A Brief History of Evolutionary Spirituality

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
for Astyanax

a star for poetry

even sarcastic poetry is better than no poetry at all

:-)

edit because I forgot how to use the reply button

[edit on 10/9/2008 by Spiramirabilis]




posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 





12: an alcoholic solution of a volatile substance


whatever it takes to get you through the thread amigo

I'm going with #4



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


I'm not sure what your point is . . . really? But, it's clear . . . you must be much brighter than I, as I can't read minds.

Since the response was to me . . . I'll answer the question you THOUGHT was rhetorical. I stated in my previous posts that I don't deal in the supernatural, so #'s 3-6 on MW's list is what I was talking about (referring to).

But then again . . . you should have known that right. I mean it's clear.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by dunwichwitch

I have trouble with worshiping or grasping any type of concept or philosophy firmly. I understand it and everything, but I can't grasp it fully, because what is is not a concept. It just kind of is.


In my relatively useless opinion, that is a great grasp of philosophy. Some of the best mystics and philosophers ever born have argued exactly the same thing. I wouldnt let the word salad thrown at us by many modern "scholarly" philosophers confuse you. Many of them really do not have a grasp of the philosophy they are discussing, and substitute multi-syllabic words, and confusing terminology to cover this fact up.



Originally posted by dunwichwitch
It's best we don't figure out a way to describe it. To know it is to know not to describe it anymore because then it ruins the meaning of what you are.


This is where I am torn. I know why describing it with words and concepts is doomed to failure, and I do not kid myself into thinking that I am going to be the one to succeed where greater minds than mine have failed or decided that trying at all was not wise.

classics.mit.edu...


Thus much at least, I can say about all writers, past or future, who say they know the things to which I devote myself, whether by hearing the teaching of me or of others, or by their own discoveries-that according to my view it is not possible for them to have any real skill in the matter. There neither is nor ever will be a treatise of mine on the subject. For it does not admit of exposition like other branches of knowledge;


However Plato also says this;


but after much converse about the matter itself and a life lived together, suddenly a light, as it were, is kindled in one soul by a flame that leaps to it from another, and thereafter sustains itself.


and this;


But I do not think it a good thing for men that there should be a disquisition, as it is called, on this topic-except for some few, who are able with a little teaching to find it out for themselves. As for the rest, it would fill some of them quite illogically with a mistaken feeling of contempt, and others with lofty and vain-glorious expectations, as though they had learnt something high and mighty.


The nature of written discourse has changed since Plato's time. With the internet, we have the opportunity for written conversations that they did not have in the past, which are now near the same as "converse about the matter itself" where one can go over again the pieces misunderstood due to the language problem.

And, there are always those, " who are able with a little teaching to find it out for themselves." Where just a brief written passage is the thing that knocks them over the edge into the only understanding that can be had, gnosis, the understanding that actually comes from within themselves, that higher part of themselves that has access to or "is," more accurately, the "Supermind."

I dont think there is any reason to want everyone to see "what is." Nor any real reason to be particularly worried about throwing the inadequate descriptions around. Those who can hear, will hear. Those that cant hear wont. It isnt a value thing, those that cant hear are not less than those that can. It is is a function thing. Those that cant hear do not need to hear. They have another role in "now" that doesnt include understanding. One shouldnt perhaps throw the concept out hoping to be a savior, and teach those in "ignorance" anything, but if it simply spills out of one, if it is your function to think, and to speak about it, just do it and do not worry what the consequences are.

Like it says in the Tao de Ching; (where it also discusses the impossibility of using language and concepts to accurately describe "What is")


The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.


and of the concept of who needs to know,



When a superior man hears of the Tao,
he immediately begins to embody it.
When an average man hears of the Tao,
he half believes it, half doubts it.
When a foolish man hears of the Tao,
he laughs out loud.
If he didn't laugh,
it wouldn't be the Tao.


Just like a rock is not an unevolved bit of God, but exactly what it must be in this now, so the person who cannot grasp "what is" is not an unevolved human, but exactly what they must be now. How silly would it be to sit in judgment of perfection? If it is your function to speak about the unspeakable, why worry about that either? Just do what you are naturally designed to do and let perfection take care of itself.



[edit on 9-10-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by solomons path
 





I don't deal in the supernatural, so #'s 3-6 on MW's list is what I was talking about (referring to).


