Faith vs. Belief?

[shifu]

Hi to all. I’m new in this group. I’ve taken “shifu” as my screen name here, which means teacher in the Chinese mandarin language (if I’m not mistaken). I’m a great lover or searcher of Wisdom (Sophia). In fact it has been a way of life since then. I’m a Malayan by race. My country, ethnicity, personal identity is a product of long and painful process in the making. So, also is my own quest of that process in the making. We are moving forward as De Chardin says. The way I understand it seems it means, we’ll undergo the process of becoming into being. I remember the first time I realized my great desire to learn how to play a guitar. At first, I was so hesitant, then I familiarized its stuff, learn the major chords until such time that I learn to play a song. I was so happy but not so satisfied, so I decide to learn more. I guess, I have understood the lingo man’s eternal quest of becoming.

Treading my foot on this restless waters of the big view makes me eager to know more. For this I will forever grateful. To the Administrator, Sir Thomas, I admire generosity.

The first time I trod in here, I was surprise by the great minds that have been into discussion in here. On this behalf I would like to contribute also my own also.

As a have noticed persons in all walks of faith is here. Its great! However, since new, I had some confusion. So, I would like to pose again the question what is faith? And what is the similarity or difference between faith and belief ?

Again thank you very much :rolleyes:

shifu-the believer

[shifu]

oppss I'am so sorry :o . Can't edit it anymore. Sir Tom, can you do something bout this? I've got Belief misspelled. It’s unintentional guys. Sorry again. What a shame..... :lol: I hope it won't happen again.

shifu_the believer

[Polaris]

Welcome Shifu,

I'm a relative newcomer myself. I've only been bugging the good people here a couple of months so far :)

I am a middle-aged mother of two. Canadian.

I'm prehaps not the best person in the world to define 'faith' and 'belief' since I'm really not fond of either of those words. To me they represent a trust in something that is unknown. I undertand that we constantly find ourselves in situations where we have to utilize faith and belief in order to move ahead since most often we can't predict what the future holds for us with any accuracy. But when it comes to matters of religion, I prefer to manage my own affairs and not leave them in the hands of something unknown and perhaps non-existent.

[rich]

To The Dears,
shifu,
Polaris,




Shifu, I think that Thomas is the only one here who can change the
title or make corrections to of a Thread Topic. Do not think that members can.

Polaris wrote, "But when it comes to matters of religion, I prefer to manage my own affairs and not leave them in the hands of something unknown and perhaps non-existent".

Yet, you trust your destiny, like crossing the street, driving a car, and other everyday occurences, to something unknown to you. You do not always know how each day will go.
Neither does a believer, either you may think.
Still a believer will believe that perhaps there is a guardian angel, or some unknown force in which she/he can put their faith in to lead them safely through the day. Sometimes, this unknown force, may have other ideas. Ok, you accept it as God's will, for you are not going to change ITS mind, anyway.

Believe is to acknowledge and trust in a person, and/or an unknown force to protect you personally from harm.

Faith is affirming what you believe.

Both words seem synonomous with each other.

These are hand made definitions, and are very vulnerable for attack via vincente. Sure could use some help from the 'good' guys in this forum, to counteract vicente's words.:mellow:

[Polaris]

These are hand made definitions, and are very vulnerable for attack via vincente. Sure could use some help from the 'good' guys in this forum, to counteract vicente's words.

:lol: Richie. :lol: You manage just fine, my dear. :)

Polaris wrote, "But when it comes to matters of religion, I prefer to manage my own affairs and not leave them in the hands of something unknown and perhaps non-existent".

Yet, you trust your destiny, like crossing the street, driving a car, and other everyday occurences, to something unknown to you. You do not always know how each day will go.

Very true. I do motor around in my car believing I wont have an accident today and that I'm a good enough driver that I wont cause an accident either. However, I don't have much faith in the abilities of the other drivers and I take care of myself on the road by driving prudently and defensively. Also, contrary to those bumper stickers I see around, I don't believe God is my co-pilot. My destiny on the road depends on many factors but I don't believe God is one of them.

Incidently, I really don't understand those "God .... Co-pilot" bumper stickers. If God exists as the Almighty shouldn't HE be the pilot in control and the regular human be the auxiliary co-pilot?? :huh: It's like putting God in a subservient role. :o

[rich]

I think what they mean is the more you, as a person is God-like in your actions, even when driving a car.
All of us should always try to be, God-like.


Were Gautama Sakamuni and Jesus Christ God-like? Is The Dahli Lama God-like?

AFAIK, All were, and other's too.

Their basic message is Love . The more we follow their examples of Love the more God-like we become.I think. :D

[vicente]

I do so enjoy watching ego defend words that are detrimental to the realization of spirituality.

faith n. akin to trust.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

If you notice, 5 of the 6 accepted definitions for faith are directly attached to belief.

As for misspelling belief/believe,...simply remember that beLIEf/beLIEve is always, in essence, a LIE.

Here's a task,...for one day (more if you'd like) eliminate the words faith and belief from your communication. However, if you use faith/belief, write down the context which it was used and continue the task. Look for alternative ways of communicating that are pro-spirit, verses ego-sustaining, ie., instead of "I believe", one could say, "I don't honesty know", or "I think that might be so, but you know how unreliable thinking is".

Remember, the way beyond ego is to cease feeding it.


vicente
:)

[Polaris]

I do so enjoy watching ego defend words that are detrimental to the realization of spirituality.

That's a good thing, Vicente, because nobody does it better than you as you continued to prove with the rest of your post. ;) :P



Richie said : I think what they mean is the more you, as a person is God-like in your actions, even when driving a car.
All of us should always try to be, God-like.

Were Gautama Sakamuni and Jesus Christ God-like? Is The Dahli Lama God-like?

I agree and then I disagree with this.

First of all, Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ and the Dalai Lama have all admitted to being 'only men'. They are born, live and die as men. And as as far as the Buddha and the Dalai Lama are concerned, neither claim to be even the son of God. The Dalai Lama considers himself to be nothing more than a simple monk.

What worries me about your idea about everyone should always try to be "God-like". Sometimes it's bad enough having people just doing what they think God would want them to do. If the basic message is love, there are a heck of a lot of people out there not listening but still acting in the name of God.

[vicente]

That's a good thing, Vicente, because nobody does it better than you as you continued to prove with the rest of your post.


Polaris,...I'm rather surprised that it was who you think you are that would confirm my statement.

Few experience the world which surrounds them, but instead, experience the world which surrounded them.

Vicente
:)

[Polaris]

Polaris,...I'm rather surprised that it was who you think you are that would confirm my statement.

Just as it was who you think you are that responded to my statement :)

[rich]

Polaris wrote: What worries me about your idea about everyone should always try to be "God-like". Sometimes it's bad enough having people just doing what they think God would want them to do. If the basic message is love, there are a heck of a lot of people out there not listening but still acting in the name of God.


What I mean by being" God-like" Polaris, is practicing the Dharma of Buddha .
I probably should not have used the term, God-like. I should have used the word, "Buddhalike", for that would mean, to practice being, A Perfect Human-being, for isn't that what Prince Gautama Sakamuni,
tried to teach us, through The Dharma?
We can always find imperfect people, but whenever we find that, it reverts back to ourself. Me too. ;)

[Thomas Knierim]

Hi to all. I’m new in this group. I’ve taken “shifu” as my screen name here, which means teacher in the Chinese mandarin language (if I’m not mistaken).

Hi Shifu, welcome to thebigview.com!

Since I live in Thailand we are practically neighbors. I've been in Malaysia seven or eight times. Mostly in Georgetown, Penang. The island is very interesting for an architecture fanatic like myself. I love the place.

Sir Tom, can you do something bout this? I've got Belief misspelled.

Okay, it's already done.

Cheers, Thomas

[a random hack]

Hmm, Hi shifu.

Today (it's always changing :) ), my opinion is that belief is a kind of faith in 'myself', and faith is a kind of belief in 'others'. So pretty much the same thing pointed in different directions.
I tend to find that neither complete trust, nor complete distrust, is the correct way to travel thru life. The trick is learning where and when to trust/ believe/ have faith, and when not. Which requires judgement. Based on experience. Any one got a better way?

[shifu]

To Polaris, Rich and a random hack..,

So it seems to me that Faith is the outcome of ones Belief. Given the fact, I am resolved that Faith is the end entity of a person who believes. Therefore, it is also an act of personality (hence personality actualized belief); the way I deal with myself, to others and to the unknown. Thus, it is also a will (power) to believe. Putting ones trust even to oneself, others and to the unknown requires Will to do it. Wherefore, a person who have faith must accept the element of uncertainties that it caters. From this point of view, faith became a cognitive affirmation of the transcendental nature of realities and ultimately the Ultimate Reality, which from henceforth, brings awareness of the sacred and eventually to the religious spiritual component of faith.

For Vincent...,

[ I do so enjoy watching ego defend words that are detrimental to the realization of spirituality…] Vincent, Sir, you are NOT spread by your statement.
[ simply remember that beLIEf/beLIEve is always, in essence, a LIE ] So, good Sir, you’re a big LIE.

[ Here's a task,...for one day…. I don't honesty know, I think that might be so, but you know how unreliable thinking is = BELIEF] So, even your own process and ability of thinking, you don’t believe and what you have been saying and bugging here are all LIES.


