Resurrect the Myth

What needs do mythology and religion serve in today's world and in ancient times? Here we discuss the relationship between mythology, religion and science from mythological, religious and philosophical viewpoints.

Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.

Locked
User avatar
Vissi
Associate
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 3:16 pm
Location: Symbol City, Deep In the Heart of the Sonoran Desert
Contact:

Post by Vissi » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

nandu wrote:
Another thing: just the other day, I visited a bookshop. The shelves were full of a new Jesus Christ: one who married Mary Magdalene and fathered a dynasty. What surprised me is, why this interest in this legend now? The original book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" which put forth this theory is years old. Maybe Dan Brown has given birth to a new myth of Christ!
Nandu, in a vision quest I had, Mary Magdalene was the Christ. The love Mary had for Jesus and the love Jesus had for Mary created a divine power in both that was not either. Because all the sacred texts that had come before identified "the savior" in a lineage descending from only male prophets, Mary and Jesus decided together that he would assume the place (in society) of the teacher. He would share their wisdom with others and be sacrificed in body. She assumed the role of his student and sacrificed being known as the source of his wisdom, as he was the source of hers. His bodily sacrifice saved her physical life. The sacrifice of her love gave the world a new idea --- that humans are born from, and live through, the enlightened heart of love which, in its purity, transcends physical form and does not die. But...the message was quickly lost when society remade the metaphor to agree with what could be seen with physical eyes.

In the same vision quest, I saw that Jesus had come again to the world and no one realized his return because he came as the catalyst of each person's becoming. Privately, in the confines of the hearts and minds of each person. A "rapture" was occurring in which each slipped free from the chains of his or her personal, cultural, spiritual identity and knew, well and truly, that this power was living within each of them, here and now.

These are metaphors I found in a vision quest. I am no one special and have no great gift. I am not particularly Christian. For me, this turn of events means that all metaphors live in the collective unconscious and can be found by anyone and everyone.

If I agree, as Joseph Campbell stated, that myth is metaphor, why would I want to define what the metaphor is for someone else when they are clearly able to seek and find it for themselves? Myth is. Metaphor is. My "is" is not your "is" and your "is" is not my "is." So, if I am living from my "is" and you are living from your "is," we should be able to live in harmony so long as neither of us insist one "is" is better than another.

A while back, I suggested that a new law be enacted worldwide: follow any religion, spiritual practice, or lack of religion or spiritual practice that resonates in your heart but your personal choice must never be named. With no names, there can be no perception of belonging to any group that doesn't include everyone else. There can never be a "them", only an "us."
SteveC
Associate
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:41 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Post by SteveC » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-02-12 16:53, Vissi wrote:
A while back, I suggested that a new law be enacted worldwide: follow any religion, spiritual practice, or lack of religion or spiritual practice that resonates in your heart but your personal choice must never be named. With no names, there can be no perception of belonging to any group that doesn't include everyone else. There can never be a "them", only an "us."
I agree wholeheartedly, but of course it dooes not need to be a law, but a practice.

While reading about the new dollar coins today I had an idea. What we need is a coin with zero (0) on it. You can buy everything with it. Whatever anyone charges, it costs zero. And so you pay with a zero coin. There is no point counting them, because a million coins times zero is still zero.

Stores buy what they need from suplliers, people shop, people work and get paid, but everything is done and multiplied by zero. If you borrow zero, then you have to pay zero back, etc.

Zero is the new one. <IMG SRC="/forum/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif">
You can only see the height of a mountain from its valley.


The radical myth towards which the helix aspires is beyond the desire for money or power, yet which has greater returns than all the power and money in the world could not achieve.
Evinnra
Associate
Posts: 2102
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by Evinnra » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-02-12 16:53, Vissi wrote:

A while back, I suggested that a new law be enacted worldwide: follow any religion, spiritual practice, or lack of religion or spiritual practice that resonates in your heart but your personal choice must never be named. With no names, there can be no perception of belonging to any group that doesn't include everyone else. There can never be a "them", only an "us."
Interesting idea Vissi. But if we never tell our stories to our children, if we never relate all those myths that shaped our ideas how will Myth survive? How will others understand where we coming from? How will we know the truth of an other person?

Perhaps we could just declare that there is God, he owns the joint hence we all ought to respect everyone elses religion because it all comes from the same source. I am living this statement for over 30 years now. Sure, not everybody have so much love in their heart that they could fully accept this statement above, but if we all had we could live in a marvelously diverse universe. There is an old saying my Grandmother used to tell to us: 'many GOOD people can live in a small place'.

