Spriritual Sohbets Shaykh Eşref Efendi
Sheikh Esref Efendi download .pdf
Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

Put democracy on the crown

Sheikh Eşref Efendi - Sufiland  07.11.2019
  • Question: I would like to ask an earthly question, because I am interested in your opinion about it. When I evaluate the political situation in Europe nowadays, especially in Germany, there is currently a low, but unfortunately no big alternatives to prevent it on a political level. I notice also in my environment, that the trust in politics and politicians hardly exists. What do you think, how could the political situation nowadays be rescued?
    It is not a question about a spiritual matter, although you have perhaps an opinion about it.

    S.E.: In the name of the Almighty and merciful

    The one who is not assign the earthly matters where it actually belongs, has irrevocably lost himself for here and now. That means, you have to assign the right position to the worldly and make use of it in its right place. You have to build the worldly on a divine foundation. Nowadays the people are doing it the other way around, they try to build the divine, if at all, on a worldly foundation, causing it to lose its divinity.
    The world is a lie. You can not build the truth on lies. But on the foundation of the truth, you can even build lies, for every lie must take its power from a truth. Where there is darkness, there cannot be light, but where there is light, there is also darkness. The worldly exists because there is the divine. Therefore, your question addresses both the spiritual and the worldly at the same time. You cannot separate one from the other, and that's why it's not separated in your question either. That's why I was authorized by my grand sheikh to answer socio-political questions as well.
    You should know that the spritual well-being of each person depends on the way he lives. The way of life influences behavior and belief. It is called:

    "Those who do not live by their beliefs begin to believe in their way of life."

    But how should we know which way of life is the right one? Because everyone has his own opinion about it. And we say, right there you have to be careful!

  • The way of life is shaped by the direction of a country's leadership. Just as the leadership of a country is, so is the way of life of the people. And as the people is, so is the leadership. The Creator says about it:

    „O people, as you are, they are the ones who govern you. "

    If the leadership of a country is right, then the life of the people in this country will be influenced correctly. But proper leadership requires proper leaders. Political rise, economic prosperity, and morality and faith within the society are possible only through properly educated leaders. In order to know what is going wrong in this system and why the whole world has the same problem in terms of government and education, we must try to get to the bottom of the problem. Because today in the whole world, confidence in politics has reached its lowest point. We should know the reason so that we can even identify the disease.

    Monster instead of Angel

    People's behaviour during their life is based on what they have learnt during their childhood and their upbringing. It is very difficult for them to learn morally and socially fundamental things in old age, because human development builds on the basics that was created in childhood. However, this foundation is primarily dependent on the influences that affect the child in the first six years. In the same time these influences depend on the circumstances in which the parents are.
    Who is still educated today according to religious and moral principles? Where are the commandments and prohibitions? What has become of the religious and moral principles? Especially in Europe, they are not much appreciated, because they are not a fundamental part of the school education of children. On the contrary, one confronts children who are still in second or third grade in the guise of sex education. As a result, they are waking up the sexual drives prematurely, so that boys and girls have sexual contact with each other early.

  • Question: But isn't it better when we introduce this topic to children in such an early age. We live in a world of enlightenment.

    S.E: Yes, but look at the result. Is it good or bad? If you want to know the value of something, then you must always look at its result. The result is underaged mothers and fathers, and maybe even abandoned or dumped children. What else can you expect from a child? But we must not forget that these children will later become those people who will shape the society. In today's school education, the children are presented with a picture of the human being who is descended from the animals.
    We do not believe in this theory, but we can still accuse the people believing in it, why they do not act according to their theory. Can we experience in Nature, that animals have to be enlightened in order to be able to reproduce? In animals they say it is instinct, but man has a mind and five senses, so how should he not be able to discover and learn his own sexuality? One should not burden young children with this knowledge so early, especially in a phase in which they are so strongly shaped for their later life.
    At one time children were taught interpersonal, moral and religious principles at this age. Now the people just left off the heavenly and the human believes and the animal like is given precedence.

    Question: In a way, you're right, but do not you think that's a bit too pessimistic?

    S.E.: We know what we are talking about. If that sounds pessimistic, it's only because it's really so. We only have to look at the children. Look at the kids, we just described what we see. But the point of view always depends on the position. It begins with the so-called children's films, which, apart from the fact that they are drawn, are not different from the films that are for adults. On the contrary, they are even more brutal than adult films, and it's all about the ego in them. And after these movies, then the children behave just as they have seen and learned in these.

    What is taught to the children on the street and on television every day, charity or selfishness? Of course, most parents know that the cartoons

  • are not very beneficial to the character of their children, but how can they avoid it? It is tolerated by highest instance. There is no law prohibiting these things. The state tolerates it, what should parents do there?

    Question: Do you really think that the state promotes that?

    S.E.: If you do not prevent something, you promote it indirectly. Who else should be able to prevent something in a system, if not the leaders? They make the laws! What does the leadership of a state do against the bad, the evil or the immoral? What security measures or precautions do they have against the unbelief in the good, the right and the beautiful?

    In a state, the most important thing is not to lose faith in the good and the right. In this point, faith in God is the decisive factor. Because faith in God promotes morality and the right and reflects the good as mutual respect and responsiveness, honesty, charity, decency, sense of community, mercy, tolerance, modesty, friendliness, patriotism and faithfulness.

    And when we look at the whole world, we see that it is going crazy. No matter if it is the Islamic world, the Buddhist, the Christian or the Jewish world! The whole world is crazy. There is almost no land where there is no restlessness. Terror they say. But where does this terror come from? From the moon, from God? Or did people create it themselves? hey encouraged it by promising freedom for everyone in the name of democracy or the people. Freedom and self-determination for the people, freedom and self-determination for children, freedom and self-determination for students.

    But what does freedom mean? Being free in everything you do? Or how to properly define freedom? Legalized and unrestricted freedom or disciplined and limited freedom? If, in a leadership system, you begin to educate a person incorrectly as a child, what do you expect later from the people in this system? Ultimately, the leaders of these countries are chosen from those people who once learned to grow their own ego as big as they can. And sometimes they were even those who rebelled against their own people and regimes and threw stones, in the name of freedom the enjoyed.

  • Question: Do you mean Fischer?

    S.E.: Fischer (Fisherman) or butcher, all the same! During their youth and university time, they did not dare to dream to stand at the top which the same top that they fought against for more freedom.

    By Chance

    During each election cycle the chosen ones appear, the ones that lived their whole live based on a wrong sense of freedom and that were constantly dealing with their own ego. What is it that you can expect? What else can you ask for? These people, who in the name of freedom or democracy were brought up as conscious or unconscious rebels, then suddenly become "by chance" the ruler of a country in which they simply try their luck in one of the elections and come out as winners. In their constant dissatisfaction, the people always want to see and try new faces in which they keep voting and therefor get rid of their aggression. One could also view this reaction of the people as a sort of legalized rebellion against the head or leadership of the country, which amounts to a coup attempt. But what makes the people so aggressive and rebellious? As we tried to explain in the beginning, it is the wrong education and being up system and the leadership that are not based on any celestial beliefs that are to blame for everything. How did it happen?

    The French Revolution

    „Liberté, égalité, fraternité". Liberty, equality, Brotherhood. These were the words that were foist to the people so that they might revolt. It has been whispered to the people that they do not possess these rights, so they were led to rebel against the monarch and overthrow him to take the lead themselves. But above all, the French Revolution brought this devilish tradition. The right to revolt against the leading force!

    That's why, according to this tradition, every four years the government is overthrown and a new one appointed, since traditions have to be maintained.

  • Because the elections are always a result of freedom, aggression and the subsequent reaction of the people.

    Question: But the people where suppressed by the kings. At that time, they hat to be content with their fate because they were not allowed to choose. Not they can at lease determine who is in power.

    S.E.: How can they determine it? Is there a 100% majority in an election? There is always one group that determines another. The majority always triumphs over the minority. How can they then say that there is equality? It's a lie. People are cheated because they want to be cheated.
    They did not want kings because they wanted to choose themselves. And, are they really doing the politics?

    What was so wrong with the Monarchy, that people rushed against their own king? That only one king could ever be and not everyone? Only one from the same family? What has actually changed?

    Actually, only the family. But the form of government has remained the same, except that one was crowned, and nowadays not anymore. But they also live like kings. The king also had his advisers, he had never determined himself, but through the advice of his viziers, so advisers. He had only the last word. But today's presidents and prime ministers also have that. So, nothing fundamental has changed. The rulers even live in the palaces of the ancient kings or use them for state meetings. It may be different, however, that instead of every forty years, today every four years, rulers change and ascend to the throne without ceremony to play the king.

    Und the people still do not determine themselves. It seems that way, but it's not like that. The people are the king only once every four years, only at the day they go to vote. After that you do not hear anything from them for four years. It has only one vote and that only to choose a new king, this time from another family. That's an irony. If the people make the policy, why they are never satisfied and are always going to choose again? Because they are satisfied with the policy? What about the

  • election results? We see that the distribution of votes is never the same as in the election before. Because there are those who give their vote to a different party than before. Why do they do that if they are satisfies with the way, how the people they choose, are ruling? These are just simple thought that anyone can ask.

    Question: are you against this system?

    S.E.: We are believers. Our faith dictates that we should follow the laws of the land and act upon them, whether we like it or not. But this system allows us to express our opinion freely within the law. We are not against the system we are living in or its laws. But we see that this system currently does not make people happy, and we believe it will not help them. That's why there are riots. However, we believe in an alternative.
    A one that has existed thousands of years and proven itself. There is a sacred principle:

    "If you find two evil, you should choose the less among them."

    Our opinion is a real alternative is the monarchy. When you say it was evil, we think, it was a little less evil than what we have today.

    Question: But in a democracy, the government is controlled somehow by the opposition, in case they do something wrong.

    S.E.: According to the opposition the government is never doing something right. It must be also like that, otherwise the opposition will not find a suitable program to offer for the next election if they find everything the current government is doing good. The government has the accelerator, but the opposition the brake. How should the car roll? The one gives gas, the other brakes, because he does not want that one comes further.

    At that time people did not want to be controlled, they wanted to decide for themselves, but even now they are controlled. Not by just one person, but hundreds of them. Where is the logic? Is that better now? Many cooks spoil the pulp, say the Germans. How is it then when five hundred chefs in the kitchen try to cook? Then there is not even a pulp.

  • There was only one person in the monarchy who united the people. In democracy, people are split. The people are divided into parties that hate each other and criticize each other, where is the unity, when they are throwing each other with chairs inside the parliament? Doesn't it mean unity, justice and freedom?

    Question: If I understood you right, you are supporting monarchies.

    S.E.: I am for the good and when the good is found in democracy, then I am for democracy. In the monarchy, a prince was always educated from the cradle to govern the people properly. He should be like a father to the people, and then he was educated and educated, which cannot be said of the ruling politicians.
    In one country there was a politician who was a tomato seller before. At some point, when he became a politician, he was thrown with the tomatoes that he had previously sold to the people. An irony of fate.

    Question: What do u suggest?

    S.E.: If we want to have a positive environment, a philanthropic and honorable and credible political leadership, we must first start to properly educate our children. And in education discipline is inevitable. Where there are bids, there must also be prohibitions. Man has to learn to bear responsibility as a child. Namely that we are responsible for others and have to share the world with others. The world is bound, tied to his career. People are bound, bound to parents, tied to teachers, tied to supervisors and fellow human beings and even, as strange as it may sound, bound to life and death! So where is the unrestricted freedom?

    At the end, the desire for unrestricted freedom brings only a huge harm. Therefore, the New World Order probably demands a limited freedom. Because the unlimited freedom only brought terror, because the rebellion always ends up in terrorism.

  • Question: That means terrorism comes through wrong education and has nothing to do with faith?

    S.E.: Right. It has nothing to do with faith, but it has to do with disbelief. Faith knows no terror and terror knows no faith. No matter what name they choose, terrorists are unbelievers! Terror is the wrong way to go and always ends in a dead end. It may sound philosophical, but the initial letter of terror begins with T. And the sign of a dead end looks exactly like a T. And if you take away the T from the terror, there is only "error", which means "wrong" in the international language. In short, terrorism's efforts could also be described as a hopeless, dead-end, wrong way to go. A way on which there is no way out and no progress.

    Question: Which advice would you give the politicians?

    S.E.: Put the crown on the head of Democracy!
    * * *

  • Question: I would like to ask an earthly question, because I am interested in your opinion about it. When I evaluate the political situation in Europe nowadays, especially in Germany, there is currently a low, but unfortunately no big alternatives to prevent it on a political level. I notice also in my environment, that the trust in politics and politicians hardly exists. What do you think, how could the political situation nowadays be rescued?
    It is not a question about a spiritual matter, although you have perhaps an opinion about it.

    S.E.: In the name of the Almighty and merciful

    The one who is not assign the earthly matters where it actually belongs, has irrevocably lost himself for here and now. That means, you have to assign the right position to the worldly and make use of it in its right place. You have to build the worldly on a divine foundation. Nowadays the people are doing it the other way around, they try to build the divine, if at all, on a worldly foundation, causing it to lose its divinity.
    The world is a lie. You can not build the truth on lies. But on the foundation of the truth, you can even build lies, for every lie must take its power from a truth. Where there is darkness, there cannot be light, but where there is light, there is also darkness. The worldly exists because there is the divine. Therefore, your question addresses both the spiritual and the worldly at the same time. You cannot separate one from the other, and that's why it's not separated in your question either. That's why I was authorized by my grand sheikh to answer socio-political questions as well.
    You should know that the spritual well-being of each person depends on the way he lives. The way of life influences behavior and belief. It is called:

    "Those who do not live by their beliefs begin to believe in their way of life."

    But how should we know which way of life is the right one? Because everyone has his own opinion about it. And we say, right there you have to be careful!

