Discover Your True Nature…LOVE!

Enlightenment – An Updated Introduction

Whole Khab FRONT Cover72

In April of 1954, a manuscript of the New Testament in the Aramaic language was first shown to the public in America. On that day, the Yonan Codex was, at the President’s request, presented at the White House to President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. After their examination, it was then transported to the Library of Congress for display. In an emotion packed unveiling, a panel of speakers headed by the Secretary of State gave tribute in an impressive ceremony.

The manuscript was labeled as the “N.T. Time Bomb,” by the Reverend Frederick Brown Harris, Chaplain to the United States Senate. His words are most appropriate. We quote them from his newspaper article about the manuscript.

“The N.T. of the title stand for New Testament. More profound in its final significance than the test of any instrument of deadly destruction on the Nevada desert was a recent April scene in the Capitol of the Nation. The setting was the exquisitely beautiful Great Hall of the Library of Congress. That cathedral of learning and letters, where are stored the garnered treasures of all man’s searching and striving, received that day into its custody a priceless volume, its safety insured for $1 ½ million, escorted by motored police and armed guards.”

“It was about 1,600 years ago that a skillful scribe, with an evident pride in expert workmanship, laboriously yet joyously inscribed on parchment velum the entire New Testament. The chapter headings in red are still timelessly brilliant. Across the centuries, through the varied vicissitudes of history, invasion and catastrophic social and political changes, including cruel examples of man’s inhumanity to man, this book has been almost miraculously preserved. It represents the canon of the New Testament on which the early followers of the Great Galilean were in agreement before divisive controversies split the church. But the thing that lifts it to the pinnacle of Biblical interest is that it is written in the language used by Jesus, who spake as never man spake, as the vehicle of His deathless concepts of life. Here are the very syllables as they fell from His lips when the matchless Teacher was here among men. It is like hearing the One whose birth broke the ages in two, talking to our modern age without a language barrier between. Here is not a translation of the words, but the words themselves of that One who under the blue sky of Palestine, declared: ‘My words shall not pass away. They are spirit and they are life.’ Gazing across the years to be, He warned that those who defy His precepts, which are the laws of life, will be ground to powder.”

“What treasures will be found as the very language of Jesus (Y’Shua) is studied can only be imagined.”

 The Aramaic language presents an imagery unknown to the western mind but well-known to the mind of the East. Aramaic was the lingua-franca to the Persian Empire, which stretched from the Mediterranean to the Great Wall of China for more than a thousand years before and after the birth of Jesus. The Aramaic language, unlike the other languages on earth, has no known place of beginning nor does it appear to have ever gone through any evolutionary period. It is as if it sprang to life fully matured; fully grown. An easterner speaking Aramaic could walk 4,000 miles and communicate with everybody he met. Carried upon the imagery of Aramaic, the Zoroastorian religion grew to its full flower. It is the language of most of the prophets in the Judeo-Christian faith. It is the language of Y’Shua. Its phonics is the language of Mohammed and the Koran. Its symbols appear upon bricks lying in the plain near Babylon which are thought to be the building blocks of the Tower of Babel, and it is, of course, the language many of the famous Dead Sea Scrolls.

Its imagery and capacity for communicating the subtleties of religion after this record of use, and of success, cannot be disputed. However, the difficulty of comprehension for a western mind is extreme. Perhaps this difficulty underlies the fact so poetically phrased by Kipling….

“East is East and West is West and Never the Twain shall Meet”

The construction of the Aramaic language involves the use of a multitude of suffixes and prefixes attached to a root word so as to establish a new meaning. This is, of course, also in every western language. For instance, we have the word “dress” and by suffix change it from one to more than one – “dresses.” We have the word “man’ and by prefix change the gender to female – “woman.” By suffix or prefix the English language modifies the meaning of a root word in many, many ways.

In the Aramaic, however, there are suffixes which modify the root word meaning in terms of a comprehension not widely known to the western mind. In Aramaic syntax, the suffix “-oota” indicates the concept designated by the root word is then human action, active human judgment and behavior. Thus -oota added to the root word “sney” indicates malicious, vicious human judgment and behavior. The suffix “-ta” indicates the root concept is a present mind set, or attitude, a force on the mind exercising a control function over what can be perceived, what can be stored in or recalled from memory and what can be used in judgment formation.

The Beatitudes, good attitudes, in Matthew carry this “-ta” suffix indicating the beneficial traits recited stem from a mind set or sets, the controlling forces within the mind predictive and causal to this resulting judgment and behavior. Modern psychology has uncovered two distinct types of mind sets exercising control. One type is goals, objectives or desires, what one wants to do. The predominant goal of the moment, either conscious or unconscious, essentially controls what data the brain will select for use from among the whole supply of data always available from the five senses and memory. A second and more pervasive mind set is that controlling what is cued or triggered into use by the goal selected data. An examination of the Beatitudes shows both types of controlling mind sets, that is, goals and cue controls, to be designated by the “-ta” suffix. Thus in the translation text, the English word attitude is faithful to the Aramaic meaning of “-ta” so as to include both the data selection controls and cue controls.

With the fact of these two controlling mind forces before us, we can understand the dilemma of him who stated, “My words fly up, my thoughts remain below.” Under Aramaic understanding of the mind, he had a poor attitude. Apparently he had sound goals, but poor cue controls. Thus, while his words were sound, what was being cued was poorly filtered, thus unsound.

The use and meaning of these suffixes confront us with the question of what is represented by the root word standing alone when it is without the “-ta” or the “-oota” suffix, when it is not an active mind set or attitude nor active behavior and judgment. Thus “sneyoota” is active malicious, vicious behavior and judgment’ “sneyta” is the attitude or mind set productive of malicious, vicious behavior and judgment. But what is designated by “sney”? Apparently the root word to which a “-ta” or “-oota” can be appended represents a stored mental capacity, a latent, finite entity of mind, available yet inactive, mind structure or formation developed, inherited, planted or otherwise acquired and readily available for activity. There is no English word for such an entity except the word “gestalt” applied by Wolfgang Von Kohler. The Russian Christian scholar, Ivan Pavlov, gave the world his conditioning experiments whereby he changed, developed and reorganized mind entities, these structures of the mind.

The word “gestalt” is so harsh, however, and its meaning so fragmented in modern use another term was sought. The term neural structure was first used, but in this edition the term mind structure is employed to designate the entities, organizations or formations within the subconscious mind which are the biochemical electric representations of our available perceptions, ideas and capacities.

In the western mind Sigmund Freud was more than entitled to the Nobel Prize for his discovery of the unconscious mind. Apparently, for untold thousands of years before the birth of Y’Shua, the existence of the unconscious mind and its functioning was so well-known to the Aramaic speaking people that it was a part of their syntax and grammar.

A translation of the Aramaic teachings of Jesus into western imagery, such as English, which preserves these psychological distinctions inherent in the words actually used by Y’Shua himself gives to the western mind new and deeper insights into His words. This is a new “evangelion,” new “good news,” for “good news” is the meaning of that splendid Aramaic word applied so many years ago to His teachings. For the first time, the western mind can easily see, hear and understand the psychology taught by Y’Shua.

Truly, God moves in mysterious ways. Until the rediscovery of the unconscious mind in 1898 there was no way for the western mind to intellectually understand the rules for sound mind development and management contained in the Aramaic teachings of Y’Shua of Nazareth. There is no way for a chemistry book to be properly translated if the translator is ignorant of chemistry. Unless there is an idea within the human mind, there can never be a word for it. Without the public acceptance of the science of psychology, there would be no way to communicate the psychological teachings of Jesus from His native Aramaic. One may well wonder what other wisdom is in that, “Purest Truth ever made known on earth,” waiting only for us to discover the subject before we may truly understand that He has explained it.

Who knows? Perhaps someone has just received the Nobel Prize for the discovery of a subject which, seventy years from now, we will find has been explained in these ancient teachings.

A physical examination of the Yonan Codex reveals the unfortunate fact that both the front and back pages of this remarkable document have been replaced with text written on paper instead of the original hide. This was a crucial absence of antiquity and authenticity since the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of St. Matthew was on the paper pages rather than on the hide pages, whose antiquity and authenticity were thought by many to exceed that of any New Testament manuscript then known.

The particular portions missing represented an important part of the transcription of the only gospel preached in Aramaic, the only gospel which substantially all scholars, both eastern and western, agree was first written in Aramaic. Accordingly, the Foundation set out to acquire the text of the Gospel of St. Matthew in an ancient Aramaic New Testament inscribed on the original hide.

