Maybe because you are conflicting your propensities.
What is the starting point?
- Thread starter wynn
- Start date
Which is a lot different from propensitizing your conflicts - that may be where the aroma of the musts of your normatives has become confusing.
The main point is that you should have faith in what an expert in theology tells you about God. Then you will be less confused.
What do you mean?
I would understand that I have conflicting propensities, propensities where the acting on one would make acting on another impossible.
But how does someone conflict one's propensities?
typical iceaura format :
- make an attempt at parody
- drive home an atheist sound bite
get back to us when you feel capable of a coherent discussion
:shrug:
meaning that you have certain propensities but you oblige yourself to adopting other ones which makes for conflict.
For instance an old person trying to act like a young person would face a similar conflict.
Allright, I agree. But there must be some reason (ie. a propensity!) why I do this, must it not?
Moreover, what you are saying seems to be different from what the scriptures are saying. Namely, the scriptures keep stressing "one should do this, one should not do that". I have never seen them say "Act according to your likes and dislikes".
Is "Act according to your likes and dislikes" the proper understanding of BG 3.5?
Also, could you please list some of those propensities which you think that I oblige myself to adopt, but which are in discord with my (original) propensities?
(This could be a cultural thing, though. Where I come from, we have an ambiguous relationship toward a person's character or nature: on the one hand, it is considered completely malleable, changeable, something that can and should be changed. On the other hand, it is considered solid and unchangeable.)
Last edited:
sureSo I can be cured of the affliction? OK.
its not so much that you are an idiot but that you're merely acting like one
sure
some come from the modes and some come from the degree that one is spiritually capable
according to one's propensity one will act in accordance with scripture in a particular way.
Basically it boils down to what one comprehends as a principle and what one comprehends as a detail or menas of applying that principle.
For instance its a principle that one must eat food. Its a detail what, where and when one eats. Or furthermore its a spiritual principle that one should offer food before eating. Even though there may be restrictions on what one can and can't eat, there's still a lot of variety (where, when and what) within that parameter
3.5 is more along the lines that action is a given so the notion of stopping or simply getting rid of everything is a waste of time
For instance you don't have a lifestyle that can accommodate reading scripture 10 hours a day and spending the remainder in contemplation of it (if you were had a solitary life in a temple however).
I'm not suggesting that you should adopt such a solitary life, but rather that your needs, interests and concerns have a more pragmatic sphere.
I think a lot of this sort of stuff has to be worked out by the person themself. (hence the self of self realization). Its all part of the whole deal of accepting responsibility for one's actions and choices etc ... as opposed to being an automaton or mode of nature where everything is carried out for one ... kind of like the very last application of free will was the decision to serve god and since then you can put it on the shelf or something.
nature (as in one's personal nature) is often celebrated as very difficult thing to change across many cultures. One's opinions and objects of will however easily move back and forth.
So how far does this go?
I took to spirituality/religion driven by the search for the meaning of life, for a way to make my daily life and work meaningful and bearable. I can't say that I have succeeded.
Will I just have to accept that my life doesn't have meaning, or that I am simply not intelligent enough to understand enough spiritual science to make daily life bearable? And that I should just try to push ahead, mindlessly, no different than beating my head against a wall?
I speak for my own religion. You are not a Christian because you chose to do good things, nothing we do makes us a Christian. It's what God has done. Christianity is not a ritual (that is if you exclude the Catholic church; which I personally would)
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” Ephesians 2:8
I'll send you a more in depth reply through PM if you want me to, just ask.
I think you have to accept that you have needs interests and concerns. I don't think you have to try and adhere some set of propensities that do not really belong to you ... which is generally how meaningless develops in a persons outlook.
But how do I figure out which is which - which are my propensities, and which are the foreign ones?
Is there some principle by which one can distinguish ones from the others?
Don't forget the conflictings - you need to distinguish which are your conflictings, and which are the foreign ones.signal said:
But fortunately you have your answer: you simply ask an expert in theology, and they tell you what God's will is in the matter.
