Omnist Igtheism

Ruh Ishq said:
it simply becomes impossible.
Click to expand...
The purpose of a sermon is to lucidly convey the meaning of scripture to an audience. Although I don't believe in any divinity in scripture, its the same idea. The unambiguity of scripture does not get the point across or help someone understand it. It usually requires interpretation. Explanation is possible. Much of philosophy is written in very technical terms that have unambiguous definitions. I take a stance of apatheism regarding ambiguous esotericism.

Lol sorry to turn the conversation into an argument. I hope we can discuss something else in the scope of syncretism.
 
This true, the responsibility if communication is the communicator.

If the goal is to get one's point across, it is not the reader that needs to make that clear...but.the writer.
 
Any claim to a greater ability to perceive is BS in the religious context.
 
Callum Cooper Nissen said:
The purpose of a sermon is to lucidly convey the meaning of scripture to an audience. Although I don't believe in any divinity in scripture, its the same idea. The unambiguity of scripture does not get the point across or help someone understand it. It usually requires interpretation. Explanation is possible. Much of philosophy is written in very technical terms that have unambiguous definitions. I take a stance of apatheism regarding ambiguous esotericism.

Lol sorry to turn the conversation into an argument. I hope we can discuss something else in the scope of syncretism.
Click to expand...

I see no argument here, it's fine.

I think synthesis is only possible when we understand Unity, Love.

When we experience this One, we understand all in relation to it...

Yet, it is itself that inner experience.

All we can do is point and try to create an environment where the experience is available to others.

Those who don't know the One try to convince you of their belief, but see that it is only really to convince themselves because they don't know.

The mystic has a fundamentally different approach, exactly because he actually knows.
 
Callum Cooper Nissen said:
Any claim to a greater ability to perceive is BS in the religious context.
Click to expand...

In a way you are true, but on the path we pass through various states of consciousness that convey reality as experiential scripture.

These stimulate the reward centers of the brain to assure you you're on the right path.

Your capacity to experience these is equal, but through them alone is clarity.
 
I have rejoined for this thread...

I think the conclusion is good, but can easily create justification for avoiding the specifics.

Every religion teaches us something of the whole.

Less than the whole is not the One.
 
I have been a Sufi as long as I've been on this site, but it is hard to acknowledge because of the association with Muslims.

The author of the Mathnavi is Mevlevi - my Master.
 
wil said:
I am typically oblivious...
Click to expand...

It is good, nothing alive should be treated as a static object.

I checked out a local Unity Church because of you, I liked the energy.

I had to laugh watching them apply the stories of the mystics to Christian tradition.

Seeing how many had come to hear them made me smile.
 
It is a shame that the general Christian has lost the ideal of Divination.

The Church Fathers stated its importance so succinctly as "the purpose of Christian life"...

Somehow it became blasphemous?
 
A Sufi looks arrogant because you think he is speaking to boast.

It is simply so, for you too.

The only difference is the Sufi knows it.

Fana results in irfan.
 
He speaks exactly because it is so of you...

He wants to share it.

What else can he do?
 
I would resist making distinctions that divide a group from the rest.
Ruh Ishq said:
The mystic
Click to expand...
Ruh Ishq said:
Those who don't know the One
Click to expand...
The only thing that is known is what comes from sensation. There is no other "One" to know. Since we are all human, we all have the capacity to sense and our world views derive from our perception of those sensations. No one can know one's own experience more than they can. Religion is a very individual experience. It should not be interpreted in terms of groups, some of which "know" something more than others. No one is a prophet more than anybody else. We are all humans. Religion is a product of our human perception of the world. Thus all religion is demonstrative of humanity. Just that religious truth cannot be attributed to absolute, unpercieved reality does not discount its expressive value.
 
Callum Cooper Nissen said:
The only thing that is known is what comes from sensation. There is no other "One" to know. Since we are all human, we all have the capacity to sense and our world views derive from our perception of those sensations. No one can know one's own experience more than they can. Religion is a very individual experience. It should not be interpreted in terms of groups, some of which "know" something more than others. We are all humans. Religion is a product of our human perception of the world. Thus all religion is demonstrative of humanity. Just that religious truth cannot be attributed to absolute, unpercieved reality does not discount its expressive value.
Click to expand...

You are ignoring the knower of these.

Without which, there is no basis for knowledge.

Religion is self evident, it means re-bind, to make one what was apparently two.

Most who claim it are divisive, not religious.

It remains mental, the heart has not risen.
 
Without objects, the subject is unknowable...

Yet, in deep sleep, with no objects at all, still you are.

Same is before birth and after death.

All else is grace.

You are conscious of being.
 
John 15:9 "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love."

1 John 4:16 "Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them"

Ephesians 4:3 "Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top