Know Thyself?

@richrf,

richrf;93727 wrote:

Many, many, many times. Trains, cars, buses, planes. In Chicago breakdowns, detours, delays, buses and trains never arriving, construction delays and detours are a regular occurrences. Streets are blocked for parades and baseball games or events. There are influences all around us that change our intended directions.

Most of the things in my life (maybe all) do not turn out as expected. Things happen. For example, you probably didn't expect this answer, did you?

There is what we intend and then there are all the influences around us that intend otherwise, and life is about navigating between where we want to go and what the influences will allow. Some people may try to overwhelm all influences with Will Power and end up dying early from exhaustion. Others may try less exhausting routes.

Rich

Sure. Things happen. But unless most trains and buses arrived at their destinations, and approximately on time, they would not be used. The abnormal is not the normal. It couldn't be. The glass is always more than half-full. When it is broken, people don't use it. And they get a new glass. You seem to think that unless something works infallibly, it doesn't work at all. The fallacy of black or white thinking.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;93730 wrote:

Sure. Things happen. But unless most trains and buses arrived at their destinations, and approximately on time, they would not be used.

It is a matter of probabilities. Some are so bad (and I am not just talking about Chicago), that they aren't used.

kennethamy;93730 wrote:

The abnormal is not the normal.

Normal and abnormal change daily in my neck of the woods. One they I might go this way and the next day that way. It all depends upon what is happening around me. I live in a very dynamic society.

kennethamy;93730 wrote:

It couldn't be. The glass is always more than half-full. When it is broken, people don't use it. And they get a new glass. You seem to think that unless something works infallibly, it doesn't work at all. The fallacy of black or white thinking.

People adjust.

Rich

@richrf,

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

Hey William,

I can see that you have given this a good deal of thought. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks and you're welcome.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

There is more than one kind of creating IMO. One takes place when you already have two things, for instance neurology and psychology as two separate disciplines and by bringing them together as neuropsychology we create something bigger than its two parts.

Yes, I agree, but is it "better" than it parts or does it just get more complicated? Just as I have stated on numerous occasions the more we try to understand the longer the words get, Ha! I think there is a lesson there and we are failing to see it. In all sincerity, I think all science is trying to understand something it never will as it gets more and more complicated as we go.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

The other creativity seems to come out of our subconscious, if you will, more like an artist painting something the way only s/he sees it. This type of creativity often follows a process, beginning with a passionate effort, followed by a period of relaxation, and then pop, it shows up whole. Read a book on this, years back.

I don't think it is creativity, just an attempt to express using any means to communicate something words can't, to satisfy a lack or express a love. It is using a gift that comes natural without effort in that artistic expression. Now there are types of artistic expression which clearly identifies the "artist's" expression and is only attractive to those who share those expressions. Some show beauty, some have no idea of what beauty truly is as their art are considered abstracts or confusion and to me that is not art, but it is cry for "help". Now let's observe this closer up. Now what does that identify the person who spends a fortune for "abstract" art? How confused are they? That would depend on how much they are willing to spend as they find comfort in the abstract and need it close to validate themselves. Let me give you an example. This link: Most Expensive Painting Ever Sold
illustrates exactly what I am saying about David Geffen and spending $140,000,000 dollars on a, pardon my expression, piece of crap by Jackson Pollock, in my most honest opinion. Yuk!!!!!!
Here is what is said to justify it: how lame:

"The painting itself, apparently a mixture of oil and canvas created in his highly successful "drip" style, is a swirling mixture of earth tones and black and white, that to the "untrained eye" may appear a splattered mess. His paintings have a certain harmony and are developed in such an enigmatic way that they are sure to hold some public interest for years to come". (I am so thankful to have such an untrained eye)

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

I wonder if too you are familiar with the term xenophobia, or the fear of strangers? This seems to be naturally built into the human psyche. I agree with you 'social psychology' is fascinating.

Yes, Sub, all too familiar with it as most people are zenophobic and in varying degrees afraid of other people and have much justification to be that way. In that many people live in fear in some from or another and do not understand they attract that they most fear. I am of the opinion faith and fear are extreme opposites You can't have both as it goes with friendship. You can't have faith in a person or a diety if you fear them. Not going to happen and one of the gross misinterpretations of certain controlling, powerful religions.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

I personally wonder if with personal change we are only the last one to know. So much seems to be going on unbeknownst to me in that area. I have actually woken up in the morning changed in some way. Or again, thought something that showed me that Spiritually I had finally understood something that I had been grappling with for years, like a gift.

