Do you believe that all the ancient traditions initiating with a conscious source exist at the exoteric level and devolve into opposing opinions. — Nikolas

I couldn't say for certain. I think people are similar so their ideas are often similar. But people are also tribal, so approaches develop and split off and often expand in deliberate contrast.

I couldn't say for certain. I think people are similar so their ideas are often similar. But people are also tribal, so approaches develop and split off and often expand in deliberate contrast. — Tom Storm

True, but all this happens at the exoteric level. But what if it is possible to consciously develop from being fixated on fragments to experiencing the wholeness of human being in relation to its origin or what Plotinus called the ONE? Then all the paths can lead to the "way" or what the depth of the human essence needs to experience. How to graduate from a path into the way?

Society rebels against this idea and prefers fighting over and or abandoning paths as with atheism. But what of those who seek the esoteric evolutionary teachings of their paths in their need to experience the "way?" How do they proceed and stand up to the power of imagination which rejects their potential to experience the way?

to experiencing the wholeness of human being in relation to its origin or what Plotinus called the ONE? — Nikolas

Sorry - This kind of model isn't my thing; if it is exoteric - I don't get it :smile: For me human beings are clever animals with language and an ability to develop conceptual frameworks. For me there is no pathway or oneness available to us - there are only good and bad ideas.

For me there is no pathway or oneness available to us - there are only good and bad ideas. — Tom Storm

That is because modern culture only recognizes discursive, symbolic modes of consciousness. I'm not saying there's anything the matter with that, but I accept there are other ways of knowing and being, that Niikolas and others are referring to - that it's not just made up, but refers to something real. Real, but off the beaten track of mainstream culture.

what if it is possible to consciously develop from being fixated on fragments to experiencing the wholeness of human being in relation to its origin or what Plotinus called the ONE? Then all the paths can lead to the "way" or what the depth of the human essence needs to experience. How to graduate from a path into the way? — Nikolas

I certainly believe that there are such 'cognitive modes' but also that they're very difficult to access. It's easy to read about them or imagine that you might realise them, but in practice it's very difficult.

Pierre Hadot, for example, was an historian of philosophy, whose first book was on Plotinus - still regarded as one of the best introductory texts. But one of his obituaries noted that:

Hadot wrote Plotinus or the Simplicity of Vision in a month-long burst of inspiration in 1963, a lucid, sincere work that is still one of the best introductions to Plotinus. Hadot would continue to translate and comment upon Plotinus throughout the rest of his life, founding in particular the series Les Ecrits de Plotinus a series, still in progress, that provides translations with extensive introductions and commentaries to all the treatises of Plotinus' Enneads, in chronological order.

On a personal level, however, Hadot gradually became detached from Plotinus' thought, feeling that Plotinian mysticism was too otherworldly and contemptuous of the body to be adequate for today's needs. As he tells the story, when he emerged from the month-long seclusion he had imposed upon himself to write Plotinus or The Simplicity of Vision, he went to the corner bakery, and “seeing the ordinary folks all around me in the bakery, I [...] had the impression of having lived a month in another world, completely foreign to our world, and worse than this—totally unreal and even unlivable.”

That said, Hadot devoted the rest of his career to 'philosophy as a way of life', and he sought to understand and teach those 'philosophical exercises' that enabled students to go through the inner transformation that he believes philosophy was originally about. (See entry here.)

The Catholic Church fought with the progress of modern society for years. — Gregory

Not only Catholicism! There's a reactionary political-philosophical movement, called Traditionalism, not very well known outside academia, that believes that modernity is fundamentally evil and will ultimately result in the destruction of mankind. Some of these figures, like Julius Evola, are associated with fascim, and some of them are adulated by the radical right. See Traditionalists, a weblog by Mark Sedgwick, whose book on the subject is Against the Modern World.

I accept there are other ways of knowing and being, that Niikolas and others are referring to - that it's not just made up, but refers to something real. Real, but off the beaten track of mainstream culture. — Wayfarer

I understand that - I was immersed in Jung and theosophy amongst others in the 1980's. I would need someone to demonstrate that this is justifiable before accepting it. Just because there are impressive cross cultural snippets about it doesn't make it true. The same thing could be said about human sacrifice (not that I am comparing the two).

It's easy to read about them or imagine that you might realise them, but in practice it's very difficult. — Wayfarer

Who did it successfully in your view?

Who did it successfully in your view? — Tom Storm

That's an interesting question. Like a many others I was very attracted to Zen, but after a long while, I realised that Zen is a highly-structured and culturally-specific discipline and that it's very easy to fool yourself that you understand it when you don't. I stuck with sitting practice for many years but it's fallen away since the end of 2019. Can't find the motivation for it, but of those traditions, feel the greatest affinity for Sōtō Zen, specifically the recent teacher Nishijima-roshi.