  • The way of life is shaped by the direction of a country's leadership. Just as the leadership of a country is, so is the way of life of the people. And as the people is, so is the leadership. The Creator says about it:

    „O people, as you are, they are the ones who govern you. "

    If the leadership of a country is right, then the life of the people in this country will be influenced correctly. But proper leadership requires proper leaders. Political rise, economic prosperity, and morality and faith within the society are possible only through properly educated leaders. In order to know what is going wrong in this system and why the whole world has the same problem in terms of government and education, we must try to get to the bottom of the problem. Because today in the whole world, confidence in politics has reached its lowest point. We should know the reason so that we can even identify the disease.

    Monster instead of Angel

    People's behaviour during their life is based on what they have learnt during their childhood and their upbringing. It is very difficult for them to learn morally and socially fundamental things in old age, because human development builds on the basics that was created in childhood. However, this foundation is primarily dependent on the influences that affect the child in the first six years. In the same time these influences depend on the circumstances in which the parents are.
    Who is still educated today according to religious and moral principles? Where are the commandments and prohibitions? What has become of the religious and moral principles? Especially in Europe, they are not much appreciated, because they are not a fundamental part of the school education of children. On the contrary, one confronts children who are still in second or third grade in the guise of sex education. As a result, they are waking up the sexual drives prematurely, so that boys and girls have sexual contact with each other early.

  • Question: But isn't it better when we introduce this topic to children in such an early age. We live in a world of enlightenment.

    S.E: Yes, but look at the result. Is it good or bad? If you want to know the value of something, then you must always look at its result. The result is underaged mothers and fathers, and maybe even abandoned or dumped children. What else can you expect from a child? But we must not forget that these children will later become those people who will shape the society. In today's school education, the children are presented with a picture of the human being who is descended from the animals.
    We do not believe in this theory, but we can still accuse the people believing in it, why they do not act according to their theory. Can we experience in Nature, that animals have to be enlightened in order to be able to reproduce? In animals they say it is instinct, but man has a mind and five senses, so how should he not be able to discover and learn his own sexuality? One should not burden young children with this knowledge so early, especially in a phase in which they are so strongly shaped for their later life.
    At one time children were taught interpersonal, moral and religious principles at this age. Now the people just left off the heavenly and the human believes and the animal like is given precedence.

    Question: In a way, you're right, but do not you think that's a bit too pessimistic?

    S.E.: We know what we are talking about. If that sounds pessimistic, it's only because it's really so. We only have to look at the children. Look at the kids, we just described what we see. But the point of view always depends on the position. It begins with the so-called children's films, which, apart from the fact that they are drawn, are not different from the films that are for adults. On the contrary, they are even more brutal than adult films, and it's all about the ego in them. And after these movies, then the children behave just as they have seen and learned in these.

    What is taught to the children on the street and on television every day, charity or selfishness? Of course, most parents know that the cartoons

  • are not very beneficial to the character of their children, but how can they avoid it? It is tolerated by highest instance. There is no law prohibiting these things. The state tolerates it, what should parents do there?

    Question: Do you really think that the state promotes that?

    S.E.: If you do not prevent something, you promote it indirectly. Who else should be able to prevent something in a system, if not the leaders? They make the laws! What does the leadership of a state do against the bad, the evil or the immoral? What security measures or precautions do they have against the unbelief in the good, the right and the beautiful?

    In a state, the most important thing is not to lose faith in the good and the right. In this point, faith in God is the decisive factor. Because faith in God promotes morality and the right and reflects the good as mutual respect and responsiveness, honesty, charity, decency, sense of community, mercy, tolerance, modesty, friendliness, patriotism and faithfulness.

    And when we look at the whole world, we see that it is going crazy. No matter if it is the Islamic world, the Buddhist, the Christian or the Jewish world! The whole world is crazy. There is almost no land where there is no restlessness. Terror they say. But where does this terror come from? From the moon, from God? Or did people create it themselves? hey encouraged it by promising freedom for everyone in the name of democracy or the people. Freedom and self-determination for the people, freedom and self-determination for children, freedom and self-determination for students.

    But what does freedom mean? Being free in everything you do? Or how to properly define freedom? Legalized and unrestricted freedom or disciplined and limited freedom? If, in a leadership system, you begin to educate a person incorrectly as a child, what do you expect later from the people in this system? Ultimately, the leaders of these countries are chosen from those people who once learned to grow their own ego as big as they can. And sometimes they were even those who rebelled against their own people and regimes and threw stones, in the name of freedom the enjoyed.

  • Question: Do you mean Fischer?

    S.E.: Fischer (Fisherman) or butcher, all the same! During their youth and university time, they did not dare to dream to stand at the top which the same top that they fought against for more freedom.

    By Chance

    During each election cycle the chosen ones appear, the ones that lived their whole live based on a wrong sense of freedom and that were constantly dealing with their own ego. What is it that you can expect? What else can you ask for? These people, who in the name of freedom or democracy were brought up as conscious or unconscious rebels, then suddenly become "by chance" the ruler of a country in which they simply try their luck in one of the elections and come out as winners. In their constant dissatisfaction, the people always want to see and try new faces in which they keep voting and therefor get rid of their aggression. One could also view this reaction of the people as a sort of legalized rebellion against the head or leadership of the country, which amounts to a coup attempt. But what makes the people so aggressive and rebellious? As we tried to explain in the beginning, it is the wrong education and being up system and the leadership that are not based on any celestial beliefs that are to blame for everything. How did it happen?

    The French Revolution

    „Liberté, égalité, fraternité". Liberty, equality, Brotherhood. These were the words that were foist to the people so that they might revolt. It has been whispered to the people that they do not possess these rights, so they were led to rebel against the monarch and overthrow him to take the lead themselves. But above all, the French Revolution brought this devilish tradition. The right to revolt against the leading force!

    That's why, according to this tradition, every four years the government is overthrown and a new one appointed, since traditions have to be maintained.

  • Because the elections are always a result of freedom, aggression and the subsequent reaction of the people.

    Question: But the people where suppressed by the kings. At that time, they hat to be content with their fate because they were not allowed to choose. Not they can at lease determine who is in power.

    S.E.: How can they determine it? Is there a 100% majority in an election? There is always one group that determines another. The majority always triumphs over the minority. How can they then say that there is equality? It's a lie. People are cheated because they want to be cheated.
    They did not want kings because they wanted to choose themselves. And, are they really doing the politics?

    What was so wrong with the Monarchy, that people rushed against their own king? That only one king could ever be and not everyone? Only one from the same family? What has actually changed?

    Actually, only the family. But the form of government has remained the same, except that one was crowned, and nowadays not anymore. But they also live like kings. The king also had his advisers, he had never determined himself, but through the advice of his viziers, so advisers. He had only the last word. But today's presidents and prime ministers also have that. So, nothing fundamental has changed. The rulers even live in the palaces of the ancient kings or use them for state meetings. It may be different, however, that instead of every forty years, today every four years, rulers change and ascend to the throne without ceremony to play the king.

    Und the people still do not determine themselves. It seems that way, but it's not like that. The people are the king only once every four years, only at the day they go to vote. After that you do not hear anything from them for four years. It has only one vote and that only to choose a new king, this time from another family. That's an irony. If the people make the policy, why they are never satisfied and are always going to choose again? Because they are satisfied with the policy? What about the

  • election results? We see that the distribution of votes is never the same as in the election before. Because there are those who give their vote to a different party than before. Why do they do that if they are satisfies with the way, how the people they choose, are ruling? These are just simple thought that anyone can ask.

    Question: are you against this system?

    S.E.: We are believers. Our faith dictates that we should follow the laws of the land and act upon them, whether we like it or not. But this system allows us to express our opinion freely within the law. We are not against the system we are living in or its laws. But we see that this system currently does not make people happy, and we believe it will not help them. That's why there are riots. However, we believe in an alternative.
    A one that has existed thousands of years and proven itself. There is a sacred principle:

    "If you find two evil, you should choose the less among them."

    Our opinion is a real alternative is the monarchy. When you say it was evil, we think, it was a little less evil than what we have today.

    Question: But in a democracy, the government is controlled somehow by the opposition, in case they do something wrong.

    S.E.: According to the opposition the government is never doing something right. It must be also like that, otherwise the opposition will not find a suitable program to offer for the next election if they find everything the current government is doing good. The government has the accelerator, but the opposition the brake. How should the car roll? The one gives gas, the other brakes, because he does not want that one comes further.

    At that time people did not want to be controlled, they wanted to decide for themselves, but even now they are controlled. Not by just one person, but hundreds of them. Where is the logic? Is that better now? Many cooks spoil the pulp, say the Germans. How is it then when five hundred chefs in the kitchen try to cook? Then there is not even a pulp.

  • There was only one person in the monarchy who united the people. In democracy, people are split. The people are divided into parties that hate each other and criticize each other, where is the unity, when they are throwing each other with chairs inside the parliament? Doesn't it mean unity, justice and freedom?

    Question: If I understood you right, you are supporting monarchies.

