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.

 

FEAR: the basis of beliefs

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 04:39 AM
link   
Why do we believe? Because otherwise we would be utterly lost, wouldn't we? We can believe in theoretical, political or religious dogma, in which we lean when explaining the world and all what happens in it. We want security, and false security is achieved by belief. God promises us everlasting peace, eternal life and paradise should we believe in his word; scientific dogma gives us rational basis of explanation, a secure ground upon which build higher card houses; political ideology gives us sense of security that we are not alone, but there are others who have succumb into the madness as well.

If we think about it, we quickly notice that one reason behind accepting any belief is FEAR itself. Without beliefs, what would happen? Woudn't we be very afraid of tomorrow itself? If we had no pattern of action, based on belief - either in God, or in communism, or in socialism or in capitalism - the dogma which we are conditioned in, we would be utterly lost. Isn't the acceptance of any belief system covering up this fear? This fear that there is nothing, that we are empty and alone?

Can human mind stay remain sane without belief system? We all after all believe that sun will rise tomorrow as it has risen every day since (except during the Kaamos up here or down there). Can we be genuinely open to the option that it is possible that sun doesn't rise tomorrow (as metaphorically)? In other words, can we set aside all systems of belief wheter religious, philosophical, ethical, political etc. and remain sane? I think we can:

For sometime (for few years) I have lived like this, or at least tried to. That is, without fear and renouncing beliefs in my personal sphere of experiences every time I come accross one. I look at the world as it is, not postulating creator or absence of it, not subscribing into any political frameset, not believing anything. It is so refreshing - with it has come real freedom; freedom of thought that is not constrained by any conditioned boundary, which are typically erected by various beliefs. With this, nightmares are gone; even if I see nightmare, I feel no fear and I can actually act in those dreams, where before I used to paralyze.

The problem with fear based beliefs are that they divide; they make people so angry against each other, that they start throwing stuff, later perhaps bullets - at each other. Even the believers in same dogmas have their differences in opinions, which they then argue in heated debates. Yet all of these people fail to understand that their opinions are based on conditioned dogmas which gives them false security; and when this security is threatened by opinion of others, they get angered. And if totally debunked, they get depressed. So they defend their security in fear to the last breath; the cause of wars.

-v
edit on 19-12-2010 by v01i0 because: 2345




posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:00 AM
link   
I'm with you that we must enter into the unconditional ground of all being and becoming, which must involve by neccessity, the capacity to leave everything else behind, every attachment and belief system which would hinder us from our journey into truth and reality as it might increasingly be and become for us, and that takes courage, yes.

However I ask God for this courage to enter into God as a condition of the unconditional eternity of which you allude, and to remain there with me, simply as the higher love which makes it all possible in the first place. That is not because I am fearful, to tread alone into nothing, but only because I'm courageous enough to embrace the love of God as I am embraced, and enveloped, as are we all. So it's not a belief, nor a reaction born of fear of the unknown, just rational, logical practical sense, since there is always and forever an eternal relationship between two and the one who is not two founded on love, as the reason for the interplay of life.

So I think that since we cannot understand "God" and can only experience the creation, that some form of loving bhakti (devotional service) must become our modus operandi, and what we experience there, is a whole new consciousness, which for me, simply brings me and my fellow man closer to God realized in love.

Therefore the Golden Rule alone is sufficient to experience the fullness of intent of the love of creation, and thus God, and "God" as a conceptualization of some kind, is no longer needed at that point, provided we maintain an understanding, that by virtue of our very inclusion, we are intrinsic to the greater love of the larger reality, which seeks to share it's kingdom as a realm of possibility, for the sake of love and freedom.

So i agree then put a very slight spin on what you say, to keep it fun and humorous. There's no fear there at all in fact.


S&F


edit on 19-12-2010 by NewAgeMan because: S&F added, so you'll know it was me first! ; )



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Thank you for you contribution. Maybe there is "god" or maybe there isn't. To me it seems that you think god to be something else than is commonly understood in religions. God is very ethically loaded word, so I personally avoid it's use. Love is another word I avoid; to me all this is just unconditional being. We are, nothing more nothing less. We all have our unique ways of being and I like to be without any categorization. Right now I am somewhat objected of giving further replies, got a baby to take care of.

-v



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Fear is a primitive emotion that is meant to "protect" us. Being that we are no longer in an environment where we need to be weary of larger animals or stronger tribes, fear is pretty useless in western society. I agree that fear based beliefs are a huge crutch and really get you nowhere as far as learning about yourself (spiritually and cognitively) and the multi-verse. Sounds (while text is monotone) like you are a bit of a Taoist...



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


What if you **CHOSE** to be love?



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 

A baby! OMG, that's wonderful! Congratulations.. (although perhaps all kudus really go to him or her, it's not an easy thing to be born).

And yeah, the thing I was describing, the unconditioned, is the same, except the view I take fills it with a sense of mirth, and love, and when I say love I mean as a loss of self in an experiencial relationship, not unlike that of a parent to a child!

A humorless, unconditioned ground of being, is insulting imho, not that it HAS to be amuzing all the time mind you - that's just what arises for me, a sense of wanting to seek out community and intimate authentic human interaction and participation, what i've found termed as "koinionia", which is good humoured in nature, and by its very nature. So when I get to that space you're talking about, it makes me smile, sigh, want to stretch out, and relax. Then again, I don't have a baby to take care of either..



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


I S&f'ed this thread because it is spot on.
It also renders 90% of this board obsolete for this board is imo mainly a feartool.

To keep people coming in every day at or after work to be able to 'be themselves' and have arguments over some things they can't even perceive of while constantly keeping themselves out of the picture .

Know thyself



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by jezabelandthesea
 


I have been called many things (to answer your impression of me being taoist), yet I identify myself with nothing.