Evinnra
'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
Vissi
Associate
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 3:16 pm
Location: Symbol City, Deep In the Heart of the Sonoran Desert
Contact:

Post by Vissi » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Evinnra wrote:
Interesting idea Vissi. But if we never tell our stories to our children, if we never relate all those myths that shaped our ideas how will Myth survive? How will others understand where we coming from? How will we know the truth of an other person?
We tell our stories, Evinnra, but we tell them as metaphor. We say, "I am a dove." "I am a lightning flash." "I swim." "I help the rain find the earth." We have a larger vocabulary than we ever use because we limit ourselves by telling our loved ones how to read or hear the beauty of our spiritual lives without allowing them to create within themselves, through the power of their own heart and experience. My story of the dove is not yours. You have one of your own. When you tell yours, I listen, and I imagine the dove as you describe it. The dove in my story grows and changes because I've heard your story. Together, all our dove stories create a narrative of all the ways we know doves. I think myth will survive, long after we've gone.
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Dionysus writes: >>However I find that I am constantly having to clarify and define terms, which I thought we were all agreed upon, to others who simply don't get it (yet). Is this an educational conversation or are we attempting to create a mythology that has import to the world we live in NOW. From whom or what, or for whom or what are we attempting to resurrect the myth?
I fully understand Dionysus' frustration, and have felt the same way myself at times. It’s a not uncommon dynamic at times - just as a discussion seems to have hit its stride, doors opening and light bulbs going off in the head, suddenly the exchange gets bogged down because of a misunderstanding of a term or concept central to Joseph Campbell’s understanding of myth.

On the other hand, keep in mind that a mythology that “has import to the world we live in now” can’t just speak to those who have read so many pages of Campbell and demonstrate mastery of an official list of vocabulary words. And then there are so many levels to Joe’s thinking and writing – every time I re-read one of his books – say, Hero with a Thousand Faces or the volumes of The Masks of God, it’s a different book than the first time I read it through – like peeling the layers of an onion.

Campbell’s work takes much reflection to absorb, and that needs to be done in little bites that take time to chew and digest – hard to swallow it whole anymore than one inhales a steak in one gulp.

A lot of people are not going to fully grok every contribution to the conversation as we're not all in the same place - or even coming from the same place. Further, I find even people who have read a great deal of Campbell have blind spots (myself included) where they cling to a single and often correct (as far as it goes) interpretation, to the exclusion of other understandings (as if additional layers threaten the original insight); I suspect, given the empirical emphasis of our culture, that we all at times have a little bit of a literalist lurking within …

And then these are “conversations,” not graduate seminars – and conversations tend to be a little free ranging, drifting off topic here and there, but generally circling back to the main subject (depending on how interested the participants are in the subject).

One hint on how to deal with this somewhat disconcerting dynamic on those occasions it arises: I would suggest not worrying too much when one or two people get sidetracked or confused by basic concepts or misapplications of vocabulary if you find this jolting; the whole conversation doesn’t need to follow. It’s not rude to not respond to every single comment – that’s impossible anyway, considering we’ve had over 90 posts to this conversation. If you prefer, just keep talking to those who are engaged and getting what you are saying; if the pace of the conversation is maintained, those who are confused will catch up. I guarantee someone will sooner or later will jump in and take the time to connect the dots for them – but that doesn’t have to be you, nor do you need to be drawn into that side loop to the main conversation.

Thanks to Dionysus, though, for drawing attention back to the main subject (as have sladeb and nandu and others)
Dionysus continues:

I am not interested in trying to adapt the Semitic religious beliefs (Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity or Mohammedanism) to the modern world. Not the "isms" at any rate. I am not denying the value of some of the teachings of these faiths and I am sure that parts of them have a value in the modern world, but the basic thrust of these faiths, in my opinion, no longer apply. Now what is the answer? Do we take a bit of this and a bit of that. Grab big chunks of the Greek perspective (Prometheus, now there was a Hero) and synthesize with the beautiful psychological perspectives of the Hindu and Buddhist teachings and try to develop something of relevance to ourselves and others? I really want to know.
What, indeed, is the answer?

