Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15872Re: [Meditation Society of America] Mambo #5 with God

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Belyea
    Jan 17, 2008
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:
      >
      > Jeff knows this, but just for
      > clarity: I'm not questioning
      > his authenticity, just noting
      > what I see as the pitfalls of
      > adopting theistic expression.
      > We all have to weigh pulpit
      > impact vs. possibly misleading
      > or occluding effects, and we
      > tend to make our calls based
      > on conditioning -- both the
      > environmental conditioning of
      > our upbringings (cum other
      > formative experiences) and the
      > biological/genetic conditioning
      > that determines our places on
      > the bhakta-jnana spectrum.
      >
      > Thanks for the dialogue, Jeff!

      You're welcome, Bruce.
      True, your responses to
      me are never taken as
      questioning authenticity.

      I couldn't help but note
      the "plot twist" at the end
      of your post. Two of us
      from Judeo (you)-Christian (me)
      backgrounds discussing
      the pros and pitfalls of
      theistic language ends with
      a reference to the bhakta-
      jnana spectrum. Smilling.

      How about, God is knowable,
      but not wordable?

      Peace, love and blessings,

      Jeff

      PS: Not sure why you mixed
      in the little aside about fortunate
      "realized" ones having to cope with
      the slings and arrows of life on
      earth, but, of course, agreed.

      Above the fray (in a way), but not
      above stubbing a toe on a bedpost
      during a night-time sojourn...
      and spouting a burst of profanity.





      >
      >
      > Jeff Belyea wrote:
      > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
      > > <editor@> wrote:
      > >
      > >> Jeff Belyea wrote:
      > >>
      > >>> --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
      > >>> <editor@> wrote:
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>> Jeff Belyea wrote:
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>> In response to Bob and Bruce's
      > >>>>> response to Era's post about
      > >>>>> "knowing God"...
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Here's my "little bit of this,
      > >>>>> little bit of that" from my dance:
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> >From The Old Testament
      > >>>>> (repeated in the New One
      > >>>>> and reference several times
      > >>>>> as "having come to pass"):
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> "Behold, the days come,
      > >>>>> saith the LORD, that I
      > >>>>> will make a a new covenant...
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> I will put my law in their
      > >>>>> inward parts, and write it in
      > >>>>> their hearts; ...
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> they shall all know me."
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> So, if the wise say that
      > >>>>> they know that God is
      > >>>>> unknowable, they err. And
      > >>>>> they are wise in their
      > >>>>> own mind - which is
      > >>>>> incidently the major block
      > >>>>> to enlightenment.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Enlightenment IS coming
      > >>>>> into the knowledgable
      > >>>>> presence of God..
      > >>>>> as promised.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> I know God.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Formally introduced
      > >>>>> July 21, many years ago,
      > >>>>> at about 9:30am.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> And we continue to
      > >>>>> stay in touch.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Call me ignorant if
      > >>>>> you must. God knows.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>> I see you as not "ignorant,"
      > >>>> but perhaps playing somewhat
      > >>>> fast and loose with the word
      > >>>> "knowledge," which essentially
      > >>>> means "stored information."
      > >>>>
      > >>>> As an illustration, can you
      > >>>> tell me what it is you "know"
      > >>>> of this "God?"
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>> It is the inadequacy of words
      > >>> to explain the fuller meaning
      > >>> of "Knowledge" in the context
      > >>> of my earlier post that makes it
      > >>> seem as a fast and loose dance.
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> True.
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>> Knowledge becomes secondary stored
      > >>> information when it enters
      > >>> the necessarily dualistic world
      > >>> of mental reflection and any
      > >>> attempt at "telling".
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> True.
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>> God can be Known, but God
      > >>> cannot be explained in words;
      > >>> only Known by direct experience...
      > >>> which, to be redundant, is
      > >>> beyond words.
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> Iow, "unknowable" -- and
      > >> capitalizing that "K"
      > >> doesn't change that fact.
      > >>
      > >> Please consider that
      > >> fortunate "realized" folks
      > >> still have the failings of
      > >> incarnate life to deal with.
      > >> Religious conditioning is
      > >> especially problematic and
      > >> can easily lead to mistaking
      > >> the ecstatic response of our
      > >> personal meat puppets to the
      > >> unknowable (aka "Holy
      > >> Spirit") with "knowing God"
      > >> or some such -- our heads
      > >> are full of old scripture
      > >> vouchsafing this knowledge
      > >> to us, so in the aftermoment
      > >> ego "backfills" the miracle
      > >> of realization with that
      > >> stuff and we are quite prone
      > >> to claiming that we now
      > >> "know God." It sure sounds
      > >> good from the pulpit too!
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>> Thanks, Bruce. Always
      > >>> enjoy your perspective.
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> Right back atcha, Jeff!
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>> Jeff
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> Much love -- Bruce
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > > Interesting syntax -
      > > ego backfilling vs new
      > > enlightened understanding
      > > of scripture. There would
      > > be more of a case for the
      > > headroom filled with
      > > scripture that is used
      > > by the ego to backfill,
      > > if the backfilling were
      > > model specific (the home
      > > of the fundamentalist),
      > > but when the knowledge
      > > with a capital K (a literary
      > > and graphic design convention,
      > > I know) reveals a core
      > > understanding in all
      > > spiritual traditions
      > > (the mystical path),
      > > the case is less
      > > convincing.
      > >
      > > The meat puppets who
      > > think morph into meat
      > > puppets who have a
      > > pseudo-spiritual experience?
      > >
      > > Cosmic, man.
      > >
      > > I'll take theist language,
      > > thanks. Sure sounds better
      > > from the pulpit - especially
      > > when it comes from the
      > > mystic heart of Knowledge.
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > >
      > > Cosmic Man
      > >
      > > PS: Just had flashback
      > > to the punch and Judy days.
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic