"Your task is not to seek for love,but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it."
This is a most beautiful and profound quote.
I have seen it famously given reference to as a quote from Jalal ad-Din Rumi (who was born 800 years ago). It is however also written word for word in A Course in Miracles (page 338 chapter 16 IV:6).
A course in miracles is supposed to be a channeled original work.
I can find the quote all over the internet accredited to Rumi, yet I cannot find any conclusive evidence of it's origin. Does anyone know any more? Any insight much appreciated.
Well, the BBC accredit it to Rumi, and they usually (I say usually!) do their research:
Perhaps a course in miracles have just nicked it. 😉
From what I can see, it seems that only "a course in miracles" accredit that quote to Jesus:
As Jesus exhorts his students: [INDENT]Your task is not to seek for love [or hear the Holy Spirit's Voice], but merely to seek and find all of the barriers within yourself that you have built against it. It is not necessary to seek for what is true, but it is necessary to seek for what is false (T-I6.IV.6:1-2).[/INDENT]
Everywhere else accredits it to Rumi.
I'd personally go with the majority in this case.
Well, the BBC accredit it to Rumi, and they usually (I say usually!) do their research:
Perhaps a course in miracles have just nicked it. 😉
Well done 🙂 Thanks for the link!
I do always 'wonder' about channelled material.
Yes, some "chanelling" is just retrieving that which we already know in our unconscious mind. It could just be that whoever did the "chanelling" had heard the quote somewhere before and had it stored away in their unconscious just waiting to come out. 😉
Love and Reiki Hugs
From what I can see, it seems that only "a course in miracles" accredit that quote to Jesus:
Everywhere else accredits it to Rumi.
That correlates to my findings... Thank you for sharing. Let's see if any other budding detectives have any more info on the case 🙂
Yes, some "chanelling" is just retrieving that which we already know in our unconscious mind. It could just be that whoever did the "chanelling" had heard the quote somewhere before and had it stored away in their unconscious just waiting to come out. 😉
Love and Reiki Hugs
We are indeed on the same page this morning 😮 Just what I was thinking!
It's a great and profound quote.
The story behind its accredition reminds me of something that happened in the late 1800s when the Mahatmas who were H.P. Blavatsky's teachers would just make letters appear in peoples' rooms all over the world, often falling from the air. So this isn't quite channeling, and I agree with Giles' take on that subject. But with the Mahatma letters there were of course sceptics who didn't believe they were authentic and sought to prove some form of global trickery was afoot.
They found a paragraph or such in a letter by Koot Hoomi Lal Singh (now usually called Kuthumi) which was word-for-word the same as that in an existing book. Ah-ha! Evidence that the letters at least were not original pieces by a Himalayan Adept! But Kuthumi then replied trying to explain the very complex mechanism by which that and other letters were done. He said that he'd been riding a horse for days, lacking sleep, and had telepathically dictated the letter to a disciple scores of miles away. This disciple then wrote it down, and was capable of the teleportation. Under such hard conditions, not only riding, and simultaneously using telepathy, but actually composing the long letter, Kuthumi said he had indeed unwittingly used the words, which made his point well, not realising he'd picked them up from the ethers since many had read the book.
It's all a bit like the story behind George Harrisong's "My Sweet Lord". It was a big hit but later he was sued for plagiarism of the melody. It is indeed a note-for-note copy of the song, "He's So Fine" (which to me has better lyrics). Obviously George had unconsciously taken in this melody which came out in something like 1962-3.
The author of Course In Miracles seems to have done something the same?
V
I think the current laws of plagiarism, wouldn't take too kindly to this, but there again law don't take into account the fact that many people can pick up on the same message that is being transmitted by the planetary hierarchy, the masters or call it whatever you want.
How many times do we get similar books being published at the same times, and is this merely coincidence or more than that. The message is the same, just a different messenger. If Rumi wrote it 800 years ago the message still carries the same power but would be available to a broader group - which I think is a great thing. It's the message that's important and not the personality who said it.
Luv Binah
x
He said that he'd been riding a horse for days, lacking sleep, and had telepathically dictated the letter to a disciple scores of miles away. This disciple then wrote it down, and was capable of the teleportation. Under such hard conditions, not only riding, and simultaneously using telepathy, but actually composing the long letter, Kuthumi said he had indeed unwittingly used the words
But would that stand up in court? 🙂
But would that stand up in court? 🙂
I only know that if Kuthumi ever appeared personally in court to explain such a thing, I'd want to be in the public gallery!
I only know that if Kuthumi ever appeared personally in court to explain such a thing, I'd want to be in the public gallery!
If you Google 'Kuthumi' you come across quite a few people channeling him too. Maybe he wouldn't have to appear personally 🙂
I you Google 'Kuthumi' you come across quite a few people channeling him too. Maybe he wouldn't have to appear personally 🙂
Yes .... the "channelers" are not authentic IMO. Others are actually called 'Messengers', which is quite different, and those you get through a google search authentic IMO. (And I know you were only kidding anyway 🙂 .)
The Wikipedia on him is short but accurate:
Back on-topic, it's not just plagiarism (probably unconscious?) in A Course on Miracles, but with the words accredited to Jesus, then this is a factual innacuracy too.
V
Hi V 😮
I enjoyed reading your interesting post (post number 8 that is).
The concept of 'ownership' is rather a interesting one!
I do remember writing a poem many years back. Some time passed and I read a passage from a book, at which point my eyes almost popped out of my head! They had written almost word for word the same as one of the verses in my poem!!! I'd never read anything like it before. So your sharing above does strike a chord.
Trin
x
Yes, some "chanelling" is just retrieving that which we already know in our unconscious mind. It could just be that whoever did the "chanelling" had heard the quote somewhere before and had it stored away in their unconscious just waiting to come out. 😉
Love and Reiki Hugs
Of course the same could apply to Rumi.
Like most information whether channelled or not, there is no guarantee that it was or is original. Just because the majority of people seem to agree to a source, that does not IMO make it a fact.
I would just say go with whatever feels right for each of us.
Someone pointed me here:
At which point I found this....
"Misattributed
- Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.
- [url]Helen Schucman[/url] in Jesus' Course in Miracles (2000) by [url]Helen Schucman[/url] and [url]William Thetford[/url], Ch. 16 The Forgiveness of Illusions, p. 162"
Usually with a quote we can trace it back to an orignal text, poem, book etc. With the above quote (when attributed to Rumi) it only ever seems to be quoted out of context without reference to its original source.
On the other hand in ACIM the quote is embedded amidst other text.
Perhaps it is not a Rumi quote after all.
I couldn't say for sure Trin, but the quote could be from Rumi's collection of poems and stories called 'Masnavi'.
"Comprising six books of poems that amount to more than 50,000 lines, it pursues its way through 424 stories that illustrate man's predicament in his search for God."
Hmm. Almost needs a call for Sherlock Holmes? The Wiki piece on Rumi seems assured that the lines aren't from him after all, but who wrote it? I see there's nothing behind the article, as a discussion page.
V
The Wiki piece on Rumi seems assured that the lines aren't from him
Does it? Can't see where it says that :034:
On the page cited by trin,
On the Contents box (upper left) click on "3. Misattributed".
In fact the link to go right there is:
But it's not the main page on Rumi. A quick look makes it seem to be something about Rumi quotes.
V
Putting "Your task is not to seek for love" into Google, I'm not yet convinced it isn't originally Rumi. He's cited all over the place with it. However, on the subject of the ethers having the same concepts floating around, you also get:
Our task, which is also your task, is not to seek for love.
Oh, but wait. There's this:
September 30, 2005 (quote of the day)
Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it. ~ Helen Schucman
proposed by Kalki, and used on this date, because this had become attributed to Jalal al-Din Muhammad Rumi (born 30 September 1207); the attribution was later corrected on 2007·09·30.
If you click on the name, Kalki, it's a Wiki admin who's main expertise and interest is quotes, and getting them right, so ...
V
I couldn't say for sure Trin, but the quote could be from Rumi's collection of poems and stories called 'Masnavi'.
"Comprising six books of poems that amount to more than 50,000 lines, it pursues its way through 424 stories that illustrate man's predicament in his search for God."
Thank-you 😮
Is there indication that makes you think that the quote may be contained in 'Masnavi'? (before I plough my way through 424 stories :rolleyes:).
Oh, but wait. There's this:
September 30, 2005 (quote of the day)
Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it. ~ Helen Schucman
proposed by Kalki, and used on this date, because this had become attributed to Jalal al-Din Muhammad Rumi (born 30 September 1207); the attribution was later corrected on 2007·09·30.If you click on the name, Kalki, it's a Wiki admin who's main expertise and interest is quotes, and getting them right, so ...
V
Looks like we are getting to the bottom of it now Detective V :).
As much as I would LOVE for this to be a Rumi quote, I have a feeling that it has been misattributed in his favour. It is looking that way, although, who knows - another clue may arrive to swing things the other way entirely:cool:.
Trin
The other point is that Rumi's work has been translated into English.
I know that his essence radiated with the message contained within the quote... so this is the type of thing that he expressed. Perhaps the translation is identical to the one in ACIM.
It is a profound quote, and given that our language (English) is extrememly limited, perhaps there are only so many ways to asy the same thing.
Round and round we go!
Thank-you 😮
Is there indication that makes you think that the quote may be contained in 'Masnavi'? (before I plough my way through 424 stories :rolleyes:).
Your task Trin, is not to seek for this quote, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against finding it.:)
Just a hunch, Trin. As the Manavi is the most well known of Rumi's works I thought that it was most likely that it would be in there.
I wonder if the confusion on Wiki is that contributors have read A Course In Miracles too. If you find that the quote was around before ACIM was published you'll know for sure that it's older than the book.
If Rumi didn't say this I wonder why it would be so widely attributed to him?
If Rumi didn't say this I wonder why it would be so widely attributed to him?
I do not doubt for a moment that Rumi did say this. But of course he could have picked it up from writings or he heard it from someone else before him.
As it is a great quote does it really matter where it came from?
As it is a great quote does it really matter where it came from?
🙂 For 99 % of purposes, no!, LOL. But I just took it as an exercise, the way some people do crossword puzzles. Then again, if you were Wiki's Kalki, or any author writing an academic or decent-level text, you really would want to know the true source if you quote it. For some people it is important, as fact-checking.
If anybody really wants to know, join Wiki discussions so that you can write to Kalki and ask. He/she probably has a good idea why the Rumi attribution was actively removed.
V
Your task Trin, is not to seek for this quote, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against finding it.:)
:rollaugh:
🙂 For 99 % of purposes, no!, LOL. But I just took it as an exercise, the way some people do crossword puzzles. Then again, if you were Wiki's Kalki, or any author writing an academic or decent-level text, you really would want to know the true source if you quote it. For some people it is important, as fact-checking.
If anybody really wants to know, join Wiki discussions so that you can write to Kalki and ask. He/she probably has a good idea why the Rumi attribution was actively removed.
V
Point taken Venetian, but what do we define as the true source of a quote. Is it only when someone actually puts it in original writings rather than hearsay? What I mean is:
If you can see and touch the script of a piece of writing by the originator of the writings (not channelled) then that becomes tangible, but if someone says so and so said xxx in whatever year without any tangible evidence, then is that not just hearsay.
🙂 For 99 % of purposes, no!, LOL. But I just took it as an exercise, the way some people do crossword puzzles. Then again, if you were Wiki's Kalki, or any author writing an academic or decent-level text, you really would want to know the true source if you quote it. For some people it is important, as fact-checking......
Exactly V.
Personally, I don't mind where it comes from. We don't 'own' words.
In certain circles however (i.e. the world at large) accurate attribution for quotes is fundemental. Say example if the quote were to be used in a film or book...
And occasionaly life does throw up these enquiries. I am not one to get involved in unnecessary question asking.
If anybody really wants to know, join Wiki discussions so that you can write to Kalki and ask. He/she probably has a good idea why the Rumi attribution was actively removed.
What a great idea :hug:
Trin