I'm feeling a little conflicted about where I stand on this one - or where to go with it

I love this topic

and, I'm not a complete idiot (it may be complete at some point) - I do understand why this discussion has to include religion

but at the same time - I'm not sure why this discussion has to include religion

so - I agree with what you're pointing out - this doesn't have to be a supernatural conversation at all - and 3-6 pretty much covers it without taking anything away from the idea

but, maybe I'm just battle weary :-)



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 





I dont think there is any reason to want everyone to see "what is." Nor any real reason to be particularly worried about throwing the inadequate descriptions around. Those who can hear, will hear. Those that cant hear wont. It isnt a value thing, those that cant hear are not less than those that can. It is is a function thing. Those that cant hear do not need to hear. They have another role in "now" that doesnt include understanding. One shouldnt perhaps throw the concept out hoping to be a savior, and teach those in "ignorance" anything, but if it simply spills out of one, if it is your function to think, and to speak about it, just do it and do not worry what the consequences are.


I like that Illusions

it's all good... :-)

are you a professor in your real life? The amount of information that just seems to spill out of you never ceases to amaze me

and, you make me read - which is a good thing



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by dunwichwitch
 


I have problems reading words - so in the end - same difference - language issues




...but I can't grasp it fully, lbecause what is is not a concept. It just kind of is. I can't say anything is evolving because I can't say forward or backward is a motion. It's all just patterns to be observed.


I have difficulties with time concepts, and I see in pattern too - so, I think I understand what you're saying



It would be weird if our consciousness decided to push the stop button on the telescopic fractal kaleidescope and step away for a few moments.


which makes this idea very interesting to me

so - what is it about this conversation that bothers you? I'd like to understand why you think it's a mistake to examine it -

[edit on 10/9/2008 by Spiramirabilis]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
To Illusions:

Nice avatar and screen name. nudge nudge wink wink say no more.

The Tao cannot be taught, only realized! This is why religions fail. This is why science for the most part remains stagnant. This is why much philosophy, like you said, is more reliant on grammar and witty poetic and important sounding statements, which for the most part are just rehashed notions spoken differently without real understanding. It's all trying to describe the same thing. Even psychology...

It's all asking "why is this?"

We really don't want to know. The closest thing I can do comfortably is rebut with the question "Why not?"

To spiramabillis:

I probably mis-spelled that. I have only been able to see in patterns and vivid picture since about 2 years ago.

Does anyone ever get to the "Oh no, dude!" stage when contemplating this stuff?



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dunwichwitch
 





Does anyone ever get to the "Oh no, dude!" stage when contemplating this stuff?


oh, yeah - definitely - minute by minute

you just seemed concerned - like - maybe we were going to trip a switch or something :-)

wanted to make sure no one got hurt



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I don't know . . . maybe my point wasn't clear, as to what I'm getting at. I think that the concepts, that most, associate with spirituality is actually natural processes of the mind and emotion.

Whether one ascribes to the super-string theory of vibrations or a collective conscious and archetypes . . . they are natural/physical processes that effect our perception and emotions. Just as the sun rising is no longer associated with a physical god riding across the sky, so to will "spirituality" be seen as our connection to this STILL mysterious universe. But . . . what do I know? (less and less everyday!)


EDIT - grammar/spelling


[edit on 10/9/08 by solomons path]

[edit on 10/9/08 by solomons path]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by solomons path
. . . they are natural/physical processes that effect our perception and emotions. Just as the sun rising is no longer associated with a physical god riding across the sky, so to will "spirituality" be seen as our connection to this STILL mysterious universe. But . . . what do I know!


I think that works

our understanding of "spirituality" - or whatever word we agree we're using - changes

it's another one of those situations where language - or whatever we end up using to describe things we don't understand - gets in the way more than it helps

this is something I've always thought - that whatever people may consider to be metaphysical now (whenever now is) - eventually will become less mysterious - and then just plain normal

metaphysics will just be physics at some point - even if that point is in the distant future



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


Hi Spiramirabilis,

I love your avatar...

I know exactly what that monkey feels like it is a pity many others don't and pretend to be anything different.

I am one of those people that have experienced what human primates call a near death experience.

But in my case it was Not a near death experience, but I was pronounced "brain dead" for a period longer than 30 minutes!

After this experience, I no longer know what is death is, and can only say that death is a myth!

It is only the biological robot ceases to function.

The human body is already dead and is Not Living.

Life looks through another body, called the soul.

Often people think that the soul and the spirit are one and the same, but this is Not the case.

But as for Spiritual Evolution I also have my doubts, as I don't think it is an individual process, but rather it is a collective phenomena. That is if "spirit" is defined as the nature or character of something.

