Don't strip my ego...please

[Howie]

You are a scientist. You are religious. You are..........? Does it matter if..... When a personality grows to know "things" it is the ego that thrives on the knowing! If it is then stripped of that knowledge, it then stands naked without answers. But is knowing not subject to Change? Knowing is only an experience. It becomes dangerous to one who believes in knowing or thinking they have absolute answers. The scientist. All her/his life has put forth their efforts to know. They may have concluded or attached themselves to a specific set of ideas. When these Ideas change it is hard for the person to handle. Why? Because they had the answers, they had resolution in their mind. The religious person. One who has devoted their life to and adhered to a belief of something that is subject to change. But not MY belief! It is set in stone, isn't it? Is it? Nothing NEW can be learned of religion now? It is ALL what you know and nothing more? Has all been written a learned? When the end does not come, as your religion predicted. The doctrines do not promise what they have stated and new ones are founded. When the theorems have radically changed and you stand there bare and naked of knowing, who do you have? What do you have? Science changes and religion changes. Ironically Science changes religion and religion changes science. The two are closer to being one in the same than most have percieved.

[wombing]

good topic howetzer. i have been intensely considering just this subject for the last few years. it has become apparent that both religion and science have the type of person who finds meaning and identity in a very specific field of knowledge..indeed, they often see themselves as one of the tallest, most beautiful flowers growing out of that field of knowledge (or hope to grow into one of th tallest, most beautiful in the future). sometimes scientists hold onto their carefully crafted theories with equal dogmatism, fear, and close-mindedness as religious zealots bind themselves to a book or creed. i have concluded that the atheists vehemently trying to disprove god are close in spirit to those who are trying to prove god with equal vehemence. they both find identity in a particular paradigm, and consciously or unconsciously attempt to incorporate "objective facts/truth" into their subjective being in order to "arrive". they must see their annihilation in those who find similar concrete meaning in opposing worldviews. and so if only they can successfully defend their citadel of "truth" by vanquishing their shadowy foes they hope to live on eternally in the perfect theory or doctrine. and yet i think there are agnostics in both inner science and outer science who are primarily concerned with being honest instead of having a truth, or truths. being honest is what gives one the eyes of a child, what makes you question your precious ideas as much as their opposites. having truths or facts solely in the form of a PhD or ordination certificate seems to be where the deadness of ego thrives. heh, i don't even know if that makes sense. it been a rough weekend, and i'm fairly hazy today

[syzygy]

That makes perfect sense Wombing! I would agree with you, Howetzer, in saying that it is true for the majority in regards to religion. Any true religious person, however, will dealing with this exact issue, intuitive knowledge vs. learned knowledge. Once you strip your ego of its contents, you realize that its knowledge can never be completely true, it is always based on its Principle, intuitive knowledge. This is the fundamental step for any true religion and it does not change. It is that non-changing Principle that allows everything else to exist. This may be expressed new ways in time, but not fundamentally.

[Wolffe]

Its very true. Have you ever read Dan Brown's bood, 'Angels and Demons'? It's core is about the struggle between science and religion, and their obscure but present bond.

[oleander]

Science - quite fascinating really. A small molecule that the Buddists call light. Amazing in itself. Fond of science to a point. You can prove the impossible with science. Yeah you can. Right down to emotion. All kinds of science out there. All kinds of books you can read to disqualify any emotion, personality disorder, preference for the oppostie and same sex, war, peace and baby making. Ah but the bible. Religion isn't a science. It is an intangable belief. People will bomb themselves in the name of religion. People will heal themself in the name of religion. Would I ever consider that religion and science is the same. Nope never. Mind over matter is still a mystery to the scientific brain. How you can contemplate they are one in the same - well good thinking - but deep down some mysteries of the brain, body, mind and spirit can not be put in a pie chart. I never saw a change in either - all I have witnessed is the same argument. That is: Some things are never explained. They are excepted. I have also heard that "ignorance is bliss" and who needs to know why really? Science takes away from your soul and makes the world a cold place. I am sure some person as we speak is reading this and trying to make a valid argument with the use of science as to why I answered the thought this way. Bottom line - you can't. I patent this thought so there.

[Carôusoul]

Science - quite fascinating really. A small molecule that the Buddists call light. Amazing in itself. Fond of science to a point. You can prove the impossible with science. Yeah you can. Right down to emotion. All kinds of science out there. All kinds of books you can read to disqualify any emotion, personality disorder, preference for the oppostie and same sex, war, peace and baby making. Ah but the bible. Religion isn't a science. It is an intangable belief. People will bomb themselves in the name of religion. People will heal themself in the name of religion. Would I ever consider that religion and science is the same. Nope never. Mind over matter is still a mystery to the scientific brain. How you can contemplate they are one in the same - well good thinking - but deep down some mysteries of the brain, body, mind and spirit can not be put in a pie chart. I never saw a change in either - all I have witnessed is the same argument. That is: Some things are never explained. They are excepted. I have also heard that "ignorance is bliss" and who needs to know why really? Science takes away from your soul and makes the world a cold place. I am sure some person as we speak is reading this and trying to make a valid argument with the use of science as to why I answered the thought this way. Bottom line - you can't. I patent this thought so there.