    S.E.: I am for the good and when the good is found in democracy, then I am for democracy. In the monarchy, a prince was always educated from the cradle to govern the people properly. He should be like a father to the people, and then he was educated and educated, which cannot be said of the ruling politicians.
    In one country there was a politician who was a tomato seller before. At some point, when he became a politician, he was thrown with the tomatoes that he had previously sold to the people. An irony of fate.

    Question: What do u suggest?

    S.E.: If we want to have a positive environment, a philanthropic and honorable and credible political leadership, we must first start to properly educate our children. And in education discipline is inevitable. Where there are bids, there must also be prohibitions. Man has to learn to bear responsibility as a child. Namely that we are responsible for others and have to share the world with others. The world is bound, tied to his career. People are bound, bound to parents, tied to teachers, tied to supervisors and fellow human beings and even, as strange as it may sound, bound to life and death! So where is the unrestricted freedom?

    At the end, the desire for unrestricted freedom brings only a huge harm. Therefore, the New World Order probably demands a limited freedom. Because the unlimited freedom only brought terror, because the rebellion always ends up in terrorism.

  • Question: That means terrorism comes through wrong education and has nothing to do with faith?

    S.E.: Right. It has nothing to do with faith, but it has to do with disbelief. Faith knows no terror and terror knows no faith. No matter what name they choose, terrorists are unbelievers! Terror is the wrong way to go and always ends in a dead end. It may sound philosophical, but the initial letter of terror begins with T. And the sign of a dead end looks exactly like a T. And if you take away the T from the terror, there is only "error", which means "wrong" in the international language. In short, terrorism's efforts could also be described as a hopeless, dead-end, wrong way to go. A way on which there is no way out and no progress.

    Question: Which advice would you give the politicians?

    S.E.: Put the crown on the head of Democracy!
    * * *

  • Question: I would like to ask an earthly question, because I am interested in your opinion about it. When I evaluate the political situation in Europe nowadays, especially in Germany, there is currently a low, but unfortunately no big alternatives to prevent it on a political level. I notice also in my environment, that the trust in politics and politicians hardly exists. What do you think, how could the political situation nowadays be rescued?
    It is not a question about a spiritual matter, although you have perhaps an opinion about it.

    S.E.: In the name of the Almighty and merciful

    The one who is not assign the earthly matters where it actually belongs, has irrevocably lost himself for here and now. That means, you have to assign the right position to the worldly and make use of it in its right place. You have to build the worldly on a divine foundation. Nowadays the people are doing it the other way around, they try to build the divine, if at all, on a worldly foundation, causing it to lose its divinity.
    The world is a lie. You can not build the truth on lies. But on the foundation of the truth, you can even build lies, for every lie must take its power from a truth. Where there is darkness, there cannot be light, but where there is light, there is also darkness. The worldly exists because there is the divine. Therefore, your question addresses both the spiritual and the worldly at the same time. You cannot separate one from the other, and that's why it's not separated in your question either. That's why I was authorized by my grand sheikh to answer socio-political questions as well.
    You should know that the spritual well-being of each person depends on the way he lives. The way of life influences behavior and belief. It is called:

    "Those who do not live by their beliefs begin to believe in their way of life."

    But how should we know which way of life is the right one? Because everyone has his own opinion about it. And we say, right there you have to be careful!

  • The way of life is shaped by the direction of a country's leadership. Just as the leadership of a country is, so is the way of life of the people. And as the people is, so is the leadership. The Creator says about it:

    „O people, as you are, they are the ones who govern you. "

    If the leadership of a country is right, then the life of the people in this country will be influenced correctly. But proper leadership requires proper leaders. Political rise, economic prosperity, and morality and faith within the society are possible only through properly educated leaders. In order to know what is going wrong in this system and why the whole world has the same problem in terms of government and education, we must try to get to the bottom of the problem. Because today in the whole world, confidence in politics has reached its lowest point. We should know the reason so that we can even identify the disease.

    Monster instead of Angel

    People's behaviour during their life is based on what they have learnt during their childhood and their upbringing. It is very difficult for them to learn morally and socially fundamental things in old age, because human development builds on the basics that was created in childhood. However, this foundation is primarily dependent on the influences that affect the child in the first six years. In the same time these influences depend on the circumstances in which the parents are.
    Who is still educated today according to religious and moral principles? Where are the commandments and prohibitions? What has become of the religious and moral principles? Especially in Europe, they are not much appreciated, because they are not a fundamental part of the school education of children. On the contrary, one confronts children who are still in second or third grade in the guise of sex education. As a result, they are waking up the sexual drives prematurely, so that boys and girls have sexual contact with each other early.

  • Question: But isn't it better when we introduce this topic to children in such an early age. We live in a world of enlightenment.

