Whether we discuss religion or spirituality, we most often come up against the wall of trying to sort out immanence from transcendence. How does one get there? How do we keep clear in our heads which is which? How would I “know” reality from illusion?
JT
Knowing others is wisdom;
Knowing the self is enlightment.
Mastering others requires force;
Mastering the self needs strength.
He who knows he has enough is rich.
Perseverance is a sign of will power.
He who stays where he is endures.
To die but not to perish is to be eternally present.
What is the difference between reality and illusion? The border is too thin to tell a rule, which can explain all. As usual, it all depends on the individual point of view. THe way you see the reality may not be the way your friends think of it. Many people live life of dreams, they live in their own world, but their feel happy like in the reality. Some of them cannot recognize real life from life of dreams… But what is an illusion by itself? Illusion is option of brain, supporting imaginations. Illusion is unreal concept of smth. But who can tell what is reality? Reality is different for everyone; you can see reality in walking in the park, smbd else can think of reality when stays in front of the computer. You think his life is unreal, because cyber life is unreal by itself, but he connects to his life like he’s connecting to reality. This is his reality, he doesn’t like park walking.
Hi JT
Immanence as I understand it is defined in Dictionary.com as:
Transcendence is defined as:
Living in dreams as we do, our awareness is very limited and the void between our awareness and our capacity for awareness is filled with imagination. Attempts to isolate reality in such circumstances doesn’t seem profitable. Maintaining such a state of self awareness that could result in a higher degree of realism would require both sustained periods of consciousness and will which are lacking in us as we are.
Immanence within our common presence allows us to experience our higher possibilities by sacrificing it. This leads to transcendence. But without a degree of “I Am” able to sacrifice itself, there is nothing to transcend and man just continues the cycle of dust to dust. As we are we lack the ability to discriminate between reality and illusion within ourselves other than in a minimal sense. This is the purpose of “Know Thyself” which has gone out of fashion in favor of “Create your own reality.”
Nick,
Your statement can only make sense in a static ‘one behind many’ universe. In a processual universe, creating reality is all there is…
JT
JT
I don’t know why or how you can consider the continual cycles of evolution and involution occurring within a universe of continual motion as “static?”
The cycles must follow the laws of vibration for the universe to maintain itself which leads to cosmological harmony much like the musical notes of a scale on the piano produce a harmonious flow from which chords and the like are created. I can’t see how this could be perceived as “static.”
Nick,
I was simply referring to your quote. Know thyself and create your own reality are the same thing. Dividing them into seperate concepts implies that there is a self to be discovered. A self with boundaries and borders. I don’t think you see the implications of your own statement. You can’t have it both ways - at least I can’t.
JT
JT
We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this. You don’t seem to draw any distinction between objective and subjective qualities of perception. If it works for you then that should be what is important for you.
Tentative wrote:
Hi JT,
I guess one way of sorting out immanence and transcendence in theology of the past has been to go whole-heartedly with one or the other, ignoring the other experience. But I personally find that “one or the other” mentality untrue to my experience of feeling part of something holy and perceiving something beyond myself.
If there is a term that comes closest to describing my take on immanence and transcendence it would be panentheism, all in god. To me there is something sacred in all life (immanence) “For every thing that lives is Holy” --Blake, “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.” However, one must not presume to be ALL that is holy (pantheism). In my opinion the divine is not limited to the sum of creation, there is an element (god if you will or the creative force of the universe) that still transcends each individual life (although each life partakes in that creation and forever changes it). I think an example of this careful sort of thinking can be found in the Yahwist’s depiction of the divine and the irony that humankind is created in god’s image, commanded to “Breathe with my breath,” and be like me (the divine); however, the second commandment is “Do not presume to be too much like me.” So while there is something immanent in the potential to live with the breath of the creator, one must not “presume” to be all there is to creation (one must not presume to be just like god).
Perhaps “illusion” comes in when we think we have completely transcended the transcendent, which of course is a paradox and impossible. But it is just as delusive to think there is no immanence (that we are nothing), that the spiritual is all transcendent. I don’t know if this really gets us anywhere practically, “practical” has never been my strong point.
Hi Noos,
Thank you. A thoughtful response. I have to agree with you. I am agnostic, which I don’t advertise much anymore, and I find that same intuitive feeling. There is that ‘something’ there at the edge of vision that inspires awe and reverence. I have no other words than divinity, God, [insert name here]. At the same time, I see the paradox of sensing without ‘knowing’. (howls from the faithful) Our illusions and self-made delusions amplify and reinforce our knowing we cannot know, and so we plunge ahead hopefully doing the best within us.
Practical? I think so. To be in awe of the universe and to be aware of that something without knowing is precisely where we should be.
A part of my intention with this topic was to show that all of our religiosity finally comes down to personal opinion. As for our spirituality? Well, lets go back to the intuitive experiencing of our lives.
JT
my opine on this;
Reality is the mire of the day dragged through the illusion of tomorrow.
Both reality and illusion are distractions to the “core” of ourselves. We can no more reject the mire of reality, than we can immerse ourselves in the waters of illusion. But we can’t find the truth without pushing these concepts to the side. The real trick is convincing your mind to reject reality and ignore illusion.
my 3 cents.
Scyth
A bottle of good scotch does wonders for this approach.
If you reject reality, something has to replace it which if not real must be imaginary. Yet you want to ignore illusion. I can only take this to mean that you want to ignore illusion that is in some way upsetting while keeping the satisfying illusion in place of reality.
This is indeed “creating your own reality.”
what is reality? what is illusion?
reality is what we make it, illusion doubly so.
so we unmake reality to find the fibers of unreality.
We destroy illusion to find the tatters of dreams.
then we open the door.
Nick,
I think you may have missed the point. Perceived ‘reality’ is part of the illusion. Perceived reality is a projection of, in your terms, ‘corrupt ego’. If we are to approach ‘objective reality’ in genuine awareness, we must let go of not just illusions, but our illusory reality as well.
Objective reality is parsed by stripping away our preconceptions and seeing directly.
I know this does violence to levels and layers, but emptying out is what is necessary if we are to see.
JT
Hi Angel,
I didn’t respond to your post because I couldn’t quite see how Chp 33 could answer the question posed. I’m not questioning that knowing one’s self is enlightenment, but it doesn’t quite explain how one would know one’s self. Or maybe it does, and I’m not seeing it.
Please explain how one would know that which is ‘knowing’, and that which is illusion?
Enlighten me, please?
JT
JT
I was responding to scyth who was making his particular distinction between reality and illusion:
My point is that if “mire of the day” is considered reality then it seems reasonable to attempt to replace it with something like “joy of the day” or some such slogan and create your own reality. I’ve emphasized the human condition as sleep enough for you to know howI view perceived “reality”.
The corrupt ego interprets but many of our experiences are quite real. if you stub your toe and it hurts, it is a real experience. How it is rationalized and who you blame for it is an interpretation.
Real experience and objecxtive reality are different since real experiences are results of universal laws that exist as objective reality. For us to experience objective reality, we must be capable of objective consciousness. Since this only occurs in flashes for us and is imemediately interpreted to become “comprehensible,” we are incapable of the experience of objective reality. It does require a gradual peeling away of illusion but it is not something we can do. This is why the void is created to be filled with spirit. Objective reality is a quality of the spirit and not possible for our normal emotional and physical energies which is why we are incapable, as we are, of peeling away these created things. Our “being” doesn’t allow it.
Hi JT,
No way, I have enough trouble trying to enlighten myself.
I don’t really know how to answer your question. How do I get myself into these situations? I’ll try not to ramble too much…bear with me…and hopefully through our exchange we can come up with something valuable.
“He who stays where he is endures.”
Osho says that ‘turning in’ is not a turning at all. That going in is not a going at all. Any effort to go inward is a going outward.
He who endures knows that the only true Reality is enlightenment and that enlightenment exists within us at any given moment. Enlightenment is the merging with the absolute. (Knowing ourselves). The only true way to know this is to experience it. If I don’t experience it then it cannot be so. If I don’t experience it then all things are illusory.
There have been many who have experienced it and expressed it to us in words. These words have been so profound that for some of us we have glimpsed Reality. Those who have experienced and expressed have given instructions on the path to follow. Without ever walking the path we would never know. Faith because of a glimpse is our promise.
To die but not to perish is to be eternally present."
To let go of the illusory is to be enlightened.
A
Do you rate osho as a spiritual master?
All human beings are sleeping Buddhas. All Buddhas are awakened human beings.
A
"We must know that, within finitude, we may find the inspirations of a true religion, a religion that is equal to life because it is based on life itself. Then we shall be inspirited to rescue it from nuclear war and incendiary terrorism, the diminutions of pollution and overpopulation, and the depredations of ignorance.
Let us begin while we yet may. It is not, as you know, necessary to kill a tree entirely to find oneself sitting by while it continues to brown into a lifeless remnant.
Let us begin with what we know for certain: we have life. And then let us derive from that all of our beliefs. I suggest that the basic tenet of such a religion would be Faith In Life – a trust in its greatness and logic – and that it contains within it the religious expression of Faith Through Life, that through the natural care and fulfillment of life we may not only find in it considerate joy but also express our truest reverence to whatever created it. "
read the rest free at toreasonpublishing.com
Mirth
PS. I didn’t write the book but want to share its promise.[/b][/list][/list]