Spirituality

Spirituality from my understanding means having a connection to the spirit of the all in all (All-ah). Spiritual means to encompass the spirit of the all, hence the name spirit-u-al (al denoting God), meaning the spirit of God. To ask someone what’s their spirituality is to ask by what means do they connect with God. To some it’s THROUGH (not in) the BELIEF of religion. For those that KNOW it’s knowledge of self. Spiritual and spirituality are both derived from the word spirit. Spirit is generally defined as an essence, energy, the life force or breath of life. It’s derived from the Latin word spiritus meaning breath. Compare it to other words such as the Sanskrit word Prana and the mandarin word Qi which both mean breath. Prana is a Hindu word which translates to life sustaining force of living beings and vital energy. Qi is a Chinese word which translates to energy flow and is often compared to the words elan vital (vitalism) or energeia. Energeia is a Greek term indicating something at work which is where we derive the word energy from. Thus the word spirit is synonymous to the word energy. Energy is defined as the amount of work that can be performed by a force. This gives new understanding to common phrases such as he blew the “breath” of life into him or the phrase the “spirit” of God is in him. God is positive energy as opposed to negative energy.

Everything is created from energy and made into matter. Matter makes up the substance (sub/under-stance/standing) of everything and the physical component of energy. Energy becomes matter by traveling, rotating at terrific speeds to condense to the state or phases of solid, liquid, gas and plasma. It’s like if you had a yo-yo string tied to your finger. If you were able to twirl it at an incredible speed and keep it constant, it would become solid. When I look at the word energeia, I see the word inner gaia or inner earth (gaia being a name for the earth). I compare the word inner to the words inert and inertia which means doing nothing or little and the resistance of any object to change in its state or motion respectively. Both derive from the word iners which is Latin for idle or lazy. Gaia, a name for the earth, has 4 cardinal points (North, East, West, and South). It’s on the fourth plane of existence where energy becomes matter. From the word Maat is where we get the words mater, matter and mother. It’s through the mother, or the feminine principle, that everything is born into the physical plane. The word energeia is the inner matter, or what’s inside matter, which is the spirit or the essence. They termed it iners, or lazy, due to it moving so fast, it appeared to slow down to non movement or solidify.

If energy is the spirit (Ka), than matter is the soul (Ba) that houses the spirit. The soul is the carriage, the spirit are the horses that drives it/you. The spirit fuels the soul. Alcohol is sometimes called spirit water because some people get a lot of energy after consuming it. Depending on what kind of spirit (energy) you have, a negative spirit/energy or a positive spirit/energy, determines how your soul (what matters to you) manifest. The spirit is the mind, the soul is the heart. Not the physical heart, but what you put your energy/mind into. Although the heart is the pumper of your life force (figuratively and literally which would make your blood an aspect of your spirit), and what is weighed on the scales of Maat. The spirit is often identified with the mind, while the soul is identified with the psyche. The mind being the input to your consciousness, while the psyche being the resulting state of that input. Some people confuse the mind with the physical matter within your head called the brain which is incorrect. The mind is all around you, its waves of pure energy. The brain is the receiver for your physical body to receive the mind. For an example, the mind is the environment, whether it’s people or things. If you come into a particular consciousness, and your environment doesn’t reflect that, you might be judged as out of your mind by the people that know you. Say if you’re following some sort of cultural conscious, but can't defend it intelligently, people might label you as out of your mind. Or you call your self conscious, give yourself a new name, yet you do the same actions that the unconscious do, your family might label you as out of your mind because they can see through the facade. Hence the only true mind is the mind of God. Most people judging by their ways and actions, whether they say they know or believe in God or not, are not manifesting that.

The first law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation, states that energy can not be created (or destroyed). That means that the energy in the beginning of the universe that emanated from the “big bang” that was ONE, is the same energy that exists today, no more, no less. It just exists in different forms of matter. This means that everything is related. It's like cutting a tree down and making it into different pieces of furniture, like chairs, tables, benches, etc. They're all different, but they're all related through the same tree. Yet the seed of the tree grows to be a tree itself. That's the difference between man and the other creations, we are the seed. The spirituality of earlier civilizations, that was plagiarized with little to no knowledge or understanding by the creators of what has now become the modern religions, understood this concept of everything being related. The deities that were ignorantly classified by the ignorant as the worship of multiple gods, wasn't that at all. It was their way of paying respect to the essence, the energy, the spirit and the mind of God in everything by anthropomorphism, which is the act of personifying principles. This understanding entitles one to a sense of responsibility to all things around them. The responsibility to treat all things equal that is, in respect to the nature of that thing and to the nature of oneself. For they knew that the state of their environment (people and things), ultimately effected them and theirs (i.e. their children and their children’s children). They formed rituals and customs designed to give back to what has been given to them. It wasn't just take, take, take, take, as it is selfishly done today.

I previously stated that one could gain spirituality through religion as opposed as to in religion (as it's practiced and presented today) is because religion today is basically the acceptance of the same deity and stories. Spirituality is the culture, the way of life, how you relate to people, your spouse, your neighbor, your neighbor's spouse, that's extracted from these stories. You do find traces of spirituality in the eastern religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism and the esoteric versions of the western religions such as Gnosticism, Sufism, and Kabbalists. Being that these stories are subject to interpretation, different meanings can be gained from different perspectives. Like Goldilocks and the Three Bears or the Three Little Pigs have meanings to them that can be interpreted in different ways. As long as the people within that culture (men and women), have an agreed upon understanding of the meaning of the stories on how to conduct their relationships with themselves, others, and their environment, and honor their God. We subconsciously and consciously equate the foreign religion and god that we have adapted to, to the success of the western world and the western culture which is hardly the case. This is the reason why we gravitate towards this particular religion (along with the threat of damnation) so intensely and even feel that our lack of success (personal or otherwise) is due to us not worshipping their God enough. That's the smoke and mirrors. They'd have you think that the reason for their success is because of their faith in their God when really it's their culture of greed and control of resources. Like they say, at one time we had the land and they had the book, but then they took the land (our women and children/resources) and gave us the book (to subdue us). We always had the word, although not necessarily in the way they presented it to us. It's like a magic trick where they tell you to look at one hand while it's the other hand that's pulling the wool over your eyes. They only allow a few "minorities" into the club. The rest of us are left stranded like crabs in a barrel, fighting each other for position, feeling that we didn't work hard enough (read greedy) to attain elite status. Other cultures succeed on the whole because although they may adhere to the same deity as those in the western culture, through spirituality they recognize their ultimate resource is each other. They may dabble in the devil's un-civilization, but they don't stay within the culture. They get in to get what they need and get out. People come to this country, shack up two or more families in a home, everyone supporting the business, and expand from there. We feel that we've been in this country too long not to have what the white man has. But they control the resources. We're not going to succeed in the devil's un-civilization on a whole playing their game when we know they cheat. We need to change the game. We look at the lives of the people that come here as second class citizens, like we're too good for that. We rather show off. We want other's to succeed as long as we can get ours first, so we can say I got my car, and I got my house. It's true only you can save self, b.u.t. the true self is one with all.

How can one claim to have knowledge of self and not encompass spirituality? Spirituality is the epitome of consciousness. To be conscious is to be aware. To serve God is to serve self. Being that everything is related, to serve self is to serve others. Thus, to serve God is to serve others. Love is the highest elevation of understanding. This says that there must be a lower elevation of understanding. The three degrees of understanding are the mental, the physical, and the spiritual with spiritual being the highest. Yet some don't know this. They may believe this, but they don't know the science that makes this true. Therefore their convictions aren't as strong, nor are their actions reflections of this truth. This means that what you do affects everything around you and everything around you affects you, therefore it would be in your best interest to improve things. If you don't feel it directly, your descendants sure will. To not see yourself as being responsible for the future of your descendants is selfish. You are your descendants just as you are your ancestors. Just as you being here, being able to do what you’re doing, is testament to the survival of your ancestors. There are some that didn't make it. Some that couldn't take it and just gave up. If that was the case with your ancestors, you wouldn't be reading this now. So why waste it. Everything is now, the future is now, the present is now, and the past is now. If you can't feel the pain of your brother and sisters struggle as your own, then you can’t claim spirituality. Whether he's strung out on drugs or she's being promiscuous, they're both lacking something in their lives. Or your brothers at the bar because his woman did him dirty, or your sister is settling for whatever because there aren't enough good men to go around and she's lonely, that's a problem that should be handled by the community, not just the individual. Men don't know how to treat their women, women don't know how to treat their men, brothers don't know how to treat their brother, sisters don't know how to treat their sister, parents don't know how to raise their children, children don't know how to respect their parents, and the community doesn't know how to respect their environment, polluting the earth, wasting and abusing resources. Most important of all, we don't know how to respect ourselves, putting anything in and on our bodies and excuse it as just living our lives. Don’t you know that your health affects your family? We let our minds absorb anything and we call it entertainment.

There are six degrees of separation and three degrees of influence. Six degrees of separation says that everyone is separated by everyone else by no more than six people. Three degrees of influence states that the influence you have on a person, has influence on an acquaintance of that person, as well as the acquaintance of the acquaintance of that person. So if you have some type of influence on three people, you may have influence on up to nine people. Science says that you can't observe something without influencing it. And everyone in your life is observed by you for nothing exists in your universe until you observe it in some shape or form, which is most likely more than three people. That means if you give a friendly gesture to someone, or help someone that really needs it, you've influenced more people than you've realized. By the same token, if you've given a nasty attitude to someone, especially for no reason at all, you've just affected more than you know. That's what's happening with our communities. People say they're for each other at some cultural event, calling each other brother and sister only to turn around and act nasty on the day to day. With this cut throat atmosphere, people feel that the next person is just looking for a way to take advantage of them. They feel like if they let down their guard, show kindness which some may interpret as a weakness, they'll try to use them. So we walk around with a chip on our shoulder. It's no need to walk around with a chip, just know where you draw your line and don't cross it or let anybody else cross it. If they do, treat them accordingly and with respect. How we treat people is of upmost importance, the elderly, your partner, your brother and sisters, your neighbor. It's just as important as to how you are treated as well, b.u.t. it starts with you, the conscious individual. The other person may not be as conscious as you are. They may have their uncivilized ways. You just treat them as those that know not. The way you teach is by being an example, regardless of whom or what if you are who you claim you are. Waiting for the next person to do it may never get done. This goes for anyone with a conscious mind. If those who claim they are conscious truly represent spirituality, and come together with other conscious spiritual people, I don't see how it wouldn't be a change in our situation. Are you your brother and sisters keeper?

Peace

Natural Diet of the Original Family

When man (and woman) first came to this planet (the elements for life was not on this planet when it was formed and came from elsewhere), all that was needed was provided. To doubt that would be to doubt the infalliablity of the creator. Whether you acknowledge a creator or not (i.e. atheist), you have to recognize this divine order of things. Nothing occurs by accident, especially of this level of intelligence and complexity. This is when we were closes to our original state of mind. Meaning free from a mentality of the self destructive behavior we have now. All the ignorant things we do are learned. Life is a state of constant elevation. Being that we had all we needed, my position; which is a logical one, is that a vegan/vegetarian diet was/is the natural diet for the original family. We didn’t always eat meat, and for good reason. We were not savage in the pursuit of happiness. Not in the early beginnings. Think about it. Ask and answer this question yourself. Does it make any sense of man looking at an animal and saying to his self I want to kill that thing and eat it? Or for that matter, eating a bird's embryo (eggs), taking the nectar from bees (honey), or drinking what was meant for a calf (milk). That right there should signal that this may not be natural to us. We take for granted what it takes to get meat from an animal to our plates. If we had to kill our own food, many of us would opt to go veggie by choice. It’s this ignorance or unawareness of this that allows us not to think about the insanity of eating flesh, which is just what meat is, flesh, just as you and me. Our anatomy tells a different story far from eating flesh (meat). We do not have the digestive system to properly digest meat. I stopped eating beef and pork when I was 13 when I had watched an episode on PBS saying that when we die we will have a lb of meat still in our system. Nor do we have the canines that meat eating carnivores have to rip flesh from the bones of an animal. You are what you eat. And for those that are still eating pork, pigs are about the nastiest creatures on the face of the earth. They'd eat their own feces if they had to. If we want to eat meat we have to tenderize it and cook it to kill the deadly bacteria. We can’t eat it raw like a real meat eater (carnivore) could. But we can pick an apple from a tree and eat that.

Then how and why did we start eating meat? I wasn’t physically there but I have a few theories. In any case it was a decision that was made to eat meat. One of my theories is that we had traveled away from the garden, which was rich in vegetation, to areas of the planet that was susceptible to cold weather and scarce in vegetation. In those circumstances we would have had to eat meat as a means for our survival. This doesn’t mean that it was natural to our diet, but natural for survival. If I was stranded today without food with another person, don’t you think the first to go would be eaten by the other to survive? But does that mean I would or should keep up this practice once I acquired other foods to eat. Then possibly, those that became accustomed to eating meat came to mix in with those that didn’t and they adopted their habits for one reason or another. My other theory is that in some early cultures, they believed that by eating certain animals you could gain the “powers” of that animal or the animal it was a prey to. We just inherited the practice.

Why do we continue to eat meat? Because life is short and it taste good, it’s culturally accepted, I was raised this way, my parents or grandparents ate it and they lived along time, it won’t immediately kill me, it’s never been explained this way, don’t have the will power or the discipline not to eat it, don’t know any other way, been told that it’s essential to our diets, just don’t care (about your health)? What do you call a person that continues to do something they know is not good for them? What do you call them, ignorant, foolish? Then what does that make you if you continue to do what you know is not good for you? I loved the taste of meat, my whoppers, and chicken steaks. I began to be conscious of my health when I thought about where I would like to be in my elder years. I personally would like to be healthy and mobile, possibly still jogging, or at least brisk walking. There was a study done on the diet of centenarians (people over 100yrs old). It was discovered that their diet consisted of little to no meat at all. Some studies also show that a vegetarian diet reduces the risk of cancer. I often get hit with the statement that being a vegetarian doesn’t guarantee me a healthy long life and that I could die tomorrow. This is true, but getting an education doesn’t guarantee a job either but we still do it. That’s because it’s more likely that you’ll get a job with an education than without one. There in lies why I’m a vegetarian. It’s more likely that I’ll be healthier than not. If I acquire an illness, I’d feel better KNOWING that I did what I could do for my health than just relying strictly on chance. Then I’d be stuck knowing that I could have done something when I didn’t. I should have shown discipline and responsibility for my health but I didn’t. I wanted to eat what I wanted to eat not even thinking about my future and the consequences to my health. Even if my parents or grandparents lived a long time eating meat, that doesn’t mean that that genetic trait passed on down to me. Why rely on that? And it would be pointless to point out that just because it's culturally accepted doesn't make it the best or intelligent thing to do. We just adopted the ignorance of a previous generation. We should be smarter and improved on that. But we're a bunch of copycats that don't want to go against the grain and make an intelligent decision. A healthy lifestyle is looked upon as weird as opposed to an unhealthy one. Isn't that backwards? And if you’re concerned about proteins, there are other ways to acquire it. Trust me I didn’t give up meat to eat just any vegetarian foods. I had to find foods that I liked. It won’t replace the taste of meat. But you have to think about all the things they inject into your meats to make it so addictive. How is it that we can get full off of healthy foods and not crave it but we fiend for a steak? Sounds like a junkie hooked on drugs. After awhile of not eating meats, you loose that addiction. You don’t think you can but you will. I can remember the feeling I got from meat, but not the taste itself. Nor do I miss it, even though it smells good at a barbecue at which I usually bring my veggie burgers.

To the so called conscious community, vegan/vegetarianism should be highly promoted. It is the diet of the Gods. Especially to my brothers and sisters in the Nation of Gods and Earths, which I feel, is the best nation in the universe and consist of the most intelligent individuals on the planet. I mean, eating meat is a bi-product of a grafted mind. How can we justly consider ourselves original people yet our minds are still operating other than? Asiatic is MIND and body. The foods we ate played a significant part in the making of the devil. We have to be an example for our children. The reason why it's so difficult for us is because we have been raised on these foods. But if we raise our children without these foods, they won't go through the same battles we go through. To continue to make excuse because of the lack of self discipline or self control doesn't make it acceptable. I could be wrong, but to me that doesn’t sound Godly at all. They say there’s a 5% of the 5%. I guess this is one of many things that draw the line between whose real and who’s really real. Even to those who've been in the nation for years and years and can recite the lessons forwards and backwards. As original people, as Gods, we have to be responsible and in control of our own health instead of letting it fall to circumstances. For starters, other things I would suggest to refrain from is white sugars, white flours, white bread, white rice, sodas and drinks; artificial sweetners such as high fructose corn syrup, aspartame, msg, dairy products. Do eat a lot of fruits and vegetables, salads, blue berries, bananas, broccoli, kale, quinoa, amanranth, almonds, burdock, sea moss, 8 glasses of water daily, and plenty of exercise, sunlight, and rest. Also do the knowledge on foods suggested by Dr Sebi, alkaline (electric) foods and water, calorie restriction, and genetically engineered and modified foods. Peace

Naturally Beautiful

I dedicate this to my physical daughters Sierra and Khaliah. My daughter in love and spirit, Celeste. May you grow to be natural beautiful women. To all the women who keep their hair natural, locks, braids, cornrows, afro, twists or shortcuts, may you keep inspiring our younger generation of women. Thank you. To all the women with chemicals in their hair, may you have the strength and the courage to go natural. Peace

