Hey Lee, I hadn’t forgotten about our conversation here…just got real busy. I’ll do my best to respond to as many of your points as possible.
No, I didn’t get the notion of a divine spark in mankind in Sunday school. I don’t even remember attending even though one summer I did spend a little time at a church…mostly carving and painting a bible out of a bar of Ivory soap and learning to repeat a few of the books of the bible. My guess is that it was a good child care deal for my mom. Of course, since my parents (and mostly their parents) couldn’t make up their minds how to indoctrinate me religiously, the default was no church nor teaching at all. The former small foray into it was the only one I remember and I must have been all of 3 or 4 years old. I’ve shared parts of my spiritual quest here over the years so won’t bore others with much repeating. In about midlife, I did become curious, having claimed atheism and agnosticism for quite a while and so at that point did study a few sources. The notion of the spark I’ve found back in many ancient writings, Plotinus for one. Even though Buddhism doesn’t address god in most sects directly, the sense of such a spark arose while studying and practicing some of it too. The same during a zhikr…as one reaches fanaa. There are countless other sources one can run across and I did find quite a few of them. Yet, more to your point, there were moments in my life (here I’m mostly thinking about youth…2-16) when I had a sense and direct apprehension of, for lack of a better term and not having it at the time in my youth, a divine spark within. So, Lee, for me, I’ve both internally found it and noted it externally…of course, both are ultimately the same. “…It is clear that you belive such a thing, so by what yardstick have you measured the validity of this idea?...” – Lee Lee, as I’ve mentioned often here, even though it may be as simple as a semantic issue, I don’t use nor accept for myself the use of the term “belief” when it comes to god or the divine. My best understanding is that in almost every such case when it *is* used, the actual meaning is blind belief…something taken on from a book or ‘teacher’ precisely without the examination nor understanding you are currently searching for…and then made to be one’s own, even though the experience itself wasn’t there before. Now I know I can easily be wrong here so won’t belabor the point more. Please just accept that the term is problematic for me. Thanks. Now to the meat…your term ‘yardstick’. I’ll also point out that you attached the term ‘idea’ to it as well as ‘validity’. For me, I can’t say that I have a formulated ‘idea’ when it comes to divine spark…thus my reticence in using the term ‘belief’ which normally connotates a concept or idea. And, it is not just a ‘feeling’ either…yet, there is a knowing. Little more to say here. You share your spiritual path and teachers and teachings. I appreciate this. It is an interesting journey is it not! Yet, please just accept that I do not personally accept anything I hear nor read by itself as being in any way a valid yardstick for determining divinity let alone any associated intention. Again, for now, I will leave this here. Your particular yardstick of universality (transcending culture) has some merit as I see it. However there are many issues associated here. Thus, my question about hearing words in one’s head…something I haven’t experienced in this context. You don’t seem to appreciate the possibility that something ‘crazy’ that one thinks just might be associated with the divine…did I understand you correctly here? Later on, you address something biblical…which does little for me. However, your words “…I asigned Godly attributes to humanity…” do have a ring of truth for me. However, as much as there may actually be a connection here thus allowing some attributes we human beings know to be assigned to things divine too, overall, what all too often is done is some sort of expectation that any god(s) will be just like us…including all of the motivations, qualities, emotions, thinking, logics etc. and, at the same time be *something* “out there”. This to me is absurd. Your last commentary implied that maturation includes changing ideas/ beliefs…for whatever reason(s). In some ways, of course this is the case. However, I have little confidence that such an either/or approach, using reason and ‘logic’ alone can produce any lasting let alone valid and satisfactory answer/solution to such a spiritual search. On Feb 24, 2:05 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Om, > > Yes some fine questions there, I'll do my best to answer them for you. > > 'Is this a rhetorical question Lee? I do understand that most people > require such intermediaries and/or representatives and/or ‘revealed’ > truths…I don’t.' > > Heh no not at all, it is a serious question. What I mean is how come > you to