PDA

View Full Version : Creation - transformation


adamkade
17-12-2015, 06:25 PM
I am helping a friend understand about creation/experiencing life - transformation of self. I had a thought about putting here, so as to know what others think in relation to what I think. Here it is:

Yes, you are right. I think what is happening in your self (and consequentially, your life) is, at the heart of it, transformation. We have to remember, it is not about deconstructing everything and then rebuilding it. It's about getting to the heart of what makes you, you. Your life reflects you, your thoughts in the past, and right now.


There is no rush though, take your time. You are quite correct to pause to analyze something, and ask: huh?


Life is not the way it "is" because it is the way that it "is". In actuality it "is" the way it "is" because our perception is telling us so. Our mind pieces everything together and forms our reality. Also, we have to understand that me (you) and reality are linked. Your thoughts are constantly created and defining what is true. As our mind stops and says: "This is how things are." What we have to understand is that nothing "is" as it "is" because of its essential isness. Rather, our minds perceive it to be that way. But that is okay. We have to define our reality in order to create it. But what must be understood is that the reality that we experience is there because we create from our perception. So whatever we create must serve us.


What I am saying is that if our perceptions (which are created by our minds) tells us something is the way that it is, then it is that way. But what if our reality is excrement?


We walk in the kitchen and we put everything in our mind's life pot. We stir it and give it time. Other people give us ingredients (their perceptions of things) and we put some of that in the pot too. Then when it is cooked we eat it. When we "eat" it we are experience it in our reality. Sometimes we find it to our liking. When we do this we should keep everything just as it is, But if we taste our food (experience the situation of our life) and find it not to our liking then we know something has to be changed. The question is: what has to be changed? It depends on what you feel is not serving you,


Everything in our life must serve us. Our ideas, our beliefs - everything. If something does not serve you, then it has to be changed, transformed or thrown out and replaced.


I feel you are experiencing spiritual inertia. This is because nothing in all your past has prepared yourself for this moment. You are at a point of spiritual change, great change. What ever you decide in your life at this point will decide your future because you are creating your future in the now. You are entering into the portals of revaluation. I say: re-define everything. Also, re-define your past experiences too. Read through your story - life, and attempt to glean a different perspective.


When one is writing one is always at the point of creation. Every word, before it is written, has infinite possibility. You are the same. You are a person who is limitless, truly limitless. When we say "no, I am not." or "I just don't see it." We are right. You do not see it, but it is there, so how come you don't see it? It is because your mind is seeing things through a narrow lens. You are creation. All of your faculties are for one purpose and that is creation!


It is like the man that rubs a lamp and the genie comes out. Whatever you perceive to be becomes your reality. So all we have to do is change our perception of reality. So we know this. The next question then is how! How do we change the way we perceive? We have to be honest to how we perceive things, Yes this is true, but do we honestly acknowledge all that we perceive? Or do we hide certain parts of ourselves from ourselves?


Lets say we do? If we do hide certain parts of ourselves from ourselves, then why oh why would we do this? We have to acknowledge a truth. We like to think we are right. We look at the world and the conscious mind (or ego - or lower self) has created a version of what reality is, and it thinks that this version is correct. It will hold to that version of reality. It will kick and scream. Picture the lower self as a boy who is swinging from a school bell. The head master and the whole school comes running to the bell to see who is ringing it!


The boy swinging from the bell shouts. "Somebody stop that bell from ringing!"


"You are ringing the bell." Shouts the headmaster.


"I'm not ringing the bell!" shouts the boy. "It isn't me!" All the while he is swinging backwards and forward on the rope that rings the bell.


We have to acknowledge that we have created the experiences in our life. If we are entirely happy, then the job is done. But if we are not then we are missing something. The question is what?


Maybe all the boy has to do is let go. Let go of self. Or the self which has been created. Maybe the person who goes through the portal of revaluation must be willing to abandon the previously constructed self. Wow. Frightening. Now we know why the lower self is in denial and why it clings so fervently to its perception, its version of events.

