Short Change Churches

[awediot]

Many churches and denominations and religions, I can respectfully disagree with. Many versions of my own Christianity seem to politicize themselves too much, whitewash crucial elements or exaggerate others. However, when a belief system, any belief system, claims to be the purveyor of absolute, timeless truths, to retain credibility, it should stand its ground, whether or not society grows out of those truths or not. I disagree with certain aspects, but I respect the unshakable certainty itself.

A church, in not only being it's community, also safeguards its sacred doctrines from the fickle winds of civilizations' ebb and flow. Popularity, scientific insight and voter influence ought not be enough to alter central dogma as if God didn't anticipate or know about such newly realized fact... The few extra or less days discovered in zygote development shouldn't suddenly overturn reproductive moral law, nor should a gay gene automatically dissolve all admonishments against it any more than a bigot gene should. Standing for God is one thing, proclaiming He has changed, or unwittingly changing His mind for Him, is something else entirely.

This is not to say that a Church should never change. But it should do so under divine revelation, not human realization. It is not an open ended effort to perfect a mere human institution. "America. Love it or Leave it." doesn't hold up when a government is designed to change and adapt. A Church, THE Church depends on being the vanishing point giving all else a perspective to grow from. It is, right or wrong, the bedrock society adjusts around and you build your life from. It is not meant to shift to whims. It is there to disagree with you, to convict you, confront, comfort and to change you... Indeed, Love it or Leave it for another.

[NathanATX]

This is not to say that a Church should never change. But it should do so under divine revelation, not human realization.

How should mere humans go about realizing divine revelation? Are you saying that we're not doing that? (the more progressive among us)

[awediot]

I would say that true revelation is incredibly rare and cannot be missed. It is the exposure of knowledge that has NEVER been known before. Not realization, or a mere discovery of the expected or new way of looking at things... And there is nothing new or revolutionary about the "progressive" view of Christianity, other than some of its terminology. Most of it is pantheistic in nature and the resulting point of view is ancient. It used to be called either heresy or apostasy and always considered an improvement by progressives. The modern alterations are not revelatory as they have been long anticipated and described.

[Daniel]

The few extra or less days discovered in zygote development shouldn't suddenly overturn reproductive moral law, nor should a gay gene automatically dissolve all admonishments against it any more than a bigot gene should.

It seems to me that your logic is a little a-kilter here: if there is indeed a gene for 'gayness' this would make 'gayness' an immutable factor in as much as the color of my eyes is grey-green. Mental attitudes which concretize themselves into stances and announce themselves as bigotry are another matter entirely and are subject to change via insight.

This is not to say that a Church should never change. But it should do so under divine revelation, not human realization.

An equally sticky problem here. Who is going to be the deciding body that deems what is and is not divine relevation? (This is assuming one believes in such things. Let's not forget that there was a reason for the Reformation.) This seems to point out the fact that man, for all his follies, cannot escape himself.

I would say that true revelation is incredibly rare and cannot be missed. It is the exposure of knowledge that has NEVER been known before.

An interesting thought that has its correlation in Buddhist thought, that is, that there are Teachings which await their time to be revealed. However the difference here is that Buddhists talk about teachings and not Absolutes as objective top down assertions which must be Obeyed or Else. The Truth is something you come experience on a cushion via spiritual practice and meditation- not discursive thought.

[dewdrop_world]

I would say that true revelation is incredibly rare and cannot be missed. It is the exposure of knowledge that has NEVER been known before. Not realization, or a mere discovery of the expected or new way of looking at things... And there is nothing new or revolutionary about the "progressive" view of Christianity, other than some of its terminology. Most of it is pantheistic in nature and the resulting point of view is ancient. It used to be called either heresy or apostasy and always considered an improvement by progressives. The modern alterations are not revelatory as they have been long anticipated and described.

We like to make up stories about the world so the the world (seems to) make more sense. Sometimes the stories come pretty close to reality, sometimes they don't. They usually leave something out, though. It's an odd relationship -- you can't find the truth if you cling to them too tightly, but you can't live without them either.

I could propose a different narrative: the ancients could not rely on advanced technology to bend the world to human wishes and make the world easier to survive in. To survive, they had no alternative but to live in deep connection with nature and with each other. As such, they had access to some sources of wisdom that have largely been lost in the West (and which are disappearing quickly in developing areas). They may have understood some things in a supra-rational way that we now have difficulty even conceiving of, or which we now reject as primitive.

Christ was no fool, and it seems pretty clear to me that he was in touch with these fundamental sources of wisdom. The early church may have been right there with him. But then it started to organize -- institutions formed, doctrine took shape, and eventually the doctrine began to take the place of spiritual experience, and the church, especially the Roman church, got distracted by the task of maintaining sovereignty. Church doctrine -- those absolutes -- became disembodied from what is supposed to make them real, and the doctrine became less and less real itself, and the more empty the doctrine became, the more defensive.

So, seeking ancient wisdom could be seen as an opportunity for renewal in Christianity.

Now, I'm deliberately making that narrative a bit hamfisted -- I don't believe every word of it myself -- but I don't think your narrative is nearly as self evident as you present it.

My main concern is, what is Christianity going to do at this point? It faces an immense challenge. What is it going to do? Circle the wagons, or take the opportunity for self-reflection, self-criticism and growth?

James

[Daniel]

I could propose a different narrative: the ancients could not rely on advanced technology to bend the world to human wishes and make the world easier to survive in. To survive, they had no alternative but to live in deep connection with nature and with each other. As such, they had access to some sources of wisdom that have largely been lost in the West (and which are disappearing quickly in developing areas). They may have understood some things in a supra-rational way that we now have difficulty even conceiving of, or which we now reject as primitive.

It's been said: There is knowing and there is Knowing. The words sound the same but mean something alltogether different. It seems to me that this is the kind of distinction that is in danger of being lost in our technologcial go as fast as you can world. I'm sure there are those who will say that the burden of living back then was infinitely more harsh than it is now- we have all these 'conveniences' don't we? But I think the better part of wisdom understands that faster isn't better. It's just faster.

Church doctrine -- those absolutes -- became disembodied from what is supposed to make them real, and the doctrine became less and less real itself, and the more empty the doctrine became, the more defensive.

I've heard it expressed (I cannot remember where exactly) that if you want to know what the Roman army functioned like, you have only to look at the inner functioning of the Roman Catholic Church.

My main concern is, what is Christianity going to do at this point? It faces an immense challenge. What is it going to do? Circle the wagons, or take the opportunity for self-reflection, self-criticism and growth?

As far as the Roman Catholic hiearchy is concerned, I think the circle the wagons dynamic is the current modus operandi. But that will eventually tire itself out one hopes. Personally, I don't see major change on the horizon in my lifetime as far as they are concerned. But I hope they prove me wrong. That would be welcome. My husband, who was fired from three Catholic Parishes for being gay would rejoice.

[Zerbie]

But I hope they prove me wrong. That would be welcome. My husband, who was fired from three Catholic Parishes for being gay would rejoice.

Fired from a job as a church musician?!?!! THREE times!? :eek:

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[awediot]

...if there is indeed a gene for 'gayness' this would make 'gayness' an immutable factor in as much as the color of my eyes is grey-green. Mental attitudes which concretize themselves into stances and announce themselves as bigotry are another matter entirely and are subject to change via insight.

My utter confusion, and dread, that that very confusion and dread, may be only chemical reactions, I must make glaringly clear. If I can buy that my deepest, most driving Loves and preferences are just genetic, then I can buy that a person can have a similarly sour chemistry against an abundance of pigment, a deficit of blue blood or all out allergic reaction to the beans and chilies emanating from our southern neighbors... In other words, to me a gay gene makes just as much sense as a bigot gene, and I fear the day science proves we are all just robots and vessels for our immortal genetics. Both are just states of mind.

Who is going to be the deciding body that deems what is and is not divine relevation?...This seems to point out the fact that man, for all his follies, cannot escape himself.

Rare, in regards to true revelation, meant like a few times every thousand or so years. It tends to come with comets, bleeding statuary and walking dead. It isn't more knowledge we need, its the will and balls of the heart to do what is already obvious (feed, heal, house, nurture...) Revelations blow us out of the water, not trickle down from closed door symposiums or dreamy inspiration... Man cannot escape himself.

...However the difference here is that Buddhists talk about teachings and not Absolutes as objective top down assertions which must be Obeyed or Else.

Are you absolutely certain about that? (word games, but makes a point) We are told to look both ways before crossing the street, or Else. That 'or else' is not always a threat of punishment and often the authoritative top knows better than we. Its not all about control and we can indeed exert our independence and rebel right into an on coming garbage truck.

o-----------------------(&)-----------------------o

Not sure if/where/how we are on the same screen or not, James. You got that 'no absolutes' thing down...

...the ancients could not rely on advanced technology to bend the world to human wishes and make the world easier to survive in. To survive, they had no alternative but to live in deep connection with nature and with each other. As such, they had access to some sources of wisdom that have largely been lost in the West (and which are disappearing quickly in developing areas). They may have understood some things in a supra-rational way that we now have difficulty even conceiving of, or which we now reject as primitive.

Depending on how ancient you want to go, the idea of advanced technology once included fire, sharp rocks, the wheel, a spoon, herb poultices, farming, curved glass, iron, pencils, et al. We have always seen ourselves as cutting edge and been delighted with how well the latest thing bends and improves the world. This is one area I think is totally relativistic... But, I agree that earthen hut living allows a greater communion with mama nature. Whether that translates into a Truer or better spirit, I really can't say. But alot of the romanticized views of gentle natives ignores some pretty horrendous tribal war, enslavement, self mutilation and lots of overlooked cruelty that, for whatever reason, civilized man has more or less gotten out of his system... I have mixed feelings about your conclusions, as I have always persevorated how cultures that have an older, more grounded ghost in our machine, keep losing out... Does technological might make right? ... like, Hex us already...

You bring to mind a recurring thought though. When I look at today's primitive cultures, it is like looking back in time. Never the less, they have had the same 500, thousand or- years as we (the advanced man) have had to expand. We went toward the brain and science, they, into the heart and mysticism of nature. I have to wonder what we've missed out on.

...seeking ancient wisdom could be seen as an opportunity for renewal in Christianity...what is Christianity going to do at this point?

I absolutely agree. Christians have scared themselves out of so much mystery and magic. Aside from the thumping (drum beat?) and dancing around original thoughts, and the whole being the elect thing, the shear, tepid boringness they consider a life, drifts me away... I've read a few books on Christian mysticism, went to a school for metaphysics for about a year, devoured Carlos Castaneda and could lucid dream basically at will... Some of this definitely pulled me away from God, but not all. Depth and experience are not something most Christians are good at... What will they do now? Become obsolete and take the blame as predicted.

I'm sure there are those who will say that the burden of living back then was infinitely more harsh than it is now- we have all these 'conveniences' don't we? But I think the better part of wisdom understands that faster isn't better. It's just faster.

Amen sister..... Amazing how with all these time saving advances, multi-tasking self perpetuates, stress kills, over-time becomes the norm and leisure time continues to plummet... Wasn't reincarnation supposed to teach us something?

Note- Can't even fake a concerned comment about the finer points of the Catholics' capacity to corrupt- coo coo katchoo...

[Daniel]

Fired from a job as a church musician?!?!! THREE times!?


Zerbie- Yes. A trinity of firings. The truth is that 99.9% of organists are gay and work in situations where two thirds of them cannot be open about their sexuality. It is any wonder that there is a high degree of alcoholism and substance abuse within the profession? Stand up for yourself and you get the boot.

My utter confusion, and dread, that that very confusion and dread, may be only chemical reactions, I must make glaringly clear. If I can buy that my deepest, most driving Loves and preferences are just genetic, then I can buy that a person can have a similarly sour chemistry against an abundance of pigment, a deficit of blue blood or all out allergic reaction to the beans and chilies emanating from our southern neighbors... In other words, to me a gay gene makes just as much sense as a bigot gene, and I fear the day science proves we are all just robots and vessels for our immortal genetics. Both are just states of mind.

Awediot- At the risk of offending you I think you are confused. If one investigates the matter at close range, one comes to the conclusion that being attracted to someone of the same sex is nothing at all like the discomfort of, or pure hatred evidenced in bigotry. In the latter, to quote a lyric from South Pacific, 'You must be carefully taught.' It doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce from observing first-graders play together that even though they are aware their skin color differences, they are more curious than reactive about such things: they'd rather play together than fight about such things. Now. Where and from whom do they get their cues in this regard? Their teachers and parents. And it also doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce that the gay kids, the same ones who are being told they should be straight by everything in their environment, in fact, grow up very different. What explains the difference between learned bigotry and same-sex attraction? Genetics.

Yes. You could make the argument that those kids don't know they're gay either. But think logically here for a minute. Most of those kids grow up to be straight. The ones that grow up gay see the same hetero 'examples' the straight ones do but become gay nevertheless. Are they bad learners? The ex-gay people would think so. However, the simple truth is that there is something else going on which is much deeper than the synaptic responses that affect modelling behavior. That's genetics. A much deeper issue than a matter of mind.

..However the difference here is that Buddhists talk about teachings and not Absolutes as objective top down assertions which must be Obeyed or Else.

Are you absolutely certain about that? (word games, but makes a point) We are told to look both ways before crossing the street, or Else. That 'or else' is not always a threat of punishment and often the authoritative top knows better than we. Its not all about control and we can indeed exert our independence and rebel right into an on coming garbage truck.

Yes you are right about this. It's not about 'top down' control. It's about self-control. What I was saying without saying it is that Buddhist don't have a concept of an independent external diety, that is, God. If you take God out of the picture then 'top down', as it were, ceases to exist.

[Zerbie]

What I've gotten outta this thread so far:

I believe Awe is contending that genetics, and/or brain chemistry, IS mind. How could the mind be independent of those things, after all? Awe, IS that even close to what you are thinking?

Not to say I don't clearly see the learned behavioral examples you've given us Daniel. What we seem to be debating here is a philosophic-neurologic-biologic-culturo-politico-spiritual issue and it's doubtful we'll find an agreeable "answer" any time soon, if ever. Which drops us right back to the question of relevancy. IS the how question really relevant, or is the relevant question what we do with what we have now? (not to undermine the fascinating fun of the debate you've got going, just engaging in my favority activity of derailing the entire point, a trait of mine with which Liberal Crozier and Emproph are intimately familiar. ;) )

Re: Church organists. Ya gotta be kidding me. I don't think I've ever met a church organist who I thought was straight - you mean all those guys are closeted and/or have been fired like your husband was? :eek: :mad: Just when I think there is no more homophobia out there than can still surprise me. I can't BELIEVE all these people serving the church are still going through this garbage, though why that surprises me given the scapegoating of priests, I just don't know. I just can't imagine putting up with that.

Last thing: I don't know if Emproph is reading this thread, but if you are, I think this was another hint for you to go out and rent South Pacific, if ya haven't yet. . .;)

[awediot]

Sorry Zerb, swing and a miss. I can't fathom that ALL WE ARE is a chemical reaction...

What I was saying without saying it is that Buddhist don't have a concept of an independent external Deity, that is, God. If you take God out of the picture then 'top down', as it were, ceases to exist.

Yes Daniel, I know... Just wanted you to say it.

What we seem to be debating here is a philosophic-neurologic-biologic-culture-politico-spiritual issue...

...and the cherry on top.

But wait, the top has ceased to exist... it Is exist... It Is, IS,... IS... IT... IS ...IT ...IS ...I ...AM ...

and it's doubtful we'll find an agreeable "answer" any time soon, if ever.

Nope. Never. And Both... we just did.


It is the deep, beautiful, self-deifying and blinding ways to remove God from the picture that concern me. All the cryptic and basic questions of why, nature/nurture/chemical/environment/cultural...made this or that, go no where and will prove to reveal nothing if the True answer is God just wanted it that way. The sense that one can ponder at all, may itself be an illusion, and that is the last absolute thought the Buddha believed, then was gone...

[Daniel]

Yes Daniel, I know... Just wanted you to say it.

Thanks unfortunate because your statement here gives me the unwelcome feeling that I'm being played with.

It is the deep, beautiful, self-deifying and blinding ways to remove God from the picture that concern me. All the cryptic and basic questions of why, nature/nurture/chemical/environment/cultural...made this or that, go no where and will prove to reveal nothing if the True answer is God just wanted it that way. The sense that one can ponder at all, may itself be an illusion, and that is the last absolute thought the Buddha believed, then was gone...

Here are the actual last words of the Buddha for your contemplation.

THE LAST TEACHING OF THE BUDDHA

Beneath the sala trees at Kusinagara, in his last words to his disciples, the Buddha said: Make of yourself a light. Rely upon yourself: do not depend upon anyone else. Make my teachings your light. Rely upon them: do not depend upon any other teaching.

Consider your body: Think of its impurity. Knowing that both its pain and its delight are alike causes of suffering, how can you indulge in its desires? Consider your 'self'; think of its transiency; how can you fall into delusion about it and cherish pride and selfishness, knowing that they must all end in inevitable suffering? Consider all substances; can you find among them any enduring 'self'? Are they not all aggregates that sooner or later will break apart and be scattered? Do not be confused by the universality of suffering, but follow my teaching, even after my death, and you will be rid of pain. Do this and you will indeed be my disciples.

My disciples, the teachings that I have given you are never to be forgotten or abandoned. They are always to be treasured, they are to be thought about, they are to be practiced. If you follow these teachings you will always be happy.

The point of the teachings is to control your own mind. Keep your mind from greed, and you will keep your behavior right, your mind pure and your words faithful. By always thinking about the transience of your life, you will be able to resist green and anger, and will be able to avoid all evils.

If you find your mind tempted and so entangled in greed, you must suppress and control the temptation; be the master of your own mind.

A man's mind may make him a Buddha, or it may make him a beast. Misled by error, one becomes a demon; enlightened, one becomes a Buddha. Therefore, control your mind and do not let it deviate from the right path.

You should respect each other, follow my teachings, and refrain from disputes; you should not, like water and oil, repel each other, but should, like milk and water, mingle together.

Study together, learn together, practice my teachings together. Do not waste your mind and time in idleness and quarreling. Enjoy the blossoms of Enlightenment in their season and harvest the fruit of the right path.

The teachings which I have given you, I gained by following the path myself. You should follow these teachings and conform to their spirit on every occasion.

If you neglect them, it means that you have never really met me. It means that you are far from me, even if you are actually with me; but if you accept and practice my teachings, then you are very near to me, even though you are far away.

My disciples, my end is approaching, our parting is near, but do not lament. Life is ever changing; none can escape the dissolution of the body. This I am now to show by my own death, my body falling apart like a dilapidated cart.

Do not vainly lament, but realize that nothing is permanent and learn from it the emptiness of human life. Do not cherish the unworthy desire that the changeable might become unchanging.

The demon of worldly desires is always seeking chances to deceiver the mind. If a viper lives in your room and you wish to have a peaceful sleep, you must first chase it out.