I have a question for the women. What are your views on skin whitening? For those not familiar, skin whiteners are cosmetic products used to whiten or lighten the skin. It's more commonly used by women of color in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. They're used usually because the user attributes their social and/or economic limitations to their skin color. The best example I could give of this is the entertainer Michael Jackson's alleged use of such products. Michael has turned from the brown skin brother born in 1958 to the next to white looking freak that we see today. I feel that anyone should live their life the way they choose as long as they hold their individual personal social and economic responsibility to the community they live in, especially to the children. But for the women that oppose skin whitening, what are some of your reasons? Is it your opposition to the use of harmful chemicals? Or is it that you feel that taking away from your black features could signal a sign of self hatred? Or could it be that you feel that it's crazy, and phony to go through extreme unnatural means to be other than how god made you? For whatever the reason, let's be clear so we can make a point. For I have another question for the women of color that oppose skin whitening. Tell me, how can you oppose skin whitening on these reasons, yet you perm, relax, color, weave, extend, or use harmful devices such as a hot comb to straighten your hair? Isn't that being hypocritical, that is if being a hypocrite matters to you? It should matter if we critize people for the ignorant things they do, yet we turn around and do ignorant things ourselves. It should matter if we as adults are supposed to be examples to our children, but we tell them to do the right thing yet we have excuses(not reasons) why we don't do the right thing ourselves. I know some women are quick to cite convenience as a factor. But what's a tad more dedication to represent who you are compared to the dedication that was displayed by women such as Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks? There's a difference between styling your hair, such as cutting, braiding, locking, combing, etc., and altering your hair through unnatural means or the use of unnatural chemicals. Don't blame the children for the way that they are. Blame the adults because they get that ignorance from us. There's a difference between teaching and preaching. To teach you have to show someone by examples. If we're not giving examples, by being an example, all we're doing is preaching/speaching to them. Which goes in one ear and out the other. It's like telling a child not to be a follower or succumb to peer pressure yet you smoke cigarettes. Isn't that how you started smoking, by being a follower and succumbing to peer pressure? Or knowing that smoking is detrimental to our health but we stress to them to use their intelligence, or to be better than us. But we're not using our intelligence, or being better than we could be. That's preaching, not teaching. Real recognize real. And we fail to realize how real and intelligent our children truly are. They see through that fake b.s. we be shoveling. They're only limited by the mental barriers of the adults. How can we tell them to love who they are as black children and all their attributes yet we're scared to be that ourselves. That's phony.

The most contributing(but not only) factor to why women don't keep their hair natural is not because of the mentality of the women themselves, but of the mental disease that we as men are suffering from. It's only natural to do things to attract the opposite sex. And it seems to be that men(black men especially) are more attracted to women that alter their hair. If men weren't attracted to these styles, from hair to clothing, women may be more reluctant to sport them. But these men unknowingly have a mental disease. It can go undetected when the majority of men, say 8 out of 10, has this infliction. The 2 out of 10 will be looked upon as having some sort of problem for not conforming to the majority. I see it like this, if your in a group of parents, and they all decided to commit suicide and you oppose, yeah you may be look at as crazy. In the eyes of the group that is if they're holding to some sort of belief(not knowledge). But does that qualify you as truly crazy, if it's natural to want to live to raise your children. How do we qualify these men as having a mental disease? Well the term mental in this context refers to the mind. And Webster's dictionary defines disease as any state of a living body in which the natural functions are disturbed. We can conclude that a mental disease is when your mind isn't functioning naturally. For a black man, whose own hair by nature is kinky, to prefer or to be more attracted to a woman who alters the state of her own naturally kinky hair, is a sign of a mental disease. Because it's unnatural. A man with his mind functioning within it's natural element, should be more attracted to a woman who represents her self in looks, ways, and actions as a naturally natural woman. To not be would be like a black man who was raised surrounded by black women but is more attracted to a white woman. Or a dog that prefers to try to mate with a cat rather than another dog. That's crazy. Like I said, it's only natural for a woman to do what she thinks attracts the opposite sex, whether the intentions or the ignorance is conscious or unconscious. There are some women who are exceptions to the rule. And hold principle's of doing the right thing, the conscious thing, regardless to whom or what, sometimes more willingly then the so-called men. But if men changed their mentality and what attracts them on the majority, women would be more inclined to follow suit. Then maybe the rift between black men and black women would change, and so would our communities and families. The mental stability of both parents plays a major factor on the mental health of the children. The black man's love for women with straighter hair, and lighter skin for that matter, developed due to the white man's acceptance of these women as opposed to women of darker complexion and frizzy hair in their society and in their media; television, movies, and magazines. The black man himself also began to favor these women and the women in the communities seeing that this is what gets our attention began to conform to these ideologies.

The importance of this is the message that we are sending our children, especially our young women. And that message is that the hair that god gave you as a black women isn't fit to wear. Think about it for second, don't be quick to down play it. If what I just stated isn't true, and if this isn't so, then wear your hair natural then. If you can find every excuse not to, then the statement holds true. Tell me how can we teach our children to be better than we are if we won't take the responsibility? The majority of white women don't say I want kinky hair like a black woman. So why do you want hair that look like hers? Just the acceptance of wanting to look other than who you are aside from the occasional dress-up is a sign of a mental disease. When a horse says I want to look like a cow, that's a mental illness. Sometimes when sitting in back of a woman with a perm, you got a fifty fifty chance that it may or may not be a black woman. But sitting behind a black woman with locks, afro, or a close cut, there's no mistaking that's a sista. You have white women locking their hair, facing scrutiny from their relatives, trying to look more like the original woman. Yet we have black women altering their hair, looking more unlike the original woman, yet it's accepted and no one says a word. Do you realize how backwards and widespread the ignorance must be? That's as crazy as condemning a polygynus relationship, but screaming discrimination if you condemn a homosexual one. It truly is all in the mind. The battle between what you know is right, and your insecurities. I'll prove it. If you had never had a perm, and the women you were raised by and the women within the society didn't have perms, do you think that you would have one or be so opposed to keeping your hair natural? The answer is no. You would possibly look at a sista that had thoughts about getting a perm like you would look at a sista that said she's thinking about whitening her skin. It would be just as taboo and you'd probably criticize her. And rightfully so she probably wouldn't get one. And it would be clear that getting a perm is a subconscious form of black self hatred. Which it is, it's just not clear.

We, black men and women alike, are so far spiritually removed from God, so far spiritually removed from ourselves, our true selves, that we have lost our sense of what true beauty is. We confuse attractiveness with beauty because we don't know what beauty is. If we knew what beauty was, we would put our efforts in attaining it. Not to get too scientific, but beauty brings about peace, love, and happiness on principles such as symmetry, truth, health, balance and harmony. Two attractive people may not have a beautiful relationship because they aren't beautiful themselves so they fail to see the beauty in each other and all things. Beautiful people build beautiful relationships, families and children. Attractiveness is fleeting, it's more of an attention getter than a bond which is what beauty does. Beauty requires an innate intelligence, the intelligence to form connections. It brings people together. It's like a mother nurturing a child, or a brother helping another brother. It has a physical aspect, but it's more of a spiritual nature, it resonates on the inside. While attractiveness has a spiritual aspect, yet it's more of a physical nature. Our young women are so set on being attractive like their favorite star, they don't know what it means to be beautiful. Or realize who or what(negative energy) they're attracting. They're attracting the same knuckle heads who look at those stars as sex objects. And then expect that they treat them with respect. That's not logical. That doesn't make sense. The foundation of ignorance was already set. Starting with how you presented yourself. A beautiful woman, mentally physically, and spiritually, attracts beautiful people, including those of the opposite sex. Those who see the beauty in you are more inclined to be right with you. But first you must see the beauty within yourself, your true true self. This is not to say that you won't attract knuckle heads, but you get a better choice of pickings and you can spot the knuckle heads a mile away. Just be wise in your choices. Who is it to judge beauty? They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Meaning that it is the viewer who determines what is beauty or not. This is misleading and not entirely accurate. For the eye only captures the image. It's the mind that does the processing. Therefore, a more accurate statement would be that beauty is in the mind of the beholder. Well all things were made from the mind of God. Archeology has proven that the first man and woman on the planet were black. And these black people had kinky hair. God doesn't make mistakes so this is what he deemed beautiful to him. Isn't that right? So for you to want to change your hair, your either saying God made a mistake, or your not in tune with God. Which one is it? Is God wrong or is your mind wrong? I repeat the question, is God wrong or is your mind wrong? You wont find this information at your religious centers. Your religious leader wont speak on this, maybe for fear of losing money; I mean people. You may find it in your holy books, but most likely it will be in code. A mind in tune with God is a healthy mind, a natural mind. Black woman, your natural hair is what God deemed beautiful. If your not in tune with God then your mind must be sick. Why would you make yourself lesser of what God deemed beautiful? Because of pressures from society, your girlfriends and family members? Can you now see that they must be sick too. They say that the devil rules this world. And that's what your conforming to, the devil's ideology. Now that you know, will you continue to live under the devil's ideology, or will you make the change? Are you strong enough, or are you content on being weak? If so don't say a word on the weak ignorant things that others do.