The Foundation was fortunate in securing in 1966 an Aramaic New Testament now known as the Khaburis Manuscript in which almost all of the text of the Gospel according to St. Matthew is presented on the original animal skin. No claim as to its age has been made by the Foundation, for no claim need be made. The news presented here is not the antiquity of the manuscript, but the totality and accuracy of the psychological wisdom expressed in the Aramaic syntax and concepts.

The history of the Khaburis Manuscript is unknown prior to its receipt here in America. It was secured by the Yonan Codex Foundation by gift from two Americans, who are thought to have secured it from the members of an ancient religious sect known to modern scholars as Nestorian. This sect is a surviving remnant of the See of Babylon of the Church of the East. It is thought by some to have been out of the library of a small church atop one of the mountains of Kurdistan. The contents of this library were seized by Turkish authorities in 1966 and now are in Ankara, Turkey, as per announcement in the Istanbul Gazette of June 11, 1966, complete with pictures of the church and some of the documents then in hand.

The language of this small church is the Aramaic as it was spoken by Y’Shua of Nazareth. Their script is Estrangela, long thought to be a dead and unused script since the days of the Islamic conquest. The present condition and welfare of this church and its most reverend members is unknown.

While Aramaic texts of the New Testament have been available in western scholarship since Matthew was first inscribed, all known efforts to translate Aramaic text into English have largely failed to deliver into any western language the full insights that the translator has gained from his reading of the Aramaic. This could well have been due to the fact that all western languages are descendent from the Sanskrit language brought out of the East by the Persians in their first westward conquest. Aramaic was the language of Persian theology and the language by which they would rule their empire. The Aramaic language comprehends psychology so completely, it utilizes a syntax which portrays the working relationship between mind sets, perception, mind structures, reason, judgment, entities of mind (realities), human attitudes, and human behavior. Also, Aramaic does not distinguish verbally between the mental and the physical. The word for “near” in Aramaic includes the mentally near as well as the physically near. Nor does Aramaic verbally distinguish between a cause and its effect. The same word signifies both the cause and its effect. Such thoughts as these did not exist in the Sanskrit, nor do they exist in any of its descendent languages such as Latin, Greek, English or any other western languages.

It would appear that the people of the day, native Aramaic speaking peoples, little understood His words as indicated by His statement in Matthew 13:13-15 (KJV) Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Many will try to convince you that the Aramaic imagery carried by Y’Shua’s words come through in Greek translations. They simply do not.

Many will attempt to convince you that the original writings were in Greek. Those same scholars will tell, however, that Y’Shua’s words from the cross were left in the ORIGINAL ARAMAIC. Obviously, if they were left in the original Aramaic, the original was Aramaic.

A new process was developed to enhance the probability of conveying the Aramaic imagery into the imagery of the derivatives of the Sanskrit without wiping out the psychological understanding implicit in the Aramaic text. To explain this process, a clear understanding of the nature of language is needed.

A language is first spoken before it is written, so that any language may be summarized as an organized grouping of sounds which permit accurate transference of thought and realities between minds. Thus a language is, among other functions, a vehicle for transporting the thoughts, concepts and realities in one mind to another. From psychological studies of the mind, we find that the human mind is peculiarly adept in organizing complex thoughts or concepts so that they are keyed or cued by a particular sound, visual or other sensory symbol. Perception of visual or auditory symbols to which thoughts or concepts have been keyed in a given mind causes that mind to perceive those thoughts or concepts, if the mind set or attitude is proper.

Obviously, if the thoughts and concepts within a receiving mind are not keyed to sounds the same as in the mind, attempting to communicate with it by sound or in writing, there can be no communication, nor can there be any complex joint effort by the bodies controlled by those minds. This point is illustrated in the story of the Tower of Babel.

In translating the Khaburis, scholars were immediately confronted by a fact few scripture translators or preachers would ever admit! Y’Shua was speaking far beyond the wisdom of both His day and this. Though many pretend understanding, the Truth is His thinking and teaching were light years beyond anything in common understanding in either age! The Foundation’s scholars discovered that there were many Aramaic concepts, thoughts and intricate thought complexes, which, with their western oriented minds, they simply did not know and had difficulty understanding.

