taoism and sufism

[-_sometimes]

 

14 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Maybe, but it’s why I personally believe that syncretism is the answer. I don’t have to blindly follow what other people think, I can come to my own conclusions

So for you, Islam is more of a personal philosophy or approach to life than you ascribing yourself as a follower of a religion? 

 

That's a very interesting approach that I can't quite understand!

 

I'm pretty sure the shafii do not adopt this viewpoint at all. They have the Qur'an, hadith, 4 khalifa, along with the pillars and all that. To quote an explanation of the sect with regards to Sharia law: 

Quote

Shafi’i does not allow for consideration of personal opinion or local custom. Nor does it accept legal arguments based on “the greater good” of either Islam or the local community. The concern of Shafi'i is the full, unhesitating acceptance of the hadith.

 

Which is fine of course, I just wonder if that's not 'you', if there are any sects that similar opinions to you, as that would be a fascinating side of Islam to study. @Pak_Satrio

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by -_sometimes

[Cobie]

9 minutes ago, -_sometimes said:

So for you … 

You quoted me quoting Pak_Satrio. 
 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cobie

[-_sometimes]

1 minute ago, Cobie said:

You quoted me quoting Pak_Satrio.

I'm sorry I got lazy and didn't want to scroll further up, it was convenient and I didn't know it would quote you quoting him TwT 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Cobie said:

Yes, I did notice.  Even so I had my ‘answer’, as ‘Koan/7 meanings’ is not something I am interested in. 

 

 

Its a Sufi thing .  I was about to explain it.

 

But I see you are not interested .

[Nungali]

[Cheshire Cat]

Can anyone share some information about djinn and magic in a Sufi context?

[Lairg]

1 hour ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Can anyone share some information about djinn and magic in a Sufi context?

 

I am not sure how Sufi is the author, but here is a reasonable if religious account of djinns

 

https://horusastropalmist.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/part-one-djinns-the-truth-about-supernatural-beings/

 

While I do not use religious terminology/beliefs, much of my experience parallels that account

 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Lairg

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

9 hours ago, -_sometimes said:

 

So for you, Islam is more of a personal philosophy or approach to life than you ascribing yourself as a follower of a religion? 

I would still say I’m a follower of a religion. 
 

 

9 hours ago, -_sometimes said:

That's a very interesting approach that I can't quite understand!

 

I'm pretty sure the shafii do not adopt this viewpoint at all.

That’s why I said I was “technically” Shafi’i at the start. Islam in Indonesia is very different from other countries as it has adapted to and adopted a lot of local customs. Some places play the gamelan on religious occasions, others have shadow puppet shows (which traditionally were used to perform Hindu epics), others combine Islam with local cultivation schools like ilmu kebatinan and tenaga dalam. Then you have the more traditional Sufi mosques where tombs of saints are venerated, of course the wahhabis have started influencing things too and also there are quite a few Shias and Ahmadis. I remember a few years back I even saw a transgender mosque on the news. My point is one label can’t encompass everything, and is mainly a label in name only. Just because most Muslims in Indonesia are meant to be Shafi’i doesn’t mean it’s followed to the book 100%, just that it’s the main influence. 

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Can anyone share some information about djinn and magic in a Sufi context?

 

Solomon's ring stumped me for a while .   I made mine according to instructions ..... nope .

 

I made a  different version using artistic license  ...... nope .

 

I tried using the 2nd one a totally different way  (on a hunch )  .....  YES ! 

 

 

Here I was thinking it was supposed to be worn on the finger !   .....  nope . 

[Nungali]

34 minutes ago, Pak_Satrio said:

I would still say I’m a follower of a religion. 
 

 

That’s why I said I was “technically” Shafi’i at the start. Islam in Indonesia is very different from other countries as it has adapted to and adopted a lot of local customs. Some places play the gamelan on religious occasions, others have shadow puppet shows (which traditionally were used to perform Hindu epics),

 

Thats a great example  (and please feel free to correct me if  its not )  .  

 

Shadow puppets where used to perform Hindu epics .

 

Muslims  turn up, Indonesians start becoming Muslims .   Oh oh .... those puppets  ( some representing Gods )  are not like  pictures or statues that are thought to encourage the worship of idols are they ?

 

We better stop that .

 

But .... But ..... Puppet plays !   They are part of our culture  !

 

But they are Hindu Gods  that people could mistake as idols .

 

What if we put a screen up so people cant see them ?

 

The they will not be able to see the show .

 

Hmmmm .....  I could adjust the lighting so a shadow is cast on a the screen .... a shadow isn't a picture, a statue or and idol .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34 minutes ago, Pak_Satrio said:

 

 

others combine Islam with local cultivation schools like ilmu kebatinan and tenaga dalam. Then you have the more traditional Sufi mosques where tombs of saints are venerated, of course the wahhabis have started influencing things too and also there are quite a few Shias and Ahmadis. I remember a few years back I even saw a transgender mosque on the news.

 

 

Wow !

 

 

34 minutes ago, Pak_Satrio said:

 

 

 

My point is one label can’t encompass everything, and is mainly a label in name only. Just because most Muslims in Indonesia are meant to be Shafi’i doesn’t mean it’s followed to the book 100%, just that it’s the main influence. 

 

 

Well, come census time  here , many people automaticity tick off their religion as one they do not have much to do with .

 

You   might be Church of England or Catholic and that might just define what church you go to once a year  at Christmas, or not even that ,  some only use their church for a wedding or funeral .   .... or other 'troubles'      .

 

Joke ; 

 

" Not many people attended church today  Reverend . "

 

'" No . Everything is fine . " 

 

" Its fine that no one is coming to church ? "

 

" Oh no . I meant  'things are fine'.  Just wait until  trouble starts , the place will be full  then . "

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

56 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Thats a great example  (and please feel free to correct me if  its not )  .  

 

Shadow puppets where used to perform Hindu epics .

 

Muslims  turn up, Indonesians start becoming Muslims .   Oh oh .... those puppets  ( some representing Gods )  are not like  pictures or statues that are thought to encourage the worship of idols are they ?

 

We better stop that .

 

But .... But ..... Puppet plays !   They are part of our culture  !

 

But they are Hindu Gods  that people could mistake as idols .

 

What if we put a screen up so people cant see them ?

 

The they will not be able to see the show .

 

Hmmmm .....  I could adjust the lighting so a shadow is cast on a the screen .... a shadow isn't a picture, a statue or and idol .

 

 

As far as I know it has always been a shadow puppet play but that could be a possibility! Will have to look into it. 

 

Quote

Well, come census time  here , many people automaticity tick off their religion as one they do not have much to do with .

 

You   might be Church of England or Catholic and that might just define what church you go to once a year  at Christmas, or not even that ,  some only use their church for a wedding or funeral .   .... or other 'troubles'      .

 

Joke ; 

 

" Not many people attended church today  Reverend . "

 

'" No . Everything is fine . " 

 

" Its fine that no one is coming to church ? "

 

" Oh no . I meant  'things are fine'.  Just wait until  trouble starts , the place will be full  then . "

This is according to Wikipedia : 

 

“In terms of schools of jurisprudence, based on demographic statistics, 99% of Indonesian Muslims mainly follow the Shafi'i school, although when asked, 56% does not adhere to any specific school.”

I have to admit, I am the 56%. I had to google what form of Islam my family followed because it’s not really placed with much importance. You are basically just Muslim, unless you are Shia or Ahmadi. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Pak_Satrio

[terry]

gabriel marcel, from the mystery of being

 

This world of ours is a broken world , which means that in striving after a certain type of unity, it has lost its real unity. These types of unity in the broken world are:

 

(1) Increased socialization of life: we are one and all treated as agents, registered, enrolled, and we end by merging into our own identity cards. 

(2) Extension oj the powers of the State , which is like a searching eye on all of us. 

(3) This world has lost its true unity probably because privacy, brotherhood, creativeness, reflection and imagination, are all increasingly discredited in it.

 

Therefore — it is of the very utmost urgency that we reflect, and reflect upon reflection, in order to bring to light that exigence which animates reflection, and in order to show that this exigence when at work transcends any sort of process whatever, and sweeps beyond the opposition of the empiric ego and the universal ego.
 

