What do you understand by "Transcendence"?

Do you have a conversation topic that doesn't seem to fit any of the other conversations? Here is where we discuss ANYTHING about Joseph Campbell, comparative mythology, and more!

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

Locked
User avatar
romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:03 pm

jonsjourney wrote:
There is one major assumption here JJ. -Rom
Actually, there could be several, so you will have to point out what you mean.
The major one is consciousness.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
User avatar
romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh » Sun Oct 21, 2012 5:17 pm

nandu wrote: Nothing exists after the "I" is gone... or everything exists. That is why I said the Nothing becomes Everything, or Everything becomes Nothing.

The dichotomy, which is a creation of the self, disappears.

Nandu.
The self is everything.
The logic of cause and effect points to this.

We seem OK somehow to accept at least the transcendent dichotomy of nothing and everything but then we hang to the experience of free will? How can nothing have free will, how we as everything have free will? Answers on the back on an envelope at the Free Will thread please.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
jufa
Associate
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:07 am
Contact:

Post by jufa » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:23 am

nandu wrote:
Neoplato wrote:
Bingo! When "I" ceases to exist, you have acheived transcendence!
Ok...but the indiviual identity (formerly known as "I") will exist. Extistence is the "1". Even though "I" is gone, to exist still requires a notion of Self.
Nothing exists after the "I" is gone... or everything exists. That is why I said the Nothing becomes Everything, or Everything becomes Nothing.

The dichotomy, which is a creation of the self, disappears


Nandu.
This dichotomy is not true. And there is no proof nor evidence given to justify the italic statement above. It is only a theory. One has to disappear [return from the dead] as proof positive this dichotomy theory is true.

When ones awareness can no longer find sanction of a personal I of life for self, one must explain the existence and purpose of life's continuance as a personal I of self when the individual I of ones self disappears.

For the dichotomy to go beyond theory, one must be able to practice their theory visibly. In order to prove the I disappear into nothing, one must give proof that nothing does not exist. Moreover, one must define what happens to the I in nothing, and whether nothing is an extended form of life incomprehensible to the sentient mind.
Never give power to anything a person believe is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:49 am

IMO, jufa, there is a difference between the dissolution of the self as part of transcendence, and death. Of course, death may be the same, but nobody has come back so we do not know.

And none of this can be proven... that is why I said in the beginning that the transcendent experience is totally subjective. What I am sharing here are my viewpoints, which are valid only to myself.

...And trying to understand what others understand by the concept.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
Evinnra
Associate
Posts: 2102
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by Evinnra » Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:26 am

nandu wrote:IMO, jufa, there is a difference between the dissolution of the self as part of transcendence, and death. Of course, death may be the same, but nobody has come back so we do not know.

And none of this can be proven... that is why I said in the beginning that the transcendent experience is totally subjective. What I am sharing here are my viewpoints, which are valid only to myself.

...And trying to understand what others understand by the concept.

Nandu.
:shock: Nobody has come back?! I thought you Hindus believed in reincarnation :lol:
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:31 am

Evinnra wrote: :shock: Nobody has come back?! I thought you Hindus believed in reincarnation :lol:
What do you mean by "Hindu"? :wink:

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
jonsjourney
Associate
Posts: 3191
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:24 pm
Location: Earth

Post by jonsjourney » Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:16 am

The major one is consciousness. -Rom
Why not expand your thought?

It leaves me wondering if you agree that consciousness is a factor or not, or if you even believe that we have consciousness to begin with.
"He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot." -Douglas Adams
Cindy B.
Working Associate
Posts: 4719
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

The Collective Unconscious and Archetypes

Post by Cindy B. » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:45 pm

I thought of this Jung quote this morning so just sharing. :)

Whoever speaks in primordial images speaks with a thousand voices; he enthralls and overpowers, while at the same time he lifts the idea he is seeking to express out of the occasional and the transitory into the realm of the ever enduring. He transmutes our personal destiny into the destiny of mankind, and evokes in us all those beneficent forces that ever and anon have enabled humanity to find a refuge from every peril and to outlive the longest night. ("On the Relation of Analytical Psychology of Poetry" (1922) In CW 15: The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature)
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung
jufa
Associate
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:07 am
Contact:

Post by jufa » Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:51 pm

nandu wrote:IMO, jufa, there is a difference between the dissolution of the self as part of transcendence, and death. Of course, death may be the same, but nobody has come back so we do not know.

And none of this can be proven... that is why I said in the beginning that the transcendent experience is totally subjective. What I am sharing here are my viewpoints, which are valid only to myself.

...And trying to understand what others understand by the concept.

