Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

13 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Indeed. The Romans were not big on forgiveness.

It's not just the Romans.

Any empire,  or authority which is too forgiving will be perceived as weak by the observers.

Something similar unfortunately happens  even in human relations, kindness and forgiveness is often perceived as weakness. 

[canthai55]

“Oderint dum metuant.

 

"Let them hate me, as long as they fear me.”

― Caligula

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, canthai55 said:

In my view the "Core Teachings" of all organized religion is blind obedience in Dogma on pain of terrible suffering, both now and in the future after death.

Both tools to keep the people in line and exert control over their actions.

Compassion, Love, Solidarity, Respect - do not even enter into it.

dog·ma

/ˈdôɡmə/

a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

Think Heaven, 70 Virgins, Olam Ha-Ba, etc

 

I'm not a big fan of organized religions either, but I think it's fair to say that within every religious structure, there are many well meaning people who have a sincere desire to help others. 

But I agree that replacing dogma with direct experience would empower people a lot more and give humanity a giant leap forward. 

Either religions change their ways, or they will be left behind in history as empty shells. 

[ivor bigun]

5 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Oh, what a relief, thanks for letting us know. ???? 

 

"oh sorry i dont believe in religion."
Sorry, but that doesn't make sense... It's like saying you don't believe in cars. 

Maybe you mean you don't believe in the core teachings of the various religions? Compassion, love, solidarity, respect...?
Or maybe you don't believe in the allegories, parables and symbols religions use to convey deeper meanings? That would be like saying you don't believe in George Orwell's Animal Farm. Of course the animals are not real animals, but the deeper meaning is very real.

????‍♂️

sorry i suppose i wrote the wrong thing ,in many ways religion is a good thing ,it gives out many good vibes ,oh and some bad ones , but what i really meant is ,what i said in the beginning i do not believe that there is a God who looks over us ,also i do not believe that his Prophets  eg Jesus or Mohamed  were sent to us by God . i believe that in the end most religion is about control of the people ,

 

[canthai55]

17 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Either religions change their ways

 

[mauGR1]

3 hours ago, canthai55 said:

 

Good song, sometimes i blame the women too.

Have to admit though, sometimes women are right when they blame the men ????

[VincentRJ]

On 7/22/2021 at 12:52 AM, Sunmaster said:

Thanks for the warning, but until a better explanation comes along, I'll stick with what I know to be so. ????

There are those who know that they don't know, and those who don't know that they don't know.

 

I'm in the first category. In which category are you? ????

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

There are those who know that they don't know, and those who don't know that they don't know.

 

I'm in the first category. In which category are you? ????

I know what I know, and what I don't know I strive to know. ????

[VincentRJ]

12 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

I know what I know, and what I don't know I strive to know. ????

Well done! So I take it you are still striving to understand if the ineffable and indescribable is God? ????

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

Well done! So I take it you are still striving to understand if the ineffable and indescribable is God? ????

No, that part is already sorted.

I'm trying to understand how best to reconnect with the ineffable and indescribable. 

[Skeptic7]

47 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

No, that part is already sorted.

I'm trying to understand how best to reconnect with the ineffable and indescribable. 

"Reconnect" or connect?

Serious question. Thanks. 

[Sunmaster]

5 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

"Reconnect" or connect?

Serious question. Thanks. 

Reconnect, definitely. 

[Skeptic7]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

Reconnect, definitely. 

Interesting. So the "connection" has been lost or dropped? Why? On which end? 

[Sparktrader]

On 7/22/2021 at 4:19 PM, mauGR1 said:

It's not just the Romans.

Any empire,  or authority which is too forgiving will be perceived as weak by the observers.

Something similar unfortunately happens  even in human relations, kindness and forgiveness is often perceived as weakness. 

Ask Connor. Kindness is good.

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, Skeptic7 said:

Interesting. So the "connection" has been lost or dropped? Why? On which end? 

The way I see it, the connection is always present, for everyone. I was made aware of this in an unexpected and breathtaking manner during the spontaneous kundalini awakening I had 23 years ago. What prevents me (and most others) to be fully aware of this connection on a daily basis though, is the deep seated attachment to the ego. Its very existence depends on the illusion that we are separate from everything else. The "I" (ego) can only exist if there is a "you" (the world) as well. 

To re-establish that connection and make it a lived reality is central in my life, and the detachment from the ego is the key to realize it.

[VincentRJ]

5 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

No, that part is already sorted.

I'm trying to understand how best to reconnect with the ineffable and indescribable. 

That's only possible when the ineffable and indescribable become effable and describable. Isn't the Bible an example of the ineffable becoming effable?

 

As humans we have the unusual capacity for language and abstract thought, which is fundamental to all our activities, progress, prosperity, general understanding, and control of our environment and general health.

[Sunmaster]

21 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

That's only possible when the ineffable and indescribable become effable and describable. Isn't the Bible an example of the ineffable becoming effable?

 

As humans we have the unusual capacity for language and abstract thought, which is fundamental to all our activities, progress, prosperity, general understanding, and control of our environment and general health.

Well, the Bible and other such books are attempts at describing the ineffable to those who have never experienced it but feel there is something more to life than what we can see and touch.

All of them pale though compared with the real thing. They are forced to squeeze the indescribable into words, using parables, analogies and allegories, but that can only approximate very VERY roughly the actual thing. And we all know how much confusion those efforts have created and still do.

So, the only antidote to that confusion is imo direct experience. Once you have that, you won't have to follow holy books or organized religion and rely on their descriptions. 

You don't defer your power to them anymore. You take your power back.

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

Well, the Bible and other such books are attempts at describing the ineffable to those who have never experienced it but feel there is something more to life than what we can see and touch.

All of them pale though compared with the real thing. They are forced to squeeze the indescribable into words, using parables, analogies and allegories, but that can only approximate very VERY roughly the actual thing

I find some of those parables, analogies and allegories, picked up from Indian or Christian or Buddhist sources, pretty good actually.

Of course a deep insight into holy texts is impossible for those who, without even trying to understand, have some "attitude " about those books. 

Of course you are spot on about what you  call "direct experience " , one doesn't even need to believe,  one knows. 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

3 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

The way I see it, the connection is always present, for everyone. I was made aware of this in an unexpected and breathtaking manner during the spontaneous kundalini awakening I had 23 years ago. What prevents me (and most others) to be fully aware of this connection on a daily basis though, is the deep seated attachment to the ego. Its very existence depends on the illusion that we are separate from everything else. The "I" (ego) can only exist if there is a "you" (the world) as well. 

To re-establish that connection and make it a lived reality is central in my life, and the detachment from the ego is the key to realize it.

No need to detach from ego in my opinion. Ego to me is a  belief in yourself. 

My approach is to go with the flow .. sometimes I think I am a bit special ..sometimes I realise I am clearly not. 

 

It comes back to my feeling that trying in these matters is often a failure because you are just pitting one part of yourself against the other. 

 

 

 

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

No need to detach from ego in my opinion. Ego to me is a  belief in yourself. 

My approach is to go with the flow .. sometimes I think I am a bit special ..sometimes I realise I am clearly not. 

 

It comes back to my feeling that trying in these matters is often a failure because you are just pitting one part of yourself against the other. 

 

 

 

Perhaps a distinction should be made about false ego and true ego, or desire and will, if you prefer... but I seem to remember that you've branded spiritual science as " bad science " a couple of times,  so.. 

[3NUMBAS]

it was always a money making scam right from the early days        in eurpoe

[Fat is a type of crazy]

2 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Perhaps a distinction should be made about false ego and true ego, or desire and will, if you prefer... but I seem to remember that you've branded spiritual science as " bad science " a couple of times,  so.. 

I concur definitions are difficult. Detachment from desire may be admirable but how to do it without tying yourself in knots or separating yourself from any form of stimulation. Will can be the same -  a will to survive could be helpful but will can become stubborn resistance to reality. 

Fighting the above? Will to defeat will. A desire to usurp desire. As you say there may be good and bad of each and it comes down to some more key idea - could be honesty. 

I still don't know what spiritual science is. I get exploring the body and seeing what makes us tick but I think it is bad science if there are conclusions that there is a spiritual world but there is no testing to back that up.  If someone thinks there may be that's fine.

 

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I concur definitions are difficult. Detachment from desire may be admirable but how to do it without tying yourself in knots or separating yourself from any form of stimulation. Will can be the same -  a will to survive could be helpful but will can become stubborn resistance to reality. 

Fighting the above? Will to defeat will. A desire to usurp desire. As you say there may be good and bad of each and it comes down to some more key idea - could be honesty. 

I still don't know what spiritual science is. I get exploring the body and seeing what makes us tick but I think it is bad science if there are conclusions that there is a spiritual world but there is no testing to back that up.  If someone thinks there may be that's fine.

 

Well, false ego is brilliantly defined imho, in some old Indian text, as a chariot pulled by wild and strong horses (the physical senses).

As one gets older, the "horses" lose power, and it gets easier to take a step back and observe the different parts which concur in shaping oneself. 

If one is able to renounce what is useless,  such as vanity, fear, etc, what is left is the true ego, or the divine spark.

 

 

 

 

[Skeptic7]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, false ego is brilliantly defined imho, in some old Indian text, as a chariot pulled by wild and strong horses (the physical senses).

