|
Post by maat on Mar 14, 2011 4:01:03 GMT
... and I learned all about patterns from Max and Prom. I have much to be thankful for from many posters here. You know, Russell and I have never met in person, and probably not likely to, but I would count him as my true Bro in every way.
I have learned also, that it is not important if one is right of wrong in coming to conclusions. What is important is the intention.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Mar 14, 2011 7:32:30 GMT
There is still only one truth, perhaps we must learn to know truth without dogma? Go on go for it!! There is only one truth that we can see - one day our physical body will die. Maat your comments about sins and fathers etc- is an example of why I consider Religions and religious texts - Lores -- simply legends of peoples
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 15, 2011 2:30:00 GMT
I have leaned also, that it is not important if one is right of wrong in coming to conclusions. What is important is the intention. Perhaps so, if the conclusions are of no consequence.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 17, 2011 0:14:06 GMT
There is still only one truth, perhaps we must learn to know truth without dogma? Go on go for it!! There is only one truth that we can see - one day our physical body will die. Maat your comments about sins and fathers etc- is an example of why I consider Religions and religious texts - Lores -- simply legends of peoples How about Karma? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KarmaI would disagree that the Bible and other Holy Books are simply folk tales. All that is wanting is the key ... to interpreting them. In full sight the secret is hidden.
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 17, 2011 0:30:30 GMT
There is only one truth that we can see - one day our physical body will die. Maat your comments about sins and fathers etc- is an example of why I consider Religions and religious texts - Lores -- simply legends of peoples How about Karma? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KarmaI would disagree that the Bible and other Holy Books are simply folk tales. All that is wanting is the key ... to interpreting them. In full sight the secret is hidden. The Bible is an astrotheological text. The stars are the key...
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 17, 2011 2:54:12 GMT
A good example of why our religion is not important... On another thread I made mention of Ka.. words and possible interpretations. Mention was then made of the Ka'aba and Ka'huna. Kahuna, meaning keeper of the Secret. Did you know this? How about those other Keepers of the Secret ?
The Assassins were the "Guardians" of the Secrets. They awaiting the coming of two Promised Ones: the Al-Madhi (Guided One) and the Al-Maseeh (Messiah). The symbol of al-Mahdi was the Compass (the compassing of the Ka'aba seven times during Hajj), and the symbol of Al-Maseeh was the Square (the Heavenly Ka'aba). The Assassins were learn the secrets while sitting in front of two poles called in Arabic Al-Báb ("The Gate"). …………….
The Square and Compass is a Masonic symbol. Freemasonry came from the Order of the Temple of Solomon; an order of Christian warrior-monks that protected Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land in the Middle-ages. During the Crusades the Templars made a covenant with a secret society of Shi'ite Muslims called the Assasseen (who were not hashish users nor "assassins" as their enemies claimed). The Assasseen were from the Elborz Mountains of Írán. They were considered heretics to other Muslims, and were prevented from going on pilgrimage to Mecca. So, they designed their "pilgrimage" in the form of a secret ritual that included handclasps and gestures. They took the Square as a symbol of the Ka'aba ("Square") and the Compass as the symbol of the circumambulation (walking in a circle) of the Ka'aba 7 times during Hajj (pilgrimage). They initiated many of the members of the Order of the Temple into their secret rituals.
Freemasonry can be just as easily connected to Sufism, Rabbinic Judaism, Esoteric Christianity, etc etc. They must all be talking about the same thing? Just using different languages?
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 17, 2011 4:26:02 GMT
The problem is that words having similar sounds does not mean they have the same root or meaning. It does not follow that these words are any kind of proof that Masonry is directly related to Sufism. The link to the KT is thin, at best, and probably imaginary. Originally, it was opined the link was through the Hospitalers, until the romance of the Templars became popular.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Mar 18, 2011 11:05:27 GMT
Why must they be talking about the same thing?
