The Faith of Uncertainty.

reply to post by Itisnowagain
There is no utopia possible in this place - everyone we love dies sooner or later, if they have not already. So, so much for utopia! This is certainly certain! Regardless, any search for utopia is idealistic.

However, one can clearly see this place is not utopia or even fine, by at least recognizing how screwed up it is to begin with. These days, so many people into their own version of non-dualism say things that seemingly dismiss any felt responsibility for what is going on in the world. Just like many such non-dualists justify no disciplines relative to right life practices because that would be seeking!

Such deluded thinking makes for mainly just a "talking school of spirituality" rather than whole bodily understanding, love, and outwardly-expressed service.

reply to post by bb23108


It sounds as if you are dissatisfied with it all.

reply to post by Itisnowagain
I would say that I am disillusioned with what the world has to offer in terms of distracting me from Reality. I would also say that I am realistic about what is going on in the world - and it is not just fine.

Anyway, I am uncertain, though fairly certain, or at least I have faith that I am certain, that we are off topic!

U2U me if you want to continue this discussion.

Originally posted by bb23108
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I would say that I am disillusioned with what the world has to offer in terms of distracting me from Reality.

What 'reality' is it distracting you from?
Are you saying that until the world changes you cannot be at peace?

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
What 'reality' is it distracting you from?
Are you saying that until the world changes you cannot be at peace?

edit on 14-5-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

If I may be so bold as to butt in, the way I read it is that the world's distractions no longer hold much attraction for bb23108.

reply to post by NorEaster

Originally posted by NorEaster
The whole writhing mass that is higher thought is completely helpless, and it's the dedicated intent of brilliant people to ensure that it remains completely helpless. Even on this board, it's evident every single day that intellectuals are like lobsters in a tank, and that no one is going to ever let anyone else make it up to the lid. Not even for a peek over the lip to see if there's anything out there. The real point of intellectualism will always be to drag the highest one back down again. Just an endless wasted effort.

I have given this statement some further study, and now consider that what really drags anyone down from taking "a peek over the lip to see if there's anything out there" is that nothing outside the rule of exotericism, whether that be so-called sacred as proposed by all the creationist-religious institutions - or secular, as proposed by rationalists/scientific materialism - is allowed or even supported as a consideration.

What do both the institutions of creationist religions and the institutions of rationalism/scientism/scientific-materialism have in common? Their refusal to accept anything esoteric or outside the rules of their sacred or secular institutions.

It seems that anytime, anything esoteric is brought up, even around here, inevitably some materialistically-exoterically-oriented individual tries to shut it down with arguments based solely on the rules of materialism and reductive rationalism.

Also, bringing up any esotericism to creationist-religious believers in the Religious Forum here, even if clearly indicated in the Bible, is usually shut down.

How do these two dominant forces (the sacred and the secular) in our world stop trying to control all of us from ever "peeking over the lid"? I don't think they will stop because the constant debate between the two sides keep the masses in place - either materialistically-exoterically-bound to an institutionalized life of rationalism, or exoterically-bound to an institutional life of belief in a creator-god idea that somehow saves you down the line.

And the result common to both is that mankind is tending to get reduced into either a sacred or secular institution, neither of which includes anything esoteric, or outside either institution's basic principles and belief structures. Such exclusive acceptance of these exoteric-only institutions that are controlling almost all of mankind is what keeps most from "peeking over the lid".

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Visitor2012

 

My answer was the Itisnowagain claims the mind cannot see this truth, yet apparently his/hers can. I was pointing out the logical fallacy in his/her statement.

The mind cannot see - the mind is an appearance.
The mind is scenery.

Originally posted by bb23108
And the result common to both is that mankind is tending to get reduced into either a sacred or secular institution, neither of which includes anything esoteric, or outside either institution's basic principles and belief structures. Such exclusive acceptance of these exoteric-only institutions that are controlling almost all of mankind is what keeps most from "peeking over the lid".

Your post is very perceptive and I believe deserves a thread of its own.

One thing I will add, if I may, is that much of the non-dualism promoted on this forum also belongs in the exoteric category, as paradoxical as that may seem at first glance.

Realization of unity in a state of normal waking consciousness is limited to awareness within the material realm, or the body/mind point of view.