Silver
17-12-2015, 06:35 PM
Hi adam - after a quick read-through, I really like what you've written. It rezzes with me - mostly because for the past year, I've been reading/studying about the Buddha, Buddhism, and getting into mindfulness practice and meditation. I feel if I hadn't been doing that, it would seem a little mysterious as to your words' meanings.

Lucyan28
17-12-2015, 07:05 PM
Hi Adam, thank you for your post, it is really incredible !

adamkade
17-12-2015, 08:04 PM
Hi adam - after a quick read-through, I really like what you've written. It rezzes with me - mostly because for the past year, I've been reading/studying about the Buddha, Buddhism, and getting into mindfulness practice and meditation. I feel if I hadn't been doing that, it would seem a little mysterious as to your words' meanings.

I have learn't so much through Buddhism. Looking beyond the sun. It is good to see something. Just by seeing something, without letting the conscious mind begin to try and analyze. Then as we see a concept (or anything) the true meaning of the idea begins to make sense.

It is good to analyse, but I feel we can be guided by the inner feel of something. Yes, to resonate with another it is very good. It is also good to understand others, to maintain our own viewpoint - agreement is not a prerequisite for understanding.

adamkade
17-12-2015, 08:05 PM
Hi Adam, thank you for your post, it is really incredible !
God bless. Have a great Christmas and new year.

essvass
19-12-2015, 03:21 AM
I have learn't so much through Buddhism. Looking beyond the sun. It is good to see something. Just by seeing something, without letting the conscious mind begin to try and analyze. Then as we see a concept (or anything) the true meaning of the idea begins to make sense.

It is good to analyse, but I feel we can be guided by the inner feel of something. Yes, to resonate with another it is very good. It is also good to understand others, to maintain our own viewpoint - agreement is not a prerequisite for understanding.

Thank you, Adam. It almost sounds like you are talking to me. Blessings,

adamkade
20-12-2015, 08:31 PM
Thank you, Adam. It almost sounds like you are talking to me. Blessings,
I lit a candle, and as I looked into the flames, I felt the flame was sending thoughts to my mind. Then I thought: who could be talking to me through the flame? I thought about light, and the thought came to me that the light vibration is a frequency which others use, and that it doesn't matter who it is because it is being carried on a light vibration and so therefore it was good (in a way - though it is always nice to know).

Then I thought about the sun and that the sun is a portal by which spiritual information comes. Then it occurred to me that obviously without the sun there could be no life. Then I realised that every creature and life form is an expression of the sun, including us.

There is so much information and understanding. Other thoughts: Every moment is emptiness, and if looked from a negative point of view, the empty is that every moment is nothing.

Yet when I think in a positive way, I realise that emptiness means everything. When a cup is empty it can be used for so many things. But when it is full it can only contain what it is contained with and not anything else. So if I have half a cup of coke and wish to taste lemonade, and then pour lemonade into the coke, then I no longer have the coke or the lemonade but some amalgamation of the two (which for my purposes the contents of cup and the cup itself becomes useless) But if I empty the vessel, the cup, make the clean, then fill it with lemonade then I get the taste of the lemonade.

So what if every moment of our lives is an empty moment. So when we look back upon our lives and see the many different experiences that we have had: we see some experiences as being bad and some that are good. Yet as we are remember we are existing in the present and we have to acknowledge that the present moment is made up of emptiness (in that it contains everything, potentially). We look back in the past and remember an unpleasant experience. We know more now, in the present, what we did when we were experiencing the bad experience/s. We draw back to the now and the unpleasant memory somehow has followed us through time and is influencing us negatively in the present.

I feel that there is a tendency to think of situations, good or bad as being intrinsically good or bad. We tend to think that the moment was bad because it was bad and that we experienced the moment as bad, because it was bad. But it is not that the moment was bad or good, but it was the individual who placed that label on the situation. Perhaps we could say that the individual imbued the moment with badness by making a value judgement of the situation.

This is where we get the idea that there is good luck or bad luck. But of course, when we realise that one moment is neither more fortunate or less fortunate than any other we begin to realise that we are bringing value judgements to the moment.

I make a value judgement when I say that placing value judgements on a situation is a good thing. I say it is good because when we place a value judgement on a certain thing then we are defining the event.

