Does the idea that 'this place' is a Dream upset you?

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by iamthat

Hi David

It seems somewhat ironic that you tell me not to dismiss what you say "on the basis of the number of 'respected' people who have thought like you still do" and then back up your words with quotes from the Bible and the Bhagavad Gita. This sounds rather like dismissing what I say on the basis of the number of those respected people who think like you do.

I only quote those sources (which I admit are in a 'minority' in terms of numbers) to show you that many people see things differently than the way you do. I do not mean to claim that the way they (or I) see and think about things is necessarily correct. I would be happy to discuss what the Reality of The Flow of Life actually is, but this requires that you acknowledge the possible validity of views and evaluations other than yours. Your attempt to 'reverse' my argument so as to discredit my argument is shameful in my opinion.

Now, I honestly/directly ask you, are you saying that you actually believe that what the Vedic and Upanishadic sources you cite say in support of your 'attitude' and 'position' vis a vis 'Peace' are actually 'truer' descriptions and responses to possibilties currently unfolding in the context of our conjoint Reality than the sayings of Jesus and The Bhagavad Gita?

Let's talk explain and talk about our respective but differing views of the truth about the Reality of The Flow of Life which we are both part of, shall we?

Explain to me what and how you see 'Peace' as an implementable (both necessary and desirable) 'ideal' if that is what you think and would like to do.

[inavalan]

Not to pick sides, but truth isn't decided democratically. The truth isn't in the number of those who agree. History and common sense actually show the opposite.

There might be some guru or a dogma that is closest to the truth, but how do you know which? You can't know.

The closest you can get to the truth is by looking for it inside your mind with no bias. You can't reason it out.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

So yeah, I agree. Bring serenity to one's inner world and let it manifest outward in an organic way. If everyone did that, even just a measurable percentage, the world would be a much better place.

I agree with this JASG. Except I would call it 'calm', not 'peace'. in relation to everyone and everything in one's Life-'orbit'. And I would emphasize that there will be no or very little outer 'peace' in the context of the storm that is now coming 'on'.

I reiterate to Iamthat, or just others in case he can't or just won't 'hear' me', that I quite clearly said "Assertions to the contrary don’t alter [the] truth a jot, no matter how authoritative or persuasive the person who makes them. Think about it: Life depends on there being an ever-evolving diversity of different and, therefore, in one or another way competing, sets of feelings and perceptions regarding what is and isn’t essential ..."

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by inavalan

Not to pick sides, but truth isn't decided democratically. The truth isn't in the number of those who agree. History and common sense actually show the opposite.

There might be some guru or a dogma that is closest to the truth, but how do you know which? You can't know.

The closest you can get to the truth is by looking for it inside your mind with no bias. You can't reason it out.

Inavalan ... except I would say that one can reason it out - 'correctly' if one has no 'bias'!

Originally Posted by davidsun

I agree with this JASG. Except I would call it 'calm', not 'peace'. in relation to everyone and everything in one's Life-'orbit'. And I would emphasize that there will be no or very little outer 'peace' in the context of the storm that is now coming 'on'.

I reiterate to Iamthat, or just others in case he can't or just won't 'hear' me', that I quite clearly said "Assertions to the contrary don’t alter [the] truth a jot, no matter how authoritative or persuasive the person who makes them. Think about it: Life depends on there being an ever-evolving diversity of different and, therefore, in one or another way competing, sets of feelings and perceptions regarding what is and isn’t essential ..."

If I'm at peace with myself, I'm at peace with the world. The problem out "there" is too many people aren't at peace with themselves, and instead of working to that end they work at bending the world to their will. That is they will not or cannot acknowledge the true source of their suffering and address it at the source, hence they lash out at the world, attempting to change it to their liking instead of changing themselves.

Instead of their inner tranquility manifesting outward it's their inner suffering manifesting out into the world.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by davidsun

I do disagree, and strongly so! My comment related to the PRO FORMA use of "Peace" as a presumed to be 'holy' benediction - especially in relation to people who one has expressed disagreement with, so as 'apparently' 'kindly' respond to them even though one more or less blithely just dismisses their propositions.

Like 'Christians' who 'bless' those who they regard as being misguided 'sinners' - like 'gays' who wish to 'marry', for just one instance.

I understand your disagreement of proforma use of peace ie peace of meek , selfish , ignorant , diffident , fearful , weak, powerless ,without base in reality . In fact I agree in this and there appears no disagreement .