For Thomas…,
Sir Tom, thanks for welcoming and for the extra effort you’ve done to me. I’m happy and relatively at home here. Thanks for starting this group. It has a lot of help be it in intellect, emotion and spiritual advancement.

[vicente]

Shifu,...there is an old Buddhist saying that is applicable here, "don't throw pearls to swine",...which is not meant as a slight, but simply suggests that some "beLIEvers" are more closed Minded than others, and thus sharing with them, is as communing with a brick wall.

When you eventually realize (which I understand may not be in this lifetime) that there is nothing to discover, but merely to uncover,...when you realize that love is not found by seeking, but revealed through the letting go of the barriers you have built against it,...then perhaps, when you dissolve and disrobe enough beLIEfs, you will be ready to commune.

Until then,
Best Wishes in your struggle,
Vicente
:)

[shifu]

Vicente - the saint,

[Shifu,...there is an old Buddhist saying that is applicable here, "don't throw pearls to swine",...which is not meant as a slight, but simply suggests that some "beLIEvers" are more closed Minded than others, and thus sharing with them, is as communing with a brick wall.] I suppose there is nothing personal in here San Vicente, isn’t it? I suppose I am still worth communicating after all. <_<

[When you eventually realize (which I understand may not be in this lifetime) that there is nothing to discover, but merely to uncover,...] The way I understand this Sir is, it seems to me that a particular entity/ultimate/whatever-you-call-it, have been into existence yet you still don’t know what it is. And since you don’t what it is you refrain from believing because it might be a lie. Correct me if I’m wrong, isn’t it that to discover and to uncover reaches up to the same destination by the same process. The only difference guess is: to discover is more self-proclaiming with pride and the other is a humbling act of eliminating the cloud of doubts thus, reveal what you truly beLIEve in the end.

[ when you realize that love is not found by seeking, but revealed through the letting go of the barriers you have built against it,...then perhaps, when you dissolve and disrobe enough beLIEfs] LOVE? Sorry this comment Sir, but by quoting LOVE and basing from our previous discussion, just know I realize that you’re a heretic of your own words. Yes, I Agree that it is not found by seeking, rather it is brought into being by putting your trust and beLIEf in it no matter where it lead you. In fact LOVE is almost the same as foolishness. Oh, Good Sir, try to read Khalil Gibran’s The Prophet if you haven’t.

thank you very much for the wish in my struggle. :)

shifu

[vicente]

shifu,...it is impossible to realize Love while encapsilated by beliefs,...such would be like bringing conditions into the Unconditional and expecting the Unconditional to remain Unconditional,...LOL

saint n.
1. Christianity. A person officially recognized, especially by canonization, as being entitled to public veneration and capable of interceding for people on earth.
2. A person who has died and gone to heaven.
3. A member of any of various religious groups, especially a Latter-Day Saint.

I see no connection between saint and Vicente. My father was Vincent,...my greatgrandfather was Vincenzo.

No, not a saint, but if you wish to bestow a noun on me, how about:
bodhisattva n.
1. An enlightened being who, out of compassion, forgoes nirvana in order to point the way to others.

Vicente
:)

[sahyo]

:o

[sahyo]

No, not a saint, but if you wish to bestow a noun on me, how about:
bodhisattva n.
1. An enlightened being who, out of compassion, forgoes nirvana in order to point the way to others.

no

[shifu]

Polaris

Hi, Madame Polaris. It’s nice to communicate with people whom you know a little bit. Actually, for the information also of Vicente. I’m a free thinker, it is a kind of faith that is synthesized because of the great desire to know and to understand (maybe not in the absolute sense). I attended school and finished philosophy. I’m in my late 20’s. An NGO worker in Manila, Philippines. I am actually from the Southern part of the Philippines whose endless bloodshed between the two offspring of Abrahamic Religion, Islam and Christianity for more than 300 years never ends. I always viewed myself as Malayan by race because Muslims and Christians from this place have the same root. And for me that should be point of our common understanding. I would say that my belief now and the faith that I posses is not merely a struck of Light form above. It was, it is and it will be a tedious process becoming. Having in mind my people’s struggle, one time a realize that this is not the ways or the way what the One, the Holy Being, the Ultimate Reality, the Enlightenment, the God, the Yahweh, the Allah, the HE/SHE, the WAY, the Yin and Yang or what-ever-you-call-it, wants from us. Our faiths and religions aids us and leads us to the Path. What makes it defiantly absurd is when our Patriarchs and former leaders institutionalized or dogmatized it. Now, we are killing each other not in name of God rather of dogmatism.

What is the point of this, anyway? Only to affirm that my belief is not like a struck of a lightning from above, rather a summation which is still seeking summation and on and on.

Regards



Vicente…,

[ No, not a saint, but if you wish to bestow a noun on me, how about:
bodhisattva n. An enlightened being who, out of compassion, forgoes nirvana in order to point the way to others….] Sir, do you mean to say like Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva of Compassion? Isn’t that HE/SHE has been worship by Buddhist? Like an Icon of the Christians? Uhhh! So, I’m starting to unveil the cloud of the doubts in me.

Anyways, a curious question Sir, why does the Great School of thought that was propagated by the Enlightened One was divided; Mahayana and Hinayana. And why the Buddhist China and Tibet have been at war until its occupation? Where do you think lies the failure? I believe it not from the Sakyamuni Buddha.


shifu

[Polaris]

Shifu,

Interested and glad to learn more about you. I'm happy you showed up. :)

What is the point of this, anyway? Only to affirm that my belief is not like a struck of a lightning from above, rather a summation which is still seeking summation and on and on.

Seems like a logical way to progress. :)

[vicente]

shifu,..."where is the failure"?

There is a gnostic story of Thomas having returned from a walk with the Master. His friends said, "Thomas, Thomas, what did he tell you"? And Thomas replied, "if I told you just one thing he said, you would pick up rocks and throw them at me".

In my den here in New Mexico, a 3X3 1/2 meter room with sliding glass door overlooking my garden of sunflowers, sweetpeas, roses, honeysuckle, etc., I have a 1/2 meter long chime hanging from the ceiling, in shape of a fleshless fish. It helps to remind me of reality,...ie:

"Naropa hastened towards Bengal where Tilopa lived. The first meeting of Naropa with Tilopa occurred in the courtyard of a Buddhist monastery. The cynic Sage, naked, or nearly so, was seated on the ground eating fish. As the meal went on, he put down beside him the fish’s backbones. In order not to defile his cast purity, Naropa was on the point of passing by at some little distance from the eater, when a monk started to reproach Tilopa for parading his lack of compassion for the animals, that is, killing the fish, in the very premises of a Buddhist Monastery; and order him to leave at once.
Tilopa did not even condescend to answer. He muttered some words, snapped his fingers and the fish bones were again covered with flesh. The fishes moved as if living and then swam away through the air as if it were water. No vestige remained of the cruel meal on the ground".

Vicente
:)

[rich]

Vicente,

In another thread, you have written, that you were not enlightened.

What should one believe, you are or are not? :unsure:

[vicente]

Rich,...are you certain that I said "I am not enlightened"? How could that be? Even Rich is Light,...although so obscured by beLIEfs that that Light barely penetrates through the veils.

Vicente
:)

[Polaris]

Shifu, I just thought I'd add, that Vicente does not represent Buddhists. He represents only himself when he speaks.. as we all do.

[vicente]

Absolutely Polaris,...I'm not a Buddhist, although my own path is closely related to Vajrayana Buddhism. I would actually best be labeled, for those who like to label, as an Ontosopher.

ontosophy n. < NL. ontosophia (Caramuel Lobkowitz 1642), pref. onto - being; Gk pp of einai; parousia, to be (in pareina, to be present) from Latin esse; + sophy, Gk wisdom.
1. wisdom of being
2. arising from wisdom (sapientia) verses knowledge (scientia)
3. the sapience to be present in the presence of one's Presence, or Being.

[Polaris]

ontosophy

Interesting. I've never seen it spelled that way before. In my experience and according to my sources it has always been spelled 'ontology'. :huh:

[DavidS]

Hi shifu -

Interesting topic. I've enjoyed reading all the replies. My thoughts in response the 'belief' and faith' topic is that the I experience and think of the former as more 'intellectual' (or 'mental') and the latter as more 'visceral' (or 'emotional').

Here's a piece I just received via email which touches on the issue of faith in practical terms, quite nicely IMO - it's today's "Thought for the Day" from the source listed at the bottom (I am including it to honor the sources wishes, not to promote him in particular):


Subj: Emanations Thought for the Day

What if faith is a much more logical concept than it is generally given credit for?

We often think of faith as something that takes the place of reason, goes to bat where thinking fails us.

Faith doesn't have to be that sort of thing at all.

Faith can be based on our experience. We expect what we have seen.

People who have faith have experienced the divine.

Faith can be simply the remembering of the experience and trusting it to happen again.

Faith doesn't have to be blind.

It can be the creative energy derived from divine experiences.

In that case it's powerful to seek and experience the divine so that we have a store of experience upon which to draw.

Jung once said, when asked if he believed in God, that he didn't believe, he knew.

So, I return to the stillness, listen within to the divine beauty, build the trust, deepen the experience.

