Morals not an option?

[juantoo3]

I rather like the work "meme" too bad it was Dawkins who coined it and therefore spoiled it for those of a religious bent. Perhaps "Zeitgeitst"would work instead? I would have to do some work on this to get a feel for the development of the moral sense and the development of organized religion.
There is a theory of the bi-cameral mind (Jaynes?) and how it became unitive because of the complexity of society. Perhaps there is something there?

Hmmm, there must be something in the air, some synchronicity at work...this came up (again) recently and all I had to offer was your previous hint in this direction. So please...expand on this bi-cameral mind stuff if you would be so kind.

 

[juantoo3]

But the whole point of Islam is to destroy the barriers between man
and God, so why do these teachers come in the picture in the first place?

A lot of us Christians ask the same question...

They are given a set of trials as an initiation ritual (the sufis have this)
and when the trials are completed (almost like the 12 step program in
AA) the recruit is made fit for advancement... The only purpose behind
these tests is to commit the recruit's membership and build a sense of
belonging and loyalty to the sect/cult/group.

Sounds like the Catholic Catechism...

The fact of the matter is this: real religion does not need to be
divided into "esoteric" and "exoteric". Religion, if properly understood
already has a balance between these, and that balance exists for a
reason. The idea that anyone needs guidance from some
teacher who is supposed to be "higher" in rank (implying that
he is closer to God) is completely absurd. The whole point of
a personal God, is that if He wants to guide you, then He will do it
personally. The only prerequisite is for the seeker to place total
faith in God alone, and in His words.

Good point.

 

[Paladin]

Juan,
For your perusal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameralism_(psychology)

 

[juantoo3]

Juan,
For your perusal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameralism_(psychology)

Ummm, Paladin....

Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Bicameralism (psychology in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings.

Start the Bicameralism (psychology article or add a request for it.
Search for "Bicameralism (psychology" in existing articles.
Look for pages within Wikipedia that link to this title.

I love ya man, but this is no help to me...

 

[c0de]

Paladin + Juan

(for lack of a better term) higher aspect of his practice resulting in what Maslow would call a "peak experience"

Experiences such as the "peak" and more importantly "the dark night of the
soul" are not prizes to be won as they are advertised by these esoteric
sects. Nor are they status symbols used by the teachers who claim to
have gone through them and are thus closer to God and higher in rank
then the recruits they are currently brainwashing.

The experiences themselves are meant to purify anyone who is willing to
try and submit his will to the will of God. When a person makes the claim
that they understand that this world is just an illusion, God actually tests
this claim... this is when these experiences come. That moment you realize
that this world is literally an illusion and the only reality is God, that is
the peak. Once a person commits, that is when the dark night comes,
which can last for years... It is the pain which you have to deal with when
whatever you love the most is taken away from you... and you have to let
it go. This is the sacrifice that you have to make to prove to God that your
claim was genuine. As long as your desires for this world subsist, your pain will to.
The stronger your desires, the deeper the pain... I also think that this test never
actually ends while your still alive. It might ease up after a couple of years,
but you won't ever be "free" of your own stupidity.

So there never really is a point when you get some divine certificate from God
which qualifies you to be a teacher or saint or whatever. Its just a long climb
up a perpetual mountain... And the only guide is God Himself.

Like Paladin, I think I'm with you up to the last paragraph. Would you expand on this?

hmmm I think I had already posted a response by time you posted this...

 

[TheKhan]

Among linguists it is pretty well established, but there are always those who doubt.

First you gotta stop talking to me like you know Japanese and Buddhism more than I do. Especially in the Japanese department. It`s like telling a Chinese dude from China, about what being Chinese is all about.

I`ll give you the entire J alphabets derived from Sanskrit.

a,i,u,e,o
ka,ki,ku,ke,ko
sa,si,su,se,so
ta,chi,tsu,te,to
na,ni,nu,ne,no
ha,hi,hu,he,ho
ma,mi,mu,me,mo
ya,yu,yo
ra,ri,ru,re,ro
wa,un

each one of these sounds are a single character in Japanese. We substitute Chinese into our Japanese words to optimize, but technically the entire language can be expressed with just the J alphabets noted above. Look, I speak fluent Japanese and am from an ancient Japanese family, take my word for this in terms of at least Japanese.

There are many theories about Ainu. And Ainu are not the only one`s. They`re the one`s who exist today, but there are other theories like Ainu took over the south, forgot they were Ainu and went back up north etc.. 10% of Japanese DNA is native, so I`d rather not see any Ainu coming back in about 1000 years from now from some remote location claiming Japan.

To note, look up Indo-European languages, and you`ll understand that Indo-European is a category. And Sanskrit is noted as just a sub-branch, like Greek, and Latin. It`ll take a lot of digging to find out what Sanskrit is as you say, but it won`t be proven at least in the wiki, and that is what I`m talking about.

I know what Buddhism did to Asia. If you think its any less than Greek and Roman combined, you are majorly mistaken. Of course communists, like the Muslims wouldn`t have a clue or the means to understand Asian history.

We generally agree what Sanskrit is to the world. If you tried to convince an Abrahamic religious person who does not agree, you`d be getting the same kind of response as you and Bandit are giving me. Try convincing Bandit who`s on a child pornography roll at this present moment, and has problems with me for not agreeing that teen-agers should not be charged for child pornography. Even tells me to prepare myself for going to jail for child porn just because I don`t agree with him.

All the old things older than Buddhism are present as you say. But at one time or another Buddhism did an entire sweep of the Asian cultures, or they would have got occupied. To prevent occupation was probably the main reason to embrace buddhism to a hilt in all Asian countries, at least that is why it was imported initially in Japan. Then the faith.


TK

 

[juantoo3]

OK, guys, I'm locking the thread for a bit until everybody cools down.

