First of all, Spinoza was not an ethereal man. Spinoza was not a prophet, as we know it. His philosophy can not be named or bordered by any religious point of view. Even his pholosophy can not be named or bordered solely by pantheism. His philosophy can not be named or bordered by panentheism at all. His pholosophy can not be namer or bordered solely by atheism. Not any raligious point of view Not pantheism Not panentheism Not olely an ateism His philosophy is beyond all these definitions. May be his philosophy can be named A KIND OF MATERIALISM or ATHEISM. We shouldn't attempt to connecet his philosophy to any religious or politic ideology or concept. Yes Novalis said for Spinoza "God intoxicated man", But this is not true as far as I understand his philosophy, according to me. Yes German Romantics love him and his philosophy as a kind of naturalism. But this point of view is insufficient, as far as I understand his philosophy, according to me. He says "Deus sive Natura'. That is to say, All Universe (maybe Multiverse) itself is God. This means "Dynamite all Religion", "Dynamite all religious point of view" Spinoza's God, that is to say "Deus sive Natura" exactly not a TRANSCENDENTAL GOD, but an IMMANENT GOD. Religious God is transcendental. Religious God is beyond of the universe and all creatures. Religious God creates all the universe and all the created things. This God designs them, controls them, punishes them, rewards them etc.. Religious God is antrapomorphic. But Spinoza's God is not transcendental but immanent. Spinoza's God has no any plan or program about his creaters like Religious God. Doesn't care them. Doesn't punishes or rewards them. Doesnt promise anything to it's creaters. Spinoza's God doesn't CREATES anything, but everything DERIVES from Spinoza's God, from Natura. NATURA NATURATA derives from NATURA NATURANS, unceasingly. So energetic, so lively, so colorful.so dynamic, so harmonic, so rhythmic and of course so wonderful. This deriveness is magical. This is extraordinary beautiful panorama for sighted people. Like Blake McBride said, this point of view needs very very much effort and practise with "Third Kind of Knowledge of Spinoza and plus Fourth Dimension Looking". Maybe a kind of Nirvana. But a zen budhist only watchs the whole MAYA. But spinoza teaches LIVING IN REAL LIFE WITHOUT FORGETTING PERSEPECTIVE of ETERNITY.. Yes. Spinoza's philosophy teaches to see things from perspective of eternity. Yes Sphinoza's philosophy teaches people to see their lives in a cosmic contex. Not only the infinity of space but the eternity of time as well. This perspective of eternity is the most important pillar of his philosophy, but this doesn't mean that this extraordinarily beautiful panorama not only for watching hypnotized look but more importantly for LIVING. Already The biggest difference between Spinoza and the other pphilosophers is this LIVING PHILOSOPHY. Spinoza is a philosohper of daily life. He never advice or teaches to live in a glass vase or in a crystal ball. Niever says this. He was never an asocial man and his philosophy is never an asocial philosophy, his philosophy is never life escapee philosophy. Spinoza teachs to evreyone to combine their CONATUS' to other CONATUS' So there is a sociality here, there is an association here, there is a philosophy of contact here, there is a philosophy of merging powers here. Luis asks in his mail that "how Spinoza's philosophy can be solved teh problem of to deal with malignant people and situations (ie., Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, The Inquisition, Salem Witch trials, psychopaths running around, etc.)?" My answer is: "if Spinoza would live here in todays world I'm sure he would be an anticapitalist, he would be antifaschist, he would be disobeident man against all manipulative brain washings of systems, always beside of freedom discourses especially he would support A REAL DEMOCRASY. ('But unfodrtunately I myself can't see any real democrasy in this world:) Oguz from Istanbul -------------------------------------------- On Tue, 10/21/14, Donovan Rundle donovanrundle@... [spinoza] <spinoza@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [spinoza] To: spinoza@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014, 9:39 PM On Oct 19, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Luis Gutierrez luiguti_88@... [spinoza] <spinoza@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Hi Blake and Donovan,I am starting to get glimpses of how important it is to answer the question of the relationship between Substance (Deus sive Natura) and the finite modes and the imperative necessity to get it right. And you guys are helping me stroll in that direction. It is what all religions are searching for and want to answer. I guess I know what you mean, but the ones I've investigated, including a denomination of Protestantism in which I was raised, turn out to be the bitter ashes of fires which once burned brightly in those from whom these organizations devolved. I’ll give a pass to Tibetan Buddhism, but it is really a tiny sect. I had a sit down with Samdong Rinpoche once, and he was a remarkable man who gave every impression of walking the talk. And I don’t know all the religions in any event, for example I can’t even remember the rudiments of the B’ahai faith. But, I still maintain that generally the priest class says, "You pay my bills (large) and I'll give you some of this sacred ash to rub into your eyes...you will see later, when you are dead. Trust me, I know.” The priests may have drunk the Kool-Aid themselves, and so we have “the blind leading the blind.” Do these leaders explain that they are as blind as those who follow them? I don’t know, but I didn’t hear much along those lines. Did you know that Thomas Jefferson, who was imperfect, but still a brilliant architect of the idea of an American republic, constructed his own version of the New Testament? I’m reading it now. It’s popularly called “The Jefferson Bible." It has a good deal in common with the Gospel of Thomas. No