belief, superstition, reality and truth

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

The only way you can notice the flag waving is by remembering its positions in the past, and compare it to its position in the present. You need your mind to find this continuity. (Notice how recalling a memory is a very creative process?)

OK, I had not made that connection before. Thanks.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

Thinking out loud again: How does one make a map of an intangible location? If, in my adventures in consciousness, I somehow find myself in a really groovy state of mind which results in some amazing vantage point of clarity or extraordinary sense of connection to the Source, how do I get back there again in the future? How can I imbue objects or actions from the physical side with special significance so that they function as a sort of map to a location in the non physical? The meaning isn't necessarily intrinsic to the natural properties of the objects, so in that sense, to an uninformed observer, my actions could appear to be entirely illogical and superstitious. This would be especially true where ritual has become, to a large extent, anachronistic, having taken on the characteristics of a classic simulacrum- the original intent having been blurred over a long period of time not unlike noise building up on an analog tape loop through constant re recording.

It's OK China Cat, I for one like it when you think out loud.

Maybe I am way off base here, but I am reminded of the idea that the recreational drug user is chasing that original high, which is a plateau that is never (or very seldom) regained. Or how orgasm is just not the same experience as it was the very first time.

I suppose it is possible one might apply some superstitious ritual in an attempt to regain that plateau, but I question whether that plateau can ever actually be regained...ritual or no. Maybe it is the drive, the desire, to reach that plateau again that makes the ritual so appealing, in the vain hope of someday revisiting a glorious moment of experience. Just a dumb thought...

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

It's OK China Cat, I for one like it when you think out loud.

Maybe I am way off base here, but I am reminded of the idea that the recreational drug user is chasing that original high, which is a plateau that is never (or very seldom) regained. Or how orgasm is just not the same experience as it was the very first time.

I suppose it is possible one might apply some superstitious ritual in an attempt to regain that plateau, but I question whether that plateau can ever actually be regained...ritual or no. Maybe it is the drive, the desire, to reach that plateau again that makes the ritual so appealing, in the vain hope of someday revisiting a glorious moment of experience. Just a dumb thought...

That sounds as good as any rendition of idolatry, (or spiritual materialism, as Paladin calls it,) that I've heard.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

That sounds as good as any rendition of idolatry, (or spiritual materialism, as Paladin calls it,) that I've heard.

Hmmm, even if that ritual is in association with an...

<cough, cough>...idol...<cough, cough>...

such as a Madonna or a Crucifix in an attempt to recapture a *spiritual high?*

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Hmmm, even if that ritual is in association with an...

<cough, cough>...idol...<cough, cough>...

such as a Madonna or a Crucifix in an attempt to recapture a *spiritual high?*

The way I think of idolatry is that it is veneration of an empty shell. Faith can fill up an empty shell, but one must ask the question: is it the faith or is it the shell that is the key?

[China Cat Sunflower]

More thinking out loud: It seems to me that there are two parts of myself, one of which has a sort of cosmic existence "out there", and the other a more physical-mental existence "in here" in my brain. They seem to be part of one conscious continuum, but there is a degree of separation which, evidently occurs because the part that uses my body, and that I identify as "me" resides here in the physical. In observing my mental and conscious processes it seems that a lot of my "thoughts" seem to come from the "out there" part. They don't seem to originate from inside my brain. So the "out there" part is always communicating easily with the "in here" part. But what if I want turn the information flow around and communicate some instructions from "in here" the "out there"? The landscape of consciousness doesn't have the same properties and control surfaces as the interior mental processes which arrange things hierarchically and analogically. But these are the mental tools that I have. So how do I adapt their function: the objects, actions, signs, symbols, and hierarchical orderings of the physical-mental realm, for use as a tool to navigate the featureless landscape of consciousness?

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Congrats on the long birdie! Breaking 90 is excellent.

Sorry to hear that you don't get to play as much. We're in the same boat actually. If the girls get into playing it might be worth it for us to get some kind of family membership as our main form of entertainment, but that's a long way off. I was really spoiled because when I was in grad school we lived right next to a really excellent and really inexpensive golf course. Roger was in heaven. And in upstate NY we also were near some pretty good inexpensive courses. But in MO and here in CO it is so much more expensive.

Do your girls play at all?