Some of the most important imagery connected to Y’Shua’s words presupposed an intricate knowledge of the unconscious which would not be “discovered” in the West for almost two thousand years. He was teaching people a technology based in Love. A way which they to go inside themselves and access previously inaccessible parts of their own minds. This empowered them to clean up what was in their “hearts” – “their unconscious.” Those who understood were converted from fear and hostility based minds to Love based minds. They healed. They became healers. They became gentle Beings. The behavior of the vile became civilized and peace loving. War was no longer an option! This was a threat to the Greek fear and hostility based control the political and religious leaders of the day had over people. A war, fear and hostility based language cannot easily carry imagery that teaches people to shift. People in captivity to a fear/hostility based language are not easily freed!

The Foundation’s scholars were attempting to directly bring the Aramaic ideas forward with English sound symbols. Symbols which had kept the English world at war almost continuously since its inception. Obviously, this was an impossible task. In addition, each Foundation scholar respected the wisdom of Y’Shua far more than his own. However, each felt he should understand what he wrote down. Thus each scholar was embarrassed to realize that even if he were to understand Y’Shua’s Aramaic language, he must, of necessity, filter down Y’Shua’s wisdom to a level which could not exceed his own – another contradiction impossible to resolve under standard translation practices.

To overcome these impossibilities, the wisdom of the ages was consulted on how best to determine the truth about that which we do not know and cannot know. In the profession of law, the rules of evidence have evolved for many thousands of years with this very object as their motivation and their goal. Consulting the learned of that profession, Foundation scholars were informed that cross-examination was the only method developed in recorded history to permit those who do not know the truth to test the veracity of a communication. With this in mind, a system was devised to permit Foundation scholars to cross-examine the meaning cued by English symbols which had been substituted for the Aramaic symbols used by Y’Shua in His teachings, in order to ascertain the verity of the resulting English text. Accuracy, in the case of an English equivalent of the teachings of Y’Shua, was assumed to exist when the words of the English text triggered, in the average English trained mind, the same understanding of one reading the Aramaic words.

It had to be admitted, also, that the Aramaic text of the Khaburis Manuscript may not have presented every verbal symbolization of the thoughts and concepts of Y’Shua of Nazareth exactly as He Himself symbolized them. However, it is a perfect certainty that no other language than Aramaic can symbolize them. Aramaic was the language of His home, of His childhood, of His teachings, of His listeners, and His language from the Cross, the language of Abraham, and of the prophets. Indeed, Aramaic is the lingua-franca of those who best taught the Law behind the Law. A next step in testing the veracity of the English words was to present the resultant ideas to a troubled, violent population and see what result it produced. In a broad based prison population words and concepts faithful to the newly discovered Aramaic reduced recidivism by ninety percent! The teachings simply worked and have changed, in ways not previously dreamed, thousands of lives! Lives thought to be unredeemable.

To throw open the work for cross-examination, the Aramaic text was first transliterated and transposed into phonics, using the English alphabet. By this means anyone could identify the recurrence of a sound symbol whenever it appeared. Underneath each separate sound symbol, the idea, thought or concept triggered in Aramaic was noted as can be seen on the cover of this text. Others, not familiar with Aramaic, connected and reconnected these ideas until the resulting English text was thought by bilingual scholars to trigger the same images and concepts as did the Aramaic.

For cross-examination, a postulate was established that each time an Aramaic word appeared within the same sermon, or parable, it probably symbolized the same thought. Thus if the same thought did not appear in the English text each time an Aramaic word appeared in a given sermon or parable, a lack of textual veracity was suspected and received careful reexamination.

As an example, in Matthew 19:24, the King James version of the Bible states:

“And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”

The breakdown of the Aramaic text indicates this imagery is not supported in the Aramaic text. There is no Aramaic word meaning “to go” in the verse. The word gamla is frequently rendered “camel’s hair” by some scholars in translating this verse from the Aramaic. The application of the cross-examination technique described above shed doubt upon the accuracy of this rendering. Elsewhere in the gospel John the Baptist is said to have had a coat of camel’s hair. The Aramaic word used for camel’s hair in that passage is not the same word as gamla. Therefore, gamla apparently does not mean “camel’s hair” in this verse. Further exploration of the images keyed by Aramaic words clarifies the apparent meaning of the verse. At the time of Y’Shua, Jerusalem was a walled city with heavy main gates. For night use there was left open a small gate which was so narrow that only one man could pass at a time and through which a camel could not pass without difficulty and, while passing, was severely confined and frustrated. This small night opening, which was shaped like a hole in a sewing needle of the day, was called “kheta,” Aramaic for needle. Thus it would appear that the images presented in this verse of the teachings of Y’Shua involved a comparison between the difficulties of a camel confined within the narrow space within the night gate of Jerusalem, then known as “needle.” A rich man confined within the narrow boundaries of the pathway into the kingdom of God, rather than presenting the rich with inevitable doom.