I don't believe all of the sages of the East, or West, for that matter, have clay feet. The first one I noticed was Ramana Maharishi. But then, probably like you, I used to visit the Adyar Bookshop when it still existed, so I read a lot of those kinds of teachers. Krishnamurti, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche (boy his downfall was an eye-opener).

I've also started to realise that we inherit cultural archetypes. So my current interest is the Western philosophical tradition. Seriously thinking about enrolling in my alma mater to do an MA - in The Argument from Reason. Although I know I'm probably tilting at windmills. :-(

hat's an interesting question. Like a many others I was very attracted to Zen, but after a long while, I realised that Zen is a highly-structured and culturally-specific discipline and that it's very easy to fool yourself that you understand it when you don't. I stuck with sitting practice for many years but it's fallen away since the end of 2019. Can't find the motivation for it, but of those traditions, feel the greatest affinity for Sōtō Zen, specifically the recent teacher Nishijima-roshi.

I don't believe all of the sages of the East, or West, for that matter, have clay feet. The first one I noticed was Ramana Maharishi. But then, probably like you, I used to visit the Adyar Bookshop when it still existed, so I read a lot of those kinds of teachers. Krishnamurti, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche (boy his downfall was an eye-opener).

I've also started to realise that we inherit cultural archetypes. So my current interest is the Western philosophical tradition. Seriously thinking about enrolling in my alma mater to do an MA - in The Argument from Reason. Although I know I'm probably tilting at windmills. :-( — Wayfarer

It is true that lacking consciousness we cannot prove that conscious humanity exists. But we can verify the human condition as it exists in us by making efforts to Know Thyself rather than judge ourselves. I've experienced the struggle between my higher and lower natures St.Paul describes in Romans 7. Is its reconciliation possible through the help of the Spirit? This is something a person must experience rather than debate.

14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

That's deeply interesting Wayfarer. I had a long interest in Krishnamurti - I think it was his exceptional clarity on some matters and his no nonsense approach that for me, anyway, cut through most of the other teachers I heard back then. He was the thinker I needed. And his story was extraordinary.

I started with Alan Watts, I always wondered what he would be like to know, but I suspected he had strong hedonistic impulses that might have taken him off course. I studied philosophy at university briefly but had an argument with the Head of Department when he said, 'You are not here to learn, you are to give us what we want and parrot back to us everything we say.' I quit, went out and bought Joseph Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces and read for several years. Those were the days...

I think we have quite a bit in common......I also quit philosophy for comparative religion, which has of course not been at all useful from the perspective of making a living but it's been a lifelong interest.

Is its reconciliation possible through the help of the Spirit? This is something a person must experience rather than debate. — Nikolas

Indeed, that is a very meaningful passage from the Letters, it sure resonates with me.

“seeing the ordinary folks all around me in the bakery, I [...] had the impression of having lived a month in another world, completely foreign to our world, and worse than this—totally unreal and even unlivable.” — Wayfarer

A lovely story. It's fortunate for us that Hadot could live in both worlds and appreciate simplicity as well as complexity.

..That said, Hadot devoted the rest of his career to 'philosophy as a way of life', and he sought to understand and teach those 'philosophical exercises' that enabled students to go through the inner transformation that he believes philosophy was originally about. (See entry here.) — Wayfarer

I was introduced to Hadot when following Marcus Aurelius. I bought but, as usual, haven't completed his book 'The Inner Citadel - the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius'.
I was also attracted to his 'philosophy as a way of life'.

Unfortunately, the link you provided didn't work for me. 'The site can't be reached'.

It is fascinating to read the different paths people have taken in their lives, their continuing interests.
An amazing amount of sharing.

Right now, I have started to read the Chuang Tzu or Zhuangzi.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/zhuangzi/

Free download from an extraordinary index and choice of translators here:
https://terebess.hu/english/tao/ChuangTzu-palmer.pdf
Also a kindle Penguin classic by Martin Palmer, £1.99 ! Usually £10.99.

Thanks to @Jack Cummins for starting this thread.
A quick reply to why the need for religious beliefs and ideas:
Because we're human.
Ideas are part of who we are, they're just there aren't they - part of the thinking process.
Not everyone has a need for a religious belief.
In my case, I was brought in to the Protestant Church as a baby, the christening ceremony.
My family were religious. At some point you start questioning. Turmoil can set in.
Long story short - reading philosophy and sharing ideas with others now seems to have become a need.
Although it can get a bit overwhelming at times, you can step away and go visit a bakery.
Possible even in this day of covid restrictions.
To walk and reflect in your own space...
That sounds good to me :smile:

Edit to add:
The IEP article is less dense than the SEP one. Also has a useful chart of the text showing where 'the further to the right the chapters are listed, the further away they are from the central ideas of the Zhuangzian philosophy of the Inner Chapters':

https://iep.utm.edu/zhuangzi/

Unfortunately, the link you provided didn't work for me. 'The site can't be reached'. — Amity

It is a good link but that site is a bit erratic, it is intermittently unreachable.