When we experience the divine directly, faith goes to the next level, becomes trust in the truth.
=========
Eman8tions
Copyright © 2003 by John MacEnulty
9/7/2003, St. Louis, MO

Subscription is, and always will be, free.
Email your request to
emanationstoday@aol.com

Web site address:
http://Emanations.net/

Please feel free to forward Emanations
to anyone you think will enjoy it or benefit from it.
If you are receiving Emanations as a forward
please feel free to subscribe for yourself.

[vicente]

Polaris,...ontology is a different word than ontosophy,...knowledge is to ontology, what gnowledge is to ontosophy.

I actually coined the word ontosophy in 1983, but years later found that Caramuel Lobkowitz first proposed it in 1642.

In the 1990's, an Italian psychologist altered the pure meaning of ontosophy to fit his psychotheaputic system.

Vicente
:)

[vicente]

DavidS,...I pretty much disagree with John MacEnulty's attempt to justified his clinging to the word faith,...of course all faith is not blind faith, but his overall discourse reminds me of many of todays Theologians, who, presented with the falsity of the Bible respond, "but that shouldn't undermine your faith". However, I did wish to mention that I saw Carl Jung say that quote.

When a youngser, perhaps 5 or 6, while playing with 3" Revolutionary War figures, there was an interview on television (B&W) which was merely background noise to me,...yet when the interviewer said to this older gentleman, "do you believe in God", and the man said "no!",.... my full attention was now on the TV. It seemed an eternity before the next words came out of his mouth,....for the interviewer on the TV too, judging by his stunned expression . Then the old man, whom I later learned was Carl Jung, said, "I don't believe in God because I know there is a God".

I would have never guessed that 40 years later I'd learn that Carl Jung made such a dishonest statement.

Vicente
:)

[rich]

Vicente,

There are many undefined words which i can not find in
the Thorndike Barnhart Dictionary which I use when posting, since my computer has a link to Toolbar , which can be accessed through View.

Using this convenient dictionary, one does not need extra references, to check spelling and look up definitions. When asking my computer to search for a word you used, gnowledge, I received this answer: No Dictionary information available for "gnowledge." Since many do not have access to the source of some of the words that you use, would appreciate that you provide the documentation we need
to check the authenicity of the word. Or kindly limit the words you use to dictionaries we have internet access to. :)

[shifu]

David S….,

Sir David, I was the one who e-mailed you once. Thank you for welcoming in this estrange yet wonderful forum. Nice thought to ponder (Emanations Thought for the Day). Indeed, IMO, faith is something existential. Just a simple thought about your comment Sir David [ My thoughts in response the 'belief' and faith' topic is that the I experience and think of the former as more 'intellectual' (or 'mental') and the latter as more 'visceral' (or 'emotional')]. It has been a fact that there’s some sort of ambiguity in faith’s definition. And it is our task to resolve it.

As Tillich puts it; Faith is a centered act of being ultimately concern. I supposed ambiguity lies in the line …centered act of being ultimately concerned. Concern for what and of what? with ultimate reality.
We, as being-in-time, have many concerns; what to eat, what to wear, how to get food for the day or so, am I maturing in my job, on and on. In this instances what we believe are being questioned. (I agree with what you say that belief is more on the intellect.) Then we reflect or introspect. In this process I believe comes the idea of faith and thus, determine the reasonableness of faith.

Sometimes I had a thought that to have belief, thus, pondering on it to have strong faith is a luxury. Just a simple thought Sir David, because I am still not resolved in this idea. Good for us because we have the luxury here in our forum, in school etc., to validate our belief. But what about those laborers, farmers factory workers etc. (please try to view it at least in the third world perspective), who do not have the luxury that we have, are their faith, should we say are still reasonable? Just a thought: How can I think of god and the likes (object of faith and its ultimate concern) if my stomach is empty? Happy to hear your view on this.



Vicente…,
[ I would have never guessed that 40 years later I'd learn that Carl Jung made such a dishonest statement.] Before as a child I believe that whenever I go the moon is always following me. And ask my grandma why is it so. To give light to you during the night because you are always afraid of the dark, she answered. That kind of belief is still with me, but not childlike one anymore. It matures. Conversion does not only happen when struck by lightning. What we believe before as true may not be true today. There is no harm in correcting ones mistake. :)

shifu

[rich]

Originally posted by rich@Sep 8 2003, 10:22 AM
Vicente,

There are many undefined words,used exclusively by you. i can not find in the Thorndike Barnhart Dictionary which I use when posting, since my computer has a link to Toolbar , which can be accessed through View.

Using this convenient dictionary, one does not need extra references, to check spelling and look up definitions. When asking my computer to search for a word you used, gnowledge, I received this answer: No Dictionary information available for "gnowledge." Since many do not have access to the source of some of the words that you use, would appreciate that you provide the documentation we need
to check the authenicity of the word. Or kindly limit the words you use to dictionaries we have internet access to. :)
Revision of original post, see above.

[vicente]

Rich,...you certainly crack me up. While we're at it, lets limit our discussion Westernize thought, I mean, after all, the English language is a Western Language. Heck, while we're at it, let's limit our diet to McDonald's and Coke,...names we can trust.

The other day I was quoting some religious census',...a poster came on and asked for the website in which I got the info,...I had to respond that "everything" I post is not found on the internet, somethings actually have to be found in a Library,...remember those? Big buildings with massive archives.

Vicente
:)

[Polaris]

Vicente, maybe it's just a matter of citing your sources more often so that we can determine if what you quote is your own work or somebody else's? At least we could check it out ourselves should the remote chance arrive that we stumbling into a library accidently. :)

[DavidS]

Originally posted by vicente@Sep 7 2003, 11:46 AM
I would have never guessed that 40 years later I'd learn that Carl Jung made such a dishonest statement.
'Dishonest' is your personal/subjective attribution, vicente - no surprise to anyone, though, I'm sure - that's what you 'characteristically' do (along with attributing 'inauthenticity' of experience) in relation to any and everyone who arrives at a personal synthesis of the truth that differs from yours.

You provide an excellent example, I must say. Quite necessary and desirable for folks around to become more discerning. Keep up the 'good' work!

:) David

[DavidS]

shifu,Sep 9 2003, 03:57 AM
Sir David, I was the one who e-mailed you once. Thank you for welcoming in this estrange yet wonderful forum.

Hello again, shifu - Your thoughtful, considerate and caring (in relation to others) presence is indeed a most welcome pleasure.

Sometimes I had a thought that to have belief, thus, pondering on it to have strong faith is a luxury. Just a simple thought Sir David, because I am still not resolved in this idea. Good for us because we have the luxury here in our forum, in school etc., to validate our belief. But what about those laborers, farmers factory workers etc. (please try to view it at least in the third world perspective), who do not have the luxury that we have, are their faith, should we say are still reasonable? Just a thought: How can I think of god and the likes (object of faith and its ultimate concern) if my stomach is empty? Happy to hear your view on this.

There is a 'theory' (often associated with folks like Maslow) that 'lower' 'needs' have to be 'met' first before people have enough free-time-n-energy to address 'higher' 'callings'.

Though this may seem to be a 'generalizable' case based on statistics - because most people who are involved in 'subsistence'-level; concerns exhibit little interest in (and therefore 'capacity' for) 'attending' to issues pertaining to 'topics' like "God", "Ultimate Reality", "Ultimate Value", etc., my personal observation and experience of individuals has led me to the conclusion that it is often only when people 'inescapably' experience 'threat' and/or 'hardship' on the (physical) 'subsistence' level that they begin to genuinely (in a more than a 'hypothetical', armchair-philosophy bandying about, la-di-da sense) attend to such matters. This is not 'generalizable' either, however. Many 'freak out' or 'cave in' in the process, so, as in the case of people who get a 'terminal diagnosis') (I recommend Kuhbler Ross's work if you want to explore 'case material') there is a whole 'spectrum' of 'outcomes' in this regard.

The notion that things like an 'empty stomach', in and of themselves, preclude people's attention form being focused on the kinds of matters you speak about is, I think, 'belied' by the fact that 'fasting' is often useful/used to better get 'in touch with' what's 'up' for them in such regards.

Also, as Castaneda's Don Juan reputedly also advocated, 'Death' is a great 'advisor'.

:) David

[fu*]

D.S.>>>my personal observation and experience of individuals<<<

You maybe should have stopped at "observation". You do not, and can not, have any "experience" of another "individual".


>>>Many 'freak out' or 'cave in' in the process, so, as in the case of people who get a 'terminal diagnosis') (I recommend Kuhbler Ross's work if you want to explore 'case material') there is a whole 'spectrum' of 'outcomes' in this regard.<<<


Suggesting reading to gain experience, or understanding is like "experiencing" a place by reading about it. You may convince yourself that you know about "it", but breathing, feeling, being, may be("may be", is just being nice, because being is.... quite different). Different.


How sure are you David s. that you know what is an empty stomach. "Fasting" may be quite different than an empty stomach. One is an experiment. The other is real.

fu

[vicente]

DavidS,...to some, truth may be as a "personal synthesis", however, IMO, and also the point of view of Light, as I've mentioned previously, which you conveniently overlooked [as you do], truth is not object-ive, nor subject-ive. You appear to be very much "in a box".

I've been most open, forthcoming and specific. Because you cannot see beyond your logic, doesn't mean there is nothing beyond your logic.

