Science's Spirituality: Mysticism

See, I'd agree, and personally I do think it's futile to try and "unname" God; we have these words and concepts for a reason, and to try and give them up before we are transcendent is pointless - it's just attempting to appear transcendent before one has actually achieved it. There are any number of people who think they are in touch with the divine purely because they've learned how to act like fakirs and mystics.

 

Dependency on words and concepts is in and of itself responsible for the existence of spiritual charlatans, as well as for the inability of their followers to recognize the facade that they have been seduced by.

It is the act of truly giving up words and concepts that produces transcendence.

Travis

 

it seems that the language we use today is more of a result than a cause. at the same time, some of us may be more evolved than others, while still being required to use the same medium for communication. we are evolving, perhaps even re-evolving to a point where vocal language won't be necessary. until that time comes, we might as well use it positively. language may not be able to describe the divine, but it can lead one closer to it if used properly.

 

We are reliant on words and concepts to communicate, so really no one has truly 'given them up'. You might rise above them, or get behind them for some time, but inevitably you return to them, as long as we are in these bodies. If we had actually given up words in a total sense, we would not be able to have this interchange.

Transcendence isn't something to 'be produced' - it is there always and quite naturally. One simply has to become open to it. Some use words such as mantras to become open. Others seek to silence the mind. Probably the former method is easier. It is very difficult to attain any sustained mental silence through one's own efforts.

 

You have a tendency to fixate on semantics, don't you? Like I said, the point is to transcend dependency on words and concepts. Naturally, I'm not advocating abandoning verbal communication.

Transcendence must always be produced. It is only through an individual's willingness to relinquish their separative identification through a consciously surrendering mentality that one progresses towards higher levels of consciousness. This mentality can manifest in many ways -- through mantras, prayer, or a plethora of other techniques and practices, but is always dependent on the exertion of willpower. Willpower, in essence, is synonymous with enlightenment.

 

Julia Kristeva would agree, or at least argue that it was positive. Myself, I'm very skeptical of it. I believe language is a good thing.

 

i personally feel that willpower is alot closer to being synonymous with sorcery than it is with enlightenment. it seems that while development of the will and logic/language are necessary, it is also necessary to drop them when the time comes.

 

Language is a good thing. It's just not an end unto itself.

Travis

 

Well of course not. Unless you're a poet or something.

But it does play a vital role in allowing us to develop an identity, a self, etc. and to be understood by and to understand others.

I've never believed that one gets very far through self-reflection only. I've met plenty of people who never listened to others, who could effectively give up on words and concepts for how divorced from the world around them they were. Compared to that, someone who enters a dialogue is like an energy being compared to pondscum.

 

Enlightenment is the total liberation of freewill, and requires the conscious (willful) devotion of one's entire being to the process of spiritual evolution. The only thing that is dropped is the identification with the separate individual exerting the willpower.

Travis

 

Which is exactly why it must ultimately be transcended. If one is under the impression that their true identity is derived from words and concepts, then they are being influenced by an illusion.

The illusion of separation manifests in many ways. Being an anti-social recluse who is immersed in an imaginative world of their own creation does not equate with transcendence of words and concepts.

Travis

 

Your words. Thats what you said. No use accusing me of being obsessed with semantics. Maybe you should use words i na more precise way to indicate what you do mean.

The entire manifestation including you and me comes from transcendence. It can't be 'produced' by us. Once more, I suspect you haven't put this very well.

 

What identity do we have other than that which we construct? I have no reason to believe there is another. Before we learn of language and concept, we have no identity. Are we meant to be regressing to the level of babies? Because I believe that Alzheimer's can do that for us.

 

Self control

Agree.
what use is a human child.?
[none, unless one is rational and time free.. then potential becomes all]
All newborns are 'Tabula rasa'
Blank... but with a 'BIOS' genetically encoded.
A bios X, allows input/structure S to operate in reality Y ..X/S=Y
A baby kept in a box will remain a baby in a box, for ever.
All we are is the sum of experience and the processing of such
using reason ,memes and engrams [~] Top that off with the most
epherimal icing.. emotion from the lymbic.
[shake but dont stir]

And here we are.

Occam

 

Also, I don't really think that words obstruct growth that much. They are by nature imprecise, but I think if we acknowledge this fact, we become better people. I don't think it's a question of doing away with words, concepts and so forth, merely of understanding that they are not immutable purely because they're what we're used to. I guess you could say that of everything really. Knowing that one can push down on a table only because the table is pushing back changes one's whole outlook. Some, religious and secular alike, don't seem capable of understanding that they're a product of their environment. The worst believe that they were, but then somehow had a revelation that allowed them to shake that off, and that now they are somehow a unique or otherwise free person. That, I think, is the difference/differance; it's not about declaring yourself free purely because you've become aware of the cage, just about knowing that you're in the cage.

That's why I've always found, anyway. Creatively, given a blank slate, I've always felt trapped by supposedly limitless freedom, not because I was scared, but because actual limitations were replaced with unfamiliar ones.

 

I was using that statement in the context of the conversation I was having with SelfControl. If you look at the post that preceded it, you'll find my quoted response says exactly what I mean. A little logical deduction on your part is all that is required, but I have a feeling you just like arguing about minutiae for the sake of arguing.

The manifestation comes from transcendence, yes. But unless we exercise our freewill in the most profound way possible, we will never realize this on an experiential level. Our own transcendence must always be produced by our own conscious intentions.

Travis

 

We have the universal identity -- the energy that creates and sustains all life and transcends the illusion of separative existence. Generally, one passes through three stages before realizing this. The first stage is innocence, which is represented by children. This is followed by the process of societal conditioning that most individuals undergo -- we are programmed to conform to certain societal values, to strive to fulfill our ego-bound notions of success and prosperity. The more astute individuals then pass through a third stage of realizing the one-dimensional, illusory nature of these values and seek to find a greater sense of meaning and purpose. This often takes the form of a spiritual quest, the culmination of which reveals the true identity of the individual.

So, no, we aren't meant to regress to earlier levels of development, but to recognize that the development of a separative identity (facilitated of course by language and all that it entails) served a purpose -- to allow us to experience life in an unnatural state, thus providing us with something to constrast our authentic state with and serve as an impetus for its attainment.

Travis

 

Spiritual quests again have always created the impression of someone who wanted to lend credence to something far more mundane that can be found within them - their opinionz.

 

Not so. I just think you are as dependent on words as anyone else, or you wouldn't place so much stock on mine, or feel antagonism when someone uses a set of words which don't match up with your own.
Also the word can be the source of liberation, as in mantra, prayer etc.

How does one exercise ones's free-will (assuming there exists such a thing) on the most profound level? What is 'the most profound level? Surely that which one is seeking, so until you realize, you can obviously do nothing on that level. And profundity is strange thing - it has a habit of suddenly becoming shallowness when a level more profound is glimpsed.

There are also some noteable cases of people entering permanantly into a state of transcendence quite spontaneously, e.g. Ramana Maharishi.

But actually, I guess I probably agree with the principle here, assuming my deductive powers haven't failed me yet again - only I'd express it differently. I'd say what we need is aspiration. Personal 'will' is usually simply an obstruction to realization, because it is usually an illusion of the ego consciousness.
Also 'will' in itself really only exists in relation to some activity which expresses it, and I'd be interested to know what form you think will has to take in order for a person to enter a transcendent consciousness.

 

Oh, you mean like the opinion that spiritual quests exist for the purpose of reinforcing opinions?

Travis