... a bit erratic...it is intermittently unreachable. — Wayfarer

A bit like myself. I'll try again later...ta.

Strangely, the links worked for me and it is strange indeed because a lot of the links people put on this site don't seem to work from my phone. And, the link provided me with a whole free book, instantly downloaded onto my phone. I have had parts of books or an article downloaded on my phone but never a whole book, so thank you for enabling me to read this, like a gift from the divine. It is very interesting to me because it links Taoism and shamanism, both of which I find extremely interesting.

I will have a read and reply to the content of your post later today when I have read more of the book as I am starting chapter 4 of the book. Also, for anyone else who is reading this post, I recommend logging into the second link which Amity provided to see if you receive this book like I have done. I think it all depends on signals and locations, and perhaps, also, a few mysterious factors.

Strangely, the links worked for me — Jack Cummins

Yes. It was the link in Wayfarer's post re Hadot that didn't work for me.

like a gift from the divine. — Jack Cummins

Glad that you found the link to the free book useful !
The website index is quite remarkable.
https://terebess.hu/english/tao.html

A bit too good to be true. I hope it doesn't lead to any unwanted viruses or anything horrendous.
That would be devilish :naughty: and not so divine :halo:

I am certainly wanting to avoid devilish viruses, and also trying to digest and think about all the ideas arising on this thread. I am glad that it has got the amount of response it has, and hope this continues, but I often feel the need to reflect, because there are a lot of deep questions. Of course, I do not see myself as having all the answers but I am trying to respond to it in such a way that it can be a springboard for people's exploration. In the meantime, I have just thought of a question for people who think about, because I do like to ask questions.

I have just thought of a question for people who think about, because I do like to ask questions. — Jack Cummins

:smile:
Yes, I think we all noticed that - and your way of bringing people and their ideas together in even a single thread is most appreciated.
I couldn't start and manage a thread without my brain splitting in half and me falling through the gap !
Talking of left and right hand brains...

That's true. But there are questions that come out of this. Why is it that Christianity - and let's face it, so many religions worldwide - so effortlessly undertake evil actions?

Is it just a matter of believe oneself to be God's favourite? Might it not also be what happens when you think you have access to special knowledge that comes from an uncountable, extramundane source that is the origin of all morality. — Tom Storm

The Christians I know attempt to resolve every problem with prayers and they have complete faith that God/Jesus will answer their prayers. Obviously, if that is what one believes, God, will take care of everyone and all we need do is pray. Those who survive the hurricane, flood, landslide, or whatever, will be reassured God takes care of them. Those who don't, won't be here to worry about it. The religion is going to help in so many psychological ways, but it does not work as well as science. :lol: However, many Christians do not trust science and put their faith in God. When that can lead to thousands of people dying and suffering, I have a BIG problem with that!

My Christian friend kept approving of Trump and enjoyed believing her prayers helped him be "a good father to our country". She even approved of children being separated from their families and that was the last straw for me! Bottom line, faith has wonderful psychological effects, but it can also be the worse source of evil we have.

Are you asking those questions for purely rhetorical purposes or are you genuinely curious?

So far in this discussion, I have not opposed your thesis but only remarked upon where your observations did not satisfy my understanding of matters. That does not mean I am representing Torquemada or apologizing for the sins of an institution. You said something was easy-peasy for Christians. It isn't for all of them. — Valentinus

My relationship with Christianity has changed many times over my lifetime. I went through a period when I believed it was a challenge that brought out the best in us and I still believe that is psychologically true, but I do not like literal interpretations of the Bible. I came to prefer Eastern philosophy/religion.

I do not recall ever having a concept of the City of God, but since you didn't answer the question I googled to see if it is mentioned in the Bible and I see it is, and after reading the explanation, I have a big problem with that notion because of the religious/political nature of it.

Bottom line, faith has wonderful psychological effects, but it can also be the worse source of evil we have. — Athena

Which quality of faith do you refer to? For example Gurdjieff taught that:

Conscious faith is freedom. Emotional faith is slavery. Mechanical faith is foolishness.

As important as it is, how many have ever contemplated the difference?

I am so glad that you are keeping up the discussion. It is interesting that you do prefer a literal interpretation of the Bible. I am a bit more on the esoteric level, but I think that there is a whole spectrum of possibilities, ranging from the exoteric and esoteric.

