Saturday, May 19, 2007

Thoughts on illusions, justice, forgiveness

In the Gary Renard comments, Pascal ruminated:

Quite interestingly, the Catholic Church has decreed the Gospel of Thomas as definitely apocryphal. They seem to quite dislike it. They seem to dislike a lot of ideas...
The covering up of internal pedophilia not being one of them, alas. "Okay, so we do abuse kids, but we always do it without a condom, so it's allright." ):-P

The physical universe may be an illusion, but this is very different from a hallucination. A hallucination has no real basis, it is false by essence. An illusion is an erroneous interpretation of something that exists. Whether you take a movie for real or not, it was acted, shot and edited. The images exist, something real caused them. The illusion is when you mistakenly interpret what they SEEM as what really IS. My reflection is an illusion, yet it's born from my very real mirror, face and the ambient light. And, indeed, anybody can fall victim to an illusion, only the mind can help you understand that it is not what it seems. Even though somewhere it is something real.

I think people who criticize these notions would make a big step toward serious debate if they understood the difference between illusion and hallucination. Nobody said the universe in its entirety was just a vision born from LSD or something. Well, d'uh! If anybody who says the universe is illusory still bothers to discuss it with others, it means they acknowledge that these others exist as more than a figment of the imagination.
So please, let's know what exactly is being discussed here, shall we? Misunderstandings are just a time-wasting illusion. :-)

At least, this is the way I see things. Provided I'm not completely delusional. :o)

I don't agree with everything asserted by ACIM. I seldom agree with everything anybody says. But, like Freud, Darwin, Galileo, Newton and many others, even if it is not the absolute truth, it goes in the right direction. It pulls (or pushes) us out of the knee-deep swamp (tar pit?) of intellectual contentment that's slowly drifting backwards, therefore helping us progress in the right direction. Wherever it may be exactly. There's probably more than one. Who cares? The horizon is the limit.
And, as you probably all know, the limit of the horizon is purely a visual illusion. :-)

“The way to really undo the ego and become enlightened is by changing the way that you think about things, and how you look at things.”

Quality is always better than quantity in these matters.

I think I assimilated the principle of non-judgement after reading chapter 1 of Dale Carnegie's book. It felt like so much more than just "winning friends and influencing people". Even though he clearly has a whole different approach than ACIM. I just read it and built over the ideas I found in there... and kept building, along with other foundations! What was that I said earlier about paths? ;-)
He who would tell you there's only one path (his, naturally!) probably has a nice concentration camp built at its end just for the likes of you. He wants to lock you up into a single state of mind, carefully closed and fenced. Find your own paths. Just make sure the one you're on isn't a mechanical conveyor belt going backwards at a speed equal or superior to your travelling one. (I've discovered that sneaky trick by playing the Dora the Explorer videogame. Really. Red Planet, first level, before Flinky's Giant Radar Dish. You pick a wrong conveyor belt, and suddenly it's dragging you backwards presto. Who said kiddie games didn't teach anything?)

Back on the topic of non-judging forgiveness, it really does the soul good. And not just because of some "why bother?" attitude of laziness. When you reach a certain understanding of human nature, you keep your lucidity about actions (starting the Iraq war, for example), but you lose all urge to punish for the sake of punishment itself. You understand how morally or comprehensively handicapped one has to be to do such things, and apart from wishing to limit the harm they may cause to others, you feel nothing toward such people but pity or compassion. What you really fantasize about is somehow having the power to magically make them feel that universal sense of fraternity that brings such peace and joy to one's heart. You want to share that treasure, a sharing which will only make it bigger.
Is that reasonably summarized for you, Professor Identity, sir?

Forgiving doesn't mean excusing, as in, "it doesn't matter what they do". It means jettisoning the absurd burden of wanting to keep tabs and give lessons to everybody, of holding spite for people being who or what they are. It means getting out of the vicious circle of constant mutual assessment and grading. Who in their right mind would spend their whole time worrying about every little theoretical sin they may be committing every other minute? It's a guaranteed one-way ticket to the cuckoo-house, a very toxic clinical obsessive-compulsive disorder. So, common sense says that it's equally foolish to do the same to others. Equally foolish, multiplied by the number of others you know! Terrible psychic poison, that's what it is!

