Nathair/|\ Posted December 4, 2012 Posted December 4, 2012 Assuming that you aren't using a special definition of gullibility, a gullible person would believe whatever he saw. As the Talmudic quote (and verse from Psalm 101) show things are not always as a seem. Indeed, one must not accept everything at face value, but discern the truth of each thing. Gullibility would have the person swallow every illusion line, hook, and sinker.It seems I must again cite the Great Beast, Aleister Crowley. As much as he makes me very uncomfortable, he did know his stuff. In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths; of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and many other things which may or may not exist. It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing certain things certain results will follow; students are most earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophic validity to any of them. Book VI : Liber O vel Manus et Sagittae
Nathair/|\ Posted December 4, 2012 Posted December 4, 2012 Maybe someone will find this relevant. Pedro Olavarria shared it with me.
mfbukowski Posted December 4, 2012 Posted December 4, 2012 Judas! The poor guy was embarrassed for life.Yeah- he was a total failure after 1965- you know how it goes with one-hit wonders.... I actually do remember that - I was horrifiedBut I got better!
mfbukowski Posted December 4, 2012 Posted December 4, 2012 I will need more clarification on this.Oh just maintain your usual style and you will get clarification all right.
peteolcott Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 Maybe someone will find this relevant. Pedro Olavarria shared it with me.[media=] Satori: "union with the world soul"Transhumanist, AKA when the children of God grow up.
mfbukowski Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 I am far more open to the possibility that these things should not be spoken, than the possibility that they are untrue.If these things are true, then they would tend to go without saying.Things are not true, only propositions are and propositions are linguistic. If propositions cannot be spoken, they cannot be true OR false because they do not exist.How could a sentence which was never said be true? 1
peteolcott Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 Things are not true, only propositions are and propositions are linguistic. If propositions cannot be spoken, they cannot be true OR false because they do not exist.How could a sentence which was never said be true?(1) The Universal (Set of all Things) contains propositions as one of its elements, thus some things are necessarily propositions.(2) The ratio of the diameter to the circumference of a circle was determined to be PI, as soon as round circles were created / discovered, which may have occurred before the concept of PI was understood or otherwise known.
mfbukowski Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 (1) The Universal (Set of all Things) contains propositions as one of its elements, thus some things are necessarily propositions.(2) The ratio of the diameter to the circumference of a circle was determined to be PI, as soon as round circles were created / discovered, which may have occurred before the concept of PI was understood or otherwise known.The set of all things is a linguistic invention. 1
Nathair/|\ Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 How did this discussion get to be over 1000 posts while accomplishing so little? 1
mfbukowski Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 How did this discussion get to be over 1000 posts while accomplishing so little?You can't achieve anything like that without everyone doing their share. 2
volgadon Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 Yeah- he was a total failure after 1965- you know how it goes with one-hit wonders.... I actually do remember that - I was horrifiedBut I got better! Haha, I meant the guy who made the remark.
peteolcott Posted December 5, 2012 Posted December 5, 2012 The set of all things is a linguistic invention.I will buy that.
volgadon Posted December 6, 2012 Posted December 6, 2012 Exactly. Gullibility is almost the antithesis to Catholic mysticism. The mystical experience must be discerned, hence the focus on a capable spiritual director. St. John of the Cross lamented the lack of spiritual direction for many monks and what a hindrance it was because it is quite easy for someone living the contemplative life to get lost in side-paths and illusions. The ego finds sneaky and slippery ways to retain pride ("My ego-death is better than your ego-death!")I found this idea true in my experience of Theravadan Buddhism as well -- there is always the meditation master to whom you take your experiences for help and clarification. Mine was this very old monk from Thailand and he would sit and watch me meditate and then call me over and have relate what was going on in my mind and then give me advice, obviously Buddhist based.In Catholic mysticism, gullibility is ineffective at best and dangerous at worst, as it allows the flesh, the world, and the devil to deceive you right smack dab in the middle of a spiritual practice.I'm reminded of a scene from "The Diamond Arm," a Russian comedy made in the 60s. I won't go much into the plot, but one of the hapless crooks in the film gets stuck on what he thinks is an island in the middle of the sea (not really though). He sees this young boy head out into the sea, walking on water! The sun too, shines in such a way as to make the picture even more fantastical, lending a halo above the boy. Very mystical scene. The crook grabs a stick and a black rag, and begins to walk after the boy, until he falls splash into a deeper bit of water... They are actually on a shallow beach.