Everything taught in the Aramaic makes perfect sense, is usable and frees people from fear and hostility. The fearsome, punishing gods of the Greeks disappears and is replaced with a God that is Love. The command to fear God is replaced with the beneficial idea of removing all fear and hostility from the unconscious and acquiring the capacity to follow the Law that says, “Love God.”

In order to empower you to conduct your own cross-examination of the text, a limited first century dictionary of the text is included. While the phonic spelling of Aramaic words does not conform to currently followed scholarship, it is felt to be sufficient for the purpose.

Because of the use of this method and the employment of cross-examination as heretofore described, the resulting text may be said to have been generated, not translated. Images triggered for the Aramaic mind are approximated to a fair degree by the English text presented with the exception of a few where the concept did not exist in western thought or excessive confusion attached to the usual English word. When this difficulty arose, the symbol was left in the Aramaic sound, so as to indicate a new concept must be acquired if understanding is to be achieved.

One cue or word left undisturbed is the Aramaic symbol, “Naphsha,” which appears as “life,” “soul,” and “itself” in English and Greek texts. This word is left in its original sound, for all attempts to change it into English symbolism failed. The word is a philosophy involving life, law, cognition, physical health and the harmony of human actions and affairs with divine origin and active force. There is no word clearly cueing such a thought or concept or idea in western culture, so it is left in its original dignity. An essay considering its apparent meaning appears in the glossary.

Another symbol left in the original Aramaic sound is “Rookha d’Koodsha,” not because its literal meaning is not available, but because of the degree of theological conflict on the concept illustrated. This sound triggers the third unit of the Trinity, denial of which “leaves you in unforgiveness” (not the unforgivable sin) (Matthew 12:32). This is the entity which is a part of God and must be worshipped (followed) (John 4:23-24) and all-embracingly loved and trusted. It is this which breaks off the effects of error and causes us to be mindful of the rules by which we should live and think (John 14:26).

With such great importance placed by Jesus upon understanding Rookha d’Koodsha, Foundation scholars felt it advisable to use the original Aramaic symbol. Ancient symbolic pictures from Egypt, South America and elsewhere depict the use or action of four elemental forces in the creation of the universe and all that is therein. Man, augmenting his created sensory equipment with all manner of created devices, has as yet been unable to sense or perceive any of these four forces or major energies which are said to constitute the fundamental energies creative of the physical universe and life. For instance, it is well known that the stars are expanding outward at tremendous velocities from a central point of beginning despite gravitational attraction, each for the other, which contradicts their outward rush. Some immense originating expulsive force or energy initiated their outward journey which still continues despite the contrary tug of gravity for billions of years. Man’s created mind, using created constituents, has been unable to locate or contact such an initiating force, but can observe the fact it existed by observing the outward flight of the stars. After this originating expulsive force, the coalescing pressure of the gravity force acted on the originally expulsed material bringing individual units together, ultimately bringing the clouds of primordial hydrogen into the solidity of the stars and their planets. As with the expulsive force, the gravity force cannot be sensed directly by man’s mind. All man can do is observe its effect and thus affirm its existence.

A third force appears to operate in the physical area untouched by the sensing equipment of man. Something associated with heat appears to prevent the orbiting electron or a free electron from joining the nucleus of the hydrogen atom despite the pull of the opposite electrical charge. Perhaps that same force lifted the electron out of an inert neutron so as to form hydrogen. If so, this force is the creator of chemistry and chemical reactions and the father of plant and animal life. While undetected, there is no doubt as to the existence of this force, for no matter how low we cool hydrogen, or how many electrons we spray upon it, or how much we squeeze it, the center proton refuses to accept an electron and remains hydrogen, the beginning unit of matter as we know it. Again, man cannot directly contact this force, only sense its impact in the material world.

