery of matter itself, a shadowing forth of its hidden, willful depths. It is a melancholy not generated via relation, but paradoxi- cally revealed without exposure in the ground of its own latency, re-veiled in the painful flash of feeling that glimpses it and at once knows—somewhere within the mute feeling of feeling itself—that it cannot. The sorrow of the crucifixion darkness, a sorrow whose genitivity is perforce elided, is a dark sorrow, a sorrow that is dark to itself, as if it were a sorrow that only sorrow itself feels.
Such deep, real sorrow is not properly understood as expressed or even signified by the crucifixion darkness. It is rather, with pre-relational celerity, something that is actually photographed by the darkness- event, illuminated in the seemingly impossible light through which it takes a picture of everything. The universal darkness of the crucifixion is not an image of all matter being made to weep, as if for three miraculous hours in Christian history the world were temporarily a panpsychist one.
Nor is it the base op- posite of that, a merely material spectacle poetically marking the crux of the cosmic theo-drama, the truth of which is ultimately al- legorical or otherwise than the darkness event itself. The darkness is an image of something harder to envision than either. For it is equally true that the crucifixion darkness is a true image of all mat- ter being made to weep.
Or rather, it is the image of a cosmos that cries, the image of tears that are materially at the heart of its be- ing made. In sum, the universe itself, an entity that most certainly includes your being in it, and vice versa, is the true melancholy object, the dark realm of a literally authentic melancholy, that is, sorrow humorially proper to black earth. This primordial passivity into which the crucifixion darkness opens is visible in the impersonal affects found both within and on the surface of its representations. Again, still, we are here in the domain of a hyper-literal anagogy, of a truth that presents itself too immediately, too terribly in advance of my capacity to recognize or acknowledge anything as true.
So, paralleling the unrecognized appearance of God in the world, the crucifixion darkness bears the overall paradoxical sense of an un- mistakable yet unrecognized event, of a radically novel and indeed obvious happening that yet happens without being known. This aspect is communicated not only in the general feeling of historical doubt that haunts the whole tradition, with its continual demand for extra-biblical and non-Christian confirmation, but also in the interpretive narration of the darkness as simultaneously an inde- pendent cosmic event and the mirroring sign of perversely excep- tional human blindness to it, so that the spectacle of all creation sorrowing also only testifies to the fact that, on the island of hu- man identity, it strangely does not.
Whereas the eyeless elemental world, like an affective avant-garde, immediately feels or sorrows for the divine passion, the human world, in the inertia of its own inner darkness, remains unmoved. Here we clearly find expressed the weird privative doubleness of the cru- cifixion darkness as sorrow, its being equally a sorrow in that it is not felt, a sorrow negatively in turn for itself.
The cosmic sorrow communicated in the withdrawal of light from the world inter- sects with the withdrawal of sorrow from those who witness it, a withdrawal that is itself an object of sorrow. The universal sorrow of the crucifixion thus appears in the mode of an inverted, extra- human sublimity. People, despite the sorrowfulness of life, somehow remain stupidly unmoved by the plenitude of the universe passing through their very being.
And this essential incomprehensi- bility is likewise seen in all creatures so that the divine image is, as if indistinguishably, at once something properly within the human specifically and the general visibility of the image to the human within all things, a living visibility or image-being that the human, in the immanent space of its own being to itself, actually is. Along the universal continuum connecting the hidden superessential de- ity to the inscrutable essences of visible nature, these dark rays of the divine image, emanations of the whatless and whyless that intersect formally with the exegetical clarification of the darkness as sorrow, withdrawal, and mystical vision—intersections which themselves show the connection between unknowing and under- standing, between obscurity and the light of commentary.
Accordingly, to follow or trace these intersec- tions between what commentary sees in the crucifixion darkness sorrow, withdrawal, mystical vision and the negative epistemic elements inherent to its event spiritual blindness, the question of divine dereliction, supernatural mystery is precisely to touch upon the identity of feeling perfect sorrow and seeing the image of mat- ter. Just as matter never rests till it is filled with every possible form, so too intellect never rests till it is filled to capacity.
Early-seventeenth-century prayer card. Im- age provided by George Vahamikos and used with permission. Be drunk, but not with wine; stagger, but not with strong drink! Accordingly, the sorrowfulness of the crucifixion darkness, as a visible manifestation and general projection of mass human blindness, consists precisely in its immaterial materiality, which is the form of both spiritual blindness itself and its being an object of sorrow.
So the spectacle of cosmic sorrow, in which the entire material universe darkly mourns and refuses the event of ignorant human action, is the very image of spiritual stupidity as the inane and banally self-centered whatless and whyless that whereby our reality is diurnally mystified. The crucifixion darkness as sorrow is an impossible seeing and being moved that reflects, through perfect inversion, the inexplicable unmoving sleepy blind- ness of the ordinary matter-bound human who, as Bonaventure says with respect to the sensible plenitude of the world, deserves that that world itself revolt against him.
That there is matter or grounds for sorrow cannot be denied. That one ever ought to sorrow is absolutely deniable. The question of the cross, of actually inhabiting the cosmic darkness surrounding it, is the question of sorrowing without sor- row, of refusing evil without refusing its fact, of withdrawing from blindness without entering into the worse delusions of worry. Such is the superlative good news, a truth bigger than the fact of God and precisely one that you cannot accept, which the crucifixion darkness, if one shows the courage to see it in its simple identity with the actual silent expanse of cosmic darkness surrounding us all, instructs you in, pointing the way back beyond the suffering of law and before the trauma of beginning.