I often wonder if language is a major problem in understanding one another's point of view in its true context.

However I do know, that Geometry is The universal Language of both the Creation and The True Mind.

Even writing is a geometric form.

There is nothing at all alive on the earth, or in any Universe, as Life looks into this holographic manifestation, we call the Universe.

What we experience is the greatest virtual reality program, the True Mind has ever Created.

What people call the human Mind, is Not of the brain.

The brain is a Decoder/Encoder between the Mind and the program it is experiencing .

This is why you can Not feel the exact Location of a thought in your brain and technicians can only detect the by-products, in the form of electrical and chemical activity, because the source of the Life activity, is Not in the Brain.

So this is why I love your monkey in your avatar as it reminds me of my true position of how I and others view The Cosmos.

LOL....

[edit on 9-10-2008 by The Matrix Traveller]

[edit on 9-10-2008 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 




I was pronounced "brain dead" for a period that longer than 30 minutes! After this experience, I no longer know what is death is and can only say that death is only a myth!


I'm glad you're still with us - I think death is a myth too - got nothing to lose if we're wrong :-)


But as for Spiritual Evolution I also have my doubts as I don't think it is an individual process but rather it is a collective phenomena......I often wonder if language is a major problem in understanding one another's point of view in its true context.

I think I agree on both counts - but especially the language issue - especially on a subject like this

we almost have to agree first on what words we're going to use - and what those words mean before we can really dig in - and even then - the idea is sure to get messed up before long



However I do know that Geometry is The universal Language of both the Creation and The True Mind.


I have suspicions about geometry myself - math in general - not sure where to go with that - but it's interesting



So this is why I love your monkey in your avatar as it reminds me of my true position of how I and others view The Cosmos. LOL....


:-)

I'm glad you like it - my happiest so far

it's also reflects my true position on my view of the cosmos

did you see this thread?: www.abovetopsecret.com...

this is what inspired this one - if you haven't seen it - it's worth the time



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 




I very much intrigued by the idea of humanity being in a transitional phase, struggling to reconcile it's ever increasing technological and scientific knowledge with it's lagging spiritual understanding.


SD - I like this idea too - very much - and I've always had a sense of the whole shebang moving forward together - our physical evolution and our "spiritual" evolution

as has been mentioned previously - we may have an issue with words or definitions

I have to say - with just what you've supplied in the first few posts - there's enough material here for a hundred new threads - my head is going to explode

I've only been able to dart in and out of here today - and still haven't had time to really read through a lot of this

but just for starters - from one of your opening posts:


Freed from the mythic dogmatisms of premodern religion, transcending the materialistic biases of modern scientific thought, and liberated from the narcissistic self-absorptions of postmodernity...what kind of new world could human beings aligned with the trajectory of a spiritually evolving cosmos actually create?


this is where my brain wants to start with all this - - but how do we really get into this until we agree to do it free of - well, free of all of the above?

do we still have to have the god or no god chat - or is there a way to do this without it?

if not - I'm up for it - but, seems like it might cut into time spent on the actual subject

I don't see why science and spirit (whatever) can't hold hands and walk into the sunset together on this one - but, maybe I'm wrong



I am not entirely sure what sort of direction you want to take this, however. It touches upon three of my favorite subjects evolution, science in general, and spirituality, but I am not sure where you want to begin.

Obviously this is going to be an opinion paper, and not a fact filled one as we consider facts. Is it, "what would human society look like if we recognized that we were involved in a spiritual evolution as a collective?"


edit to add something Illusions asked earlier on

[edit on 10/9/2008 by Spiramirabilis]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I'm not sure a definition of spirituality 'works' (for many people anyway).
It's like defining a color.
A color which we don't even know exists to begin with.
It seems everyone has a different view of what spirituality is/isn't.
I remember first hearing about the theory that we are all one and thinking it was a bit delusional with no bases.
The more I look at it though, everything does seem to be connected in ways we can't even begin to comprehend.
The human mind is tricky.
I know that every part of my being yearns for a greater purpose.
To have a soul that lives on forever.
An afterlife which, for whatever reason, is better than this life.
It's this knowledge that as a human I WANT to believe in this that makes me push against it all the harder.
What is spirituality?
If everything is connected, then it's everything and nothing.
Yin and yang. Co-existing for whatever reason.
If this were a computer program, then I suppose you could call it the code which we can't see.
The hidden force which guides everything.

But then again, this is just a crazy person's view on it.
I really know next to nothing about such things.

Personaly, I think we are in a sort of bubble of limited physics/dimensions. We can't seem to pop this bubble, nor can we understand what is on the outside.
It's like we're the number '1'. We can understand all the numbers that come before us, but none of the numbers that come after us and leading into infinity.
I believe infinity is the key to all our questions.
We can't understand 'all', so we can't understand anything.
Like we're looking at a fraction of the entire picture.

By now I'm sure you've noticed that I love to use metaphors.
Anway, this is my crazy view of the universe and the unknown even though I have no real bases for believing it
.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by solomons path
I don't know . . . maybe my point wasn't clear, as to what I'm getting at. I think that the concepts, that most, associate with spirituality is actually natural processes of the mind and emotion.

Whether one ascribes to the super-string theory of vibrations or a collective conscious and archetypes . . . they are natural/physical processes that effect our perception and emotions. Just as the sun rising is no longer associated with a physical god riding across the sky, so to will "spirituality" be seen as our connection to this STILL mysterious universe. But . . . what do I know? (less and less everyday!)



That makes a lot of sense.
I'm probably way of base with my understanding or lack of understanding about spirituality.
But then are you implying that spirituality is not a natural process?
Years from now, say we had technology which could measure the 'spiritual' (if it exists). Wouldn't it also then be considered natural compared to our lack of understanding today?
Or do you believe that it could not be measured given any scientific advances in the future?
OR, do you believe that it works on a different 'track' than science all together?
I believe that spirituality is generally a misunderstanding of completely 'natural' forces which we can't understand and are therefor forced to misunderstand.
But I also believe it's a piece of the puzzle, in which if we had the other pieces, the whole picture would become clear.

Meh.
My brain hurts.
I need a brewski.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


It's interesting that you describe spirituality as a color.

The theory of spiral dynamics uses colors to describe different stages of humanity's "collective intelligence" in non-linear evolutionary terms.


Spiral Dynamics argues that human nature is not fixed: humans are able, when forced by life conditions, to adapt to their environment by constructing new, more complex, conceptual models of the world that allow them to handle the new problems. Each new model includes and transcends all previous models. According to Beck and Cowan, these conceptual models are organized around so-called vMemes: systems of core values or collective intelligences, applicable to both individuals and entire cultures.

In spiral dynamics, the term "vMeme" refers to a core value system, acting as an organizing principle, which expresses itself through memes (self-propagating ideas, habits, or cultural practices). The prepended and superscripted letter v indicates these are not basic memes but value systems which include them.

Spiral Dynamics (v-memes)

I actually don't subscribe to this theory, but it is interesting in its own right.


ps. My apologies for being absent for the last few days, I will attempt to respond to al of your posts over the next couple of days.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Non-Dual Spirituality (god within):

The awakening as the intuitive awareness of unity and dissolving our attachment to egoic consciousness.

Conceptual Spirituality (God outside):

Belief on a mind made conceptual omnipotent "something" or "some thing" outside of the self.

Many, such as myself, believe that the present transitional state described in the OP is a an evolutionary shift from the latter to the former.





[edit on 10/9/2008 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 



No . . . you and I are "thinking" the same. I believe "spirituality", at least as most ascribe to it, is a natural process. Whether one sees it as a "force" or "connection", it is our bond to the universe. Where in the past those that refused to deny this connection would have no other option than to look to the supernatural, we know have studies on the mind and consciousness that show it's far more complex or "mysterious" than previously thought. Add what has been found out though quantum mechanics and how unseen or unmeasurable forces shape the world around us and I think we see that the feeling of spirituality is guided by these same forces, in the future.

Masaru Emoto's experiments on how the structure of water molecules can change based on projecting emotional intent at said water have proven that there is more to our mind and the emotions we project than we currently thought. Where as we used to think that praying and sending positive thoughts someones way had an impact due to a deity that had our best intentions at heart, it seems that the power to effect change resides in us . . . and shows an intimate connection to the natural world and our universe. If the body is made up of mostly water . . . how do our emotions effect our own body and it's health . . . how do our emotions effect those around us. I think this is just an example of how the natural world and other forces in the universe are still WAY above our understanding, but that is changing. In my opinion . . .

Masaru Emoto

Pravda article on Russian research of the subject (molecular telepathy)

EDIT - fixed link


[edit on 10/9/08 by solomons path]



posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 


If you are going to trust a dying organ's perception of the world, you are far from rational.

Why do you assume your brain, in its death throws, is going to function perfectly? Especially considering the brain is inherently flawed at the best of times?

Seems somewhat arrogant to me.





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join