To my mind definition is the first stage of creation.

So we have an event, then we have the perception of the event, then we have the judgement of the event, then we have our actions that we do in relation to the event. Then from our actions there comes consequences and other events.

But to put a more correct version of the above process we have to recognise that after our first initial value judgement, which is usually a reactionary judgement, there is a moment, a small pocket of time, when are able to reevaluate our value judgements. So perhaps it is like this:

Event > Perception > Judgement (definition) > creative moment > action > event.

It is the creative moment which brings about actions which brings about the event in the moment. When we reach the creative moment stage we have a choice. We can choose to choose or we can choose not to choose. If we choose not to choose then what we are born in the image of the event. But if we choose to choose then whatever is created is created in the image of the self. An image which is actively created in the present.

What do you think?

Molearner
20-12-2015, 10:19 PM
To my mind definition is the first stage of creation.

So we have an event, then we have the perception of the event, then we have the judgement of the event, then we have our actions that we do in relation to the event. Then from our actions there comes consequences and other events.

But to put a more correct version of the above process we have to recognise that after our first initial value judgement, which is usually a reactionary judgement, there is a moment, a small pocket of time, when are able to reevaluate our value judgements. So perhaps it is like this:

Event > Perception > Judgement (definition) > creative moment > action > event.

It is the creative moment which brings about actions which brings about the event in the moment. When we reach the creative moment stage we have a choice. We can choose to choose or we can choose not to choose. If we choose not to choose then what we are born in the image of the event. But if we choose to choose then whatever is created is created in the image of the self. An image which is actively created in the present.

What do you think?

adamkade,

I love the thought that you have put into this. It is obvious that you have spent some time considering this. You asked for opinions, so this is mine: I view the stage of perception as being synonymous with the creative moment. I see 'perception' as I would a 'seed'. A seed can be planted in the ground and remain dormant until the right conditions are present to bring it to life. Those conditions, in the case of a seed, can be moisture, temperature, fertility of the soil, etc. In the case of something that is deemed creative the conditions can be additional knowledge, acquired skills, amalgamation and connecting of the dots. In effect, the pieces of the puzzle have already been given(the perception, the seed).......it now becomes a matter of putting them together in the right order. We know from the annals of science that some breakthroughs in science have occurred simultaneously and independently of one another.

This is an alternate way of considering your proposition......it is presented in no way to demean or undermine your line of reasoning.

adamkade
20-12-2015, 11:04 PM
adamkade,

I love the thought that you have put into this. It is obvious that you have spent some time considering this. You asked for opinions, so this is mine: I view the stage of perception as being synonymous with the creative moment. I see 'perception' as I would a 'seed'. A seed can be planted in the ground and remain dormant until the right conditions are present to bring it to life. Those conditions, in the case of a seed, can be moisture, temperature, fertility of the soil, etc. In the case of something that is deemed creative the conditions can be additional knowledge, acquired skills, amalgamation and connecting of the dots. In effect, the pieces of the puzzle have already been given(the perception, the seed).......it now becomes a matter of putting them together in the right order. We know from the annals of science that some breakthroughs in science have occurred simultaneously and independently of one another.

This is an alternate way of considering your proposition......it is presented in no way to demean or undermine your line of reasoning.

I agree completely. The creative moment can be anywhere you want to place it. This portion of my thinking came up when I was writing a book. But yes, sometimes we are able to suspend the moment of perception, even as we experience a moment. Naturally, we assign some moments as more important than others, but even in the so called boring moments of life, if we suspend the moment in our mind we are able to alter our perception, in short, to have a deeper moment.

Perhaps, once there were a few people in a room, and they were having a moment, and decided to become actively present in that moment. Perhaps one of them said: "I have an about creating an online forum where people can discuss all things spiritual."

There are so many empty pockets of time, they are like dominoes, each domino is an empty moment longing to be filled by the thoughts and actions of sentient beings. I call these moments Dharma, I believe part of the idea came from an idea in Hinduism or perhaps Buddhism. It is irrelevant, the importance is the truth of the idea.