[terry]

On 8/29/2022 at 11:10 AM, Pak_Satrio said:

I do not agree with the salafis/wahhabis in any way, shape or form. I see them basically as the Amish except with oil and modern technology, bringing the Muslim world backwards. Islam has evolved constantly over the years wherever it went, but the salafis/wahhabis want to impose their version of “correct” Islam which is their interpretation of what they think it was like back in the Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) time. 
 

 

 

We have the same problem in america with the supreme court, only a bare majority is needed and six of nine are catholics, who are about the same as wahhabis. We'll be burning witches soon.

 

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 11:10 AM, Pak_Satrio said:

So I’m Muslim because my mother is Indonesian, and in Indonesia Islam was spread by Sufis, who believed in syncretism 

 

 

I personally don't think sufis can be separated from islam. 

 

I also think islam is compete in itself and that god needs no partners.

 

One may find truth in all religions; islam does not reject what is true in other religions.

 

Suhrawardi (the murdered sheikh) even resorted to buddhism, and sufis often integrated zoroastrianism. Ibn 'arabi claimed to have gotten his original enlightenment from jesus albeit a muslim jesus.

 

Anyhows, syncretism can be taken too far and god requires very little in the way of drama.

 

There are three books: the book of one's life, the book of nature and the book of scripture. If all the seas were ink and all the trees pens, the words of god would not all be written. God is everywhere, in everything that exists and all that does not exist. In the sacred and the profane, in truth and in lies.

 

It is for us to separate the gold from the dross the truth from the lies, wherever we are.

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 11:10 AM, Pak_Satrio said:

So in short, no I don’t believe everything needs to be followed word for word as it is. If you look at the Quran lots of the later verses contradict the earlier ones! This is because it is meant to be followed chronologically as things changed during Muhammad’s (pubh) lifetime. So why should we not update things during our lifetimes too?

 

I normally read the qu'ran backwards, the shortest verses first. Or I play the audio as I work. The incredible beauty of the shorter suwar seems to build my attention for the longer ones as they come around. And repeat core ideas.

 

If you can write verses like these, then update them.

 

 

[terry]

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

 

I guess then , no  -   you have not heard of Fatima the Rope Maker .

 

 

ancient tale, the arabian nights...of course I have heard of it, don't presume...

 

just giving you air...

 

play your trump

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

 

 

Its a fairly common realisation in more than one system of philosophy ... and I think that trumps the above piece of 'obscure Daoism'  -

 

 

"profound" and "obscure" are not necessarily synonymous

 

calling things obscure does tend to obscure them

but all unsupported untrue allegations do that

 

if there is something you find obscure I would be happy to help you out

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

Let's have some  REAL demonstration other than citing some prose  .   Which by the way did demonstrate that knowledge was superior ... superior over    Dao ? No, as 'Non doing, the speechless one made no reply  (of course     )  . It was superior over 'act on impulse '  ... again , no great surprise  there .  And knowledge meets the Emperor Ti .  Nowhere in that story is knowledge  shown to be superior to Understanding and Wisdom .

 

BUT it did cite  : 

 

" For he who knows does not speak, He who speaks does not know" ; 

 

 

Non-doing, the speechless one. You may not know this guy. It's your true self. There is no "you" who is speaking, no "you" who is doing. There is a complete idiot within your mind who enjoys the whirl of activity and doesn't care about past or future or results, its just happy do be here. Sometimes in meditation, or if you are being very still, this true self is revealed as profoundly knowledgeable and exceedingly gratified, a condition of selfhood we are normally too fucked up to relate to.

 

Our literate individual minds can formulate questions and ideas about things that are ultimately utterly irrelevant and insignifianat to real enlightenment as experienced by the non-doing one, the truly enlightened one. One who doesn't speak and knows what cannot be formulated in words.

 

Act-on-impulse is enlightened because he acts on impulse, and doesn't think, doesn't resort to symbolic understanding, he just knows without intermediation. This is The Prophet. Called upon to think and answer, he says, oh yes, I know and can tell! but the words are forgotten because the literate mind asking cannot hear the answer in no-language.  God has his prophets "recite" in inspired language because truth cannot be simply told to thioe whose minds are obscured by "knowledge" and "facts."

 

Emperor Ti is Reason, which formulates questions but may ask questions which have no dualistic answer. 