this idea of a divine spark in mankind? Did you hear or read > about it elsewhere, is it 100% purly your own original thought(well > not original but you get what I mean), did you learn of it perhaps in > Sunday school? > > It is clear that you belive such a thing, so by what yardstick have > you measured the validity of this idea? > > For myself it is a teaching of my religion, a teaching from Guru > Granth Sahib, and so reveled truth direct from God. > > 'The main question that remains as I see it is, just how does one know > what ‘message’ one is hearing, god’s or > their own…or even both?!!!' > > Indeed that is the very question I am asking. > > 'I haven’t heard words in my head that I would attribute to anything > supernatural. So, exactly how do you > approach such things?' > > Exactly, I see you understand my concern. As I have suggested I use a > serious of yardsticks to measure teh validyt of any holy scripture. > The one I'm talking about in this thread is the idea that a truely > global religion should transcend culture. > > You mention one of the sticking blocks on this train of thought, > asigning human atributes to diety. I think though that we can turn to > the Christian Bible for a way out of that one. > > What do you suppose is meant by the following: > > Genesis 1:26 (New International Version) > > "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and > let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over > the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that > move along the ground." > > Surly not that we look like God that God's physical form is human not > when you consider that God is formless. > I enterpret that to mean our emotions our intelect, our outlook. If > God is capable of love, as we humans are then that is clearly a human > attribute. Or perhaps more correctly, I asigned Godly attributes to > humanity. > > The other one is hard to counter. Yes of course this all depends on > my own inturpretaions. There is not a lot I can do about that > though, I can't ever intrept anything as somebody else. > I am however honest and grownup enough to rethink entiryly my stance > if this house of cards does come tummbling down that is how we grow > and learn is it not? > > On 24 Feb, 05:56, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > “…I guess we can say by message I mean scripture. What is holy > > scripture if not Gods message to humaity, encompassing teachings, Gods > > plans, what God requires of us etc...” - Lee > > > Hey Lee...then this sort of thing is what I don’t embrace. Such > > anthropomorphism just doesn’t do it for me. It is in this light that I > > said I don’t embrace revelation…as being told by other people or words > > in a book…what some deity is supposed to think/want etc. > > > “…The notion of life including a divine spark is included in this > > message, or where else would you have the idea from?...” – Lee > > > Is this a rhetorical question Lee? I do understand that most people > > require such intermediaries and/or representatives and/or ‘revealed’ > > truths…I don’t. > > > “…I guess I am also talking about reveled truth, something that I > > certianly belive in. How can a theist not belive in such a thing? If > > the truth of God message is not reveled by God then the assumption is > > that it is made up by the minds of humans. Anybody could literaly say > > anything they liked, promote any idea they wanted about God and Gods > > plan, the ultimate authority on what God wants us to do, must come > > from God, otherwise, all manor of these 'truths' sping up, which of > > course makes it hard to choose wich one to belive. In every belife > > there must be a yardstick by which to measure the validity. Reveald > > truth is one of the ones that I use to measure religoin…” - Lee > > > Lee, this is all quite important when it comes to theism. You hit most > > of the points quite well. The main question that remains as I see it > > is, just how does one know what ‘message’ one is hearing, god’s or > > their own…or even both?!!! You use revelation as a standard. This is > > all well and good; however, exactly how does one know the source of > > such things for sure? I wouldn’t take it on ‘faith’. I wouldn’t just > > listen to what other people say. I haven’t heard words in my head that > > I would attribute to anything supernatural. So, exactly how do you > > approach such things? > > > “In Sikhi the very first lines of Guru Granth Sahib are: 'Ikoncar, sat > > naam' Which translates literaly into '1 God, true name' But we know > > the problem with literal translations, and so I cpersonaly translate > > it (wrongly or rightly I know not) as meaning, '1 God, whose name is > > true/truth' Delving further the idea is thus: '1 God, who is the only > > absolute truth' “ – Lee > > > And presto chango, you may have created yet another religion Lee! Such > > things are