We can also do it with something in the past. We can remember things, and then go back in time and remember an experience. It is possible to step into our thoughts in a past experience, and perceive it anew. I have done this many times and have found new insights into the majesty of a previous moment. Yet, it was experienced in the present. It seems to me that the one constant is the perception of the golden moment which is in the now.

Thank you for your insights. I will look forward to more communications from your good self.

Molearner
20-12-2015, 11:12 PM
Thank you for your insights. I will look forward to more communications from your good self.

adamkade,

Thanks for your response. Sometimes I hesitate to respond or comment on postings because, unfortunately, many posters tend to be sensitive and feel that they are being attacked. It is refreshing to encounter open-mindedness that enable discussions to become expansive rather than contractive.

essvass
21-12-2015, 12:53 AM
I lit a candle, and as I looked into the flames, I felt the flame was sending thoughts to my mind. Then I thought: who could be talking to me through the flame? I thought about light, and the thought came to me that the light vibration is a frequency which others use, and that it doesn't matter who it is because it is being carried on a light vibration and so therefore it was good (in a way - though it is always nice to know).

Then I thought about the sun and that the sun is a portal by which spiritual information comes. Then it occurred to me that obviously without the sun there could be no life. Then I realised that every creature and life form is an expression of the sun, including us.

There is so much information and understanding. Other thoughts: Every moment is emptiness, and if looked from a negative point of view, the empty is that every moment is nothing.

Yet when I think in a positive way, I realise that emptiness means everything. When a cup is empty it can be used for so many things. But when it is full it can only contain what it is contained with and not anything else. So if I have half a cup of coke and wish to taste lemonade, and then pour lemonade into the coke, then I no longer have the coke or the lemonade but some amalgamation of the two (which for my purposes the contents of cup and the cup itself becomes useless) But if I empty the vessel, the cup, make the clean, then fill it with lemonade then I get the taste of the lemonade.

So what if every moment of our lives is an empty moment. So when we look back upon our lives and see the many different experiences that we have had: we see some experiences as being bad and some that are good. Yet as we are remember we are existing in the present and we have to acknowledge that the present moment is made up of emptiness (in that it contains everything, potentially). We look back in the past and remember an unpleasant experience. We know more now, in the present, what we did when we were experiencing the bad experience/s. We draw back to the now and the unpleasant memory somehow has followed us through time and is influencing us negatively in the present.

I feel that there is a tendency to think of situations, good or bad as being intrinsically good or bad. We tend to think that the moment was bad because it was bad and that we experienced the moment as bad, because it was bad. But it is not that the moment was bad or good, but it was the individual who placed that label on the situation. Perhaps we could say that the individual imbued the moment with badness by making a value judgement of the situation.

This is where we get the idea that there is good luck or bad luck. But of course, when we realise that one moment is neither more fortunate or less fortunate than any other we begin to realise that we are bringing value judgements to the moment.

I make a value judgement when I say that placing value judgements on a situation is a good thing. I say it is good because when we place a value judgement on a certain thing then we are defining the event.

To my mind definition is the first stage of creation.

So we have an event, then we have the perception of the event, then we have the judgement of the event, then we have our actions that we do in relation to the event. Then from our actions there comes consequences and other events.

But to put a more correct version of the above process we have to recognise that after our first initial value judgement, which is usually a reactionary judgement, there is a moment, a small pocket of time, when are able to reevaluate our value judgements. So perhaps it is like this:

Event > Perception > Judgement (definition) > creative moment > action > event.

It is the creative moment which brings about actions which brings about the event in the moment. When we reach the creative moment stage we have a choice. We can choose to choose or we can choose not to choose. If we choose not to choose then what we are born in the image of the event. But if we choose to choose then whatever is created is created in the image of the self. An image which is actively created in the present.

What do you think?

Adam,

I am not a philosopher. I don’t think that every event is to be judged/defined and is subject to a creative moment. Some events are simply to be felt. Neither do I think that moments are empty.

I would think that the answer to your line of thinking in general is in the notions like “Whatever happens happens for the best,” and ideas that good things can come out of something bad.

In the grander scheme of things, whatever happens always happens for the best and can serve for the higher good of all… Not sure why do we need creative moments... Everything always happens for the best.