miracles such as bringing back the dead, including himself, no John 3:16. What’s left is a radical moral teaching that would raze the Vatican and sell it’s treasures to feed the poor and get people back to wondering how to love God above all. Islam is much in the news, but how many people have actually read the Koran? When you read it, some will try to tell you that what is written plainly enough is your “misconception” because you don’t know Arabic or how to render the Suras properly. There is no denying the scriptural basis for those endeavoring to establish a caliphate, and to kill the infidel. American evangelicals don’t want separation of Church and State either. Jefferson did want that. Few realize that Spinoza’s collected works were in Jefferson’s library, and while John Locke was more in the public eye, Spinoza’s universalist idea of a true religion is more in harmony with Jefferson’s ideals. Here in the US, while our supposed freedoms are spelled out (and frequently denied to us by politicians and the police), few realized the debt we owe to Spinoza’s political treatises. It is at the crossroads of the meaning of life. Well put I say. My Spinoza teacher was asked once "What is the meaning of life?" He replied,"Life has no meaning other than what you give to it.” So, if you make the study of God, yourself and the world your priority, you are in good company. Look no further than Albert Einstein and his love of Spinoza. What amounts to is what a finite, perishable, limited thing has to do with the Eternal and Infinite, if anything at all? How can a finite thing comprehend the scope of the Infinite? It can't. I don’t know how many times I’ve read Spinoza’s letter to DeVries concerning “the infinite.” If you will consult Spinoza’s “Short Treatise on God, Man and His Well-Being, you will find not only that Spinoza claimed an Immortality of the Soul, but also describes the bliss of union with God. Indeed, the human mind is, in some cases, consciously united with God. "Tat tvam asi." Be your essence, your Atman, then see. But Spinoza says maybe or Yes, you can! He is definitively an optimist, to say the least. Yes, but it is not an optimism of faith or hope. It’s based on the truth and on the perfection of the Absolute. He says "Look for the good in everything." There is a Jesus story that the Christians don't have, but certain Muslims know it. Jesus and the Apostles were walking through a small city where they passed by an alley from which a horrific stench was coming. Jesus turned to walk down to investigate the source. He motioned the Apostles to come and see. There lay a reeking, long dead dog, some half way to full rot. Jesus was gazing with admiration at this carcass. "Rabbi, what are you doing? Let's get out of here! Can't you see this dog is full of maggots?""Of course I can," replied the Lord. "But can’t you see the perfectly white and well formed teeth of this animal? They are a marvel." This is why I find myself trying to get at what Spinoza glimpsed and intuited. "It is the truth that frees, not your efforts to be free."- J. Krishnamurti If we look at a flowing river as an image of life, the single finite droplet of water versus the infinite main current of the river, our perspective will be very different if we try to comprehend the River from one point of view or the Other. Man is trapped in the limited, temporary, droplet's view. In "Ethics," Spinoza lays out a method of associating emotions to true ideas, such that they function like alarm clocks to waken us from our slumber. This builds awareness of our true essential nature. How could we simultaneously get the Other view, from the perspective of the single droplet? Not possible. Send an email to “seriousinquiry@...” and I will send you some information that may be useful to you. We can not scape the limitation. Yet Spinoza says I have found a way. There is a kind of knowledge, intuitive knowledge, that can soar above the droplet's view and contemplate the full current of the river and glimpse the Eternal and Infinite flow.The key here is "simultaneously." But, how to comprehend and understand what Spinoza found? Are his explanations and writings sufficient to reach a clear and concise idea to make it possible to break through the "Gordian knot"?Luis If I could choose but one book to study, it would be “the Short Treatise.” I’ve heard that Spinoza circulated this among his disciples that formed the “Club” mentioned in the letter to Devries. I don't recall if it's in the Rig Veda or some other Sanskrit antiquity, but the saying, to repeat, is "Tat Tvam Esi" or "I AM THAT." It means, roughly, that Atman, the immortal soul of the perfected individual, IS as One with Brahmin, or Godhead. Spinoza puts it that the mind is united with the whole of nature. Or, that our being conceives Substance as attributes of mind and matter, and an infinitude of others, when it comprehends itself as well. This is the truth of our cosmic origin. But this is the starting point for proper investigation, so that the mind and emotions reflect the true order of nature. When someone asks,"How?" they have already got the cart before the horse-understandably so- yet we must see that true knowledge flows from cause to effect in a single and simultaneous activity of infinite and eternal creation. A thing which is only knowable through itself cannot be known as the end of some process. That would imply that periods of duration put together would reach the eternal. If Spinoza has a true idea of God, this aspect of his mind is eternal, and he claims we can come to know God better than we know ourselves. Still, to know oneself is an aim which can be broken down into parts. In "Ethics," Spinoza has performed a masterwork of self-inquiry which begins with God, as all things must, and ends with the freedom that comes with the knowledge and love of God. So, we aim to improve ourselves to a standard of moral excellence, and see how well we can come to love the source of our Being along the way.“Be ye perfect as I am perfect” -Jesus of Nazareth