[Sornaensis]

You are a scientist. You are religious. You are..........? Does it matter if..... When a personality grows to know "things" it is the ego that thrives on the knowing! If it is then stripped of that knowledge, it then stands naked without answers. But is knowing not subject to Change? Knowing is only an experience. It becomes dangerous to one who believes in knowing or thinking they have absolute answers. The scientist. All her/his life has put forth their efforts to know. They may have concluded or attached themselves to a specific set of ideas. When these Ideas change it is hard for the person to handle. Why? Because they had the answers, they had resolution in their mind. The religious person. One who has devoted their life to and adhered to a belief of something that is subject to change. But not MY belief! It is set in stone, isn't it? Is it? Nothing NEW can be learned of religion now? It is ALL what you know and nothing more? Has all been written a learned? When the end does not come, as your religion predicted. The doctrines do not promise what they have stated and new ones are founded. When the theorems have radically changed and you stand there bare and naked of knowing, who do you have? What do you have? Science changes and religion changes. Ironically Science changes religion and religion changes science. The two are closer to being one in the same than most have percieved. Yea, science definitly changes religion, but the only time religion seems to affect science at all is when it is stopping it from advancing.

[Xaqaria]

Howie was the original deep thinker of Dream Views. The ODT of DV.

[ClassyElf]

Yea, science definitly changes religion, but the only time religion seems to affect science at all is when it is stopping it from advancing. this

[Howie]

Howie was the original deep thinker of Dream Views. The ODT of DV. Ha ha....Thanks Xagaria. I used to be so motivated and driven to ponder over and discuss topics like this. I have so many hundreds of philosophical ideas floating around this forum. There has been an exodus of sorts of any "deep" thinkers such as yourself on this current Forum. After time you just loose interest when the replies that you get do not have much thought behind them. Thanks for digging this up. Reading the responses brought a smile to my face. I don't know where or why you found it. Just reading the replies makes meaware of the evident change in most of the ongoing discussions that currently take place.

[Xaqaria]

Is it possible to maintain a thirst for knowledge, and to constantly seek it while still maintaining that you know nothing? Sometimes I feel like this is the answer. I feel like to continually move forward, one must constantly look for interesting possibilities to ponder; to entertain ideas of what could be true, all the while knowing that none of it really is. The idea, I guess, is to always be developing a world view that allows for the largest number of possibilities without any of them contradicting each other. Maybe the goal in life is to find a perceptual paradigm that allows for everything to be true without any contradictions. Ha ha....Thanks Xagaria. I used to be so motivated and driven to ponder over and discuss topics like this. I have so many hundreds of philosophical ideas floating around this forum. There has been an exodus of sorts of any "deep" thinkers such as yourself on this current Forum. After time you just loose interest when the replies that you get do not have much thought behind them. Thanks for digging this up. Reading the responses brought a smile to my face. I don't know where or why you found it. Just reading the replies makes meaware of the evident change in most of the ongoing discussions that currently take place. Actually, Oleander has apparently been on an old thread kick today and dug it up. What I noticed though is that whenever someone finds a thread thats 2-3 years old that they think is worth responding to after all this time, it is usually a thread by you (or one by Leo Volont that someone really wants to disagree with). Whenever these topics pop up I invariably click on them thinking that a new and interesting idea is being presented, only to find that its an old and interesting idea. Makes me wish I had found this forum a few years earlier when I might have fit in better.

[NonDualistic]

Knowledge is like writing written on the steps of a staircase Ego is what walks up the staircase The words on each step draw one up the stair case Yet with each step the words wash away from under ones feet The reality is not in what is written on the step itself It is in the taking of that step and looking onto the next As one rises up the staircase The more knowledge one has Yet, the more knowledge one has The more transparent one becomes The more transparent one becomes The less there is one there to have the knowledge

[ClouD]

Who is there to know? Then who is typing? Certainly there is typing? What am I, but not I as in the sense of another, just this? I don't know!

[really]

I don't know! You don't know you do (know). I'm stuck on this question also. Has anyone else got it? lol

[ClouD]

Where are these rhetorical statements? Perhaps not knowing is as just This as much as This is. There is no question higher. There is no religion higher than truth. Nobody can answer it, but we can go deep into the question. Going deep into the question, the question will disappear. You will find the answer at the very core of your heart. You are truth. Truth is not a hypothesis. Truth is not a dogma. Truth is neither Christian, nor Hindu, nor Mohammedan. Truth is neither mine nor yours. Truth belongs to nobody, but everybody belongs to truth. Truth means that which is.

[NonDualistic]

Knowledge is like writing written on the steps of a staircase Ego is what walks up the staircase The words on each step draw one up the stair case Yet with each step the words wash away from under ones feet The reality is not in what is written on the step itself It is in the taking of that step and looking onto the next As one rises up the staircase The more knowledge one has Yet, the more knowledge one has The more transparent one becomes The more transparent one becomes The less there is one there to have the knowledge ....to continue... ..... As one becomes transparent enough, and more so Ever present knowledge shines forth through the one Yet the less one Is to claim that knowledge Words interchange, yet the saying of It remains a constant What is said, has been said before, and will be said again

[ChaybaChayba]

Science and religion are complementary. Instead of replacing the one with the other like most people do, I simply combine them both. Why limit yourself to only one source of knowledge? "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."- Albert Einstein

[Original Poster]

OKAY but how do you combine them? In what way does Religion contain "knowledge?" How do you settle the ways they contradict each other? Which religions or esoteric writings do you choose?