I recall a recess supervisor, when I was in junior school, who was constantly taking mysterious notes in his little black book, most certainly writing down every little discipline violation he witnessed, with names and all. I always hated that attitude; it felt as if he didn't trust God Himself to remember everything and hold us accountable. He never made a remark to anybody, just took silent notes with a smug look that seemed to say "You'll see one of these days, you'll see, you just wait". How can a student correct their behavior with such a method? All he was doing was revel in deducing points from the Discipline grade. His kick was in judging, not educating. Intimidating? Perhaps. But also the best way to get yourself universally hated. (He had a VERY unflattering monicker, universally used in his absence.) When I think back about him now, I shudder at the thought of how disturbed and repressed I'd have to be to ever act like that. I'm not judging him back, hadn't thought about him once in more than a decade. Nobody loved or even liked him, that's more than enough daily retribution in itself, isn't it? He's probably a very lonely old man today.

Things have a way of getting themselves in order without us bothering. It may not be clearly visible, but it's there.
The greedy may become filthy rich and powerful. They'll also build their own solid gold prison bars, living in constant worry of being robbed of their wealth. The tyrants live in the terror of losing their position and power, or getting killed by one the the great many they have oppressed. Hollow people are their own judges. We don't need no stinkin' little black books. We don't need no paranoid soviet-like cloak of fear. Not for justice. Payback is pointless and harmful to the heart.

Other example: the judgementals will create a world around them where they absolutely HAVE to appear perfect, for fear of being judged in turn. Do you see where the moral flaw is? As long as it doesn't get known, you then can use any pressure valve to let off some of that astronomic steam pressure. Send obscene text messages to underage pages. Do "you-know-what" to children which you know will never dare talk because you made THEM feel guilty about potential public reprobation. This defines, quite simply, Hell on Earth. Built with our own hands. And filled with lost souls. Let's just shatter these shackles, shall we?

When I was "taught" about how God would account us for EVERY little thing we ever did (so what good is confession, huh?), I used to think, when I was only seven, that living in a worry of every instant was probably far worse than getting punished in the end, and that telling us this kind of stuff was pure sadism. A sure recipe for a horribly disturbed psyche.
There's no way I'm gonna let myself become one of those obnoxious sadists. Making up rules rigid as steel and claiming they are the One Truth? Bah! A guy named Jesus brought other very different rules, saying that you can forgive, absolve, and forever not judge your fellow man, woman or child. And apparently, it brought him great inner peace and spiritual strength.
Those "sadists"? They're not just unbearable to live with. They're also very sad, for they have to live with themselves with no hope of escape. There's one thing I'll do to them if it appears that I can: bring them happiness, free them from their self-built cages. *IF* they are willing to exit them. Can't force them. Being a bloody fool is every citizen's democratic human right!

Life is too serious not to be taken light-heartedly.

I'd say, in consistency with my previous developments, that the only reincarnation/karmic trap there is, is the one we build ourselves, with our ignorance, selfishness or stubbornness. Therefore it is by definition an illusion: something that has a real foundation somewhere, but which crucially depends on our perception of it. Since it is self-referring, because it originates from our own attitudes and perceptions, changing those can and will change everything else. What's war, and what's the peace treaty that ends it? Mutual attitudes. Perceptions. Conflict is an illusion.
The destruction it brings, of course, is all too real.

Laurie said...
My neighbor who came over for a visit saw the book "The Disappearance of the Universe" on our table. He looked at the title and said, "Now THIS freaks me out!" Didn't even want to know what it was about!

