Tonight's discussion rambled a bit far afield, but still, but still...
Thinking about foundational beliefs, refer back again to 4-10-1 "Faith and Belief" where we differentiate between Notions, Opinions and other aspects of belief that go deeper into a person's makeup.
"Notions and opinions deepen into beliefs and convictions when you relate them to other certainties and values. They become the opinions you assert more universally, claiming them to be truth for others as well as for yourself. Foundational beliefs are those convictions in which you have the deepest personal stake. Some convictions are held deeply because they seemingly concern matters of life and death for you. Other foundational beliefs reflect your deepest convictions about God, humanity, and the very nature of the universe.
When you hold a foundational belief or a conviction, your emotions are involved. Some have called such convictions "gut-values" or "soapbox" opinions. You have engaged such a "gut-value" when you speak our passionately, under circumstances in which you might normally remain quiet. You lose self-consciousness and become intense, often apologizing later for the outburst and saying something like, "I'm sorry, I just get on my soapbox whenever I talk about that subject." You have been expressing beliefs which are foundational for you.
As foundational beliefs and convictions deepen, they become an integral part of your identity. When someone challenges these deep convictions, you take the challenges personally."
***
Urban T. Holmes and John Westerhoff, in a remarkable book called Christian Believing, make the distinction between faith and belief in the following way:
'It is important to distinguish between faith and belief. Religious faith is an attribute of personhood. As long as we have records of humanity we have records of religious faith. Faith, deeply personal, dynamic, and ultimate, has always been present among all peoples at all times in history.
Faith -- the word appears two hundred and thirty-three times in the authorized version of the Bible (belief appears only once) -- is best understood as fidelity, as trusting obedience. Faith implies a deliberate and positive existential involvement; it precedes belief.
The word for 'belief' in Latin is opinio. "To believe" is opinor, opinari -- that is, to have an opinion or to make an intellectual assertion.
Credo should never have been translated as 'belief.' The only reason it was so translated is that in classical theology, faith and belief were once considered synonymous. In any case, credo literally means "I set my heart."
To have religious faith -- credo -- is to pledge allegiance, to hold dear, to prize, to love intimately, to give our loyalty, to commit our lives.
Faith can be and indeed must be expressed in words and ideas. Beliefs are intellectual expressions of a people's faith. But beliefs are not faith. Traditionally, theology has said that seekers ask two basic question: First, "Is there a God?" -- a question which demands a simple "yes" or "no" answer; faith is the affirmative response. Second, "What is God?" -- a question of belief whose answer is complex, diverse, and inadequate."
***
For a different look at this subject, I recommend you read a post by Arthur Silber:February 24, 2008
Flecks of Light, Points of Understanding, and the Gift of Sight: All Things Are Connected
"In somewhat the same way as described above -- and again, here I speak broadly only of the general issue involved and not at all about the nature or scale of the achievement, if any -- I view all of my writing as connected. The sanctity of an individual life is always my most fundamental concern. I frequently write about the immorality and criminality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, just as I write about the immorality and unforgivable nature of an attack on Iran in the present circumstances. With regard to an attack on Iran, the crucial nature of personal responsibility greatly concerns me, as do the specific means by which we could take action to avert such a catastrophe (which will remain entirely possible with a new Democratic administration, if it does not occur before Bush leaves office). I write about foreign policy (and developments within the U.S. of great significance) because of the supreme value of a single human life: these are the same issue for me, viewed from different perspectives.
The great heroism of a man such as Ehren Watada must be noted, and Watada helps us to understand the absolute necessity of saying No when one is ordered to perform a monstrous and evil act, such as torture or the murder of an individual who has never threatened you. The heroic actions of high school students who oppose our government's occupation of Iraq deserve to be heralded, and young people such as these, who teach us how to be adults, must be supported. These subjects matter to me because I view nothing as more sacred than an innocent person's life, and I am always searching for those individuals who act to protect that irreplaceable value. In the same way, I discuss the crucial need to resist evil and to break the rules, especially when those rules are purposely designed to stifle thought, vitality, truth, and even life itself."