Aubrey and Carly's interest in golf is mainly confined to riding around in the cart and getting sodas from the beer lady. I took them to play putt putt recently, but they weren't very interested in it. I'll keep exposing them to it and hope they develop an interest, but I'm not going to push it.

Chris

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

But what if I want turn the information flow around and communicate some instructions from "in here" the "out there"?

What if the interface is intended to be "one way?" I mean, what if the tv wanted to use the remote to tune you to a different channel?

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

The landscape of consciousness doesn't have the same properties and control surfaces as the interior mental processes which arrange things hierarchically and analogically. But these are the mental tools that I have. So how do I adapt their function: the objects, actions, signs, symbols, and hierarchical orderings of the physical-mental realm, for use as a tool to navigate the featureless landscape of consciousness?

Dunno. It seems reasonably obvious we utilize symbolic thinking and association to categorize and catalogue, assembling a library of memories and learning/training. But I'm still not convinced of the value (or at least continuing the value) of superstitions and superstitious symbolism. When used to convey an idea, I suppose it is OK as long as the idea is actually conveyed and it stops there. The parable, the metaphor, the allegory. What troubles me is the tendency to confusing the symbol for reality and calling it truth, the literalization of the symbol.

That's when skivvies turn into idols. As funny as that sounds, I think religions do far worse things and end up dogmatizing metaphors and symbols as though they are reality instead of teaching tools.

Which is how we end up with people sincerely believing in some pretty strange ideas and fervently believing them to be true.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

The way I think of idolatry is that it is veneration of an empty shell. Faith can fill up an empty shell, but one must ask the question: is it the faith or is it the shell that is the key?

I relate to doubting Thomas (the disciple, not our good friend Thomas), I struggle with faith in things unseen (other than those things that have made themselves known to me by other means).

So much in my faith walk in Christianity just feels hollow and empty to me. If these hollow shells serve a valid purpose for another I certainly don't wish to undermine that process. Neither do I enjoy the condescending glances that seem to question if I am a "real" Christian. I find myself more and more willing to cast off the label of "Christian" if by being one I must be resigned to holding to hollow superstitions. Sure, those superstitions serve a purpose in teaching, a finger pointing to the moon so to speak. But they are not the moon. Once the direction is discovered, is the finger still necessary (other than the possible recheck of position)?

Christianity is just so rife with the insistence of crossing "t's" and dotting "i's" without really giving full consideration to just what that really means. Every sect says believe as we believe and you are OK, but miss some trivial point of contention and you're doomed. Follow the book to the letter, except when it is inconvenient or contradicts our long cherished traditions (even when those traditions are in direct defiance of what the Book says).

Dunno Seattlegal, I see too much conflict and contradiction between what I read in the Book, and how that ends up getting applied in real life after various institutions get through putting their brand of selective spin on the teachings. Like deleting the commandment that says not to keep idols and replacing it with something a little more compatible with the politics of the day...

And the irony is that they all lament the disunity in the Christian faith...

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I relate to doubting Thomas (the disciple, not our good friend Thomas), I struggle with faith in things unseen (other than those things that have made themselves known to me by other means).

So much in my faith walk in Christianity just feels hollow and empty to me. If these hollow shells serve a valid purpose for another I certainly don't wish to undermine that process. Neither do I enjoy the condescending glances that seem to question if I am a "real" Christian. I find myself more and more willing to cast off the label of "Christian" if by being one I must be resigned to holding to hollow superstitions. Sure, those superstitions serve a purpose in teaching, a finger pointing to the moon so to speak. But they are not the moon. Once the direction is discovered, is the finger still necessary (other than the possible recheck of position)?

Christianity is just so rife with the insistence of crossing "t's" and dotting "i's" without really giving full consideration to just what that really means. Every sect says believe as we believe and you are OK, but miss some trivial point of contention and you're doomed. Follow the book to the letter, except when it is inconvenient or contradicts our long cherished traditions (even when those traditions are in direct defiance of what the Book says).

Dunno Seattlegal, I see too much conflict and contradiction between what I read in the Book, and how that ends up getting applied in real life after various institutions get through putting their brand of selective spin on the teachings. Like deleting the commandment that says not to keep idols and replacing it with something a little more compatible with the politics of the day...

And the irony is that they all lament the disunity in the Christian faith...

