Wholeness

[felix_dakat]

To lose sight of wholeness is to fall into ideology.

Wholeness is beyond number which begins only with duality.

Duality is nonetheless of ontological origin.

Duality’s reason for being is love-- the union of the feminine and the masculine, the yin and the yang, the lunar and the solar.

The fruit of this bipolarization is the child.

This is the foundational archetypal myth.

[felix_dakat]

I’ve never been a particular fan of Norman Vincent Peale. But Gary Lachman writes that for Peale prayer was a way of becoming “in tune with the infinite” a phrase he borrowed from Ralph Waldo Trine. “All the universe is in vibration,” wrote Peale “and prayer was a way of aligning our vibrations with those of the person we were praying for, as well as with God, the source of all vibrations.” I find that proposition rather a-Peale-ing.

[Ecmandu]

@felix dakat

To lose sight of wholeness is to fall into ideology.

Wholeness is beyond number which begins only with duality.

Duality is nonetheless of ontological origin.

Duality’s reason for being is love-- the union of the feminine and the masculine, the yin and the yang, the lunar and the solar.

The fruit of this bipolarization is the child.

This is the foundational archetypal myth.

My term is ‘otherness’ not ‘duality’

I don’t like these folks who stroll into life and say inane things like “there must be evil for there to be good”

Fuck that shit!

[Dan1 (Dan~)]

@Ecmandu

My term is ‘otherness’ not ‘duality’
I don’t like these folks who stroll into life and say inane things like “there must be evil for there to be good”
Fuck that shit!

Sadistic vicious hateful corrupting rage.

Satan doesn’t “test” everyone.

Satan is not necessary.

Satan is really a crappy idea.
One of the worst mistakes of christianity.

[felix_dakat]

My approach is phenomenological. Metaphysics is beyond my paygrade. When God became identified with the summum bonum, a dichotomous evil became necessary. Hence Satan. Likewise Christ necessitates Antichrist. The vision of the New Jerusalem is the symbol of wholeness in which the Christian Bible culminates.

[Ecmandu]

@Dan~

@Ecmandu

My term is ‘otherness’ not ‘duality’
I don’t like these folks who stroll into life and say inane things like “there must be evil for there to be good”
Fuck that shit!

Sadistic vicious hateful corrupting rage.

Satan doesn’t “test” everyone.

Satan is not necessary.

Satan is really a crappy idea.
One of the worst mistakes of christianity.

And Judaism if we’re going to be accurate. Look at the book of Job!

[felix_dakat]

@Ecmandu

@felix dakat

To lose sight of wholeness is to fall into ideology.

Wholeness is beyond number which begins only with duality.

Duality is nonetheless of ontological origin.

Duality’s reason for being is love-- the union of the feminine and the masculine, the yin and the yang, the lunar and the solar.

The fruit of this bipolarization is the child.

This is the foundational archetypal myth.

My term is ‘otherness’ not ‘duality’

I don’t like these folks who stroll into life and say inane things like “there must be evil for there to be good”

Fuck that shit!

Your reactivity is evidence of their psychological significance to you.

[felix_dakat]

@Dan~

@Ecmandu

My term is ‘otherness’ not ‘duality’
I don’t like these folks who stroll into life and say inane things like “there must be evil for there to be good”
Fuck that shit!

Sadistic vicious hateful corrupting rage.

Satan doesn’t “test” everyone.

Satan is not necessary.

Satan is really a crappy idea.
One of the worst mistakes of christianity.

The idea of a destructive god, deity, deva, devil, or evil spirit didn’t begin with Christianity or Judaism. Angra Mainyu was the adversary of Ahura Mazda, the good God of ancient Zoroastrianism, for instance. Devilish figures appear to be archetypes of the collective unconscious. They were probably with us in prehistory. They populate world mythology. Hermes, Prometheus, Lucifer, and Satan in the book of Job are trickster figures.

[felix_dakat]

@felix dakat

To lose sight of wholeness is to fall into ideology.

Wholeness is beyond number which begins only with duality.

Duality is nonetheless of ontological origin.

Duality’s reason for being is love-- the union of the feminine and the masculine, the yin and the yang, the lunar and the solar.

The fruit of this bipolarization is the child.

This is the foundational archetypal myth.