I understand that natural fear is important factor in survival of human race. In here I was referring more to the spiritual or psychological fear that seems to be somekind of perverted form of fear - but yeah, it's propably derived from instinctual fear.

-v



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


It's she and she says:





-v



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TheFaceless
 



Originally posted by TheFaceless
reply to post by v01i0
 


I S&f'ed this thread because it is spot on.
It also renders 90% of this board obsolete for this board is imo mainly a feartool.


Thank you. I agree with you, that many people on ATS project their fears upon others, and many succumb into fears that others project upon them. Sad really.


Originally posted by TheFaceless
reply to post by v01i0
 

Know thyself


Exactly. Knowing and recognizing the psychological fear in oneself is a good step to take in order to know oneself.


-v
edit on 19-12-2010 by v01i0 because: 2345



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 

This guy describes what I was trying to get at very well



With the exception that I believe we are variables of a supreme value, and so i like to maintain, wherever possible, an indespensible I-thou relationship with the Absolute, but one which can only be expressed and/or experienced through the love of bhakti (devotional service) since the Absolute or the Godhead cannot possibly be understood except in terms of a love relationship that is creative, and one which, I believe, has given rise to existence itself. So while it's good to walk around in absolute freedom, with a beginners mind, for me anyway, I cannot bring myself to be ignorant and without awareness of the sheer fact of my own existence and that of the world around me, and everyone else, so there's the sharing, the "koinonia". None of this however is based on "belief", but is just the felt experience or what some call gnosis.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


On Friday night, when I was playing hockey, fearlessly I might add (at 43 I can outskate any of the 20 somethings), it occured to me, what the "fundies" actually mean by "living for the Lord" which always seemed so ridiculous and absurd to me, in my past life, where I would think c'mon, what about ME, why shouldn't I just be allowed to live for ME and ME alone, but with time, perspectives can change.. - and I suddenky realized that the experience was just SO good, that I could not keep it merely to myself, and so I played, not as much for "me" (I tend to disappear to myself when playing hockey anyway) but also so that "God" as the spirit left over, can also play THROUGH me, and enjoy the experience WITH me, so to speak, and then in the flow, there's also the dance of life, of lover and beloved other, which can only enrich a personal experience, by many orders of magnitude. Plus I play better hockey when the spirit controls me, growing at times, eyes in the back of my head, it's a wonderful experience. There is absolutely ZERO fear in this viewpoint, worldview or paradigm, none, because if God is for us in this way, as a spiritual dance of love, then just who or what can be against us, and where is death's sting in it? It makes me laugh, sometimes cry, but I'm always left in the end with a smile and a warm fuzzy, and a peace, that comes not of this world, of people, places and things.

So no one can mock me for trying to foist a "belief" onto them, that's not it, not at all. Just looking for friends is all, no matter where they can be found, even if only in a certain likemindedness, a shared koinonia. That's it that's all.

It's about somehow generating a new space of possibility in this dark and uncaring world, to make way for something better, something happy, creative and fun, for one and all. What would possibly be wrong with that?





edit on 19-12-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


I guess that Koinionia is pretty much same as feeling with of communion in community; it is necessarily a religious('religare' = 'to bind together') feeling, yet it has nothing supernatural in it, meaning that it would require a faith to some higher being, unless by higher being we simply refer to the spirit of the group? In this light it seem somewhat clear to me, that the 'god' from the beginning may have just been the 'spirit' of the community. In the beginning it was the spirit of the tribe, their totem-animal; when society and civilization expanded, this 'spirit' became more complex, like god's of religions are today.

In fact, the above makes perfect sense; hence there is no god (as concrete being), just the shared emotion of community which is given some "shape" in the form of totem or religious scripture:

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
– Jesus (Matt 18:20)

But there's a great danger in group Koinionia as it separates people to "tribes", to us and them – to me and you. I know that you experience it as "melting" into the one, but those with somewhat limited perspective experience it as "melting" into their one. They don't necessarily understand their experience as natural human social ability, but attribute this experience to god, to their god and hence they require anyone to accept their god before they will be part of their Koinionia, community.

-v



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by jezabelandthesea
 



Originally posted by jezabelandthesea
reply to post by v01i0
 


What if you **CHOSE** to be love?



I try not to choose to be something; I try to be, whatever I am


It seems to me that the need to choose is confusion. Whenever there are options to be chosen from, there is confusion. A clear mind doesn't need to choose, for it has no options because clear mind knows what to do.

I have tried to explain this in thread called Levels of Consciousness.

I gave following representation with a picture and explanation:





On X axis, we have increasing consciousness where on far left there is zero and little consciousness and it increases towards the right end of axis. In the end of X, there are fully or highly conscious beings.

On Y axis, there are freedom of choices, or free will, or however we want to express it. More high the gaussian curve peaks on axis Y, the more we have possible choices that the being can make, or choose from.

So, as the level of consciousness increases, more the possibilities seems to become. But as we reach the peak of the curve, suddenly the choices begin to decrease.

Explanation goes as follows:

Imagine an insect or animal on the far left of the X axis. It has little choices and small to none free will - it is more like driven by it's instincts and it reacts to the any given stimuli by instinct.

In the middle, both sides of the peak, are the human beings (with various levels of consciousness) described in the OP. Level 0 person does not really have lot of choices. One has to behave as the society and culture demands. But here one can still exert some freedom. As we approach levels 2 and 3, there are more freedoms, and more consciousness.

But as the consciousness begins to reach very high levels, the options seems to decrease, as one is aware of the right choices, and most likely is bound to commit them. They know what needs to be done, and they usually do it.

On far right are fully conscious beings that cannot err. They simply make the right choices, demanded by their consciousness and awareness.


-v
edit on 20-12-2010 by v01i0 because: 2345



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join