The Trouble with Transcendental Unity of Religions

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Thomas

If you want to know about angels in the Christian Tradition, you should read "The Celestial Hierarchy" by Dionysius the Areopagite.

Thanks Thomas, I'm reading your post. I posted before I saw yours.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

We don't need no stinkin' gurus!

Chris

I suspect one could learn a little something even from the smellier variety.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Dream

I almost drew a flowchart, but it is simple yeah.

Lets do some charades. What's my motivation?

Ok, I'm Adam & Eve outside of the garden. Do I dearly desire to go back into the garden and eat of the life-giving fruit? If so, the fiery critter is in my way. How can this creature represent my passions? In other words "Do I have a passion to enter the garden, or is my motivation something besides passion?" How do I tell the difference, SG?

Is this based upon the assumption that you would recognize the tree of life if you saw it?

In the same story there is enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent. Her seed will crush the head of the serpent with his heel, someday. This crushing has been loudly heralded as a remedy to my (Adam & Eve's) outcast condition. Does the serpent also represent my passions? Is it my passion that its head be crushed? If not, then who's passion is it?

Good question. Certainly worth exploring, imo.

[Raksha]

whilst it is true that the development of the supramundane abilities are part and parcel of progression within the Path the idea being communicated is that to use the siddhis as the goal or measurement of ones progress is going to create obstacles rather than remove them.

Namaste Vajrahara,

First of all, you are assuming that I am attempting to make "progress" on "the Path," and that I am using the siddhis such as telepathy as a measurement or yardstick of that progress. I have to call into question both assumptions. I could very well be wandering off "the Path" because I want to investigate something interesting by the side of the road. I'm easily distracted by nature so I do that frequently.

I am not at all sure that my "goal" (if I even have one) is the same as that of Buddhism or Hinduism--that is, the total overcoming of maya and the renunciation of ALL attachments, even the "attachment" to my own life. In fact, I'm pretty sure that isn't my goal at all. What interests me or motivates me is the overcoming of limitations that prevent me from seeing life for what it really is and from living as effectively as I would like to.

I don't see the overcoming of ALL attachments as desirable, and YES, that definitely puts me at odds with the Gnostics too--in some areas anyway. It's the reason for my growing interest in Paganism and shamanistic traditions in general--the fact that they are non-authoritarian, non-hierarchical, and most of important of all they place their primary focus on the direct experience of nonordinary reality. Not on what somebody else has to say about the experience, or whether or not a given person should even be having it in the first place!

I would never consider the development of allegedly "supernatural" abilities such as telepathy as a "yardstick" or measurement of spiritual progress. For one thing, I see it as more natural than supernatural, and there also seems to be a strong hereditary component, as with other aptitudes.

But most important of all--there is no necessary correlation. Aleister Crowley for example was one of the most naturally gifted telepaths of his generation, but he wasn't even a GOOD person, let alone a spiritual person! It all caught up with him in the end.

his view, however, is not particularly western in this regard as this is the same teaching which the Buddha Shakyamuni gave regarding the way in which Buddhists should regard these phenomena. i have a feeling that Dr. Smith was paraphrasing this teaching.

I don't see the East as one bit less authoritarian or hierarchical than the West. In many ways it's even more so. There is no question that India and China and Japan developed what might be called "the technology of the sacred" to a degree that leaves Western cultures in the dust. In that area there is simply no contest.

That said, though...how did they even tolerate the caste system, let alone defend and uphold it for centuries? The blatant social injustice and indifference to human life that exists in those countries causes me to seriously question their claim to spiritual superiority.

--Linda

[Dream]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

The reason why I suggested that the action of the Cherubim could be related to the partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is because that is the reason why the path to the tree of life needed to be guarded.

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Is this based upon the assumption that you would recognize the tree of life if you saw it?

In the story I already know the way back to the tree and have tasted it before, so its not a matter of identifying the trees. My problem is the deadly cherub which G!d placed between me and the tree. I'd eat from the tree if the cherub weren't in my way, because I don't obey when G!d says 'Do not eat'. Ironic that obedience requires that I die, and disobedience is instant death. My problem is also the serpent, which G!d allowed in the garden. The serpent is obviously the variable that matters, which I realized soon after I'd eaten fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. I will be permitted to live in the garden once the serpent dies, even though I now know good & evil. Puzzling. Should complain about my situation?

In the question of transcendental unity of religions, a related question is "is it the knowledge of good and evil or the serpent that matters, and how is it killed?"

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Hi Dream —

If you want to know about angels in the Christian Tradition, you should read "The Celestial Hierarchy" by Dionysius the Areopagite.