Although wholeness seems at first sight to be nothing but an abstract idea like anima and animus it is nevertheless empirical insofar as it is anticipated by the psyche in the form of spontaneous or autonomous symbols. These are the quaternity or mandala symbols, which occur not only in the dreams of modern people who have never heard of them, but are widely disseminated in the historical records of many people’s and many epochs. Their significance as symbols of unity and totality is amply confirmed by history as well as by empirical psychology.

What are first looks like an abstract idea stands in reality for something that exists and can be experienced that demonstrates its a priori presence spontaneously. wholeness is this an objective factor that confronts the subject independently of him like anima or animus and just as the latter have a higher position in the hierarchy then the shadow so wholeness lays claim to a position and a value superior to those of the syzygy. The syzygy seems to represent at least a substantial portion of it if not actually two halves of the totality formed by the royal brother-sister pair and hence the tension of opposites from which the divine child is born as the symbol of unity.

C.G Jung, Aion

[felix_dakat]

Some here worship the will.

I’m not here to tell you what to do.

The Tao Te Ching chapter 22 says:

“If you want to become whole, let yourself be partial.
If you want to become straight, let yourself be crooked.
If you want to become full, let yourself be empty.
If you want to be reborn, let yourself die.
If you want to be given everything, give everything up.”

According to the Tao, enantiodromia, the tendency of things to become their opposites, is more powerful then the human will. Wholeness then is not static. A sense of wholeness involves recognizing that becoming is a dynamic process.

[felix_dakat]

Those of us who are relatively high in neuroticism can expect to find help in stoic philosophers like Epictetus, cognitive therapy, New Thought practices and positive thinking. Such practices can help us to achieve the psychic balance necessary for a sense of wholeness.

[promethean75]

We’ll need a context, of course.

[felix_dakat]

“Can I explain the Friend to one for whom he is no Friend?”

Jalal-uddin Rumi

[iambiguous]

@promethean75

We’ll need a context, of course.

I already tried that:

@felix dakat

@iambiguous

@felix dakat

To paraphrase CG Jung, wholeness is a gift which can’t be fabricated by art or science. You have to grow into it.

We’ll need a context of course.

See above. There’s already a context.

See above, and find one.

[felix_dakat]

@iambiguous

I already tried that:

@felix dakat

@iambiguous

We’ll need a context of course.

See above. There’s already a context.

See above, and find one.

Can I explain the Friend to one for whom he is no Friend?"

Jalal-uddin Rumi

[iambiguous]

@felix dakat

Can I explain the Friend to one for whom he is no Friend?"

Jalal-uddin Rumi

Now all we need to do is to connect this to the OP…

@felix dakat

To paraphrase CG Jung, wholeness is a gift which can’t be fabricated by art or science. You have to grow into it.

…and choose a particular context in which there might be conflicting assumptions regarding what it means to embody wholeness.

You know, as long as that particular context is never actually named.

[felix_dakat]

@iambiguous

@felix dakat

Can I explain the Friend to one for whom he is no Friend?"

Jalal-uddin Rumi

Now all we need to do is to connect this to the OP…

@felix dakat

To paraphrase CG Jung, wholeness is a gift which can’t be fabricated by art or science. You have to grow into it.

…and choose a particular context in which there might be conflicting assumptions regarding what it means to embody wholeness.

You know, as long as that particular context is never actually named.

You are the context O “fragmented” one.

[iambiguous]

@felix dakat

@iambiguous

@felix dakat

Can I explain the Friend to one for whom he is no Friend?"

Jalal-uddin Rumi

Now all we need to do is to connect this to the OP…

@felix dakat

To paraphrase CG Jung, wholeness is a gift which can’t be fabricated by art or science. You have to grow into it.

…and choose a particular context in which there might be conflicting assumptions regarding what it means to embody wholeness.

You know, as long as that particular context is never actually named.

You are the context O “fragmented” one.

That’s Stooge talk: making me the issue.

Oh, and by the way, it’s official: you’re Larry.

[felix_dakat]

You wish to objectify religion. To discover true religion you must find it in yourself. So yes it’s all about you.

[felix_dakat]

Boy psychology…is charged with the struggle for dominance of others, in some form or another. And it is often caught up in the wounding of self, as well as others. It is sadomasochistic. Man psychology is always the opposite. It is nurturing and generative, not wounding and destructive.

Moore, Robert. King, Warrior, Magician, Lover (pp. 5-6). HarperOne. Kindle Edition.

Not that anyone would ever practice “Boy psychology” here on ILP.