    S.E: Yes, but look at the result. Is it good or bad? If you want to know the value of something, then you must always look at its result. The result is underaged mothers and fathers, and maybe even abandoned or dumped children. What else can you expect from a child? But we must not forget that these children will later become those people who will shape the society. In today's school education, the children are presented with a picture of the human being who is descended from the animals.
    We do not believe in this theory, but we can still accuse the people believing in it, why they do not act according to their theory. Can we experience in Nature, that animals have to be enlightened in order to be able to reproduce? In animals they say it is instinct, but man has a mind and five senses, so how should he not be able to discover and learn his own sexuality? One should not burden young children with this knowledge so early, especially in a phase in which they are so strongly shaped for their later life.
    At one time children were taught interpersonal, moral and religious principles at this age. Now the people just left off the heavenly and the human believes and the animal like is given precedence.

    Question: In a way, you're right, but do not you think that's a bit too pessimistic?

    S.E.: We know what we are talking about. If that sounds pessimistic, it's only because it's really so. We only have to look at the children. Look at the kids, we just described what we see. But the point of view always depends on the position. It begins with the so-called children's films, which, apart from the fact that they are drawn, are not different from the films that are for adults. On the contrary, they are even more brutal than adult films, and it's all about the ego in them. And after these movies, then the children behave just as they have seen and learned in these.

    What is taught to the children on the street and on television every day, charity or selfishness? Of course, most parents know that the cartoons

  • are not very beneficial to the character of their children, but how can they avoid it? It is tolerated by highest instance. There is no law prohibiting these things. The state tolerates it, what should parents do there?

    Question: Do you really think that the state promotes that?

    S.E.: If you do not prevent something, you promote it indirectly. Who else should be able to prevent something in a system, if not the leaders? They make the laws! What does the leadership of a state do against the bad, the evil or the immoral? What security measures or precautions do they have against the unbelief in the good, the right and the beautiful?

    In a state, the most important thing is not to lose faith in the good and the right. In this point, faith in God is the decisive factor. Because faith in God promotes morality and the right and reflects the good as mutual respect and responsiveness, honesty, charity, decency, sense of community, mercy, tolerance, modesty, friendliness, patriotism and faithfulness.

    And when we look at the whole world, we see that it is going crazy. No matter if it is the Islamic world, the Buddhist, the Christian or the Jewish world! The whole world is crazy. There is almost no land where there is no restlessness. Terror they say. But where does this terror come from? From the moon, from God? Or did people create it themselves? hey encouraged it by promising freedom for everyone in the name of democracy or the people. Freedom and self-determination for the people, freedom and self-determination for children, freedom and self-determination for students.

    But what does freedom mean? Being free in everything you do? Or how to properly define freedom? Legalized and unrestricted freedom or disciplined and limited freedom? If, in a leadership system, you begin to educate a person incorrectly as a child, what do you expect later from the people in this system? Ultimately, the leaders of these countries are chosen from those people who once learned to grow their own ego as big as they can. And sometimes they were even those who rebelled against their own people and regimes and threw stones, in the name of freedom the enjoyed.

  • Question: Do you mean Fischer?

    S.E.: Fischer (Fisherman) or butcher, all the same! During their youth and university time, they did not dare to dream to stand at the top which the same top that they fought against for more freedom.

    By Chance

    During each election cycle the chosen ones appear, the ones that lived their whole live based on a wrong sense of freedom and that were constantly dealing with their own ego. What is it that you can expect? What else can you ask for? These people, who in the name of freedom or democracy were brought up as conscious or unconscious rebels, then suddenly become "by chance" the ruler of a country in which they simply try their luck in one of the elections and come out as winners. In their constant dissatisfaction, the people always want to see and try new faces in which they keep voting and therefor get rid of their aggression. One could also view this reaction of the people as a sort of legalized rebellion against the head or leadership of the country, which amounts to a coup attempt. But what makes the people so aggressive and rebellious? As we tried to explain in the beginning, it is the wrong education and being up system and the leadership that are not based on any celestial beliefs that are to blame for everything. How did it happen?

    The French Revolution

    „Liberté, égalité, fraternité". Liberty, equality, Brotherhood. These were the words that were foist to the people so that they might revolt. It has been whispered to the people that they do not possess these rights, so they were led to rebel against the monarch and overthrow him to take the lead themselves. But above all, the French Revolution brought this devilish tradition. The right to revolt against the leading force!

    That's why, according to this tradition, every four years the government is overthrown and a new one appointed, since traditions have to be maintained.

  • Because the elections are always a result of freedom, aggression and the subsequent reaction of the people.

    Question: But the people where suppressed by the kings. At that time, they hat to be content with their fate because they were not allowed to choose. Not they can at lease determine who is in power.

