Ezra





@ Nick



Does the Quran mention a similar idea in relation to "quality" within human psychological striving to experience objective human meaning and purpose.
Now that is a question!! I do not want to speak for anyone else,
but this is the way I would answer this question for myself:

"O you who believe! take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will inform you of what you did. "

Chapter 5; Verse 105



The interaction between God and man, as outlined in the Quran, for me, is contained within this very verse. Man, by himself can never uncover objective truth. Man can not even know who he is. Everything that we understand is subjective... This, at the end of the day, in my opinion, is the root of all despair. What ultimately makes man rise (or fall) is the knowledge that is bestowed on man by God. And the ultimate bliss can only be achieved once all of man's questions about himself, are first answered. So that he may know who he really is. And to this end, are directed all the ultimate hopes and fears of the believer. That upon meeting God, on the Day of Judgment, as each man stands before God, His Creator... alone... Nothing about that moment will be "subjective". Nothing will seem "relative"... ever again.
 
@ Nick


Now that is a question!! I do not want to speak for anyone else,
but this is the way I would answer this question for myself:


"O you who believe! take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will inform you of what you did. "


Chapter 5; Verse 105



The interaction between God and man, as outlined in the Quran, for me, is contained within this very verse. Man, by himself can never uncover objective truth. Man can not even know who he is. Everything that we understand is subjective... This, at the end of the day, in my opinion, is the root of all despair. What ultimately makes man rise (or fall) is the knowledge that is bestowed on man by God. And the ultimate bliss can only be achieved once all of man's questions about himself, are first answered. So that he may know who he really is. And to this end, are directed all the ultimate hopes and fears of the believer. That upon meeting God, on the Day of Judgment, as each man stands before God, His Creator... alone... Nothing about that moment will be "subjective". Nothing will seem "relative"... ever again.

Then is it possible that our understanding of the Quran will change and increase in objective quality during the process of our return? Is it possible then that what we reject now can change as our human perspective develops?
 
@ Nick


Then is it possible that our understanding of the Quran will change and increase in objective quality during the process of our return? Is it possible then that what we reject now can change as our human perspective develops?

Possibly. But as to the question you asked, I can only answer based on my present understanding of the words of the Quran. And as far as I understand the words which I quoted, they explicitly reject all forms of trinity/neoplatonism.
 
@ Nick




Possibly. But as to the question you asked, I can only answer based on my present understanding of the words of the Quran. And as far as I understand the words which I quoted, they explicitly reject all forms of trinity/neoplatonism.

IMO we need people from all faiths to become aware of the unity of science and religion. To do so requires becoming familiar with certain universal laws. One of these laws is an expression of the unity and division of three forces Dr. Basarab Nicolescu calls the axiom of the Included Middle. In the context of levels of reality we can begin to see how three becomes one and then three again as part5 of the flow of a universal process.

Basarab Nicolescu : Gdelian Aspects of Nature and Knowledge



To be honest, you've written in a way that expresses a desire to become open. In all honesty the worlds needs this. It needs people from all faiths understanding that Man cannot serve science as a tool of egotism but science must serve Man's evolution towards the Creator. You appreciate Simone Weil. Look at how she describes it. She is years ahead of her time:

I believe that one identical thought is to be found--expressed very precisely and with only slight differences of modality-- in. . .Pythagoras, Plato, and the Greek Stoics. . .in the Upanishads, and the Bhagavad Gita; in the Chinese Taoist writings and. . .Buddhism. . .in the dogmas of the Christian faith and in the writings of the greatest Christian mystics. . .I believe that this thought is the truth, and that it today requires a modern and Western form of expression. That is to say, it should be expressed through the only approximately good thing we can call our own, namely science. This is all the less difficult because it is itself the origin of science. Simone Weil....Simone Pétrement, Simone Weil: A Life, Random House, 1976, p. 488
Remember when I mentioned my conversation with two Sufi's during the art exhibit. They were brilliant people. They understood the light better than I did as well as the union of three forces. We need this influence of scientific spiritual thinkers. My guess it will be through the influence of such people that the horrors we are capable of through modern technology will be minimized and also diverted into more human pursuits.

It requires being open minded. I say this out of respect for you since you seem to be interested in such things and it is there to be learned. The info is there and if you ever needed it, I can show you where you can read of such things.

The problem is simple. We know far more than we understand. We can kill on a huge scale without knowing what it means to kill. We need more people that can put science into a human perspective. Without enough people willing to be part of this awakening influence, we may very well be doomed. With so much at stake, is trying to appreciate levels of reality and its relevance to humanity returning to its source rather than dogmatically defending literal ideas so much to ask?
 
@ Nick


The problem is simple. We know far more than we understand. We can kill on a huge scale without knowing what it means to kill. We need more people that can put science into a human perspective. Without enough people willing to be part of this awakening influence, we may very well be doomed. With so much at stake, is trying to appreciate levels of reality and its relevance to humanity returning to its source rather than dogmatically defending literal ideas so much to ask?

I completely agree. However, while I fully appreciate your intentions of reconciling science with religion, I am confused as to why you feel we need to accept the trinity to accomplish such a task?
 
@ Nick




I completely agree. However, while I fully appreciate your intentions of reconciling science with religion, I am confused as to why you feel we need to accept the trinity to accomplish such a task?

Science measures in linear time; between before and after. Religion measures the quality of "now." For science to contemplate in this direction it has to have a theory. The interaction of three forces is part of that theory. The division of one into three in the timeless quality of now is a way that science can begin to grasp the process of creation itself and begin to respect man's position and potential within this vertical line of being that we call "now," When science begins to appreciate the workings of this vertical line of being as a workable theory, it won't be so quick to condemn it as it does not and sacrifice the psychology it offers for the benefit of our being.
 


@ Nick



The division of one into three in the timeless quality of now is a way that science can begin to grasp the process of creation itself and begin to respect man's position and potential within this vertical line of being that we call "now,"

... This violates the thesis of the Quran. But I still do not see how you think that such a distinction will contribute to the ends that you intend on achieving.
 
@ Nick




... This violates the thesis of the Quran. But I still do not see how you think that such a distinction will contribute to the ends that you intend on achieving.

If you are truly interested you would have to study Sufi Cosmology

Sufi cosmology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course this includes neoplatonic influences you are wary of. However to appreciate creation as the results of the union of three forces on levels of reality called cosmoses, it would mean jumping into the cold water.

Cosmology is an essential part of my path of esoteric Christrianity so there is no conflict with Sufism.

If your path satisfies your psychological needs there is no reason to go further. I'm a strange one so it was necessary for me to abandon traditional Christianity for esoteric Christianity and its revealing cosmology.

Fortunately IMO there are scientists like Dr. Basarab Nicolescu who understand cosmology and its impolications far better than i do. These ideas are hard to understand if you're not familiar with vertical cosmological perspectives. But there are a minority that understand these things and though we are fifty years from collectivley accepting such things even if possible, what is being done is essential IMO

Review Essay on Nicolescu's *Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity*

After reading Nicolescu's Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity, it is hard to imagine how any thinking person could retreat to the old, safe, comfortable conceptual framework. Taking a series of ideas that would be extremely thought-provoking even when considered one by one, the Romanian quantum physicist Basarab Nicolescu weaves them together in a stunning vision, this manifesto of the twenty-first century, so that they emerge as a shimmering, profoundly radical whole.

Nicolescu’s raison d’être is to help develop people’s consciousness by means of showing them how to approach things in terms of what he calls “transdisciplinarity.” He seeks to address head on the problem of fragmentation that plagues contemporary life. Nicolescu maintains that binary logic, the logic underlying most all of our social, economic, and political institutions, is not sufficient to encompass or address all human situations. His thinking aids in the unification of the scientific culture and the sacred, something which increasing numbers of persons, will find to be an enormous help, among them wholistic health practitioners seeking to promote the understanding of illness as something arising from the interwoven fabric—body, plus mind, plus spirit—that constitutes the whole human being, and academics frustrated by the increasing pressure to produce only so-called “value-free” material.

Transdisciplinarity “concerns that which is at once between the disciplines, across the different disciplines, and beyond all discipline,” and its aim is the unity of knowledge together with the unity of our being: “Its goal is the understanding of the present world, of which one of the imperatives is the unity of knowledge.” (44) Nicolescu points out the danger of self-destruction caused by modernism and increased technologization and offers alternative ways of approaching them, using a transdisciplinary approach that propels us beyond the either/or thinking that gave rise to the antagonisms that produced the problems in the first place. The logic of the included middle permits “this duality [to be] transgressed by the open unity that encompasses both the universe and the human being.” (56). Thus, approaching problems in a transdisciplinary way enables one to move beyond dichotomized thinking, into the space that lies beyond.
Nicolescu calls on us to rethink everything in terms of what quantum physics has shown us about the nature of the universe. Besides offering an alternative to thinking exclusively in terms of binary logic, and showing how the idea of the logic of the included middle can afford hitherto unimagined possibilities, he also introduces us to the idea that Reality is not something that exists on only one level, but on many, and maintains that only transdisciplinarity can deal with the dynamics engendered by the action of several levels of Reality at once. It is for this reason that transdisciplinarity is radically distinct from multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity, although it is often confused with both. Moreover, because of the fact that reality has more than a single level, binary logic, the logic that one uses to cross a street and avoid being hit by a truck, cannot possibly be applied to all of the levels. It simply does not work. Nicolescu explains it is only the logic of the included middle that can be adequate for complex situations, like those we must confront in the educational, political, social, religious and cultural arenas. As he writes, “The transdisciplinary viewpoint allows us to consider a multidimensional Reality, structured by multiple levels replacing the single-level, one-dimensional reality of classical thought.”
As you can see, there would be no way to explain this in a thread. A person must be interested in these things enough to read challenging material from several sources. Yet it is there to be pondered and built upon. Whether or not we can survive long enough as a species before this vertical reality begins to kick in is an open question
 

@ Nick



Of course this includes neoplatonic influences you are wary of. However to appreciate creation as the results of the union of three forces on levels of reality called cosmoses, it would mean jumping into the cold water.


To me this seems to be an invitation to allow the ends, to justify the means. In this case, I do not even accept the ultimate ends, but I will explain that point in my final words. For now, let us examine the means: If I seek to harmonize science and religion, by violating the principles of my religion, in the mere hope that doing so will ultimately result in positive results, I would have lost the battle before it even begins. This is why I have chosen a different path, and my road takes me in a very different direction. For example, while you are exploring Transdiciplinarity, which has its stated purpose as explaining everything. To me, this goal itself is nothing more then another hopeless search for the holy grail or the elixir of life.

The methods I have chosen take me completely in the opposite direction, but the stated (secondary) ends are the same:

The problem is simple. We know far more than we understand. We can kill on a huge scale without knowing what it means to kill. We need more people that can put science into a human perspective.
With two main differences, plus another.

1- I believe we are already past the point of no return.

2- Instead of trying to harmonize the dissonance between the many levels of reality, (relativity vs quantum for example) I use this dichotomy to point the finger squarely at the ones who pretend to "know" and call their bluff. Also, I use this itself as part of the http://www.interfaith.org/forum/proof-of-god-9794.html argument.

Finally, what must be understood Nick are the ultimate implications of your approach vs mine. If you succeed, you will end up deifying man. Whether or not you realize this, whether or not this is even your ultimate goal or not, that is the result of neoplatonic approach. Unifying the Creator with the created, is blasphemy. You either end up trying to lift man above his place with unjustified arrogance, or you enslave him by making him subject to lesser creations by bestowing divinity upon them. This is the reason why I must reject your preferred approach. Since I base my views in the Quran, I already know that neoplatonic thought is fundamentally flawed. So I know that any attempt to use it as a means to achieve such ends is doomed to fail.
 
"Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble." Einstein

Hi cOde

To me, this goal itself is nothing more then another hopeless search for the holy grail or the elixir of life.

You can't be sure. You know that someone like Dr. Nicolescu and others of similar depth believe it to be so and have reconciled science and religion. Why not leave the question open? Without seriously contemplating the axiom of the Included Middle, which opens one to a new vertical direction of thought and its levels of realities, there is no way for you to judge.


Finally, what must be understood Nick are the ultimate implications of your approach vs mine. If you succeed, you will end up deifying man.

The Bible says that Man is in the image of God. This doesn't mean fallen man on earth. Is the image of God equal to God? High C on the piano is not the same as low C in vibratory frequency yet they are in pitch.

Imagine three circles. The largest is outside of time and space and called "God'" Inside the circle where time and space prevail, there is a smaller one called "Son" and inside this smaller circle there is still another called "Man."

God outside time and space and as ONE includes no-thing, every-thing in potential and the being that connects them. The three parts manifest as creation and a myriad of fractions of ONE all lesser in quality. The son within the father has these three qualities but is also ONE but lesser in scale as a circle within a circle. Fallen Man on earth which is our concern has these three attributes but out of balance so cannot exist as ONE or inner unity but rather man's name is legion. we are many.

Imagine the head or conscious intellect as everything in potential. Imagine the body as manifesting every-thing. Imagine the heart as the scale of being that unites all potential with every manifestation. I AM is then the unity of mind, body, and spirit. Fallen man on earth is incapable of I
AM.

Why would the Quran have anything against Man acquiring inner unity unless it is based on a perversion as is always a danger and why the Tower of Babel had to fall for example.

Unifying the creator with the created on the same level may be blasphemy but appreciating the inner vertical scale of being itself and Man's place within it in contrast to his conscious potential doesn't suggest equal quality but rather how man can become that "middle" which reconciles the higher and lower directly above and below within the vertical scale of being or the living quality of "NOW."

Prof Salam suggests that the real meaning of the word Jehad pertains to the inner struggle I know of as becoming a conscious "middle." Yet for the great majority, Jehad refers to a religious struggle in the world. I see this as a classic example of the esoteric devolving into exoteric expression..

But if Prof. Salam is right, Allah is served through our inner struggle to become oneself rather than the outer worldly religious wars.

IMO when science explores the vertical quality of NOW, matter within matter, and how it begins to manifest into quantum physics, the idea of spirit known by Einstein will become more evident. The question for Man then is our relation to it. Do we exist as we do now, as just creatures of the earth living in dreams or are we capable of a more cosmic conscious perspective we can awaken to worthy of the word Man?
 



Hi Nick



IMO when science explores the vertical quality of NOW, matter within matter, and how it begins to manifest into quantum physics, the idea of spirit known by Einstein will become more evident. The question for Man then is our relation to it. Do we exist as we do now, as just creatures of the earth living in dreams or are we capable of a more cosmic conscious perspective we can awaken to worthy of the word Man?
That is not the real question as far as I can tell. The real question is can this awakening take place in this life? Within this plane of existence. I believe that the answer to this question is no. As far as I understand the Quran, this awakening is only possible after the resurrection on Judgment Day. I doubt any claims to enlightenment of anyone who says he has figured it all out. As they say, 'anyone who thinks he knows, knows not'.

This is where I disagree with even the mainstream sufi thought. I believe such beliefs were actually infused into sufism from the Eastern Religions, specifically Buddhism. The idea that man can somehow raise himself into higher and higher spiritual stations through acquiring "knowledge" seems self-contradictory to me.

You can't be sure. You know that someone like Dr. Nicolescu and others of similar depth believe it to be so and have reconciled science and religion.
They would have to reconcile science with science first. Have they reconciled Relativity with Quantum Physics? Shouldnt they have a nobel prize?

But if Prof. Salam is right, Allah is served through our inner struggle to become oneself rather than the outer worldly religious wars.
With this, I agree.
 
Hi Nick


That is not the real question as far as I can tell. The real question is can this awakening take place in this life? Within this plane of existence. I believe that the answer to this question is no. As far as I understand the Quran, this awakening is only possible after the resurrection on Judgment Day. I doubt any claims to enlightenment of anyone who says he has figured it all out. As they say, 'anyone who thinks he knows, knows not'.

This is where I disagree with even the mainstream sufi thought. I believe such beliefs were actually infused into sufism from the Eastern Religions, specifically Buddhism. The idea that man can somehow raise himself into higher and higher spiritual stations through acquiring "knowledge" seems self-contradictory to me.

They would have to reconcile science with science first. Have they reconciled Relativity with Quantum Physics? Shouldnt they have a nobel prize?

With this, I agree.

This is where I disagree with even the mainstream sufi thought. I believe such beliefs were actually infused into sufism from the Eastern Religions, specifically Buddhism. The idea that man can somehow raise himself into higher and higher spiritual stations through acquiring "knowledge" seems self-contradictory to me.

It isn't a matter of knowledge but "consciousness" Does the Quran as you know it accept the idea that there are relative states of consciousness possible for Man as described by Prof. Needleman?

A person through efforts at self knowledge can experience that consciousness is relative. If so, what is the difference between conscious humanity and man on earth. Can a person become more conscious while alive on earth and what are its limitations?

WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS
 



Hi Nick


A person through efforts at self knowledge can experience that consciousness is relative.


According to the Quran (IMO), God states that human consciousness/knowledge is dependent not on man, but on God, as He decides the state of man's level of knowledge/consciousness. Man is not capable or making himself rise up out of darkness without the path being illuminated by God.

This is another perspective on the dichotomy between neoplatonic thought and the Quran.
 
Hi Nick




According to the Quran (IMO), God states that human consciousness/knowledge is dependent not on man, but on God, as He decides the state of man's level of knowledge/consciousness. Man is not capable or making himself rise up out of darkness without the path being illuminated by God.

This is another perspective on the dichotomy between neoplatonic thought and the Quran.

But there is no dichotomy. Christianity asserts that we get in our own way. We need the help of illumination to get out of our own way. Plato's cave analogy asserts the importance of turning to the light entering the cave rather than continue being fixated on shadows on the wall. We need the light but the world hates it since it threatens its importance.

All man can do is to open to help from above.
 
@ Nick

All man can do is to open to help from above.

I agree with this completely.

However, am I mistaken or is this not the standard neoplatonic view? Illumination in neoplatonism is dependent on man's own ability and persuit of knowledge is it not?


Plato's cave analogy asserts the importance of turning to the light entering the cave rather than continue being fixated on shadows on the wall.

The man who leaves the cave, is still inside another 'cave', only this one is bigger and the chains are invisible. This is the problem with human knowledge and rationality. Everyone is in a cave, and only God can guide those He pleases to the right path.
 
cOde

However, am I mistaken or is this not the standard neoplatonic view? Illumination in neoplatonism is dependent on man's own ability and persuit of knowledge is it not?


Man is attracted to consciousness yet is attached to the earth. This is the human condition. This is the classic struggle with ourselves. Unless we can remain open and not fall into emotional turmoil and its resultant egotism, righteous indignation, self justification, and whatever, we cannot get anywhere. Our attachment to the earth is too strong and the result is "dust to dust."

We need the ability to be open. the World prefers us to stay closed since the secular conditioned life on the earth is dependent on remaining closed. We have to allow the conditions for help from above. if we reject the light, it cannot enter:

"Grace fills empty spaces, but it can only enter where there is a void to receive it We must continually suspend the work of the imagination in filling the void within ourselves."
"In no matter what circumstances, if the imagination is stopped from pouring itself out, we have a void (the poor in spirit). In no matter what circumstances... imagination can fill the void. This is why the average human beings can become prisoners, slaves, prostitutes, and pass thru no matter what suffering without being purified." Simone Weil

Are we willing to sacrifice imagination for the sake of illumination. this is a choice we can make. Knowledge in this context is ways of regaining the power of sustained attention that imagination normally takes the place of

The man who leaves the cave, is still inside another 'cave', only this one is bigger and the chains are invisible. This is the problem with human knowledge and rationality. Everyone is in a cave, and only God can guide those He pleases to the right path.
But what good is worrying over the second cave when we find ourselves unnecessarily in the first. We don't know if we are elect. all we can do is invite help from above through freedom from the dominion of our own self deception or imagination. My guess is that since so many reject the opportunity, anyone that genuinely feels it, will not be denied.

[SIZE=-1]
[SIZE=-1]"The difference between more or less intelligent men is like the difference between criminals condemned to life imprisonment in smaller or larger cells. The intelligent man who is proud of his intelligence is like a condemned man who is proud of his large cell." Simone Weil
[/SIZE][/SIZE]


Intelligence or analysis of the contents of consciousness is a tool but at some point it must sacrificed for direct experience which I think is what I believe you mean. If not sacrificed, we are just as you say in another cave or a larger cell. But this is a long way off. The first step is to witness the struggle in ourselves and see it for what it is. It is a necessary foundation necessary to lessen the attractions of self deception.
 

Hi Nick


Man is attracted to consciousness yet is attached to the earth. This is the human condition. This is the classic struggle with ourselves. Unless we can remain open and not fall into emotional turmoil and its resultant egotism, righteous indignation, self justification, and whatever, we cannot get anywhere. Our attachment to the earth is too strong and the result is "dust to dust."

We need the ability to be open. the World prefers us to stay closed since the secular conditioned life on the earth is dependent on remaining closed. We have to allow the conditions for help from above. if we reject the light, it cannot enter:



Are we willing to sacrifice imagination for the sake of illumination. this is a choice we can make. Knowledge in this context is ways of regaining the power of sustained attention that imagination normally takes the place of


But what good is worrying over the second cave when we find ourselves unnecessarily in the first. We don't know if we are elect. all we can do is invite help from above through freedom from the dominion of our own self deception or imagination. My guess is that since so many reject the opportunity, anyone that genuinely feels it, will not be denied.


Wise words.


Intelligence or analysis of the contents of consciousness is a tool but at some point it must sacrificed for direct experience which I think is what I believe you mean. If not sacrificed, we are just as you say in another cave or a larger cell. But this is a long way off. The first step is to witness the struggle in ourselves and see it for what it is. It is a necessary foundation necessary to lessen the attractions of self deception.


Yes, I did mean that, in a way. I also do not have any contention with this first step that you outlined. Of course that is a basic prerequisite.

I can sense a greater harmony between your words and the thesis of the Quran now. As I said, I am not willing to accept anything which contradicts the following principles. If you say that the ideas which you want to present are not contending against these principles, then I will be more then willing to examine them further.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Say: He is Allah, the One!
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, nor is He begotten.
And there is none like unto Him.
 
Hi Nick





Wise words.





Yes, I did mean that, in a way. I also do not have any contention with this first step that you outlined. Of course that is a basic prerequisite.

I can sense a greater harmony between your words and the thesis of the Quran now. As I said, I am not willing to accept anything which contradicts the following principles. If you say that the ideas which you want to present are not contending against these principles, then I will be more then willing to examine them further.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Say: He is Allah, the One!
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, nor is He begotten.
And there is none like unto Him.

We are making progress. :) I'd like to pursue this vertical direction of being that adds an additional vertical dimension creating the psychological quality of a moment itself to our normal horizontal secular life that just moves along without concern for this vertical quality.

"The transcendent Unity of Religions" is a book by Frithjof Schuon who amongst other things was a scholar of Islamic culture and a Sufi Mystic.

Monastic Interreligious Dialogue | Book Review: The Transcendent Unity of Religions

The idea here is that religious friction is natural for the exoteric level of religion and how it has been secularized.

Smith compares Schuon’s thesis with others, quoting the author himself in saying that there is “a unity at the heart of religions” that can be “univocally described by none and concretely apprehended by few.” Smith’s introduction concludes with a helpful description of the esoteric and exoteric distinction restated—a key, he says, to the understanding of the whole book. T.S. Eliot said of Schuon’s volume: “I have met with no more impressive work in the comparative study of Oriental and Occidental religion.” From beginning to end, Schuon quotes Muslim and Christian, Hindu and other mystics alike to substantiate his valuable insights. He insists that the unity of the different religions is not only unrealizable on the external level, that of the forms themselves, but ought not to be realized at that level even were this possible, for in that case the revealed forms would be deprived of their sufficient reason. The very fact that they are revealed, he claims, “shows that they are willed by the Divine Word.” He uses the word “transcendent” in the title because it means that the unity of the religious forms must be realized in a purely inward and spiritual way and without prejudice to any particular form. “The antagonisms between these forms no more affect the one universal Truth than the antagonisms between opposing colors affect the transmission of the one uncolored light.”
Here is a diagram showing the vertical growth of conscious traditions from exoteric, esoteric, to the transcendent level which is its source.

On The Transcendent Unity of Religions

Are you open to the premise of this book introduced by this highly respected Islamic scholar? Could you see your appreciation of the Quran moving from the exoteric level into the esoteric level of the teaching?

IMO It really is a profound introduction to this vertical line of being which all the traditions initiating with a conscious source are concerned with in their own way. It is another expression of Plato's Cave as well as explaining Dr. Basarb Nicolescu's concerns mentioned before. They all deal with this vertical direction and its levels of reality that only a few are aware of and yet I believe introduces a perspective that feeds our spiritual nature that society needs in order to survive since technology has become so advanced making our mutual destruction so much easier.

Only fools fight in a burning house and life in Plato's cave is a burning house.
 



Hello Nick and Good Morning


I'd like to pursue this vertical direction of being that adds an additional vertical dimension creating the psychological quality of a moment itself to our normal horizontal secular life that just moves along without concern for this vertical quality.
Sounds good to me. Lets do that.


"The transcendent Unity of Religions" is a book by Frithjof Schuon who amongst other things was a scholar of Islamic culture and a Sufi Mystic.

Monastic Interreligious Dialogue | Book Review: The Transcendent Unity of Religions
It is an established fact that the Quran indicates that prophets were sent to every nation. So it is very possible that a man like Buddah or Zoroaster etc. were actually the prophets of God who transmitted the unity of God to their people. But their teachings, over time, became diluted and corrupted. This obviously a Islamicly biased view, but that is the view of the Quran.



Here is a diagram showing the vertical growth of conscious traditions from exoteric, esoteric, to the transcendent level which is its source.

On The Transcendent Unity of Religions
I like this statement from the site, however I wonder if it is valid: "But it is essential to observe that this unity is also transcendent, i.e., the unity is in the spirit and not in the letter."


Are you open to the premise of this book introduced by this highly respected Islamic scholar? Could you see your appreciation of the Quran moving from the exoteric level into the esoteric level of the teaching?
Well that depends on a couple of things:

1- Is the spirit of the religions really is as unified as he claims

2- Even if it is, does that mean that I should consider Islam to be equal
with these previous revelations?


As for question 1, the answer can be determined by a simple inquiry: Take Hinduism and Islam. In Hinduism, the idea that God can be divided and sub divided and united with his creation through these lower deities, and that we can access God through these deities, is a concept completely contradictory to Islam. Just because there is a supreme deity at the top, does not mean there is agreement between the two religions.

As for the second question, the reason why I consider the Quran to be the best religion, and the best model that God has bestowed upon humanity, is simply because of blind faith. Remember Nick, when you begin to walk a path, you are by definition walking away from others. When you are open to one, you are closed to another. This is just the way it is. I can not consider any other model as being equal to Islam. That is part of my faith.

However, I do see every experience like this as a lesson from God. I examine all new form information and pick and choose that which I feel is benificial. If this new paradigm *(if it is even a new paradigm)* has something which I find useful, I will incorporate it in my beliefs.

Lastly, the religion of Islam (proper) is not the only path towards God. The Quran makes it very clear that God guides believers... not just Muslims. Anyone who believes in the unity of God and does good, is granted access. That is the spirit of Islam. As long as you believe in the unity of God, and believe in doing good, you are following the spirit of religion that God ordered man to follow.


 
Back
Top