In reality we own nothing!

C

christine.P

Bowlacy
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
The cycles of growth - spring, summer, fall, winter.
The cycles of the human being – baby, youth, adult, elder.
Our earth continues to grow by cycles and seasons.

It is through these cycles that we all experience changes. Things will come and things will go. In reality we own nothing, the Creator owns all.

All too often I label things as mine. I say this belongs to me, but in reality everything belongs to the Creator/ universe. All we are all doing is taking care of things.

Thoughts.
Bow...:)
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
I own all of my stuff. I paid for it, it's mine. Me, mine,... don't touch!:)

Chris
Click to expand...

Ah, but can you take it with you on the final journey? :)
 
"The land shall not be sold permanently, for the land is Mine. You are but aliens and sojourners with Me." (Leviticus 25:23)

Reverence for God and reverence for the Earth go hand in hand.
 
Jeannot said:
"The land shall not be sold permanently, for the land is Mine. You are but aliens and sojourners with Me." (Leviticus 25:23)

Reverence for God and reverence for the Earth go hand in hand.
Click to expand...

See? You and me, two peas in the same pod...;) (you just express it better)

v/r

Q
 
If I recollect correctly the human race was designated in Genesis to be "vice regents" (stewards) in care of the earth until G-d's return.

What kind of a job does anyone think we are doing ? What does anyone believe G-d will think and feel about how we've done our assigned tasks upon "the return"?

Thinking out loud again...

flow....:cool:
 
flowperson said:
If I recollect correctly the human race was designated in Genesis to be "vice regents" (stewards) in care of the earth until G-d's return.

What kind of a job does anyone think we are doing ? What does anyone believe G-d will think and feel about how we've done our assigned tasks upon "the return"?

Thinking out loud again...

flow....:cool:
Click to expand...

Also called to "conquer" the earth...control it, regulate it...so I guess we have half the task completed...:eek:
 
In the US our deed indicates we currently have the right to use...allows eminant domain, which most think is the Gov't taking your land but actually just returning it to them...same with our cars in MD, our registration and title is an indication that we have the right to use our cars. drive them sell the right, but not own...

So the Gov't thinks they own everything....despite our notions.

Tolle's 'A New Earth' delves heavily into this mine concept and its detriment to our psyche.
 
Quahom1 said:
Also called to "conquer" the earth...control it, regulate it...so I guess we have half the task completed...:eek:
Click to expand...

Well that covers one half of the two threads in the creation saga in Genesis, but it's the other thread I'm concerned about. Which half do you consider to be completed ?

Conquering, controlling, regulating the earth simply is not compatible with the rules of nature and acts of G-d. It's a worthy goal, but likely unattainable in the context of events like Katrina, Rita, and the earthquakes in Pakistan. Caring for something can be considered to be controlling it's destiny in a sense. But over the long term that's mostly an illusion. Better, perhaps, to strive to to live in harmony with one's neighbors and environment to the extent possible.

Which of the two halves of the Genesis theme do you consider best fits the definition as acting as steward and vice regent ? Or both halves whenever compatible ?

flow....:)
 
Wow. That is a very interesting perspective. I, however, like to think that I CAN own things. However, ownership is a very fine line. Perhaps - I am in control of it. I get to say how it is used. And of course if someone doesn't respect my wishes, they can easily steal it/use it or anything like that. Surely I will grow old and die, and it is obvious by the fact that items aren't constantly dissapearing into thin air that I cannot take my items with me. However, any items that I "own" are indeed mine to use during this life. When I lose it, give it, sell it, or it is taken from me, it breaks, it gets thrown away, or I die, then I lose ownership. That's the way I see it. But I can definetely also understand what you are saying.

-I do completely agree that the world revolves in cycles. It has forever and it will forever. The cycles might change, but there will always be cycles.

-The above is my opinion. I don't claim it as fact. I hope it lets you see from a different perspective as your opinion has done for me. Thank you :)

May you all find peace within yourselves.
 
Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower
I own all of my stuff. I paid for it, it's mine. Me, mine,... don't touch!:)
Click to expand...


Quahom said:
Ah, but can you take it with you on the final journey? :)
Click to expand...
See Razorclean's post.

Look, I agree with the sentiment expressed in the OP, but I think that it's nice but unrealistic. Can I borrow your car for a while since it really belongs to God? Hmmm, thought not. I'm pretty cynical when it comes to spiritual fuzzywuzzies because they don't translate into meaningful action. It's all well and good to express these nice ideas, but let's be honest about our intentions: who here is ready to give up their possesive nature for the sake of some make-nice spirituallyness? What really happens, I think, is that sentiment serves as a substitute for action. It allows us to feel enlightened without having to give anything up.

I'd rather just be honest. I'm not poor, but I'm a long, long way from being rich. I work hard to provide my family with a modicum of comfort. I'm pretty frugal, not a blatant hedonist. I paid for my stuff, I like my stuff, I'd like a little more stuff, and I ain't givin' it away. Not to you, not for God, not for nothin'.

Chris
 
christine.P said:
It is through these cycles that we all experience changes. Things will come and things will go. In reality we own nothing, the Creator owns all.
Click to expand...


What does "own" mean in this context?


