Originally posted by kacou
In today world global civilization, it seems that individual spiritual freedom has been altered to give birth to a cacophony of half legitimacy that
are all fighting, interacting, and dismissing one another.
It seems to me more like egoistic competitions disguised as ‘spiritual freedom.’
For, IMO, those who enjoy, privately and scattered amidst
the din, a truly free spirit have no need to strive for some particular coveted golden ring.
But you do have a point – it is the chaos that inhibits most people from feeling free, somehow, to be themselves without fears and anxieties that
need to be expressed outwardly; usually in a negatively interactive fashion.
Yet, eventually, there must arise a spirit of selflessness that is selfless to the point of not being able to enjoy their own spiritual freedom
knowing that it could be so much more to other people if it were shared rather than just quietly lived out in anonymity. That is essentially the
philosophy of the bodhisattva.
It appears that more then ever today is the time for someone or something to broaden a practical and clear bulk of knowledge about our place in
the spectrum of what we see and what we don’t see.
Yes, I think so, too. It isn’t really that mankind is lacking anything in particular except some sort of organization or initial leadership
(note I said LEADER not RULER)
to get the ball rolling. More of an actual living example of an ordinary person who might also be able to
provide some important answers at the outset to get humanity in gear as far as tapping into our collective pool of ‘MIND’ in which all answers can
It does seem to be that the perennial shepherd/sheep allegory is a valid one – it isn’t about domination but rather guidance. And just for the
time required, if you know what I mean.
Because provable spiritual experience seem to be constant from individual to individual and from period to period, it is possible that all
spirituality are entrenched in unfailing laws just like physic or any other discipline.
Personally, from my own studying/research and personal experience, I truly believe that ‘metaphysics’
is a good word to describe what I
perceive as a truly legitimate defined field of study which pretty much encompasses ‘reality’
– both seen and unseen. Actually, it
CONNECTS the two – it makes sense of all the mysteries and it is logical and scientific in nature, the way I see it.
It’s beyond quantum physics although that is a VERY big part of it. It is actually almost simple in its logic, once perspective is clear past a
certain point. The biggest problem, from what I see, is getting most people to get past that ‘certain point.’ And one of the main
reasons for that is our propensity to label everything and then judge by our labels – basically prejudice ourselves from opportunity and new
If and only if, someone or something discovers this law, would it be regarded as a messiah?
Or would it be regarded as a civil disturbance?
Yes. To both. And then some. Or maybe even a whole bunch ‘then some.’
It can not do anything BUT tip over the apple-cart of human society…but we can surely but it back right again, soon enough.
The thing is…it MUST be.
Either it must be or we will cease to be. We need to change our course of action – not so much as far as a
drastic change in total existence but more or less just a purposeful yet not-too-complicated adjustment in both our attitudes and our habitual
I hope that makes sense. It seems to, when I type…but then I think, GEE that’s awfully muddy.
Because for sure this will be a very novel ideas which will bring a lot of discomfort to those that prevail in keeping every one ignorant about
our true identity.
Exactly. Expected and unpleasant for many and maybe even insufferable (temporarily)
for some…but what might be called a ‘necessary
And of course because the majority of the world is so ingrained with religious dogma, does the contributor of this law would have to be cast in
a saint mould?
Well, I can answer this is in two ways.
First – my personal opinion is that no ‘saint’
was ever born as anything other than a totally dedicated-to-debauchery ‘sinner.’
Just like the Rolling Stones say in ‘Sympathy for the Devil.’
Which brings me to the second form of my answer:
I think it would be far more effective just to have ‘GOD’s left-hand-man’ come directly and make short work of the whole deal.
If you dig what I’m saying.
My personal definition of 'saintliness' is 'selflessness.'
Nothing more or less. Just being about others rather than self.
If there is anything that works hardest toward the evil that comes from the hearts of men, it is religion and all its dogma. Totally precluding and
discouraging anyone’s attempt at individual pursuit of spirituality and nirvana/salvation/enlightenment/etc.
To the historic point, in fact, as we all well know of crucifixions, human bonfires, and the even more horrendous practice of ‘drawn and
Or would it be more sensible to experience what he has discover and tested for our self, and dismiss what ever personality he may
I have come to the personal conclusion that personality is a far different thing than individuality – personality seems to be more of a mask that we
wear for others (and more so ourselves, probably)
to hide behind – in both our perfections as well as our flaws. Individuality is just who
we are. No excuses and no baggage. As in: I AM WHAT I AM…and that’s all that I am.
No doubt the ‘cult of personality’
will play a part in the whole picture but maybe, in a way, that is an essential part of the beginning.
There must be some sort of following but not of persona but of example – of character and of demonstration. The ‘cult of personality’
would die a natural death, I think, due to the humility of the soul serving as the impetus. Because it wouldn’t be about THEM but about ALL OF
It’s never been like that, yet. Those that DID possess such a rare quality were usually summarily disposed of as soon as the society in which they
lived perceived a threat to the status quo. Or else ignored, shunned, or otherwise effectively discredited or silenced.
The only difference that I see, in our present time and situation, compared to the past, is that we are truly becoming a ‘global village’ instead
of imperialistic societies and also because I think mankind, as a whole, in general, is just READY for a change. Maybe we don’t manifest it but in
our hearts, we are. We know WE MUST change…we just don’t know how….yet.
But when the student is ready, the teacher will come.
I think that applies to the world as well as to the individual.
What will be important, the substance or the form?
Well, the substance – and yet the form, too – but the form will be human. So that is a given. But it is the substance of the motivation behind
the human as well as what they will have to share and give.