Not strange at all, it is just strange to exclude. For if one is excluded from the whole it diminshes the rest. But always remember there is survival struggles in the pond, if too many fish, the pond dies, if too many plants the pond dies. If too many pebbles and so on. A pond is balanced, it can withstand shifts and changes and certain imbalances but not massive imbalance.
Exclusion is a form of survival in the pond a defensive measure designed to protect and balance others from taking too much space in the pond.
It is just strange that sentient creatures can’t share and maintain balance. Too much of anything is detrimental and too little of something else is just as bad.
You seemed to have learned this well in matters of including and condoning selective expression of religious/philosphical bigotry. You enhance it rather well.
Whereas I can understand your neo-Darwinism with regard to natural resources and land, is it the same with the spiritual or religious? Haven’t we all a deep inner need to fathom out existence which could lead us to each other rather than away from each other? I find that the “wretchedness†of man is a pitiful condition because it implies that we have this need, but at the same time, we have our dualistic or polar views that dominate us. This means that we can’t see the whole pond or that we have an inbuilt neglect of a half of our existence, like someone who has suffered a stroke and cannot feel or register half of their body or anything on that side of them.
It is the inner balance that needs to be brought in line with the external balance of reality/ nature/ pond, since, like you say, the pond is dependent upon it’s balance – but so are we. I feel that the pseudo-Christianity that took the place of the initial movement when it came to power has effectively turned this discussion into a question of morality whilst ignoring its own decadence – a good example for the blindness I mean. The struggle we are in is the rush to gain spiritual balance before that pond dies.
But it is not possible as long as we continue to condone selective expressions of religious/philosophical bigotry while denying others. How to do that is the real question.
Bob, I am not a religious person, most would consider me anti religion not just atheist. Because most religions condone anti tolerance and nonacceptance, Oh they say they condone and accept but in subtle ways they don’t. It is couched as a subtle my way or the highway plattitude.
I am not anti religion but, I am. People need their beliefs like they need to breathe. Some just breathe religion too much and get light headed.
There is a line, at one end of this line there is a person that believes one way, totally fanatic about their beliefs, at the other end is a person that believes just the opposite and is totally fanatic. The rest of humanity rides along in between.
Now most if not all religions claim that their god, their one supreme god/godess created humans and that their way is the right way. I see a whole lot missing with this picture. Since there is with all religions only one supreme being responsible it seems to me that there would only be one.
For if there were others then would not humanity have vastly different physical appearances? It seems to me different God, different attributes or physical shapes. So I figure since we all are the same physically there must only have been one and only one creator.If indeed there was.
Now my next question is why any difference at all? Physical is easy. But mental is harder to answer, except if you aproach it in one way. We are different because in our differences we learn different things. We all bring different knowledge and beliefs to the table.
Why are the differences important? Because it is a lesson about overcoming, unity and gain, plus probably a whole lot more. Until true tolerance and acceptence is felt by most, then we will never graduate past where we stand. We must learn this lesson to move on forward. We will gain many things if we learn to accept and tolerate.
If one group has too strong a foot hold it causes the lesson to move further from our reach. But, only if the rest lay down.
Christianity is strong but, it still is not in control nor overrunning, yet. And all the yelling, name calling, condemning, and fighting is not going to make things better. There are better ways.
But it is all impossible since as the Wretched Man, we easily are tempted to become slaves to our prejudice. How can any lesson be learned if some resort to selective expressions of religious/philosophical bigotry as a means of attempted bullying and others support it through silence and looking the other way? Without the courage to stand up and be counted as against such tactics and those that use them, all the above is only imagination
This internet connection that the world has now for the Average person, is knocking down barriers right and left, Its slow but constant. Its not the world leaders that must change it is the followers. They must put down the hate and fear and prejudice. It is happening Nick. People from all walks of life and religion are here at ILP and other sites. Communicating. We have never had this much communication in our hands before.
People are becoming more understanding and accepting. Islamics, Taoists, christians and etc… are learning that we all pay bills put our kids in school, laugh , cry, hurt, bleed and die. I have met people that are vastly different then me here, and yet we converse peacefully and exchange thoughts.
What a problem is and it is a major one: People are trying to push too fast and causing unrest about the slowness of change. which causes more people to dig in harder, which causes anger on both sides. It took centuries to get this way, Lasting benificial change certainly is not going to happen in a decade or two.
Patience and courage will change things. Courage to apologize, courage to say hey you are different but I like you, courage to learn from each other and have no fear of being harmed by your kind. Courage to stand up for your enemy when their only real crime is different belief.Courage to be the first to put your words and weapons down in peace. When you can do this Nick, when we all can do this , one lesson down and more to follow.
But, Nick the trick is not to wait for others to get on the dance floor.
Just jump on that dance floor with me and we change things even if its just a bit. Because someone is going to follow you, then another and another will follow, you just have to have courage and patience.
Then our great grandchildren will laugh and smile like kids should.
First we have to agree uipon what is worth changing. Do you believe that it would be helpful to change our normal tendency towards acceptance and the condoning of selective expression of religious and philosophical bigotry? I believe so. Do you?
This is a point that I have often heard, and I would be so bold as to say, “Of course you are religious – in your own way!†Our spiritual needs are personal first of all, but when we start exchanging with others, they become religious. Religion is an activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion and can have many sources. Very often there is a similarity between sources of religion or spirituality, which makes it odd that they are so exclusive. To understand this, we must understand that religion (especially in Europe) has been infiltrated by those in power for centuries. You can imagine how difficult it is for these lords and ladies to accept that they are “wretched†like the rest of humanity and so we find that Church history took very odd paths.
I am on record here as having said many times that there are reasons for not being a “Christian†– you have mentioned a number of them. But I separate that from a returning to our sentience and our spirituality. I find that Christian scripture still provides a base for spirituality and so I try my best to promote it where I am. It isn’t easy I would admit, since we are all caught up in our own destinies and there is always the need for the brave to go humbly forward – a very Christ-like picture, even if it is hardly “Christian†in our day. Am I the best example? No, since I am as wretched as the rest. But if we can find enough to stand up, perhaps we can move those mountains.
Nick and Bob, I am going to attempt to answer both of you
One size fits all. People believe that. If it fits them and many, many more, it will fit you too. That may work with our physical clothing, well, except for me I always look like a kid in mommys clothes wearing that one size fits all. It does not work for our mental self. We can’t all fit into one belief system. It will never work. We can exchange thoughts and beliefs and share. But preaching only works on those that already follow your way.
Beating a person verbally about how you feel,your beliefs, puts them on the imediate defense. If you are honest with yourself you will know this to be true because, I know you both can feel that little button get pushed on you when someone pushes you.
We must not allow our selves to be pushed into a single belief system, that is stagnation and so against our survival and growth.
If someone pushes. Pat them on the head and walk away.
If that doesn’t work, listen to them totally, let them finish, and get it out of their system. then pat them on the head and walk away.
If they are particularly stubborn go verbally ballistic then calm down fast… Pat them on the head and walk away. Now guys, I mean verbal pats on the head Ok, Not literal.
Why do these things? because it promotes curiosity. It really does. People get curious about calm behavour when the person should have fought back or argued back. Once curiousity is achieved that means they are more likely to hear you and learn. Keeping the curiousity going just depends on how you present yourself.
Insults, creates more bigotry, tolerance leads to acceptance, Preaching leads to defense. Sharing when asked or encouraged, leads to growth.
Courage leads to patience.
In a very real sense, you both seem to believe that one size fits all in your own ways. I have read both of you here on this thread. And trust me your words seem to want that. Also You both want the same thing for humanity you just want it done your way because, one size fits all.
You both are good caring men and stubborn, and prejudiced.
be prejudiced against stupidity not ignorance. You can help ignorance but, you can’t help stupidity. You both are just ignorant of each other. Because you both are too busy beating each other over the head, not patting each other on the head. Promote curiosity not defense. It works better and saves you from ulcers.
Read all my posts here then, go back and reread the thread entirely from a different view. Have the courage to see from a different view. Be patient and couragous. See how you could have worded things differently.
Ahem, do you have the feeling I have “beaten†you? I thought I had made it clear that you do things your way and there are many reasons not to do them my way – but what was more important to me was that we still can have a common ground where we can support each other.