You know Juan, I thought something like this was going on with you from what you wrote in the OP. I can only imagine what you are feeling about this, but I do know that inquiry along these lines can only be healthy, and if followed through will bring deeper understanding. Maslow wrote about what happens in groups that follow on behind a founder who has had a peak experience, usually they become somewhat dogmatic and superstitious about the things the founder has said.
Every mystic in history couched his experience in terms that his fellows understood, usually religious terms.
Looking deeply, you won't find much real difference between St. John of the Cross and Rumi for example.
Further I think it important in the growth of an individual when they stand up and say " I respect all that my elders have taught me, and the traditions are of great value, but now I would open my mind to all the possibilities of reality and inquire what is real"

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

What if the interface is intended to be "one way?" I mean, what if the tv wanted to use the remote to tune you to a different channel?


Dunno. It seems reasonably obvious we utilize symbolic thinking and association to categorize and catalogue, assembling a library of memories and learning/training. But I'm still not convinced of the value (or at least continuing the value) of superstitions and superstitious symbolism. When used to convey an idea, I suppose it is OK as long as the idea is actually conveyed and it stops there. The parable, the metaphor, the allegory. What troubles me is the tendency to confusing the symbol for reality and calling it truth, the literalization of the symbol.

That's when skivvies turn into idols. As funny as that sounds, I think religions do far worse things and end up dogmatizing metaphors and symbols as though they are reality instead of teaching tools.

Which is how we end up with people sincerely believing in some pretty strange ideas and fervently believing them to be true.

To me the point, or pay off of examining these processes is in the increasing realization of just how pervasive and all encompassing they are. It's kind of frightening, really, to realize just how immersed we are in the pea soup of self-referential symbolism. We're swimming around blindly grasping at shiny objects. Well, that's my observation, can't say for anyone else. But, see, everyone wants their favorite idol to be objective truth. "Everything else is crap, but my God, my religion, my political orientation is different."

I want to just let it all go. I can use superstition for what it's good for. If it helps me play better golf or hold on to my lighter longer that's great. Maybe it's good as a mnemonic device in some cases. I can use that. Instead of buying into the idea that there MUST be meaning, I'm more interested in understanding how "meaning" is built up from the self-referential soup, and evaluating my participation in that.

Chris

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Paladin

You know Juan, I thought something like this was going on with you from what you wrote in the OP. I can only imagine what you are feeling about this, but I do know that inquiry along these lines can only be healthy, and if followed through will bring deeper understanding. Maslow wrote about what happens in groups that follow on behind a founder who has had a peak experience, usually they become somewhat dogmatic and superstitious about the things the founder has said.
Every mystic in history couched his experience in terms that his fellows understood, usually religious terms.
Looking deeply, you won't find much real difference between St. John of the Cross and Rumi for example.
Further I think it important in the growth of an individual when they stand up and say " I respect all that my elders have taught me, and the traditions are of great value, but now I would open my mind to all the possibilities of reality and inquire what is real"

Or, as I like to put it, "why do cows say mu?"
(The feeling of emptiness that follows a great religious experience doesn't really cover it. Some call it 'the great doubt.')
It's like the Coming Full Circle thread.

Somehow, Phillipians 4:11-13 seemed to help me out in that regard:

11 Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: 12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

To me the point, or pay off of examining these processes is in the increasing realization of just how pervasive and all encompassing they are. It's kind of frightening, really, to realize just how immersed we are in the pea soup of self-referential symbolism. We're swimming around blindly grasping at shiny objects. Well, that's my observation, can't say for anyone else.

Self referential symbolism...just letting the concept sink in. If I am understanding correctly, I am thinking that is an occupational hazard attached to a self-learning autonomic system. The predisposition to grasp at shiny objects in the dark (I presume figurative) is in evidence in other critters besides humans, so may even have an evolutionary component. I can't reach for the stars in your galaxy, and I can't use your symbology; they are alien to me and out of my reach. Besides, my stars and symbology are close at hand and I have spent a lifetime building my own referential library.

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

But, see, everyone wants their favorite idol to be objective truth. "Everything else is crap, but my God, my religion, my political orientation is different."

But then we are back to the mental instability caused by undermining surety and security. Surely even an atheist does not believe in "nothing?" If not else surely they would believe in themselves or fellow humans? Even crazy people (not all, there is a spectrum) believe in some pretty wierd ideas and notions, but *they believe.* I am beginning to think it goes with our programming.