Zero, Consciousness, Love, Light, Vajra, etc., upsets logic,...that's just the way it is,...as soon as you can accept that, the sooner what I'm pointing to will be seen, not as my personal synthesis, but as reality's own truth. I have no interest in a "vicente's truth". Logic is based upon the belief that object-ivity is real. But can you show me one 'object' that is true? And, if there are no objects, there is no subject.

The sooner you cease flinging accusations that are totally contrary to what I'm sharing, than the sooner we can celebrate the flow for what is, rather than defending the predispositions put upon it.

Carl Jung, spoke from belief, not knowingness,...therefore he was dishonest,...even though, in all the belief of his heart, he thought he was right. He gave no evidence of this truth of his. A blooming flower is no evidence of a god, but the understanding of Light is indeed evidence that no god, as defined in todays dictionaries, exists.

It's ashame that those who have no belief [nor disbelief] upsets your narrow view of life, and even more ashame that you will probably read what I just wrote as some slight against you. In truth, I would not rally against you,...I'm simply discussing your beliefs [in, of all places, a 'belief thread']. And no matter what your opinion,...the dictionary consenus of what a belief is, says beliefs are always false.

If something believed is proven truth, that does not mean the belief is true, but only that belief was transformed, and as such, is no longer a belief.

In espanol a fish is a pez. But a fish that is caught is no longer a pez,...it's pescado. When a belief is caught, it is no longer a belief.

Vicente
:)

[Thomas Knierim]

fu: How sure are you David s. that you know what is an empty stomach. "Fasting" may be quite different than an empty stomach. One is an experiment. The other is real.

I can tell from personal experience that there is no physical difference between fasting and not being able to eat. Sudden withdrawal of food for a few days may create discomfort and stomach aches (as does overnutrition), but there is no danger. Continued undernutrition is of course detrimental, but it takes fairly long before damage is done and even longer before symptoms show. The differences between fasting and not being able to eat are primarily psychological. I suppose that anxiety of not being able to acquire food plays a role, but the stress resulting from the circumstances that effect food withdrawal (such as illness, war, famine, personal loss, etc.) outweigh this by far.

Most "first world" inhabitants shudder to think of missing a meal, not to mention a whole day's supply of food. Actually that's no big deal. Every healthy person can go without food for several days.

David: Though this may seem to be a 'generalizable' case based on statistics - because most people who are involved in 'subsistence'-level; concerns exhibit little interest in (and therefore 'capacity' for) 'attending' to issues pertaining to 'topics' like "God", "Ultimate Reality", "Ultimate Value", etc.,

While there is a correlation between economical factors and the time available for intellectual/spiritual pursuits, it is mistaken to think that Maslow's stairs unfold rigidly sequentially. I am living in a part of the world where many if not most people are involved in subsistence activities (though not here in Bangkok). These people, poor farmers and construction workers, for example, are as interested in religion and spiritual matters as anyone else. The numerous country temples -which admittedly also have secular functions- doubtlessly evidence this. The difference is that the poor usually do not spent much time on developing their intellect and spiritual understanding. Education is the single most important differentiator. Concordantly, the spiritual (self-actualization) activities are limited to superstitions, ancestor worship, merit making, and such things. For instance, it is not uncommon in rural Thailand for villagers to worship holy trees and extract lottery numbers from its bark. They would go to the temple and make offerings primarily to "beg the Buddha" for fortune and prosperity. Their understanding of Buddhism is often limited, but many have knowledge of the traditional Buddhist narratives and prayers. There are very few among the poor -usually only those who have spend a long time in a monastery- who have an adequate understanding of Buddhism.

Vicente: I would have never guessed that 40 years later I'd learn that Carl Jung made such a dishonest statement.

Seeing Jung's overall outlook I don't perceive this statement as dishonest. He probably meant it. Which brings me to another point: C.G. Jung died in 1961, so for you having watched this interview with him on telly, I guesstimate this may have occurred in the late fifties and you must have been old enough to remember it?! Didn't know you go back that long... :lol:

Cheers, Thomas

[shifu]

David S.
[ There is a 'theory' (often associated with folks like Maslow) that 'lower' 'needs' have to be 'met' first before people have enough free-time-n-energy to address 'higher' 'callings'….]

fu
[ D.S.>>>my personal observation and experience of individuals<<<

You maybe should have stopped at "observation". You do not, and can not, have any "experience" of another "individual".
>>>Many 'freak out' or 'cave in' in the process, so, as in the case of people who get a 'terminal diagnosis') (I recommend Kuhbler Ross's work if you want to explore 'case material') there is a whole 'spectrum' of 'outcomes' in this regard.<<<
Suggesting reading to gain experience, or understanding is like "experiencing" a place by reading about it. You may convince yourself that you know about "it", but breathing, feeling, being, may be("may be", is just being nice, because being is.... quite different). Different.
How sure are you David s. that you know what is an empty stomach. "Fasting" may be quite different than an empty stomach. One is an experiment. The other is real.]

Thomas K.
[ I can tell from personal experience that there is no physical difference between fasting and not being able to eat. Sudden withdrawal of food for a few days may create discomfort and stomach aches (as does overnutrition), but there is no danger…]

Sirs David S., Thomas K. and Madame fu,

Comments first:

1.) Through catharsis or cathartic effect, one may and can have a grasp of a particular given situation or problem through reading and slight personal experience, thus, one may and can have understanding with and of the other, however this is absolutely not enough.
Catharsis: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=catharsis
http://members.aol.com/vernvier/private/cathars.html
I first encounter this word in one seminar Phycho-spiritual Integration, then secondly, in one of my class in Ancient Greek Philosophy coined by Aristotle.

2.) Fasting is an element or substance of faith. Its degree of spiritual gain may vary individually. Having food and fasts is very different from empty stomach because no food. The former portrays personal choice of not eating for personal spiritual gain while the later don’t have any choice.

3.) For Sir Tom, indeed there is no physical difference between fasting and not having to eat food at all. However, the outcome in the non-physical may be remote.


Point to Clarify:Mine is a very religious country and faith driven nation. Two Abrahamic religion spreads the goodness (and also the not so goodness) influence upon us. Like what Sir Tom had mentioned about the socio-economic situation in rural Thailand, the Philippines, I supposed had the same setting. What I have in mind when asking that provocative question, of “empty stomach,” is the idea that if they don’t have time think, reflect, introspect one may have a doubts about the authenticity of their kind of faith, thus, faith and religious rituals became what the Marxist termed as: the opium of the masses.

In my previous post [ Faith is a centered act of being ultimately concern. I supposed ambiguity lies in the line …centered act of being ultimately concerned. Concern for what and of what? with ultimate reality.] I have mentioned that faith in the greater extent is ambiguous by definition, thus, it needs to be clarified. What I am trying extract in my previous post is the question when can we say that faith is reasonable?

nice chatting with
shifu

[Thomas Knierim]

Shifu: For Sir Tom, indeed there is no physical difference between fasting and not having to eat food at all. However, the outcome in the non-physical may be remote.

That is certainly true. As I previously pointed out the differences are psychological; hence that which determines the "outcome" is predetermined by the attitude towards the experience of hunger. When one fasts voluntarily, the attitude is conditioned by a sense of elated renunciation. In case of involuntary hunger, the attitude is most often conditioned by desire and a sense of lack coupled with a feeling of uncertainty. This is pronounced suffering. However, the suffering results largely from psychological conditioning rather than from physical symptoms, unless starvation is in advanced stages. This means that it is ultimately under our control. We cannot change our psychological conditioning all of a sudden with a clap of our hands, but it is possible to set in motion process that leads to increased awareness and exposes the workings of negative autosuggestion, thereby eliminating them. This is exactly why fasting in religious practice is used as a tool for purification. The term 'purification' relates not only to the riddance of poisons and excess nutrients in the body, but also to the riddance of negative mental processes that lead to suffering.

Shifu: What I have in mind when asking that provocative question, of “empty stomach,” is the idea that if they don’t have time think, reflect, introspect one may have a doubts about the authenticity of their kind of faith, thus, faith and religious rituals became what the Marxist termed as: the opium of the masses.

Quite right. Religion becomes opium of the masses when followed blindly without intellectual and spiritual involvement. Unfortunately there are too many clerics willing to tend to such opiate needs, no matter what particular religion. Here in Thailand, for example, it is not uncommon to see monks peddling charms and amulets, consecrating cars and houses, or engaging in various forms of divination. Lay people are most interested in such things and give offerings in return. Although in contradiction with the spirit of Buddhism, these practices are widespread and widely accepted. To be fair I should say say that the monks engaging in such "holy business" activities constitute a minority and that most monks are quite eager to bring the Buddhist teaching closer to the uneducated populace. Which brings me to the key issue: education. It is the single most severe social problem of all developing nations. 99 percent of all other social problems, such as overpopulation, corruption, pollution, ethnic conflicts are direct or indirect consequences of a lack of intellectual and spiritual education, which means they are results of ignorance. It is somewhat disheartening to see how few politicians have realized this.

Cheers, Thomas

[sahyo]

most educated people
thinkbelive can 'know', but:

fu: You may convince yourself that you know about "it",
but breathing, feeling, being, may be
("may be", is just being nice, because being is.... quite different).
Different.

[sahyo]

shifu: when can we say that faith is reasonable?

from science thread:

thomas: This means that scientific theories -and I mean all of them- are simply hypotheses that haven't been invalidated yet. They are beliefs pinned on axiomatic assumptions. In fact, there is no epistemic difference between knowledge and belief, only a gradual difference in perceived certainty.

