Kierkegaard’s leap of faith and The Cloud of Unknowing have one thing in common. Both are belief that mental analyses of spiritual matters end in an abyss of uncertainty. Does the abyss of unknowing exist? And does it require a leap of faith for further spiritual understanding?
I take it that you ‘leap over’ the abyss. And once on the other side you no longer use reason to understand God.
How do you know that this new understanding is real in some sense and not merely a fabrication of your mind? Maybe it’s just a dream.
Many dreams tell the truth.
Once you give up reasoning, you can’t determine which dreams tell truth and which dreams tell lies.
I think that after the leap of faith there is a new sense of reason that can distinguish lies from truth. The other side of the abyss is living in spirit and in truth.
The new reason must be the same as the old reason… the difference is in the concepts formed and the evaluation of the relationships between concepts. It must still be founded on physical reality and not dreams.
This leap seems to be same as the process of enlightenment in Zen:
Humans are unfortunately infected with a condition and in a state of ‘between the devil or the deep blue sea.’
It is very clear from Kierkegaard that one has to take a leap of faith to relieve one of the inevitable terror, trembling and angst of an existential dilemma.
The ‘Cloud of Unknowing’ is taking the leap ‘unknowingly,’ subliminally, and ‘beating around the bush’ for the same reason, i.e. to relieve the trembling and terror.
The fact is, the trembling and terror are very real and ooze subliminally from the unconscious and by taking that leap, the believers get immediate relief and a ‘temporary’ escape from that terror.
To understand the complexity of the above, one need to understand the other 9/10 of the ‘iceberg’ of the Complex Human Being.
This is the reason why I raise this thread;
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=187308
The Complex Human Being
That leap from the ‘devil-in-oneself’ and into the ‘deep blue sea’ is based on ‘pure reason’ inferring an illusion, thus that is a ‘lie’ and not a real truth of reality.
At least a dream whilst not real is empirically possible at the minimum of 0.0001% certainty. The ultimate God or the ‘supreme of the supreme’ is an illusion that is impossible (zero possibility) within reality. However, the positive thing is thinking about it [the ultimate supreme being] and believing in it do provide immediate and continual psychological resolution to the trembling and terror that is besieging the self subliminally.
The leap of faith, occurs when the mind is at the wit’s end, and reason is no longer a matter of certainty by any measure. The letting go of this reason, is the beginningof the faith in the absolute, which is the source of all, including reason it’s self. There from occurs a complete change, and a certain realization that that the fear and trembling will absolutely end a into the disconcern with trying to get back to the other side of the abyss. There remains not a scintilla of doubt, and not because it is within .0000000001% of this realization.
There is a range of mathematics from kindergarten’s 1+1=2 to the higher PhD pure and applied mathematics.
Similarly there is the range of reason from kindergarten reason to rational PhD pure and applied reason within the human faculty of reason.
‘Every effect has a cause’ is basic kindergarten instinctual reasoning.
In addition, to end the infinite regression and to jump to conclude a first cause [Absolute] and reified or anthropomorphize it is also instinctual reasoning. The absolutely no doubt acceptance of such conclusions is based on faith, i.e. without further proofs of justification of reality.
The above is all grounded on the psychological impulse to deal with the fear and trembling, and its associated psychological terrors.
Thus the imperative and necessary illusory God for theists is grounded on human psychology.
I feel I have learned recently that all human thought and human memory has a “format”. It is like a certain fit, like the shape of a key. Things that are outside of the format, either don’t register at all in the mind system, or they are semi unknowable and would drive a regular lay person insane. If one part of the mind went out of its format, or its alignment with the rest of itself, the whole thing would dip into madness. Human beings live at the edge of madness. Most of them don’t realize it either.
I agree that we live on the edge of madness. When foundations of reason are shattered by existential angst, madness often ensues. But, perhaps there is enough left of reason to see that the valley of unknowing can lead to the mountains of renewal.
The valley of unknowing is an illusion, albeit can be a very useful one but the leap to the unknowing can also land one on the folded hands of the devil.