This is the reason why I only date women with natural hair. Because appearance is the first impression, and I build to be with a sista who is in tune with God and has a healthy mind. Not just for my personal benefit, but for the benefit of the future of our relationship, children, and family. Healthy minds build healthy relationships. Our duty is not just to teach, but to teach the best way we can. If we weren't responsible for the raising of our children, and they grew up in pods, it might not matter as much to me. This is not to say that all women who keep their hair natural have a healthy natural mind state and are in tune with God. It's just the place where I look first and just the beginning of the values I keep. On halloween night, a person may just be wearing a police officer's uniform, but that's who I'm going to first if I need a police officer. Then I'll find out if they're real or not. It used to be a time when only truly conscious women would lock their hair. Now you have women who do it only because they like the style. Not because they're seeking spiritual growth. They still put all types of harmful chemicals in their system. Still keep a negative attitude. Have no parental skills. Live a promiscuous lifestyle. And most importantly don't know how to conduct themselves naturally in a natural man and woman relationship. These women give the concept of natural hair a bad name. Nor am I saying that you couldn't find a good woman who alters her hair. A woman who conducts herself in a respectful manner. Knows how to operate in a naturally natural relationship. Exercises and is conscious of her health. And does have a relationship with God. But without the knowledge and understanding of her true beauty as deemed by God, it keeps her out of sync with the true God. That's the key ingredient that would elevate her from good to great. Without it it's like eating mama's potato salad without the key ingredient. It's still good and edible, it's just not great. Speaking of mama, before she (and my sister) got rid of their perms, she used to chastise me for only dating women with natural hair. She would say that it's just a hairstyle, they're no different from any other woman. I used to tell her (and any women I saw no matter the age or attractiveness) that when I see a black woman with her hair natural, I see the reflection of the truth and beauty of God. She probably didn't feel me then. But last year when she had her locks, we were at a tutorial on locks at the annual locks conference. The speaker, she asked the room of about 30 women and 2 men, if they noticed the positive treatment and the difference of the men that approached them when they got their locks. Out the corner of my eye I noticed my mother nodding in agreement. If she didn't understand me then, I felt that she understood me now.
PEACE

El Natur(e)-al (The Nature of God)

My mom and dad split up when I was about eight. My sister and I stayed with her. We celebrated pagan(christian) holidays and occasionally went to church, but I wouldn't say we were christian. For one, I have a problem identifying anyone as christian when they still eat pork which is clearly prohibited by the bible(Leviticus 11:7-8,Deuteronomy 14:8). My father is a muslim. My first name is an old french old german name given to me by my mother, and my middle name is as arabic name obviously suggested by my father. I didn't have a firm belief in any religion or God, but then again neither do some of the people who claim a particular religion. Otherwise they wouldn't do some of the things their religion says not to do. I became conscious of God and HIS relation to self thru hip-hop music. One song and artist that stands out in particular was BDP's "Why is that?". If I was raised in a particular religion, I may have succumbed to the social pressures of that group and geared more towards one religion than the others. Though as an adult, I am intelligent enough not to just go with the crowd(peer pressure), only what's presented to me, or anything that logically doesn't make sense. If there is only one God, which one is the right one? This group says their religion is the only way to God, that group says their religion is the only way to God. Yet they have different beliefs. If I would have followed my mother and my aunts, I might would have choosen christianity. If I would have followed my father and my friends, I might have been a sunni muslim. You may have suggested to follow whatever is right for me. But I would have to assume that either your not into religion or your not steadfast in the belief of your religion. Because one who is steadfast in their religion would gear you more towards their religion. Saying something like that would belittle their own beliefs. Their job is to save all that they can. That's the extremist(that also causes wars) that put religion(not necessarily God) first and people second. Besides, at the time, the whatever is right for me approach sounded like a lazy and illogical approach to knowing the God of us all whose responsible for my salvation, not to mention selfish. How could the God of all be what I personally felt was right? That would mean that whatever somebody else felt was right, was right, even if it meant discriminating or killing people. The God I searched for had to be universal and noncontradictory, plainly put, the truth. I began my search outwardly and inwardly. Outwardly I read any material I could from any and all of the particular trains of thoughts, as opposed to just the three main ones (judaism, christianity, islam). Inwardly I questioned what makes logical sense, how could it make logical sense(assuming it was a metaphor), and my own logical illogical influences or restrictions. Plus I had to factor in that the so called holy books, which are said to have been written long ago, are by people who SAID that this was the word of God(for whatever reason). Which could have been changed from their original context. The most logical way to learn about something or someone that happened before our time is to investigate the things produced, what others wrote about them, and the influences of the period they were in. The one thing that has been since the beginning of time, written about by people through myths and science, and was actually produced by God, is nature.

Nature by principle is anything not created through the hands of man. Nature is somethings intent of being. Although principles interact with each other, and sometimes trump one another, they never change per se. For example, you take apple juice, and mix it with cranberry juice, you have apple cranberry juice. You can call it cranapple, or appleberry, if you want to. But it's still apple juice and cranberry juice. Now if you scientifically genetically took properties from the cranberry and from the apple, and made it into a juice, than you would have the true cranapple or appleberry juice. Or if you took a genetically modified apple and a genetically modified cranberry(for ex. seedless fruits, by principle everything LIVING must produce a seed in order to reproduce) and mix them together, you may call it apple cranberry juice but it's not. It didn't come from true living apples or cranberries, it's a frankenstein food(franken foods). It's not from nature, or of God. Nature is derived from the kemetian word neter. Loosely translated it means the divine, or divinity(of God). From nature we get the word natural. Webster defines natural as consistent with nature; not artificial. The suffix al, or el, or la, is used to denote God. Hence natur-al can be loosely translated as nature God, nature of God, divine God, or divinity of God. Therefore if natural is the nature of God, and God is right, isn't the right way of living, a Godly way of living, to live a natural lifestyle?

Anything other than right and God, is not of God, and has to be of the Devil and wrong. There is no "sort of" of God. You're either of God or your not. Living a natural lifestyle may not afford you the life you WANT to live, but it provides you with the life that you need to live, to be in accordance with God's divine order for everything to come out right. Right being what's best for self, each other, our children, and our children's children. Not necessarily that car, house, job or business, money, partner, baby, physique, food, clothes, lifestyle, material things, etc., that you always WANTED. But the car, house, job or business, money, partner, baby, physique, food, clothes, lifestyle, material things, etc., that you always NEEDED. Do you think God is going to come down to your way of thinking? Or should you refine your thoughts and ask yourself why, how, and should I think the way that I do and rise up to God's way of thinking? Although unlikely, the way I am, respectful, conscious of the way we eat, our health, our mental, our understanding, our children, I could have found no one to have a committed relationship with. And I would have been alright with it because I know(not believe) if more people held these qualities, the future for our children will be a better place. Not if I adapted to their qualities that's other than these, other than God, other than right. You're either part of the solution or part of the problem, either or, and neutrality is part of the problem.

We underestimate how a natural lifestyle can be a factor in the change of our condition. We hear about the stop the violence movements, black men united programs, but rarely if ever do we factor in a way we think and live as a culture type agenda. I think this is because most people say they want change but don't want to put their own mentalities up for examination. Because they think that their way has to be the right way and everyone elses is wrong and crazy. I say if this is so, then their way should be able to logically defend against scrutiny. Tell me how if nature is of God and God is right and exact, that a natural lifestyle could be anything other than right? Tell me! Lets not associate a natural lifestyle with the concept of "doing you", meaning doing whatever it is you want to do that you feeelll is right. This happens when you associate "doing you" with freedom and being free. And furthermore, it's not natural to not be yourself, enslaved by another, physically or mentally. Hence freedom and being free would be a component of being natural. This would be true if our concept of free was right and exact. We take freedom to mean to be able to do whatever you please, which it's not. It's the ability to be who you truly are, as an intelligent being. Should you be permitted the freedom to go to a job high when it's against company policies and puts others at risk and keep your job because you have your self and your family to take care of? That's not being free, because that's not intelligent. Your intelligent by nature. You were made to be blind, deaf, and dumb. God is free to be intelligent. He doesn't chose to be stupid.

Naturality is about finding acceptance and beauty(truth) in the life provided to you naturally by nature. Nature, when left alone to it's own devices, will ultimately intelligently work out it's own problems. This is based on the principles of adaption. The problem is, for our unnatural(creations of the lower man) dilemmas, we try to rectify them with unnatural solutions, which naturally causes more unnatural dilemmas. It's like the principle of covering up a lie with another lie which just causes more lies. The principle of the unnatural is that it's an unknown; an X-factor. Unknowns or X-factors are ANYTHING that we don't know the lasting effects to self and others with a 99.99% accurracy. Everything in nature, which are of God, can be known. We know about the importance of fruits, vegetables, water, minerals, plants and grains. How many times has something come out on the market citing to be safe, then 10-20yrs down the line it's a health risk? The most you can know of an unknown, is that it's an unknown, and best not to deal with. Unless you make the unknown known, the only time we deal with an unknown is when we don't know better. And that's not intelligent; therefore it's ungodly and unnatural. For nature or being natural is about understanding God's divine intelligence and natural order.

