the confusion between strength and weakness

'Common sense', as commonly used, is a nonsense term, a lazy rhetorical device meant to frame an argument around any terms the speaker wishes. It's almost universal when someone refers to 'common sense' they are actually referring to their own POV, just as almost universally when people speak about 'personal responsibility' they are talking about someone else's.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by happy soul

A Course in Miracles says, 'What seems to be your strength is really your weakness, and what seems to be your weakness is your true strength.'

Sometimes things are the opposite of what they seem.

It may seem that when people are being aggressive and unkind, they're being strong and powerful. The truth is they're being weak. They're AFRAID.

Yet kindness and love are strength, not weakness.

happy soul,

Thanks for introducing this. This is a concept that is not understood very well. 'Blessed are the meek' comes to mind. Meekness has a modern day connotation of weakness and thus is viewed(in modern day lexicon) as not being an attribute. Biblical translations often prefer to substitute and employ 'humility' in its stead. Meekness in its former understanding actually referred to the condition and state of being the absence of fear. In reality, the meek were viewed as the most courageous of individuals because they feared no one.

Numbers 12:3 tells us....."(Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth)". This humbleness can only mean that Moses recognized God to the ultimate degree and was secure in this knowledge. Immediately following this verse God indicates that Moses is unlike other prophets in that....."With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles". In regards to the strength of Moses, upon the death of Moses his obit in Deut. 34:12 says......"For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel".

[iamthat]

I am reminded of the trigram symbols for fire and water in the I Ching.

Each line of the trigram can be unbroken (yang, strong) or broken (yin, weak).

The trigram for fire is yang, yin, yang.

___________
_____ _____
___________

In other words two strong lines with a weak line in the middle. This indicates that fire is outwardly strong in that it consumes everything, but inwardly weak, because when it has consumed everything it dies down.

The trigram for water is yin, yang, yin.

_____ _____
___________
_____ _____

In other words two weak lines with a strong line in the middle. This indicates that water is outwardly weak because it is shaped by whatever surrounds it, but inwardly strong, because whatever happens it will endure. And so over time the strength of water will wear away even the hardest rocks.

So as humans are we outwardly strong but inwardly weak? Or are we outwardly apparently weak and yielding but inwardly we endure through all things?

Peace.

[sky]

Originally Posted by iamthat

I am reminded of the trigram symbols for fire and water in the I Ching.

Each line of the trigram can be unbroken (yang, strong) or broken (yin, weak).

The trigram for fire is yang, yin, yang.

___________
_____ _____
___________

In other words two strong lines with a weak line in the middle. This indicates that fire is outwardly strong in that it consumes everything, but inwardly weak, because when it has consumed everything it dies down.

The trigram for water is yin, yang, yin.

_____ _____
___________
_____ _____

In other words two weak lines with a strong line in the middle. This indicates that water is outwardly weak because it is shaped by whatever surrounds it, but inwardly strong, because whatever happens it will endure. And so over time the strength of water will wear away even the hardest rocks.

So as humans are we outwardly strong but inwardly weak? Or are we outwardly apparently weak and yielding but inwardly we endure through all things?

Peace.

We are yin/yang as they can be divided further...

[happy soul]

Kioma, something struck me from your first post on this thread: 'It takes great awareness and discernment to choose our paths correctly.'

That's very wise imo. Zen master Charlotte Joko Beck said, 'It's very difficult for a fully enlightened being to tell the difference between truth and error.' (Except instead of the words 'truth' and 'error' she used Buddhist terms that I can't remember)

I'm definitely not 'fully enlightened' but I've found that the subtleties of life can require extreme discernment, as you said.

My opinion is that we need to check in with spirit (or our guides or whatever we see as our higher power) and LISTEN to get wisdom and guidance. In other words, it may be best not to try to discern things ALONE. We need divine guidance.

Molearner, thanks for sharing your thoughts, and the Biblical quotes about Moses. I agree with you about humility. A Course in Miracles says that the meek will 'literally take over the world because of their strength.' Of course, they will do it lovingly and without violence.

Iamthat, that's very interesting about fire and water. It sounds very Taoist, and definitely applies to the teaching from ACIM about strength and weakness. I agree that a hard, apparently tough exterior is usually just a front, a mask to cover weakness and fear. And a humble, soft personality often has great strength. Of course, if you put fire and water together, the water will consume the fire.

[happy soul]

double post sorry

Originally Posted by happy soul

...My opinion is that we need to check in with spirit (or our guides or whatever we see as our higher power) and LISTEN to get wisdom and guidance. In other words, it may be best not to try to discern things ALONE. We need divine guidance...

I agree. That said, just as life requires a balance of spiritual and egoistic attention, so too I feel I must take the spiritual guidance I get and balance that with intellectual reflection and discernment.

