How Many More Ages Before We See What We Were?

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by NoxiousGas, Mar 3, 2017.

  1. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    ^Here's a textbook they might use.........Actually though, meant for adults.

    2 people like this.
  2. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    Having intellectual knowledge of what saints have stated of the higher states of consciousness is one thing, and experiential knowledge obtained through meditation or deep love is an another thing.

    Most people are content reading the experiences of other saints and discuss it their whole lives without attempting to attain it themselves. This also perhaps may be attributed to modern education where the focus is predominantly intellectual rather than experiential.

    As Swami Vivekananda stated, 'The knowledge of man, his powers of perception, of reasoning and intellect and heart, all are busy churning this milk of the world. Out of long churning comes butter, and this butter is God. Men of heart get the "butter", and the "buttermilk" is left for the intellectual.'
  3. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    So are you saying then that Sri Aurobindo was wrong, or that you suspect I'm a mere intellectual dilettante?
  4. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Haven't read Wilber; sounds like I need to check him out. I do think, however, humans are on vastly different planes in their take on reality. The assumption that we'll reach a point some day when the scales will fall away presupposes progress, which may be an unwarranted assumption. People who have only a high school education or less and people with Ph.D.s or greater would have radically different outlooks on reality. I have lots of friends who never read and are living in the eternal present driven mainly by appetites. Even highly educated folks with MBAs who are oriented toward balance sheets and the bottom line would have a radically different perspective from the average historian or philosopher, and among scientific disciplines a theoretical physicist may see the universe quite differently from a biologist, etc. Differences between Democrats and Republicans on the issue of climate change are striking, with 65% of Democrats but only 25% of Republicans believing it's a serious issue. Superimpose religion on this and the differences may increase--or decrease, depending on whether the religions coincide or are cross-cutting. Our Oklahoma Senator and staunch climate change denier, Jim Inhofe, Republican, is sure human-induced climate change is a hoax, because God controls climate.There are certainly some commonalities brought about by our biological natures and mass communications, but the gaps remain One of the most frustrating things to me in encountering the Trump phenomenon are the Republicans who ignore the warning signs that the guy is seriously deranged and ignorant because of the goodies he could deliver in terms of tax cuts. Seems to me disaster is waiting round the corner, but the people around me are oblivious.
  5. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed and Confused Staff Member

    I find Wilber to be very interesting, for example on the subject of religion he is very careful to describe two different types of religion, dogmatic and spiritual. In addition he sees no problem reconciling science and religion.

    Here's an interesting talk about how personal growth interacts with social growth which I think pertains to the original question in this post.​
  6. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    Neither. :)

    Only that intellectual knowledge does not translate into the real thing.
  7. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    It can though help to prepare the ground. And in terms of spirituality and religion in general, it's probably good to have some intellectual idea of different systems, as that helps avoid dogmatism, and helps create a broad outlook.
    1 person likes this.
  8. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Don't have time right now to watch the video, but I'll get back to it when I do. I like Wilber, although I don't agree with everything he says, some of it makes a lot of sense.

    On you earlier post of his arrangement of human levels - there are different similar schemes coming from various sources.None I think should be taken as set in stone, but they can be useful. Sri Aurobindo, Gurdjieff, Leary/Wilson and others all have their 'ascending scales'.
    I think what we can say with relative confidence, is that people are at vastly different levels, and the more intelligent and conscious one's are a smaller number than the less developed.
  9. Dejavu~

    Dejavu~ Well-Known Member

    Holon a minute! I don't want to look past our travelling meat sacks! I want to learn that the proof is in the pudding! "Infinite potential" isn't formless! Nothing is! :D
  10. Dejavu~

    Dejavu~ Well-Known Member


    I gave that to someone as a gift about a year ago
  11. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    That's true. But it is experiential knowledge that translates into precise intellectual knowledge as well, and it is the lack of precise intellectual knowledge that results in dogmatism , fanaticism and narrow-mindedness as you put it.

    Mere intellectual understanding, even of different systems, would also probably just result in a mass of undigested information, which can even be confusing and lead people to erroneous and distorted perceptions which can do more harm than good.

    As a Japanese proverb goes, ' One look is worth a thousand reports.'

Share This Page