Rookha stands for these three forces and various invisible but material forces such as wind, magnetism, and electricity. As Rookha d’Koodsha, it represents an undetectable and yet tangible force upon the mind of man, a force from God for that divinely intended for man, a fourth force which man cannot contact and as yet cannot fully perceive to exist. The elders of the temple had no idea what Y’Shua was talking about when He informed them of the existence of this elemental.

Another symbol left in the original Aramaic sound is “kenoota,” human behavior and judgment which we would describe as just and fair. Justness is a slightly different concept in western thought, being a finite measurable result or symptom, whereas kenoota is not only the result but the cause of the result. It is the judgment and behavior which produces justness, as well as the just judgment and behavior produced.

Another unique symbol in Aramaic is “khooba,” the love we are told to have for our enemies (Matthew 5:44). The concept to be cued by khooba did not exist in western thought until psychological advances uncovered the controlling force of a set of the perceptual mind. This love is filter that produces an attitude, a mind set, which includes the desire for All-embracing affection for others and the cue control set which causes what is good about the other to be perceived. The cue control set causes that which is fair and just in the circumstances to come to mind and causes perception of the wholesome desires and objectives of others. Being only a mind set or attitude, khooba does not include reasoning, judgment or action, only the controlling sets which, if sufficiently maintained, fill memory with wholesome information (Matthew 22:35-40).

It is helpful to distinguish the love designated by khooba from the love indicated by the word “rakhma.” Rakhma is a condition, a filter over the part of the brain that stores intentions and is the Aramaic word cue for the love for God, neighbor and self upon which all law hangs. It is the love for others which produces being loved (Matthew 5:7). While it is interdependent with khooba and cannot be maintained without the khooba mind set love, the love represented by rakhma includes reason, thoughts, judgment and behavior.

With an understanding of these Loves, the unique fact that Will Rogers never, “met a man he did not like” ceases to be unique and becomes a natural result anyone can reach. If one maintains mind set love, behavioral love, rakhma, for them as his motivation for such achievement will be continuous and his cue controls will fill his memory, perception, reason and judgment with what is good and lovable about the other until All-Embracing Love is established.

Under ancient Aramaic understanding, the mind set, khooba, produces a particular judgment regarding another. Under modern understanding it appears to do so by controlling present perception and stocking memory. On the issue of “How should I feel towards this person?” khooba produces the answer of kenoota, justly and fairly. In response to the question of “How do I work with this person?” khooba produces the answer of humility, cooperate with his good and wholesome desires and objectives.

With the attention directed toward God, as it is in prayer, khooba produces a love of truth and a home in rukha. Thus the mind set, khooba, continuously maintained for neighbor and for God may be considered to produce the admirable qualities of human personality recited in the first five beatitudes.

Another Aramaic symbol not normal to western thought is “koodsha,” the Aramaic ancestor of the Hebrew word “kosher.” While kosher means proper as delineated by the five books of Moses, koodsha is broader and means proper as determined by the will of God for man, both known and unknown. It represents that which is divinely intended for man.

Two Aramaic words, “khata” and “bisha,” are rendered as sin and evil, respectively. However, the concepts cued by these words in the language of Y’Shua are not normal to western thought. Each is an archery term – sin or khata representing “missing the target,” and bisha or evil representing “off target,” where the arrow went when it missed. Thus in Aramaic these words appear as “not right” as opposed to their normal meaning of positive wrongs. Increasingly, neural research, research into the mechanics of the mind, appears to indicate the fact that the human mind cannot utilize a right-wrong judgment approach. Apparently the mind must follow at any given moment a right-not right or use a wrong-not wrong evaluation system; that the mind’s scanning system may be set to pick up what is right or to pick up what is wrong, but cannot be set both ways at the same instant. The Aramaic limitation of sin and evil to “not rights” appear to reflect understanding of this newly discovered facet of the mind’s mechanics. Which of these two sets of mind should be maintained is the subject of much of the text to follow.

The limited material from the Khaburis is felt to be of sufficient quantity to add materially to the understandings available in standard texts, particularly in relation to the mind development and mind maintenance instructions of Jesus of Nazareth. The versing is in conformity with the King James version of the Bible. We sincerely hope and pray that these few lines hereafter presented will provide a wider understanding of and respect for the most complete truth ever made known on earth, the teachings of Y’Shua of Nazareth.

For the inevitable errors in the following text, we sincerely apologize.


For currently published work from the Khabouris, you can order the book ENLIGHTENMENT from our catalog.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to content