The better move is to reinforce one’s foundation of reason and wisdom continually to deal with the inevitable unavoidable existential angst.
I refer you to the Story of the Buddha (a myth of life and reality & btw I am not a Buddhist officially).
Guatama’s family tried to prevent him from knowing the reality of the existential angst of ‘terminal illness,’ ‘old age’ and ‘inevitable death.’
However Guatama the Buddha found out the solution to the existential angst is not to cover it up with false hopes (eternal life in heaven as promised by an illusory God or a leap into the unknowing) but instead faced these realities and resolved them at the brain/mind and neural level knowingly based on reason, rationality and wisdom.
Try giving up all attachments; then, speak for Buddha.
Note sure of your point.
In Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, there is this principle of ‘detachment’ while being engaged in reality.
Thus one may be ‘detached’ while being engaged in reality.
For example, if one is studying for an exam, one should focus on doing just that rather than thinking and ruminating on [detach from] what one can achieve or boast after passing the exams.
A professional sport person should just focus on the action and not [i.e. detach from] the winning and its associated benefits.
In Buddhism, ‘detachment’ not mean ‘do not act’. Attachment [mental desire] while in action bring forth sufferings.
The essential point in Buddhism is just to live in the NOW and ‘detach’ from worrying what will happen after death in the future.
Your engagement with the ‘unknowing’ is due to an inherent subliminal [subconscious] impulse that is worrying about the your future.
The Buddha realized this inherent subliminal impulse and introduced a solution to deal with it from the conscious level.
Note the Gita’s ‘Do not be attached to the fruits of action.’
Bruce Lee mentioned ‘The art of fighting without fighting’ as lifted from Taoism.
Wut!!! 
Where did you get the idea that Buddha said to resolve angst at the “… brain/mind level… based on reason and rationality…”?
.
Are you trying to be deprecating, sarcastic or what?
Not sure how much do you understand about Buddhism?
To appreciate the above question, you’ll need many many years of reading Buddhism [from head to toe] extensively plus knowledge of the various neurosciences and other fields of knowledge.
At the highest level of Buddhism, reason prevails and modulate itself.
Listen to this youtube and let me know what you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWY0Tyhu9MM
Therein Jay Garfield discussed the use of the higher level of reason and rationality from the philosophies of Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti.
Btw, I did not imply reason and rationality by themselves will resolve the inherent angst, practice is critical and primary. I mentioned ‘wisdom’ i.e. knowledge in action or practice.
When I was a practicing catholic, Ierrellus, I often had doubts and would eventually have to take that leap of faith. It might appear to give one a renewed sense of freedom in a way - a kind of reprieve - but I don’t necessarily think that it gave a new sense of reason. At times I intuited that i was still “stuck” as it were in the same place.
I think that sometimes a leap of faith is taken because we don’t have the courage or stamina to live in negative capability, to live in uncertainty.
The other side of that abyss might appear to be in spirit and truth but it might be darker than it was before we took that leap.
I think that there might be a level of balance when it comes to giving up all attachments. We do after all have to live in the real world.
What it is about is GIVING UP OUR INORDINATE ATTACHMENTS TO THOSE ATTACHMENTS.
That’s why it’s very important to discover what is meaningful and valuable and what is not.
Something that is so meaningful and valuable - can we really lose it or its essence. It’s always a part of us.
Something that isn’t is usually the inordinate attachments that we hug to ourselves to greatly.
But I may be wrong in this.
I think that there might be a level of balance when it comes to giving up all attachments. We do after all have to live in the real world.
What it is about is GIVING UP OUR INORDINATE ATTACHMENTS TO THOSE ATTACHMENTS.
That’s why it’s very important to discover what is meaningful and valuable and what is not.
Something that is so meaningful and valuable - can we really lose it or its essence. It’s always a part of us.
Something that isn’t is usually the inordinate attachments that we hug to ourselves to greatly.
But I may be wrong in this.