Not a fan of discovering how Copperfield does his tricks/illusions, is he? :-)
I can picture it as a Sci-Fi parodic novel... Chapter one, page one:
"I woke up that morning, and the Universe wasn't there. All gone. There was nothing at all. At all? No nothing, even! Well, I was pretty upset, naturally. I mean, there I was, but there was no more space or time. What was I to do? WHEN was I to do it, anyway? I'd never bothered to read about the Big Bang's fancy theories, and now it was too late. Too late for anything to ever be late or early again. And where was everybody and everything, anyway? I grabbed my towel (fortunately, my whole house was still there, but my alarm-clock's display was just a hypnotically blinking 00:00, like some demented VCR), and without much hope I stuck out my thumb upwards... what seemed to be upwards, toward the ceiling of my room. Suddenly, at some (moment?)..."
You know, come to think of it, no wonder your neighbor decided to take a hike!

-----------
Back to me.
"Payback is pointless and harmful to the heart."
I like that. It really is.
Not only that, but you'll notice that almost all "justice" in this world is not for correction, but punishment, in other words, payback.
We think and we say that we punish to correct, but given how that generally works out, I think that the real reason we do it is the ego's satisfaction of dealing out hurt, in a "just cause".

Also, I agree, "How To Win Friends and Influence People" is about a lot more than just what the title suggests. And I think he did the book a disfavor by not talking about that at least once in the book. Granted, he may have won more readers by emphasizing the selfish angle, but the thing is that if you fake it, usually it will backfire on you.

25 comments:

Cristina Rodríguez said...

Whenever I find someone open enough to discuss matters like these (and most of us in Spain have had a catholic upbringing), I sense people feel lost, unprotected, if God doesn't deliver punishment. It's a paradox, I think. I will only feel safe if you promise to punish me if I'm bad.

That's what it sells, the fear of getting hurt (~punishment), instead of the fear of hurting others (~compassion).

Anonymous said...

Laurie said: "My neighbor who came over for a visit saw the book 'The Disappearance of the Universe" on our table. He looked at the title and said, "Now THIS freaks me out!' Didn't even want to know what it was about!"

The name of the book is poorly chosen. Even though the 'physicalness' of physical reality is an illusion, it does not mean that it is any less real. Quite the opposite. Also, no part of it is going anywhere, or disappearing.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

No, the philosophy actually is that the universe *is* an illusion, is not real, and will one day disappear, when we all have woken up.

Anonymous said...

No, the philosophy actually is that the universe *is* an illusion, is not real, and will one day disappear, when we all have woken up.

That notion is entirely childish which borders on foolishness. (No offense)
When you "wake up" where will you be? Trapped in another illusion? This philosophy is a dangerous game that people are playing with Satan as the card dealer. Wise up before it's too late.

Anonymous said...

I think the universe might be an illusion, which could be the illusion of an illusion, and another illusion, and so on.
See, we obviously live in more than three dimensions, of which our sensors and brain can only grasp these three.
We might be destined to live some more existences in other dimensions after we're done in this earthly world.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

"When you "wake up" where will you be?"

One with God, or Source.

A third of the world (Hindus and Buddhists) believe these things.
It is the human condition to be hostile to different beliefs, but it is divine to be tolerant.

Anonymous said...

It is the human condition to be hostile to different beliefs

Why is this so?? Will this ever change? I hope it will.

Anonymous said...

I have no problem with different beliefs. No matter how out of this world, or out-of-sync with my own.

It is intellectual dishonesty (and intellectual lazyness) that I do not stomach.

For example, if

1. Universe = "all that is"
2. Universe disappears when all observers reach a certain state
3. Observers then become part of God/source

then either God/source is not part of Universe, or this is a logical fallacy.

If Universe is not equal to "all that is", then it is acceptable that Universe and God/source are separate, but there is then the problem of how can part of "all that is" disappear?

Also the precondition of every observer having to be in a certain state for it to happen violates the very idea illusion being specific to observer.

Anonymous said...

I was looking for a condensed (and hopefully unambiguous) summary of the metaphysical model presented in the book, and came accross the Wikipedia article. There's also some discussion on the respective talk page.

The article does not contain the kind of explanation I was looking for, but it does have some quotations that might be useful for someone here. (Fans of the book who want to promote it would do well to put some more work on the article. It's a bit short as it is.)

I gotta say, though, with sentences such as the ones below, it is difficult to take this seriously. (But I will give it a chance, nevertheless.)

"A Course in Miracles is a self-study, one-on-one metamorphosis into Christ done at the level of the mind." The Disappearance of the Universe, Page 83

"To correct something usually means you fix it up and keep it. When the false universe is finished being corrected by the Holy Spirit, it will no longer appear to exist." The Disappearance of the Universe, Page 8.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

TTL, some attempts at answers.

The universe is not all that is.

God/Source is not part of the universe.

But you should read the book. It is a big leap in logic, and can't be digested in a minute. The wiki quotes also illustrate this, you can't rip them out of context.

All our communication is based on the universe and the ego. This is a philosophy attempting to teach a viewpoint OUTSIDE the universe. I think you'll have to agree that's a challenge.

Anonymous said...

Confession time: that WAS a long post, in my typical style, so the Captain had to trim a bit off the end in order to make it fit on the ship's deck. ;-)
For those select few who aren't yet dizzy after all this reading, you can check the small but witty final part in the cargo hold. :-)

"but the thing is that if you fake it, usually it will backfire on you."

Amusingly, Mr Carnegie says the exact same thing somewhere around the end of his book, as a form of conclusion. He advises to make his pointers a whole new attitude, a sincere second nature. From reading that book and sensing the spirit within it, I gained great respect for Dale Carnegie, whom I've never met.
I don't know whether he changed my life, or just spared me decades of learning from my own mistakes. In any case, I thank him. To think I got that priceless book dirt cheap on sale in a dusty old book store... It was one shelf away from Stevenson's Treasure Island. ;-)

Magnetic Mary said...
"I sense people feel lost, unprotected, if God doesn't deliver punishment."


Hey, if it's indeed the way I see it, if you bring the punishment on yourself and God simply made the world work that way, I believe it's just as efficient in the end. On the short term, of course, ignorant short-sighted people will not understand why it is in their interest to behave. Culture, knowledge, education... it is the greatest power indeed.
I'd love to share it with the whole world, and make everybody very rich and powerful, in the wealth and strength that truly counts!
You're not rich/strong when you are more so than the others, but when you are more than you ever were and know you'll never know poverty/fear ever again. So it's NOT an endless quest after all, just one that you never have to end if you don't wish to. Big difference.

"That's what it sells, the fear of getting hurt (~punishment), instead of the fear of hurting others (~compassion)."

This is not exactly the main message I sensed by reading the Gospel. A matter of attitude, perhaps?
"Everybody sees noon at his doorstep." - (Old French proverb)

"the philosophy actually is that the universe *is* an illusion, is not real, and will one day disappear, when we all have woken up."

Some call it awakening, some might calling bodily death, or passing over to the true life, or breaking free from the matter/flesh toward enlightenment... Lots of philosophical concepts, suppositions or convictions.
I sure hope we don't need to all agree on the One Single Truth to ever find it, otherwise we never will. You can trust me on this.

"Monsieur Beep said...
I think the universe might be an illusion, which could be the illusion of an illusion, and another illusion, and so on."


Oh, you're good. You're really good. Care for a "friendly" poker game?
We'll just be playing for matches. And your soul...

TTL said...
"I have no problem with different beliefs. [...] It is intellectual dishonesty (and intellectual lazyness) that I do not stomach."


See, there's your problem: you claim to be all-tolerant, but you are deeply prejudiced against the Dishonetomentians, who are just common people. Very common. :-(
Admit it: you're in disagreement with every joe's constitutional right to be thick, aren't you?

"Also the precondition of every observer having to be in a certain state for it to happen violates the very idea [of] illusion being specific to observer."

So... if I'm getting you right, you are saying that the disappearance of the Universe could very well be itself an illusion too, and we would never bloody know it?
A tad iconoclastic, but a creative hypothesis.
You too, you're good. Poker for three?