    S.E.: How can they determine it? Is there a 100% majority in an election? There is always one group that determines another. The majority always triumphs over the minority. How can they then say that there is equality? It's a lie. People are cheated because they want to be cheated.
    They did not want kings because they wanted to choose themselves. And, are they really doing the politics?

    What was so wrong with the Monarchy, that people rushed against their own king? That only one king could ever be and not everyone? Only one from the same family? What has actually changed?

    Actually, only the family. But the form of government has remained the same, except that one was crowned, and nowadays not anymore. But they also live like kings. The king also had his advisers, he had never determined himself, but through the advice of his viziers, so advisers. He had only the last word. But today's presidents and prime ministers also have that. So, nothing fundamental has changed. The rulers even live in the palaces of the ancient kings or use them for state meetings. It may be different, however, that instead of every forty years, today every four years, rulers change and ascend to the throne without ceremony to play the king.

    Und the people still do not determine themselves. It seems that way, but it's not like that. The people are the king only once every four years, only at the day they go to vote. After that you do not hear anything from them for four years. It has only one vote and that only to choose a new king, this time from another family. That's an irony. If the people make the policy, why they are never satisfied and are always going to choose again? Because they are satisfied with the policy? What about the

  • election results? We see that the distribution of votes is never the same as in the election before. Because there are those who give their vote to a different party than before. Why do they do that if they are satisfies with the way, how the people they choose, are ruling? These are just simple thought that anyone can ask.

    Question: are you against this system?

    S.E.: We are believers. Our faith dictates that we should follow the laws of the land and act upon them, whether we like it or not. But this system allows us to express our opinion freely within the law. We are not against the system we are living in or its laws. But we see that this system currently does not make people happy, and we believe it will not help them. That's why there are riots. However, we believe in an alternative.
    A one that has existed thousands of years and proven itself. There is a sacred principle:

    "If you find two evil, you should choose the less among them."

    Our opinion is a real alternative is the monarchy. When you say it was evil, we think, it was a little less evil than what we have today.

    Question: But in a democracy, the government is controlled somehow by the opposition, in case they do something wrong.

    S.E.: According to the opposition the government is never doing something right. It must be also like that, otherwise the opposition will not find a suitable program to offer for the next election if they find everything the current government is doing good. The government has the accelerator, but the opposition the brake. How should the car roll? The one gives gas, the other brakes, because he does not want that one comes further.

    At that time people did not want to be controlled, they wanted to decide for themselves, but even now they are controlled. Not by just one person, but hundreds of them. Where is the logic? Is that better now? Many cooks spoil the pulp, say the Germans. How is it then when five hundred chefs in the kitchen try to cook? Then there is not even a pulp.

  • There was only one person in the monarchy who united the people. In democracy, people are split. The people are divided into parties that hate each other and criticize each other, where is the unity, when they are throwing each other with chairs inside the parliament? Doesn't it mean unity, justice and freedom?

    Question: If I understood you right, you are supporting monarchies.

    S.E.: I am for the good and when the good is found in democracy, then I am for democracy. In the monarchy, a prince was always educated from the cradle to govern the people properly. He should be like a father to the people, and then he was educated and educated, which cannot be said of the ruling politicians.
    In one country there was a politician who was a tomato seller before. At some point, when he became a politician, he was thrown with the tomatoes that he had previously sold to the people. An irony of fate.

    Question: What do u suggest?

    S.E.: If we want to have a positive environment, a philanthropic and honorable and credible political leadership, we must first start to properly educate our children. And in education discipline is inevitable. Where there are bids, there must also be prohibitions. Man has to learn to bear responsibility as a child. Namely that we are responsible for others and have to share the world with others. The world is bound, tied to his career. People are bound, bound to parents, tied to teachers, tied to supervisors and fellow human beings and even, as strange as it may sound, bound to life and death! So where is the unrestricted freedom?

    At the end, the desire for unrestricted freedom brings only a huge harm. Therefore, the New World Order probably demands a limited freedom. Because the unlimited freedom only brought terror, because the rebellion always ends up in terrorism.

  • Question: That means terrorism comes through wrong education and has nothing to do with faith?

    S.E.: Right. It has nothing to do with faith, but it has to do with disbelief. Faith knows no terror and terror knows no faith. No matter what name they choose, terrorists are unbelievers! Terror is the wrong way to go and always ends in a dead end. It may sound philosophical, but the initial letter of terror begins with T. And the sign of a dead end looks exactly like a T. And if you take away the T from the terror, there is only "error", which means "wrong" in the international language. In short, terrorism's efforts could also be described as a hopeless, dead-end, wrong way to go. A way on which there is no way out and no progress.

    Question: Which advice would you give the politicians?

    S.E.: Put the crown on the head of Democracy!
    * * *

powered by webEdition CMS