Nature is based on principles and principles never change, therefore you establish consistency. When consistency is established, your able to plan your life accordingly intelligently. The reason God is great is because of consistency. God is great and greatness is measured by consistency therefore God is consistent(word is bond). I show and prove greatness being measured by consistency by using an example of two NBA basketball players. Who would we consider great, the player who holds the single game scoring record off 100+ but had a 10yr career average of 8.5, or the player who's high game was 45 points but has a 10yr career average of 25 points a game? The player with the career average of 25 points a game because he was more consistent in his output. Dealing with this unnatural, ungodly, devilish(ignorance) way of living there is no way to be assured of your life because there is no way to establish any consistency or patterns because we throw in too many X-factors in our lives. Instead of being focused, conscious and responsible, for what we do know, which is family, man woman and child. Whether they be our own or someone else's. If you don't think consistency is important, try dancing in rhythm to a song that has no consistent pattern, or keeps skipping. You may can dance to your own tune, but not in rhythm with your partner. And being in accord with your partner is the most important part of a family. It's wrong for one parent to teach their child this(the truth) while the other teaches the child that(a lie). With a natural man and a natural woman thinking in their natural mind state(intelligently), together a natural relationship such as the one in the post U-N-I Verse(or polygyny) can be achieved. Because you know what's naturally expected of you and they know that you know what's naturally expected of them. This, along with a natural diet(vegetarian), natural self representation(ie.natural hair), and natural thinking(decisions, social interactions, etc.), among other things(ie. law and government), we can build a righteous nation.
Peace

P.S.A.

"We now interupt your regularly scheduled program for this brief public service announcement"

Now there are specific builds that I planned to post on this blog. Although sometimes I have an itching to just post some random thoughts. Really I could post something everyday, maybe multiple times a day. I examine the science of everything in life so just by observation there are things that spark my mental. Yet I wasn't going to post them here. I contemplated starting another blog, but really there are other things I need to do. But yesterday(Fri.,Mar.6,2009) there was some things that pissed me off that I need to just get off my chest. This will be, may be, the only time I go on such a rant on this blog.

Now this isn't something I don't see often. I actually see it on the regular. I'm just deciding to speak on it now. I was on the subway(underground train), and there was this young dude, maybe between the ages of 15-18, eating something in a styrofoam container. He was with two of his dudes. After he finished his food, he closed the container, put it on the floor, and pushed it with his foot away from him as to say since it's not close to me, it's no longer my responsibility. This was mid day, on a train about 3/4th full, and they were sitting mid-car. I thought to myself, WTF! These kids are off the hook. So I'm at the other end of the car, just stairing at him, contemplating should I walk down and pull his coat. He see's me looking at him. Now I'm not a big dude, but when I give you that look, it's so sharp it can pierce steel. I know he's probably saying to hisself, why is this dude grilling me? But he dared not to say anything, so he kept turning away. Now I have no problem doing my duty as a civilized person as I have had to other times. I once screamed on a bus load of people because they allowed an elderly lady to walk all the way to the back of the bus when there was younger folks up in the front. I almost got jumped asking these brothas to put out their blunt on the train because it was bothering the women and the babies. I'm a strong advocate of non littering. You will not see me doing it intentionally. Now I started to go over to this young man and tell him to pick up his trash, and don't disrespect himself as well as the other people. But you have to prepare yourself for anything. Proper education always correct errors. I thought to myself, what if this brother has a gun on him. I have no problem returning to the essence for what's right if I was assured that my brothers were going to responsible for my family. But I don't, and that pissed me off. It's that situation that prevents good brothers from doing their duty. It's like, if you want to step up and say something, whose to say you won't get killed in the process? And how can you be assured that your own babies will be taken care of? I shouldn't have to be the only man to step to these brothers. It should be where I know that when I step up, some of the other men on the train have my back, or vice versa. I wasn't around the nation in the flag wearing days, but I wouldn't be opposed to it if it would help me identify someone that had my back in such circumstances. Or if a person not in the nation realizes the pin and knew what we're about and offered their support in this situation. But what's really bad, is that we as brothas and sistas in this nation, don't support each other to the fullest. I know this sistah in this nation who's going thru some tough times. I shouldn't be the only one responsible for her and her seeds well being. Her God is incarcerated doing big numbers. I've only known her for about 4yrs, yet she's been in the nation for at least a decade I suppose. What happened to the Gods who built with her God? It's not necessarily about putting some money in her hand. How about collectively contributing to a bill, or bringing some food by? Whatever. If even without her God she's repping this nation fully, we have to support our sistas. As well as our brothas in rough times. Especially if they're truly attempting to get back on their feet and they have a family to support. I'm just saying.

One last thing while I'm ranting. Truly I can go on for a few more pages. There's this free newspaper called Rolling Out. On this weeks paper, Nia Long the actress in on the front page. In her article she makes this statement. "If I'm at my girlfriend's house and it's a mess, we're going to clean it up together...I think that's a part of sisterhood that's so important and it's something we need to get back to." I think that sisterhood is really important, as well as brotherhood. If a sister ain't on point, a group of two or more need to help her get right if she accepts the offer. I say it needs to be two or more, because just one may seem confrontational to said woman. That's all. I'll be back in about a week with a post.
Peace

3/4ths

Who says you can't tell a book by its cover? If the cover of a book says Dictionary, Encyclopedia, or Thesarus, can't you tell what the book is about? The statement may hold true if we were dealing in fiction, where the title may be intentionally misleading to attract curious customers. But for those who know exactly what they want they know exactly what to look for. This principle also applies to the clothes we wear. Whether we want it to or not, the clothes that you wear makes some type of statement whether you like it or not, that's just the way it is. There's nothing unnatural about it. In tribal times the clothing you wore would identify to another person if you were from the same tribe or not, if you were friend or foe. Usually people of the same culture would wear similiar styles of clothing. Maybe you've never acknowledged it but you and I adhere to the same ideology. Do you wear your casual clothes to a job interview? No, why not? Because the clothes you wear have a purpose, sometimes other than just for comfort. The statement that the clothes that you wore to the interview is to say that you are professional enough to work for this company. Although it takes more than just what you wear to truly be considered, unless you have a history of making companies money, you would not go to a interview wearing anything you want. Unless your collecting unemployment and you don't want them to actually consider you.

As a woman, what does your clothing say about you, your casual dress? What do you want your clothes to say about you? What should your clothing say about you? You can decide this if you so choose, but if you don't, or feel that you shouldn't have to choose because "they're just clothes", then it will be choosen for you. Having that debate on why should your clothes matter is just as sensiless as discussing why you can't wear your pajamas at work. It's just the way it is and not a battle worth fighting. The culture of a society is usually the influential factor of dress. The word culture is a simplified way of identifying the ways and actions of a people. In philly you might call a sandwich a hoagie, in new york you might call it a sub. Calling it a hoagie is a philadelphian culture. By principle, culture can be divided into two basic categories, intelligent and unintelligent. An intelligent culture would be ways and actions that promote prosperity. Womens clothing in american culture and cultures influenced by american culture are designed to be appealing in a sexual fashion. The very nature of clothing has an appeal to the opposite sex. It's its appeal to the opposite sex that makes the clothes that much appealing to the sex that's wearing it, more so in womens clothing than in mens. Depending on a womens intent, what she wants to say with her clothing, decides whether this is a positive or a negative. If your intent is for guys to look at your butt and chest, to see you as a sex object first and foremost, and to approach you not with the intent to take you seriously but to get in your pants, then congratulations, you've succeeded. If you ask most women what their goals are, they'll usually say they want to get a degree, get a good job, maybe start a business, own some property. Rarely do they ever say by itself or along with the forementioned goals that they want to find a good man and start a family. This is while they are currently dating and having sex...with a man. This is very unlogical. To get that good education, good job, good opportunities, you put your self in the best possible position to achieve it. Shouldn't it be the same way with attracting a suitable partner. Men are very visual, that's why strip clubs and adult films cater to men more so than women. If your wearing clothes that accentuates your breast and rear, then don't wonder why your mans a dog when you waved your meat in front of his face. That's the foundation that you set. A man will be on his best behavior till he gets the taste of the goodies. He may not even realize that he's acting different. He may put up with whatever you dish him, at the same time hiding his bad habits. This is not to say that changing the way you dress will guarantee you the right partner, but if your fishing for trout, use the right bait. If you want to put your self in a position to meet a better quality of men, wear clothes that says something more than just sex. It's common sense. Or don't complain about the guys you do meet.

In the Nation of Gods and Earths, the Earths(black women) adhere to the 3/4th principle. 3/4th is a term that relates the black women as Earth to the planet earth that we live on. Being that the planet earth surface is covered by 3/4th of water, so should the black women be covered or hidden with 3/4th of clothing. Tooken on face value some might view it as a practice that's oppressive to women. But an Earth knows that knowledge is the foundation and it's best to set a good strong foundation for things to come out right. She knows there is nothing more vital to her and her black family than a righteous black man. She also understands that a righteous black man is attracted to a refined black woman. She know that her way of dressing deters unwanted lewd and sexual attraction and comments and puts her in a better position for a healthy relationship. Most men that would approach her would look at her first as a spiritual woman of God and show her the proper respect. This is not to say that the occassional slacker wont step up to plate every know and then, but if her screening process is right then she can cut that short. The type of men that she would expect knows the value of having a strong black woman by his side. He should be financially, physically, and mentally ready to start a relationship. The type of women who adorns the 3/4th has knowledge of her self, her black men, and the divine order of things. She knows how to choose a brother capable of leading a family and would be receptive to his leadership. A 3/4th woman should also knowledge her own body and a healthy way of living for herself and her family. To say this way of thinking is oppressive to women is sort of like saying telling people to say no to drugs is oppressive. I mean, do what you want to do. It's no guarantee that you will face the negative effects, but the track records say otherwise. Get inolved with crack or heroin, most likely the effects will be damaging. Keep dressing the way your dressing and keep attracting whatever guys you are attracting.

Traditionally 3/4th constitutes a skirt to the ankles, a loose fitting top, and a headwrap. This isn't only practiced within the Nation of Gods and Earths. You see this with the muslim women, hebrew women, rastafarian women, some christian women and other indigenious women around the globe. Although sometimes thought of as a religious custom, it's more of a cultural one. Without the womens understanding of it, and being forced to comply, I see how it can be viewed as oppressive. 3/4th says that you're a woman of God and you reserve the best part for your man, mentally, physically, and spiritually. Personally I don't feel a Earth should be restricted to wearing a long skirt as long as the clothes that she wears aren't hugging the curves and doesn't attract negative attention. Although I have to say that womens jeans, pants, and shorter skirts are grafted(unoriginal) versions of the original intent. Pants/jeans were made for men and only became more feminine by becoming more sexy. Nor does jeans, pants, and short skirts have that same flare or regal that the 3/4th does. We have no "restrictive rules" within the NGE but I do feel that an Earth should want to wear a head wrap. To make wearing a head wrap mandatory would be implimenting a restrictive rule which breeds a bunch of followers with no understanding. To know the reason why you should wear a head wrap would show understanding which would be a Gods rule, not a restrictive rule. The difference between a restrictive rule and a Gods rule is understanding, which is G.R.E.A.T(Gods Rule Equals Allahs Truth). I'm not refering to God in the sense of a black man, I'm refering to the essence of God that resides within each and everyone. Waking up early to exercise, eating right, abstaining from drugs when you are in the military because you are told to is a restrictive rule. Doing the same thing just because it's good for your health is a Gods rule. Allah is seen and heard everywhere. Muslim women wear their hijabs at work. Rasta women wear their hair covered in public. Why wouldn't you want to represent Allah to the fullest? Also other than the breast and the chest, the hair is an attractive point, especially natural hair, long hair, and locks. I had a buddy who admired the sista I was dealing with because of her long locks. I had another sista with locks who told me that this guy on a date told her he heard that women with natural hair and locks were freaks and he just wondered was it true.

Some women feel that wearing the 3/4th is like wearing a uniform. That's not so because with a uniform everyone must wear the same thing, same style, same color. That's an excuse because if you see every woman in a room wearing jeans, we wouldn't conclude that that's a uniform. There are different styles, colors and ways you can rock your skirts. There are different colors and ways you can wrap up your hair. As I said in the beginning, the culture is usually the influencing point on what the people wear. If most of the black women you knew wore 3/4th, than more than likely you would too. The question you have to ask yourself is, which style of dress better puts you in the position to achieve what you want to achieve? The main point is that it puts a guy who's going to approach you on aware that your not about games, eventually you want to start a family, and you better come with respect. Back in the day I used to only approach women with natural hair being that they were more conscious to who they were as a black woman. That's until it became a fashion trend and you now have all types of women wearing naturals with no sense of consciousness. Now it's all about a woman and her 3/4ths. No matter what, I don't see that becoming a fashion statement in the mass media. Even though just because she rocks the 3/4th doesn't necessarily means she's conscious when she doesn't take care of her health and still put chemicals in her hair and/or styles it like an unoriginal woman. The main satement the 3/4th(including the head wrap) should convey is that you are a healthy natural black woman in ways and action and you're receptive to the leadership of a qualified black man. The bottom line is 3/4th is not just about doing something, but about doing it the BEST way YOU can. Representing your indigenous culture fully. Other than comfort we know that the clothes you wear says something. We also know that it attracts the opposite sex and in turn makes it much more appealing to you. Why not make the best statement you can make? Why not attract the best man that you can? One that can see by the way you dress that you are a woman of God and respects you for much more than sex. An employer can't discriminate against your spiritual/cultural/religious principles. We need to put more brothas on to this post and this blog in general. Let them know that as black women you are here to give black men what they NEED(not what they want or what you want to give them) if they are willing to give you as black women what you need.
Peace
Check out the builds on other perspectives within the nation as well as some tips on dress:

Zaneta
IMajestic
Los Indios
14th Degree
Allahs Five Percent
Woman's Headwrap
Black Womans Worth
Dress Code
How a woman should dress
Double Head Wrap
Head Wrap How to
How I tie
Head Wrap tutorial
Wrapping Head Wrap
Head Wrap How to...
Head Wrap
Rock A Head Wrap 1
Rock A Head Wrap 2
Badu/Nefertiti Wrap 1
Re:Head Wrap How to
My Head Wraps
Head Wrap from T Shirt
Head Wrap reflections

Polygyny (only if necessary...?)

"Question:Do you want for your sista what you want for yourself or do you feel that a man should only be committed to one woman and not allow polygyny? It's either one or the other, for the lack of available good men will not allow both to exist. It's a choice between what WE Need to do and what YOU WANT to do. Which one do you choose?"

Let's establish a few principles before we get into the meat of the matter. I feel it's necessary to do this to deter any irrational emotional feelings trying to surface preventing us from gaining an understanding. Remember, everything we do(our ways and actions) should be based on principles. Principles are what you know and understand. What you know about the situation and what you understand in obtaining the best part of it. If you don't know and understand, why would you do it? For it to come out wrong? There's two ways to do things, the right way and the better way. Why do it if your going to do it wrong? Winners practice so they get it right, champions practice so they don't get it wrong. The physical universe was built upon principles, and so should yours. Principles never change, although what principle you use can. For example, when I was single my principle was to do me as long as it didn't harm anyone else. Now that I have seeds, the principle is to do what's best for us. When I gained knowledge of self the principle became to do what's best for my people. The last principle mentioned still encompasses to do what's best for my family. The difference is whereas in the second principle prior to gaining KOS I may have kept a closed door, the last principle places us more in tune with the people, children, and families of the community. The principles that we should keep in mind as we read are these, but remember don't accept them unless you fully agree with them and if you do agree with them don't forget them when a irrational emotion pops up in your head. For this exhibits the law of non-contradiction, you can't say your fully about something then exhibit behavior that says otherwise. Right? The first principle is that our communities, our families, our children, are in a disarray right now and we need to do whatever we can do in our NATURAL abilities to rectify the problem. Is that agreed on? If not you need to stop reading right now and don't front to anybody like you care. We need to be willing to give our life for this, more so mentally and if need be physically. The mental life I'm referring to giving up is our ignorant ways. Physically I mean you would die for your own children, but would you die for your brother or sisters children. You would jump in front of a bullet to save your own child, would you do it for another child, just on the strength that it's the right thing to do? I would. My only request is that you treat my surviving children as your own. I'd do it even if I didn't think that you would. Not for you but for the child and the example I set. The second principle is what you want for yourself, you want for your sister. This doesn't mean material things, but the basic natural things in life that every woman deserves according to nature, food, water, clothing, shelter, a mate, children, a family, responsibility, self worth, and respect. Do you want that for your sister or not? And finally the third and last principle is just that, stick to the principles we acknowledged as oppossed to your emotions. We know that making decisions based purely on emotions can be consequential. Take anyone who has made bad decisions, including murders and rapist, it's usually due to emotions. Emotions not based on logic is dangerous, for oneself and our communties on a whole. Be emotional on a logical decision that you made. Not to say you wont have any negative emotions about it, but the logic of the first two principles, and the principle that all is one, should override and take presedent over any personal feelings you may have, and may even turn your negative emotion into a positive one. Like say if I give up my seat to an elderly caucasian woman and she calls me something derogatory. I won't feel bad because I did it, and would do it again, off the principle that it's right. With these forementioned principles, we can preceed with the preceedings this evening with equality.