You must break the bonds of worldly passions and drive them away as you would a viper. You must positively protect your own mind.

My disciples, my last moment has come, but do not forget that death is only the end of the physical body. The body was born from parents and was nourished by food; just as inevitable are sickness and death.

But the true Buddha is not a human body: -- it is Enlightenment. A human body must die, but the Wisdom of Enlightenment will exist forever in the truth of the Dharma, and in the practice of the Dharma. He who sees merely my body does not truly see me. Only he who accepts my teaching truly sees me.

After my death, the Dharma shall be your teacher. Follow the Dharma and you will be true to me.

During the last forty-five years of my life, I have withheld nothing from my teachings. There is no secret teaching, no hidden meaning; everything has been taught openly and clearly. My dear disciples, this is the end.

In a moment, I shall be passing into Nirvana. This is my instruction.

[Zerbie]

So, did I getcher meaning exactly backwards?

:p

[awediot]

Thanks unfortunate because your statement ("Yes Daniel, I know... Just wanted you to say it".) here gives me the unwelcome feeling that I'm being played with.
What I was saying without saying it...

Who's playing? I respect you and your search to much to play with it... I'm playing with the Buddha itself.

Point being, if "Buddhist don't have a concept of an independent external deity", then, their concept is more of a dependent, internal deity. Though "deity" is better described as a power or force residing in and guiding all things, the dharma, rather than a Supreme, creator Being... Therefore the "I am God" declaration, is perhaps premature, a tad vane and put within a western context, but essentially, inevitable and accurate... Is this a fair summation?
If not, please correct me. If it is, please understand how it is believed by about half the planet to be responsible for the fall of mankind... Are we or are we not "God?"

Much of what you posted as Buddha's last teachings are lovely, common sense gentleness. Just as much of Christ's were. A couple of them are blasphemous to Him, just as His were to Buddha, if Buddha can be insulted...

The rest I'll address in light of your response.

"Make of yourself a light. Rely upon yourself: do not depend upon anyone else. Make my teachings your light. Rely upon them: do not depend upon any other teaching." Buddha.

5 I am the Lord, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me, (Isaiah 45:5-10)
2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you. (Deuternonmy 4:2)


Zerb, when I said, "I fear the day science proves we are all just robots and vessels for our immortal genetics." I hoped to convey that I believed humanity, spirit and Soul was transcendent of chemistry. I feel we all have a brain, not that we are a brain. Finding out I like cobalt blue or the dark, mysterious type, only because my DNA has wired me that way, will be a chilling, dehumanizing day for all of us.

[Zerbie]

... Are we or are we not "God?"



"Make of yourself a light. Rely upon yourself: do not depend upon anyone else. Make my teachings your light. Rely upon them: do not depend upon any other teaching." Buddha.

5 I am the Lord, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me, (Isaiah 45:5-10)
2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you. (Deuternonmy 4:2)


Zerb, when I said, "I fear the day science proves we are all just robots and vessels for our immortal genetics." I hoped to convey that I believed humanity, spirit and Soul was transcendent of chemistry. I feel we all have a brain, not that we are a brain. Finding out I like cobalt blue or the dark, mysterious type, only because my DNA has wired me that way, will be a chilling, dehumanizing day for all of us.

Awe: Gotcha.

Re: the 2 sets of quotes: sounds like the same voice speaking.

Re: your question in bold: in order to answer this question, first we would have to know what are we? And also what is God? Be with those questions for a while first. Until they are answered, the question in bold type can't make sense.

[awediot]

"Re: the 2 sets of quotes: sounds like the same voice speaking."

'Sounds like', but one profusely and deeply warns of impersonators...(not sure about the other)

(I know, familiar, but:

Then the Lord said to me, "The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.---My hand will be against the prophets who see false visions and utter lying divinations---"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.---Her prophets whitewash these deeds for them by false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says'--when the Lord has not spoken.---For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible.----But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.----Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. )

...and arrive at opposing conclusions: We make God. / God made us.

"Re: your question in bold: in order to answer this question, first we would have to know what are we? And also what is God? Be with those questions for a while first. Until they are answered, the question in bold type can't make sense."

C'mon Zerb, http://www.websmileys.com/sm/fingers/fing04.gif you're better than this cyclical cop out... "First we have to know what we are, know what God is?" That IS the question. There is no "first" about it... It is up to us to answer...I have been with this step one question for some thirty five years. Humanity, for a few thousand... The question in bold type makes sense to a four year old... You know exactly what it means.

How about: Is there a Creator, A Supreme Being, or Not?

(I'm sure Daniel is typing away http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/spezial/Fool/adr.gif)

[Dash]

Oh, we know what scripture says.
We've been beaten over the head with it again and again.

(His corner is getting smaller and smaller...
His position less tenable with every verse he slings.
Scripture has great value, except in the way it is used by him...
...and them.)

We know what scripture says.
A thousand verses will prove mankind wrong.
Five verses would separate us all from whatever god there may be.

Don't pick up a sword if you don't want to cut someone.

[awediot]

Uh, ...sure.

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/waffen/violent-smiley-105.gif

...ya wanna answer the question?

[Zerbie]

Awe:
Oh.

It took me 10 minutes of typing and erasing responses to you, Awe, before I caught WHY you called that a cyclical cop-out. :lol: Okay, yes - because it re-asks the question again. :p Yes? IS that why you called it a cop-out? (don't wanna attribute meanings to you that you don't intend. . .I've been doing that a TON with you lately). I didn't give you enough credit to begin with when I typed the earlier post.

Yes, you're right that IS the entire question. Who the Bleep are we and who the Bleep is God and the answers all roll into one another.

Well, do you have an Answer? I haven't. No, I certainly haven't. But perhaps typing at each other will help us to understand something that we don't yet. Or have you got further insights here that you are still holding back? If ya do, c'mon, spill! Share what you've discovered. This four-year-old wants to understand.

I know there is *being* far beyond Zerbie and Awediot (and Daniel, and Dash, and. . .), but beyond the Existence of That, I understand very little. The nature of It? I would need broader senses with which to apprehend It. If I weren't averse to smoke, I'd say pass me a doobie.

Now, why do you make a distinction between the 2 quotes we talked about? They both say to follow their teaching and not another one. If they are different teachings, we need to understand that and decide IF we are to follow either, and if so, which. Or are they the same teaching? That requires looking closely at the nature of them both (if indeed there is a "both") here. It can very well be that the same Voice *has* uttered both of those quotes.

Dash - I didn't "get" your post. :confused:

[Daniel]

Point being, if "Buddhist don't have a concept of an independent external deity", then, their concept is more of a dependent, internal deity. Though "deity" is better described as a power or force residing in and guiding all things, the dharma, rather than a Supreme, creator Being... Therefore the "I am God" declaration, is perhaps premature, a tad vane and put within a western context, but essentially, inevitable and accurate... Is this a fair summation?

Awe- To answer your quandry as best I can, which may be less than can be understood in this limited space: It's not a matter of external vs internal. To view the matter in these terms is dualistic, something which the Buddha's teachings also addressed. I humbly suggest the following: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&isbn=0802130313&itm=1

[Dash]

Hi Zerbie,

Scripture is now being quoted as a way of proving that, “No, you are all false prophets if you don’t toe the line, and agree fundamentally with standard Church doctrine. Either agree with it or leave it completely.” (just what I’m getting from the overall theme of this thread)

Many of us here are queer people who come from strongly religious church backgrounds. As queer folk, we’ve been bludgeoned by scripture until we have bloody bible marks all over our souls. Quoting it to us in this fashion is kind of insulting...as if we needed any reminder that scripture would separate us from God and community. There are thousands of verses that condemn humanity and promise our destruction.

I believe that his position, buttressed by such use of scripture cannot be held. By using scripture in the way that he does, he will ultimately find himself surrounded by references that condemn him as a gay man. In fact, there are only five references (if my memory serves) that are used to condemn us. These are the five wounds that nail us to Christ’s cross.

There are two lessons one can learn from a sword:

One can learn to cut and kill...or...one can learn to never again use it that way.

Scripture is very much like that. For myself, and many others, it is never again to be used in the fashion that Awediot understands. This is why he is annoyed by our “watered down” Christianity.

We must lay aside the sword. We, especially, who have been abused by it.

[NathanATX]

Hi Zerbie,

Scripture is now being quoted as a way of proving that, “No, you are all false prophets if you don’t toe the line, and agree fundamentally with standard Church doctrine. Either agree with it or leave it completely.” (just what I’m getting from the overall theme of this thread)

Many of us here are queer people who come from strongly religious church backgrounds. As queer folk, we’ve been bludgeoned by scripture until we have bloody bible marks all over our souls. Quoting it to us in this fashion is kind of insulting...as if we needed any reminder that scripture would separate us from God and community. There are thousands of verses that condemn humanity and promise our destruction.

I believe that his position, buttressed by such use of scripture cannot be held. By using scripture in the way that he does, he will ultimately find himself surrounded by references that condemn him as a gay man. In fact, there are only five references (if my memory serves) that are used to condemn us. These are the five wounds that nail us to Christ’s cross.

There are two lessons one can learn from a sword:

One can learn to cut and kill...or...one can learn to never again use it that way.

Scripture is very much like that. For myself, and many others, it is never again to be used in the fashion that Awediot understands. This is why he is annoyed by our “watered down” Christianity.

We must lay aside the sword. We, especially, who have been abused by it.

this makes sense to me...

[awediot]

Damn Dash, you have had a number done on you.
I can understand how these passages rip open old wounds and I am sorry that you haven't found a way to heal them. But I have, and they speak to me and all I am attempting to do is share how. You are reading judgment and damnation of your own into my motives that isn't there.

“No, you are all false prophets if you don’t toe the line, and agree fundamentally with standard Church doctrine. Either agree with it or leave it completely.” (just what I’m getting from the overall theme of this thread)

That is your own conclusion and your own past damage projected on me. I have a well worn badge of fundi victimization myself, but mine I keep in a memory album and others may be trying to see how to get it there. If you are not at that stage yet, don't undermine those who are. If you want to pick out the scripture you like and blow off what you don't, knock yourself out. Don't insist I, or others do the same...

By using scripture in the way that he does, he will ultimately find himself surrounded by references that condemn him as a gay man.

Do you think this is my first foray into these waters? That I haven't been surrounded by, swallowed and regurgitated as pearls, these nine inch nail references? Hell, I've got a couple of the CDS...You vastly underestimate me my friend... And please, I am right here. Its kind of hard to talk behind someones back on a public forum. You are welcome to address me directly. My bite is lots worse than my bark but gnawing on my monitor frightens my roommate. You are physically safe anyway...

This is why he is annoyed by our “watered down” Christianity.

True. No secret here. It is "watered down." I am curious as to why some still consider themselves a Christian when they abandon all of its basic tenets. I realize it is a touchy area, as you prove, but it is something I really want to know and hope I can help others refine within themselves as they do for me. There are differing psychological and emotional factors at play, and I think one is healthier than the other... So what? So do you...Last thing I want is the power to say: "you're going to hell" if you do X or don't do Z. I have no absolute certainty if or how or why or by what we are ultimately sorted. I think we will be, but I'm not the one to do it. I do not mistake myself for judge or jury, maybe a little lawyer, but not the arresting officer, law giver, long arm or snitch. I'm more like a "CAUTION: BRIDGE OUT" sign. Or I try to be... but alot of people are going way to fast to see me, so I trip the ones I can reach. They don't like it, but if there is a chasm ahead, they like it better than that...If there's not, then I'll be sorry, but no real harm done.... I've good reason to think there is

All this and you still haven't addressed the Question. It is not my own, it is not new, it is the very first to be encountered in every sincere, spiritual journey, it will be the last, it sets you off in one direction or the other, and it won't go away when you log off... Get as defensive and hurt and angry as you must, and answer it. Find a way to answer it, not better excuses to avoid it or complicate it out of reach.

Well, do you have an Answer? I haven't. No, I certainly haven't. But perhaps typing at each other will help us to understand something that we don't yet. Or have you got further insights here that you are still holding back? If ya do, c'mon, spill! Share what you've discovered. This four-year-old wants to understand.

Zerbie, I have my beliefs and I have answered this question for myself (you no doubt know what my answer is). My "holding back" is not meant to play games or manipulate anybody, but to emphasize the power and impact of this simple question. It has divided nations and set them against each other. It has split families apart and set the left hemisphere against the right in not only my mind, and it will stand as the line dividing the planet in its next world war. It is the first and last question to exist and the inability or unwillingness to answer it, speaks for itself. It is one of those things one must sort out for themselves. My reticence is for that reason.

There are two lessons one can learn from a sword:
One can learn to cut and kill...or...one can learn to never again use it that way.

...somethings deserve to be cut from us and killed... One can learn to use a sword as it was meant to be used, and await the day it can be abandoned.

Now, why do you make a distinction between the 2 quotes we talked about? They both say to follow their teaching and not another one.

Zerb, ...and, they both say to follow their teaching, and not THE other one... They are the embodiment of distinction, and I didn't make it. They themselves pose the question. I am but an unhumble messenger...

Daniel, thanks for the link, but I don't want to read any more books on what the Buddha said. I by no means know it all, but I am not unfamiliar with much of it... I want to know what you, personally think about it, why and if its reconcilable between faiths in a way I haven't seen.

This has boiled down, and merged with the Theocracy-The Threat is Real thread and deserves a world of its own... Big new, uncomfortable thread (Ooooh! A Poll! A Higher Power Poll) to hopefully get more involved... Don't you guys go away! ...to Be Continued There...

Nate...you can come too!

[Dash]

Awediot,

I never intended to address your question. I address your methods. Nonetheless...

Of course there's a higher power. I don't believe in God, though. Those are such silly words. As if I'd say, "I believe in my friend Ryan."

Nonsense.

I have an intimate relationship with One I love. Sometimes, after long years of living with one another, the lines get a little blurred. It's hard to tell where I end and my Lover begins. We are one. That's the way it was meant to be. If I say "I am God" the reply comes without hesitation, "AND I AM JAY."

So you haven't had the relevant experience. That's okay. These words don't make sense to you and you think we are mistaken. Your limitations...your boundaries...are not our fences. That would most certainly be a mistake.

And once again...

The wise warrior lays down the sword forever.

[awediot]

Holy Toledo! -you sure know alot about me Dash. Who needs Briggs Meyer? ...you know my relevant experiences with flowing Deity, what does or doesn't make sense to me, what I think are mistakes, my limitations and boundaries and how and why I try to fence you in with them, where my thoughts have been and are going and are doing to everybody else on this site... ya may as well ignore me all together since I've no desire to be the source of such predictable boredom... But you knew I'd say that...

and for your warrior's sake, I hope his metaphorical war is over or he's a sitting duck...http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/spezial/Fool/bud.gif
and if it is, have him pick up a mirror. See where that goes.

Wish my war was over.

[Daniel]

Daniel, thanks for the link, but I don't want to read any more books on what the Buddha said. I by no means know it all, but I am not unfamiliar with much of it... I want to know what you, personally think about it, why and if its reconcilable between faiths in a way I haven't seen.

From your sentence above, you seem to want to know what I think about Buddhism, and if it is reconcilable between the two faiths, that is, Buddhism and Christianity. Now why would I want to put myself in a position where, with your self-assigned lawyerly stance clearly defined, I would be 'tripped' up? (to use your own words). There are enough lawyers in the world. How about simply being a friend on the Way.

[Dash]

“No, you are all false prophets if you don’t toe the line, and agree fundamentally with standard Church doctrine. Either agree with it or leave it completely.” (just what I’m getting from the overall theme of this thread)

That is your own conclusion and your own past damage projected on me.

A Church, THE Church depends on being the vanishing point giving all else a perspective to grow from. It is, right or wrong, the bedrock society adjusts around and you build your life from. It is not meant to shift to whims. It is there to disagree with you, to convict you, confront, comfort and to change you... Indeed, Love it or Leave it for another.

I'm just reading what you wrote, neighbor. I don't think I'm projecting. :)
Perhaps I'm being argumentative now, however. And really...I'm throwing someone's words back at them. Sheesh! That's even more obnoxious than quoting scripture at them. (bad Dash!! bad Dash) :lol:

[awediot]

From your sentence above, you seem to want to know what I think about Buddhism, and if it is reconcilable between the two faiths, that is, Buddhism and Christianity. Now why would I want to put myself in a position where, with your self-assigned lawyerly stance clearly defined, I would be 'tripped' up? (to use your own words). There are enough lawyers in the world. How about simply being a friend on the Way.

Dan, maybe its just me, but I want a belief system, a religion or worldly outlook, that cannot be easily tripped up, that can withstand lawyerly dissection and places me in a position I can defend, eventually put more than faith in and use as my rock. I do not need to have every answer about it, but I do need it to be able to fight the good fight in the face of any and every question. And it must be able to differentiate between the unknowable, the unknown, and what I'd rather not know. After all, it is my Truth, my Sensibility, ability and desire to care and sacrifice for, how I see myself and others in the big scheme of things.... Dan, I do say this as a friend (just ask my poor friends). It stuns and saddens me to see such a basic question as to the nature of God cause such trick of the light distress when so much relies on and can build only from an answer... even an answer we would rather not say.

I used to want unquestionably, a partner who shared my beliefs. That does cover alot of ground and leg work up front. Now, I think I could be happy with someone who asks the same questions...

I still have a wierd time connecting as fibre-optic, virtual friends who I have never seen or heard. I think some of my 3D friends are cyborgs and you all are just clever programs churning out responses for my viewing pleasure... Then I remember I'm not paying anything and you get all fleshy again... gad durn technology...http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cartoon/051.gif

..Let me ask, what do you want in a friend?


Dash, kinda lost which quotes referenced what,

Originally Posted by awediot
A Church, THE Church depends on being the vanishing point giving all else a perspective to grow from. It is, right or wrong, the bedrock society adjusts around and you build your life from. It is not meant to shift to whims. It is there to disagree with you, to convict you, confront, comfort and to change you... Indeed, Love it or Leave it for another.

I'd forgotten where we began 'til your pulled this up... I stand by it, but hope anyone understands, and I think within the entire contexts it is clear, that I do not define any particular "church". The Church, is YOUR Church, it is YOUR Beacon, your teacher and leader and guru, and once you make it Yours, and place it in essence above you and society, changing its sacrosanct status or doctrine should, to say the least, be done with the Highest regard, if done at all. It is one of the only institutions intended to dominate your very thoughts...

I look at the search for a therapist in the same way... How much are we supposed to just LIKE it? ---It is a critical decision to find a thing to give yourself to..

[Daniel]

Dan, maybe its just me, but I want a belief system, a religion or worldly outlook, that cannot be easily tripped up, that can withstand lawyerly dissection and places me in a position I can defend, eventually put more than faith in and use as my rock. I do not need to have every answer about it, but I do need it to be able to fight the good fight in the face of any and every question. And it must be able to differentiate between the unknowable, the unknown, and what I'd rather not know. After all, it is my Truth, my Sensibility, ability and desire to care and sacrifice for, how I see myself and others in the big scheme of things.... Dan, I do say this as a friend (just ask my poor friends). It stuns and saddens me to see such a basic question as to the nature of God cause such trick of the light distress when so much relies on and can build only from an answer... even an answer we would rather not say.