Now consider this: If God is an axiom, God is unquestionable.

[DavidS]

Originally posted by fu*@Sep 9 2003, 04:57 PM
D.S.>>>my personal observation and experience of individuals<<<

You maybe should have stopped at "observation". You do not, and can not, have any "experience" of another "individual".
You are partially right on this score, IMO, fu*. I don't think it would have been 'better' for me to have stopped at "observation." But I do think it would have been 'better' if I had said "experienced in relation to individuals." Thank you for 'prodding me' to more 'precisely' express what I had in mind.

I think all your other 'points' are very well-taken. There is, IMO, TRUTH pertaining to LIFE in what I said, but what you say certainly re·fines IT. Your statement of 'nuances' are appreciated.

- David

[DavidS]

Hi Everyone: This is quite fairly detailed and therefore quite long response to vicente's post meward. I thought the situation called for this much 'detail'. Just skim or totally skip it if that doesn't suit your energy level or mood.
===========

I very much appreciate your willingness to engage in a (from my 'point' of 'view', MORE) 'reasonable' manner, vicente.

to some, truth may be as a "personal synthesis", however, IMO, and also the point of view of Light, as I've mentioned previously, which you conveniently overlooked [as you do], truth is not object-ive, nor subject-ive. You appear to be very much "in a box".

I did not 'overlook' what you have stated, vicente. I was 'focusing' on certain aspects of your relational/communicational pattern which were problematic to the point of making mutually meaningful discussion impossible (in my 'view', that is). I had to 'trouble-shoot' that 'target' first.

Yes, you 'see' your 'view' as NOT being a 'personal synthesis', but as resulting from some kind of supra-personal 'absolute' comprehension of truth pertaining to life. (I refer to my post pertaining to the notion of 'Absolutes' eleswhere.) In my view, all beings (and this includes your 'being' pattern) live and act from 'within' the 'box' of their personal perception and experience. IMO, there is NO way for any 'historical' (meaning 'existential') 'being' NOT to.

As I stated in one of my earlier posts, quoting from something I had written earlier, in my view, "The phrase ‘Life processes’ includes beings as well as happenings. These are phenomenologically not as different as you may be inclined to think: beings are actually happenings with aparticular history-conditioned character, just as matter is energy with a particular space-time locus."

This applies to every 'being' or 'existential locus of consciousness', IMO, Jesus, Gautama, yourself and myself included. That anyone may have 'freed' himself or herself in relation to this or that set of prior 'conditionings', still doesn't mean that he or she was (or is) totally (or 'absolutely'?) de·conditioned; this, notwithstanding the kind of 'belief' (as is generally accorded new-ground-breaking 'heroes') which presumes and asserts that this is the case (putting them on some kind of 'absolute' pedestal).

I accept that you think-n-believe that "truth is not object-ive, nor subject-ive." This is the basis of your 'operational' stance (at least at present). I accept and respect that EVEN though I 'disagree' with and so do not operate on the basis of such pro·position. I hope that you can accept that I think-n-believe that all 'truth' is subjective. You might say that is one of my 'absolutes' in the sense of being the cornerstone of my personally arrived at 'operational stance'.

From your point of view, I 'appear' 'deluded'. I accept that. From my point of view, you 'appear' deluded. I hope you can accept that. IMO< there's room on this TBV smorgasbord table for both of our 'offerings' to be taste-n-considered. What I won't 'accept' is any implication on your part that my (subjective) take on the truth is any less 'valid' or 'valuable' than your (subjective) take on it - and that includes any assertion on your part that you personally have the truth pertaining to matters under discussion 'all sowed up', as well as any use of 'tactics' which aim to exclude other points of view by implying or asserting that they are 'wrong' in some 'absolute' sense.

IOW, you and I are 'equals' when it comes to having and sharing our personal 'theories' pertaining to the truth about life/reality/whatever.

I've been most open, forthcoming and specific.

Yes, you have. What you haven't been is accepting and respectful in relation to what has been 'openly' declared in a 'forthcoming' and 'specific' by others (in this case, me) who have a different take on and operational stance in relation to the thang we are all part of - you, me, everyone else here, Jung, and others every-elsewhere included.

Because you cannot see beyond your logic, doesn't mean there is nothing beyond your logic.

I hope you can 'see' or eventually come to 'see' that this applies equally to [U}you[/U], vicente.

Zero, Consciousness, Love, Light, Vajra, etc., upsets logic,...that's just the way it is,...as soon as you can accept that, the sooner what I'm pointing to will be seen, not as my personal synthesis, but as reality's own truth.

I accept that this is what you think-n-believe based on your personal perception-n-experience, vicente. But I suggest you don't hold your breathe waiting for me to think-n-believe the way you do such that "the sooner what I'm pointing to will be seen, not as my personal synthesis, but as reality's own truth." I hope I have made it 'clear' to you that it is 'clear' to me (in my 'view', that is) that your (and everyone else's) thought-n-belief platform is is personal synthesis -- 'reality' consists of and contains everyone's personal truth-synthesis -- IMO, if there is any such thing as "reality's 'own' truth", that's IT.

I have no interest in a "vicente's truth".

That's 'pure' bull dung <_< in my view.

Logic is based upon the belief that object-ivity is real.

Not my 'logic' - I hope that's now 'clear' to you.

But can you show me one 'object' that is true? And, if there are no objects, there is no subject.

I cannot relate to such a statement, since in my view, there are only 'subjects' and all perception-n-experience as well as all thought-n-belief is 'subject'ive.

The sooner you cease flinging accusations that are totally contrary to what I'm sharing, than the sooner we can celebrate the flow for what is, rather than defending the predispositions put upon it.

I have only been 'flinging' accusations in relation to your manners and methods, vicente. As far as my (or anyone else) sharing views and opinions that are 'contrary' to yours, my suggestion is that you get used to it and stop trying to claim/usurp all 'validity' and 'value' in relation to truth pertaining to life, and, instead, respectfully relate to differing views and opinions expressed by others. When and as that 'happens', we'll (all) be able to 'celebrate' to·gether, in a 'community' of 'equals'.

Carl Jung, spoke from belief, not knowingness,...therefore he was dishonest,...even though, in all the belief of his heart, he thought he was right.

Now your high-falluting, gnow-it-all 'delusion' is showing again, vicente (that is, it is 'shown' or 'shines forth' in my view').

He gave no evidence of this truth of his.

Megalograndiose, sir, that just means you have no 'reason' to think he might 'gnow' what he was talking about. Your 'jumping to the conclusion' that he was 'dishonest' is absolutely ;) PREPOSTEROUS, in my view.

A blooming flower is no evidence of a god,

It is not 'evidence' for what you think of as the only possible "God"-concept-postulate. Methinks you are in a very small "box" in this regard. Maybe try 'open endedly' thinking of just what it is a "blooing flower' is 'evidence' of; then, conceivably' you will at least understand if not 'gnow' just what it is I and certain others think-n-believe is a 'valid' and 'valuable' "God"-concept-postulate.

but the understanding of Light is indeed evidence that no god, as defined in todays dictionaries, exists.

I am trying to, but I must confess, I cannot follow your 'logic' -- the 'jump' you make from a banana appearing yellow NOT because it is actually yellow but because it absorbs all other colors and only reflects yellow to thinking of and presenting that as 'evidence' that "no god" exists appears completely 'foolish' in my view.

In my view, every 'being' (each and every banana included <_< ) 'radiates' an integral ISness and all such ISnesses are 'facets' of what I think of and present to all willing to consider such possibility as the one and only "God" that 'exists'. I have tried to get you to abandon your adhering-to-dictionary-definitions-when-it-suits-your-axe-grinding-venture trip. In my view, you lack 'integrity' in this regard, as you have shown yourself to be opportunitistically willing to 'modify' your use of dictionary definitions by adding 'qualifying clauses', 'extra notations', etc. when that 'serves' to help you make [U]your 'point', but 'adamanently' insist' that others hew to dictionary definitions that 'serve' to help you pillary your favorite 'whipping' posts. I look forward to discussing "God" with you in a mutually meaningful way when and if see that value of and so choose to become 'integrous' in this regard, as I 'hope' <_< you someday will.

It's ashame that those who have no belief [nor disbelief] upsets your narrow view of life, and even more ashame that you will probably read what I just wrote as some slight against you. In truth, I would not rally against you,...I'm simply discussing your beliefs [in, of all places, a 'belief thread']. And no matter what your opinion,...the dictionary consenus of what a belief is, says beliefs are always false.

If something believed is proven truth, that does not mean the belief is true, but only that belief was transformed, and as such, is no longer a belief.

In espanol a fish is a pez. But a fish that is caught is no longer a pez,...it's pescado. When a belief is caught, it is no longer a belief.

Now, it looks to me like you're resorting to 'sophistry' again - just 'spinning' words about in ways that 'sound' good on 'simple' hearing. As mentioned I look forward to engaging further down the road.

Sincerely - David

[DavidS]

Thomas, Shifu et al -

Too much to respond to - time for me to go beddy-bye. I appreciate your responses which 'qualify' what I was 'aiming' to get at - I just want to emphasize the point about things not being 'generalizable' in this regard - I have personally known several people who grew up in what may be considered very 'impoverished' and 'harsh' circumstances who responded in extremely (IMO) 'high calling' ways. They had (were 'gifted' with? or personally 'developed'? or a combination of both) sufficient response·ability to do so.

