A Sense of the Cosmos...Part One

The initial question pertaining to part one that I’d like to ask in beginning a discussion on “A Sense of the Cosmos” is if you are willing to consider the universe as a teaching? Naturally for those that believe that the universe is in reality random chaos, this cannot have any interest.

If the universe is a teaching, is it possible the ancient teachings are a way of revealing it and its purpose to us which is necessary since we are a part of it?

Is it posible that more than just the literal mind is necessary to comprehend the meaning and purpose of the universe and Man’s place within it? Do we need “experience” that is beyond the realm of linear associative reason in order to “understand”?

Well, obviously we need an above average mind to comprehend the mysteries of the universe and life and our place in it. And for having an above average mind, we would need experiences that are beyond the realm of ordinary because it’s experiences that broaden our horizon. The more varied and broad they are, the broader the mind.

BJ

Maybe its exactly the opposite which is why it was easier to do in ancient times without our mind filled with so much imagination. Instead of seeing what is beyond the ordinary, it would be good first to be able to see, as part of the conscious experience of the ordinary.

How can the universe be a teacher if we imagine it through habitual preconception? We have to experience the “ordinary” as it is. All of a sudden it may not be so ordinary.

When I suggested that to have a broader mind we need broader, extraordinary experiences, I was not excluding the ordinary experience. The ordinary and the extraordinary do not have to be exclusive of one another, they can both exist together. I would see the forest AND every individual tree, why would I just see the forest or just one tree? Only that person can experience the extra ordinary who has already experienced the ordinary. It is my sincere suggestion to you, since you like to quote so much of the old without bringing anything new to the argument, that you first go and experience the ordinary, 'cause it seems that you missed it my dear. And because of that YOU have undermined the ordinary by quoting it here, whereas I just used it as the foundational basis for all future extraordinary experiences. Ouch! That hurt!

BJ

I didn’t mean to imply that you were intentionally excluding the ordinary experience. I was suggesting that it is something that we all do automatically including me.

If you read descriptions of periods of awakening by several people, you’ll see how often the ordinary is seen in a new way. Walt Whitman’s “Leaves of Grass” is such an account.

Part of my practice is to try to “experience” the ordinary. In this way it is experiencing the ordinary in an extraordinary way. Normally we just sleepwalk through our habitual preconceptions of the ordinary.

There is no argument and there is nothing “new” to add. The truths being suggested by Prof. Needleman have always been known. My task and for those with similar interests is the attempt to “remember” them so as to experience the human realities of “meaning” and “purpose” as related to our being.