Nandu.
Nandu, Dissolution & death can mean the same according to? Am Not attempting to prove anything here. All experiences are subjective conjecture if it has not been experience by the collective whole equally and reaching the same conclusions in exactness, beyond relativism.

Transcendent does not necessary mean going beyond sentient intelligence. It simply means rising above a stage of thought.

Transform means to change. Change always carries the possibility of falling off the wagon.

From a metaphysical viewpoint:
"Transcending the world of collective and individualized human thinking is the change [transformation] of necessity needed, if men are to become receptive to Spirit forms absorbing the physical body in ascended form. Transcending is ascending beyond the words of human interpretations, beyond affirmations, beyond singularity of prayer for changing human situations and needs. Ascension is beyond the mantra and mode of human meditation. Ascension is stepping into the vacuum of the unconditioned Mind where Spirit is, and matter is not. Stepping into that secret place beyond the one called thee, me, and I, where there are no human thoughts, words, images or analytical human interpretations because they are of the Nature of Error, without God's ordination to “Let there be.” jufa
Never give power to anything a person believe is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
jufa
Associate
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:07 am
Contact:

Re: The Collective Unconscious and Archetypes

Post by jufa » Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:02 pm

Cindy B. wrote:I thought of this Jung quote this morning so just sharing. :)

Whoever speaks in primordial images speaks with a thousand voices; he enthralls and overpowers, while at the same time he lifts the idea he is seeking to express out of the occasional and the transitory into the realm of the ever enduring. He transmutes our personal destiny into the destiny of mankind, and evokes in us all those beneficent forces that ever and anon have enabled humanity to find a refuge from every peril and to outlive the longest night. ("On the Relation of Analytical Psychology of Poetry" (1922) In CW 15: The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature)
I understand this to be saying once a thought is released into the ethereal, it is available to all of like conscious thinking.

To myself, it is explaining what Eccl.1.9 is saying.
That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.
Never give power to anything a person believe is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:15 pm

jufa wrote:Transcendent does not necessary mean going beyond sentient intelligence.
For me, it does. :D

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
zoe
Associate
Posts: 235
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 1:00 am
Location: In route

Post by zoe » Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:34 pm

It is interesting that no direct comparisons between and among religion, transcendence, insanity and induced altered states has been made in this discussion. This exchange brought it to mind.
Transcendent does not necessary mean going beyond sentient intelligence. - jufa
For me, it does.- Nandu


Hence the illusionary and transient nature of the experience.
The two primary effects you mention (visual hallucinations, sense of connection to the universe) are generally believed to be consequences of the modified patterns of serotonin release. Outside visual stimulus doesn't get processed in the same way, allowing other systems in the brain to influence your experience of visual perception. At the same time, because you're not processing external input in the same way, your brain stops doing such a good job of effectively differentiating between your self and the surrounding world.
http://www.quora.com/How-does-LSD-work
User avatar
romansh
Associate
Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:25 am
Location: In the woods, BC, near US border
Contact:

Post by romansh » Tue Oct 23, 2012 12:47 am

jonsjourney wrote:
The major one is consciousness. -Rom
Why not expand your thought?

It leaves me wondering if you agree that consciousness is a factor or not, or if you even believe that we have consciousness to begin with.
It is an age old conundrum. I do have my doubts about consciousness. We tend to assume blithely (I think) that we have it.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Evinnra
Associate
Posts: 2102
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by Evinnra » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:17 am

nandu wrote:
Evinnra wrote: :shock: Nobody has come back?! I thought you Hindus believed in reincarnation :lol:
What do you mean by "Hindu"? :wink:

Nandu.
Thought you had mentioned once upon a time that you were a Hindu and as far as I know, all hindus believe in reincarnation. Is this belief correct?
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
Evinnra
Associate
Posts: 2102
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: The Collective Unconscious and Archetypes

Post by Evinnra » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:26 am

Cindy B. wrote:I thought of this Jung quote this morning so just sharing. :)

Whoever speaks in primordial images speaks with a thousand voices; he enthralls and overpowers, while at the same time he lifts the idea he is seeking to express out of the occasional and the transitory into the realm of the ever enduring. He transmutes our personal destiny into the destiny of mankind, and evokes in us all those beneficent forces that ever and anon have enabled humanity to find a refuge from every peril and to outlive the longest night. ("On the Relation of Analytical Psychology of Poetry" (1922) In CW 15: The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature)
Fabulous quote, thanks for sharing this Cindy. :) A quote rather similar in meaning was bought up at our first Melbourne jcf roundtable meeting this weekend by one long time associate. That capacity of myth to transform the individual is so eloquently expressed by Jung.
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
Locked