****
"The sanctity of an individual life is always my most fundamental concern."This is the place from which Arthur Silber writes and communicates.
This place of "Ultimate Concern" -- this place which most closely defines us -- may be the greater part of our purposes and meanings for existence. Is this something we decided? Or is the coding for this level of belief somehow embedded in our DNA -- in the heart of us, body and soul?
Collect for the week:
GOD IS
IN THE MIDDLE
THEN, FALLS OUT
PRESENT
AND SPLASHES LOVE ALL OVER US.
WE PRAY
IN OUR HEARTS
AND FROM OUR HEARTS
TO KNOW YOUR TRUTHSO THAT WE
GROW OURSELVES
LOVE TO LIFE
TO RECOGNIZE IN EACH OTHER YOUR PRESENCE.AMEN.
*****
Opening Words
I believe the earth
exists, and
in each minim mote
of its dust the holy
glow of thy candle.
Thou
unknown I know,
thou spirit,
giver,
lover of making, of the
wrought letter,
wrought flower,
iron, deed, dream.
Dust of the earth,
help thou my
unbelief. Drift
gray become gold, in the beam of
vision. I believe with
doubt. I doubt and
interrupt my doubt with belief. Be,
beloved, threatened world.
Each minim
mote.
Not the poisonous
luminescence forced
out of its privacy,
The sacred lock of its cell
broken. No,
the ordinary glow
of common dust in ancient sunlight.
Be, that I may believe. Amen.
{Now Making Light}
Posted by Teresa at 12:31 AM * 266 comments
I believe that if God is as advertised, God’s ways and means and purposes cannot always be comprehensible to us.
I believe in the God of the Burgess Shale*, Who not only made creation stranger than we know, but stranger than we could ever imagine.
I believe it’s a sin to throw out awkward data.
I believe that the God who made (among other things) light, and space, and number, and time, and the spiral curve of Fibonacci numbers, must be acknowledged to understand more than I do about why there’s pain in the world.
I believe God put that itchy spot on our backs, just exactly where we can’t reach it, to encourage us be to nice to each other.
I believe God doesn’t play mean practical jokes on His children; for instance, the ones He makes gay.
I believe that God created my friend Rob, who is all that Christians are enjoined to be but is also a perfect natural atheist; and I believe that God rejoices in His creation.
I believe that any Christians whose religious practices aren’t centered around sacrificing and burning animals ought not spend all their time trying to enforce obscure passages in the Pentateuch.
I believe that God will not deprive any of His children of their free moral agency, which among other things includes their freedom to screw up.
I believe that most of the people who go on about the misogyny of western religion have failed to look closely at the Doctors of the Church.
I believe that I am a member of the Body of Christ, and that He acts in this world through our embodiment of him.
I believe that if Christ himself were here right now, his chief interest wouldn’t be in the church hierarchy.
I believe that the Holy Spirit gets around, and is not solely embodied in the formal structures of religion. I nevertheless also believe that so many earnest believers trying so hard to do right and know right for more than 2,000 years must have done more than accumulate errors all that time, since otherwise it calls into question the whole enterprise of religion.
I believe that a religion that exists only to tell you how good you are, and which never requires you to do anything you don’t want to do, or refrain from anything you do want to do, is a species of moral cotton candy.
I believe that of all the blessings we’re given, one of the greatest is that we can occasionally make each other happy.
I believe that the cure for disliking organized religion is prolonged exposure to the disorganized sort.
I believe that religion isn’t complex; it’s simple. It’s putting it into practice that gets complex.
I believe that anyone who interprets the Bible on a sentence-by-sentence basis, as though it were a user’s manual, is willfully making himself or herself stupider than necessary. A sentence in the Song of Songs does not compile meaning in the same way as a sentence from the Acts of the Apostles.
I believe the book of Jonah was meant to be funny.
I now believe the saints are sneakier than my early years of study led me to think.
I believe that when you start thinking of any one part of creation as being somehow more real than any other part, you’ve made a wrong turn in your philosophy and will come to an undesirable conclusion.