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Quahom1 said:
Also called to "conquer" the earth...control it, regulate it...so I guess we have half the task completed...:eek:
Click to expand...
I prefer the terms "subdue" or "tame" the earth. {Which would, of course, also include ourselves. "Adam" means "red clay," and we will all return to the dust of the earth after we die.} Our ability to tame or subdue "earth" is a product of our thoughts, actions, and words, like Vajradhara wrote. It is our "charge," so to speak. {Our spiritual credit card?} ;)
 
Namaste all,

i get the general impression that most modern beings are not all that keen on accepting personal responsiblity for their actions, thoughts and words. we often find beings trying to justify these things by proclaiming that another being has made such and such come about.

this seems to be wrong thinking at its most subtle.

if a child is abused, for instance, it is clear that the responsibility for the abuse lies soley with the abuser. yet, you will often hear former abused children are, themselves, abusing children and proclaiming that they couldn't help it because they, too, were abused.

whilst it is certainly a terrible thing, and please don't misunderstand that point. as an abused child, it is something quite close to me. each being is responsible for their actions and the thoughts and words which they express.

so not only do we own our actions, thoughts and words, we are the inheriters of our actions, thoughts and words as well.

metta,

~v
 
Well said, Vajradhara! In not accepting resposibility for {or owning,} our actions, thoughts, and words, we risk becoming morally {and spiritually} bankrupt.
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
Look, I agree with the sentiment expressed in the OP, but I think that it's nice but unrealistic. Can I borrow your car for a while since it really belongs to God? Hmmm, thought not. I'm pretty cynical when it comes to spiritual fuzzywuzzies because they don't translate into meaningful action. It's all well and good to express these nice ideas, but let's be honest about our intentions: who here is ready to give up their possesive nature for the sake of some make-nice spirituallyness? What really happens, I think, is that sentiment serves as a substitute for action. It allows us to feel enlightened without having to give anything up.
Chris
Click to expand...

Hi, I like your stance, but I think a bit of detachment can be healty, especially when things go wrong. Recently I was shortchanged by 20£ in the supermarket, I complained straight away, the supermarket's response was to check the balance in the till, guess what, it was 6 pounds short. I couldn't do anything else, there was no cctv that I could use to prove anything either. Instead of let it eat me away, in my heart I decided to let go of those £20 as I gained nothing with dwelling on it, it also made reflect: have I shortchanged other people?

Also if somebody is too possesive it might be a symtom of compensating for something else, as there could be something missing emotionally for example.

But no, you are not borrowing my toys.
 
Caimanson said:
Hi, I like your stance, but I think a bit of detachment can be healty, especially when things go wrong. Recently I was shortchanged by 20£ in the supermarket, I complained straight away, the supermarket's response was to check the balance in the till, guess what, it was 6 pounds short. I couldn't do anything else, there was no cctv that I could use to prove anything either. Instead of let it eat me away, in my heart I decided to let go of those £20 as I gained nothing with dwelling on it, it also made reflect: have I shortchanged other people?

Also if somebody is too possesive it might be a symtom of compensating for something else, as there could be something missing emotionally for example.

But no, you are not borrowing my toys.
Click to expand...

Letting go of things that eat you up is hard. It's bad enough that you're out twenty quid, but then you can't help but beat up on yourself for letting it happen. I suppose one could compensate by affirming that it's all God's money anyway if that works. The main thing is to find a way, in persuit of your own enlightened self-interest, to let it go. Easier said than done, though. I sometimes say to myself "I'll remember to be pissed about this later." I like to play golf, and in golf you've got to be able to let go of your anger over bad shots or it will wreck your game. It's pretty much that way in life too.

Rich people have stuff and poor people have faith, isn't that the way it works? Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich and taking their stuff. Lao Tzu said, "keep the people's heads empty and their bellies full." If you read Chinese philosphy it's pretty clear that it's about how to keep the citizenry pacified and orderly. But what if you can't keep the people's bellies full? Ah, then you have to put a little something in their heads that helps them accept not only their own poverty but also the inferiority in social status that accompanies it.

"In reality we own nothing" is a true statement since the concept of ownership is a subjective construct. The idea that "GOD" owns everything is fine with me, but I'm always mindful of the ways religion strives to construct virtue out of self-denial, and how that serves to perpetuate the stratification of class and caste. So I think we have to look carefully at our motives and emotional compensation mechanisms because deep down in our tangled psyches is a bunch of social programming that we've inherited without even being aware of it.

But why bother? Why dig down below the comfort mantle and deconstruct our motives? Why not enjoy a fluffy affirmation and leave it at that? I believe in this axiom: "The Universe arranges itself to come to the assistance of those whose intentions are clear." You can't have clear intentions if you don't know what you really want. That's why I believe in enlightened self-interest. I think that God wants us to take ownership of the earth. In fact, I think of the Torah as a primer on how to do that. But to truly have enlightened self-interest, the kind that seduces the universe to back up our intentions, I think we have to become really clear about what we really want, and that's so, so hard. Well, I find it hard, anyway.

I find the concepts of asceticism and enlightened detachment put forth by eastern religions, as well as the piety, self-denial, and submission espoused by Christianity and Islam to be serious impediments to unearthing true enlightened self-interest from under the rubbish pile of acquired social programming. I think that's by design.

Chris
 
Anyway, I forgot the point...oh, yeah. The point is that I'm trying to pin down the nature of compensation mechanisms. Obviously, when I hit that bad shank into the pond it's in my enlightened best interest to shrug it off as quickly as possible, compose myself, get my mojo going again so I can hit the next shot solid. It doesn't do you any good to beat yourself up, and it surely doesn't punish whatever or whoever pissed you off in the first place. But it's hard to let it go even though it's in my own best interest, so I go looking for a compensation mechanism. What I've discovered is that the comensation mechanisms are located in the same file as the emotional responses that make it so hard to let go.

In fact, the compensation mechanisms act like an insulation blanket around the emotional responses that seemingly necessitate them. It's hard to say which came first, the emotional discontinuity or it's temporary remedy since they seem to be bundled together in a mutually self-protective relationship. What is clear, to me anyway, is that to really advance the agenda of what I want and what's good for me I can't just go on letting pavlovian emotional responses and their transcendental compensation mechanisms drag me around by the nose.

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top