Thank you for your thought-provoking posts. Blessings,

adamkade
21-12-2015, 02:15 AM
adamkade,

Thanks for your response. Sometimes I hesitate to respond or comment on postings because, unfortunately, many posters tend to be sensitive and feel that they are being attacked. It is refreshing to encounter open-mindedness that enable discussions to become expansive rather than contractive.

I don't feel that I have arrived. Nor do I wish to arrive at the complete answer. I love the journey. In fact, I believe that I am completely wrong. Which is a strange thing to say. I often say, or would like to often say, that if truth were an island, then it is a dot to me. But I can see it. I can see it in the distance. I wish to move closer to it, and if another can guide me to a closer understanding, or if I can guide someone to a closer understanding, then that is simply wonderful.

Also, there are many aspects of truth that can only be understood through the eyes of another, or through the ears of another, or indeed, through the mind of another. Sometimes a merging of minds is the only thing that can bring us closer. This is an essential element.

Going back to the "I am completely wrong aspect." It's like knowing something. You either know something or you don't. If you think you know something then you don't know it because knowing doesn't require any thought process. I am not referring to you when I say "you", I mean us, including myself. It is okay to not know. I know very little, but I believe quite a lot. Knowing and believing are completely different things. It is okay not to know. Feel comfortable with not knowing.

I feel that to know something in its completeness I would have to be God, not just God in the microcosm, the inner God if you will, but actually God, standing outside of time and space. To know one thing would be to know all things. So therefore I go a step further. Not only do I know very little, in a very real sense I will never entirely know something. In other words, it is impossible for me to be right. At least completely right.

I love the process of trying to understand, to getting nearer and nearer. It is wonderful, simply a delight. Its actually quite a refreshing realisation that the people in the world, the type of people I always thought as being knowledgeable, or knowing, really haven't got a clue. They always come from a place knowing-ness, but if they knew what I knew, that it is impossible to know anything, then they would know why I smile when they use their "knowing-ness" tone with me. Incidentally, these sorts of people almost always attempt to establish authority in some way. Don't even get me on the subject authority.

Just some thoughts. I would love to know your thoughts. You can ask me at any time. I have a feeling that you are very interesting person.

adamkade
21-12-2015, 02:44 AM
Adam,

I am not a philosopher.
Well, the question is: are you not a philosopher because you are not a philosopher. Or, are you not a philosopher, because you have deemed yourself not to be a philosopher?

I think it is a valid point.

Some people close to me, at a time of development, when I was a child, and onward throughout my life told me I was stupid. So I carried with me that idea. Philosophers are clever people, right or wrong, so I couldn't be clever because I was stupid. So to say I was a philosopher is out of the question.

Yet, there came a point when I realised that there many people of this world which do not value other people. That is not because those people did not have value, it was because other people did not place value in them.

Then I began to realise that this idea could be extended to the experiences of my life. There have been many times in my life when I considered that certain experiences in my life to be bad. In fact, I don't think it humanly possible to see the blessing in such experiences, at least, not when you are experiencing the experience. But later when I looked back I undoubtedly learnt a lot.

There was one situation that happened to me that I have regretted all my life. When I mean regretted. I mean there was not a day that went by that I didn't regret it. I hated myself for a very long time. Even when I learnt to forgive myself I still often thought that if only I could go back in time. Occasionally I would catch myself thinking if I could only go back in time would I? The answer over the last twenty years was yes.

But then one day I thought about it and realised that if I was able to go back in time and change certain things, then I wouldn't have crumbled as a person.

I crumbled but after woulds I was fortunate because luckily I wasn't irreparable. I changed my whole being in regards to who I am because of that experience. It took twenty years to do it.

But when I thought about it not so long ago, I realised that I wouldn't do it. It shocked me. I mean , it really shocked me. I knew that if I went back and changed things then I would never have crumbled as a person, and would have never had the opportunity of creating my new self.

It was then that I realised that worst thing to ever happen to me, was really the best thing. Because without that bad thing happening I would never have changed.