TurnerJE Posted December 6, 2012 Posted December 6, 2012 Just to be clear, the mystical experiences I am discussing are not a "burning in the bosom." In fact, usually there is little emotional aspect to them at all. St. John of the Cross warns that religious affectations can actually be a stumbling block on the mystical path, because we become so easily attached to them and then start to seek a religious feeling rather than a direct experience of God.Yes, us Catholics are theological taxonomists Actually, we're not quite as intense about it as the Buddhist. They classify and number and rank EVERYTHING. The four noble truths, the five aggregates, the seven factors of enlightenment, and on and on Now, we all rank things (even you, darling mfb), so the issue isn't why do we, but how can we do it correctly. And the answer is: we seek for truth in all the ways we can, from rationality to empiricism to, in this case, mystical experience.It is Joseph Smith who taught that we accept all truth where ever we may find it. In my own opinion I think his experience had to not only been physical but mystical as well. No one can see God and Live unless under the protection of the Holy Spirit. God is both Physical and Spiritual. Doesn't Mysticism delve in to the realm of spiritual?
volgadon Posted December 7, 2012 Posted December 7, 2012 It is Joseph Smith who taught that we accept all truth where ever we may find it. In my own opinion I think his experience had to not only been physical but mystical as well. No one can see God and Live unless under the protection of the Holy Spirit. God is both Physical and Spiritual. Doesn't Mysticism delve in to the realm of spiritual?But that doesn't mean that all mystical phenomena are the same. 1
Hamilton Porter Posted December 10, 2012 Posted December 10, 2012 I want a mystical experience. Apparently there is a Mormon guy who had one.https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/151-28-34.pdf
pogi Posted December 11, 2012 Posted December 11, 2012 I just looked up the word "mysticism" in the topical guide, it says: (see false doctrine; sorcery; superstitions; traditions of men).It doesn't seem that the church is too warm towards the word "mysticism" for whatever reason.
Nathair/|\ Posted December 11, 2012 Posted December 11, 2012 I want a mystical experience. Apparently there is a Mormon guy who had one.https://www.sunstone...s/151-28-34.pdfLots of Mormons have had them, some even on this board. I'll let them self identify if they wish. I just looked up the word "mysticism" in the topical guide, it says: (see false doctrine; sorcery; superstitions; traditions of men).It doesn't seem that the church is too warm towards the word "mysticism" for whatever reason.I love Elder McConkie. He was a wonderful apostle, but he did have a tendency to equate his opinions with absolute truth.
Hamilton Porter Posted December 11, 2012 Posted December 11, 2012 I just looked up the word "mysticism" in the topical guide, it says: (see false doctrine; sorcery; superstitions; traditions of men).It doesn't seem that the church is too warm towards the word "mysticism" for whatever reason.Like Stephen E. Robinson told us in NT class years ago, they just say that because they don't want you dialing up Ms. Cleo. 1
Hamilton Porter Posted December 11, 2012 Posted December 11, 2012 Lots of Mormons have had them, some even on this board. I'll let them self identify if they wish.By all means!
mathonihah Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 I was just browsing the Catholic Answers Forums, and noticed that somebody had started a thread about mysticism in Mormonism; and somebody else had posted a reply based on information found on this page on the LDS website. LOL! Is that what Mormonism has to say about mysticism?
mfbukowski Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 I was just browsing the Catholic Answers Forums, and noticed that somebody had started a thread about mysticism in Mormonism; and somebody else had posted a reply based on information found on this page on the LDS website. LOL! Is that what Mormonism has to say about mysticism?I would say no, that is what whoever wrote the page has to say about Mormon mysticism with all that fact implies.
pogi Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 I was just browsing the Catholic Answers Forums, and noticed that somebody had started a thread about mysticism in Mormonism; and somebody else had posted a reply based on information found on this page on the LDS website. LOL! Is that what Mormonism has to say about mysticism?That's funny, I actually commented on that just 4 posts previous to yours.
mathonihah Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 That's funny, I actually commented on that just 4 posts previous to yours.Thank you for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed that.
Recommended Posts