 

It's like knowledge is a fish asking the source of knowledge what is water and on being told it's all around you, within you and without you, and it supports all things,  the fish swims away disappointed and still searching.

 

 

Understanding is a matter of cause and effect, the lowest level of reason. Knowledge is a direct tasting, actual experience untainted by belief. Wisdom is knowing the difference between truth and mere convention or belief.

 

 

You can define any word any way you want. Most of the time winning tricks trumps actual communication.  People of good will try to find common language.

 

Bucket o' crabs.

 

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

 

Cobie might find that interesting , in relation to his post queering Nasruddin's action regarding the sermon's subject matter .

 

 

What were those six other meanings again?

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

 

Knowledge is a collection of facts ... thats it . There is no hint of 'application'. Its just knowledge . 

 

 

Knowing so-called facts is not real knowledge. There are an infinite number of facts for every point of view, and an infinite number of points of view. So what we call "facts" are highly selected. How do we know what facts out of the infinite are relevant? Knowledge is a higher order than facts, no mater the quantity.

 

Muhammed (pbuh) loved knowledge, and scholars. The more you know, the better you know god. "He who knows himself knows his lord." 

 

Facts are only factual within a context of relevance, an understanding. A world. An individual perceiving, a set of opinions and values. Real knowledge transcends individuality. 

 

Wisdom discriminates between real knowledge and mere facts, or desire bodies.

 

 

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

"Knowledge can be defined as awareness of facts or as practical skills, and may also refer to familiarity with objects or situations. Knowledge of facts, also referred to as propositional knowledge, is often defined as true belief that is distinct from opinion or guesswork by virtue of justification "

 

Did I mention sharks love murky water?

 

Knowledge can even be defined as having had sexual congress.

 

Aloha means love, hello, goodby, and it means having sex too. There's even a "dirty hula."

 

Some herrings are red.

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

Has philosophy been lost on us ? Have we been not paying attention  to all the advice we have been given about 'knowledge'  ... being used in isolation :    a little knowledge is a dangerous thing .  What good is knowledge without other forces moderating it ?  One then ends up with knowledge about the intimate creation and destruction of matter , and what do we do  ..... develop ways to nuke out whole countries and civilisations with it !

 

That's not knowledge at all, bra, that's your facts.

 

Technology is not knowledge.

 

Knowledge of virtue is not separate from virtue.

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

We ALL realise, to some extent , knowledge can be inefficient and dangerous . Would you teach a small child how to fire a gun, or any other person  to fire a gun  without any other moderations ?

 

Sorry, knowledge is a false God that modern man worships .

 

 

That is sad.

 

Perhaps you should quit worshipping false knowledge.

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

Beyond knowledge is Understanding .... or it should be and knowledge should be moderated by understanding . I would have thought that would be blindingly obvious ?   I  have knowledge of what  fulminate of mercury can do  , but without understanding of the  proper process in handling it ...... KABLAM ! 

 

Understanding is realising  the effects the application of knowledge will or can have .

 

Wisdom is beyond that and is about realising the effects and when to apply knowledge, considering the effects it might have .  Applying knowledge with understanding so it has the  wanted effect .

 

Solomon's famous wise decision would not have been wise at all if the  women had said , go ahead and cut the baby in two, and the  baby was cut in two -  as he applied his 'trick' at the wrong time and with the wrong people . But he judged the situation right . He was presented with the knowledge and facts of the case ( although disparate ), and his own knowledge garnered previously.

 

 

Nansen killed the cat under identical circumstances. And his action is a koan. His action did not involve the sort of decision making you imagine solomon to have engaged in.

 

And here's the problem: nansen didn't actually kill a cat and solomon is a complete fabrication! So much for facts, which are  convenient fiction.

 

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

He HAD to have Understanding beyond that disparate  knowledge  as the 'knowledge' / information he was being given was in conflict .  He understood the situation and  what was playing out .  His wisdom was in considering all this and making the right decision which led to a better outcome .   Which is why Solomon was said to be wise .

 

Anyway . Dont take my word for it  . Understanding and Wisdom are   firmly cemented 'up there' beyond the 'Abyss of Knowledge' -  in the Supernal Triangle ... just below 'Godhead'.