 

[juantoo3]

Let's try this again, hopefully everybody has cooled off a bit now.

Thread unlocked.

 

[Paladin]

I feel better already

 

[Nick_A]

Change also needs will. No amount of grace can overcome an obstinate will. A person has to want to change, or change will never occur.

Why do you think people would want change other than to acquire more prestige? Just look at what sells and what we spend our entertainment money on. Do you see what we spend money on reflecting any desire for change other than for personal gain? I don't. The only ones wanting change are those at the low end of the totem pole. How many of those on top speak of any change that lowers their status?

We are governed by society and force regardless of what the platitudes say.

What Simone is saying is that wanting to change only comes from an acquired human perspective that only comes through grace. As we are, we are governed by "prestige." It requires grace to become psychologically part of the big picture where change becomes possible.

We like to talk the talk but who is capable of walking the walk?

"The combination of these two facts – the longing in the depth of the heart for absolute good, and the power, though only latent, of directing attention and love to a reality beyond the world and of receiving good from it – constitutes a link which attaches every man without exception to that other reality. Whoever recognizes that reality recognizes that link. Because of it, he holds every human being without any exception as something sacred to which he is bound to show respect. This is the only possible motive for universal respect towards all human beings." Simone Weil
“Draft for A Statement of Human Obligations” SIMONE WEIL, AN ANTHOLOGY ed. Sian Miles​

To be brutally honest, technology has dulled our natural drive to seek what is greater then ourselves other then as escapism and denies our capacity for the necessary attention to remember it. As a result we drift further into materialism and commercialism. No platitudes or dictates from personal gods will change it.​

The brutal reality is that collectively we don't want change. What we want is "prestige" that establishes the societal norm. The only thing that can minimize the dominance of prestige and its natural conflicts is experiential knowledge of the greater good which we deny ourselves.​

This is not a politically correct feel good idea yet regardless, it is what it is. Our morality is an expression of what we ARE so naturally includes our hypocrisy. As such, change is only welcomed in reality on a societal level when it furthers collective prestige. Once we see that it doesn't we look for the scapegoat to blame this failure on. We've gone through the Jews and the Armenians for example. Who do you think is next in line?​

 

[Paladin]

Ummm, Paladin....



I love ya man, but this is no help to me...

That is so weird there was a full article there before

Anyway if you look up Julian Jaynes and his book from the seventies;
The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind,

You'll get an idea of where I was heading. This is a hotly debated topic in the psychology world but has gained some support over the years.
Quite simply Jaynes suggests that prior to 3000years ago the brain was not unitive but was bicameral, in other words there was no introspection. The executive function of the brain had some trouble sending comands to the action part and therefore the idea of hearing voices was common.
There is some suggestion that schizophrenia is a vestige of this.
But you would have to read up on it a bit to get a more accurate description.

 

[Paladin]

Code,

I agree that the experiences you speak of are not prizes, couldn't agree more. There are those that state you are lucky if you don't experience that but come to the understanding anyway.

As for the sects you mention, I'm sure you are quite right in your assessment of them.
And as for keeping my stupidity, I resigned myself to that many years ago

In my experience, (which is not to offer anything but an anecdote) I have seen that seeing past the veil is really quite ordinary in a way, and quite beautiful in another. For one thing it occurs to me that there isn't anyone there to "get" anything and there is nothing to "get" There is quite literally nothing being everything and it is indeed beautiful and wondrous.
And the Dark Night of Soul, a wonderful work in Christian literature, I loved reading it. Sometime I would love to have a coffee with you and talk about such things too personal to reveal in a simple post.

 

[c0de]

Code,

I agree that the experiences you speak of are not prizes, couldn't agree more. There are those that state you are lucky if you don't experience that but come to the understanding anyway.

As for the sects you mention, I'm sure you are quite right in your assessment of them.
And as for keeping my stupidity, I resigned myself to that many years ago

In my experience, (which is not to offer anything but an anecdote) I have seen that seeing past the veil is really quite ordinary in a way, and quite beautiful in another. For one thing it occurs to me that there isn't anyone there to "get" anything and there is nothing to "get" There is quite literally nothing being everything and it is indeed beautiful and wondrous.
And the Dark Night of Soul, a wonderful work in Christian literature, I loved reading it. Sometime I would love to have a coffee with you and talk about such things too personal to reveal in a simple post.

Well, until then

 

[Postmaster]

Early in the morning and thinking as I usually do. If humans are inherently good, say we have an uncontrollable evolutionarily hardwired circuitry for morality, I'm starting to analogize and realize how it's this system that can work adversely and contrary to its purpose. Take for instance times my mum used to damage my clothes in the wash, accidently throw away or break something expensive in my room, I would get annoyed but not express that I was and very easily let it go. However I received a Valentines card the other day which I decided to save for sentimental purposes and left it in a bag with other stuff which I must admit appeared to look like rubbish and it seems like my grandma had thrown it away mistaking it as rubbish. I found myself reacting differently to this and can’t let it go so easy actually I’m still annoyed lol! Messing with sentiment doesn’t go so easy with humans!

 

[greymare]

lol, or you could clean your own room!!!!
(lol, boys...)

 

[juantoo3]

If humans are inherently good, say we have an uncontrollable evolutionarily hardwired circuitry for morality, I'm starting to analogize and realize how it's this system that can work adversely and contrary to its purpose.

Well, that's the rub. How can we be so sure humans *are* inherently good? If we were good, inherently, we would have no need for any religion or any morality or ethics training / indoctrination. Seems to me we have these things to teach us because we are *not* inherently good, we just have this innate need to cooperate. Survival of the herd translates into better survival chances for any given individual within that herd. Loners don't last long.

 

[Postmaster]

true true.