The question is about resurrecting myth – but does this mean creating a new collective mythology? If so, I fear we’ll be disappointed. L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith notwithstanding, a mythology is not a conscious creation of the head, but comes from, and speaks to, the heart. Myth is a creation of soul, not intellect – and, as Campbell points out, we can no more determine what the coming mythology will be anymore than we can know what we will dream about tonight; nevertheless, just as there are elements common to all dreams, so myth flows into recognizable patterns and shapes.

Paul Ray and Ruth Anderson describe an exchange with Joseph Campbell in their book, Cultural Creatives:
We were new to these ideas, and we argued energetically with the eminent and exceedingly patient profesor. How could he claim that myths were so important to the coherence of a society when it was clear that, as a culture, we no longer had such myths? Certainly no guiding story was carrying our generation through the stages of life and opening us to a sacred connection, we said.

"That's exactly the point," he agreed genially.

"Well, where do we get one?" we wanted to know.

"The panorama of possibilities has made it impossible to mythologize," he announced calmly. "The individual is just going in raw. All you can do is follow your own inward life and try to stay true to that."

"That's not very helpful."

"I'm not able to correct the world, he replied. "I can tell you what a mythology is, but when you ask me how we're going to get a new one, you've gone past me level of incompetence." And then he rocked back in his chair and laughed with great amusement.
I suspect that's one of the main reasons why I like Joseph Campbell. He doesn't tell one what to believe - "this is the way, walk ye therefore in it" - or try to construct a mythology for us to implement. Instead, he provides the tools, but trusts that if you use those tools with an open heart, you will find your way. Campbell pointed out that in this postmodern age, absent a working cultural mythology, each individual must discover/create one's own mythology. Like the Knights of the Round Table, each ventures into the forest where the woods are thickest and there is no path.

I've noticed two trends among those who explore Joseph Campbell's ideas and observations. Campbell himself noted that many of his students at Sarah Lawrence discovered depths to their birth faith of which they were unaware - and this added dimension deepened their own commitment to the beliefs in which they were raised (generally Judaism and Christianity). Of course, among associates of the JCF, I notice that renewed interest in one's birth faith is rarely channeled into fundamentalist and literalistic readings, but opens out to embrace ecumenical and mystical aspects of these traditions.

AJ’s experience is relevant here:
I personally feel that for a myth to be real for any individual, one has to actively practice it … For me, as I remember us discussing some time ago, that involved a return to a more liberal form of Christianity. For others, several of whom post here, it meant shifting to an Eastern perspective, finding a better balance, perhaps, by practicing Buddhism, or finding their own rituals, sometimes pulling together the more meaningful bits and pieces from several sources. What is important is the active participation in the practice. For me, this means participation in a community, and involves giving some sort of service to the community, as well as practicing the rituals themselves.
That’s a powerful personal account of engaging the mythos powering the Christian revelation. AJ’s experience isn’t tied to a literal interpretation of scripture, but to participation in the ritual – which, as Campbell points out, is participation in the myth that comes to life through us in the ritual. It’s an attitude – call it the mythic perspective, if you will – that AJ brings to the ritual that gives it life, and hence the power to transform. Nor does her experience lead her to discount that of others outside her tradition; rather, it seems to increase her understanding – and hence compassion – of others who follow different yet parallel paths.

(And AJ, considering my words have in other venues been criticized as trying to drive people away from Christianity, I am thrilled to have played some small part in your personal movement toward a deeper relationship with Christ! Oh, and yes, this conversation should sound familiar – we have discussed this subject two or three times this year, but it fascinates me nonetheless – nevertheless, I apologize for repeating myself ad nauseum.)

I’m not sure I’d automatically discount the “isms.” The literalist versions in all these traditions seem destined to fade away - but beyond the literalism the transcendent mystery peeks through. Right now I am immersed in Meditations on the Tarot, an anonymous, 658 page exploration of Christian Hermeticism that someone here on site recommended (short term memory loss precludes recall of exactly who), with an afterword by the late Cardinal Hans Urs von Balthasar - in fact, Pope John Paul II kept a two-volume German translation on his desk – and the book is absolutely mind blowing in it’s approach to symbolism and the deeper Mystery behind the Christian revelation. Gurdjieff, Spinoza, Jung, even Sri Auribindo and the Buddha are referenced throughout this work, which is a wonderful bridge between Campbell’s observations regarding myth, and esoteric Christianity – an encouraging sign.

