Re: 'This place is Sacred' - Genuine experience of hallowed ground? Devotional hyperb
ok, i'll bite.
firstly, what nativeastral said about "tested, reliable psychics". yeah. there's an oxymoron i don't think i've come across before.
on the other hand:
Do physical places on this planet (like with a human body) retain a similar memory of powerfully positive or religiously significant events which happened long ago at this specific spot? (Do such events retain an aura or ghost-electromagnetic memory of some kind?)
i actually believe it's simpler than that. have you ever seen australian aboriginal paintings? in those, there is no fourth dimension. all the time is shown squashed into the same space that the "dreaming" has always and will always share. my concept of time, based on the teachings of our mystical tradition and in particular the
sefer yetzirah, is that in a 5-dimensional "G!DSpace", the three dimensions of physical measurement and the fifth of "soul", or morality if you prefer, are ones we have it in our power to move along and reposition ourselves. the fourth, that of time, is outside our remit. from the Divine PoV, this restriction does not exist. all times are One; this is how determinism and free-will are able to coexist in the same space. by this logic, everything that has ever happened or will happen at a place is, in theory, accessible, if only you could move along the fourth dimension. what i believe happens with psychics and the like, probably also in the phenomenon of
déjà vu, is that people stumble across folds in time in some way, thus they are able to experience "echoes" of something that has happened previously or in the future. i believe prophecy is probably a very exalted form of this, whereby by the exercise of certain techniques some form of oh, i don't know, temporal singularity is opened which the prophet is given a glimpse into. perhaps certain places are more prone to this sort of singularity, it would make sense if prophetic techniques and structures were frequently practiced there, to make some kind of impression, to, if you like, thin the fabric of the lower worlds such that it makes it easier to make a wormhole. anyway, that's just my opinion, or at any rate, it is where my understanding of the primary sources that deal with this would lead me to think. the holy land and, particularly, jerusalem, the "navel of the world", are of course probably the largest focus of this on the planet.
it is, of course, entirely possible that the "form of hysteria" explanation is correct - or, more likely, that both explanations are present in different forms. in any case, it makes it all the more important that prophetic techniques are practiced with an experienced guide and appropriate safeguards.
What if this "sacred place" is actually the wrong place?
a good point. certainly, following the logic of my argument, you would expect two things to happen. one would be that people would in any case practice prophetic techniques at the location and end up creating a singularity in its own right. the second, however, would be that the singularity would be less likely to yield valid prophetic results and you would get odd characteristics popping up. of course, it would be difficult to test because there is no currently practiced public and reliable standard for evaluating the validity and consistency of prophetic experience. you used the word "genuine" - but the trouble is, how is that to be agreed upon? a good example is the putative mt sinai in the eponymous desert peninsula. i once spent the night on top of it. did i have a religious experience? no. perhaps this is because i was not open to it. perhaps this is because it was the wrong mountain. in that particular case, it is not especially clear that it is the right mountain, certainly, concerning this, we have no tradition that i am aware of and the current designation was one by coptic christian monks. on the other hand, there are other places where this doubt does not obtain:
What logically or emotionally or spiritually makes "Jerusalem" ("Mecca") or the "Temple Mount" ("Dome of the Rock") or "the Wailing Wall" ("Kaaba") or "Mt Sinai" ("Medina") any different?
you could, arguably, say that there is a scale of something that makes it different, but as i think someone pointed out, the hebrew word for "holy" means "set apart". the same word is used for many other things, so clearly it is not only "place" that can be holy. interestingly, one of the most recondite names we have for G!D is "Ha-MaQOM", which means "the Place". on the other hand, we are principally interested in sacred *time* rather than sacred place - the only place that has ever been "set apart" officially was the site of the Temple in jerusalem. interestingly, i think someone mentioned the word "sanctify" - well, perhaps, in the sense of setting apart, but as for literally making something "sacred" in the english sense, i don't think this exists in such a way for us.
b'shalom
bananabrain
There are so many points of view in the interfaith community that I can only speak from mine. I try to always be careful that everyone knows that I am being sensitive to other peoples just as I would want them to be sensitive to mine.. Its also the only way I can post here and still stay true to my faith. If I were to go around declaring that everyone else is wrong.. I wouldnt get very far.. but If I tell everyone that I am a bible believing Christian they already know where I am coming from *wink* then I can state my piece and discuss from that point of view and everyone loves each other I dont have to hedge. Everyones happy!