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 20, 2011 23:45:06 GMT
Why must they be talking about the same thing? You need to discover those thing for yourself over a period of time.. hence the lesson in Freemasonry that we take one step after another.. The renunciation of self is the great lesson to be learned, and its first steps may be learned from a merely human love. But what is called love is often selfish; rarely absolutely unselfish. The test of unselfish love is this, that we should be ready and willing to sacrifice our own desires, happiness, even life itself, to render the beloved happy, even though we know that our sacrifice will never be understood or appreciated, and that we shall therefore not be rewarded for it by an increase of love or gratitude. Such is the true love which leads us up to God. We love our fellow-creatures because there is in them something of the Divine, some dim reflection of the True Beloved, reminding our souls of their origin, home, and destination. From the love of the reflection we pass to the love of the Light which casts it; and, loving the Light, we at length become one with It, losing the false self and gaining the True, therein attaining at length to happiness and rest, and becoming one with all that we have loved--the Essence of that which constitutes the beauty alike of a noble action, a beautiful thought, or a lovely face. ………………….. The whole Universe, then, is to be regarded as the unfolding manifestation, or projection of God. It is the mirror wherein He sees Himself; the arena wherein His various Attributes display their nature. ……Tthe Universe is co-eternal with God, but not co-equal, because it is merely an Emanation dependent on Him, while He has no need of it.
Just as the light proceeding from a luminous body becomes weaker and more diffuse as it recedes from its source, so the Emanations of Being become less real, or, in other words, more gross and material, as they become farther removed from their focus and origin. This gradual descent or recession from the Primal Being, which is called the Kaws-i-Nuzul ("Arc of Descent"), has in reality infinite grades, but a certain definite number (seven) is usually recognised.
bahai-library.org/books/ayatp/ayatp.06.html
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 20, 2011 23:50:08 GMT
Ascending/Descending ... from the same source. Man finds himself in the lowest of these grades--the Material World; but of that world he is the highest development, for he contains in himself the potentiality of re-ascent, by steps corresponding to those in the "Arc of Descent," to God, his Origin and his Home. To discover how this return may be effected, how the various stages of the Kaws-i-Su'ud ("Arc of Ascent") may be traversed, is the object of philosophy.
"The soul of man is corporeal in origin, but spiritual in continuance" ("An-nafsu fi'l-huduthi jismaniyya, wa fi'l-baka'i tekunu ruhaniyya"). Born of matter, it is yet capable of a spiritual development which will lead it back to God, and enable it, during the span of a mortal life, to accomplish the ascent from matter to spirit, from the periphery to the centre. In the "Arc of Ascent" also are numerous grades; but here again, as in the "Arc of Descent," seven are usually recognised. It may be well at this point to set down in a tabular form these grades as they exist both in the Macrocosm, or Arc of Descent, and in the Microcosm, or Arc of Ascent, which is man:--
I. ARC OF ASCENT. SEVEN PRINCIPLES IN MAN
(Lata'if-i-sab'a). 1. The most subtle principle (Akhfa). 2. The subtle principle (Khafa). 3. The secret (Sirr). 4. The heart (Kalb). 5. The spirit (Ruh). 6. The soul (Nafs). 7. The nature (Tab').
II. ARC OF DESCENT. SERIES OF EMANATIONS.
1. Exploration of the World of Divinity (Seyr dar 'alam-i-Lahut)[1]. 2. The World of Divinity ('Alam-i-Lahut)*. 3. The World of the Intelligences ('Alam-i-Jabarut). 4. The World of the Angels ('Alam-i-Malakut). 5. The World of Ideas ('Alam-i-Ma'na). 6. The World of Form ('Alam-i-Surat). 7. The Material World ('Alam-i-Tabi'at).
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 20, 2011 23:52:01 GMT
Rembrandt, I know enough about you to know you will think about this You are a gentleman and a scholar.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 21, 2011 1:40:09 GMT
Don't miss Page 9 ... about the premiliminary studes required of the student...
Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, Mathematics (including Euclid and Astronomy), Jurisprudence, Scholastic Theology.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Mar 21, 2011 1:42:28 GMT
RE: Man finds himself in the lowest of these grades--the Material World; but of that world he is the highest development, for he contains in himself the potentiality of re-ascent, No that is not correct - how arrogant it would be for us to make that assumption, the Material world is just one of many workshops for us to hone our skills - the material world is full of sentient beings of all forms doing the same thing - and to re-ascent goodness me I don't think there is any such thing as ascent- Creation is full of dimensions that are neither up or down, they just are
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 21, 2011 3:39:13 GMT
Arrogant to believe that we are the bottom of the barrel? Sky is up, hole is down. Master is up (x 3), Wardens are a step or two down. Ladders go both ways. Rose Croix ritual indicates a two way street. Dual nature of the world we live in, indicates that there are opposites. Dimensions are another thing as you suggest. All is one anyway. (I and my Father are One - if you are a Christian). I think the sacred texts are referring to the relative nature of things. A child will grow and evolve to the stature of its parents. It is within the very nature of the child to do so. Euclids 49th Problem. www.phoenixmasonry.org/47th_problem_of_euclid.htm(And I see no reason why an ant or a cow or a maple tree might not similarly evolve to equal status with everything else that is part of All That Is.)
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 21, 2011 3:42:42 GMT
PS .... totally agree with this bit though Whistler
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Mar 21, 2011 3:51:04 GMT
Re : Sky is up, hole is down Here again confusion reigns - The "South is up Society" will point out that for the Poms the Sky will be down and the hole will be up - I guess they also would go down to heaven and up to Hell. Which takes me back to my original post in this topic - it doesn't matter what we believe - The earth, the Universe, humanity have have been created - without regard to any spin, legend lore or plot mortals might like to put onto the creation
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Mar 23, 2011 3:44:12 GMT
Rembrandt, I know enough about you to know you will think about this You are a gentleman and a scholar. I appreciate the kind words. I have spent a good deal of time on this exact topic and will most likely commit more time to it. Through my studies and time I have found that they are not necessarily talking about the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 23, 2011 4:42:20 GMT
Great stuff - can you share with us?
I see the similarity of patterns in different cultures and belief systems and assume they are relating to similar things, albeit on different levels maybe.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on Mar 23, 2011 11:52:46 GMT
I began my studies in comparative religion and psychology because of apparent similarities. It was interesting. There are aspects of any culture that are most likely the result of Jungian archetypes (evolved psychological mechanisms) but their manifestations and applications can be radically different. It isn't a leap to state that all (the vast vast majority) or religions have a creation myth. They are all talking about the creation of the world if not the whole universe. Within in that myth the differences can be striking. The similarity of religious myths does not constitute evidence that the various cultures are talking about the same thing. In some cases it is absolutely clear. Many religions don't have a "chosen people," some don't have "hell." One of the foremost reasons that it would be pre-mature to say that the religions are talking about the same thing is the adage that the simpliest solution is most likely correct. I refer again to Jung's archetypes and the follow up work by Stevens. The emergent quality of archetypes would explain more about the similarities amongst religions than any proposed world connection or hypothetical supernatural force.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Mar 23, 2011 14:37:06 GMT
I began my studies in comparative religion and psychology because of apparent similarities. It was interesting. There are aspects of any culture that are most likely the result of Jungian archetypes (evolved psychological mechanisms) but their manifestations and applications can be radically different. It isn't a leap to state that all (the vast vast majority) or religions have a creation myth. They are all talking about the creation of the world if not the whole universe. Within in that myth the differences can be striking. The similarity of religious myths does not constitute evidence that the various cultures are talking about the same thing. In some cases it is absolutely clear. Many religions don't have a "chosen people," some don't have "hell." One of the foremost reasons that it would be pre-mature to say that the religions are talking about the same thing is the adage that the simpliest solution is most likely correct. I refer again to Jung's archetypes and the follow up work by Stevens. The emergent quality of archetypes would explain more about the similarities amongst religions than any proposed world connection or hypothetical supernatural force. Convenient doesnt mean correct or simple.
|
|