The 'light' of your words clearly amplifies the topic.

David

[a random hack]

V: Logic is based upon the belief that object-ivity is real.

D: Not my 'logic' - I hope that's now 'clear' to you.

V: But can you show me one 'object' that is true? And, if there are no objects, there is no subject.

D: I cannot relate to such a statement, since in my view, there are only 'subjects' and all perception-n-experience as well as all thought-n-belief is 'subject'ive.


Subject-ive to what? Other 'subjects'? Why? Does this mean 'I' am also subjective? How can you appear so certain of anything with at least two levels of uncertainty? Or is it all a bluff? :)

[Thomas Knierim]

David,

The key question is whether "impoverishment" is only material or whether impoverishment affects the entire cultural/social/mental environment. During latter half of the past century many developing and newly industrialized countries caught up with the developed world in terms of material and economical status. Thailand has enjoyed double-digit growth during the 80's and 90's and now possesses a strong, state-of-the-art industry and a competitive service sector. Unfortunately, the socio-cultural development is not on par with technological and economical development, which leads to a very precarious situation. Thailand is presently incapable of handling advanced technology and economical empowerment to the benefit of all of its citizens. Consequently, natural resources are destroyed, forests disappear, urban growth is in a catastrophic state, and much of the country's wealth is siphoned off by the political elite, while the poor remain poor, and the uneducated remain uneducated. As you undoubtedly know, the same situation is encountered in many other newly developed countries.

Sadly, the political leadership of Thailand is relatively blind to these problems. The present government is primarily interested in strengthening the economy. It spends too little effort on resolving pressing problems such as modernizing the education system, reforming the legal system, and preventing further environmental degradation. Not that previous governments have been more successful in resolving these problems. These are very difficult tasks. But, to me it seems that things are going the "wrong" way. For example, the Thai government is currently rolling out a large e-learning program that is aimed at bringing a computer on every student's desk. They think this is modernization. In my book, access to a computer does not change a thing. What needs to be changed instead is the way people think, the underlying values. The rote-learning system must be toppled. Students must be allowed to disagree with the teacher and with other authority persons. Kids need to learn how to think creatively and responsibly, not how to surf the Internet. But unfortunately ignorance permeates all levels. It reaches out into schools, administrative branches, the executive authority, and the government itself. It's a long way to go.

Cheers, Thomas

[shifu]

Hey, guys. Peace!

It seems to me that there is relative peace in here. :) I just dropped by to let you know that I’m still into discussion. Too busy to stick my butt for now. But I’m meditating, recollecting and introspecting. Broadenning the horizon for common and uncompromising understanding of the self and others.

Our team is preparing for the preliminary part of our Project. So, i just made a quick view. Sir David S. Pewwss! Too long to digest. :D It made realized that language, culture and affinities, sometimes or most often than not, are barriers. I supposed it was an emanation of energy aimed to clarify.

Sir Tom, some good points to chat with (your last post). For me beliefs, faith, day to day life experience i.e. politically, economically and historically are inter-connected and integral. I guess this is how Asian thinks often times.

asheera; Madame or Sir: I’ll deal with your question next time.

Jah lives! :rolleyes:

shifu

[DavidS]

Hi Hack:

Subject-ive to what? Other 'subjects'?

Subject·ive in relation to any and every thang that IS; this includes 'other subjects', of course.

Why?

Don't know or gnow. Given the way I've come to 'see' everything that's going on,* it strikes me that this is just the way it all 'happens' to 'be'. (Of course, this may 'indicate' no more than a mere 'preference' on my part for relating to life through "everything is subject·ive" spectacles; but, on the other hand, there may be more to my 'vision' than that.)

Does this mean 'I' am also subjective?
Yes, of course (qualified by "in my subject·ive 'view'," that is).

How can you appear so certain of anything with at least two levels of uncertainty?
As stated elsewhere, I gnow I don't gnow anything for certain. It's just an operational hypothesis which I 'imagine' is 'true' and then proceed as though it were.

Or is it all a bluff? :)
I do in fact operate on the premise that "everything is subject·ive" (as far as I 'gnow' :) ), despite the above-referenced 'uncertainty'. Maybe my 'confidence' in that regard, which may come across as a 'bluff', is the result of having operated for a while on the basis of such premise and found the results, both in terms of the quality of my 'inner' state and in terms of the quality of my relationships with others and with Life in general), very 'satisfying' (like an artist who looks at a piece s/he's creating and feels 'pleased' with 'how it's going').

By the way, it also makes 'complete' 'sense' to me - but as we all know, that something makes complete sense to someone 'guarantees' nothing!

Here's a thought: maybe 'imagine' a 'dream-based' world in which there's no 'materiality' to anything. Imagine we are all just 'spirits' floating around and interacting in and via a medium of 'form' (such forms being 'dreamed' and therefore not having any 'objective' 'reality' at all, only being a 'reflection' of certain 'subjective' states of being). Imagine any consistencies in terms of 'form' to be a function of inner subjective states simply being ''habitualized".

If and as you engage in such thought-experiment, be aware that just because somethang (experiences of one another included) is 'subjective' or 'emanates' from 'subject·ive' state does NOT make such thang un'real' (except possibly 'by definition'). In my view, our subject·ive presences and their 'unmanifest' as well as 'manifest' activities are 'real' happenings taking place in the context of LIFE's all-encompassing 'field'.

Mindful of Shifu's comment, let me say that I hope this clarifies the 'waters' of my expression, at least more than it muddies the stream. Whatever the case, it's what came to mind in reponse to your queries.

David :)

[sahyo]

(like an artist who looks at a piece s/he's creating and feels 'pleased' with 'how it's going').

which thinking'who'which not?, thinking"looks at a piece"?, thinking"creating"?,
thinking"feels pleased with 'how it's going'"?

:)

[DavidS]

Originally posted by asheera@Sep 12 2003, 05:55 PM
which thinking'who'which not?, thinking"looks at a piece"?, thinking"creating"?,
thinking"feels pleased with 'how it's going'"?
@#%$^(%$$@@? ('which' <_< translates into, "It's all Greek to me).

While I'm responding to let you know your words make no sense to me, let me say I 'think' I have a fairly good idea of what I AM -- might this be the 'which' you are refering to? :blink:

[DavidS]

overpopulation, corruption, pollution, ethnic conflicts are direct or indirect consequences of a lack of intellectual and spiritual education, which means they are results of ignorance.
.* * .* * .
The key question is whether "impoverishment" is only material or whether impoverishment affects the entire cultural/social/mental environment.
.* * .* * .
But unfortunately ignorance permeates all levels. It reaches out into schools, administrative branches, the executive authority, and the government itself. It's a long way to go.
Hi Thomas - I share your concerns and agree with your assessments (excerpts from what you wrote above).

In my view, population expansion-pressures are the key precipitants of the kind of crisis we presently face. Here is a passage (set of paragraphs, really) from something I previously wrote which presents a 'zoom out' overview of the phenomenon, as I 'see' it [caveat to readers – it amounts to about 3 pages worth of text]:

There were times, such as the period during which we were hunter-gatherers and simple herders, when relatively limited perspective and short-term design, governed by the instinctual imperative to "be fruitful and multiply," were indeed sufficient. In a world where dominance has not yet been established by any particular species, creative purpose is well-served by general efforts towards material productivity and biological reproduction. Kept from overexpanding by inability to prevail, populations remain in dynamic balance. When no particular group monopolized the stage, the stream of Life moved forward smoothly, without interruption.

But drastic consequences ensued once we attained and consolidated a position of unrivaled ascendancy (as one species or another was bound to eventually, given Life's inherent 'upward' aspiration). With others no longer able to functionally constrain our growth, we have since then repeatedly expanded past the point that our ecosystem could regeneratively support and sustain. Severe crises have continued to recur as the needs and desires of increasing numbers of us have cyclically exhausted the productive capacity of our environment, precipitating ecological disasters and massive populational deletions. Again and again, as now once more, we have found ourselves caught in a tightening net, faced with life-or-death prospects in increasingly competitive relationship with one another, as available resources* become insufficient. [* Note added now: I am referring to both 'natural' and 'social' resources, the latter including the 'resource pool' of (reasonably) 'enlightened' parents, educators and administrators.]

Events and trends of this and recent centuries highlight the escalating process. As individuals and groups continue to multiply and aspire to ever greater power and attainment in the context of a finite setting, in addition to increasing levels of stress, more and more suffer unwelcome privation. As returns gradually diminish, more and more have to work harder and harder to make a decent living; and fewer and fewer of those who are functionally dependent are adequately provided for and protected (witness the plight of so many of our children!).

As exploitation becomes exhaustive, those at a competitive disadvantage sink into poverty and become increasingly malnourished and ill-effected by environmental pollution. Not just materially; analogous trends are evidenced in realms of Mind and Spirit. The texture of emotion and awareness becomes more and more nightmarish. Eventually, all hell breaks loose—anomie, anxiety and frustration spread and build into an epidemic of loneliness, paranoia and rage, and finally explode, with more and more people trying to escape hopelessness, in an avalanche of insane desperation.

Synchronously, relationships break down. As people feel deprived or threatened, immediate self-interest eclipses empathy based on mutual identification. Respect and goodwill fall by the wayside. Personal desires are opportunistically asserted as valid, even as their equivalents in others are adamantly rejected as unwarranted impositions.

