Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by wil, Jan 26, 2020.
Organization & structure can be a good thing - our bodies are a very organized system as is the perceivable universe. Unity is reflected therein imo
But many would argue that the emergence of that which you dismiss is the very thing that marks the journey from ignorance to enlightenment. The great sacra doctrina of the world is, as one described it, 'the winnowed wisdom of the human race' and indeed the very language you yourself use is drawn from those wellsprings.
The contrary questions would be, if we know without the need of guidance, if we are indeed so intuitive, is there so much folly and suffering in the world, so much ignorance and prejudice, so much pride and vanity? And whatever possesses anyone to assume that their little 'i', so ephemeral and so fallible, can do it all alone, and eschew the wisdom of the experience of the Way harvested over the millennia?
Why would anyone throw away that which humanity at its finest has garnered as its heritage?
And if that were so, how do we explain the phenomena of secularism?
Ah, one needs to be careful here, as it is often the way of those who don't understand to put what they don't understand or object to in a box, for their convenience and contentment. In my experience, my little box is the gateway to the Infinite.
And again, those 'boxes' have produced Eckharts, and Shankaras, and Rumis. The sacra doctrina, the Hermeticisms and the Kabbalas of the world. Sufis and Shamans, Saints and Sages. They have produced some of the greatest art on the planet, and underpinned some of humanity's noblest endeavours and finest achievements.
But the movements of this age was spoken of by René Guénon in his metaphysical magnum opus, The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times.
The philosopher Jacob Needleman said: "Many of Guénon's books, notably The Reign of Quantity, are such potent and detailed metaphysical attacks on the downward drift of Western civilization as to make all other contemporary critiques seem half-hearted by comparison."
The poet Charles Upton offered this commentary:
The usurping of Truth as spoken of in the Great Traditions by the emerging primacy of the individual, subjective narrative which puts 'me' at the centre of 'my' universe is all part of the process.
They are the products of consciousness, but yes, nothing can grasp the Unlimited – there's nothing to grasp.
I'm sorry, but in saying that you evidence a lack of insight or awareness of the Traditions.
Because a man cannot ride two horses.
'A beginner who goes from one monastery (tradition/guru/master/whatever) to another is like a wild animal who jumps this way and that for fear of the halter.' The Paradise of the Desert Fathers
"If you did not find it in your tradition, you will not find it here" Dalai Lama to a 'spiritual seeker'.
Again, one needs be very careful here. Five minutes reading of your, my or anyone's posts will reveal the 'conditioning set in place' of that person. Everyone is the product of their time and place, no-one is unconditioned, and one cannot escape one's condition alone, simply because one cannot see it.
Regardless how much even the highest angel can know of 'God' there is always infinitely more to know?
That's it. We all have our own unique spiritual journey. It is shaped primarily by our
intentions and environment.
Success is the ability to cope within the conditions of created circumstance.
"And whatever possesses anyone to assume that their little 'i', so ephemeral and so fallible, can do it all alone, and eschew the wisdom of the experience of the Way harvested over the millennia?"
It is not the little 'I' that is one with God. One does not find God alone cause if one is alone then one wont find God. It is the understanding that no one is ever alone that is the union with God.
If the label of 'scientologist' or 'tibetan buddhist' is the gateway to the infinite...what beatific vision has one had through one's specific label? And if one had such a beatific vision, could it have been possible without the label?
Yes, because the beatific vision is based on No Mind. The infinite is there 24/7. It doesn't demand that you adjust your opinion to suit it. Its real; that means it is preeminent. There is no gateway or gatekeeper to the infinite, except the celestial gatekeepers, but for one to get there one must have already shedded all humanness.
It is one's own self who keeps oneself seperate from God. One's own 'I.' The illusion if seperateness.
There is no meeting the infinite without the shedding of humanness and worldliness.
The distinction between thought and consciousness is clear; consciousness is boundless, thought very limited. Religious doctrine here is ruled through Thought, not the dimension of boundless consciousness.
I use the language of all the books of the world to express myself, cause language is wordly (silence sacred) but my experience precedes the language.
As for why evil exists in the world? There is a reason, just like there is a reason why animals must sleep and dream. But the religions of the world can not help those who are bound the be lost regardless. Jesus' teaching could not help Judas. In the same fashion, it couldnt help all the priests I know who love their cars or reptuation or paycheck more than God, or all the buddhist who chain smoke cigarettes (popular in Thailand) while wearing orange robes while that the buddhas main teaching is to destroy craving.
There will always be a contradiction between what one is and the ideal, because one is trying to reach God through thought, and thought is limited.
There is a point that one must reject everything that has ever been said, creating a spacd of eternal silence, and go into what life is for oneself.
I wish everyone could enjoy the pleasure of doing that.
So many years of being told what is right or wrong, how to live, etc...such heavy a burden to carry. Weightless one rises above. Weightless are the things of the celestial realms.
Must reason exist based on circumstance or do circumstances exist because of reason?
All things are dependant on each other. If this exists, that exists; if this ceases to exist, that also ceases to exist. This has been written down https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratītyasamutpāda but its glory lies in discovering it experientially. What Glory! God bless.
There are no gate keepers except the celestial gate keepers?
Born in a state of confusion and given a lifetime to search and discover simplicity
There are no gatekeepers of the knowledge here in the world, cause we all already have the knowledge inside us. But there are gate keepers in the Realm of God (or any name you like; other plains of existence, other dimensions, realm of boundless consciousness, eternal silence, masterful meditation of third eye, compassion through the cosmos, Kingdom of Heaven, Bliss in the Field of Infinite Possibilites, etc)
I guess that explains why people get head traumas and wake up speaking a different language..