Awe- please try to see this from your readers perspective (and not diminutize my name). In your previous post you referred to yourself- not a belief system- as being the lawyer type guy who warns those of their mistakes and even trips them up before they fall into some pit of misunderstanding. Now you are using the same words and saying they mean something else. This sounds very bait and switch-y to me. Not only that: I still can't agree with you. I don't see why any belief system should be used as a rock.(Or do you mean a rock to cling to?) From all that you say above, it sounds like you want a great defense mechanism, a shield, a club. I short: a weapon. Why you express your needs in this way to beyond my ability to understand. A phrase from A Course in Miracles come to mind here: The Truth Needs No Defense.

The truth is, I, nor any one else can tell you what the nature of God is. Case in point: it's your job to figure out why the "I am God" idea gets under your skin so much. I really can't find the magic answer to your discomfort. Seems to me that you want me to do your work for you, served up on silver platter. Seems to me like you want to OWN this stuff. You want to possess it. As if one can. You really should read: Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism, but from what you've already said in a previous post, this kind of thing may not suit you. It's pretty heavy-lifting stuff.

You might contemplate that your struggle, in part, may have as much to do with what is called the 'ego' and it's ever present desire to buttress up its existence. (yes...this is a Buddhist viewpoint...but they, more than anyone else, deal with matters of the mind) You say "my Truth" and "my Sensibility". When you can start to see that there is nothing to acquire but everything to Be, well...that's a different matter.

I used to want unquestionably, a partner who shared my beliefs. That does cover alot of ground and leg work up front. Now, I think I could be happy with someone who asks the same questions...

Yes....I can see that. This was one of my big concerns at one time. Much less important now. What I really hear you saying is that you want to feel safe with someone.

..Let me ask, what do you want in a friend?

Comradery:

The noun comradery has one meaning:

Meaning #1: the quality of affording easy familiarity and sociability
Synonyms: chumminess, camaraderie, comradeliness, comradeship

[Zerbie]

What I want in a friend is authenticity.


Daniel, I too understand some of what Awe says to be shifting/changing as the conversation goes on, and I'm not sure if the shift is in my perception or Awe's use of the written word. Perhaps a bit o' both?
The remark about finding a partner who shares beliefs or asks the questions - wow! - I didn't hear it at all the way you did, Daniel. It is very difficult to continue a "spiritual" life or practice if you have a partner who is not in some way practicing too. I hear Awe to be waiting for someone who plumbs the depths of life the way he does. Is that close, Awe? I imagine with a partner who doesn't really delve into the questions, you would be bored.

Awe, I like what Daniel says about defending. Truly, there is nothing to defend. Or at least, nothing that WE can defend. If it is true, it is true whether we defend it or not.

Oh and - hey waita minute! I am not a piece of software!!! Grrrrr, snarl. I might hafta look you up (where the heck are ya? Kansas??? Colorado???) and smack ya one, fer the pony poo and the software remarks. Grrrr.
:love:

[Daniel]

Daniel, I too understand some of what Awe says to be shifting/changing as the conversation goes on, and I'm not sure if the shift is in my perception or Awe's use of the written word. Perhaps a bit o' both?

Yes. Excellent point. I think it's both, but when the 'defensive' stuff kicks in - on either side- everything gets messy.

Like your word re friends: authenticity. I want this too, but in an environment where I can relax. I don't want to be on pointe all the time.

[awediot]

hate quoting myself...

I do not mistake myself for judge or jury, maybe a little lawyer, but not the arresting officer, law giver, long arm or snitch. I'm more like a "CAUTION: BRIDGE OUT" sign. Or I try to be... but alot of people are going way to fast to see me, so I trip the ones I can reach. They don't like it, but if there is a chasm ahead, they like it better than that...If there's not, then I'll be sorry, but no real harm done.... I've good reason to think there is

Here, I mean lawyer as the one who presents a case, who fights for a side and defends a client... an appologist in a sense...

trip is meant to stall, to give pause forcefully in order to cause a re-examination of the situation before it is too late


Daniel, maybe its just me, but I want a belief system, a religion or worldly outlook, that cannot be easily tripped up, that can withstand lawyerly dissection and places me in a position I can defend, eventually put more than faith in and use as my rock. I do not need to have every answer about it, but I do need it to be able to fight the good fight in the face of any and every question. And it must be able to differentiate between the unknowable, the unknown, and what I'd rather not know. After all, it is my Truth, my Sensibility, ability and desire to care and sacrifice for, how I see myself and others in the big scheme of things

Here, lawyerly is used the same way, only the subject is the case itself, hopefully strong enough to withstand the lawyerly analysis...

trip here means basically the same, but a little more along the lines of confuse or contradict... (I'm a jack of all trades)

Bait and switch? To make a spiritual point on Truisms? I wouldn't know how nor insult my audience, so don't me either please.

I don't see why any belief system should be used as a rock.(Or do you mean a rock to cling to?) From all that you say above, it sounds like you want a great defense mechanism, a shield, a club. I short: a weapon. Why you express your needs in this way to beyond my ability to understand.

A rock to build on. A foundation. A solid base. So when I form my defenses, set my shield or sadly am forced to bare a weapon, I am not doing so on quicksand.

A Course in Miracles: The truth needs no defense? Then what was the Equality Ride about? All the calls and e-mails to senators? The whole struggle to be seen as normal, loving and productive people against an onslaught of lies and misunderstandings? Truth is assaulted, insulted and targeted everyday. I find it, above nearly all else, in need of and worthy of defense.... (ironically:

The truth is, I, nor any one else can tell you what the nature of God is. Case in point: it's your job to figure out why the "I am God" idea gets under your skin so much. I really can't find the magic answer to your discomfort. Seems to me that you want me to do your work for you, served up on silver platter. Seems to me like you want to OWN this stuff. You want to possess it. As if one can. You really should read: Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism, but from what you've already said in a previous post, this kind of thing may not suit you. It's pretty heavy-lifting stuff.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/mad/1106.gif


The simple existence, or not, of such a being as God, is not yet a question of its nature. It must come before any quandry of what the complexities of its nature may be. One is a fixed, stand alone nature that may or may not yield some understanding. The other, we can say anything we want about because it is in the saying that the lack of God can be not-found. I blather, therefore I am the I am... I know why the Claim "I AM GOD" gets under my skin::: Other than the tired, old, near unforgivable blasphemy and original sin thing, is just the megalomaniacal narcissistic assininity, even if All IS God. What if God is one of us? If THAT one be God, 1. fix some shit 2. explain some too, 3. why are you asst. Mgr. at Burger King? 4. Can You answer a simple question for me? -The notion mocks my religion (used to that), humps my spirit leg (not used to that), retards my logic (redundant) and poops on my capacity for hope and justice... OK, more 'n 'nuff said on that one... You say, I want to own and possess this stuff, yeah, "I AM GOD" ---Who's zoomin' who here? Can God not want to be Itself?...So, "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism," you say. (but Dash made me put my sword away) Heavy-lifting? Sounds insulting to say I'll GOOGLE it about such a weighty, unsuitable proposition, but I will... (hopes its got a better bait line than C.I.M.)

You might contemplate that your struggle, in part, may have as much to do with what is called the 'ego' and it's ever present desire to buttress up its existence. (yes...this is a Buddhist viewpoint...but they, more than anyone else, deal with matters of the mind) You say "my Truth" and "my Sensibility". When you can start to see that there is nothing to acquire but everything to Be, well...that's a different matter.

but...but...isn't contemplating my 'legos' just feeding them? Maybe I'll just take five and forget MYself..


Comradery camaraderie comradeliness comradeliness? on the comradeship-lolly-pop... carameled on my eyelids lips

Good answer. I'll try.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--------------------"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

No Fair... You guys slipped more in there since my last composingationism time...but I kinda covered the remisunderstandings (covered, not clarified). Is the lawyer and trip thing really that hard? And "defensive", or defending our/my/your version of truth, or defending Truth?

And Zerb,http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/tiere/animal-smiley-075.gif as far as my future partner goes, NONONO! I said he must be a deaf, Cajun melano, hung like a pony... and not sure where I called you a piece of software. Too busy to look. Sounds like something I might say... sorry,sorry,sorry, and I'm not in Kansas anymore...

Daniel, I too understand some of what Awe says to be shifting/changing as the conversation goes on, and I'm not sure if the shift is in my perception or Awe's use of the written word. Perhaps a bit o' both?

Both but nail me down then... http://www.websmileys.com/sm/violent/sterb249.gifSeriously, I like it! (martyr card?)...thought conversations were s'posed to shift. Do the Dash thing and throw my own words back in me cyberface...Especially if I contradict myself...now thats a friend... (seriously not as sarcastic as it appears. The air gets pretty thin here in _________________, and I have occasionally read my posts days later and can agree with ya. Spank the discombobulation from me!)

[NathanATX]

I could use a (much smaller) dose of whatever you're taking, Awe. :)

[Zerbie]

I can't quotcha to ya and show you the shifts/changes because I don't remember them. Only remember that it happened, and I notice I am holding an inch of string instead of the entire ball of yarn, and I don't know when or where I dropped it. I tend to let these conversations slide as they go along.