For the record I would like to state that I am neither pro-polygyny nor am I anti-monogamy. My position is one woman to one man unless the ratio of women to men is 2:1 or greater to give every women(our sisters)the opportunity to be in a family. I state that because some of us when we hear the word polygyny we reduce it to a sexual way of life to satisfy a man's sexual desires. Coming from a man some may assume that I'm an advocate for polygyny. Let's explain what polygyny, polygamy, and polyandry is. Polygyny is a man having multiple female spouses. Polyandry is a woman having multiple male spouses. Polygamy is in general a person of one sex having multiple spouses of the opposite sex. Polyandry is the least recognized. Woman oppossed to polygyny like to cite polyandry as a valid rebuttal. The difference is polygyny is a natural way of life while polyandry isn't. Unless I get a overwhelming argument stating otherwise, woman do not neccessarily take to being penetrated by multiple partners. Besides, a man is the leader of his family and two men will NATURALLY go to war. A man will not WILLINGLY submit to another mans will, this would make him a psuedo-homosexual. I do feel that polygyny is a way of life that occurs naturally to reduce some of the ills of society due to a lack of qualified men such as prostitution, single parenting, and adultery, which in turn can lead to other things. My view of it as a way of life that occurs naturally as oppossed to a natural way of life is because I don't feel it should be practiced if not warranted. If the ratio of qualifed women to qualified men was 1 to 1, I would be against it, but it's not. The ratio of women to men is at least, at least 4 to 1. I know this and so does every half decent man due to the amount of attention thrown our direction due to the lack of good men. I understand the skepticism towards polygyny due to the lack of morals, discipline, and ethics in some of our men. Most of the men that women meet is based primarly on sexual attraction due to the clothes some women wear. I've intentional unintentional had bouts of celibacy passing up on woman I've only found physically attractive. For one reason or another I didn't see pursueing a serious relationship with them. Nor did I allow just a physical one as some of them had suggested. Ironically I began more attractive to them, maybe because they saw I had honorable intentions and respected them as black woman and not just sexual. If I knew them well enough I'd bring up my views on polygyny. With the standards I displayed towards them, they understood it wasn't based on sex. Understand this, I feel a man could and should be faithfull to one woman. Some advocates of polygyny feel that it's in a man's biological nature to want to be with more than one woman which I agree with. However this doesn't mean our wants should be acted upon especially in a committed relationship. Woman may find the want and the capability to be with more than one woman puzzling because they tie sex to their emotions of love while men may love a woman view sex as a recreation sport, the proverbial icing on the cake. History confirms this, it's in our nature to be explorers, voyagers, conquerors. The alpha gorilla, or the alpha lion, usually has a pack of females around him. One man can repopulate the world. To go against our nature would seem crazy, but that's just one aspect of our nature. We as black men are God by nature, and we have the freedom to be who we are as Gods, to put the mental over the instinctive physical. This is one of the ways that seperate us from the animal. We don't have to adhere to the physical, unlike a rapist or a homosexual. Which means that some things don't need to be explored. Some things don't need to be conquered. Especially an unknown. I know enough of some unknowns to leave it alone. I don't need to know what a hit of crack is like. What I'm saying is if you committed yourself to a woman without any discussions of polygyny or the possibility of it, be committed. Especially if she's handling her business at LEAST 2-3times a week, 4times and over I take my hat off to you. Personally I can be satisfied with one woman if we've discussed the abc's that I mentioned in U-N-I verse. Just because I find another woman attractive doesn't mean I'm not satisfied at home and I should pursue her. Realisticly, your woman may feel the same way about another man whether you want to admit it or not. Just because I'm at a restaurant and I'm looking at the meal on another plate doesn't mean I wasn't satisfied with the meal I just ate. They had a chicken meal which I can remember so vividly, but I'm great with my vegan meal. However, if it was a vegan meal, and nobody claimed it, that's a different case. My point is that I look at polygyny as a responsibility, as the right thing to do. Right meaning that it benefits the all. The gift I have to a woman of being a man, a father to her children, a lover, a friend, is not mine to deny when in my natural capability to be with more than one woman and it's in a woman's responsibility to be a sista to her sista.

A skeptical woman might say it wouldn't be best for me so how could it be best for all. Maybe it isn't the act of polygyny that's not best for you, maybe it's your mindset. If you were to change your mindset then maybe you would change your attitude. This is where the principles we established come into play, in particularly the second and third. You say what you want for your self you want for your sister right. Let's say we figure that a man should be faithful to one woman. We have ten women and five men. Each man settles down with one woman. How many lonely women do we have left? Five. Where does that leave them, with no children, forced into homosexuality or left to handle themselves unnaturally, or do you even care? Do you wish that on them? Do you wish that on yourself? What if you were one of the five lonely? Let's be serious here, we're attempting to come to an understanding to a solution to a real problem. What would eventually happen? The lonely women will do whatever it takes to seduce your man. You would too, be serious, if you wanted children. To think of artificial insemination, to intentional prefer to raise a child without a father is crazy. Crazy meaning not conducive to the physical or mental aspect of life. It's selfish without no regards to the mental betterment of the child. Especially when polygyny is a natural and valid option. And the example I gave is a 2 to 1 ratio, not the 4 to 1 that it most likely is. If food is scarce, for the betterment of your people what would you have to do?-share. If clothing is scarce, what would you have to do for the betterment of your people?-share. If there is a lack of men, what must you do for the betterment of your people?-share. Maybe you now can say okay I no longer disagree with polygyny, just not for me and my man. Should the other four men be left to bear the weight. So everyone else should do what's right, but not you though. Maybe you don't value the importance of men in our society and our homes because you see a lack of true men. I'm not talking about the men who still want to be like teenagers. I'm referring to the men who are so disciplined that instead of playing games they let you know what's what up front even if it means not having sex with you. You may pass these men by for someone who will play the game with you. You rather be lied to and have someone sneak behind your back then for a man to say what I have with you is what I have with you, what I have over here is what I have over here. These men do it because that's what it means to be a man, to put you in the know, and let you come to grips of what it is. They know the lack of available men. You want the realy real, so you know what it is? Or do you want the games and get whatever you get behind door number two? Every household should have a feminine and a masculine parental presence for the betterment of the children. If you find a good man that can lead your family in a good direction then let him lead. Instead of saying we can't do it, say to yourself, in what ways can we make this happen.

Polygyny is not for every man, especially a lot of the so called men we have out here today. A man who chases woman, chased you, and ain't about his business, possibly isn't a good candidate for polygyny. A man's ethics, discipline, and moral character is a good indicator to his qualifications. My advice is not to enter a polygynus relationship with a man who goes out in seek of another wife. If your holding it down, and he's not satisfied with just you, then maybe he shouldn't be with you. Maybe he's greedy and lacks discipline. If I didn't connect with my Queen on a mental(first) and physical level(second) which leads to the spiritual level I wouldn't be with her. I'd feel like I was missing something and may be swayed later. The bond between him and her should be established first. Under those criterias, one way I would enter a polygynus relationship is if I met a woman, who expressed to me that she wished that there was someone with my standards that she could start a family with. I would evaluate whether she held the same values as I and my Queen, and if so I would ask her if she would like to meet her. This is under the understanding that I've discussed polygyny prior with my Queen and she understands that it's a duty to her sista, our communities, our people. When my Queen meets her and she agrees that this woman can be a positive addition to our family, then together we can set up some ground rules. Another way would be if my Queen introduces me to a sista who she was comfortable with who shares the same way of life as us but has trouble finding a decent man to build a family with. This would be the epitomy of what I want for my self I want for my sister. Granted I find this sista mentally and physically attractive, I would give at least a three week period where there would be no physical contact between I and the new woman, included within a three month trial period with a slow progression of moving her from her house to our home. I strongly suggest that all parties live under one roof. Not to underestimate our self responsibility, however, we may not yet be ready for that type of understanding. Every participating adult would have to be phenomenal. Therefore, the homes of the each woman and children should be relatively close to one another. With at least two people shouldering the financial responsibilities for all the homes and at least one maintaining the child care duties. If everyone can agree to living under one roof, unless you own a farm, I feel that at least a $52,000 a year income should be coming into the home. Ideally from the man, but with understanding it can be split however. This is just my opinion. With $52,000 a year we may can't live lavishly, but we can live comfortably if we all understand our priorities, family over materialism. Where there's a will, there's definitely a way. Two women is sufficient with a limit of three, four in extreme cases. With an additional $19,200 a year required for each additional woman over two. Having only two to three women gives each three or two days of personal time with their man with one day reserved for himself. Unless the two women have an understanding amongst themselves, a man should be able to take care of both of them if they both don't work to be fair. If not then if one works than so should the other be required. If it's three or four woman, one should be willing to be designated as the home-maker, with her having the power to delegate household responsibilities to everyone else. Plus it's a benefit to have someone always at home to tend to the needs of the children. I feel it's more efficient to be in one household with each adult having their own personal bedroom including the man, with his being the master bedroom. There would be a boys children's room and a girls children's room. All women would be referred to as mom, or umi, from all the children. And all children whether it be from a previous relationship would be considered brothers and sisters to each other and a child to all.

As I stated previously, I am neither pro polygyny nor anti monogamy. It's a real solution to a real situation. Truly I myself had to come to grips with my responsibility towards polygyny. I know how some woman may selfishly and ignorantly feel about it, but it actually is my responsibility. I've asked myself if it mean't not being with my Queen who I love SO much would I still hold my positon? The answer is yes. I figure she loved me for doing the right thing no matter what so why change now. I felt if I didn't because of the way I feel, when I know that it's right, everything I said thus far, about logic over emotions, would be a lie. It's about doing the right thing. For a woman I know it's emotionally hard to come to grips with polygyny, but that's where the principles we established in the first paragraph comes in. Do you truly stand by those principles or are you just blowing hot air? Do you truly stand by those principles or are you just blowing hot air? I ask one more time, do you truly stand by those principles or are you just blowing hot air? Unless you have a legitimate reason, say as there are no good women out there that you can see as your sista, than all you have excuses. You shouldn't be calling your so called sista sista, for she's only your sista to a point. Excuses are mental blocks that can change when if change your mind. I don't expect any changes to be made without a logical reason, but if there isn't enough good men for your sista than that should be logical enough. Especially if the shoe was on the other foot and you didn't have and wanted children. Some women ignorantly(meaning not knowing), ignorantly cite polygyny as some type of orgy affair. I like to think of this as the boogie man syndrome. Meaning like when you were a kid and the boogie man was in your room as long as you can't see the room by putting the blanket over your head than it's okay. Would you rather know and be able to have a say so to who the other woman your man is sleeping with, or would you rather him just hide it from you? Whether you like it or not, a man is going to be a man. Some of you are saying I rather not know. What type of ignorant ish is that? You must don't really know the importance of divine order and knowledge being the foundation. You can't imbrace ignorance and knowledge at the same time. If you don't want to know, I assume you don't ask questions when he stays out all night or you can't reach him on his cell phone. Because if you go looking, eventually you'll find it. So that's b.s. Why would dealing with another woman that you regard as your sister be nasty. In a polygynus relationship, the woman you allow into the family you should already respect her ways, personal hygiene, eating habits, home keeping, child relationship, as you do yourself. If you don't then she is not the one to add on with. As a woman, I understand you personally feel that when your intimate with a man some "essence" of that man remains so being with another man would be nasty. But men are not women. We have an 'outty', you have a 'inny', so we can wash it off and k.i.m.(keep it moving). Besides why would you think negative of your sista, should she think negative of you? If I was dealing with you, and I said the other woman was say Queen Afua, would you think negatively of her. Not that I'm cosigning for Queen Afua because I don't know her personally, I'm just going on how she presents herself. My point is she could think negative of you, at the same time teach you a thing or two. Another deterent is this possessive love that we have. To want your man when you want your man is a selfish way of thinking. Can he have you when he wants you? Understandably not when the red sea is flowing, or when you have to tend to the babies. This is just another way of thinking that can be changed. A quote from Khalil Gibran's book the prophet is for man and woman to eat from each others bread but have your own loaf. Meaning that we should each have our own interest and we come together when we need be. I don't need to or want to possess somebody, nor do I want to be in someone elses possession. If we love each other we can move together in unison without any restrictive rules, for we operate through God's rule, not restrictive rules. The difference between God's rule and restrictive rules is knowledge, wisdom, and understanding to build equality. Through this blog I say MY Queen, but I usually refer to her by Queen and her name, MY denotes possession. Besides, push up on her and she'll let you know who she rolls with. As for being able to share my time, each women would get equal amount of days, with alternating weekends, with one day possible Sunday for myself. My advice to a sista in a polygynus relationship, focus on your happiness and not what he does for the other sista for this breeds jealousy and envy. If one of the Queens has a particularly bad day, whether I'm in a polygynus relationship or a monogamus one, I should be able to pick up on this. If it's not her day to share with me, I'd ask the Queen whose day it is to switch her day, or just her night if need be. If something special is going on that day that that Queen planned, then it may just be the night and I'd spend the day with the Queen's whose day it originally was. If a Queen wants to switch a day with her sista to do something with me, that would have to be an understanding between them. The deterent for abuse would be that one would not want the other to abuse their right to personal time so they would respect their sistas time and only ask when necessary.

How can an original woman submit to an unoriginal way of thinking. Our original reason for a divine union between man and woman was for the benefit of the community. It wasn't just the union between him and her, it was a union between his family and her family for the benefit of raising the children. The extra perks came secondary to the responsibilities. We keep chalking up our short comings as just a matter of circumstances which is b.s., yet we expect other people to change their b.s. We expect our children to be strong against ignorance but we aren't strong against our own. I have my own battles, but I don't down play them as just a circumstance. I recognize my weakness and I attempt to make the necessary mental changes to fight them. I don't say I know what I'm doing isn't beneficial and continue to easily keep on doing it. An unoriginal way of thinking will not help our people for it festers selfishness. You know this. A monogamus relationship works for the caucasian man because they don't have as much if any the disparity of women to men ratio. Polygyny is recognized, respected, and accepted by the majority of non-european nations, and unoffically here in the U.S.. What do you call what Hugh Hefner and some celebrities do? How many men have children by more than woman? How many men are sleeping with more than one woman whether their woman knows it or not? We practice polygyny but we don't want to accept it or call it that. Let's get real people. If it ain't real then it doesn't exist. Monogamy doesn't really really exist, only the illusion of it. Is it that you want that illusion? Is it that you want what they show you on t.v. and what you hear about in story books. Fifty percent of marriges end in divorce, and that's including the remarries. Without the remarries it could be more. If you were raised in a productive polygynus family then you wouldn't be so oppossed to it. We seem more opposed to polygyny than we are to homosexuality. I don't see us giving much of the screw face or the talks behind the back of a gay person than one who is in a polygynus relationship. That's crazy!! A positive polygynus relationship is not what they claim the mormons did, sleeping with underage girls or marrying 10, 20 women. Nor is it what some natives from the continent of africa claim, for some of them have been influenced by european materialism and acquired some unoriginal ways of chauvnism and wind up disrespecting their women. For all you so called christians out there, polygyny was acceptable before the EUROPEAN catholic church banned it because of their lack of women. Check your bibles, see how many polygynus relationship are in there. It was never condemned by your religion, it was banned by caucasian. So your opposition would be due to a european influence and not your original culture. Aside from it not being banned in the bible, if everything is according to God's will, why is there far more available women than available men? Are you implying your infallible God made a mistake? Or is God allowing only some women to have a mate and the rest have to be gay? As far as marriage goes, I would use what I stated in U-N-I verse. With my first Queen, in our affidavit I would leave some room or a clause for revision, or have a clause acknowledging the possibility of a plural marriage, with a percentage going to the new woman in case something happens to me. Then an affidavit between I and the new woman with the abc's and xyz's would be made up. This post is not to say we need to be in polygymus relationship, for all is not qualified for it. This is to open up an intelligent dialogue of it. This is for those who say they are original(black) yet still think like unoriginals and don't make any serious attempts to change that. This is for those who had no idea or pondered with the idea but didn't know how to approach the subject. If you have a noble, honorable, mature brother, or know of one, you may consider it. We just have to many single woman, and not enough good brothers. Maybe this will entice some brothers to get there act together. No fertile woman should not have the right to bear a child with a good man. Every good woman deserves to be with a good man if they're out there, even if it means sharing. What you want for your self you want for your sista. Instead of saying I can't, say we can.
Peace

Recommended reading:We Want for Our Sisters What We Want for Ourselves by Patricia Dixon,Ph,D,
Check out the links and give me some intelligent feed back on them and the post as well:
In Africa
Maasai tribe

Lack of Black Men
Poligami

Parents to black sons Pt2

Should be an option
Be an option PT 2
Bible Verses

Who benefits?

Who benefits 2?

Brainwashing vs unselfishness

Polygyny response

Dawah Yisrael(polygamy)

Original Natural Family

Nation Building

Does your man...
Monogamy Vs Polygyny

Monogamy Vs Polygyny 2

Monogamy Vs Polygyny 3

Already a Practice

Popularity defies forecast
Mama Khandi
African Family Structure
Black Philly Muslims
Co-Wife

Choice for Black family
Lifting the veil
Option for muslims
The Myth & Reality
Judeo Christianity & Islam
Polygyny

Polygyny-Wikipedia

4 Polygyny
Is monogamy natural?