What Am I?

[otherbrother]

I think that's perhaps a key to the whole caboodle – it's about relations, not about objects – God, creation, etc ... is not a think, and object, an event, its a continuum, a seamless cloth.

Loved that seamless cloth motion/metaphor.

 

[otherbrother]

I think, an equilibrium between "diving" and "harvesting" is important.

If you only focus on yourself, you ignore a great part of yourself, which is your impact, your value in the whole. You also ignore the sense of many commandments which concern just this impact, that it be good.

If you only focus outside, on other people, the environment, animals and whatsoever, your source will dry out. You risk to power out and even lose the capacity of doing good outside.

God is inside and outside. Reaching for oneness with God engenders the oneness with both, have God in yourself so that you can, like to, and will do His will.

Great comment. Perhaps authentic Being and true Love are the “diving” and “harvesting” respectively.

Positive projection onto a god in the sky or out there somewhere, results from our normal thinking (“thinking like matter?”) being unable to wrap our minds around such a Mystery. Just as in negative projection that results from not being comfortable enough with “ugly” sides of ourselves, positive projection results from similarly not being able to own the divinity and ineffable beauty of a creation such as ourselves. One might say that false pride causes negative projection, and false humility cause positive humility. Earlier factor analysis of personalities found four main factors labeled : “introversion, extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism.”

False humility and positive projection and gathering only (or too much) could be caused from both a predisposition for and a cultivation of neuroticism.

My chosen faith vehicle (or the one that chose me by means of upbringing) of Christianity seems to cultivate a lot of neuroticism, and then implicitly conditions us to use the ego defense mechanism called undoing (epitomized by compulsive hand washing).

But this compensatory defense does not leave us whole or fully integrated or “coherent.” We try too hard to absolve our sins, and our hands still feel dirty no matter how many times we wash them or how hard we scrub them. Even God-soap is not strong enough, because we subconsciously create a negative self-fulfilling prophecy of being a “sinner.” Undoing our sin is akin to Hue Ning’s (sp? founder of Zen Buddhism) “trying to wipe a mirror clean with a brick.”

Much growth and healing (for the neurotically inclined or shaped) comes from learning to be wisely psychotic-like, letting ‘er rip, shooting intuitively from our hips, having a ridiculous degree of joy, embracing Mystery. Of course a vulnerability towards psychotic-like and sociopathic religious hucksters can happen if the humblized religious followers seek liberation too quickly and easily from the fetters of their neurotic fears. Catharsis without growth.

Divers only may mistake intermediate depth levels with the truly convergent depths that potentially enlighten us to the fact that we are not merely discrete (“classical”) objects, and/or contaminate the dive with ego attachments from the lower frequency surface zones of overall reality. An other might help compliment and transcend such attachments, and help one see past one’s blind spots.

In general, introversion would seem to predispose a person toward diving, but not necessarily DEEP diving. Many introverts never get beyond snorkeling!

And extroversion would seem to incline a person towards gathering. But there is no guarantee that the natural stardust divinity will be gathered. Perhaps only superficial glitter an fools gold is gathered.

Yes, all personality and/or spiritual functions must work together if we are to become more fully integrated, “coherent,” whole.

 

[otherbrother]

and false humility cause positive humility.

Should read: “and false humility causes positive projection.”

 

[otherbrother]

Logos theology says much the same: There is Logos, in which resides all the individual logoi – the "ten thousand things".

I might be one of those Logos theologians?! Except they might be overly influenced by Plato’s Ideal forms? And not enough by Aristotles’ potentiality? Too pure for a SupRAnatural flow of God into flesh?
I don’t know, since I have not studied this school of theology. Is it gnostic-like?

 

[otherbrother]

Yes the old saying about reaching in deep during an athletic event seems literally true during endurance events. I agree with the quantum physicists that there is a real (“ontological”) substrate of reality. I think the suffering prompts us to literally go deep to a zone of inner potentiality, and that that zone is a kind of, as you say, “oneness.”

Eric, But ideally we could learn to go deeper without depending on suffering to get there. We could learn the skill of diving without sinking from the heaviness of suffering.
That’s where I think Buddhism’s emphasis on loosening our grip and mindfulness comes into play, even though I’m a Christian. But I strive to be spiritual first, Christian only if the vehicle works and doesn’t get in the way too much.

 

[Thomas]

I might be one of those Logos theologians?! Except they might be overly influenced by Plato’s Ideal forms? And not enough by Aristotles’ potentiality? Too pure for a SupRAnatural flow of God into flesh?

John was probably more influenced by Philo of Alexandria and Jewish mystical speculation than by Plato or Aristotle.

Generally the Hellenic term is impersonal, whereas for John its personal, more akin to the masculine form of sophia, or the Hebrew chokmah.

Is it gnostic-like?

Ah ... big question.

When you say 'gnostic-like', d'you mean the philosophy of various circa 2nd century groups? If so, then I'd say generally, no, although there may be some wriggle-room with a given 'gnostic' system – as there were more than one, hard to say.

If you mean gnosis as such, then I'd say yes – and the person to look to is Maximus the Confessor (579-662AD) – he who inverted the age-old Platonic model and came up with an interpretation which rests on Biblical reference and solves a number of issues with the old models.

 

[EricPH]

But ideally we could learn to go deeper without depending on suffering to get there.

Death in the family, losing your, job, accidents, breakdown in relationships, can all lead to suffering. Suffering is a reaction to events in our life, but is suffering the only option? Can we somehow learn from tragedy, to become more resilient, patient and persevere, can we dig deeper and search for the human spirit of kindness to keep going.

 

[otherbrother]

I wrote this on another thread (Here We Go, posted by Thomas):

“The assumption is that God or Deepest Self wants us to grow, perhaps to wake up (as one of the German Idealists, Schilling? claimed) from the mere-ness or “slumbering” of surface, physical, reality—to become more lucid within the “dream” that we mistake as overall reality.”

When real life “nightmares” occur, the temptation, or even the default program REACTION, is to exit the disturbing, painful, drama.

During a nighttime dream we wake up in a sweat, heart pounding. “Whew, glad it was only a dream!” The real life equivalent is to become distracted by alternate experiences, creating a kind of distance from the real life “nightmare.” Nothing wrong with creating distance, if temporary and measured/managed. It is a means of pacing ourselves in the marathon called life, But the temptation is to hold onto the distancing, or numbing, or any other ego defense that reduces the pain and/or fear and/or maddening sense of spinning out of control . We can become dependent on managing the pain instead of, as you insightfully/wisely say, allow it to teach us how to operate, or even ORIGINATE, from a deeper, stronger, more stable, more resource-full, zone of the “fountain” (the one that flows deep and wide) that is each of us, a person.

Now, imagine that our reality is Mind Itself’s dream. Is it possible to stay in the disturbing dream and allow an awareness that Mind is behind the drama, so calm down and experience the “show,” allow it to SHOW us something that helps us GROW? If we answer “yes,” we have a shot at living, participating, LUCIDLY within God’s dream.

The key is to develop a sense of a Mind behind and within the life drama/dream. When the nightmare comes, we will have an alternate tool/means than mere escape. But this “sense” probably has to be carried more or less subconsciously via a process of prior conditioning. It must be a kind of muscle memory, so it can pop up spontaneously in the moment of a nightmare-ish experience.

 

['Amir Alzzalam]

Death in the family, losing your, job, accidents, breakdown in relationships, can all lead to suffering. Suffering is a reaction to events in our life, but is suffering the only option? Can we somehow learn from tragedy, to become more resilient, patient and persevere, can we dig deeper and search for the human spirit of kindness to keep going.

"What does not kill us, makes us stronger" - Friedrich Nietzsche
"Living a meaningful life requires that we choose to take on a reasonable amount of pain" - Paul Bloom (psychologist)
Suffering is a part of life and a normal emotion. Suffering makes us more resilient to endure hardships in life.

 

[otherbrother]

Hi @otherbrother –

I was going to comment on your post #12 above that your three 'loci' lend themselves to Trinitarian analogy, but your later post picks this out.


Christianity would dialogue with you there, but again, it depends upon metaphysical nuance and model. Advaita Vedanta, for example, talks most directly of non-duality, but at the same time preserves the 'transcendent absolute' – Aman is the 'inmost self' – but Shankara goes on to say that this Atman "is to deny that the body or any other empirically knowable factor is the Self and to designate what is left as real, even though it cannot be expressed in words" – it's here, in the inexpressible, 'where all distinction ceases to exist' as Eckhart has it, that Advaita and Apophatic Christianity touch on common ground.


Again, I can see what you're saying, but another way is to detatch from self and all things that keep us where we are – one could argue that in seeking to 'own it' we want it on our (egoic) terms – but that's not what I think you're saying.


Oh yes!

There's a correspondence here with your mention of 'prevenient grace' elsewhere. In dogmatic terms it becomes an argument between Augustine (entirely dependent upon grace) and Pelagius (entirely self-determined) ... I'd say neither is absolutely right, nor absolutely wrong. God meets us where we are, so who made the first move?

In Buddhism, there's tariki and jiriki, 'other power' and 'self-power' – and I think on the Path, both are operative, and at times it seems one more than the other ...