Like you said, conversations do shift. I shift all the time. When it becomes confusing is if you say something and I respond with opposition, and your clarification of your original point sounds like the opposition I responded with. I think we aren't disagreeing more than on, maybe, about 2 things.

Absolute Truth (That one finds in religion, meditation, That Truth) needs no defending because whatever it is, it is. Regardless of us. Worldly actualities, like the anti-gay ridiculosity versus the actuality of harmless little me or Daniel or Dash or whoever innocently singing operas or typing at the keyboard, yes, actualities will need to be defended in the world. Emails and calls to senators to defend a position, to defend the as-yet not quite existent civil rights of queerfolk, those are necessary, because that deals with the actual concrete world.

[Zerbie]

Yes. Excellent point. I think it's both, but when the 'defensive' stuff kicks in - on either side- everything gets messy.

Like your word re friends: authenticity. I want this too, but in an environment where I can relax. I don't want to be on pointe all the time.


To play devil's advocate, Daniel, why bother getting en pointe? What have you to defend? Now, if someone is being constantly petty and mean, I'd get the heck outta there. But, if we're talking about friends? A friend wouldn't be being mean. They would be, well, a friend. I want my friends to feel safe with me, that they can share who they really are and what they really think and feel.

[Daniel]

Can't follow you awediot and honestly don't know how I should answer your last post which illustrates my last about standing on pointe. To answer whatever you were trying to say is like standing on pointe for me and at the moment my feet are tired. Ok? I'm just not up to it. Sorry.

Draining? You got that right. If you feel like I've attacked you, I'm sorry for that. Don't think I have more to say here....

__________________________________________________ ______________________

Ok. If you can take a breath and draw a line so can I.

I'll try to nail myself down here: half if not most of the slop I put up here come's from a non-linear way of thinking. It's just the way I am. It's conceptual more than literal and right-brain oriented more than left. In short. It's who and what I am and have become after some sitting on a cushion and having fallen in love at least once and trying to sort out my neurosis a bit.

Now I ain't no saint, but a line like "The Truth Needs No Defense" isn't something that makes sense to you because you haven't spend much if any time thinking about such things in a way that gives the words a frame of reference. To be blunt: my experience gives me the opinion that the only way to get this kind of frame of reference is through some kind of spiritual practice. Plain and Simple. That's the rock in the road that everyone comes to in one way or another. But that's another of my opinions.

You know the Hindu's (memory isn't crystal clear here) have a way of looking at this sort of thing and posit that there are different means to get to God as it were: the Devotional Path for one and the Rational Path being another. Most people fall into the first. It's easier. I would posit that you are firmly (at the moment) in the second. Ya gotta think things through. That's your way (if it is indeed your way) and I respect that. That kind of high altitude approach is a little daunting for anyone. Gotta check your gear.

Me? I'm the thinking man too, but that non-linear thing (I'm more Rumi than Plato) may be getting me into trouble here (that is, in our dialogue).

[Zerbie]

Yeah, from my frame of reference, Awe comes closest to being a Jnana Yogi.

The three paths to which Daniel refers are:

Bhakti Yoga
Jnana Yoga
Karma Yoga

Bhakti = devotion. prayer. Offering flowers, rituals. Singing worship songs. praising God.

Jnana Yoga = wisdom. Merciless questioning of self, mind, rational/suprarational concepts, religious tenets, studying of books, meditation practice, decades of contemplation on the world's various scriptures.

Karma Yoga = service. Feeding the hungry, clothing the cold and the naked, bringing water to human beings dying of thirst in the desert, funding medical care for the destitute, relieving pain physical and mental insofar as one is able.

I find that all three of these intersect hopelessly. But for convenience and simplicity, it is nice to have the terms.

[Daniel]

Ok. What are ya up to with the avatar change? Comment on the thread? How you feel today? What? Just curious. Should I duck?

[Daniel]

Out beyond ideas of Wrongdoing and Rightdoing, there is a field.
I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, and even the phrase 'eachother' doesn't make any sense.

-Rumi, c. 532 A.D.

[awediot]

RE:avatar, feelin' it, and feelin' felt like it a little bit. thought I'd go ahead and look like it, for a bit...(but basically just a costume change)

back to post...
What am I missing? (rhetorical question, or keep the list short please...)
I am completely flip-flopped in my views...

Absolute Truth (That one finds in religion, meditation, That Truth) needs no defending because whatever it is, it is. Regardless of us. Worldly actualities, like the anti-gay ridiculosity versus the actuality of harmless little me or Daniel or Dash or whoever innocently singing operas or typing at the keyboard, yes, actualities will need to be defended in the world.

Just because a thing IS, regardless of us, doesn't mean we can't corrupt it...We usually do... I can make no distinction between absolute truths, and actualities. If a thing is TRUE it is actually what is. What would be an example of an untrue actuality? Either Zerbie is harmless or she's not. I can see where my perception of a pop can may differ from yours. That leaves us First (and for me foremost) just what the can IS. It IS a certain color, a height and width, a temp., X amount full, was drunk by Z, manufactured in Y etc... Those are absolute, irrefutable truths, utterly (and maybe only) independent of our perceptions. (that is the ROCK I referred to earlier). Now maybe you or I are colorblind or have lousy depth perception, Hate that flavor of pop, lost an eye in the country where it was made, whatever... and our perspective is skewed. That means one or the other of us may see the can less accurately than it merely IS. So we have a can, your neutral, accurate view, and my inexplicable loathing of it. ...Whether the topic is a can, an outfit, a crime, another person, weapons of mass destruction or Aliens, this, 'formula' always applies. Truth is Truth and is better off without adjectives...

...and if a Big, Spirit Truth is defeated, (Jews are good, stealing is wrong) the results are catastrophic. I fight to keep the mondo ones upheld more than the (flexible?) actualities... Someone not defending the truth about the lack weapons of mass destruction, has cost dearly...

This is no doubt an example of my merciless (ouch), linear, Jnana Yoga, left brained thinking (I'm left handed BTW). If you can present an opposing, complimentary example of a charitable, non-linear, Karma Yoga, right-brained method for distinguishing Truth, it would be very much appreciated, because I am lost to you guys at the moment and would truly like to understand... ( I know you suggested a spiritual practice to a new framework, Daniel, but for insurmountable reasons, it ain't gonna happen. You earlier also said," Why you express your needs in this way is beyond my ability to understand." And it is equally beyond my comprehension why I should wish to pursue a path that confuses my desire to defend truth, or makes the simple question as to the existence of God unanswerable... Crazy world we live in, 'eh?)

To help me out, are Absolute truth and actualities just arbitrary matters of degrees of importance?

and Daniel, thanks I think for the "daunting" compliment... and thats the third reference to a cushion lately...what are you not saying?

----------------------------

I need to post stuff when I think I'm done writing on it. Lately by the time I do, what needs to be replied to has been added on...

Out beyond ideas of Wrongdoing and Rightdoing, there is a field.
I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, and even the phrase 'eachother' doesn't make any sense.

-Rumi, c. 532 A.D.

Thanks... You are succeeding in getting me tired of hearing myself type: 'BUT', but...if 'each other' doesn't make sense, you lie there alone... I'll meet you, but you won't know I'm there...

You see, The "just Be" sentiment I do grasp as much as it allows itself to be. It erases my "I" though and succeeds at the mastery of the Nothing...

I can enjoy brief excursions into meditative Zensibility, but It allows no world to explore if I stay.

[Zerbie]

The distinction is temporal and therefore relative.

My friend, awe at the absolute existence beyond the beverage and the can that contains it. From what was the can sculpted? A material or combination thereof. From what was the beverage made? Materials. Once you have consumed the beverage and it has entered your physical system it becomes, in part, your own body. Following this we see that the can actually was there in temporal and worldly reality, those of us who can see colors agreed what colors were on the can, we measured the can and concurred about it's size and the volume of liquid within it, regardless of our enjoyment (or lack thereof) of the taste of its contents. After the pop and the can are made and packaged, they actually exist, or it is better to say, they manifest, for a time. Then something happens to the can and the liquid. Ten thousand years ago the can was not. Ten thousand years from now the can will not be. But it is actually here NOW. Thus the can is a worldly actuality.

Because we live in the world the worldly actualities matter to us. They contribute to suffering, or they alleviate suffering. They determine your experience. Thus it becomes important to observe what happens in the moment, and sometimes we feel called to act in response.

Respectfully, I submit to you that words are not great spiritual truth. Great words can sometimes convey it. That is all.

Real knowledge can be attained through direct experience with life. Not always through reading, debating, thinking. In fact, far less often. Intellectual processing most often leads to "flash in the pan" mental constructs that light up for the moment, but do not develop into maturity and integrate with the entire being.

Insurmountable reasons why you will not have a spiritual practice? This makes me feel sad. If I may, it sounds to my understanding as if that is the one thing you most long for. What are these reasons? No, no, don't share them here if they are private to you, but have you recently re-evaluated what those reasons are, and IF they are indeed insurmountable?

As a religious person, I understood you to already have a spiritual practice of some kind. Am I completely mistaken then? Do you not pray and contemplate the Lord Jesus?

If "each other" makes no sense you lie there alone. Perhaps yes. If the same "you" is in each body. That may be a question worth contemplating for a time.

Has this helped you to understand what has been said so far?

[awediot]

Zerbie and Daniel,
May I ask a question, not quite on topic precisely? I have long been curious what led you to Christianity - if it is something you can conveniently articulate....you have found something that speaks to you - how? better? More clearly? More lovingly? More knowledgeably? I do not know - in Christianity, and I also do not know anything about the "brand" you ascribe to, except that you do not consider it "watered down."-------Insurmountable reasons why you will not have a spiritual practice? This makes me feel sad. If I may, it sounds to my understanding as if that is the one thing you most long for. What are these reasons? No, no, don't share them here if they are private to you, but have you recently re-evaluated what those reasons are, and IF they are indeed insurmountable?