Sladeb, on the other hand, moves in a direction that at first seems opposite to AJ, away from organized religion altogether – yet I believe both AJ and Sladeb recognize a certain kinship and understanding that they follow parallel, albeit unique, paths.

A second response among those drawn to Campbell that leaps out at me even more are those who are in search of a mythology that works for them. Some are led into a specific discipline from another culture (I think of a number of sincere seekers raised in a Jewish or Christian context who adopt the robes and traditions of Zen), but far more seem to embrace a cafeteria approach to spirituality - borrowing a little from this mythology here, that belief system over there, and combining these into a system of personal beliefs and practices that work for them.

Sociologist Paul Ray and psychologist Ruth Anderson label such individuals "cultural creatives," in a book of the same title published in the year 2000.

Cultural Creatives are more likely to be drawn to holistic approaches in everything from health to food to spirituality, are "aggressive consumers of the arts and culture," are more likely to be careful consumers, and often have eclectic, individualistic lifestyles. They are open to and interested in the beliefs and traditions of other cultures, and often adopt a hodge-podge of beliefs from all over the globe as elements out of which they construct their own spiritual practices. Cultural Creatives fuel "the experience industry" - weekend workshops, spiritual gatherings, experiential vacations, vision quests, etc. (and, the authors note, the vendors of such services "have to be Cultural Creatives themselves, or they can't do it authentically...").

Of course, since so many of these cultural creatives are following their individual quest, entering the woods where there is no path, most don't know there are so many others like themselves.

I was suprised to learn this group comprises 26% of the population - roughly 50 million adults! Of course, these demographics may have shifted some - especially immediately in the wake of 9/11 - but there are still a sizeable number of people today forging their own way through the woods

Though i hate being typed (and already see signs of Madison Avenue trying to take advantage of this market niche), I imagine I am one of these cultural creatives, taking from the mythologies and traditions of the world what works for me - myths and images and rituals and symbols that feed the soul – which has only been possible on this grand scale (that of Campbell’s Creative Mythology) in recent generations, as the world contracts and cultures collide.

After waking each morning and addressing matters of personal hygiene, I sit and meditate before my altar, lighting candles and incense, intoning various chants from a variety of traditions, then just sit and breathe. After meditating, I perform two different breathing exercises, then do some chakra work, and finally form intentions for the coming day. At the change of seasons and the cross-quarter holidays, as well as most full moons, I perform simple rituals involving smudging, candles, incense, and an elaborate tarot spread.

Joseph Campbell's work has made possible this fluid exchange between cultures, this emerging ability of the individual to draw on many mythic belief systems. Sitting zazen, then laying out a tarot spread after smudging the house with sage in a native american ritual, does not seem contradictory at all - for these rituals access the same mythic realm. Through Campbell we have learned that there is a harmony beneath the surface level of mythic symbols and images from different cultures.

Hence, I don’t apologize that I am also drawn to the beauty, elegance, and exquisite, complex imagery of the Christian revelation. At heart, it is the Love underlying this tiny persecuted cult that provided the momentum for the grassroots groundswell that overwhelmed the power of Rome, expanding beyond the Mediterranean world to conquer Europe and the Americas.

I feel more fortunate than those with an exclusive orientation, for I experience God in communion with Jesus, in prasad with Krishna, or in a peyote and sweat lodge ceremony. Those fully vested in the one true faith, however (whichever of the one true faiths that might be), will likely feel anything but holy if invited to participate in a Bushido fire-walk rite or Wicca coven.

However, I can’t question the depth of someone else’s experience of spirit, any more than s/he can question mine. The best we can do is seek the language – or maybe the symbols - to convey to one another our experiences of the Mystery, and agree to embrace where those meet.

mitakaye oyasin,
bodhibliss


_________________


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bodhi_Bliss on 2007-02-12 19:14 ]</font>
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-02-12 18:19, Evinnra wrote:

Perhaps we could just declare that there is God, he owns the joint hence we all ought to respect everyone elses religion because it all comes from the same source.
He?

<IMG SRC="/forum/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif"> :wink:

_________________


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bodhi_Bliss on 2007-02-12 19:09 ]</font>
Last edited by bodhibliss on Wed Oct 22, 2008 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

A J, I agree that Dan Brown is only a catalyst. The world was ready for a new reading of the Christ myth, and he just became the catalyst.