Sociopathology proliferates. Love becomes a mere charade; more and more often, fanciful attraction just leads to a bed of thorns. Marriages more frequently fall apart; proportionally fewer true unions are formed. Homes become battlegrounds; family life degenerates into a horror-show, full of ill will and discontent. Parents become increasingly negligent and abusive; children more rebellious and insolent. Cultural transmission is disrupted as the young and the old become mutually unsympathetic, each begrudging the special considerations and opportunities the other, by virtue of organic status, should be afforded. Even institutional settings specifically designed to promote growth and well-being become wastelands, as more and more functionaries don't truly care for their charges and their charges become increasingly dysfunctional and vindictive in response.

It should come as no surprise. As individuals and groups press up against and are reciprocally pressured by others, not of their liking or choosing, the desire to have and the fear of being had catalytically combine to spark distrust and inflame antagonism. In such context, some behave like lone wolves; others like dogs gone mad. Most, however, join in unholy alliance, not united by love of Life but by shared greed and common aversions.

Not recognizing the desire for self-enhancement itself to be the underlying cause of the dissatisfaction and distress they experience and encounter, individuals and groups project blame outward, rationalizing that they and theirs are (or would be, if they didn't vigilantly ensure otherwise) insufficiently given to and excessively taken advantage of. Denying their own duplicity and viewing others as particularly villainous, as circumstances deteriorate, they justify uncharitability and deceit as legitimate means of getting ahead, and treachery and the wreaking of vengeance as fair ways of getting even.

Mutually beneficial arrangements for the sharing and exchange of labor and its fruits consequently break down. Alliance against alliance, ideology against ideology, ethnic group against ethnic group, class against class, and newcomers against the establishment, as well as in-groups against the outcast within them, rivalries become so cutthroat that enmity develops between people, wherever categorically different. Whether hypocritically hidden or openly done, incidences of criminal dereliction and abuse become more insidious, more violational, more widespread, and more frequent.

Recurrently, at the tail end of a period of relative abundance during which all sorts of developments tend to flourish and proliferate, a dominant but unlearned species such as ours experiences an evolutionary crisis characterized by extremes of the forementioned abominations. Not as simply as the collapse of a weakened structure or the bursting of an overly distended balloon, more like earthquake activity and volcanic explosions, the growth of the complex of our pressures past the limits of multifaceted ecosystemic containment occasions destructive disequilibrium in a series of episodes, with ones less catastrophic bracketing holocausts of major proportions.

And, unfortunately, as our capabilities naturally expand and increase, to the degree they continue to be one-sidedly deployed, they serve to magnify the scale and extent of the atrocities that are unleashed.
========
Given the current spectrum of human development, methinks the pendulum's going to keep on boom-n-bust-swinging for quite a few more cycles despite the best efforts of (reasonably) 'enlightened' folks. Oh yes, "Its a long way to Tipperary, a long way to go." (words from a WWII era song, for those too young to know). :)

[DavidS]

Originally posted by DavidS@Sep 12 2003, 03:54 PM
I gnow I don't gnow anything for certain.
Hi Hack -

Just to clarify how I operate in the context of not being certain in practical terms:

Let me pick an example: Let's say I'm listening to someone talk. (I could have also used something like, let's say I'm witnessing what I am thinking-feeling-n-doing-or-not·doing, or any number of other examples of 'focus' of 'consciousness'.) As I listen to the words and intonations, I find my playful-puppy mind automatically 'form'ing an 'idea' about what the person is saying and 'enter'taining hypotheses pertaining to both the content of the person's verbalizations and the personal-process-of-the-person-making-the-verbalization's context.

I am aware that I don't gnow for certain whether the 'idea' I have corresponds to the actual 'truth' of the situation, and if so to what degree it does or doesn't. I am also aware that it is impossible for me to consciously gnow all aspects of the referenced truth simultaneously - the 'field' of my 'consciousness' can only process what's going on in certain dimensions and at best deal with a certain number of variables in each.

So I proceed on the 'bet' that my 'idea' is relevant and operate 'as if' it is (gnowing full well that it may or may not be). On that (theoretical, really) basis I think, feel, do, and/or say something 'in response' (based I suppose on what I I am interested in exploring and/or or 'getting' at or to). Then I look and feel to 'see' and 'sense' what happens and is communicated back, and as this 'new' info comes in, integrate that into the idea-'form'ulation process refrenced above.

I think (ocean) surfing presents a fairly good analogy for the consciously-'active' part of this process). At any given point, you're hanging ten on your surfboard, riding one wave or another heading in this or that direction. All that you can be 'certain' of is that, at the moment, you are 'subjectively' where you are and headed in the direction you are headed. IOW, you can only be 'certain' that what you 'gnow' is what you 'gnow' at any given point. But this is a 'fluid' process, which 'instantaneously' changes all the time, as may be 'visualized' by the surfer angling left, right, or further up, or further down the 'wave', occasionally tumbling into the water (when, if and as one's operational hypotheses prove unstainable), then climbing back up 'on surf board' and catching another wave.

The 'uncertainty' of it all (the 'change-ability' of the 'wave') can be exhilerating fun and an outlet for very vital/creative energies if and to the degree that the art of 'surfing' of varieties of waves is mastered. 'Certainty', in this case, being analogous to staying (or 'aiming' to stay) in the same relative position and going in the same relative direction on a 'steady' wave, would be a 'poor' use of the amazing vistas and opportunities mind-spirit 'life' provides. Not to mention it's being 'foolhardy' -- because all of life's processes, including what moment-to-moment in the Eternal Now flows in and out of consciousness as knowledge, or gnowledge, are in fact 'fluid'. At least my process in such regards sure looks and feels like it is.

Please lovers and advocates of 'stillness' and 'peace', please don't feel 'sorry' for me on any account. Even if you do, at least know/register that I think and feel that I am both 'in touch with' the Source and 'in harmony with' the Tao as I surf about in such fashion and that I am extremely happy and joyful (inwardly at least) when and as I do so - this, to the point where I think-n-feel I couldn't be happy·er.

This hasn't always been the case (it took quite a bit of 'surf'-navigation for me to get to this point), but I now feel just as if not more 'alive'[/U] and enjoy and appreciate 'living' just as much if not more when I'm 'surfing', as when I'm consciously 'immersed' in and 'identity-merged' with the field of all being (this AUM, for want of a better word-reference, has become a background-hum-'audible' part of my consciousness 'trip' even when I'm 'personally' focused and active.)

- David

[sahyo]

I am aware that I don't gnow for certain whether the 'idea' I have corresponds to the actual 'truth' of the situation, and if so to what degree it does or doesn't

isn't which david posts when saying this-that(whichnot)....
eg: I think and feel that I am both 'in touch with' the Source
and 'in harmony with' the Tao

[a random hack]

david,
Whatever the case, it's what came to mind in reponse to your queries.

sfunny, that's how the queries 'happened' :)

Subject·ive in relation to any and every thang that ISlet me say I 'think' I have a fairly good idea of what I AM

What are you if NOT related subjectively to 'any and every thang that IS'?

I think (ocean) surfing presents a fairly good analogy for the consciously-'active' part of this process). At any given point, you're hanging ten on your surfboard, riding one wave or another heading in this or that direction. All that you can be 'certain' of is that, at the moment, you are 'subjectively' where you are and headed in the direction you are headed. IOW, you can only be 'certain' that what you 'gnow' is what you 'gnow' at any given point. But this is a 'fluid' process, which 'instantaneously' changes all the time, as may be 'visualized' by the surfer angling left, right, or further up, or further down the 'wave', occasionally tumbling into the water (when, if and as one's operational hypotheses prove unstainable), then climbing back up 'on surf board' and catching another wave.

The 'uncertainty' of it all (the 'change-ability' of the 'wave') can be exhilerating fun and an outlet for very vital/creative energies if and to the degree that the art of 'surfing' of varieties of waves is mastered. 'Certainty', in this case, being analogous to staying (or 'aiming' to stay) in the same relative position and going in the same relative direction on a 'steady' wave, would be a 'poor' use of the amazing vistas and opportunities mind-spirit 'life' provides. Not to mention it's being 'foolhardy' -- because all of life's processes, including what moment-to-moment in the Eternal Now flows in and out of consciousness as knowledge, or gnowledge, are in fact 'fluid'. At least my process in such regards sure looks and feels like it is.



I bet you didn't write this while surfing. You woulda fell off if you wrote so much as one sentence.

[DavidS]

Originally posted by a random hack@Sep 15 2003, 04:05 AM
I bet you didn't write this while surfing. You woulda fell off if you wrote so much as one sentence.
I guess my 'writing' process is like a radio jockey's 'running announcement-n-commentary', except in relation to the thoughts-n-feelings in relation to life that continue to 'flow' through me instead of some other 'sport'.

I must say that, as a process in itself, my writing strikes me as being a pretty spontaneous surfing of whatever comes into my mind as I read-stimulus·response-write, which includes a kind of 'looping' surfing as I also re-surf what I've just written and (the option of) saying 'it' in a 'changed' way to mind.

:) David

[a random hack]

If you watch closer, you mught find that you stop surfing once you start writing...? :unsure:

To put it another way, you stop hearing when you start speaking?