OK, I appreciate your advice …;-)
Ahem, excuse me interrupting, but I don’t want it all done my way, but I want to show people the commonalities between us. I am familiar with my own origins, and I have attempted to speak with many others. I find i.e. that on a mystical level, religions (and the non-religious) find similarities which they can build on. That is why Tentative and I found an understanding, although we were agreed that we would remain on our sides of the fence, there were others since too.
I have often said to Nick that there are areas where we could agree, but I find him terribly negative and sometimes quite a snob, so I think I agree with you on most of what you have written.
Bob I am editing my first answer because I realized I answered wrong.
Why did you just attack Nick in your answer to me? Calling him negative and a snob.
I asked you both to reread the thread especially were it pertains to you two and I . well did you? and did you think of perhaps ways you could have said things different? Or looked at things different? It takes two to argue and when both are arguing that means neither is listening because you both are defensive.
Bob, you were supposed to not agree with everything. Not all applied to you and not all applied to Nick. And some applied to you both. It is a kind of pick and choose answer. If you get something out of it then we are both ahead of the game.
Yes, Bob I think you do the one size fits all thing. So do we all at times, we just need to recognize when and how we do it. that is all I am trying to say. its not a slam, it is more of a pointer.
I appreciate your attempt to point out areas where we may be tripping over each other, but I think that the whole thing is getting a little out of hand.
You are welcome to your opinion and I’m sure there is some truth in everything you wrote, and yes, Nick and I have our commonalities and our differences and I have tried to point to where I see them. Nick will no doubt see it differently.
However, we are now further off topic than we ever were. Again, thanks!
Seriously though, there is some truth to that. My concern with Bob’s approach is that it is based on a lie. Your last post was similar which is why I asked the direct question to you. I don’t mean intentional lies as a means to an end but the creation of a picture that doesn’t exist as a path towards a greater good. It is believed by well meaning people that the creation of this lie will somehow bring people together. I sincerely doubt this.
If my philosophy is correct as suggested in the Cave analogy that collectively we live primarily as blind reactive creatures responding to external influences. The same external conditions will promote the same internal conditions repeating the same results.
The trouble with the way Christianity and the Tao is being interpreted on this board is the assumption that we have as we are some capacity for choice to make the profitable inner changes suggested by all the great teachings
This idea of the Watercourse Way is naive here since it assumes that one can actually be inwardly free enough to reach intuition. You have no idea how much inner work is required to acquire some true inner freedom. Denying our true inner condition of psychological slavery just means escapism is substituted for intuition.
The same is true with Christendom as described by Bob. It sounds nice and makes wonderful reading but denies the fallen human nature. Christianity, on the other hand, seeks to transform human nature itself by bringing conscious inner unity to the chaotic psychological inner man. Nothing cutsey pooh here; it requires serious honest inner efforts.
This is why Bob defines me as a snob and negative. It appears negative to speak the truth about our nature. People don’t want to hear it and prefer wonderful thoughts. It also appears snobbish to suggest that some look down on it and not content within themselves preferring to escape from it as suggested in the Cave Analogy. Who am I to say that it is all stuff and nonsense and seek the way out as opposed to containing the endless battle of spiritually blind mankind vying for egotistical position.
But this is what was suggested by Plato and also esoteric Christianity for example. Our first responsibility is to admit the human condition in ourselves but to suggest it appears both snobbish and negative.
Naturally if this was a PTA meeting I would not say such things because there, image is everything. But when the word “philosophy” is used, it invites a certain open mindedness in theory anyway. I must assume there may be a minority of lurkers who are open to the value of such humility.
If you sincerely see what prevents you from addressing the question honestly, you will also see why collectively we all do. If you see that it is just one small problem and escape mechanism collective man uses including ourselves, it becomes obvious how difficult what is suggested by Christianity to “Carry ones Cross” actually is. It requires great inner work to acquire the freedom to do so for its psychological benefit.
Notice that I am not calling anyone “bad.” I am only referring to what we are.
The societal perspective seeks to change what we do while the religious perspective in essence seeks to help allow us to change what we are. The worst thing is when they are unconsciously mixed and held together through inner lies. but this is what normally happens
This is the idea and when a person seriously experiments with this in the quest of self knowledge, it becomes obvious how difficult it is. To serve God means develop a conscious perspective in relation to the higher and lower within us allowing us to become impartial to life and allow this impartiality to guide decisions taking our acquired corrupt egotism out of the equation. It is nice to write wonderful speeches about ego and all that but try to experience what it means. It is a big thing when we honestly are able to admit our helplessness in front of it. The idea then is not to content ourselves with it and wallow in it avoiding what needs to be done, but to strive through self knowledge for some inner unity that allows for such change.