What of awareness in the unconscious and subconscious states? How can one claim "realization of unity" if one is not even conscious? It is not until one can remain fully conscious during deep sleep and other "unconscious" states that an opportunity is presented for realization of unity at that level of consciousness.

These are the domains which much of modern non-dualism fails to explore.

reply to post by bb23108


Good points bb (as usual). Sorry for butting in.

It seems that anytime, anything esoteric is brought up, even around here, inevitably some materialistically-exoterically-oriented individual tries to shut it down with arguments based solely on the rules of materialism and reductive rationalism.

You must admit. This happens in the inverse case as well. When ever anything is brought up that uses "rules of materialism", we see all too often the wishful or hopeful-orientated individuals dive bombing it with quotes from bibles and other such literature. All we need do is look to see what has worked for us personally and what hasn't.

Check this out. There is an obvious chasm between the two views you state:
Direction of fit

In there is the same quote from Acquinas I used. It helps to outline your point:

Truth consists in the equation of mind and thing, as said above. Now the mind, that is the cause of the thing, is related to it as its rule and measure; whereas the converse is the case with the mind that receives its knowledge from things.

When therefore things are the measure and rule of the mind, truth consists in the equation of the mind to the thing, as happens in ourselves. For according as a thing is, or is not, our thoughts or our words about it are true or false.

But when the mind is the rule or measure of things, truth consists in the equation of the thing to the mind; just as the work of an artist is said to be true, when it is in accordance with his art. Now as works of art are related to art, so are works of justice related to the law with which they accord. Therefore God's justice, which establishes things in the order conformable to the rule of His wisdom, which is the law of His justice, is suitably called truth. Thus we also in human affairs speak of the truth of justice.

reply to post by mysticnoon

What of awareness in the unconscious and subconscious states? How can one claim "realization of unity" if one is not even conscious? It is not until one can remain fully conscious during deep sleep and other "unconscious" states that an opportunity is presented for realization of unity at that level of consciousness.

I believe narcotics and brain injury can help reach unity as well...so I've been told.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
You must admit. This happens in the inverse case as well. When ever anything is brought up that uses "rules of materialism", we see all too often the wishful or hopeful-orientated individuals dive bombing it with quotes from bibles and other such literature.

I definitely admit that. In fact, that was part of the point that I was making. There has been a never-ending argument between creationists and materialists and there is never any resolve. Neither the so-called sacred institutions nor the materialistic institutions ever seem to budge relative to their belief systems - but they do have some commonalities.

In Western society, neither the institution of religion nor the institution of scientific-materialism support anything of an esoteric nature, and both institutions want to dominate the world with their particular views.

As their argument is always unresolved, it has resulted in mankind for the most part choosing one side or the other - but in both cases, it is always exoteric in nature, never esoteric. Why is this? Because control of the masses is of utmost importance - and that means only exoteric principles and rules.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
All we need do is look to see what has worked for us personally and what hasn't.

Yes, fortunately (and obviously) Reality, or the Truth, cannot be institutionalized, and is self-evident and available to all - beyond the confines, control, and endless arguments of the exoteric institutions of religion and scientific-materialism.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Check this out. There is an obvious chasm between the two views you state:
Direction of fit

Yes, definitely a chasm, but in neither case is there any esotericism in their opposing views, only a great need to control and convert the masses to their particular exoteric views.

reply to post by bb23108


You used the term esoteric often in this reply, I was wondering what you mean by this:

"In Western society, neither the institution of religion nor the institution of scientific-materialism support anything of an esoteric nature"

What does esoteric mean in this context? What is esoteric that they should support? Do you like the existence of religion and/or science?

reply to post by ImaFungi
I have no problems with scientific methodologies - it has led to wonderful discoveries, but apart from this discipline, it makes for a very limited basis for understanding Reality or Consciousness. I also have no problems with religion if it is based in true spirituality.

Exotericism is about behavioral control through various rules. Exotericism can also include beneficial disciplining of the body-mind, etc. Of course, some exoteric practices are necessary and useful to support true spiritual (esoteric) practice, good health, right life, etc.

But exotericism alone is not spiritual - it is simply about conforming the body-mind to rules, regulations, ceremony, etc. Without esotericism, religion is only behavioral control and empty ceremony. Esotericism is senior because it is about one's direct relationship with Reality (the Divine, God, whatever term you prefer). This relationship is not mediated by any priest, whether such a priest is of religion or science.

Esotericism is about living the self-evident spiritual relationship with Reality or God, in daily life, in deep meditation, etc.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Les, have you heard of solipsism. It's the idea that only the self exists.

But can we be certain that anything exists at all or that we can trust even our own thoughts?

I've always read that quote with the context that he was expressing humility. I definitely can respect that. However, there's a more remote possibility that he was only admitting that since everything is viewed through his mind and he cannot determine where or what his mind is with absolute certainty then this in fact brings EVERYTHING into question and eliminates any possibility of certainty.

It's the age old argument that the whole unvierse could be a stage. If it's a stage then maybe you and I don't exist at all. Maybe our perception that we're alive is in fact a stage illusion. Perhaps we're alive but everything we know is not and is simply fed into our mind by something incomprehensible.

Not even the existence of our self is certain.

So by this logic, what he was saying was he did not KNOW anything. This does not mean he didn't have some confidence in things. He was just saying he didn't have certainty.

Maybe he could have said "I am not certain about anything, not even this statement."

reply to post by bb23108


Hm ok, I think I see. But if there is no absolute right perception or knowledge of esotericism, isnt all human activity esoteric? Or can you look at 5 people and say; that person is living an esoteric life, that person is living more of an esoteric life then that person. And where does a perceived and actual value play in? Does esotericism mainly have to do with morals?

reply to post by ImaFungi
Let me explain in a bit more detail. True esotericism begins when all points-of-view are released and one recognizes that one's awareness or consciousness is prior to, but not separate from, all arising.

When one completely recognizes this self-evident truth, i.e., when the process of moment to moment generation of an illusory point-of-view self, is fully recognized, released, and transcended altogether, then consciousness is realized as always being one's true nature.

This is a great realization that also almost always requires exoteric practices relative to the body-mind, but at root the esoteric recognition that one is awareness beyond the process of point-of-view self is the beginning of true esotericism.

Unfortunately, many people these days think that such a beginner's recognition, or even just a mental insight into non-dualism, means they are awake, perhaps even perfectly realized. This is a false notion because such realization will show great signs in the body-mind, especially in terms of the profundity of felt awareness, love, bliss, and radiance moment to moment.

Also, as mysticnoon points out, such realization of consciousness altogether is always obvious - whether in the waking, dreaming, or deep sleep state. But this does not seem to slow down various non-dualist talkers from trying to sell their notions of realization through various tours, youtube clips, etc.

Again, this is not to say that today's common notions about non-dualism are not based on some recognition of the primacy of awareness or consciousness, but that is not how I relate to the term "realization". That basic esoteric recognition is self-evident to anyone in any moment that the point-of-view illusory self is simply relaxed, but this is not realization, no matter how much abstraction from the body-mind or simple observing of it and all arising, or so-called awakening, is touted.

If you read the traditions of about the various spiritual masters who actually realized the fullness of non-duality there is a tremendous difference between them and many of the types jumping on the non-dualism bandwagon these days. Buyer beware!

And, of course, esotericism is also typically associated with inward, mystical practices but such practices are based in some point-of-view self and are limited to whatever that point-of-view self allows.

reply to post by ImaFungi


You may wish to be careful. You are asking a heavily esoteric armchair spiritualist to discern the shades of meaning and direction in esoteric practices, which means you are asking a self-taught rifleman to explain the philosophies of firearms. In short, you're not going to get an objective or even a well-rounded answer.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
... which means you are asking a self-taught ...

Self-taught???!!!!! Hahahahaha! Good one, AfterInfinity!

But thank you very much for this great vote of confidence, AI! I have actually received great help all my life, but if you want to credit me altogether, that is certainly your right!

Edit: Hmmm... maybe I should write a book and ask AI for an endorsement about it being totally original!

Please excuse my silliness, but this struck me as a very funny comment AI made about me. A star for the laugh, dude or dudess!

P.S. I assume that you, AI, will continue this conversation with ImaFungi to, as you say, "discern the shades of meaning and direction in esoteric practices". Thank you, I cannot wait to read it! Really!