The only reason we effort to consciously change is because we desire to be something we are not so we can be loved by others. The reason you felt as you did when you awoke is because you went to sleep anticipating tomorrow, you woke in a brand new day, much like re-birth and felt refreshed, alive, looking forward to what that day will bring and it should continue that for the rest of your life. If you went to sleep dreading the thought of what tomorrow brings you awake in a worse mood and that also continues also. You awake to the same dread or even worse.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

The mind like the body is carrying on in a complex fashion that isn't always right there on center stage. Often when it works something out, it sends me a memo.

It's only on center stage when we force it to be there. In other words you are "troubled" by something and You will not let you sleep until you solve the problem. It's like what happens when you talk to yourself. Don't despair, we all do it, usually when we are alone, yet there are those who are so detached from this reality they don't notice if they are alone or not, the will talk to themselves not matter who is around. Now that's another subject entirely, one of which I have also given much thought.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

One big reason for conflict between persons holding different ideas is that, they identify themselves as those ideas, and so when the ideas are questioned they feel personally under attack.

Beautifully said. You are on the mark and that is exactly what the ego is. The strength of the ego depends on the depth of the fear and how strong we feel about allowing any one to make us afraid any longer. The ego is a double edged sword; damned if you do, damned if you don't. An impossible situation and a lonely one and phoney one, to boot. Ideally we should have nothing to fear but unfortunately we are just not that "civilized" yet. We have no idea of what the word truly means. Yet there are exceptions, but very few.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

I used to think that the reason that people didn't see things the way that I saw then was because they simply didn't understand them.

Now observe what you just said. "You used to think......". Now that is all you and your imagination at work. The reason because you saw things that way was because you wanted them to think like you, and that's impossible. There are no two people who think alike unless they are identical conjoined twins who share one brain. Now even if they are conjoined and have two separate brains they will be about as close as you can get to "thinking the same" for they have had the same experiences though they still have individual perceptions as no one can communicate with both at the same time. They have to direct their attention to one or the other. That is also what is occurring among siblings and that rivalry that occurs between them. This can best be illustrated by noted motivational speaker Zig Ziglar as he stated: "If you have 4 children and you treat them all the same, you are treating 3 of them wrong."

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

So I would try to explain. But I don't think that any more.

Now you are talking, ha! The only reason we consciously think is because we are trying to answer questions that are not natural to us. That in itself creates a mental road block that prevents the mind from acting "normally" and supplying you with what you naturally need. It will do that if we do not tax it and force and give it means to go in another direction, which it will if we force it to and then we walk on very thin ice and venture into territory that is alien to us as we try to be something we are not and think of ways to justify it. Not good. It's commonly called "rationalization".

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

People are so very unique and often drastically different. One man might actually kill another man because it was fun. Blame the DNA if you want.

You speak so gingerly of a person who is in hell itself, the ultimate guilt trip. Fun? I don't think so. DNA, perhaps, a little, but nothing a little external positive inertia can't correct. I will not go into all of what hell is as for you most assuredly don't have to die to go there, I know, I am one of it's survivors. That's a long story. I had a great guide holding my hand.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

But too, subjectively speaking, we are not really living in the same world. Who was it that said, "We don't live in the world. We live in that little space between our ears?"

Ha, that little space between our ears is all that matter we call brain that can light up like a christmas tree in the dark. Now when we bring it into the light of day, all the lights go out. Ha! When we leave it alone to do it's job it is as bright as day and we have no idea of what it is plugged into to give off such light. Now the only light is naturally gets is what we see and how brilliant it works is dependent on how we "see things". Now when we feed it a light that is not so bright, like that which might "disturb" us, the mind and the brain get disturb also and cease to function in optimum efficiency. Now when we see clearly nothing disturbs us for we understand the reason for it and the mind and the brain operate as if we weren't even there. Such as what might be considered a pleasant "dream state". Then the mind in such a state will feed you all you need to know to handle any input your senses expose it to. Such as a person told they have cancer. Damn!! Talk about disturbance! Everything breaks down.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

I know my cat isn't coming from where I'm coming from on this world. He sees more, he hears more, he smells more, is he smarter? He certainly has more information than I do in certain area? If I had to catch a mouse for supper, I would die of hunger. I don't have the stealth.

Ha Ha! Good observation. A cat is a true predator. You can't domesticate a cat. The only reason they hang around is because the food is easy to get and they subsequently get "fat". Ha! You take that food away and they will wander. Unfortunately, we also have the two legged fat cat that is a predator also. They prey also on human weakness with stealth. How sad.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

As far as getting along with others persons/races goes I tend toward the Vedanta ideas on compassion. We have to allow in good part that people must be who they are. There is room for all of us. (Granted society has a right to protect itself against violence.) But we do not have to walk in lock step.

If we let people be who they truly are they would be no violence; it's what we impose on them that makes them violent. Unfortunately people don't have the freedom to be who they are for they don't have the price this reality dictates to be truly free as they become slaves to it. Why we must create a new reality and a new beginning. It is time to start that right now. It is happening right now as we speak.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

People generally speaking believe that their happiness is to be attained out there in the world. So they start moving other people around like they were furniture. When they finally realize that happiness is found within, they stop all that. This IS "peace on earth."

Sub, those pieces of furniture have legs and they will move in the right direction on there own, if so allowed, in a direction that is complimentary to them. No one else can move them or try; but as you said they do. Just like that piece of worthless art that sold for $140,000,000. It was bought by a man that has more money that he has sense. He lives in a world that has lost all touch of reality and his taste for furnishings truly indicate that as is indicative with most people who spend there fortunes so haplessly or happy-less-ly. They are spending an enormous amount of money on crap that they think will make the happy and only attract others who find themselves so confused also. Such is the world the "filthy rich" live in as it is all show and not go. As hollow as a ballon, full of air and no substance.

Subjectivity9;93725 wrote:

If I have missed something that you wish I had addressed, please bring this t my attention and I will try my best.

Subjectivity9

Sub, you are indicating a good common sense and I thank you for bringing your thoughts to the forum for you helped me understand things more clearly, and that is what communication is all about. I hope what I have forwarded helps you and together we can look both ways and avoid those spills on rainy days. I like that little rhyme, I think I will use it again, another time. Ha. :a-ok:

William

@richrf,

Rich,

Yes Spirit is Immediately Alive Always. It is the mind/body that only borrows life temporarily.

I see my studies as the “finger pointing.” (Very Zen) It is only when I experience what the finger is pointing at, Spirit/Tao, that I feel I am onto something or know the truth.

Chinese medicine is part of my bag of tricks for staying healthy. I am sensitive enough to be in touch with my electric body and the manipulation of it. Dealing directly with the physical body is often far less efficient than going directly to the chi. I also prefer herbs and food choices above synthetic drugs.

Seeing “Spirit” as “bored” seems rather anthropomorphic, don’t you think? What I have witnessed of Spirit, through my very Being of Spirit, it seems more like Spirit is completely 100% satisfied, and in need of nothing at/all, not even entertainment.

Taiji: S9 runs off to Google once again. : ^ )

I must confess I don’t have any idea why mind exists. But it is certainly mind that gets bored.

Perhaps hierarchy was a poor choice of words when speaking of aspects. When I spoke of light being broken up through a prism into a rainbow of colors, I didn’t mean to say that purple was higher than yellow. I meant to convey only that the White light was like the Tao, the prism was like the mind, and that the different colors were the seemingly separate manifestations of this ‘One Light,’ or Spirit.

Joseph Carpenter, (an American poet, who some say was enlightened much like Walt Whitman), speaks of the Democracy of Spirit or all being equal. (Of course we must question equal where, or in what way. Certainly not in intelligence, in beauty, in athletic capacity etc.) But yes indeed, equal, I agree.

Yes like in monopoly, by stepping aside we get an over view. We see the big picture of a more complex game than simply throwing dice, moving in circles around the board, and “going to jail without passing go.” We get into the ‘hurley/burley’ of finance and competition. But it is said that with Spirit we can step back completely out of the game altogether, while at the same time the game/dream and our dream self continues unaltered. This is Transcendence. We do this by seeing that we are not the game and we are not the player of the game. Both the game AND the player are dream stuff.

By Essential Truth I am being a bit Platonic. We have limited truth like right now I better stop because the light is red. Limited truth is more of a practicality. Limited truth can even change with your mood. Ultimate Truth like Spirit is unchanging.

I agree that pain and suffering are a prime movers, so is pleasure. Suffering also is great for making us question. Some have said it is by desire that we move. When it is said we must go beyond desire, that doesn’t mean the human animal must or can do this. So what ARE they talking about?

The only way I accept an idea that I am uncomfortable with is, if I really respect the person telling me it. I even then try to see it for myself. Nothing in my arsenal is faith based.

I think that it is only by vigilant observation that we can come to truly understand anything.

It is through due diligence, or vigilant watching, that everything sooner or layer becomes clarified. There is simply too many ideas in our lives that we take for granted are right and we never re-inspect these errors allowing them to fester. Some of these were even formed way back when we were children, with little information and even a small capacity to understand. Some of these ideas were built on myths that we were taught. When we see a mistake clearly, it will simply fall away. This allows both light and fresh air back into the rooms in our mind that have been shut off.

Sometimes we have to simply look at our world, what has been called ‘bare attention,’ without projecting our expectations onto what we are seeing. What I have called “Looking with New Eyes.’

As we clean house of our mistaken notions and the dust begins to settle, some of the more subtle areas of our life and being become more apparent.

I remember how after moving to the country I had to adjust to a slower pace of living. Even though I had looked forward to this change I also found it difficult as my mind was used to larger doses of stimulation.

Thank you too.

Sunjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

Seeing "Spirit" as "bored" seems rather anthropomorphic, don't you think? What I have witnessed of Spirit, through my very Being of Spirit, it seems more like Spirit is completely 100% satisfied, and in need of nothing at/all, not even entertainment.

This may be so. But I think an experiment is in order. Attempt to do nothing. Nothing at all for several days. Do no write on this forum. Do not talk to friends. I guess you have to eat. But let us make eating monolithic. Maybe just an apple for every meal. Do not even meditate. Do nothing? And observe. My guess is that you will get bored.

I remember fasting for 10 days. I was never healthier in my life. However, I finally got off the fast. Not because I was hungry. But because I was bored. By soul needed to taste flavors. Smile

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

Perhaps hierarchy was a poor choice of words when speaking of aspects. When I spoke of light being broken up through a prism into a rainbow of colors, I didn't mean to say that purple was higher than yellow. I meant to convey only that the White light was like the Tao, the prism was like the mind, and that the different colors were the seemingly separate manifestations of this 'One Light,' or Spirit.

Yes, I would agree with this image. Light is fascinating. I spend lots of time contemplating it and reading about its nature.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

Joseph Carpenter, (an American poet, who some say was enlightened much like Walt Whitman), speaks of the Democracy of Spirit or all being equal. (Of course we must question equal where, or in what way. Certainly not in intelligence, in beauty, in athletic capacity etc.) But yes indeed, equal, I agree.

Yes, I would say I see it the same way. It is all equal (in terms of the thing that we are all doing) but different.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

Both the game AND the player are dream stuff.

Yes, I like to bounce back and forth from performing role in the play and observing the play from the audience. Gives me a different perspective of things.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

By Essential Truth I am being a bit Platonic. We have limited truth like right now I better stop because the right is red. Limited truth is more of a practicality. Limited truth can even change with your mood. Ultimate Truth like Spirit is unchanging.

Yes, in this regard I am different. For me the it is all the same and it is what we are observing, experiencing, learning, and sharing. It is what it is. There is no more. But that is my sense of things. Of course, we can always become more aware of what it is. But that is a matter of details. Is there any more truth to viewing a microbe than there is to viewing a tree. I think not.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

The only way I accept an idea that I am uncomfortable with is, if I really respect the person telling me it. I even then try to see it for myself. Nothing in my arsenal is faith based.

I listen to everything and I assimilate it all, and it affects who I am. Some have more affect than others (at least overtly) but who knows what the long term effects of any observation may be. Things are always working in that soul ... especially when when is asleep.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

It is through due diligence, or vigilant watching, that everything sooner or layer becomes clarified.

I am a bit more relaxed about this. If I don't see it this life I will see it in my next life. There is no rush. Thought I would like to improve my tennis game in this life if possible. And I am going to keep practicing art and music.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

As we clean house of our mistaken notions and the dust begins to settle, some of the more subtle areas of our life and being become more apparent.

I agree that things change. I view as a simple soul. And it may happen now or later. To me it doesn't really matter that much. I learn what I learn this life and then there are always more.

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

I remember how after moving to the country I had to adjust to a slower pace of living. Even though I had looked forward to this change I also found it difficult as my mind was used to larger doses of stimulation.

Yes. My friend once told me that we all need to learn to enjoy the simple things of life. And there are so, so many simple things to enjoy. It could easily keep one busy for many, many lifetimes. Smile

Subjectivity9;93798 wrote:

Thank you too.

Sunjectivity9

And thank you. It is a pleasure discoursing. :a-ok:

Rich

@richrf,

Knowing oneself is important, but not as important as being true to oneself.

@richrf,

A Question 4 William,

Why do you think that the Delphic Oracle said, “Know Thyself?

This question was plastered over the entrance to the temple, IMO, because it was the ostensible answer to everyman’s question about what to do, what to investigate, and how to live.

When I was younger I suffered from the disease of being Idealist. I took one look at the world and decided that it needed changing. As time went by and I learned a little bit about history, I also learned that the human world/animal has pretty much gone along as it is going along right now. Oh sure the car designs change, and we carry more sophisticated weapons, but.

I also found out that I was making myself miserable by contemplating what was wrong with the world and her peoples. So what to do?

Wait a dog-gone minute. Why is “Know Thyself” the answer to my problem, all of my problems? Can I really change ‘the world/no my world’ by “Knowing Myself.”

Being a Mystic, and after many, many years of contemplating this question, {this answer (Know Thyself)}, and myself, I would certainly say, “YES, indubitably.”

I have found that we are living on multiple levels simultaneously. We have our finite self; some call this ego. We also have a more intimate Self that is Spiritual and Eternal. When we go about living as though the ego was the only guy in town, everything bugs us. Lets face it; life isn’t fair.

However, when we draw back and get an overview, when we realize that ego is just an instrument for adaptation to our earthly environment, and we begin to get a little taste of the peace that is also here. “The ‘Peace’ beyond all understanding.”

So yes, there are people buying art that cost more than we will make in a lifetime. Yes, this seems crazy. Yes there are people starving, while other people buying art that we think of a crap, with the very same money that could feed millions. And yes, the why of this may be interesting.

Is it a art buying a financial thing? Follow the money.

But, shouldn’t we figure out who we are, and “get ourselves right,” before we take on fixing the whole &#@%$# world?

You know these others are only going to ask you, “Who died and left you boss?”

That being said:

There is no reason why we can’t do some things on this finite level to make things a little bit better for ourselves, and others. Perhaps we can be a little more compassionate, esp. when we discover in living Technicolor all about our own weaknesses and imperfections.

Knowing yourself has a funny outcome. Very often in getting to know yourself you begin to understand others and their pain. You begin to see that we are all more alike than different, deep down. Most differences are surface differences.

Often what we project outwardly (unknowingly) returns to us sooner or later. If we are unkind to people, people will be unkind back at us. It is almost like society is a mirror. If I don’t keep a good eye on myself, the originator of my own karma, I will probably think simply that the world is being unkind.

By the way, cats are very affectionate animals. They just demonstrate it differently that dogs. Some of my best friends in this life have been cats. But I digress. : ^ )

And:

Yes William, you do help me. You get me thinking, (A LOT). Something my teachers in the early grades thought impossible. ; - }

Subjectivity9

@richrf,

I believe that "enlightenment" is a vital factor in knowing one's self.

But I do not see enlightenment as some sort of instantaneous realization, although I do not deny that possibility of sudden awareness. I see enlightenment as a process of evolution where a mind continues to be enhanced by the knowledge and experience it acquires.

I think enlightenment can be better understood and defined when compared to a mind that is not enlightened. Many of our fellow humans are living existences where they have no interest or curiosity about the spiritual aspects of life. Many live life without any regard toward anything that is not material or organic. The third eye is the farthest thing from their mind where the enlightened strive to see more with the third eye than the other two.

Much of the world is trapped in this physical/material lifestyle, and their reality is whatever their brain sends them for messages.

The real difference between the enlightened and them is that we have realized or become aware of the fact that our brains are not always sending us messages that are accurate or beneficial to us. It is when we learn to see around the sensory aspect of the brain that we discover other truths that the brain is not capable of interpreting to us.

Knowing oneself is understanding that what we see in the mirror is what our brain is telling us it sees from information it receives through our organic visual process. But if one is enlightened they know that there is much more to that two dimensional dimensional image than what the brain is trying to tell them so they endeavor to look further and use other senses. Than they are able to see the three dimensions and the true depth and scope of their image. They realize aspects of their reality that cannot be interpreted by the brain and can realize the self behind the brain.

We can be easily fooled by our senses. The brain is no different than any other organ. It performs a biological function. But the enlightened reasoning and understanding of the true self is not accomplished by an organic organ.

@richrf,

Hey Leonard,

Welcome to our little gathering.

I am also a “Big Lover” of integrity.

I am not sure however how you could possibly “Know Your Self “ without also “Being True to Your Self?

Or is it, I don’t know how you could “Be True to Your Self” without “Knowing Your Self?”

Or is it “Knowing Your Self” is “Being True to Your Self?” They are circular like night follows day, and day follows night, etc.

But that is only my NOT so humble opinion.

Perhaps you could elucidate further for all of our edification?

Subjectivity9

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;93850 wrote:

I think enlightenment can be better understood and defined when compared to a mind that is not enlightened.

The reason I prefer not to think in terms of enlightened and unenlightened is that it does imply a hierarchy, and for practical purposes I would not want to get into a discussion with a person about who is more or less enlightened.

However, I do agree that we are all evolving in different ways.

Thanks for your post Pathfinder.

Rich

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93851 wrote:

Hey Leonard,

Welcome to our little gathering.

I am also a "Big Lover" of integrity.

I am not sure however how you could possibly "Know Your Self " without also "Being True to Your Self?

Or is it, I don't know how you could "Be True to Your Self" without "Knowing Your Self?"

Or is it "Knowing Your Self" is "Being True to Your Self?" They are circular like night follows day, and day follows night, etc.

But that is only my NOT so humble opinion.

Perhaps you could elucidate further for all of our edification?

Subjectivity9

If we are truly on a path to truth and intelligence, then it is at the "source" that our paths should end. The question is, on that journey, does how we walk that path really matter when there seems to be no moral authority in this world. If all of the world's religion is merely traditional wishful thinking, than its directives are not authoritative. And if the governments are mostly corrupt than their laws are useless as guidance. So if we are left to find our own path to the source, and there seems to be no laws or authority to lead us, than are we free to disregard authority from other places?

It is this walk through the fog of mystery that is the true test of a man.

There is a house about three blocks from mine where the owners leave a small childs motorized jeep out in the yard everynight. My three year old son would love to have it. I would love for him to have it myself. I cannot afford to buy one, but I could easily have that one. What is to stop me from going there late one night and throwing it in the back of the car?

Well, there it is! This one dilemma can be asked with so many references to life's various situations. Religion easily addresses the dilemma by claiming the laws of their god as authoritative. But it is not so easily answered if you cannot assign a supreme directive. If I do not adhere to any authority, than why can't I have that little car for my son? I could force them to at least share it with me.

If man learns anything in this life at all it should be that the path he walks is the path he places before him, and the one he leaves behind him. This path can only be made as he places one foot ahead of the other and moves forward, and he can only do so by choosing which direction he will take. Without direction from another source he is forced to make these decisions himself, using only what knowledge and wisdom he has attained in life.Where this path leads to will be the 'person' that he will become. At the end of that path will be the person that he created.

When I declare that I am a thought of the creator, moving forward and evolving myself as I move, I acknowledge the fact that I am creating who and what I am, by the empowernent of the original thought of this mystery we call the First Cause. Without the original I could not exist to become anything, and by the deliberate empowering design of the original I freely design what I will become at the end of this path I am travelling. So the reason why I would not steal that child's bike has nothing to do with the moral laws of some archaic religion, or even the laws of society. The reason I would not take it is simply because I want to become the type of person who would not want his own child to have something that it loves stolen from it.

An ancient wise counsel once said that we should do unto others as we would have done to ourselves. I suppose that counsel is agreeable as long as the person following it is not a sadist.To steal from others, or to do any harm to others, would make me a thief and an abuser, and that is not what I want to create. We also have to consider here that if we make abusers of ourselves, we are also making the same of mankind as a whole, because if everyone follows the same path, we end up with a race of beings that have no regard for each other, and have absolutley no ability to live with each other. Always at war, they would soon exterminate their entire species. Is that something we should strive to create for our future? If not, than we have the responsibility to make sure that we do nothing to create that in ourselves.

So, as we walk that foggy path to the source of knowledge, we are faced with choices that result in who, and what, we will become based on the decisions we make around those choices. And there are qualities of character and personality that consist of moral and immoral aspects that cannot be designated by the laws of man's philosophies and beliefs. These are qualities that are more akin to the laws of natural physics and dynamics than they are to righteousness, which is more of a religious nature.It is simply a matter of what a man wants to add to his character and identity as he walks this path. It is what he collects as supplies with which to build his character that will create the building he becomes, so to collect qualities like courage, compassion, sensitivity, loyalty, and integrity will provide supplies for a character that is the opposite of one built by using deceit, insensitivity,hate and moral corruption. The supplies we choose along the way depend entirely on what we deliberately pick up and add to our warehouse.

In my warehouse there will be nothing that does not add to the morality and integrity of my character simply because I firmly believe that this is the goal for the entire human race, and the only way that we will ever live in harmony with each other, which is what I also believe is the ultimate goal for us as humans. Love and harmony should not be cast aside as weaknesses of wishful thinking pacifists only. These should be seen as building blocks that will construct the type of buildings suitable for a place where many like it will commune together in harmony, benefiting from each other in many ways. Whereas building blocks of the antitypes of these will result in a place where war and havoc will always rule over their lives. The decision is ours; the path we will create and leave behind us.

Sorry about the lengthy post but, as you can see, I think integrity and moral character will be the building blocks that saves mankind from its natural tendencies.

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93851 wrote:

Hey Leonard,

Welcome to our little gathering.

I am also a "Big Lover" of integrity.

I am not sure however how you could possibly "Know Your Self " without also "Being True to Your Self?

Or is it, I don't know how you could "Be True to Your Self" without "Knowing Your Self?"

Or is it "Knowing Your Self" is "Being True to Your Self?" They are circular like night follows day, and day follows night, etc.

But that is only my NOT so humble opinion.

Perhaps you could elucidate further for all of our edification?

Subjectivity9

Hi Leonard and Subjectivity9,

Yes, it would be an interesting question. How can one not be true to one's own self. One is what one is no matter what one does, isn't it?

But maybe it can be understood to mean, that one should accept oneself no matter what one does. That is, do not deny all aspects of oneself. So be true to oneself about oneself.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;93856 wrote:

Hi Leonard and Subjectivity9,

Yes, it would be an interesting question. How can one not be true to one's own self. One is what one is no matter what one does, isn't it?

But maybe it can be understood to mean, that one should accept oneself no matter what one does. That is, do not deny all aspects of oneself. So be true to oneself about oneself.

Rich

I understand what you are saying Rich, but can we designate a difference between being 'aware of' what may be in us and yet also striving to 'overcome' that which may not beneficial to us. In other words we do not have to experiment with the darker sides of our humanity just because we are aware they are there. I am sure that is not what you are suggesting, I just wanted to clarify that.

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;93857 wrote:

I understand what you are saying Rich, but can we designate a difference between being 'aware of' what may be in us and yet also striving to 'overcome' that which may not beneficial to us. In other words we do not have to experiment with the darker sides of our humanity just because we are aware they are there. I am sure that is not what you are suggesting, I just wanted to clarify that.

Yes, I most definitely agree that we do not have to experiment with all sides of ourselves. Some of the stuff can really lead to some unwanted results. My guess is that for lots of the stuff, I already have experimented in former lives and have concluded it is best to stay away from it! Smile

But, in this life, I am making mistakes and learning from them, and hopefully this information will be useful as I continue to evolve.

Rich

@richrf,

richrf;93732 wrote:

It is a matter of probabilities. Some are so bad (and I am not just talking about Chicago), that they aren't used.

Normal and abnormal change daily in my neck of the woods. One they I might go this way and the next day that way. It all depends upon what is happening around me. I live in a very dynamic society.

People adjust.

Rich

Apparently so dynamic that none of your replies have anything to do with any of my comments. Philosophy is not free-association.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;93866 wrote:

Apparently so dynamic that none of your replies have anything to do with any of my comments. Philosophy is not free-association.

Yes, there are all kinds of unexpected things in life. It is a matter of adjusting.

Rich

@richrf,

Rich,

A correction:

It was Edward Carpenter who wrote ‘Towards Democracy.” (Sorry, I had said Joseph.)

Guess I was having a senior moment. ; ^ )

Subjectivity9

@richrf,

Rich,

I am not trying to live in such a way that my body/mind AKA ego self does nothing. I fully understand that would be impossible if not foolish. My thinking is that we are talking by each other on this particular issue.

It is my thinking that you have spirit sitting inside your body at the drivers seat having the time of His life playing. On the other hand I have the body/mind and Spirit completely separate from each other. This is a little like a man and his shadow. They are not really the same thing.

So I can allow the body/mind to play tennis and at the very same time know that my true identity is Spirit only. I am, as my ego, self hardly ever bored. My plate is so full with fun things to do, that I can hardly get to them. Yet I know that this doing is not my doing, “I am not the doer,” ultimately.

A close approximation might be like Lucid Dreaming.

The reason that I see us all as being equal may be a little different from your reasoning, in that I see us essentially as the Ultimate One, every single one of us. Every living being is Atman/Brahman. Enlightenment or Self Realization is when you know this. We know this not as a concept, but as an actual experience.

(For those unfamiliar with Atman/Brahman: A close approximation would be if Brahman were God, Atman would be how each person witnesses God at his very center. Obviously it is more complex than this.)

Being part of the audience is a mind capacity called self-reflection. This takes place in the frontal lobe of our brain, science says, but I cannot remember which side. When we step back even further, we become the audience of the audience if you will. Finally we come to see that Spirit steps right out of mind completely. This dream world is completely automatic or goes on without need of us helping.

Some say that our knowledge of the Spirit comes to us through the Third Eye, or through the pineal gland, also calling it Spiritual Sight. I am not sure how all of this works, but I am sure there is some truth in this.

I do believe that we must remember that this ‘Third Eye’ is just an interface or perhaps like a radio receiver. So we have two dimensions in correspondence, Spirit and body/mind. To me the Soul is simply Mind with a capital ‘M’ because it is not brain dependent and seems to travel through multiple lives.

Of course some of this I must admit is metaphysics or is worked out by my mind on what I think I know. Spirit is actually the only thing I experience directly without mind’s intervention.

I believe that I was a bit more frantic then you seem to be about getting enlightened. This has changed as I have tapped into Spirit becoming more satisfied.

I was trying to save and/or perfect the body/mind to make it deserving of Enlightenment. Know I realize I was Spirit all along. I don’t however include the body/mind as a part of who I am or Spirit.

I too assimilate most of what I come in contact with as an idea to look at. It was only the ideas that I held onto tightly, held on for dear life, that made me uncomfortable to give up. I however was fortunate enough to have a Spiritual friend who was traveling just ahead of me at times, and who I trusted enough to question even these ideas if he asked me to.

Yes living more simply here in the country is certainly different than I would have imagined. Multi-tasking in to “smell the roses” isn’t quite the same. : ^ )

Subjectivity9

@richrf,

Wow there is a lot of metaphysics on what knowing thyself is and what it means. I don't think I could even begin to comment on that. But if it isn't too obnoxious and regress to the original question, on how to know thyself, then I will put my thoughts in.

So assuming that knowing thyself is understanding the knowledge one already has we can look at some history on the topic. I believe it was Plato, that said all knowledge is pre-existing in one's mind. This akin to Immanuel Kant's a priori knowledge, the assumption that we have knowledge before hand. So at first glance we already have this knowledge so we already know all that we can know and thus already know thyself. But the catch is, we may have this knowledge but we may not understand it nor are able to filter it from fallacious knowledge.

I think here Socrates provides the key to this, and this is self doubt or an admission of unknowing. One must question oneself in a Socratic style. Now Socratic questioning and answering sessions typically often involve two people but one person might be able to do this on their own by viewing what they already know from a 3rd person stance. This 3rd person stance won't be honestly possible until that person has an honest doubt for what they know. In essence Socrates asks you to give up what you know, so you can look at what knowledge there may be from an unbiased stand point. There is heavy debate if people are able to do this, and I don't think there has been a well accepted conclusion on it. And it may be that one cannot exercise enough doubt to know thyself completely. But its a start and a noble effort, even if its endless, I believe.

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93915 wrote:

Rich,

It is my thinking that you have spirit sitting inside your body at the drivers seat having the time of His life playing. I on the other hand have the body/mind and Spirit completely separate from each other. This is a little like a man and his shadow. They are not really the same thing.

Thanks for explaining to me your perspective of life.

Yes, I agree. I see the physical body as a manifestation of the soul that is using the physical to explore, learn, and share. The physical is simply a dense aspect of the soul. They are two sides of the same coin and not separate.

My overall point of view is always unity. So the physical is the same as the soul, but denser. And the souls are connected at the higher layer of spirit. Everything is connected like the waves in an ocean.

Thanks again.

Rich

Philosophy Forum

Quick Links

My Account

able2know