God bless.

adamkade
21-12-2015, 02:54 AM
Adam,

I am not a philosopher. I don’t think that every event is to be judged/defined and is subject to a creative moment. Some events are simply to be felt. Neither do I think that moments are empty.

I would think that the answer to your line of thinking in general is in the notions like “Whatever happens happens for the best,” and ideas that good things can come out of something bad.

In the grander scheme of things, whatever happens always happens for the best and can serve for the higher good of all… Not sure why do we need creative moments... Everything always happens for the best.

Thank you for your thought-provoking posts. Blessings,

Incidentally, the reason why I only took a portion of your post, in my last post, was because after the words: I am not a philosopher, you went into quite a lengthy paragraph about how you do not necessarily need to have a creative moment. I don't think we can not not have a creative moment. You proved this by your first statement: I am not a philosopher. That was a statement of who you are (or rather, what you aren't) by that you defined yourself.

We define ourselves over and again as being this or that. Over and over we think, and say it. Do you not think that this is a powerful statement? I have always maintained that it is the most persistent thought which becomes created, which becomes our experienced reality.

"This was really bad." we say. "Oh it was terrible." We get others to agree with us to. They nod their heads in agreement. "It was terrible." lol, then I came along and say "I think it was just absolutely marvelous!" Lol

essvass
21-12-2015, 03:44 AM
Well, the question is: are you not a philosopher because you are not a philosopher. Or, are you not a philosopher, because you have deemed yourself not to be a philosopher?

I think it is a valid point.

Some people close to me, at a time of development, when I was a child, and onward throughout my life told me I was stupid. So I carried with me that idea. Philosophers are clever people, right or wrong, so I couldn't be clever because I was stupid. So to say I was a philosopher is out of the question.

Yet, there came a point when I realised that there many people of this world which do not value other people. That is not because those people did not have value, it was because other people did not place value in them.

Then I began to realise that this idea could be extended to the experiences of my life. There have been many times in my life when I considered that certain experiences in my life to be bad. In fact, I don't think it humanly possible to see the blessing in such experiences, at least, not when you are experiencing the experience. But later when I looked back I undoubtedly learnt a lot.

There was one situation that happened to me that I have regretted all my life. When I mean regretted. I mean there was not a day that went by that I didn't regret it. I hated myself for a very long time. Even when I learnt to forgive myself I still often thought that if only I could go back in time. Occasionally I would catch myself thinking if I could only go back in time would I? The answer over the last twenty years was yes.

But then one day I thought about it and realised that if I was able to go back in time and change certain things, then I wouldn't have crumbled as a person.

I crumbled but after woulds I was fortunate because luckily I wasn't irreparable. I changed my whole being in regards to who I am because of that experience. It took twenty years to do it.

But when I thought about it not so long ago, I realised that I wouldn't do it. It shocked me. I mean , it really shocked me. I knew that if I went back and changed things then I would never have crumbled as a person, and would have never had the opportunity of creating my new self.

It was then that I realised that worst thing to ever happen to me, was really the best thing. Because without that bad thing happening I would never have changed.

God bless.

OK, Adam, I hear you. Thank you for sharing. Blessings,

Molearner
21-12-2015, 02:54 PM
Going back to the "I am completely wrong aspect." It's like knowing something. You either know something or you don't. If you think you know something then you don't know it because knowing doesn't require any thought process. I am not referring to you when I say "you", I mean us, including myself. It is okay to not know. I know very little, but I believe quite a lot. Knowing and believing are completely different things. It is okay not to know. Feel comfortable with not knowing.

I feel that to know something in its completeness I would have to be God, not just God in the microcosm, the inner God if you will, but actually God, standing outside of time and space. To know one thing would be to know all things. So therefore I go a step further. Not only do I know very little, in a very real sense I will never entirely know something. In other words, it is impossible for me to be right. At least completely right.

I love the process of trying to understand, to getting nearer and nearer. It is wonderful, simply a delight. Its actually quite a refreshing realisation that the people in the world, the type of people I always thought as being knowledgeable, or knowing, really haven't got a clue. They always come from a place knowing-ness, but if they knew what I knew, that it is impossible to know anything, then they would know why I smile when they use their "knowing-ness" tone with me. Incidentally, these sorts of people almost always attempt to establish authority in some way. Don't even get me on the subject authority.

Just some thoughts. I would love to know your thoughts. You can ask me at any time. I have a feeling that you are very interesting person.

adamkade,

This is great stuff. Knowing, as you say, is not the result of a process of thought. In this way it belongs to the province of God/the Divine. If we know something it is because we have been allowed into this glimpse of the Divine. It is not our own doing. I think of freedom in much the same way as you think of knowledge. We tend to think of freedom as this great multiplicity of choices that we can make. But I visualize true freedom as also being the province of God. God must surely not sort through infinite choices to make a decision. He simply knows that which is true and right. In essence His is the freedom FROM choices rather than the freedom of choices. We can believe that our freedom is increasing when we realize that our choices are increasingly diminishing. In other words, bad choices are being eliminated as choices. True freedom and true knowledge mirror each other.

I have always thought that humbleness serves as an indication that one has had an experience of the Divine. Thus you are able to say....."I am completely wrong". If one experiences the Divine, he/she becomes rapidly aware of how little one actually knows. I have a Christian background so I think of the scripture concerning the publican's prayer......."Have mercy on me, a sinner". Sin, here, being understood as 'missing the mark' or even better understood as 'ignorance'. The admission of ignorance and the realization that it is a repetitive and ongoing problem is probably the first step to acquiring any kind of true knowledge.

When I read your post I thought that my favorite poet, Rilke, probably could provide insight. In this particular poem, he forces Christians to contemplate the very foundations and veracity of their 'beliefs'....their 'knowledge'. It comes from Rilke's _Book of Hours...Love Poems to God_.

So God, you are the one
who comes after.

It is sons who inherit,
while fathers die.
Sons stand and bloom.

You are my heir.

(end of poem) You can see that is a challenge to our knowledge. What do or can we really know? Does our confidence warn us that, in reality, we might not be the open-minded person that we visualize ourselves to be?

adamkade
23-12-2015, 12:15 PM
adamkade,

This is great stuff. Knowing, as you say, is not the result of a process of thought. In this way it belongs to the province of God/the Divine. If we know something it is because we have been allowed into this glimpse of the Divine. It is not our own doing. I think of freedom in much the same way as you think of knowledge. We tend to think of freedom as this great multiplicity of choices that we can make. But I visualize true freedom as also being the province of God. God must surely not sort through infinite choices to make a decision. He simply knows that which is true and right. In essence His is the freedom FROM choices rather than the freedom of choices. We can believe that our freedom is increasing when we realize that our choices are increasingly diminishing. In other words, bad choices are being eliminated as choices. True freedom and true knowledge mirror each other.

I have always thought that humbleness serves as an indication that one has had an experience of the Divine. Thus you are able to say....."I am completely wrong". If one experiences the Divine, he/she becomes rapidly aware of how little one actually knows. I have a Christian background so I think of the scripture concerning the publican's prayer......."Have mercy on me, a sinner". Sin, here, being understood as 'missing the mark' or even better understood as 'ignorance'. The admission of ignorance and the realization that it is a repetitive and ongoing problem is probably the first step to acquiring any kind of true knowledge.

When I read your post I thought that my favorite poet, Rilke, probably could provide insight. In this particular poem, he forces Christians to contemplate the very foundations and veracity of their 'beliefs'....their 'knowledge'. It comes from Rilke's _Book of Hours...Love Poems to God_.

So God, you are the one
who comes after.

It is sons who inherit,
while fathers die.
Sons stand and bloom.

You are my heir.

(end of poem) You can see that is a challenge to our knowledge. What do or can we really know? Does our confidence warn us that, in reality, we might not be the open-minded person that we visualize ourselves to be?
This is great stuff. Knowing, as you say, is not the result of a process of thought. In this way it belongs to the province of God/the Divine. If we know something it is because we have been allowed into this glimpse of the Divine.

To clarify my thinking I do think that reason and logic can help us to know things. For example. My reasoning says that Japan exists. I have not experienced Japan, but I have seen a lot of evidence that supports the idea that Japan is very unlikely not to exist. It is the same with my prediction of the sun. I have not witnessed many things, another example is germs. I have never seen them, but I have no doubt that they exist because my reason and logic in relation to evidence tells that they exist.