Ok. I had never seen that before.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Where is that?

That was an extrapolation from Isaiah and I Corinthians

Originally Posted by Isaiah I Corinthians

Isaiah 25:8 He will swallow up death for ever, and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth; for the LORD has spoken.

I Corinthians 15:54-55 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory." O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Not a Christian interpretation I have ever heard — nowhere and never has any Christian taught that you should ignore the Word of God — and what Christ states over and again is man's inability to comprehend what he reads and what he hears.

I think you have read much more and lived more than I have, and I really I wouldn't want anyone to ignore the Word of God. Jesus spoke in parables on purpose, knowing full well that people wouldn't understand. He would rather not have, but was under orders to do so. The reason he gave for this was "lest they should turn and repent and be forgiven." When speaking he would say 'He that has ears, let him hear.' He would explain things clearly to his own disciples, however in his prayers it is clear that even they were not of his own choosing but the Father's. Peter is a huge representation of this, because Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven."

Originally Posted by Thomas

Everybody thinking they know best is the source of the problem, not its solution. It's also nigh-on a fact that as soon as we go our own way, we're most probably making a mistake ... "hey ma, look! everyone's marching out of step but me!"

I think that is human wisdom talking. I think think that individual revelation is the Stone the Builders Rejected, which is been made the Capstone. The builders are of course the builders of the House of God. The builders reject it, because they cannot conceive of it working. It is not their decision however, and every stone in the spiritual temple must be custom cut at the quarry, just as the physical stones were for Solomon's temple. Not a tool was heard during its assembly. (I Kings 6:7) Another example is the stone in Nebuchadnezzars vision that was cut out of a mountain without human hands and destroyed all the human built kingdoms.(Daniel 2:44)

Originally Posted by Psalm 118

19 Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter through them and give thanks to the LORD.
20 This is the gate of the LORD; the righteous shall enter through it.
21 I thank thee that thou hast answered me and hast become my salvation.
22 The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.
23 This is the LORD's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes.

[Netti-Netti]

Originally Posted by Raksha

I don't see the East as one bit less authoritarian or hierarchical than the West. In many ways it's even more so. There is no question that India and China and Japan developed what might be called "the technology of the sacred" to a degree that leaves Western cultures in the dust. In that area there is simply no contest.

Highly debatable.

That said, though...how did they even tolerate the caste system, let alone defend and uphold it for centuries? The blatant social injustice and indifference to human life that exists in those countries causes me to seriously question their claim to spiritual superiority.

Hi Linda, who claimed what?

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Raksha,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by Raksha

Namaste Vajrahara,

First of all, you are assuming that I am attempting to make "progress" on "the Path," and that I am using the siddhis such as telepathy as a measurement or yardstick of that progress. I have to call into question both assumptions.

actually i'm not assuming that regarding you but making the statement in a more generalized way to indicate beings engaged in a spiritual practice that tends to deepen as they continue said practice. sorry for the confusion.

I would never consider the development of allegedly "supernatural" abilities such as telepathy as a "yardstick" or measurement of spiritual progress. For one thing, I see it as more natural than supernatural, and there also seems to be a strong hereditary component, as with other aptitudes.

i would tend to agree, the term supramundane isn't mean to be indicative of the western term supernatural. one aspect of the Buddhist teachings is that all phenomena and noumena are natural even if outside the scope of ordinary experience.

That said, though...how did they even tolerate the caste system, let alone defend and uphold it for centuries? The blatant social injustice and indifference to human life that exists in those countries causes me to seriously question their claim to spiritual superiority.

--Linda

only one culture had the caste system as i infer your meaning here, so it would be a bit unfair of other cultures to view them in the same vein. that said, one of the most culturally radical aspects of the Buddha Dharma is the breaking of caste and gender barriers which were present in society at the time.

metta,

~v

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Dream

In the story I already know the way back to the tree and have tasted it before, so its not a matter of identifying the trees. My problem is the deadly cherub which G!d placed between me and the tree. I'd eat from the tree if the cherub weren't in my way, because I don't obey when G!d says 'Do not eat'. Ironic that obedience requires that I die, and disobedience is instant death. My problem is also the serpent, which G!d allowed in the garden. The serpent is obviously the variable that matters, which I realized soon after I'd eaten fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. I will be permitted to live in the garden once the serpent dies, even though I now know good & evil. Puzzling. Should complain about my situation?
In the question of transcendental unity of religions, a related question is "is it the knowledge of good and evil or the serpent that matters, and how is it killed?"