problematic as I see it. > > > “This is an example of such a message.” – Lee > > > Which is Lee, the written words, which you assume are from god or your > > own interpretation? Which is the revealed word of god? Now, I hope you > > know me well enough to know that I push here for a reason and not just > > in an arbitrary way. Nor do I wish to insult you or your belief(s). I > > do want to understand how others can accept such ‘revealed’ things > > with, as far as I can tell, no objective standard to determine their > > authenticity. > > > “…This though is 100% cultural, and it's meaning is lost on those of a > > diffrant culture. Divine message, easpecialy if the intent is global > > should transcend culture, I think. Why do I say this? It is virtualy > > impossible for us humans to thing outside of our cultrual norms. If > > this its true then God surely knows this and so any message from God, > > I would expect to be cultural-less, and timeless. relevant to all > > soscity over all time. Again otherwise the assumption is the message > > come from the minds of man.” – Lee > > > Yes Lee, such quagmires do emerge when one assigns human > > characteristics and logic to a deity. Such projections can only cause > > more confusion as I see it. Your question may make a sort of sense if > > all of your underlying assumptions are in fact the cast. If any one of > > them isn’t that case, the entire thing can come tumbling down like a > > house of cards. > > > On Feb 23, 4:51 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hey OM. > > > > I guess we can say by message I mean scripture. What is holy > > > scripture if not Gods message to humaity, encompassing teachings, Gods > > > plans, what God requires of us etc... > > > > The notion of life including a divine spark is included in this > > > message, or where else would you have the idea from? I guess I am > > > also talking about reveled truth, something that I certianly belive > > > in. How can a theist not belive in such a thing? If the truth of God > > > message is not reveled by God then the assumption is that it is made > > > up by the minds of humans. > > > Anybody could literaly say anything they liked, promote any idea they > > > wanted about God and Gods plan, the ultimate authority on what God > > > wants us to do, must come from God, otherwise, all manor of these > > > 'truths' sping up, which of course makes it hard to choose wich one to > > > belive. In every belife there must be a yardstick by which to measure > > > the validity. Reveald truth is one of the ones that I use to measure > > > religoin. > > > > In Sikhi the very first lines of Guru Granth Sahib are: > > > > 'Ikoncar, sat naam' Which translates literaly into '1 God, true > > > name' But we know the problem with literal translations, and so I > > > personaly translate it (wrongly or rightly I know not) as meaning, '1 > > > God, whose name is true/truth' > > > > Delving further the idea is thus: '1 God, who is the only absolute > > > truth' > > > > This is an example of such a message. > > > > Yet from just this little line, many ideas are formulated, God is the > > > only truth must also mean that God is immenent throughout the > > > creation, and thus your idea of a divine spark in humanity is also > > > addressed. > > > > The problem I'm having curently is with dogma, and it's cultural > > > bounderies. In the east it is rude and impolite to point your feet > > > towards somebody. Hence show throwing or hiting somebody or > > > somebodies effigy with your shoe is an insult, whilst washing > > > sombodies feet is an act of supreame humility and respect. > > > > We have an example of this in the Bilbe, with the prostitue washing > > > the feet of Jesus. > > > > This though is 100% cultural, and it's meaning is lost on those of a > > > diffrant culture. Divine message, easpecialy if the intent is global > > > should transcend culture, I think. > > > > Why do I say this? It is virtualy impossible for us humans to thing > > > outside of our cultrual norms. If this its true then God surely knows > > > this and so any message from God, I would expect to be cultural-less, > > > and timeless. relevant to all soscity over all time. Again > > > otherwise the assumption is the message come from the minds of man. > > > > On 23 Feb, 12:13, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Lee, if by ‘message’ you mean some linguistic directive or informative > > > > event, the notion of such commentary by a deity transcending culture > > > > is a strange one, no? Perhaps you mean things like “Don’t kill.” > > > > “Treat others like you want to be treated” etc. I’m not sure. Perhaps > > > > you could expand upon your premise here some, OK? > > > > > Beyond revealed ‘truths’ (something I don’t embrace), perhaps we > > > > should include the notion that life > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