I have not forgotten the thread I started, but need time and creation of new threads, because the matters discussed are extremely complex and need careful thought. However, I think that you are doing so well, in keeping discussion alive.

I am so glad that you are keeping up the discussion. It is interesting that you do prefer a literal interpretation of the Bible. I am a bit more on the esoteric level, but I think that there is a whole spectrum of possibilities, ranging from the exoteric and esoteric.

I have not forgotten the thread I started, but need time and creation of new threads, because the matters discussed are extremely complex and need careful thought. However, I think that you are doing so well, in keeping discussion alive. — Jack Cummins

Whoops did I forget the little word "not" again? I hate a literal interpretation of the Bible and I hate it when I forget the word "not".

Your question for this thread is particularly important to me. I mean, really, really important to me! As I see it, we can not have liberty and democracy without the correct education. For me, that does not mean education for technology and leaving moral training to the Church. :gasp:

How much fun to think about what I think with the replies to this thread. Especially with the thread Philosophy has failed to create a better world and

T Clark — T Clark

post in that thread forcing me to think about what I think.

That is I believe philosophy is essential to right thinking and right thinking is essential to liberty and democracy and must be a part of education. :sweat: that is a lot of mental work and there is nothing better I can do with my life than do as the Greeks attempted to do- to get it right. :lol:

Which quality of faith do you refer to? For example Gurdjieff taught that:

Conscious faith is freedom. Emotional faith is slavery. Mechanical faith is foolishness.

As important as it is, how many have ever contemplated the difference? — Nikolas

The only faith I know of is a blind belief. Without it there is doubt. I don't see the logic in doubting what we believe as equalling freedom? I have no idea what a mechanical faith would be? Believing something without questioning it? I don't think I have done that since I was 8 years old. However, I am pretty sure gravity pulls things to earth and I stopped jumping off of the top of the swing, and buildings, with the hope of flying. :lol:

I found page 13 of the thread extremely difficult, mainly due to the tension between literal and non literal interpretation of scriptures. When I was struggling with page 13, feeling grateful that the topic had continued for this many pages, I wondered about my own superstitions surrounding the figure of thirteen. The irrationality arises unexpectedly. I was once surprised by a psychiatrist, who I don't believe was religious, suggesting that by certain talk that I might cause jinxes. Anyway, I still believe that this thread is a way of bringing forth areas of discussion, for myself and others.

I need to stop freaking out about religion and start being more considerate of others, and you have my permission to remind me of that.

I think that you are sensitive towards others. If anything, I feel that I need to be more aware of this thread because I created it and I don't wish for tensions to erupt. Of course, the whole topic of religious ideas is emotive in itself, but I am hoping for the best possibilities.

I noticed your remark about the whole area of linterest in comparative religion and how it is not the way for making a living, and I do empathise. Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was different.I do believe that this is a neglected area of philosophy, where it seems to come down to a rigid question of belief in God, or non belief, depending on how we conceive the whole principle and what the idea of God stands for in the fullest way.

The only faith I know of is a blind belief. Without it there is doubt. I don't see the logic in doubting what we believe as equalling freedom? I have no idea what a mechanical faith would be? Believing something without questioning it? I don't think I have done that since I was 8 years old. However, I am pretty sure gravity pulls things to earth and I stopped jumping off of the top of the swing, and buildings, with the hope of flying. :lol: — Athena

Mechanical faith is what you were taught to believe. Emotional faith is belief based on fear which is why it is considered the blind faith of slavery

Conscious faith is our potential It connects above and below. A person realizes they are more than just a mechanical being and strives to retain their connection with higher consciousness. The Gospel of Thomas writes of the potential for conscious faith:

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

Normally a person only witnesses themselves for brief moments. But when a person can consciously witness themselves and sustain it they become known and helped from above. Emotional faith is a horizontal reaction while conscious faith is a vertical conscious action connecting levels of reality.

I noticed your remark about the whole area of linterest in comparative religion and how it is not the way for making a living, and I do empathise. Wouldn't it be wonderful if this was different.I do believe that this is a neglected area of philosophy, where it seems to come down to a rigid question of belief in God, or non belief, depending on how we conceive the whole principle and what the idea of God stands for in the fullest way. — Jack Cummins

Like any academic area, there are those who can excel in it and build a career from it. But unless you have exceptional skills, and maybe luck, it's very diffficult. Case in point - I did an MA in Buddhist Studies in 2011-12, again for no particular vocational outcome. There was a brilliant young lecturer with skills in Tibetan and Sanskrit at my uni. He was leaving at the end of my last year there for a Fellowship in the US. I later heard he had resigned the Felllowship and from academia altogether to explore an alternative career path.

The subjects I've studied have helped me in some ways but I sometimes think I've been tilting at windmills.