The societal meaning of learning from one another puts everyone on the same level. the esoteric meaning asserts that some people are further along, less blocked than others. Real Christian love is the more advanced helping the less so as an act of love and respect for this human effort to become oneself. This is why Jesus insisted on the washing of the feet though so embarrassing to Peter. He as yet still could not see that Jesus real value was his ability to serve rather than be put on a pedestal. We cover up this inability with wonderful speeches and thoughts serving to deny what WE are. This is the great value of this “bigotry” experience. It reveals our helplessness. Ask yourself this honest question. What prevents Kris from saying that the selective bigoted expressions in these matters of religious/philosophical beliefs is wrong. What Tentative did was wrong to use such a tactic and Bob was wrong to condone it. Whenever it is used it is wrong not just ethically but logically since it destroys communication. When you see it in yourself you will see it in the world
The truth is we do not want to rock the boat or disturb friends so look the other way. But virtually all of the ills in society you speak against occur for this same reason; the inability to be impartial towards them and define them as they are, and in this case, wrong both ethically and logically.
A poem from Simone Weil someone discovered in her notes to conclude:
LMFO thanks guys you two made my day! I leave you to your well of wretched man LMAO have fun. Don’t ask me any more questions either of you two boys., LOL I think I will just be an amused observer.
If we exchange a “capacity for choice†with a “capacity to be calledâ€, we could even find agreement. I believe that there numerous occasions in the life of a human being, when he is called to recognise his wretchedness. This is also independent of the cultural background. I think that the Ineffable is universal and therefore able to reach us all – by whatever means. The idea that Christianity or Judaism or Islam could be the only vehicles for the salvation of humanity has always disturbed me. The walls that human beings build are far more impervious than the causeways are able to bridge our differences, and I could never subscribe to a cultural or racial superiority.
Therefore, by my understanding, there has to be a universal answer to this condition. It may be true that only a few seek the narrow (or straight) gate, but it would be sinister to hide it within a cultural surrounding. Consequently I rule out a purely Christian answer and see in the mystic traditions of all religious movements a inner common understanding – despite all external differences.
This inner work is what concerns me. From a Christian point of view and considering the fact that Jesus went to the simple people of his country and confronted his learned friends with their hypocrisies; and considering the fact that Paul’s mission managed without the “wise of this ageâ€, the message of salvation is not a message that requires extensive intellectual abilities – but it requires faith.
Not at all, I consider you negative because you presuppose the failure of people without just giving everyone the chance. I consider you a snob because you affect an offensive air of self-satisfied superiority and you have told me how you admire and seek association with people you regard as social superiors.
These ideas of “higher and lower†all become topsy-turvy when we approach Christ, whose servitude to the salvation of Mankind was exemplary and who continually contradicted the ideas of his contemporaries about high and low. The idea of non-hierarchical community is from Christ (Mat 23:6-12 ):
… they love also the chief couches in the supper, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and the salutations in the market-places, and to be called by men, Master, Master.
But you – you should not be called Master, for one is your teacher – the Christ, and all you are brothers;
and you call no-one your father on the earth, for one is your Father, who is in the heavens …
And the greater of you shall be your servant,
and whoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled,
and whoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.
If you recall, I was the one who posted the thread on the idea that the unity of religions exists at a level far beyond our comprehension. From this perspective, what we know on the surface of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are just exoteric man made interpretations so how could either be the exclusive vehicles.
I agree that there are times people are called but like explained in the parable of the Sower, it often becomes lost.
Jesus’ “presence” which was the visible representation of his consciousness, allowed people to experience presence or inner alignment within themselves and self awareness. For those open to it, it was the experience of an entirely new perspective, a looking down at oneself and the earth from above so to speak. Associative thought is not its source but consciousness is. Consequently extraordinary intellectual abilities are not necessary. Instead a person needed to acquire presence to experience again what was so valuable for the experience of human meaning and potential. Faith is necessary but not faith In Jesus as much as faith OF Jesus. This faith is related to the power of attention and presence.