I've seen too many gurus and spiritual leaders who wound up going off the deep end due to their absolute faith in what they perceived as spiritual direction. I keep my ear to the spiritual ground, absolutely - but balance that with what overall awareness and intelligence I can muster as well.

Any God who just want's an automaton is no God of mine.

[happy soul]

Originally Posted by Kioma

I agree. That said, just as life requires a balance of spiritual and egoistic attention, so too I feel I must take the spiritual guidance I get and balance that with intellectual reflection and discernment.

I've seen too many gurus and spiritual leaders who wound up going off the deep end due to their absolute faith in what they perceived as spiritual direction. I keep my ear to the spiritual ground, absolutely - but balance that with what overall awareness and intelligence I can muster as well.

Any God who just want's an automaton is no God of mine.

God is speaking through you imo. That's exactly what I needed to hear. We need to trust OURSELVES mostly, without blindly believing anything external, even if that external seems to be or claims to be divine.

The reason I said God was speaking through you is because I have too often placed my faith in what I believed was divine guidance, even though it wasn't what I, myself, felt was wise, and it ended up that I was right - I should have listened to my heart.


Ultimately, we're the bottom line in our own lives, and we're our own teacher. As Buddha said, 'Be a light unto yourself.'

There's something else about this that applies to very many people, including to me. Most people feel that they need some form of 'permission' to follow their hearts, to do what they want, or to do what makes them happy. I struggled for many years, and sometimes still do, with making sure it was okay to do things like certain spiritual practices, because I wanted to make sure it was 'God's will.'

People shouldn't give their power away to their false view of God. Krishnamurti would say that such a view of God is their own projection, an illusion of the mind.

[happy soul]

dp again sorry

Originally Posted by happy soul

God is speaking through you imo. That's exactly what I needed to hear. We need to trust OURSELVES mostly, without blindly believing anything external, even if that external seems to be or claims to be divine.

The reason I said God was speaking through you is because I have too often placed my faith in what I believed was divine guidance, even though it wasn't what I, myself, felt was wise, and it ended up that I was right - I should have listened to my heart.

Ultimately, we're the bottom line in our own lives, and we're our own teacher. As Buddha said, 'Be a light unto yourself.'

People shouldn't give their power away to their false view of God. Krishnamurti would say that such a view of God is their own projection, an illusion of the mind.

Krishnamutri was an odd duck, but his statement, which I agree with, raises an immediate question. How can we know what is illusion and what is a 'true' view of God? That, for me, has been a very tricky question.

Getting back to balance, I find I am just as lost if I depend soley on reasoning as I am if I try to depend solely on revelation. And by balance I don't mean 50% of one and 50% of the other, I mean each in measure as needed for discernment in a specific situation. Even when I might fully apprehend a situation though one means, I will always come back to reflect with the other.

To me, each perspective, physicality and spirituality, is like an eye in an individual looking at the universe. They are two eyes, and IMO, both must be open to discern 'reality', to see what is true. Observing this, I reason that it must have been God's intention - or at least that's all I can wrap my little head around.

Originally Posted by happy soul

There's something else about this that applies to very many people, including to me. Most people feel that they need some form of 'permission' to follow their hearts, to do what they want, or to do what makes them happy. I struggled for many years, and sometimes still do, with making sure it was okay to do things like certain spiritual practices, because I wanted to make sure it was 'God's will.'

I struggled with this too, but eventually reasoned that the reason God created me (whatever God is), or creates anyone or anything, is to exist. Why would God create anything S/He did not wish to exist? The reason for existence, again without stretching too far, is to be - to express one's 'beingness' in the way innate to one's creation. Why else would something exist, than to be what it is? For a rock it's 'beingness' will be fairly simple, for people 'beingness' will of course be far more complex and variable, and perhaps even much more than just the sum of it's parts - perhaps even to eventually transcend what it is into something else entirely, but that's getting completely off topic.

Anyway, once something exists in the universe of course it is subject to the rules of the game. Virtually anything can happen, because it is a shared universe, designed to look like it is self-supporting, and the name of the game is change. But despite that, I further reason that as long as something exists it's prerogative is to fulfill it's greatest potential, that potential innate in it's creation by God, and this for me defines what 'good' is, fulfilling our potential being the greater satisfaction (making us 'happy'), the greater good being that which fulfills the greatest potential. This 'expression' of our beingness is the purpose of life, IMO, and people can make whatever they want of it.

Because of this, I feel we all have an innate right to be happy. You and I have just as much right - no more, and no less - to be just as happy as anyone else. For these reasons, I feel we should be able to do whatever we want, as long as it doesn't take that right from anybody else, because that would in turn diminish the overall potential, the 'expression' of beingness and whatever we as individuals bring to it, that is fulfillable in the world.

That's how I look at it.

Sorry about the long winded reply, but it does get a little complicated.