 

 

I won't take your word for it.

 

And godhead is wisdom.

 

Your are pretty confused, bra. Sorry.

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

And getting through that Abyss , with humankind's knowledge , through to Understanding and Wisdom  ie our application of our knowledge , I would venture to say , is Humankind's biggest challenge  for this age .

 

So please stop putting 'knowledge' above them .... on the crown of God . 

 

 

 

Nah

 

 

On 8/29/2022 at 12:15 PM, Nungali said:

 

Especially at this  low stage of our development .

 

 

 

 

Speak for yourself...

[terry]

On 8/30/2022 at 9:00 AM, Pak_Satrio said:

I personally believe that syncretism is the answer. I don’t have to blindly follow what other people think, I can come to my own conclusions.

 

 

Fundamentalism is the curse of the world. Wahabbism is especially bad. But they have been martyring sufis ever since there were sufis. Jami said "You can't call yourself a sufi until a thousand true believers have condemned you as a heretic."

 

To be a muslim one need only declare that there is no god but god and muhammed is his prophet. To be a good muslim entails a lot more than that.

 

Sufi martyrs were deemed to have declared there was a god other than god by saying they were god, or god's partner.

 

I think we need a way to combine buddhism and islam, essentially by finding and emphasizing the nonduality in both.

[terry]

On 8/30/2022 at 12:25 PM, Nungali said:

 

Its a Sufi thing .  I was about to explain it.

 

But I see you are not interested .

 

lol

 

explain it to me

give me seven on your nasrudin and I''ll give you seven on mine

 

even a rookie should be able to give three

[terry]

On 8/30/2022 at 3:08 PM, Lairg said:

 

I am not sure how Sufi is the author, but here is a reasonable if religious account of djinns

 

https://horusastropalmist.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/part-one-djinns-the-truth-about-supernatural-beings/

 

While I do not use religious terminology/beliefs, much of my experience parallels that account

 

 

 

 

reasonable is a stretch...

 

I'm amazed how many people believe in magic and ghosts as really existing things ("beings") and not imaginary figments.

 

Especially the demons, the monsters under the bed. Giving these imaginary beings credence seems dangerous to me, as though the mind had autonomous contents and we were at the mercy of some powerful being arising from our subconscious. None of these beings are real, not even ourselves. There is Only One Real Agent.

 

 

[Lairg]

51 minutes ago, terry said:

I'm amazed how many people believe in magic and ghosts as really existing things ("beings")

 

For millennia humans have recounted their experiences with non-physical intelligences - even being saved from disaster.   

Fortunately humans now know that only material things exist.   

 

I once had complaints about people becoming scared at night on a forest path through a local nature reserve.   They had never heard of any local crime.

 

When I went to see the place at night there was a dark cloud a bit bigger than a human, near a junction in the path.   So I stepped into the cloud and suddenly could not see the leaves on the path.  The dark cloud was a thick darkness.

 

So I took the dark energy through myself and then discharged it upwards.  Then I could see the leaves on the path again.   There were no more reports of being scared.

 

It turned out that there had been a suicide just there in 1918 by an escaped German POW.

 

 

 

  

Edited September 2, 2022 by Lairg

[terry]

from the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy article on ibn ‘arabi

 

 

3.3 Imagination

 

Imagination (khayâl), as Corbin has shown, plays a major role in Ibn ‘Arabî’s writings. In the Openings, for example, he says about it, “After the knowledge of the divine names and of self-disclosure and its all-pervadingness, no pillar of knowledge is more complete” (Ibn ‘Arabî, al-Futûhât, 1911 edition, 2:309.17). He frequently criticizes philosophers and theologians for their failure to acknowledge its cognitive significance. In his view, ‘aql or reason, a word that derives from the same root as ‘iqâl, fetter, can only delimit, define, and analyze. It perceives difference and distinction, and quickly grasps the divine transcendence and incomparability. In contrast, properly disciplined imagination has the capacity to perceive God’s self-disclosure in all Three Books. The symbolic and mythic language of scripture, like the constantly shifting and never-repeated self-disclosures that are cosmos and soul, cannot be interpreted away with reason’s strictures. What Corbin calls “creative imagination” (a term that does not have an exact equivalent in Ibn ‘Arabî’s vocabulary) must complement rational perception.

 

In Koranic terms, the locus of awareness and consciousness is the heart (qalb), a word that has the verbal sense of fluctuation and transmutation (taqallub). According to Ibn ‘Arabî, the heart has two eyes, reason and imagination, and the dominance of either distorts perception and awareness. The rational path of philosophers and theologians needs to be complemented by the mystical intuition of the Sufis, the “unveiling” (kashf) that allows for imaginal—not “imaginary”—vision. The heart, which in itself is unitary consciousness, must become attuned to its own fluctuation, at one beat seeing God’s incomparability with the eye of reason, at the next seeing his similarity with the eye of imagination. Its two visions are prefigured in the two primary names of the Scripture, al-qur’ânl-, “that which brings together”, and al-furqân, “that which differentiates”. These two demarcate the contours of ontology and epistemology. The first alludes to the unifying oneness of Being (perceived by imagination), and the second to the differentiating manyness of knowledge and discernment (perceived by reason). The Real, as Ibn ‘Arabî often says, is the One/the Many (al-wâhid al-kathîr), that is, One in Essence and many in names, the names being the principles of all multiplicity, limitation, and definition. In effect, with the eye of imagination, the heart sees Being present in all things, and with the eye of reason it discerns its transcendence and the diversity of the divine faces.

 

He who stops with the Koran inasmuch as it is a qur’ân has but a single eye that unifies and brings together. For those who stop with it inasmuch as it is a totality of things brought together, however, it is a furqân…. When I tasted the latter…, I said, “This is lawful, that is unlawful, and this is indifferent. The schools have become various and the religions diverse. The levels have been distinguished, the divine names and the engendered traces have become manifest, and the names and the gods have become many in the world”. (Ibn ‘Arabî, al-Futûhât, 1911 edition, 3:94.16)

[terry]

from the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy article on gabriel marcel

 

 

 

7. Primary and Secondary Reflection

The distinction between two kinds of questions—problem and mystery—brings to light two different kinds of thinking or reflection. The problematic is addressed with thinking that is detached and technical, while the mysterious is encountered in reflection that is involved, participatory and decidedly non-technical. Marcel calls these two kinds of thinking “primary” and “secondary” reflection. Primary reflection examines its object by abstraction, by analytically breaking it down into its constituent parts. It is concerned with definitions, essences and technical solutions to problems. In contrast, secondary reflection is synthetic; it unifies rather than divides. “Roughly, we can say that where primary reflection tends to dissolve the unity of experience which is first put before it, the function of secondary reflection is essentially recuperative; it reconquers that unity” (Marcel 1951a, p. 83).

 

 

 

[Cheshire Cat]

On 31/8/2022 at 8:16 AM, Nungali said:

Solomon's ring stumped me for a while .   I made mine according to instructions ..... nope .

 

According to the islamic tradition, Solomon was granted by Allah the ability to command djinns... but in addition, Solomon specifically asked God not to give this power to anyone else after him...

 

But there are groups and individuals who work with djinns for various purposes and I've heard that a few of them are from ancient sufi brotherhoods

 

 

[Lairg]

Is there a difference between Solomon the Great and Suleiman the Magnificient?   The first is in the Old Testament and the second is in the Middle Ages.  Both built temples and had large empires

Edited September 2, 2022 by Lairg

[Nungali]

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

ancient tale, the arabian nights...of course I have heard of it, don't presume...

 

just giving you air...

 

play your trump

 

 

No ... not after this response of yours thanks .

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

 

"profound" and "obscure" are not necessarily synonymous

 

calling things obscure does tend to obscure them

but all unsupported untrue allegations do that

 

if there is something you find obscure I would be happy to help you out

 

 

Well, your interpretations and comments on a lot of what I wrote seem obscure and self interpreted to suit your 'corrections' .

 

But no need to 'help out' further thanks .

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

 

Non-doing, the speechless one. You may not know this guy. It's your true self. There is no "you" who is speaking, no "you" who is doing. There is a complete idiot within your mind who enjoys the whirl of activity and doesn't care about past or future or results, its just happy do be here. Sometimes in meditation, or if you are being very still, this true self is revealed as profoundly knowledgeable and exceedingly gratified, a condition of selfhood we are normally too fucked up to relate to.

 

Our literate individual minds can formulate questions and ideas about things that are ultimately utterly irrelevant and insignifianat to real enlightenment as experienced by the non-doing one, the truly enlightened one. One who doesn't speak and knows what cannot be formulated in words.

 

Act-on-impulse is enlightened because he acts on impulse, and doesn't think, doesn't resort to symbolic understanding, he just knows without intermediation. This is The Prophet. Called upon to think and answer, he says, oh yes, I know and can tell! but the words are forgotten because the literate mind asking cannot hear the answer in no-language.  God has his prophets "recite" in inspired language because truth cannot be simply told to thioe whose minds are obscured by "knowledge" and "facts."

 

I am sure you are clear on where your own impulses come from , and they have no need of other considerations or valuations .

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

Emperor Ti is Reason, which formulates questions but may ask questions which have no dualistic answer. 

 

It's like knowledge is a fish asking the source of knowledge what is water and on being told it's all around you, within you and without you, and it supports all things,  the fish swims away disappointed and still searching.

 

 

Understanding is a matter of cause and effect, the lowest level of reason. Knowledge is a direct tasting, actual experience untainted by belief. Wisdom is knowing the difference between truth and mere convention or belief.

 

 

You can define any word any way you want. Most of the time winning tricks trumps actual communication.  People of good will try to find common language.

 

Bucket o' crabs.

 

Which is why I presented a landslide of other evidence supported by Judaism, Hermetics, etc  diagrams  etc  to show it wasnt JUST my definitions .

 

But to be blind to that and ignore it all then criticise it as MY opinion is  , well ..... 'transparent ' .

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

What were those six other meanings again?

 

Its a meditative process  , but you want an answer with a result ?   Whats the point of that ? Your consciousness will not develop in the way the mediation is designed to effect it if simple answers are dolled out to you.

 

Or maybe this is you having another 'dig'  ?

 

In any case , for the curious other reader ;

 

The idea is to get us out of thinking one dimensionally, to stop putting things in a  single box or niche of categorisation  and a whole lot of other psychic dynamics that I am not going to spend the time on explaining  , due to the turn this thread has taken .

 

If one wants to play with the idea , one model is that of the 7 traditional planets and their specific  energies interpreted into viewpoints . Its related to Kabbalah in that when one sees ' one thing ' one then realises all the other 'things' that relate to it on the same plane . Its origins in western occultism are from Agrippa , in Islam , from the Alexandrian Synthesis  and it probably got into there via Zurvanism  from Zoroastrian 'Sufism' .

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

Knowing so-called facts is not real knowledge. There are an infinite number of facts for every point of view, and an infinite number of points of view. So what we call "facts" are highly selected. How do we know what facts out of the infinite are relevant? Knowledge is a higher order than facts, no mater the quantity.

 

Muhammed (pbuh) loved knowledge, and scholars. The more you know, the better you know god. "He who knows himself knows his lord." 

 

Facts are only factual within a context of relevance, an understanding. A world. An individual perceiving, a set of opinions and values. Real knowledge transcends individuality. 

 

Wisdom discriminates between real knowledge and mere facts, or desire bodies.

 

Now you have morphed the subject - on which I commented on and  to which you seem determined to 'deconstruct' ie 'knowledge '

 

Into  ' real knowledge ' ... a higher order and something else  .... in order to make you critique .

 

perhaps this is a good time for a bit of introspection ?

 

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

Did I mention sharks love murky water?

 

Knowledge can even be defined as having had sexual congress.

 

Aloha means love, hello, goodby, and it means having sex too. There's even a "dirty hula."

 

Some herrings are red.

 

" I'm sorry Captain ....  sounds like you are breaking up . "

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

 

That's not knowledge at all, bra, that's your facts.

 

Technology is not knowledge.

 

Knowledge of virtue is not separate from virtue.

 

 

 

 

That is sad.

 

Perhaps you should quit worshipping false knowledge.

 

 

'Worshipping '  ...   

 

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

 

Nansen killed the cat under identical circumstances. And his action is a koan. His action did not involve the sort of decision making you imagine solomon to have engaged in.

