Resolution and Independence as MORAL LAW; or there is no greater God than truth.

There is no higher self than the moral self.

Jerusalem of Gold. Yerushalayim Shel Zahav. When truth and law coincide in one golden moment in our past.


The perils and promises of Orthodoxy. Aristocratic freedom as described by Alexis De Tocqueville, 18th century theorist not.

The schism between Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy

Heterodoxy is often associated as a means of dividing human beings and beliefs. Orthodoxy counters this by legislation and morality. Belief in Orthodoxy can be part of what De Tocqueville comments on as “Aristocratic Freedom.”  This freedom works when applied to the interests of the privileged to establish an increasing legitimate morality.


For more on thought, reason and beliefs go to the seminal account of De Tocqueville by Pierre Manent here–Democracy and Aristocracy; Chapter 2. 

On the necessity of evil. Aquinas redux. The Moral Sufficiency of Logical Necessity. A non-materialistic understanding of the Shoah or the extermination of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust during the second world war.


It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the name God means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world.  Therefore, God does not exist.

Bruce R. Reichenbach seeks to defend God’s exists in the face of natural evil by appealing to a morally sufficient reason for the existence of evil. According to this view, God must have a morally sufficient reason for allowing natural evils that makes it inappropriate to assign God any blame.  Reichenbach accepts the atheist’s contention that without a morally sufficient reason one could not reasonably accept the existence of an all-good and all- powerful God. Accordingly, he searches for some fact about the existence of natural evil and God’s causality of the natural world which protects God from blame and preserves his perfect goodness. To claim that natural evils are the unintended consequence of what God does intend, does not ipso facto exonerate God from culpability for their occurrence. Since God is omnipotent, he should be expected to have no limits to what he can bring about. Thus, as omnipotent, he should be able to create a world without natural evils. If such evils do occur, the morally sufficient reason that preserves God’s goodness must arise from natural evil being unavoidable. God would be free from blame for natural evils, not only because they are unintended consequences, but more importantly because they are unavoidable. Only what is logically necessary is unavoidable for God. A state of affairs is logically necessary if the description of the prevention of that state of affairs contains or entails a contradiction. Thus, for example, if God chooses and should choose a given good, and that good logically implies an accompanying evil, God is not blame-worthy for the evil. For God to choose the good but prevent the evil is a contradiction. The occurrence of the evil, in such a case, is logically necessary, and so God cannot be blamed for it. He would still be all-good, even though this evil were present in his creation. Reichenbach thus proposes a concatenation of unavoidable necessity which renders it inappropriate to blame God for the existence of natural evils. According to Reichenbach, natural evils are the unintended consequence of the world operating according to natural laws, and these natural laws, in turn, are necessary for there to be free moral agents. That God wills free moral agents is likewise necessary because a world without them is inferior to a world with them. Given that God wills to have free moral agents, then he must also will the world to operate according to natural laws, which will result in natural evils. The only alternative to a world operated by natural laws is a world operated by miracle, but such a miraculous world would not allow for the existence of free moral agents and a significant exercise of their freedom. Reichenbach’s theodicy thus hangs on this chain of necessity which holds God to having to allow natural evils in order to have free moral agents, which he is also bound to do. Reichenbach gives two reasons for the impossibility of God creating free moral agents in a world operated my miracle.  First, deliberation, a necessary condition for the exercise of rational choice, is prohibited given the confusion and unpredictability of a world operated by miracle. Moral action requires rational deliberation on the best means to attaining one’s desired end. However, if the world does not operate according to any regularity, but only according to the caprice of divine will, then a moral agent has no way to anticipate which means are likely to bring about which ends. Moral action is thus thwarted because rational knowledge is impossible.

Trust and Faith. Why their relationship is everlasting and how to achieve it.

 Mute acceptance of divine authority

There is orderliness in the universe, there is an unalterable law governing everything and every being that exists or lives. It is not a blind law everything around me is ever changing, that holds all together, that creates, dissolves and recreates. That informing power of spirit is God, and since nothing else that I see merely through the senses can or will persist, He alone is. And is this power benevolent or malevolent ? I see it as purely benevolent, for I can see that in the midst of death life persists, in the midst of untruth truth persists, in the midst of darkness light persists. Hence I gather that God is life, truth, light. He is love. He is the supreme Good. But He is no God who merely satisfies the intellect, if He ever does. God to be God must rule the heart and transform it. He must express himself in every smallest act of His votary. MK Gandhi.quote-the-votary-of-ahimsa-has-only-one-fear-that-is-of-god-mahatma-gandhi-128-86-43

Chaand heriche, chaand mukho tar, shoroshi aar shithe, Nazrul Geeti, Vocalist, Anup Ghosal.

Chaand heriche chaand mukho taar, shoroshir aarsheethe, The one who is enveloped by the moon is also its face from the frozen lake’s reflected glory. Chute thorongo bashona bhongo, the waves of the clouds around her pour into every home.  Shae ongo poroshithe, such is her power. Heriche rojoni rojoni jaagiya, the light that envelopes all beings has come alive. Chokoro uthola chaandero laagiya, clinging onto her, kaha piyu kaahaan dakiche papiya who will search for folorn love birds? Kumudire kaadaite, as they are at the river’s edge weeping. Na jaani shojoni kotho shae rojoni, who knows how much light will be required to quench the wailing of forgotten love.  Kedheche chokori paapiya, as even the beloved has been made into a slave.  Heriche shoshire shoroshi mukure, Come out into daylight, dhiru chaya thoru kaapiya, so that sun’s shadows tremble. Kedheche akashe chaandero bhoroni, as the skies cry out for you.  Chiro birohini rohini boroni, who will remain a radiant bride, obosho akasho dhibosho dhoroni, surely those who pray for her return wait patiently for the fullness of the moon.

Sin? The Gita has answered the question in decisive language says MK Gandhi.

gitaanddisappointment“By desireless action; by renouncing fruits of action; by dedicating all activities to God, i.e., by surrendering oneself to Him body and soul.”

There is no such thing as human law. Why Kant and his adversaries were wrong about Morality and Moral Law.

Human law cannot survive because it is never objective. Its use has always depended on subjective morality. In contrast objective or moral law applies even if there is no defense of it.  Satyagraha was a complete system to deal with subjective morality’s ambitions. Hence, the prophecy that when law is moral it is for the purpose of governing blindness to sin. The best anyone can do is to apply this morality that accounts for terrorists and saints.

Kant and adversaries

Kant and adversaries.

When is Law akin to Punishment? To teach what it means to be a fish out of water.



Those God loves he chastens, for God is a loving God, not to be confused with morality.

fish out of water