Still however whether use of word 'peace' in signature is proforma (like what I imagine above ) or not can not be concluded by me . Only the person himself/herself can gauge that better. I am open to either possibility depending on facts . But certainly I don't have anything to comment on that aspect.

And I certainly keep 'peace' as a very highly venerated object side by side readiness to fight when the need so arises .

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Now, I honestly/directly ask you, are you saying that you actually believe that what the Vedic and Upanishadic sources you cite say in support of your 'attitude' and 'position' vis a vis 'Peace' are actually 'truer' descriptions and responses to possibilties currently unfolding in the context of our conjoint Reality than the sayings of Jesus and The Bhagavad Gita?

The Bhagavad Gita can be read on many levels, and the entire battlefield of Kurukshetra can be considered as the inner battle within each one of us as we strive to overcome our lower nature. We are each Arjuna, facing that within which is familiar and loved, and being told by Krishna (Spirit) that we have to overcome all of it, so do not be attached to any of it.

And if you are going to quote Christ in the Bible then why choose just one quote? There are plenty of others you could choose.

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. (Matthew 5.9)

Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. (John 14.27)

These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. (John 16.33)

To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.(Luke 1.79)

It seems silly to get into a quoting match, because we can always find quotes to support any position we take.

Originally Posted by davidsun

Explain to me what and how you see 'Peace' as an implementable (both necessary and desirable) 'ideal' if that is what you think and would like to do.

Peace is not just a mental ideal. Peace does not require implementing through some kind of action. Peace lies within each one of us. We just have to find it and then rest there. Until we find peace within ourselves then we are part of the planet's problems, not part of the solution.

Peace

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by iamthat

Peace is not just a mental ideal. Peace does not require implementing through some kind of action. Peace lies within each one of us. We just have to find it and then rest there. Until we find peace within ourselves then we are part of the planet's problems, not part of the solution.

Yes to what you say in your post, iamthat, BUTT then there's the issue (which I am attempting to raise here, but which you are apparently, presumably for your own purposes, willfully deaf to) of appropriateness in terms of time and place, to wit: "To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; 8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace."

I 'accuse' you of grinding your own 'axe' in relation to the issue of consequence, by way of including 'Peace' as a PRO FORMA means of 'oneupsmanship' in this forum-discussion (which includes honest/valid expressions of disagreement) IMO.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Inavalan ... except I would say that one can reason it out - 'correctly' if one has no 'bias'!

What do you think is more useful to a person: intellect or intuition? What is worse for a person to be: mediocre or ignorant?

[iamthat]

To go back to an earlier point:

Originally Posted by davidsun

Life depends on there being an ever-evolving diversity of different and, therefore, in one or another way competing, sets of feelings and perceptions regarding what is and isn’t essential. If everything was absolutely consonant, there would be no progression in terms of learning and development, these being a function of the creative exercise of Intelligence and the intelligent exercise of Creativity. Existence, for it could not even be called Life in such case, would just be a round of the same set of symphonic notes endlessly repeating, because everything would then simply operate like clockwork.

Not necessarily. You seem to be saying that humanity develops through competing sets of feelings and perceptions, without which there would be no learning. Maybe humanity would develop more rapidly through co-operation and harmony. Harmony does not mean uniformity.

You refer to the "same set of symphonic notes endlessly repeating". An orchestra is a combination of many very different instruments which combine to produce magnificent symphonies. Maybe it would be the same with a more developed humanity, each person living in harmony with themselves, each other, and Nature, but combining to create an environment where each individual could reach their full potential. Alas, we will not see such a world in our lifetime.

Originally Posted by davidsun

Yes to what you say in your post, iamthat, BUTT then there's the issue (which I am attempting to raise here, but which you are apparently, presumably for your own purposes, willfully deaf to) of appropriateness in terms of time and place, to wit: "To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace."

This is true. And perhaps one day there will be a time of real peace, but humanity is not yet at that stage of development.

Originally Posted by davidsun

I 'accuse' you of grinding your own 'axe' in relation to the issue of consequence, by way of including 'Peace' as a PRO FORMA means of 'oneupsmanship' in this forum-discussion (which includes honest/valid expressions of disagreement) IMO.

You are free to project whatever motive you want on my valediction of Peace. Just remember that this is your projection.

I wish you peace.