Are you certain? How do you know?
hahaha thats a very good neurological connection you made there. I like the blending of those two ideas
@KnowSelf I know because I've travelled through through the third eye of wisdom and met gatekeepers. The purpose of these saints like all true purpose is for the good of all. One should go where God want...not where one desires to go. One must be mindful and loving and not desire to go into oppulent places, however beautiful they be. Desire lies at every stage, and at every stage desire are the chains and shakles.
Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth
and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor
rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
We ourselves are responsible for what we comprehend or see. That is why some people find "an entity" and some don't.
Haha, all talk or there is some guarantee.
We ourselves are responsible for finding the guarantees; only experientially, only experientially, only experientially.
That assumes a whole lot of givens ... where does that understanding come from?
Well a bit of discrimination would pay dividends here.
One has a beatific vision according to the nature of the paradigm.
Descriptions of the beatific vision can be located within their contextual paradigms.
The beatific vision is always contextual, even when it's of nothing! The 'nothingness' of Zen differs from the 'nothingness' of the Hinduism differs from the 'nothingness' of Christianity. Without the formal context the formless cannot be conceived or contained.
This is what is so often misunderstood about the esoteric. Genuine esotericisms exist and can only be accessed through their concordant exotericisms. The former is like a colourless, flavourless, odourless fluid, the latter is the cup. Without the cup, the fluid slips away ...
The philosophers say 'there's nothing in the mind that was not first in the senses' and this is true. The qualities we ascribe to the beatific vision: peace, bliss, etc., are themselves products of the sensible body. They're reactions to an 'experience' that transcends 'experience', because in its essence there is nothing to be experienced! Thus from the the mystical states, whether they be the altered brain waves of monks, or someone reading poetry, contemplating art or nature, listening to music, etc. to the severe 'reactions' recorded in some sacred texts: Ezekiel would fall into catatonic trances, Paul experienced states, some of the Christian mystics suffered epileptic fits ... the question is whether their experiences are the result of their epilepsy, or whether the epilepsy is a result of the 'experience'.
The same, I'm sure, can be traced in other traditions. Today we have fakirs who perform for the audience, being buried alive, piercing with pins, etc. It's all a nonsense, really ... that's not what it's about ...
The Vision Quest of the First Americans, the stories of the shamans (but not Carlos Castaneda, obviously )
The point is, in the Traditions 'experience' is not the goal. Rather, it is a goal in a consumer oriented society. No gain without pain, no effort without reward.
It's quite possible then for 'levels' of beatific vision. An ardent atheist, for example, can experience such and see it entirely within the context of being at peace with nature. It's quite possible to feel this peace and contentment and bliss with absolutely no awareness that there is a beyond as such ...
Is it? It depends on your context, again. Without context, such terms as 'No Mind' become anodyne.
Well it's there and it does not force itself upon you, if that's what you mean, but to approach there are conditions.
No disputing that.
Well that's not the case, is it? There are those who illuminate the way. Are they charlatans?
Well I fundamentally disagree. One must become authentically human.
Yes. but shedding the little i does not mean shedding one's humanity. The human state is, among the many states of being, a rare and exemplary state ...
And yet the commentaries on the boundlessness of consciousness derives from the religious traditions ...
But in making sense of experience, that is, one might say, a language ...
No. Not at all. Sleep is a natural necessity. Evil is a choice.
Need to be careful here regarding pre-determination and pre-destination. I believe no-one is beyond hope, but our choices have consequences. And in the end, perhaps even the evil are offered a choice? Who can say. I believe so, but that's my view of the eschaton, and my understanding of the nature of a God who is Good and Infinite ...
Well there were many who heard and turned away. Jesus could have pulled some kind of 'stunt' to convince the world if He wanted, but then to do so would rob us of our humanity, strip us of our dignity. God, the Good, the All, the Infinite, only rarely impresses Itself upon people.
I know, but those who are diverted from the Way by such sights miss the 'one thing necessary'
As my mum used to say, "And if he sticks his head in the oven ...'
Disgaree. It might be in your experience.
No, that's not the case at all. One does not reject Truth to attain Truth ... There is a point where one passes beyond the dialectic, the drive for the space for eternal silence comes from the heart, but having reached that space, one does not reject everything that got you there, you just see it in a greater context.
St Thomas had a beatific vision and stooped writing before the completion of the Summa, and was purportedly to have said "Everything I have written is like straw ..." but that does not mean he rejected what he had written, or burnt his works. Simply that what he had experienced had transcended words.
The problem is, such words are a green light for the hedonist or the Spiritual Boutique shopper!
And yet that which the mystics or my tradition speak of transcends even that ...
Old CC. Yes, I remember him. I used to take him quite seriously, back then. Heavy stuff. Lucid dreaming, the 'nagual.' Don Juan the Yaqui man of knowledge -- datura, magic mushtooms and peyote. All a fiction. But perhaps a bit of truth there too?
I agree. Insisting that 'my way of no belief is the only way to truth' limits it by default. It makes it into a belief. It becomes its own cup?
Otherwise there would be no point in trying to put it into words in order to tell anyone about it, imo.
In reality what seems right for me may not be right for him/her. God responds to every seeking soul, and leads us in infinite different ways, imo.
Separate names with a comma.