We live in a time that challenges our deepest being.
And whether we are tending to religious in the traditional sense, non-denominational or even atheistic, there is a question of being that applies to all of us. Can we, within the respective paths we are walking find commonalities, despite our differences?
This is not a post of what is better, or what is wrong with people, but rather what is helpful to meet the challenges of today, to meet happiness and fulfillment and the commonalities between them.
As a guide I would share this video by Rupert Sheldrake, a scientist from Brittain with rather peculiar views, that frankly blows the mind and allows you to look at things from a wider perspective.
He discusses: spiritual practices, prayer, meditation, even pilgrimage, the commonalities between them in several religious and spiritual traditions and bridges the apparent gap between science and spirituality.
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=fiUE9jCTnOQ
I do hope you will enjoy this even more as much as I have.
On a different but connected field of inquiry, I came across this channel made by prof. Wilfred Bastiani. Brace yourself. He is quite compact and speedy, so, despite the uplifting classical music, you might want to pause here and there.
In this particular instance, this is about freedom, which brings choice. How do we really make choices? A mirror to look into.
https://ytprivate.com/watch?v=jUJMTeDX-xM&list=PLSpNjGeUKaXiRj20qQxx9UXFqyeFmUSsg
Peruse his channel for more food for thought.
Enjoy!
“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.”
― Nikola Tesla
New Age crap. Don't need it. I threw him aside over 20 years ago.
Sorry you are feeling this way. As I said, this is not a thread about division but rather about commonalities.
Would you put the effort in to describe, after reflection, how the latter 20 years correlate to the years before, if in your view any commonalities exist?
I had a peak experience in 1988 and after that I learned more and more about Christianity and left behind all the Sheldrake-y gobbledegook of the New Age junk I had been reading. When you find Christianity and compare it to anything else, all else is silly and quite meaningless - to me, at least.
Thank you for your response.
Curious am I. Do you pray? If so, how does that equate to what you did back then? What is the state of mind? Do you list the things you are grateful for? Do you try to make know our troubles and some solution? Do you seek forgiveness?
I do all the things we are commanded to do: watch and pray, be sober minded, work, fast, seek the virtues, flee the world, attend corporate services, confess and participate in the holy mysteries. Life is very good and I try to remember to thank God for his blessings.
If I understand correctly, you have become part of a greater thing, where you seek to participate in the spiritual traditions, away from materialism, and when you mention virtue, it will probably be in the concept of classical virtues, yes?
In what sense is that different from what I do? I meditate and let go of my ego, trying to live in the Now, where I can be correct (virtue) in my actions towards others, share this with others who travel the same path.
What I have noticed, St. Paul writes about the fruit of the spirit. You know this, yes? Love, peace and joy. The other things he mentions are descriptions of behavior, like patience and kindness. This is exactly what flows from the soul.
In a previous post I asked: what did St. Paul point to as the source of division? If you would read that with attention, you would note that it is ego: the wants of the flesh.
Isn't it not true then, that despite perhaps a different object of pursuit, we do follow the same patterns and ideas where it comes to manifesting spiritual specifics in reality?
From my perspective, this points to commonalities. And without judgement towards each other, we stand and fight against the same evil. And so, as St Paul writes: each of us will render an account. But who are you to judge your brother in what is right or wrong? One will celebrate the full moon (like me) another will judge this to have no relevance.
Yet, what is the object we all pursue? Hence, given the tremendous pressure being put on us world wide with differing degrees of egregiousness, and as you said it to be a spiritual battle, we are in need of fortifying ourselves in this area according to the path we are walking.
added: see for instance discussion on Fourth Turning
I want to make sure, that, we share topics of interest, without becoming an echo chamber and identify with the vogue of the day.
Please, feel free to share the effects of your spiritual path and how it allows you to grow and remain steadfast.