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

I want to just let it all go. I can use superstition for what it's good for. If it helps me play better golf or hold on to my lighter longer that's great. Maybe it's good as a mnemonic device in some cases. I can use that. Instead of buying into the idea that there MUST be meaning, I'm more interested in understanding how "meaning" is built up from the self-referential soup, and evaluating my participation in that.

All of us build a house of cards inside our heads. What of that is permanent when we are gone? Anything?

I want to believe there is something more, something left, but I doubt it is mind-rational-intellect-logic. I don't know how it applies metaphysically, but I suspect spirit is divorced from intellect at death. Besides, what have we learned here that would truly be of value in the next existence? How to play nice?

[juantoo3]

Thanks Paladin and Seattlegal. I'll get back soon.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Paladin

I can only imagine what you are feeling about this, but I do know that inquiry along these lines can only be healthy, and if followed through will bring deeper understanding.

Thanks. Of course I wonder if I'm ready for the deep end of the pool yet, or if I am in way over my head?

Originally Posted by Paladin

Maslow wrote about what happens in groups that follow on behind a founder who has had a peak experience, usually they become somewhat dogmatic and superstitious about the things the founder has said.

I seem to recall something like this, but we didn't delve deeply into Maslow's musings at the upper end of the hierarchy. It seems business has little to gain from that end and finds a great deal to feast on (and feast well) in the lower end of the hierarchy.

Originally Posted by Paladin

Every mystic in history couched his experience in terms that his fellows understood, usually religious terms.
Looking deeply, you won't find much real difference between St. John of the Cross and Rumi for example.

I have heard of Rumi and know nothing about him (her?). I would be interested if you would like to present a brief comparison...

Originally Posted by Paladin

Further I think it important in the growth of an individual when they stand up and say " I respect all that my elders have taught me, and the traditions are of great value, but now I would open my mind to all the possibilities of reality and inquire what is real"

Perhaps. I am also aware that such...bravado...can come at great cost. Many are those in history who were martyred that dared challenge the status quo and the institutional monster. We have a certain freedom *now* to consider such things, but that freedom came with a price, a price that transcends traditional patriotism and political boundaries.

It does not leave my thoughts, that I might inadvertantly tread into genuine heresy or blasphemy. G-d knows if no other that that would be the last intent of my heart. I do not challenge for the mere sake of challenge, for ego, or for self-righteous justification. My challenge is not *me* centered. It stems from years of observation, collecting pieces here and there that do not add up. When puzzle pieces do not fit regardless of how often and sincerely I am assured that they do, and I have turned these pieces in every manner possible to try to fit them *as I am told* and they do not...I am left with little other conclusion. <shrugs>

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Or, as I like to put it, "why do cows say mu?"
(The feeling of emptiness that follows a great religious experience doesn't really cover it. Some call it 'the great doubt.')
It's like the Coming Full Circle thread.

Very well Seattlegal, please tell me, why do cows say MU?

I don't know that I can say my feelings to this are the result of any great religious experience...unless by great you might mean cumulative, as in over the course of many years. I remember reading that thread, and it would probably serve me well to reread, but this crisis of faith is not a new thing to me. I have been skirting the edges of this *no-man's land* for a long time, about 5 years or so I would say, with no clear distinctions one way or another of which way to turn. I just feel like I want to cut out all the crap and get to the raw essence. Maybe G-d is like a hot summer sun and religion is like sunscreen, and maybe I am daring to go naked without sunscreen and risking turning lobster red from head to tail...but it just seems like a risk worth taking.

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Somehow, Phillipians 4:11-13 seemed to help me out in that regard:

11 Not that I speak in regard to need, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: 12 I know how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. 13 I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

You never cease to amaze me with how you are always able to pull just the right passage with the proper nuance. I love this passage, it always speaks to me on a very visceral and intimate level. It strikes home.

G-d has laid many challenges before me in my life, but I am confident He has never laid any obstacle that could not be overcome. G-d helps those who help themselves; G-d loves doers of the word, not hearers only. G-d also appreciates when we go to Him for assistance. He will lead if we but only ask diligently, sincerely and with a contrite heart.

I have long asked for wisdom and understanding. It always seemed to me the noble and courageous path. It is well that foresight is not so clear as hindsight...if I had only known beforehand what the price and burden was for the prayer I offered, I would likely not have asked. It isn't a path for the faint of heart, or those who need to be led by others. But then I suspect those like you, Paladin and China Cat know this as well as I do, even if you might word it a bit differently.