[DavidS]

Originally posted by a random hack@Sep 16 2003, 06:51 PM
If you watch closer, you mught find that you stop surfing once you start writing...? :unsure:

To put it another way, you stop hearing when you start speaking?
That used to be my experience. So my 'motion' was more like a 'bumpy-step' ride, either 'hearing' or 'speaking' on thang at a time. As I 'loosened' up, though, the 'steps' of 'hearing' and 'speaking' have more and more 'merged' to be part of one continuous process in that I am constantly 'listening' to what my mouth (or keyboard) is 'saying' and 'spontaneously' mind-n-heart-bouncing off of that) 'intake' as I go along.

The 'image' of the delta-this's and delta-that's which 'merge' into one 'continuous'-'slope' of 'movement' in 'mathematical calculus comes to mind' as something that approximate's my 'improv' performance-n-experience.

Or so it seems to me. Whatever the case, I have often, in past 'meditations', as a kind of 'practice', 'aimed' to be consciously aware of the whole 'field' of my 'sensations' (via my various 'senses') - not of one thing at time as 'usual', but simultaneously. Maybe this has had a salutory 'effect' along the lines mentioned above.

I could also be self-deluding, just 'framing' things in this regard in a way that appeals to me, I suppose. But it strikes me that this may be a kind of zening.

- David

[a random hack]

That used to be my experience. So my 'motion' was more like a 'bumpy-step' ride, either 'hearing' or 'speaking' on thang at a time. As I 'loosened' up, though, the 'steps' of 'hearing' and 'speaking' have more and more 'merged' to be part of one continuous process in that I am constantly 'listening' to what my mouth (or keyboard) is 'saying' and 'spontaneously' mind-n-heart-bouncing off of that) 'intake' as I go along.

The 'image' of the delta-this's and delta-that's which 'merge' into one 'continuous'-'slope' of 'movement' in 'mathematical calculus comes to mind' as something that approximate's my 'improv' performance-n-experience.

Or so it seems to me. Whatever the case, I have often, in past 'meditations', as a kind of 'practice', 'aimed' to be consciously aware of the whole 'field' of my 'sensations' (via my various 'senses') - not of one thing at time as 'usual', but simultaneously. Maybe this has had a salutory 'effect' along the lines mentioned above.

I could also be self-deluding, just 'framing' things in this regard in a way that appeals to me, I suppose. But it strikes me that this may be a kind of zening.
Cool! Well, don't let me distract you :)

[shifu]

ey! good people in this good forum, how are ya? Sad to say that I’m already lost in this thread. I've been out for long. Now I’m back hence I’m out of budget :D. Since Sept. 27 till now, mine was a wonderful experience. Knowing, discovering and unfolding ones root helps us to understand-if-not-to-know who we are, that is my realization. Like in this forum, I meet, talked and traveled with people with a very diverse and different system of tradition, culture and belief. Amazing! There is a learning that books and classrooms can't provide and that is Experiencing Life to the fullest and striving to be happy.

Out of arrogance, sometimes it came to my mind that I can unfold things because I got a degree, but in my recent travel with some minorities in the Northern Philippines, I realized that I haven't learn one thing, to know in spite of unknowing.

'till next!

shifu

[a random hack]

:D

[DavidS]

Originally posted by shifu@Oct 18 2003, 03:01 AM
'till next!

shifu
Hey there, glad to hear-see you've been groovin' with the 'cosmos', zoomin' comet fly-by!

[shifu]

David S.

Well, happen to drop by. I’ve missed the headache in this forum! :D Sad to say I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me…. :) Now I’m always on the move [B][I]i.e.[B][I] business for pleasure and enriching my life of faith at the same time.

Namaste!

shifu

[sahyo]

I’ve missed the headache in this forum! :D Sad to say I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me….


:D

[rich]

Computerwas down, so, luckily, I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me….

QUOTE
I’ve missed the headache in this forum! Sad to say I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me….

[DavidS]

Originally posted by rich@Oct 21 2003, 09:44 PM


Computerwas down, so, luckily, I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me….*

QUOTE*
I’ve missed the headache in this forum!* Sad to say I can’t ride onto some discussion, too heavy for me….*
Sometimes the 'play' of 'light' and 'dark' can be so 'striking' that it feels like it may be 'too much' to 'bear'. But methinks that's only if you try to 'bag' and 'carry' it instead of faith-trusting that the Spirit of Life is more than able to takes care of Itself, and letting your own 'a·maze·ment' at it's capacity in that regard to 'carry' you. Some sunrises and sunsets are so out-n-out awesome, simply opening yourself to 'drinking' them 'in' 'in silence' might be the most 'worshipful' (and, in that way, 'giving' or 'adding' Glory(ing) to Life) thang one can do. :ph34r:

[shifu]

nup, not computer was down... 'was in a long trip! up in the mountains, islands and plains! Can't bring computers with me...too heavy :lol: like our discussions here ;) . Now, i'm back! Thanks for the light-load Rich :D . I don't own a computer! :P

Anyways, I was thankful that I'm still alive during my recent trip to Palawan (Southwestern Province of Luzon, Philippines). The Captain's first attemp to land failed due to bad weather. However, we made on the second. When we step out of the plane, it made me realized that, once i put my trust and my life to the ability of the Captain. <_<

shifu
P.S.
Check the link for more info in one of our Beautiful Island; Palawan.
http://www.palawan.com/resorts/princessa/index.asp

[sonrisa]

thst looked very nice shifu. Looks like you had a nice vacation. I'll add the Philipines to my list of places to go whenever my numbers hit. :D

[rich]

Post Deleted Here!

MOVED to Philosophy Forum: False Center thread. B)

[shifu]

thst looked very nice shifu. Looks like you had a nice vacation. I'll add the Philipines to my list of places to go whenever my numbers hit. :D

sonrisa, i hope that your number will hit :) ....so that you can make a visit my country. its a great help for our poor economy. See it for yourself.

shifu :D

[sonrisa]

sonrisa, i hope that your number will hit* :)


actually my number has hit plenty times. Generally 2 & 3 of them hit. Today I had 4 of them hit. Unfortunately, they all have to hit at the same time- all 6 or 7 of them, depending upon which game I'm playing. ;)

[shifu]

ey, sonrisa!
I also hope that you won't put your whole trust/faith/life/money in numbers :D You might end up on the streets :lol: . Becareful pal! There many good ways to get money for coming here ;) Bless!

shifu

[sonrisa]

the numbers I play? nah- play is the operative word here! :)

[shifu]

the numbers I play? nah- play is the operative word here! :)

sonrisa, what do you mean? :blink: :D

shifu

[sonrisa]

just what I said. I play em every day cuz I figure eventually they're all gonna hit at the same time. It's mathematics. :D now if you'll scuse me, gotta go play my numbers now! (http://www.freelotto.com) :)

[rich]

Sonrisa,

How much do you spend annually to play the numbers? Let's say you chance ~ $5.00 a day. Let's also say, you play 300 days. Do you win, $1500 a yesr? If not, you are losing money. :) :blink:

[shifu]

sonrisa, m juz curious! have you put your fate in luck and numbers? B)

shifu

[sonrisa]

Richie, check out the link I posted. It's free.Here is another free game (http://www.luckysurf.com). And another one (http://www.troppolotto.com) :)

Shifu, I put my fate in myself. :D

[sahyo]

faithselfliftfungus? :P ;) :D

[shifu]

Shifu, I put my fate in myself. :D
sonrisa

seems so, .....it it seems not also....k. lets put it this way! you put your fate on yourself who in turn puts its fate to numbers. Is it correct? My grandmother never had any chance to hit big amount for number games in 30 years :lol:

shifu

[sonrisa]

shifu, they are games ok? They are fun. The fun, for me, at least, is seeing how many numbers I got correct. If I win some $ (& I have won small amounts, btw) that's a bonus. :)

[a random hack]

The fun, for me, at least, is seeing how many numbers I got correct.
sounds like a win to me :)

Shifu, I put my fate in myself.

hye sonrisa,
where you get this fate from in the first place?

[sonrisa]

from the big Lemon Tree of Life, Random. Gives me these lemons, I try & make lemonade outta them. :)

[sahyo]

"lemons"?

[a random hack]

from the big Lemon Tree of Life, Random. Gives me these lemons, I try & make lemonade outta them

well, in that case, gimme another glass.
here's my five cents :)

[sonrisa]

:D

[sonrisa]

lemons, Asheera

[sahyo]

:lol:

[shifu]

ey, guys is there something more aside from lemon? :think:

[sonrisa]

sure is shifu--

:D lemonade!! :D

would you like pink or yellow?

& where ya been anyhow?

[shifu]

sonrisa-folks, I've been roaming around my beautiful country the philippines. It's hard to drop by at the net when your enjoying the place... beaches, pools and springs. :)
BTW, though i prefer ice tea...think i'll go for yellow lemonade :D :lol: , its very hot in here....its summer folks! B) Nevertheless, I have the faith and belief that it will take my thirst away. :)

waiting 4 you here in the phils...
shifu

[GuitarCrazyo]

Kendra: Ive told you. Ive come to slay vumpires.

LOL Just loved how she said that word. Faith is still my favourite though. Buffy was awesome though when she took on the undertones of Faith in Bad Girls.

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

Buffy: Spike, what are you doing here? In five words or less.

Spike Counting on fingers: Out. For. A. Walk...Bitch.