However, now people have started wrangling over which myth of Christ is "historically" correct - as if that mattered! <IMG SRC="/forum/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif">

Vissi, I agree with you that words are very poor instruments for the conveying of experience that cannot be conveyed, essentially. Myth speaks in symbols, rising up from the well of the unconscious. Just telling children that "there is a God and he owns the joint" as Evinnra suggests will help to push them towards theism (until they are old enough to choose for themselves, when they may or may not come out of it) but will not excite their mythic imagination. What we need to do is stoke the mythic fire in them-this is the challenge.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
User avatar
littlewing
Associate
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: coastal NC

Post by littlewing » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Am learning much from you all! I loved that treatise on science/metaphor Bodhi... best explanation I've read of how science/myth meld. I've only been able to point to the psychologic evidence that they do... resulting in raising ire in solidly science-based friends. I am solidly science based too. But loving the paradox that cutting edge cosmology or microbiology is also Mystery. Intangible concepts of quasars and nanomicrobes invisible to electron microscopes leave inquiring minds to struggle to understand a Mystery. And mystery of course, is what we build our spiritual sense around.

Re: god being in us or beyond any of us, the same metaphor as above applies: The light of soul inside me is the same stuff... composed of the same matter... as the light in a quasar of distant galaxies. 'Namaste' isn't an egotrip of homo sapiens as god; it is the recognition we each equally hold the same Mystery inside us that is in _____ (fill in the blank: God; All; Jesus...).

Oh, and hey, Bodhi. Thanks for the family reunion description! No wonder I relate easily to your essays and lines of thought! My husband Zen Coyote says hi!....lovin' you!

lw
littlewing
User avatar
nandu
Associate
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:45 am
Location: Kerala, the green country
Contact:

Post by nandu » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-02-13 00:01, littlewing wrote:
I am solidly science based too. But loving the paradox that cutting edge cosmology or microbiology is also Mystery. Intangible concepts of quasars and nanomicrobes invisible to electron microscopes leave inquiring minds to struggle to understand a Mystery. And mystery of course, is what we build our spiritual sense around.
littlewing, I am a hard-core skeptic: I reject most of new age science, miracles etc. But my rejection is based on analysis and not blind belief in "Science". Science is a method and not dogma: the true scientist should always keep on exploring....as should the true mystic. The truth is always tantalisingly out of reach.

Nandu.
Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu
User avatar
Vissi
Associate
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 3:16 pm
Location: Symbol City, Deep In the Heart of the Sonoran Desert
Contact:

Post by Vissi » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Can myth be made of this discovery?

Scientists To Save 5,000 Year-Old Embrace

Happy St. Valentine's Day!

_________________
A good writer always works at the impossible. - John Steinbeck

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vissi on 2007-02-13 02:16 ]</font>
User avatar
bodhibliss
Working Associate
Posts: 1659
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bodhibliss » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

On 2007-02-13 00:01, littlewing wrote:
Oh, and hey, Bodhi. Thanks for the family reunion description! No wonder I relate easily to your essays and lines of thought! My husband Zen Coyote says hi!....lovin' you!
Whoohoo! Lovin' you, Little Wing. I used to focalize Avalon at the gathering ("saint stephen" my hippie moniker), and in recent years can often be found hovering in a hammock at Safe Swingin' - though last year in Colorado i camped downtown behind Info by SCROLL, and put in time at council.

Hugs to you and Zen Coyote

blessed be
bodhi

Dionysus
Associate
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:07 pm
Location: Pittsfield, MA