It is personal, but not so much so. It is more difficult to express concisely and feels self centered... It also will explain alot as to where I am coming from and why. My hesitation came from that, not any desire to be secretive... Zerb, you asked, you got...


Why Awediot Is Like That

{Boiled, condensed, dehydrated and compacted for your time release pleasure...}

My Christianization trickled down from mom's mom's version of perpetual sobbing for the Lord. My family was an Easter/Christmas/Wedding/Death obligatory refuel and conserve church door darkeners. But the easy, surface story of the Bible, I don't recall really learning. It made as much sense as coming from monkeys growing up, and it moved me like weather... Around 9 or 10yo, I answered an alter call, confessed my childish evils, asked Jesus to move in and felt borned again. I was as sincere, and the emotional relief was as genuine as a ten year old can feel; which is lots.

My homo-preference discovery, denial, and drugging, mixed with desperate, wrenching prayers for change, strength, and death. I repented for things I hadn't done, begged for a new brain and sacrificed what I had not to give... A resounding, God-like: "No Deal," followed by increased horniness, loneliness and deathwishiness. This cycle built until about half way through my senior year in High School, when it all caught up. I got expelled, came out to friend number one, and was sent to live in Axtel, Nebraska with mom to graduate there... and most horror of horrors, get cut off from pot.

As fate would have at me, my last time in school, I happened to swipe two books, probably for the covers. One was Experiences in Visual Thinking (http://www.amazon.com/gp/sitbv3/reader/ref=sib_dp_pt/104-9165733-0028759?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=0818504110)by Robert McKim, considered an engineering book, the Other, "A Yaqui Way of Knowledge" by Carlos Castaneda, now, nearly a Cult. (http://www.castaneda.com/)

My lit fuse of a world blew. I was furious, at, school (I deserved it), my so called friends (to used to isolation), dad, mom, (they were just helping), myself (already suicidal), God... (motherf****r) God. ...He had done this to me. Had made me gay or let the Devil do it. Had not lifted a finger to help or comfort me. Seemed to ratchet up my loneliness for his pleasure and was gonna send me to Hell for it... Fine. It would be made tolerable by His abscence... God was dead to me and I could've swung the crucifixion hammer myself at that point...

I moved, came out to myself, got to know corn, and read... The Experiences book was a hodge-podge of relaxation technique, guided visualization, modes of thought, conscious breathing, Gestalt concepts, Jungian symbolism, dream programming and the numbing disengagement of simple thinking about thinking; all designed to inspire creative drawing ( ala: Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain). I had found my new drug...It primed me for Castaneda's book(s). It would supply the God.

There is no way I can do justice to these watershed, gravity defying books. The other worldly timing with which they entered my life, or the mind erasing impact they had on me I can't convey... But, a touch: I discovered by no means had I swiped them. They stole me... Carlos Castaneda was a college student who met don Juan Matus in the mid sixties. Carlos was interested in the study of psychedelics as used in primitive, sacred ceremony. Don Juan, a Yaqui shaman in Mexico took him under his wing... Among many other 'mystical techniques' and 'ancient wisdoms', don Juan explained how he had been seen in two places at once. How to create a double...(read this at your own peril. I came to regret it.) He instructed Carlos to find his hand while dreaming. To think about it during the day, condition his mind to pursue it while sleeping. Don Juan told him that doing so would almost always cause one to wake immediately. This was to be overcome, until he could routinely find his hand and maintain a dream state. Then, look up. Look around and know you are dreaming, without waking... (this was the first time I had encountered the concept and a description of lucid dreaming, something I had been doing regularly my whole life. It rocked my world... It took Carlos months to be able to sustain such a state. I did it the night I read it.) ...Once you hold the dream, and can move around your surroundings, you can change them. Dream yourself anywhere, anytime... Then, dream yourself into your own room, and into the real time. Watch yourself dream of yourself... (a roundabout astral projection) When you can do this, the dreamed YOU, can then take on corporeal reality, can appear as flesh and you may move between the two, or three, or four at will...

This was a direct, but in no way most dramatic connection I made with the maddening philosophies, gut feeling, levitating insights and techniques of magic I devoured from Castaneda. God had risen, and it was me.

The path was set. At the time Castaneda had 5 or 6 books out and was slowly, but consistently producing. They were an ongoing documentary and soap opera of what turned out to be an Aztec sorcerer novitiate. But they came to slow... I got into Edger Cayce, some of the channeled "Seth Material", J.Z. Knight's entity, Ramtha, and I attended the School of Metaphysics for about half a year. I loosely explored the Vedas, Tibetan Book of the Dead and other texts. And even rooted around a bit in the Aquarian Gospels and Gnosticism...But many of them were dry and over my head and began to get repetitive. I grasped the central themes. I found current interpretations were more topical and had better graphics. The term New Age was just catching on. I believed completely in reincarnation and karma, that All was god, so I was god, positivity beget positivity and was actual magic, I kept a dream journal for years and had a collection of power objects. I felt pain was a necessary lesson we brought upon ourselves, there are no accidents, all are ascending basically from amoebae to deity. The characters in my nightly, controlled dreams were spirits waiting for me to sleep, and I fought off their desires to enter in and speak through me, and thanks to the latest Castaneda episode, pity was one of the final weakness' to be transcended, as it robbed others of an opportunity for growth...

Then I learned that two men had broken into my moms house, injected her in the back of the leg with something, and casually raped her for four or five hours. She wasn't quite sure... It was a white guy and a black guy, driving, she thought a black Firebird or something...

True to form, all I'd been learning kicked in, and trumping my first impulse to weep and kill, was, "I wonder what she did to deserve that." and, "what lesson did she need to learn from this." ...and I fought back pity, because I didn't want to hurt her... and it was easy. I was devoid of sympathy. She brought it on herself.

Without an angry word or violent thought in my head, with only good intentions for all I knew and best of wishes for every future, I had become monster. I was ice cold and a black hole shell in the name of love... Though carefully setting moths free outside, I understood how I could watch pain and call it good. I saw Hell, and knew the brilliance of evil as it swelled not to possess me, but to fight for me, at my side, as it had done before. It was then I knew it was not God that had awoken in me.

Does one know when they've gone mad? Where does one go when it is their own skin that makes itself crawl? All I had thought and learned, practiced and studied turned on me, and it felt as the heavens would rejoice at my slit wrists... and then dawn... I remembered old warnings against the occult, mediums, decieving spirits and false gods. The "no other but me..." selfish vanities of my obsolete god, and now glaring cautions where angels were said to fear to tread. I thought of God, and Jesus. I had never really disbelieved. I had preferred to hate, then ignore it... I guess I prayed, like I used to, some seven or so years earlier. But not to that God, or any God. Not for help I didn't deserve, or protection I had mocked, or a way out I could no longer recognize. I was numb to being sorry, angry or knowing what to desire but a sign it was alright to just exist into the next moment. The air seemed to despise me. And I got nothing but a presence, a Phoenix of peace, and what I now still shrink at having to call, proof... The bottomless and magnetic mysticisms that had awed and mesmerized me peeled away and ignited like cheap flash paper in the essence and focused source that seemed to fill my realm. God came, and cared, and did what I never conceived, what above all else, I had a right to demand, yet eluded any wish for... He apologized, and asked for my forgiveness...

----------< ~ >----------

That was nearly twenty years ago. The pendulum broke off when I tried to push it back and the God I killed off in my youth, stayed dead. I have never tried again to put God back in the Bible and spent much energy struggling to keep Him out. Though what I have since come to understand and observe, is that is God's home. Mis-shapened and twisted in less important ways than we think, this is where he mostly resides. I myself have found nothing that illuminates Him/Her and It more...Every simple and good thing describes the mind of the Being that made it. God is so obvious as to be habitual, and yet perpetually more, better, higher and brighter... One thing it is now, is watching me try to describe it, and you try to comprehend my failure...

Much of the metaphysical side of myself, I have tried to put away. The more ethereal and supposed High-mindedness that characterizes so much of it is glorified, self dependent dogmatic meaninglessness that holds itself superior, hinges on what I want to make of it, and is therefore that self Divinization I do fear, and I want to fear.. It has a frightening life of its own... I am more flippant and aloof because of it and that hurts me... At the time, I looked to anything that specifically was NOT Christian related. And, while I can not and do not want to criticize on those grounds, nor want to compare Buddhism and Hinduism with witchcraft, humanism and New Age theatrics, there are some consistent ideologies and beliefs that appear once the Christian God is put aside...The 'More Spiritual Than Religious' (MSTR) prufundity, is Religion, and is an ancient, profound and consequential belief system repackaged for todays multi-everythingers to move and shake to... Sorting these things out will be a lifelong amazement for me.

Real knowledge can be attained through direct experience with life. Not always through reading, debating, thinking. In fact, far less often. Intellectual processing most often leads to "flash in the pan" mental constructs that light up for the moment, but do not develop into maturity and integrate with the entire being....If "each other" makes no sense you lie there alone. Perhaps yes. If the same "you" is in each body. That may be a question worth contemplating for a time.
If in the end, we are and were always pieces of the converging ALL, were One all along, and we know all, have done everything, were everyone and have no reason left to be otherwise, we are you, and so you are alone, clinging to a tired, dull bliss for an eternity that has finished with time. You are All. You are God. And You are done.

...That, is the Hell I saw...