Perhaps this passage from James might be helpful:

James 1:12-16
12 Blessed is the man who endures temptation; for when he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.
16 Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Dream

In the story I already know the way back to the tree and have tasted it before, so its not a matter of identifying the trees. My problem is the deadly cherub which G!d placed between me and the tree. I'd eat from the tree if the cherub weren't in my way, because I don't obey when G!d says 'Do not eat'. Ironic that obedience requires that I die, and disobedience is instant death. My problem is also the serpent, which G!d allowed in the garden. The serpent is obviously the variable that matters, which I realized soon after I'd eaten fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. I will be permitted to live in the garden once the serpent dies, even though I now know good & evil. Puzzling. Should complain about my situation?

In the question of transcendental unity of religions, a related question is "is it the knowledge of good and evil or the serpent that matters, and how is it killed?"

Puzzling indeed.

I have my own spin.

a parent gives their kids all these candy bars & puts poison in one bar. then says you can eat all this candy but do not eat the one that has poison because you will die.

so they eat it & dont actually die, they just get extremely sick & punished for the rest of their lives & banished from any more candy...then the fire angels stay there & divide the children from the parent. it is really kind of stupid.

or as others would put it, here are your divorce papers. You knew the coffee I would give you would be cold & you knew you were going to divorce me one day. what kind of lie marriage is this?

what kind of loving parent is going to allow their kids to be tempted by poison that the parent themselves put there unless they intended for them to die. & how many parents let strangers into their childs play area unless they intend for the stranger to tell them a lie that at least one of them will believe.

I know exactly what you are saying (& nothing anyone ever says adds up). Very few will be able to follow where you are going except for maybe some old time orthodox jews who do a nice job with it.

& guess what? you are never getting back into that room that has all that delicious candy/fruit inside...because you disobeyed & got stung by my very own horrid parental trickery- & now you must die a nice slow death as the stranger laughs.

next you hear all these excuses about this parent/god being so loving & kind & is not so loving & kind after all. It is more like Alfred Hitchcock & that which fulfills evil by doing exactly what was intended is good.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Dream

In the story I already know the way back to the tree and have tasted it before, so its not a matter of identifying the trees. My problem is the deadly cherub which G!d placed between me and the tree. I'd eat from the tree if the cherub weren't in my way, because I don't obey when G!d says 'Do not eat'. Ironic that obedience requires that I die, and disobedience is instant death. My problem is also the serpent, which G!d allowed in the garden. The serpent is obviously the variable that matters, which I realized soon after I'd eaten fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. I will be permitted to live in the garden once the serpent dies, even though I now know good & evil. Puzzling. Should complain about my situation?

In the question of transcendental unity of religions, a related question is "is it the knowledge of good and evil or the serpent that matters, and how is it killed?"

The cherubim guards in all directions against those who would reach forth and take of the tree. It is the reaching, grasping, holding, and forcible taking of the fruit that is prohibited.

Chris

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

The cherubim guards in all directions against those who would reach forth and take of the tree. It is the reaching, grasping, holding, and forcible taking of the fruit that is prohibited.

Chris

Those pesky desires, again.
**thumbs up**

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Bandit

I know exactly what you are saying (& nothing anyone ever says adds up).

You can't accept the fact that you are going to die? Life is worth living, so there's no point in complaining. Appreciate life, and respect your creator. We are still on topic in this thread.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Dream

You can't accept the fact that you are going to die? Life is worth living, so there's no point in complaining. Appreciate life, and respect your creator. We are still on topic in this thread.

When the creator complains...does that mean it is pointless? I would say there are valid complaints when addressed will help make things better. Life is not always worth living for everyone just as there are certain things in life that are appreciated & other things in life are not.

What I accept or don't accept, what I appreciate or do not appreciate, what I respect or don't respect, if I complain or don't complain, death or no death-had nothing to do with what I wrote concerning the metaphor.

Since you asked, I look forward to the end of the road with gladness.

Originally Posted by Thomas

discover and take possession of at the end of the road

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Bandit

Life is not always worth living for everyone just as there are certain things in life that are appreciated & other things in life are not.

There are always two ways of looking at it, and the two viewpoints are exclusive. When you think you'd rather die, odds are its just your perspective or frame of reference -- even if you already know you're going to die very soon. Take an example from nature: Both humans and other creatures have a death instinct that affects them when they sense they will die soon, an instinct that exists to comfort the creature or in some way make its last moments as worthwhile as possible. Trees that are dying go into overproduction and will bloom out of season. Dogs go off to a quiet place by themselves. All creatures prepare themselves for death when it becomes inevitable -- not before. Except for you.