Re this that you replied: “Again, I can see what you're saying, but another way is to detatch from self and all things that keep us where we are – one could argue that in seeking to 'own it' we want it on our (egoic) terms – but that's not what I think you're saying. “

You are correct that I mean beyond an ego-bound “Self.” Again, trusting that ego melts away in the deepest levels of consciousness and operation/being. What use would ego have in such a highly convergent zone. Nothing to defend once everything is available. In a way, clinging to ego is embracing the “law of deficit.” A stubborn individual ego makes a negative self fulfilling deficit by cutting itself off from the universe’s resources via its insistence on being a separate “individual”. I’m assuming that the “self” would realize it is no longer the merely individual “self” it once thought it was. Going deep (deep enough, that is) takes it wide.

 

[otherbrother]

"What does not kill us, makes us stronger" - Friedrich Nietzsche
"Living a meaningful life requires that we choose to take on a reasonable amount of pain" - Paul Bloom (psychologist)
Suffering is a part of life and a normal emotion. Suffering makes us more resilient to endure hardships in life.

When my youngest son lay in a hospital bed in a coma, I had one of only two visions I’ve had my entire life (now 68 years of age). I “saw” his brain neurons as light strands weaving back together. This could have simply been a semiconscious visual prayer for his healing, in which I used my made-up imagery to attempt to transfer healing energy to him. But then the vision session got more interesting and had me, my wife, son, and Jesus walking on a beach toward the ocean. Then I felt the peaceful ocean breeze blowing on our collective foreheads (no distinction of having individual foreheads). I called forth the archetype of the “oceanic” God, or else the oceanic God pulled my consciousness and sense of being there (in a “deep” zone).

As a grieving father who loves his son, I had nothing else I could do but go deep. Was it all imaginary, or did I actually interface with a metaphysical reality? I choose to believe a bit of both, in which I translated via personally meaningful images, but also dipped into an actually deep zone that facilitated the channel ing of healing energy.

The one other time I had a vision was after a meditation session. I saw a seed somehow going across the four seasons. I was driving a car at the time (having just left the roadside park where I had been meditating), and was frightened when I realized the vision had eclipsed my seeing of the (literal/actual) road before me!

 

[otherbrother]

When my youngest son lay in a hospital bed in a coma, I had one of only two visions I’ve had my entire life (now 68 years of age). I “saw” his brain neurons as light strands weaving back together. This could have simply been a semiconscious visual prayer for his healing, in which I used my made-up imagery to attempt to transfer healing energy to him. But then the vision session got more interesting and had me, my wife, son, and Jesus walking on a beach toward the ocean. Then I felt the peaceful ocean breeze blowing on our collective foreheads (no distinction of having individual foreheads). I called forth the archetype of the “oceanic” God, or else the oceanic God pulled my consciousness and sense of being there (in a “deep” zone).

As a grieving father who loves his son, I had nothing else I could do but go deep. Was it all imaginary, or did I actually interface with a metaphysical reality? I choose to believe a bit of both, in which I translated via personally meaningful images, but also dipped into an actually deep zone that facilitated the channel ing of healing energy.

The one other time I had a vision was after a meditation session. I saw a seed somehow going across the four seasons. I was driving a car at the time (having just left the roadside park where I had been meditating), and was frightened when I realized the vision had eclipsed my seeing of the (literal/actual) road before me!

Forgot to mention that I sensed Jesus escorting/leading us to the Ocean. Again, I’m assuming the helpful agent could have been a character from other faith traditions had I been raised in those, or had chosen to identify with them. Jesus happened to be personally meaningful to ME.

 

[RJM]

When my youngest son lay in a hospital bed in a coma, I had one of only two visions I’ve had my entire life (now 68 years of age). I “saw” his brain neurons as light strands weaving back together.

View attachment 2910

View attachment 2911

 

[otherbrother]

Neat!

 

[otherbrother]

Oh yes!

There's a correspondence here with your mention of 'prevenient grace' elsewhere. In dogmatic terms it becomes an argument between Augustine (entirely dependent upon grace) and Pelagius (entirely self-determined) ... I'd say neither is absolutely right, nor absolutely wrong. God meets us where we are, so who made the first move?

In Buddhism, there's tariki and jiriki, 'other power' and 'self-power' – and I think on the Path, both are operative, and at times it seems one more than the other ...

Loved that. If overall reality is as I believe it to be, then at its deepest, inmost, level Self and Other (as entities or as sources of power) probably is irrelevant.