Thus:
(I think you are allowed to repair the frequent illiteracy - jsut use your imagination and faith, to discover the meaning. )expert in theology said:
Or like this:
See? Experts in theology are always willing to help.expert in theology said:
basically boils down to your values and capacity.
For instance its only artificial for an adult to take on the propensities of a child when they have scope for higher qualities
But this only seems to further beg the question ... What are my values and my capacities - as opposed to the values and capacities that do not belong to me?
I was raised in a highly ambitious yet goalless spirit. The limit for doing something was complete exhaustion - unless something exhausted me, I was supposed to continue to do it. I was supposed to be "good", "disciplined" and "cultured", but was given no explanation as to why. Supposedly these qualities are rewarding in themselves, but I never had that experience. And of course my experiences were discounted on the spot. "If I'm not happy with being "good", "disciplined" and "cultured", this only means that I haven't worked hard enough."
How does one know one has scope for higher qualities?
I mean, one could also merely be having delusions of grandeur - and they can be very pervasive and long-lasting. I know very well what I am talking about here.
Last edited:
Actually, it's not only fear of hell that makes me complain about my limitations or slowness.
I love my parents. I want to do everything in my potential to help them. I have to be 100% sure that my choice of religion and its execution are correct and perfect.
It is up to them to decide whether and how much they wish to follow that same religion. But if there is some crucial moment in their lives that will determine the rest of their life or rebirth, and a good practitioner could play an important part in that crucial moment - then I not being that good practitioner would be a tremenduous failure for me.
whats an example of something that you are 100% sure of
actually a tremendous failure is simply not to endeavour
If you have a sense of distaste for particular things, you have values. Even to be upset by the notion of meaninglessness indicates certain values (for instance there are certain nihilistic philosophers who are quite pleased with meaninglessness)
ambition without goal?
This sounds like rajas, and its the foundation on which all western culture is built
One knows one has them by displaying them ... the only problem is when they get hijacked by lesser qualities . ... so the endeavour is to find out some way to stabilize them or provide the greatest number of situations for them to manifest.
Nothing.
So for me, it comes down to strategic calculations. I don't know anyone though who would take up a spiritual practice on the basis of such calculations, which is very alienating. Everyone I know seems to have come to their path based on "liking it," "having a good feeling about it," or something else nice and appealing.
Welcome to the land of art for art's sake, culture for culture's sake, sport for sport's sake and so on!
It seems it is usually considered impolite to ask a musician, athlete, architect, whomever, why they do what they do, what their aim is. And if they do answer, and the answer isn't too artistically or mystically sublime for me to understand even just the grammar of it, then they say something that I just cannot relate to or find utterly silly.
"Goals are for the materialistically crazed Americans. We in Europe are cultured and do not demean ourselves with such gross things as 'goals'."
I must have been ten or so when I first saw Austrian commercials (which were deemed "Western"), among them for chocolate. It said "Pamper your senses" or something to that effect. I understood the words, but I couldn't quite figure out what they had to do with eating chocolate.
I mean, we ate chocolate, we liked it. But we didn't talk about it. To actually put into words what the goal of eating chocolate is or should be - that moment of being made consciouss that that darn brown thing does not actually pamper the senses, especially not for long - that made eating chocolate bland somehow. Yet the people in those commercials did as if they would be happy, or on some mystic level that I just can't comprehend.
I feel the same way about all wordly goals that people state - once it is spelled out, it just doesn't seem worth the effort anymore. I don't know how Americans manage to live with having everything spelled out, and still finding it worthy.
I suppose as a culture, Europe was shy of stating goals, because it had the intellect to understand that those goals weren't exactly worth it, and that therefore, a civilized denial of them was the way to still make various daily and extraordinary pursuits meaningful, hence the focus on the process, not the goal.
How can greater qualities be hijacked by lesser ones?
Would you say that chanting is one such propensity that I have adopted, but which isn't actually mine?