In his lectures, he hardly gave the Islamic viewpoint, or seldom the Christian viewpoint, thus confusing his audience. I believe he likes to make the Qadianis of this country very happy by mostly giving their viewpoint that Jesus, after being put on the Cross, swooned. Mr Deedat is the only person who can tell us whether he is preaching either the Christian doctrine, the Muslim doctrine, or the Qadiani doctrine. Gilchrist writes:. Our amazement arises from two considerations. On the one hand, this idea is held to only by the heretical Ahmadiyya sect in Islam and is denounced by all true Christians and Muslims.
In previous debates with many famous Christian scholars, Shabir Ally had taken the position that Jesus as was never placed upon the Cross, but someone else was crucified in his place.
More recently, however, in public debates, Shabir has changed his usual approach and position in support of the Ahmadi view that Jesus as survived the Crucifixion. For Christians, it is an angle of attack against the scholar: why would the scholar in question come out in favour of a viewpoint supported by a sect considered heretical by orthodox Muslims? Despite Shabir explaining that he did believe in the physical return of Jesus as and rejecting the claims of the Ahmadis, that Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as fulfilled the prophecies of the second coming of the Messiah, he openly admitted:.
In my own correspondence with Shabir Ally, he explained to me his viewpoint in the following words:. The traditional interpre-tation of Quran has been almost universal in saying that someone else was on the cross. But some modern interpreters are willing to accept that what was really meant was that Jesus did not die on the cross. It seems to me that this latter approach is more likely to be correct. I must confess that I do not find these convincing. The belief that Jesus survived the cross does not mean for me that he made his way out of Palestine.
I do not profess to know what eventually became of him. Despite openly distancing himself from the claims of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community and the Promised Messiah as , Shabir Ally has openly declared that his position on the Crucifixion is in exact keeping with the views expressed by the Promised Messiah as and held by Ahmadi Muslims. Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it as charitable gifts. The Islamic orthodoxy today will have us believe that this is a prophecy about a literal quest that will be undertaken to break all crosses.
The fourth caliph of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmad ru , highlights how ridiculous a notion this is when taken fully literally:. His strategy will be to break every cross in the world, whatever material it is made of. He will visit every cathedral, every monastery, every church, every temple, every Christian hermitage. He will walk every street of every township and stare at every passer-by in search of any cross. Ladies perhaps will become the prime object of his scrutiny because he will be aware of their despicable habit of having crosses engraved upon their jewellery and ornaments.
He will take care of the fact that they also wear crosses hanging around their necks. Thus he will snatch away every bangle, every bracelet, every pendant and earring with the sign of the cross upon it. Woe to the ladies who dare to cross the path of that Jesus as , but where can they escape and hide, the poor defenceless wretches?
He will enter every house and search every cabinet and jewellery box. Every wall and every corner will be scanned.
Crosses must be literally broken and wiped out from the face of earth. Until he has accomplished this task to the full he will not rest in peace.
"Jesus, Jesus, I must remember the hot sun on your body and the terrible thirst you experience. I must remember the terrible loneliness you are going through. The Crucifixion Narrated from a Human Perspective eBook: Bonnie J. Jones: rapyzure.tk: Kindle Store.
This is the vision of the Muslim orthodoxy of the mission of Jesus Christ as if ever he returns to earth. The explanation of what this prophecy actually means and alludes to has been given to us in detail by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as and the ongoing fulfilment of this prophecy has been seen in our very lifetimes. Then there came the time for the breaking of the Cross, i. Many television stations are showing documentaries and films presenting evidence that the Christian belief on the Crucifixion and Resurrection is incorrect.
The film also explores ideas around Jesus as having survived the Crucifixion. After almost years of confusion and mystery over the events of the Crucifixion, and the life of Jesus as that followed, a detailed explanation and analysis was presented by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as. Combining fresh divine revelation with scholar-ship, crossing many religions and cultures, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as shone an illuminating light on these events.
His book Masih Hinudstan Men Jesus in India laid the ground work for research that is carrying on to this day, examining evidence around Jesus as travelling to India. This text is accepted by scholars as the first text on this subject to link the life of Jesus as in Palestine, and his surviving the Crucifixion, with his travels to the East and eventual burial in Srinagar, Kashmir.
This lifting of darkness and confusion around the position of Jesus as is summarised by the Promised Messiah as stating in his book Jesus in India :. Night is gone and now it is day. Blessed is he who remains deprived no longer! Add Comment. Jewish Viewpoint The viewpoint of the Israelites at the time of Jesus as was straightforward; had he been put to death on the cross and successfully executed by the Romans, his messianic claims had come to nought.
Ahmed Deedat The late Ahmed Deedat wrote a book entitled, Crucifixion or Cruci—fiction, in which he argued in favour of the view that Jesus as did not die upon the cross, but survived the Crucifixion. Bible , 1 Corinthians 3. The Jesus Dynasty Dr. James Tabor, Harper Element, London , pp. Mohammed Bana, Allegations Confirmed , p.
You may also like. Click here to post a comment.