[dewdrop_world]

Awediot,

Thank you for your story. I understand -- though I didn't when the discussion was "just" a debate.

I am humbled, awed, and saddened by your mother's and your suffering.

Compassion is an easy casualty in the pursuit of spiritual power. (The Buddha knew of this danger and warned against it, and I take that warning very seriously.) We've seen the foul shadow of "spiritual attainment" in New Age responses to AIDS also (you create your own disease, and if you're good enough and your practice is strong enough, you can cure yourself -- and if you're not cured, it's your own fault), and the ensuing rage against it is well placed.

That's the seduction of new age. Who needs wisdom, connection, compassion, when you can do all these nifty magic tricks? It's also a fat load of crap.

Not all "B" answers are crap though... more about that later.

I really appreciate your forthrightness here. Thank you.

James

[Zerbie]

Our dear and wonderful Awe. :pray:

Thank you.

Authenticity sings in every syllable of your story.

To some certain parts of your narrative, *I understand.* A few of those matters I have witnessed, or learned about. Most of them, I have not myself experienced, but I can still say some of these matters are familiar to me.

There are some (many?) more things in the background that want saying, but at the moment, having just now read your story, silence feels more appropriate. I will not clutter your story with a junkyard of reactions.

Now, I somehow don't imagine you the touchy-feelie type, so take this or leave it:

((((Dean))))

Thank you. :)

[Daniel]

Jesus Awe! You are right. It does explain a lot and now that the curtain has been drawn back, I understand many things which confused and annoyed me. And why my "I am God" post made your hair stand on end.

I've had my own mystical experiences along the way (lucid dreaming being one of them), but nothing that was mixed with the kind of personal tragedy that you describe; a tearing off of one's face, one's ego and the burning in the dark night of hell- a real dark night of the soul. I'm aware of the warnings of playing with metaphysical practices that can burn one and for a time myself was attracted to the 'you've created this experience" kind of thinking.

May I tell some of my own experience? Nearly 20 years ago, I was attracted to working with the dying and through a friend met a prominent music thanatologist. I allowed myself to become enchanted by this person and contemplated a whole new life for myself, one that would make me, of course, very special and very much needed and all so very very. She paid for me to travel to her city for a look-see and bought me a harp to play (part of the program) and convinced me that together, we were going to change the world one dying person at a time. I ended up giving away my apartment, piano, boyfriend, church singing job and just about everything that meant something to me (luckily, my job at the opera was on hiatus and I didn't resign that..thank you Jesus) and traveled half way across the country where I knew no one but the avatar I was to work with. Got there and guess what? I found myself high and dry. After a week of sitting in a catholic seminary in order to introduce me to the life of a 'contemplative', it became clear to me that I had made a whopping mistake. Ms. Avatar had designs more than professional towards me, something I sensed but ignored because I was into it for my reasons- and I thought I could control the situation. Whack!

What happened? I sat there waiting for the Amtrak to take me home (One thought saved me. And that was the kind words of a spiritual counselor who inuited the situation correctly and said before I left: "If it doesn't work out you can always come back"). And what did I do in the meanwhile? It seemed sensible to pray and meditate on what I was going to do with my life. I had three days before the train returned. (Did I mention that half the seminarians were making passes night and day...day and night....you are the one?) On the third day I heard myself say to no one in particular while in a very deep meditative state: 'When will I know I'm in Love?" And as God is my Witness, I felt a Living Presence near my right ear which whispered the words in answer: "When there is no Other." I cannot describe to you the quiet bliss and peace that enveloped me for the next 48 hours. I felt as though I was given the keys to the universe. I 'knew' that everything was One and all was indeed well with the world for the world was a part of God and God was everywhere and everything and nothing was left out. Nothing. And oddly enough, there was No Thing. Hard to explain here but it made sense then. I 'knew' that after I got my butt home I had to start, really for the first time, learning to sing, learning to love and learning to be a compassionate person and not someone who was into stuff for myself. The experience had the effect of stripping off some of my ego and shoved my face into what was.

That phrase: "When there is no Other" has haunted me since. I see a book in that phrase, a method, a Church, a whole life spent chasing the Presence that was in that moment. But I know that's not the way to go: concretizing the experience into a Truth that terrifies and slays all before it creates another kind of game that got me into trouble in the first place. It takes some skill to stay open- continual openness without grasping. That's why I still sit on a cushion. Still pray for myself and others in pain, do a heart practice that keeps me out of my head and grounded and for all I'm worth stay humble without making that a thing too. I've learned that my pain and ignorance must be dealt with. if I don't do that I can't get to the 'good' stuff. I know, at least conceptually, the way out is found by going in. And that going in must be grounded in compassion.

JC is big with me. He remains as large a Presence as that whispered voice I heard, yet I am loath to 'do' something with him too. I just let him be.

Yeah. I may be projecting, but I believe you need a practice.

I'm left handed too.

[Dash]

Now see.... why would you ever throw your bible at your friends when you can open your soul and give them your heart? One is a violent act and one an act of genuine love.

God speaks through people first and foremost, in my opinion...not verses...and rarely, if ever on tablets. Their stories of how they experience tragedy and redemption are full of beauty, adventure, useful lessons, and yes...sometimes warnings. This is same way the bible should be used...to see THEIR experience. The next part is to add our own experience to the great play.

Your experience is so wonderfully unique that I'm surprised you would ever imagine that others would be well served by following the direction yours has taken. Your faith is a necessary response to your personal needs. You have built your house from the stones of your own land. It carries in its walls the very paths you have tread.

But your land is not my land...your paths are not my paths...and my house is not built of your stones.

Don't you dare come to my valley and tell me that my building methods are hogwash and horse puckey! I love my home! It's a lovely spread...rich with beautiful details crafted in love and personal toil. It suits my needs. It is fashioned for the seasons of my years and the storms that come in them. You're welcome to visit...we can take a walk around the land that God has given me...share a cup of tea.

Just don't expect me to try to live the way you do.

Now, I might like to take the road between us now and then in friendship, and marvel at the proud towers you are raising to the blue sky...and taste from those whiskey barrels you've got hidden in your basement...heck! we'll get good and drunk together and mock the follies of kings and merchants. We'll dance like fools and go arm in arm across the acres that have born your own loss and largess.

Good old Awe! Not a man like him! Not a worthier soul to be met in those hills! Now HE has got stories to tell. Stories to raise the hairs on the back of your neck. Stories to make you wonder and wish you could live such adventure (and be glad you didn't).

[Daniel]

Among many other 'mystical techniques' and 'ancient wisdoms', don Juan explained how he had been seen in two places at once. How to create a double...(read this at your own peril. I came to regret it.)

...That, is the Hell I saw...

Hell for some. Heaven for others.

One has only to peruse the lives of the saints to find that bilocation, as it's called, isn't the provenance of magicians in Mexico. Padre Pio of Mexico (Pio of Pietrelcina) comes to mind here: he was reported to have been seen in two places at once too.

Speaking of things supernatural, have you read any works Charles Williams, the English Novelist who died in 1945?

From Wikipedeia: Although chiefly remembered as a novelist, Williams also published works of literary criticism, theology, drama, history, biography, and a voluminous number of book reviews. Some of his best known novels are War in Heaven (1930), Descent into Hell (1937), and All Hallows' Eve (1945). T.S. Eliot, who wrote an introduction for the last of these, described Williams's novels as "supernatural thrillers" because they explore the sacramental intersection of the physical with the spiritual while also examining the ways in which power, even spiritual power, can corrupt as well as sanctify.

ll Hallows' Eve (1945) - Opens with a discussion between the ghosts of two dead women wandering about London. Ultimately explores the meaning of human suffering and empathy by dissolving the barrier between the living and the dead through both black magic and divine love.

Stumbled across this book in college (well....my AG school was good for something I guess!) along with the works of the other Inlkings (Tolkien and C.S. Lewis) and recently gave a copy to my precocious niece.

[dewdrop_world]

Hell for some. Heaven for others.
Dunno if I fully agree with this. I would say, if it makes you feel powerful but doesn't lead to ever deepening compassion, and genuine engagement with the suffering of oneself and others, then it's just a sideshow that pulls you off the path.

I guess that's one absolute that I believe in.

James

[Daniel]

Dunno if I fully agree with this. I would say, if it makes you feel powerful but doesn't lead to ever deepening compassion, and genuine engagement with the suffering of oneself and others, then it's just a sideshow that pulls you off the path.

And I agree with you as well. That was, I thought, my point and why I included Williams work All Hallow's Eve. Too subtle perhaps?

[Daniel]

Awe- Have you heard of Milarepa of Tibet? He is considered one of Tibetan Buddhism's greatest saints. All that you said about your former pursuits brought him to mind. His is a harrowing tale, not unlike your own.

http://www.cosmicharmony.com/Av/Milarepa/Milarepa.htm

[Zerbie]

I greatly enjoyed the Milarepa story.

Daniel, thank you so much for posting that link! :love:

[Daniel]

You know. Once you start going....it's hard to stop. (sorry!) Came across this interesting piece on images of the Dalai Lama in the NYTime this morning where he is quoted as saying:

"We live in a very deep, very complex interconnectedness," the Dalai Lama has said. In his talks, he speaks of the suffering caused by clinging to self, and the antidote, which is compassion. He has warned that "these mental transformations take time and are not easy."

Asked to consider the Dalai Lama, some artists see his feet; some his face. Some see nonviolence and environmental activism, or moral discipline. Others see themselves, and their own agendas and issues.

Words worth remembering when change, ego and difficulty do a number on us.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/arts/design/11lars.html