I can share my experiences and insights, as I hope others share theirs and I have the wisdom to examine theses insights and apply what is relevant to each of us.
We are each responsible for our own lives and souls. Choose wisely.
Allan
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, James Lynch <ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:
And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.
This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
identifies where it fits?
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> thing to me.
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Seems good to me, RP...
>> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>>
>> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
>> It is the ethics code that is for others,
>> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>>
>> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
>>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
>>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
>>> and humanity as a whole.
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
>>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
>>> > a challenge?"
>>>
>>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
>>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
>>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>>>
>>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
>>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
>>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
>>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
>>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
>>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>>>
>>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
>>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
>>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
>>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
>>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
>>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
>>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>>>
>>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
>>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
>>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
>>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
>>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
>>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>>>
>>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
>>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
>>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
>>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
>>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
>>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
>>> > what does not.
>>>
>>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
>>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
>>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
>>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
>>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
>>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
>>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
>>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>>>
>>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
>>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
>>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
>>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
>>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
>>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
>>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
>>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
>>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
>>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
>>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
>>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
>>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>>>
>>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
>>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
>>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
>>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
>>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
>>> > public and personal lives.
(
)
|_D Allan
Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário