It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Myth of the Spiritual Hierarchy

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Aphorism

Why should they give you respect when you flat out tell them that you do not respect them?

If there is nothing spiritual then you cannot respect anyone, nor anything, more so than any other thing, least it be some contrived value in vain - something made up by a man and is a system of pretension that he alone has created, and holds himself to be god of.

Think about it.


Uh...define "spiritual" and explain why respect can not exist in the absence of it. Who made up the concept of respect if not humans?




posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ogbert
Aristotle taught, that in any society/state the form of religion practiced was fashioned after the form of government.

My own take, is that hierarchal attitudes can be traced to Akhenaten and the advent of monotheism in the form of patriarchy.



Certainly, the combination of monotheism and patriarchy is especially deadly. For what it's worth, Akhenaten recognized the existence of more than one god but insisted that only one be worshipped. I believe that monotheism and patriarchy are in their death throes but, due to their inherently violent, aggressive, warlike natures, are likely to take all of us with them.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

If this is true:

“True value” or any sort of absolutism is a myth


This is false:

There is nothing irrational about man contriving values.


If that first quote is true, everything is false, including logic, rationality, and any and all things else.

Man you can't base your entire life on being everything which opposes what you don't understand - that is just not the way to do it.

I know you probably do think it is all really nonsense, but to those who have spiritualism, there is truth, and that is what they seek and have, in part, and what you should seek, if you honestly want to find God.

Anyways, I just posted to show you the error in your OP - not to keep posting back and forth the errors, since they all derive from the same thought. You can think for yourself, I showed you the error.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Aphorism

I know you probably do think it is all really nonsense, but to those who have spiritualism, there is truth, and that is what they seek and have, in part, and what you should seek, if you honestly want to find God.

.


Truth is a belief. As such, there are many truths. There is no such thing as a one-and-only "The Truth" because there is no such thing as a one-and-only belief. Don't confuse truth with fact.

What God?



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

Humans are hierarchial animals.
So it naturally follows that his spiritual concepts would be so as well.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Can subjective creatures be objective and thus derive objective "facts" with any certainty?
I vote not.

Not that I am aiming this comment at you.
Just a page from my thoughts.
edit on 7-9-2014 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Tangerine

Can subjective creatures be objective and thus derive objective "facts" with any certainty?
I vote not.

Not that I am aiming this comment at you.
Just a page from my thoughts.


The scientific method is designed to eliminate subjectivity through repeated, independent testing of evidence.



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Designed to do and actually doing are two vastly different things.
A look at the climate change "debate" independent from either side will tell you that.
edit on 7-9-2014 by HarbingerOfShadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

I've been waiting for a post like this from you.

You show great wisdom in much of what you say.

I sense something from you, a deep well of knowledge gained from experience, a voice speaking by way of reason and discernment.

Yet, I also see in your words areas of opinion, areas that are unfinished, incomplete, and therefore your logic and reason irresolute by way of abandoning certain arenas of knowledge because they have not been experienced.

I do not believe you are seeking a teacher, or need one, it seems you have chosen the loneliest route, however, it is the purest if one can learn to see past their own defilements of mind.

In no ways am I trying to judge you, or say to you, that you are inferior, if anything, I can relate.

There is a place of non-being and non-ego. Almost impossible to achieve, it literally takes the changing of one's root being in order to experience it. Everything that you are, all your actions you take, are forms taking shape from energy being exerted. The will, the energy, is pure, but becomes defiled by our attachments, by our clinging. A master does not cling, and has gained knowledge and discernment through experience by way of measuring, testing, contemplating. Empty meditation is useless, and is only the gateway to gaining discernment about oneself.

A fully enlightened one requires mastery over one's own energies, in the sense that one does not allow one's will to be diverted into the channel that becomes apparent as a reaction to a situation, but has learned the pull back, the contemplation, and the action through complete mindfulness, serenity of being, learned by way of practice. One sees past the paintings drawn by the myths, symbols, stories, religion, social psychology and sees it for what it is. An animal existing among other animals with learnt traits that enhance the progression of the species. However as a human, we have more freedom in acting, in thinking, and with this freedom our folly, by being lazy pigs that decide to bathe in the luxory of their own comfort versus becoming a fully integrated system of love, support and change for the better of this world.

There are all these mysterious things that do happen, things we as human beings do not fully understand, but that knowledge is not needed in order to be a decent human being, capable of love, empathy and compassion. Capable of changing the world we live in for the better, and helping progress the human race to the next step in their evolution. You are 110% right, we need to do something here about it NOW, or else we will lose everything. But, that is ok too, as it will arise again, and again... and again... but it is not right to give up and sit on the sidelines without taking action. Problem is, what is right action? As soon as one commits too strongly, says too many words, gets too invested, the wisdom which initially began their action is quickly replaced by clinging, desire, aversion, perversion, and their sight is blurred. It is a difficult balance, which only a master of oneself can most adequately execute.

It does exist, this state of being, but it isn't what everyone thinks it is... and most people that think they've achieved it have only further put themselves in an illusion, a more concentrated fabricated reality. They do not see that it is their aversion to their true state of being that keeps them from sitting still and seeing how much they still actually suffer. What has made them take all these flights of fancy into the deeper mystical experiences, but what are they? Empty, as empty as any other experience to be had as a human being, and it is only us that gives it importance. What we must understand is that we are a system of physical beings here now, is that the ultimate truth? One must first ask if that is a good question to be asked in the first place? I will not answer it, but for what we can see, and for what we can do, we must see that we are a system of physical beings, and we must learn to better ourselves here now, for where else will it be done?

Truths are relative, and one can be used to replace another once it is no longer needed, or if a better one is found. There is error in making a truth fundamental, as this does not allow for the flexibility which life demands in order for life to succeed in creating a fully awake being capable of fully integrating with the way of nature.

As a system of physical beings, we need to learn how to enhance our way of living, our way of succeeding as a species, through our physicality. This takes spirit, this takes will. You can say it is just the body behaving in self taught ways, emerging simply from the physical system, but there is a space between the actions, which contemplates and directs in different ways, to test the boundaries of life. There is a hidden wisdom in our cells, in the core of our being, which has directed life down this avenue in this story, and here we are. As the will, we manifest whatever we decide to pour our energies into, and either we can let us take the easiest path presented to us by our habits, or we can take a step back and learn to be better human beings, better parts of nature expressing itself, nurturing itself, enhancing itself. But this takes devotion to mindfulness, concentration and the desire for wisdom. For it is through desire that one can guide the will, work will be done one way or another, and one can choose to do it through being, or non-being, but understand that non-being does not mean there is no one there, not exactly... it means there is no one there fooling themselves into thinking there is a permanent one there creating all the actions, but rather the self is empty of meaning and we only give it meaning by choosing which actions we do take. So non-being means taking action, but by using all forms of ego, all forms of self, all forms of energies in the body to the best of their abilities, by way of not clinging to any one particular way of doing things, but by contemplating all ways and directing one's actions into the more favorable. Beliefs are dangerous, and it should not be beliefs that guide us, but principles, principles which work to create a more cohesive, loving, understanding and wise mankind.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism



The only assured nature of the human race is to self arrange its individual units into a spiritual hierarchy. The most basic human society--the family--is subjugated by will of the father; collected, nourished and indoctrinated into the cult of life by the mother, and subject to the authority and paternal preference of the elder sibling. From the family hierarchy by proxy to a degree of ancestor worship comes tribal arrangement. The chieftain acts as father to all, drawing his authority in no small measure from the shaman's exploitation of the unknown delivered to tribal congregants as the angry, paternal, elder spirit. From the loins of the eldest living tribesman springs the ultimate father effigy of them all: he who created the world, and subjugates all the lesser but no less terrifying legion of filial spirits.

The power to control, in the palm of the chieftain, begins not under threat of the sword, but in the mind. Doubt in the mind of the congregant or peasant tribesman is a seed that once planted is easily nourished into greenery of mass domination by the concept of faith in the unseeable and the consequences of breaking it. Even the chieftain cannot deny he is mortal, for he watched throughout the course of his life as his father--also a chief--withered from warrior-conqueror into sage but frail methuselah. As such so also did the people of his tribe witness their former ruler's life and descent into old age and finally death. Thus the prime flaw in the reliability of deifying the living.

And as such was likely created the first primal spiritual hierarchy: an amalgamation of the head of the family unit: the father, with the worship of ancestral spirits and the original stories of a world creator, also a father, but a father to all--only an unseeable one. Following such speculation, logically the hierarchy of spirit--or the religions we know and practice today--can safely be classified as no more (and no less) than tools for the maintenance of civilization, or useful means of not only subjugating a massive population into father-son submissiveness and obedience, but of controlling them by means of generationally self-indoctrinated belief that the life given them individually is less important than their promised post death reward.

The man of great spiritual faith can find and cast out arrogance from the position that he knows something and stands to receive reward (in death) that his faithless brother does not and will not partake in. The Faithless man or man of no god can draw arrogance from the position of absolute sensory reality--that is, the belief that all he has experienced with his five senses is all that exists. Further, discovery that the magical figures and the tales they populate of youth are fictional and cannot be in the world beneath a blue sky gravity eternally withholds from our individual physical means, can arm the non-believer with both an obdurate certainty, and a sense of condescension for all those who would by blind faith insert the magical or supernatural into the rest of reality's proven physical laws.

In closing, I would truly prefer a world where the spiritual and the non-spiritual man could exist and together possibly expand the frontiers of the known world--both the world in our minds and that of the potentially unseen but existent nonetheless. Unfortunately, as history reaching back into unwritten shadow has demonstrated ceaselessly, those who believe will always punish those who do not, just as those who do not believe will persecute they who believe in an unseen and often perceived as by them, threatening force.
edit on AMp12201430552014-09-08T00:55:44-05:00J2014America/Chicago by AphoticJoe because: Added a sentence



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 02:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: AphoticJoe
a reply to: Aphorism



The only assured nature of the human race is to self arrange its individual units into a spiritual hierarchy. The most basic human society--the family--is subjugated by will of the father; collected, nourished and indoctrinated into the cult of life by the mother, and subject to the authority and paternal preference of the elder sibling.


On what planet?



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I completely understand where you are coming from...although I do believe that there is a spiritual hierarchy. Jesus said " He that will be "Geatest" among you will be servant of "ALL". And also " Love your enemies and do good to those that despitefully use you that you may be perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect'. And lastly "Take up your cross deny yourself and follow me". There is a spiritual hierarchal order it is just not one that the temporal or carnally centered individual will want to participate in. When we are able to view these matters from an energy development perspective and to see the value of establishing contrast ( In the spiritual/quantum realm) by applying those principles we will begin to willingly submit and surrender to the process of self-crucifixion.

Harry



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarryJoy
I completely understand where you are coming from...although I do believe that there is a spiritual hierarchy. Jesus said " He that will be "Geatest" among you will be servant of "ALL". And also " Love your enemies and do good to those that despitefully use you that you may be perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect'. And lastly "Take up your cross deny yourself and follow me". There is a spiritual hierarchal order it is just not one that the temporal or carnally centered individual will want to participate in. When we are able to view these matters from an energy development perspective and to see the value of establishing contrast ( In the spiritual/quantum realm) by applying those principles we will begin to willingly submit and surrender to the process of self-crucifixion.

Harry


Nothing written that was attributed to Jesus was written until multiple generations after he allegedly lived by people who never witnessed him saying anything. In fact, there is zero contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) proving that he lived.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I see no real issue here, unless there is some spiritual pride involved.
Just like we show respect to older persons by calling them "sir", or to doctors, teachers and so on, just the same we show respect to a spiritual master by calling him "master'. And it's obvious to me that as long as I come to such a master to learn from him I owe at least this simple form of respect. I'm not sure it's a hierarchy per se, more a way to differentiate the functions people have in a group; some are masters and some are disciples.
Even more so when following a spiritual path; if I'm willing to show respect and use a title for a simple teacher who won't take me beyond mundane knowledge, how much more respect I should show a master who I expect to take me to the eternal truth?
And the question comes in mind, if I don't agree with a specific master's views, it really means he is not a true master and I should denounce him? Is my opinion the only criteria that makes or breaks a spiritual master?

Buddha was a man like any other, yes; the title was given, again, to differentiate between him, who was awaken, and the rest of us who aren't yet. Yet. The only difference between him and any other person who is not awaken is that he knows he is a Buddha and the others not.

For someone who is not spiritual and couldn't care less about it as the OP, I see an awful lot of time and energy spent in trying to deny spirituality. But as long as we're only looking down on something how can we see what is above?



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine


The majority viewpoint among scholars is that Jesus existed, but scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Scholars who believe that Jesus existed differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts,[11] but most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7-4 BC and died 30–36 AD,[12][13][14] that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, that he was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate[8][9][10]and that he lived in Galilee and Judea and did not preach or study elsewhere.[15][16][17] The theory that Jesus never existed at all has very little scholarly support.[18][19][20][21][22]


Source



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Tangerine


The majority viewpoint among scholars is that Jesus existed, but scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Scholars who believe that Jesus existed differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts,[11] but most scholars agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew who was born between 7-4 BC and died 30–36 AD,[12][13][14] that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, that he was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate[8][9][10]and that he lived in Galilee and Judea and did not preach or study elsewhere.[15][16][17] The theory that Jesus never existed at all has very little scholarly support.[18][19][20][21][22]


Source

Name one scholar who cited a single contemporaneous document (contemporaneous to when Jesus allegedly lived) written by anyone who lived when Jesus allegedly lived that stated that the writer witnessed Jesus living.

Scholars BELIEVE many things. Testable evidence is required to make something a fact.

Crucified by order of Pontius Pilate? LOL There are zero contemporaneous Roman records of the alleged trial/crucifixion of Jesus or, for that matter, of his existence. May I remind you that the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. Jesus lived) to prove their claim. It is impossible to prove a negative.


Your source is Wikipedia. LOL









posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

The difference between the death of Jesus and the works of Tacticus is about 80 years.

These are Roman records.

So no reason to take your position seriously, get over it.

Any thoughts?


edit on 8-9-2014 by Kashai because: Content edit



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

"Nothing written that was attributed to Jesus was written until multiple generations after he allegedly lived by people who never witnessed him saying anything."


A Generation is about 20 to 30 years and while 2000 years ago? The majority of the human populace lived about 50 years, people did live longer.

You will also need to look more carefully as to why the documentation is verified.

Any thoughts?
edit on 8-9-2014 by Kashai because: Content edit



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Tangerine

The difference between the death of Jesus and the works of Tacticus is about 80 years.

These are Roman records.

So no reason to take your position seriously, get over it.

Any thoughts?



Uh..Tacitus never witnessed Jesus living. Duh.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Tangerine

"Nothing written that was attributed to Jesus was written until multiple generations after he allegedly lived by people who never witnessed him saying anything."


A Generation is about 20 to 30 years and while 2000 years ago? The majority of the human populace lived about 50 years, people did live longer.

You will also need to look more carefully as to why the documentation is verified.

Any thoughts?


It's difficult to give my response to your post when I don't know what relevant point you're making. A historical generation is 25 years. Anything from 26 to 50 years is two generations.

I don't need to look more carefully "as to why the documentation is verified." There is no contemporaneous documentation, period.

Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the word contemporaneous. Ir refers to documentation produced by someone who lived when Jesus allegedly lived who, in this context, claimed that s/he witnessed Jesus living. It could be as simple as, "Dear Mom, I saw Jesus at the well today. He was wearing new sandals. I wonder if you might buy me a similar pair for my birthday."

If the writer wasn't even alive when Jesus allegedly lived, they could not possibly have produced contemporaneous documentation (ie. historical evidence) of the existence of Jesus. Furthermore, simply stating a belief that Jesus lived without having personally witnessed his existence is not evidence.

I'm amazed that people don't realize this. Of course, I understand the people have been indoctrinated from birth to believe that Jesus actually lived, but it amazes me that once they realize that there is absolutely no historical evidence to back it up they still cling to their belief like flies caught on a glue strip. How many adults still cling to a belief in Santa and his flying reindeer?
edit on 8-9-2014 by Tangerine because: rewording for clarification







 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join