 

And here's the problem: nansen didn't actually kill a cat and solomon is a complete fabrication! So much for facts, which are  convenient fiction.

 

What a pathetic attempt to try and twist an example ( which need not be an historical fact'  at all  as that isnt the point !  ) of  Wisdom, as  explained , and then say it was put up as a demonstartion of facts , and since it never  complete fabrication (as you say ) its a problem for you .

 

You seemed determined to massage things to make your criticisms seem valid . ....  whatever .

 

 

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

I won't take your word for it.

 

So you should not . Which is why I immediately ut up an example to show t just is noot my opinion .... I note you ignore that part , and focus on me pointing you at it ... but ignore it .   ?

 

I am starting to see the problem of religion manifesting here .

 

Might be time to grab my hat and coat and seek less  ' harnessed' discourse .

 

23 hours ago, terry said:

 

And godhead is wisdom.

 

Your are pretty confused, bra. Sorry.

 

 

 

 

Nah

 

 

 

 

 

Speak for yourself...

 

 

If you cannot see he stage of development the human race is in COLLECTIVELY , to which I was referring , and I think you knew that , and need to turn things this way  all I can suggest is .....

 

you try the 'more than one view'  way of looking at things ...   Even three ways is a good start .

 

 

[Nungali]

18 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

For millennia humans have recounted their experiences with non-physical intelligences - even being saved from disaster.   

Fortunately humans now know that only material things exist.   

 

Of course there has been !   As one who has studied cultural anthropology , this is a basic human trait across time and locations , to ignore such obviousness, to me, smacks of some religious or scientific indoctrination .

 

We tried to sweep  it all under the caret with 'psychological definitions '  and ideas about  'hallucinations' .

 

I  won't  say more (  due to the religious turn this discussion has taken )  ... I'll invite Dr Wilson Van Dusen to  :

 

A Confirmation of Swedenborg in Recent Empirical Findings

ie .  scientific observation and recording of  findings of  a doctor in an asylum .

 

https://selfdefinition.org/hearing-voices/articles/wilson-van-dusen-presence-of-spirits-in-madness.htm

 

 

18 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

I once had complaints about people becoming scared at night on a forest path through a local nature reserve.   They had never heard of any local crime.

 

When I went to see the place at night there was a dark cloud a bit bigger than a human, near a junction in the path.   So I stepped into the cloud and suddenly could not see the leaves on the path.  The dark cloud was a thick darkness.

 

So I took the dark energy through myself and then discharged it upwards.  Then I could see the leaves on the path again.   There were no more reports of being scared.

 

It turned out that there had been a suicide just there in 1918 by an escaped German POW.

 

 

 

  

 

 

The problem with little anecdotes like that is they can easily be discounted .... but when the whole of humanity has a life long and collective history of it  ......      ... to deny THAT takes the 'conviction of a religious consciousness ' .

 

ya know, I'm pretty sure many a Sufi had warned us previously about such actions ? 

 

Of course, there are also Sufis that  where not so radical and safely stayed within the confines of their religion  ... yes, seems  the very essence of dichotomy  eh ?

 

Still, who wants to end up like this :

 

 

[Nungali]

12 hours ago, Cheshire Cat said:

 

According to the islamic tradition, Solomon was granted by Allah the ability to command djinns... but in addition, Solomon specifically asked God not to give this power to anyone else after him...

 

Yes ... to 'command Djin '  .    But that was not the use  I was referring to , which is hard to discern seeing as you only quoted a part of what I said .   I  followed on,  after saying it DID NOT WORK  I said ;

 

" I made a  different version using artistic license  ...... nope .

 

I tried using the 2nd one a totally different way  (on a hunch )  .....  YES ! 

 

 

It helps to NOT  , only cite  part of what I wrote , eliminate some,  and then comment on THAT  .

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Cheshire Cat said:

 

But there are groups and individuals who work with djinns for various purposes and I've heard that a few of them are from ancient sufi brotherhoods

 

 

 

Yes, people do that ... for various purposes .

 

I dont think anyone here is interested in any one from an ancient Sufi brotherhood  ... unless it is one embedded in the depths of  a religious confinement .