As one gets older, the "horses" lose power, and it gets easier to take a step back and observe the different parts which concur in shaping oneself. 

If one is able to renounce what is useless,  such as vanity, fear, etc, what is left is the true ego, or the divine spark.

 

 

 

 

Fear is probably a bad example. Fear is an evolutionary survival technique. 

 

Unwarranted, irrational fear...phobias...seems the more appropriate term...yes?

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, Skeptic7 said:

Fear is probably a bad example. Fear is an evolutionary survival technique. 

 

Unwarranted, irrational fear...phobias...seems the more appropriate term...yes?

Of, course,  in the case of fear, one should make a distinction between rational fear, useful for survival,  and irrational fears, or phobias. 

The parameters vary from person to person, for example,  if i believe in some sort of afterlife,  I may be not afraid of death.

[Sunmaster]

I think it would be useful at this point to define what ego is. Confusion arises because there are different definitions of the ego. Even in psychoanalysis, Freud's and Jung's definitions of ego are not the same.

 

When I speak of ego, I mean that part of ourselves that is constructed once we start to learn language and start to learn that there is a separation between our body and the rest of the world, which gives us our sense of identity. This separation is necessary for survival and to interact with the world. Without it, we would be overwhelmed with information and would likely starve to death. It's like when you're in a big room full of people, all taking at the same time. We have the ability to select and cut out a small slice of this noise that enables us to listen to only one of those people. In the same way, we cut out a small slice of reality that enables us to function in society. It is also fueling our self-confidence and self-respect.
This is the healthy side of ego.
The unhealthy side of ego, is when it gets out of control, when it becomes the center of the universe, when separation becomes the only way, when it becomes an obstacle to learning new things, when it makes you believe that there is nothing else beyond it, making you forget that before it was created (with the learning of language) you were already there.

@Fat is a type of crazy is right though when he talks about the dangers of fighting the ego. Who is fighting whom? If we say "I must kill the ego", who is this "I"? It is in reality the ego saying that. That's not going to work, is it?! It's like a thief in a police uniform, pretending to chase the thief. You will be running around in circles achieving absolutely nothing.

I think the only way to make it work is not by fighting the ego, but by acknowledging it and by simply observing it. We can only observe something by taking a step back....meaning detaching ourselves from it. The more skilled we get at doing this, the better we will know our true self. 
And like they say: to know yourself is to know God. ????
 

[mauGR1]

What is ego ?

It may seem a simple question, but it's not. 

Ask a 1000 persons to define "ego", and you'll get enough material for a big book. 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

25 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

What is ego ?

It may seem a simple question, but it's not. 

Ask a 1000 persons to define "ego", and you'll get enough material for a big book. 

Ego to me is like a pool, that can fill or empty fast, fed by life and your judgement of that life. A full pool could lead to optimistic feelings and happiness. 

When young, life experience might flow to or from the ego, with little judgement in between, leading to highs and lows.

As we get older we might use judgement to realise that, say,  a promotion or a new pretty girlfriend does not mean we are all that and we see a bigger picture.

Older people though, or people who have done bad things, might be tired or cynical and just protect their ego by controlling their judgement to suit their ego.  

So a healthy ego could be good, if ego is based on judgement , allowing for the fact that  human judgement may be faulty from time to time.

Being honest about our judgement, but not detaching from it as it is part of us, may temper any highs and lows in the ego. Or maybe those highs and lows are part of life and  judgement can get in the way of free flowing happiness and sadness. 

There may be a fork in the road  between truth and happiness.

[mauGR1]

17 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

There may be a fork in the road  between truth and happiness.

Yes, i think so.

Socrates, who i regard very highly among the greatest minds in our history, used

to say that one has to choose between being a "happy pig " or a " sad philosopher ".

... of course there are many intermediate states in between.

As for "judgement", which is undoubtedly useful for the survival of the species, i find very refreshing to "suspend" it, even if for just a couple of minutes a day; according to some masters, mastering this practice,  can project one instantly to a higher state of consciousness. 

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

That's only possible when the ineffable and indescribable become effable and describable. Isn't the Bible an example of the ineffable becoming effable?

 

As humans we have the unusual capacity for language and abstract thought, which is fundamental to all our activities, progress, prosperity, general understanding, and control of our environment and general health.

? The Bible is a book. It is so general that many things in it can be taken to have different meanings, and many things written about are hard to believe eg if everyone on the planet except those on the Ark died in the flood, are we all descendants of incestous relationships? Thus, like the Koran, there are scholars that try to understand what it actually means.

IMO if it was the actual words of God it would be simple to understand and there would be no confusion.