“Thus the concept of a guru. But, what if God is one's guru, i.e., Guru is my guru, if you see what I mean? “ – Pat
RE: “…much of import that is transmitted from generation to generation, from person to person, is esoteric in nature. Texts alone can never do this due to their very nature. “ - orn Well Pat, your guru comment is opaque at best. So I find it difficult to continue our conversation. (i.e. No, I do *not* “see what” you mean.) I say this because when I went for a reference to hope to grok how you are using the term, not only did I become more convinced that it was impossible without you rephrasing your commentary. Without going into my reference at length, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru) I will copy/paste one short paragraph due to its informational content: “…A guru (Sanskrit: गुरु) is one who is regarded as having great knowledge, wisdom and authority in a certain area, and who uses it to guide others (teacher). In Sanskrit gu means darkness & ru means light. As a principle for the development of consciousness it leads the creation from unreality to reality, from the darkness of ignorance to the light of knowledge. In its purest form this principle manifests on earth as a divine incarnation (saint), a person with supreme knowledge about God and all creation. Other forms of manifestation of this principle also include parents, school teachers , non-human objects (books) and even one's own intellectual discipline….” So as to not appear to be too involved in simple semantics nor even possibly avoidance, what I had typed was much simpler than how I believe you have interpreted my words at to their meaning. All I was suggesting was that words found in a book, while of some use, are not nearly as informative as learning from another human being. Yes, I apply this doctrine to many levels of discussion; however, for the current context, there need be no guru involved…at least not in the expanded meaning of the term proffered by Wikipedia. Since even here, I find it difficult to grasp what you mean by simple word usage, something that may not have occurred *IF* we were talking together in person, one can interpolate how difficult it is to grasp meanings found in a text alone…especially in texts from other generations. On May 25, 5:11 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 May, 17:53, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As much as I appreciate clarity, as Pat well knows, much of import > > that is transmitted from generation to generation, from person to > > person, is esoteric in nature. Texts alone can never do this due to > > their very nature. > > Thus the concept of a guru. But, what if God is one's guru, i.e., > Guru is my guru, if you see what I mean? > > > > > On May 24, 9:35 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I suppose with any faith, we can site followers who can live in love > > > and peace after coming to the scripture, and those that cannot. > > > Reading the scripture and living the scripture are two different > > > things. Islam is no exception. This does not mean the scripture is > > > flawed, although that seems to be argued ad naseum, but rather goes > > > back to the conversation of mistakes and forgiveness. > > > > On May 24, 12:11 pm, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > And that is, I repeat, the only hallmark of a true messiah ... when > > > > his word leads people to being good, gentle and loving. The Jewish > > > > temple means little, and the number of adherents is really irrelevant, > > > > when the merit of thought and speech is to be considered. > > > > > We've discussed Quran forthrightly with the participation of a Muslim > > > > member a couple of years ago, with all its interpretive flaws and > > > > consequent crap temporals, that has resulted in such behaviour among > > > > its adherents as we witness today. Such certainties as it mouths is of > > > > no merit in itself, if it does lead people to being good, gentle and > > > > loving. > > > > > I'd much prefer the less certain, if it results otherwise ! > > > > > On May 24, 7:44 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I see your point, although all of the people that I know that consider > > > > > themselves of the Baha'i faith are good, gentle, loving people. To > > > > > that end, I would say he was successful. > > > > > > On May 24, 9:55 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On 24 May, 14:21, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I have not read this, and lots of other stuff. My reading has > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > quite narrow in scope, but that may change again in my life. I > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > read what comes to me that has a ring of truth to me, and it > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > validates my latest realizations. Quite a wonderful process, > > > > > > > really. > > > > > > > I would some day like to get back to literature...so much of it is > > > > > > > beautiful. So little time, so much to read...that is, if you > > > > > > > include > > > > > > > time in your reality... > > > > > > > Well, it's not so much as to whether or not I include it, it's > > > > > > whether > > > > > > or not it is actually included. It is. Otherwise, you could read > > > > > > this before I wrote it. Only the One that has access to all time at > > > > > > once can do that. And, thus, knew, millenia ago, that this little > > > > > > post was a vital part of the whole. I wouldn't bother reading "The > > > > > > Book of Certitude". It was/is, more or less, an attempt from a > > > > > > person > > > > > > raised within Shi'a Islam, to make the claim of being the return of > > > > > > the Hidden (12th) Imam in a very subtle way, i.e., do everything but > > > > > > actually state it. Unfortunately, the book, when contrasted to the > > > > > > clarity of The Qur'an, is a mishmash of ideas that are NOT > > > > > > internally > > > > > > consistent and, thus, do not add clarity or certitude but, rather, > > > > > > detract from the Qur'an that it was intending to comment upon. It's > > > > > > an attempt to sway both Christians and Muslims into accepting the > > > > > > author's 'way forward', wich, although admirable, the way outlined > > > > > > is > > > > > > too muddled to see, in my opinion. In short, it was another attempt > > > > > > to be 'the Gospel of the Next Messiah' written before said Messiah > > > > > > claimed the title. Whilst there ARE followers, the majority of the > > > > > > population of the planet have never heard of Baha'i or Baha'ullah. > > > > > > Therefore, I don't think he was a very successful Messiah. He > > > > > > certainly never rebuilt any Jewish temple nor intended to; what sort > > > > > > of Messiah is THAT? ;-) > > > > > > > > On May 24, 7:22 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 23 May, 20:03, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > perhaps with a focus like the B'hai, that brings the > > > > > > > > > individual to > > > > > > > > > becoming rather than possessing as the basis of the social > > > > > > > > > contract, > > > > > > > > > it may some day come about. > > > > > > > > > Perhaps, but have you read their "Book of Certitude"? I have, > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > there is more uncertainty in it than any other 'scripture' I've > > > > > > > > read. > > > > > > > > I'm sure, like most people, they mean well, but the faith > > > > > > > > itself is > > > > > > > > ill-founded although well-intentioned. And the Book of > > > > > > > > Certitude is > > > > > > > > confounding. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would > > > > > > > > accept > > > > > > > > it AS a scirpture; but then, hey, it's better than David > > > > > > > > Koresh...of > > > > > > > > THAT, I'm sure. > > > > > > > > > > On May 23, 1:59 pm, DarkwaterBlight > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Quite a tall order OneCell, I think that is pointing in the > > > > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > > direction but I highly doubt that the powers can/will be > > > > > > > > > > able to agree > > > > > > > > > > on much other than we need to save the planet in order to > > > > > > > > > > save > > > > > > > > > > ourselves!LOL!Surely this statement reflects self intrest > > > > > > > > > > as well! > > > > > > > > > > > On May 22, 11:34 am, 1CellOfMany <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In response to your question,archytas, here is a direct > > > > > > > > > > > quote from the > > > > > > > > > > > article: > > > > > > > > > > > "Ultimately, the transformation required to shift towards > > > > > > > > > > > sustainable > > > > > > > > > > > consumption and production will entail no less than an > > > > > > > > > > > organic change > > > > > > > > > > > in the structure of society itself so as to reflect fully > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > interdependence of the entire social body—as well as the > > > > > > > > > > > interconnectedness with the natural world that sustains > > > > > > > > > > > it. Among > > > > > > > > > > > these changes, many of which are already the focus of > > > > > > > > > > > considerable > > > > > > > > > > > public discourse, are: the consciousness of world > > > > > > > > > > > citizenship; the > > > > > > > > > > > eventual federation of all nations through an integrated > > > > > > > > > > > system of > > > > > > > > > > > governance with capacity for global decision-making; the > > > > > > > > > > > establishment > > > > > > > > > > > of structures which recognize humanity’s common ownership > > > > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > earth’s resources; the establishment of full equality > > > > > > > > > > > between men and > > > > > > > > > > > women; the elimination of all forms of prejudice; the > > > > > > > > > > > establishment of > > > > > > > > > > > a universal currency and other integrating mechanisms > > > > > > > > > > > that promote > > > > > > > > > > > global economic justice; the adoption of an international > > > > > > > > > > > auxiliary > > > > > > > > > > > language to facilitate mutual understanding; and the > > > > > > > > > > > redirection of > > > > > > > > > > > massive military expenditures towards constructive social > > > > > > > > > > > ends[iv]." > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 21, 9:19 pm, archytas <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > The majority seem scared of anything like this Onecell. > > > > > > > > > > > > Peoples like > > > > > > > > > > > > the Amish still live under wider protection, and the > > > > > > > > > > > > B'hai are > > > > > > > > > > > > persecuted in Iran. How do we protect our sustainable > > > > > > > > > > > > communities > > > > > > > > > > > > from bandits and mad, violent religionists? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 21 May, 21:48, 1CellOfMany <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a different perspective on Prosperity. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > article below was > > > > > > > > > > > > > copied from the Baha'i News > > > > > > > > > > > > > Service:http://news.bahai.org/story/770 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new statement challenging the common assumption > > > > > > > > > > > > > that human beings > > > > > > > > > > > > > are slaves to self-interest and consumerism has been > > > > > > > > > > > > > issued by the > > > > > > > > > > > > > Baha'i International Community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A more profound look at human nature would reveal the > > > > > > > > > > > > > ability to > > > > > > > > > > > > > respond to a higher calling, suggests the document – > > > > > > > > > > > > > issued this week > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the United Nations Commission on Sustainable > > > > > > > > > > > > > Development as it > > > > > > > > > > > > > began its annual two-week session. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "The culture of consumerism ... has tended to reduce > > > > > > > > > > > > > human beings to > > > > > > > > > > > > > competitive, insatiable consumers of goods and to > > > > > > > > > > > > > objects of > > > > > > > > > > > > > manipulation by the market," it says. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In fact, "the human experience is essentially > > > > > > > > > > > > > spiritual in nature: it > > > > > > > > > > > > > is rooted in the inner reality – or what some call > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 'soul' – that > > > > > > > > > > > > > we all share in common," it states. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The document, titled "Rethinking Prosperity: Forging > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives to a > > > > > > > > > > > > > Culture of Consumerism," challenges the view that > > > > > > > > > > > > > there is an > > > > > > > > > > > > > intractable conflict between what people want – which > > > > > > > > > > > > > supposedly is to > > > > > > > > > > > > > consume more – and what humanity needs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Much of economic and psychological theory depicts > > > > > > > > > > > > > human beings as > > > > > > > > > > > > > slaves to self-interest," it says. "The faculties > > > > > > > > > > > > > needed to construct > > > > > > > > > > > > > a more just and sustainable social order – > > > > > > > > > > > > > moderation, justice, love, > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason, sacrifice and service to the common good – > > > > > > > > > > > > > have too often been > > > > > > > > > > > > > dismissed as naive ideals. Yet, it is these and > > > > > > > > > > > > > related qualities that > > > > > > > > > > > > > must be harnessed. ..." > > ... > > read more »