Because we are straying in the region of "knowing" I felt that it was worth mentioning. Another example is the sun. Now this is subtly different. I have experienced the sun rising a few time. My mind posits that it is very likely to be true that the sun has risen every day of my life, further than that, I am reasonable sure it has risen for many thousands of years.

So I posit that sometimes we come to be reasonably sure of something's existence through our reasoning and logic. Is this the same as knowing? Perhaps not, perhaps yes. Though, I do feel that "being reasonably sure" is not the same as "knowing"l.

Then I have an internal experience. This is different because it is not a shared experience, or perhaps it is. It certainly isn't by many people, and yet many people have had similar spiritual experiences. I often have spiritual communications. My being is filled with wonderful energy and I have experienced accurate information for myself and others. Others, experience the consequences of my spiritual experiences in secondary manner. They do not experience as I do but they do experience a piece of it sometimes, or simply the product of it, the information.

Of course, sometimes I experience these experiences and it is only me experiencing it. Others feel that these singular spiritual experiences can not be said to be true, because there is no way to verify the truth of such experiences.

I have mentioned that some people use "authority" to posit, or back up their ideas. They quote the works of others who have come to the same conclusion, they then use this as evidence. I feel that the only person who has authority to acknowledge something is true is the individual.

I have always thought that humbleness serves as an indication that one has had an experience of the Divine. Thus you are able to say....."I am completely wrong". If one experiences the Divine, he/she becomes rapidly aware of how little one actually knows. I have a Christian background so I think of the scripture concerning the publican's prayer......."Have mercy on me, a sinner". Sin, here, being understood as 'missing the mark' or even better understood as 'ignorance'. The admission of ignorance and the realization that it is a repetitive and ongoing problem is probably the first step to acquiring any kind of true knowledge.

I do not think God allows us to come to knowing, I think it is his very delight that we come to knowing. I think he has left a piece of himself within us. This sacred part some name as "the spirit." I refer to it as Christos or Christ. Often I use the word Christos because it makes a distinction between Jesus Christ and the Christ (Christ within). I believe when people in the New Testament used the term: "son of man" I believe they were referring directly to the Christ within. It is through the Christ within that we are able to come to know. Or to put it another way, "That a person can only come to the Father (knowing) through the son (the Christ within). I actual strongly believe that the Gospel John, from the very beginning to the end, refers the Christ as Jesus, and the Christ within synonymously.

"sin" missing the mark. I do think there is a part of a person which seems to come from doubt, or not knowing, most people seem to come from not knowing to knowing. But I think I have arrived at a place where this has become the opposite. I seem to be able to come from a knowingness. It may be perceived as a kind of arrogance but I have always had these "knowing" experiences since I was a child. As a child, I just knew that something was true. Then, I didn't have experience. There is a unmanifest knowingness and there is manifested knowingness - the kind of knowing which is experienced through experience.

In regards to sin, I think it is a misconception, or even a deliberate attempt to manipulate the human race. The idea that we are inherently incorrect, or bad, or evil goes against everything I believe. I believe the opposite is true, that in the heart of the phoenix is the Christos. Which is to say that within the heart of each of us there is Divinity, so, no matter what we do, we will eventually come to understand truth and love.

I think of sin, as the idea of being not enough, or "not enoughness" Many people have accepted at the root of themselves that they are not enough, and therefore, their root thought of not enoughness governs everything they do. The root thought manifests through their experience on every level until this brings about complete unhappiness.

So the way to happiness is clear. We accept that we are, right to the root of us, the very expression of abundance. When we have this as our root thought then everything that we do experiencializes abundance and good in our daily lives through thankfulness and Praise.

Praise to our Father/Mother God for the Christos within and all its fruits, which are the fruits of the Father. For the son is the willing recipient of the blessings from the Father, even as the Father is willing and grateful to the son for the opportunity to share His eternal being with the son.

I hope I have been clear.

Of course, I could be completely wrong.

Blessings. Adam.