The difference is one thing and one thing only: Jesus Christ. If you don't belong to Him, you belong to the devil. It is quite binary. He came to save us, and we respond to His mercy. We get baptized and are filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit. We try to rid ourselves of the passions and pursue virtue. It is not "classical" thinking, because, for example in Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes virtues existing on a continuum, but Christians see them as one thing: Good. So, many other systems use the same ideas as Christianity, but they lack the engine that makes it a stupendous gift to humans. As they say in the Russian church: c nami Bog -- God is with us. And He is. This is the one and major difference between Christianity and all other spiritual disciplines. As they say in this Q world: We have it all. And we do. We have the mysteries, we have the fantastic services and prayers, we have the Fathers, we have the holy sacraments, we have holy icons, which are windows to the saints, and we have The Church, in which Apostolic laying of hands on our priests goes unbroken from the Apostle until now. I am speaking of Orthodoxy. So, whereas I don't judge people, I do judge their structures and religions. This is OK, because we are trying to find the truth.
I began reading Rupert Sheldrake in the early 80's.
Here is his BANNED TED Talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg
I first heard about him in the nineties,when a friend of mine showed me the video of Wim Kayzer's: A glorious accident.
He first visited and interviewed at length several well know scientists and philosophers at length and then, in the final act, brought them together around one table. that was quite something. They could kill each other, and had nothing but contempt for Rupert Sheldrake. I found his ideas fascinating and thought provoking.
Also interesting is what Freeman Dyson let slip about his time at Bomber Command during World War II with regard to the incessant bombing of civilian targets in Germany.
https://invidious.snopyta.org/search?q=wim+keyser+glorious+accident
Apropos Wim Kayzer: He also did the same thing with writers from several backgrounds on memory, thought and consciousness. Familiar and yet alien, it is called (Vertrouwd en o zo vreemd)
Interesting tidbit on the programs this man made:
Alternative media avant la lettre and avant la guarde.
His interview with Roger Scruton is also very interesting: Beauty and Consolation. (in relation to the topic at hand)
Added: the reason I use invidious is to prevent google spying. So from one video to the next, I use different instances of invidious. Thanks for your yt addition
He is a psychologist and nothing at all to do with religion at all. All psychology wants to do is displace God and promote psychology as the new secular priestly caste, they have been in a turf war with other social scientists for decades and have more or less won this war. They have won it as they control the way we think about ourselves.
Beware of false prophets, they are demons in sheeps clothing.
Thank you for your closing up discussion comment. None is so closed minded as those who think they have the ultimate truth.
So, let me give you an olive branch and riddle me this:
When Paul writes about the source of division, what exactly does he points to as the source? I am sure you can find the answer to that question in 10 seconds. don 't you dare disappoint me now.
For the curious mind, what exactly is the ego? How was that looked at back then and what is the source of those views? Has Paul become a false prophet?
A 1000 years ago, a researcher in Baghdad catalogued all the plant species he could lay his hand on. Meticulously, he considered the environment and the millieu it grew in. He even made a taxonomy. When you read his book, there is a clear conclusion he had to draw. However, in the area he lived in, the grandson of Mohammad had just been brutally chopped into pieces and his wives were run barefooted through the desert. Why? You have to understand the influence Persians had on uneducated barbarians from the Arabian Peninsula. Because this grandson wanted to reform Islam for the stupidity by closed mindedness that was creeping in.
Had this scientist not ran tail and give in to his fear, he would have written about natural selection a 1000 years before Darwin. This concept of natural selection is as logical as the selection we perform when we breed new dogs, horses, chickens, etc.
Does this means that these thoughts are meant to replace God? What do you know of what God is? Is your view of God not rather anthropormorphized while the Psalmist says: what you know is only the whisper of the seams of his mantle?
How is this different from the radical materialism that Richard Dawkins espouses? How is it different from the level of suppression we are facing when we post on social media regardless what the subject is?
Red Toe? Red Shoes?
Ah ... ad hominem. How unimpressive.