I didn’t get much exposure to object relations theory in my psychology education, but SOME. Especially from reading (although on my own, rather than in school) RD Lang’s book, The Divided Self. As I recall, a main feature of healthy relationships and personality development is learning to accept the paradox of self and other as being both 2 and 1. Both separate AND united (as one). Basic trust early on goes a long way towards embracing this paradox. According to Lang, those who can’t suffer not only in the external, INTERpersonal, relationship sphere, but also in the internal, INTRApersonal sphere as well, sometimes developing into a self so divided that a schism of psychotic proportions occurs.

But these are psychological concepts independent of metaphysical concepts. The necessary acceptance of the paradox could simply be used like theorems in geometry,

The advantage of a compatible metaphysical model is that the theorem makes sense. If deepest realty is highly convergent, then the paradox of oneness and otherness is no longer paradoxical. It only stands to reason that those experiencing life in a physical surface domain would translate the convergence as being a “paradox.” But it’s just the limits of our lens. Deepest “reality” may even transcend Emanuel Kant’s two main “apriori” mental biases of in and out (spatial) and past, present, and future (temporal). Can a deep part of our consciousness “stand under” a way of conceptualizing overall realty WITHOUT using either of those apriori assumptions?

I say yes. But perhaps not masterfully or consistently. But “yes” enough to help make a more harmonious world and whole-feeling self.

Sorry I fell off the grid for awhile. Became busy and emotionally involved in a music project that ate up most of my free time and attention. It doesn’t mean I don’t value these in-depth discussions. I DO.

I guess (to modify one of John Lennon’s lyrics: Life is what happens when you’re busy blogging!

Love,
Darrell (otherbrother)

 

[otherbrother]

Loved that. If overall reality is as I believe it to be, then at its deepest, inmost, level Self and Other (as entities or as sources of power) probably is irrelevant.
I didn’t get much exposure to object relations theory in my psychology education, but SOME. Especially from reading (although on my own, rather than in school) RD Lang’s book, The Divided Self. As I recall, a main feature of healthy relationships and personality development is learning to accept the paradox of self and other as being both 2 and 1. Both separate AND united (as one). Basic trust early on goes a long way towards embracing this paradox. According to Lang, those who can’t suffer not only in the external, INTERpersonal, relationship sphere, but also in the internal, INTRApersonal sphere as well, sometimes developing into a self so divided that a schism of psychotic proportions occurs.
But these are psychological concepts independent of metaphysical concepts. The necessary acceptance of the paradox could simply be used like theorems in geometry,
The advantage of a compatible metaphysical model is that the theorem makes sense. If deepest realty is highly convergent, then the paradox of oneness and otherness is no longer paradoxical. It only stands to reason that those experiencing life in a physical surface domain would translate the convergence as being a “paradox.” But it’s just the limits of our lens. Deepest “reality” may even transcend Emanuel Kant’s two main “apriori” mental biases of in and out (spatial) and past, present, and future (temporal). Can a deep part of our consciousness “stand under” a way of conceptualizing overall realty WITHOUT using either of those apriori assumptions?
I say yes. But perhaps not masterfully or consistently. But “yes” enough to help make a more harmonious world and whole-feeling self.

Sorry I fell off the grid for awhile. Became busy and emotionally involved in a music project that ate up most of my free time and attention. It doesn’t mean I don’t value these in-depth discussions. I DO.
I guess (to modify one of John Lennon’s lyrics: Life is what happens when you’re busy blogging!
Love,
Darrell (otherbrother)

Lyrics to the song I was preparing for a gifted singer to perform in our church. I did the guitar fingerpicking, and chimed in during the chorus. :

Tend the Fire



Too long is the road

to find yourself

if you lose yourself

in the frantic steps you take,

even though you ache

for something real to feel

that you would hold onto.



It may not occur to you

what’s really worth holding onto,

but there’s a path that’s hidden

deep inside.



They say the temple doors are guarded

using flames. And most are thwarted,

but the hungry-hearted

sometimes feel so cold

they stumble toward its warmth.



It may not occur to you

How a thing that burns

might turn into something that’s

so wonderful to hold.



Don’t go outside to outrun your fear.

Just tend the fire of the heart hearth here.

(Repeat)





Don’t tighten up

and push the River.

Rest on the banks

of a gracious Giver.

If you push, you’ll just head down

the stream to a murky dream

that bears no fruit you want.



Only whirlpools

that will confuse you,

will abuse you.

So just stay put,

and sink into the

soft and fertile soil.



The temple has an inner sanctum.

If you enter, thank them.

They will show the way

to the home that you’ve been missing,

merely wishing,

wishing you were there.



It may not occur to you

how love’s been waiting to embrace you

with the arms and fingers

of its fire.



Don’t go outside to outrun your fear.

Just tend the fire of the heart hearth here.

(Repeat)