The disciples were not blindly following Jesus around and falling asleep. There were many exercises used to teach them. From what I’ve read, even sacred dance often used in Tibet was used. From my old notes:
There was more going on then just acting meek and humble. There was active inner work going on lead by an awakened being for the purpose of awakening with the goal of re-birth.
I know it appears cold but I believe that man on earth exists for the purpose of the earth and not the other way around as is normally believed. It is only a minority then that can consciously awaken to this condition and begin to consciously outgrow this purpose. I do not dare to try to define this minority.
Actually, if I’m not kicked out of this place, I was thinking of writing an essay called “Nietzsche, Simone, and Jesus,” describing what I believe to be the transition of the overman into what Simone describes as choice of necessities. Hopefully it would clarify some of this.
I am the one willing to annoy the Great Beast. One doesn’t do this and wish to associate social superiors for status. I desire to associate those who “understand;” who have acquired presence. This has nothing to do with social.superiors.
The biblical passage you quote refers to what should be our attitude towards the external world. In other words, don’t follow the experts. However 1 cor 12 gives a good description of a living church:
The whole of it is instructive but for the purposes of this post:
Notice how differences are necessary and valued and not ignored as is the modern New Age approach for reasons of self esteem. 27 and beyond indicates a natural hierarchy that is not at all offensive when seen in the context of everything being necessary for the body and respected as such. The difference between a living and dead church is that in the living the higher, the more advanced help the less to awaken and expand their talents for the sake of the common good while in normal dead churches , the weaker are used for the secular goals of the higher .
Yes I can see asking you that question is a real laugher. But for the benefit of lurkers looking on I’d like to give an example of these attitudes of avoidance taking possible behavioral progressions.
I don’t mean that either Bob or Kris would act in the way I will describe but I will use this as vivid example about how people can say one thing one day and conveniently forget its importance on the next. I was thinking of starting a thread on this but felt it would be taken wrongly and cause far more harm than good. The idea itself is important. Again, it is not to insinuate either Bob or Kris in this but only expressing what can happen when we become used to passing the buck or making a joke out of it.
I am referring to what is now known as Genovese Syndrome. It is a term devised by psychology to define this tendency we have to look the other way even though we often express wonderful thoughts of doing the opposite, Read the following article and you will see what I’m driving at. People became so conditioned to avoiding trouble that when something should have been said, it wasn’t and Kitty Genovese was killed. It is another example of us as the Wretched Man. We can say one thing and do another.
So people often avoid asking questions, don’t think, become amused observers and sometimes die as a result. Again this is not a reflection on anyone in particular but part of the collective human condition of which I am a part.
At what point to we have the obligation to say or do the right thing? I don’t know if there is a collective answer but I believe it should be a personal question for us all.
I’m sorry, I should have realised that time flies and you couldn’t know about my earlier posts. Thu Jan 01, 2004, a year before you started posting here, there was the thread on mysticism (which I didn’t start) in which we began talking about commonalities between the mystic traditions of numerous religions. ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi … t=#1578934
There were probably many before then too, but what is important, is that there have been many people posting in that direction over the years.
If you take an introspective view of that Parable, you will find that much is lost on us too, so why not focus on the good news – where the seed finds good ground it grows (some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold). That would be the positive approach that I mean. It is no secret that the “explanation†of the parable was added later.
This Meta-Vista is also possible from within without that magical “presence†to bump-start people. The sad thing about your idea of “presence†is that you can’t explain it but rather people are expected to believe that they must find others who “have†it. It is only a short-cut to misleading and misuse of those gullible enough. I find that the inner Way is more protective of those who might not be able to fend for themselves.
Of course there was a lot going on, but it was a lot more natural than the therapeutic courses you are suggesting. What do you envisage when you write “just acting meek and humble� I envisage someone who is contemplative and meditative, who goes about his daily tasks thoughtfully and attentively, aware of his own dealings and words, maintaining a balance and gaining a steadiness in his dealings with others. Such people are open for inspiration and revelation.
Have to go now, I’ll be spending two weeks in England and may not find a hotspot - so don’t wait up for me
Not all applied to you and not all applied to Nick. And some applied to you both. It is a kind of pick and choose answer. If you get something out of it then we are both ahead of the game. 