Post by Dionysus » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am


I am getting this weird sense of deja vu. Have we discussed this topic before?
Most likely you have. I am a new-comer to this list. And thus, the need for clarification in my own head.
It seems to me that if we are to ressurect "the" myth, we have to begin by accepting other peoples perspectives as being as valid as our own. Nobody has a corner on reality; we each only have a little piece of it.
I agree. But of course taht will lead to the myths - which is what we have. And the advent of neo-tribalism.
I personally feel that for a myth to be real for any individual, one has to actively practice it. I credit Bodhi Bliss and Joseph Campbell for leading me to this insight. It was after reading one of the earlier "Practical Campbell" essays, with Bodhi's explanation of practicing the ritual while "suspending one's disbelief" in order to experience that participation mystique that he wrote of again near the beginning of this thread. For me, as I remember us discussing some time ago, that involved a return to a more liberal form of Christianity. For others, several of whom post here, it meant shifting to an Eastern perspective, finding a better balance, perhaps, by practicing Buddhism, or finding their own rituals, sometimes pulling together the more meaningful bits and pieces from several sources. What is important is the active participation in the practice. For me, this means participation in a community, and involves giving some sort of service to the community, as well as practicing the rituals themselves.
I agree with everything that you have said.
But, again, if we are to ressurect our myths in any real sense, we need to recognize the validity of the myths of other people as being their "pathway to the divine," if I may borrow a phrase from Bishop Katherine Jefferts-Schori of the Episcopal Church, US. As she said, to not do so "puts God in a very small box."
I agree again, AJ. What I'm having trouble with is that we could spend an endless amount of time throwing each other's definition of what the ineffable is. And there we have it. It is ineffable. As you have stated. And to use your quote from K J-S, all of these definitions do put the formless form of all forms into a very small box. Probably our own individula brain-cases. But the myth is a metaphor and I am interested in a living metaphor which will find relevance for common and ordinary people. People who have been brought up in these outward-looking religions have a real difficulty in realizing their own divinity, let alone the divinity in a pile of pig shit. And yet, if the realization of the divinity in a pile of poop is suddenly is suddenly made in some gorgeous epiphany then, perhaps, the divinity found in the very earth beneathe our feet would become a possibility. And people would treat this here and now as sacred - every moment of it. Not because somebody told them to, but because the very act of living as part of some god-head resonates within them. That's all.

Thanks for the response to my post AJ. I look forward to interacting with you again.

--Peace, Dionysus


Dionysus
Associate
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:07 pm
Location: Pittsfield, MA

Post by Dionysus » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am



We say we are contained within reality: yet reality is contained within us, also. For example, the moment I die, my reality ceases to exist. So I can never know a reality separate from myself. But my "common sense" tells me there is a reality separate from me, because I see people dying every day, yet my reality is unchanged.
Nandu, And if I understand it correctly that is a reinforcement to what is termed Maya (the world illusion) in Hinduism, which perpetuates the illusion of the individual self. An interesting concept, I think.
In the same way, science also presents us with some concepts which are very easy to explain mathematically (mathematics is the metaphor of science!) but very difficult to visualise.
This was my point in an earlier post when I said that Science is not a metaphor. Yes, things begin to fall apart when one gets into particle physics and string theory (I guess), but the language is mathematics. And for a population which has trouble grasping evolution I don't think that science even without this objection could be used as a universal metaphor (if there is such a thing).

Peace, Dionysus.
Dionysus
Associate
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:07 pm
Location: Pittsfield, MA

Post by Dionysus » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

Well, I'm pretty sure that I am not God. <IMG SRC="/forum/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif">

Is it perhaps "the myth of myths" to think that one is God
Steve, In Buddhism, All things are Buddha things. And everyone is Buddha - they just don't know it. Zimmer (I believe) said that radio station WOB (Word of Buddha)is broadcasting all the time you just have to tune into it
In the context of "myth of myths," it is just as much a struggle to be humble as it is to be a god. It is a paradox either way. To be something small is to say that there is something larger. To be the larger is to say that there are parts that are smaller.
(/quote]

Only in the realm of temporality does duality exist. The Tree of Immortality exists with you.

Campbell from "Primitive Mythology" (I think):
Every student of the comparitive mythology knows that when the orthodox mind talks and writes of God the nations go asunder; the desi, the local, historical, ethical aspect of the cult symbol is taken with absolute seriousness and the chamelion is green, not red. Whereas, when the mystics talk, no matter what their desi, their words in a profound sense meet – and the nation too. The names of Shiva, Allah, Buddha, and Christ lose their historical force and come together as adequate pointers of a way (marga) that all must go who would transcend their time-bound, earth-bound faculties and limitations.



[quote
To exist as one with everything then one is no longer a "one."
Steve, Yes, in a Temporal Sense. But in eternity all is one.

Peace,

Dionysus
A J
Associate
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 5:00 am
Location: San Antonio
Contact:

Post by A J » Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:22 am

AJ: I am getting this weird sense of deja vu. Have we discussed this topic before?

Dionysius: Most likely you have. I am a new-comer to this list. And thus, the need for clarification in my own head.
Sorry about that; it was a different "Dionysius," it seems, who posted here for a while about a year ago.

Looking forward to hearing more from you, too.

AJ

"Sacred space and sacred time and something joyous to do is all we need. Almost anything then becomes a continuous and increasing joy."

A Joseph Campbell Companion: Reflections on the Art of Living
Locked