Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SerpentQueen
it's easy for me to "hear" something different in your words, than you actually intended. If that makes sense? i.e., fault of the reader, ahem, me... not you ;-)
|
Well if so I have no problem clarifying... although if it's all about the blog, the comments page of it might be a better place!
Quote:
|
The other thing I've noticed and marvel over is that often in my organization the same basic "big idea" will bubble up separately.
|
Yes this does happen. IMO the ideas have 'mind of their own' and are looking for a way to be born and thrive etc.
Quote:
|
So what I would be interested in knowing is whether these images - IF they stood for the same basic idea - did they pop up in isolation, around same time?
|
I agree it's an interesting question, one that some people are studying too. Of course this is where the idea of linear time, and knowing the dates of things, turns out to be rather useful. :)
Mind you, if you're talking about Uma's big images thread, that was completely all over the shop! That was not a bunch of serpents merely, that was Bernini sculptures next to rivers next to Steiner-school child development theories... it was very higgledy.
Quote:
|
I think my point still applied, whether it was "just do it" or "just do what I tell you."
|
Well I have no problem with 'just do it' in this context. Indeed I often wish more people would! :)
Quote:
|
Another angle I wonder about takes the temperament theorist approach. Four basic temperaments. Your temperament, I am going to guess, is Rational (NT).
|
Well I don't go for the whole four temperaments thing actually, and it's non-provable, but I doubt I'd be classed as rational on any ordinary psychological instrument (if it were opposed to 'imaginative and weird', say.) I made my living as a musician for many years and would have been classed as strongly over-imaginative by most in my formative days; to most people who know me I'm an eccentric mad poet/philosopher who overdoes the meditation thing. :)
Quote:
|
But the majority of the world are Guardians - they would, I imagine, vastly prefer a "just do what I tell you" approach, one based on tradition and ritual and yes, authority.
|
There you go again -- how exactly do we
know the majority of the world are "Guardians"? How can we build on that assumption, when it's simply an assumption?
I have no problem
at all with tradition, ritual and authority -- I've got a lot of my best stuff from them! None of those three needs to mean that questioning is disallowed (real tradition should be alive to questioning.) But that's more a response to the blog than this thread...
This question you ask gets us right back to the subject:
Quote:
|
Ultimately it doesn't matter what path you take, does it?
|
Assuming the path you are on actually works and is right for you (and that's actually a big assumption) that's a good enough reason to follow it.
But this thread began by making a claim about the Crown Chakra. Let's assume Uma made the claim either because she knows from personal experience it is true, or trusts somebody who does. The problem then becomes, if someone else's experience contradicts hers, who is correct?
It seems clear that both are correct, therefore
one cannot generalize from one's personal path to 'all others'. One cannot say, because this is true for me, it
must be true for everybody (and they are all misselling, lying, mistaken, not the real thing...). One cannot make that assumption just
because there exist multiple valid paths. It is often done, but it just doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny.
The reason there are so many arguments in spiritual matters is partly because people's experiences point in many different directions, sometimes agreeing, sometimes not. Unless there is full agreement no-one can say what the Crown Chakra 'always' does, or indeed that Jesus Christ is the one true Saviour, or anything else!
At least with questions about symbols there are facts to discover that can be demonstrated with some objectivity... with such huge spiritual questions, there can easily be more than one valid viewpoint.