Tell me, what's your fave poker? Me, I just dig "Poking Fun".
Ante up!

Anonymous said...

We'll just be playing for matches. And your soul...

That's the reality, "And your soul." Once you exit your temple (body) there are two destinations. Heaven and Hell.
To enter Heaven you must confess you are a sinner and confess/accept Christ as your redeemer. To enter Hell, do nothing before death. Simple answers for simple minds.

Anonymous said...

Eolake: "All our communication is based on the universe and the ego. This is a philosophy attempting to teach a viewpoint OUTSIDE the universe. I think you'll have to agree that's a challenge."

There is a whole branch of philosophy for discussing ideas about the transcendence. It is called metaphysics. There are many theories and models about the nature of reality, including all that is. And God, if you will. I don't find this field to be challenging per se.

The problem with a lot of New Age literature that touch these issues is that they do not attempt to present their case in any serious manner. When discussing stuff that can not be perceived or measured it is adamant that all concepts be carefully defined, and that the model is presented as clearly and isolated as possible. Otherwise it's all just mumbo jumbo.

Take for example the word 'disappearance'. In everyday parlance we have no difficulties understanding its meaning. But in metaphysics it is a complex issue.

Does your toilet exist during those moments when you are in your living room and have no visual perception of it?

In the theory of 'total responsibility' were each person is assumed to individually create 100% of her reality at each and every moment, the answer would be no.

And yet, under this model, it would be inaccurate to state that the toilet disappears. Rather, it's the perceiver who, by directing her attention elsewhere, stops creating it in her reality. There is a subtle difference.

Anonymous said...

Monsieur Beep mourns:
It is the human condition to be hostile to different beliefs

Why is this so?? Will this ever change? I hope it will.


I need to add:
I'd say it's none of people's business to judge upon what one believes or not, as long as everyone acts as a free responsible adult.
"God" should take care of the matter herself (!), it's not up to us to play the rulers of the universe.

Anonymous said...

"I sure hope we don't need to all agree on the One Single Truth to ever find it, otherwise we never will. You can trust me on this."

You, sir, are wronger than any sane man should be! I should know; I define sane. I reject your reality and substitute my own! Put succintly, I disagree.

I would like to put forth my own thoughts but there's a lot of material to cover and from what I've had the time to read so far most of what I'd say is contained within it. (Albeit in bits and pieces from multiple commentators and Eo himself.)

Perhaps if this is still on the first page the next time I pay a visit I'll say something. For now, just pretend I'm not here. Think of me as living shubbery. That sits erect. And talks.

(I know this is off-topic, but a bit of humor rarely harms, eh? ;) )

laurie said...

I am deeply intrigued by the idea that matter is not SUBSTANCE. There is substance, the substantial, among us, within us, as us, flowing, but is not touched by matter, and cannot be known materially (through the 5 senses). I have experienced this shift in perception, words like love, peace, power, can never do it justice. Maybe some clearer minds out there have more accurate words . . . .

The DU and ACIM touch upon this mystery, it's why they've had an effect on me.

ttl, I am lazy. Mentally. It is really lamentable, but always was, my mind was never very *sharp*. I still contruibute and write in, knowing this sorry fact, but what did Dylan Thomas say? "the force that through the green fuse drives the flower / drives my green heart."

the last two words may be different, but my memory is a little sloppy too!

laurie

Anonymous said...

Say, Anon, do you mean that playing poker, even for fun, will end me up in Hell?
What about a virtual poker game against computerized opponents in a video RPG to earn fictional digital money units for leveled-up equipment and save the world? Will it send me to Hell, or just warp me to fiery Volcano World inside the game? 'Cause I've got the Max level Ice Materia, so I'm cool about in-game lava and edgy flame-spewing dragons. With my current level of 77, THEY're toast!

TTL said...
"The problem with a lot of New Age literature that touch these issues is that they do not attempt to present their case in any serious manner."


If you mean they just come up with some "different" hypothesis and expect you to simply adopt its "groove", I agree. Too much noise, not enough talk in this world.

"Does your toilet exist during those moments when you are in your living room and have no visual perception of it?"

Forget the stupid toilet and hold it in for a nanosecond! What I REALLY want to know is: does the light really go off when I close the fridge? Now THAT's truly metaphysical.

Monsieur Beep said...
"God" should take care of the matter herself (!)


According to the very spaced-out Nestor & Pollux Bible, the eye-in-a-triangle-shaped God, who chose to become cute Godette as of last Valentine after a very strict slimming diet, was pierced off the sky by an arrow from Satan, who tricked the Earthworm into helping him by posing as the true God and making the Worm into a huge-brained evil genius. And the newly-female Cyclopeses (darn grammar rules!) are all dead, it seems. I'll have to read next month's chapter to tell you whether there'll ever be raspberry yogurt in the world again, or even that revolting but brain-nourrishing prune yogurt.
Some people sure believe into weird stuffing, I mean, stuff!

Peaceful Shrubbery disgrees succintly, eh? Well, I just as promptly will him into the amnesia of my Universe, so there!
And if the problem isn't already solved until the End of Times by this radical method, I'll say this apocalypse-bringing word to him/it/whatever: "NI!"

Anonymous said...

Monsieur Beep said...
"God" should take care of the matter herself (!)

You need to study the scriptures beep. God is QUITE MALE. To say He is female is a lie and you attempt to deny his diety this shameful way, but you only did it as a sarcastic joke I do believe. You've been reading too many false bumper stickers boy.

Ps Playing poker for fun will not land you in Hell. Rejecting Christ will. Simple answer for simple minds in our human race

Anonymous said...

God is male? So what's he (he!) gonna do with his useless male attributes, because there's no female person around to make even the destinction male/female necessary.
Male/female is a feature of earthenly reproduction, and has nothing to do with the business involved in creating and running one or more universes.
Lol, I like the bumper watcher thing! Good one! :-))

Beep!

Anonymous said...

But remember, I'm only a tiny earthling, a xiao beep in the concert of the universe.
And my opinion won't matter at all.
Yet who knows, the whole thing might not work without my cog. :-/

Anonymous said...

The Bumper Watcher said...
"Male/female is a feature of earthenly reproduction"


Yo, Beep, you're a regular bumper stalker, arent'you? You dirty old man... ;-)
Not that I'm any more well-behaved!

BTW, if your theory is correct, could you explain to me the birth/creation of Aphrodite from the seed of Uranus' severed maleness?

(Please, no childish puns on the name of the poor slash victim, he's heard them all from junior asstronomy students. It's painful enough as it is.)
"Oh no, not again!" - (John Wayne Bobbit)

Anonymous said...

Miracles do happen.
;-) :-) ;-)

Woah this is a long thread.

Emrys said...

TTL said, "All our communication is based on the universe and the ego. This is a philosophy attempting to teach a viewpoint OUTSIDE the universe. I think you'll have to agree that's a challenge."

Anyone who can share the umwelt of a flea or a blue whale or a member of a minority group would have no trouble being able to have the perspective of someone "OUTSIDE" the universe.

One might also consider the problem of imagining that there is no "OUTSIDE" and no afterlife is one of ego only. The ancient Greeks and the medieval church rejected the numerical representation of "0" as a rejection of God (him, her or it self). The ego, confronted with non-existance simply walks away.

For myself, non-existence would be a relief.

Anonymous said...

Bumper Beeper said...
"Woah this is a long thread."


Another double entendre? ;-)

Emrys said...
"For myself, non-existence would be a relief."


Hey, there have GOT to be other, more enjoyable ways to ease up.
Ever tried a vacation on a nice tropical island? Existence is sweet there...

Anonymous said...

Emrys, try to see existence as a gauge or scale, consisting of say 10 levels, capped by a super level.
We're quite at the bottom, at level 2 or so.
A level 2 island in the carribean would be wonderful, though.
Maybe all levels will be called on by each of us sooner or later.
Maybe there'll be no more "egos", but only a "we" in the super level.