I believe we’re bound to occasionally confuse God with His creation. The part of creation I most frequently confuse with God is the English language.
I love language passionately, and yet I believe human language is inadequate to fully express God and his teachings. I believe Jesus was the Word made Flesh, and that his life was one heck of a sentence, with a surprise twist on the verb in the last clause.
I believe in one God, the Father, the almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. I believe in one lord, Jesus Christ, the only son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, one in being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate. He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. I believe in the one holy catholic and apostolic church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
__________________
*Patrick’s phrase and formulation. I believe that God wants us to keep track of who makes what: thus copyright.
(Go and read the comments as well)
The first two parts are "Theological Frameworks" and "Common Lesson Four" .
{You can access them by clicking this link)
In our last meeting, we brainstormed "Jesus Christ"
and "Human Being".
Tonight, we brainstormed "The Holy Spirit" and "Love"
(The links are to Wikipedia links for the words)
Holy Spirit: breath, ruach, inspiration, grace, another, sense of transcendence, magic, always available, a connection between the Self and God, invisible, transparent, something that empowers believers, a hope of permanence in our ephemeral existence, miracle, a broader part of oneself, undefinable, counselor, all this and always more, immanence/presence, mother (feminine), ocean of meaning, individual truth, Sophia.
Love: Freedom, the Source of All Creation, connection, ancestral continuity, enduring kindness, nurturing for the giver and the receiver, sustaining interdependence, the Purpose of Life, Unconditional, Life-Giving, Compassionate, Transparent, grace, passionate, saying 'sorry' when you need to, true bonding, outflow, forgiving, truly seeing another (clear vision and emotion), promoting another's growth, force that is bigger than the action it is couched in, acceptance of everything, the universal solvent, unconditional positive regard.
*****
NEXT
We culled the lists a bit down to a more concise statement of each.
*Jesus Christ seemed to be the name of "he who brings the new paradigm" and a teacher who is an embodiment of love.
*Human Being was shortened to a God-creature. Potential & promise. Stories & storytellers.
*Holy Spirit culled to 'breath and inspiration' , God within, all this and more, a bridge between, and transcendental wisdom.
*Love summarized as sharing, connecting, bonding, continuity, passionate, grace, redemption, forgiveness, that which fuels Kindness.
Of course, we disagreed as to relative importances of each of these items, in terms of writing a code or a Creed. We decided to open up the exercise to invite each member to write a Creed this week.
I invite each to view Creed on Wikipedia , particularly the section as Creeds as a Denial of Heresies.
Also note:
Rabbi Milton Steinberg wrote that "By its nature Judaism is averse to formal creeds which of necessity limit and restrain thought" and asserted in his book Basic Judaism (1947) that "Judaism has never arrived at a creed." The 1976 Centenary Platform of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, an organization of Reform Jewish rabbis agrees that "Judaism emphasizes action rather than creed as the primary expression of a religious life."
Some of our forays into Creedal points were:
"I believe the Love of the Holy Spirit is infinite"
"I believe that loving-kindness is the way to the Holy Spirit"
"All Human beings are filled with the Holy spirit and love"
"That God sees (and seeds) our potential and promise."
"That our potential and promise comes from our connection to God, Love, the Holy Spirit and Wisdom."
"I believe that Love is embodied as The Teacher Within."
***
Have a Go !
COLLECT FOR THE WEEK;
GOD YOU ARE LAUGHING AT US RIGHT NOW.
AS WE LAUGH AT OURSELVES
WE PRAY THAT WE CAN KEEP OUR SENSE OF HUMOR
FIND JOY IN SILENCE
AND THAT WE NOT LIMIT 'GOD' TO 'CREED'
THAT WE MAY SENSE THE LOVE THAT SURROUNDS US
AND IN WHICH WE ARE PLANTED AND GROUNDED.
AMEN
***
Go read
Why Prayer is Wrong and Bad and You Should Knock It Off
- "Sweet
baby Jesus, I am a miserable sinner, but please have mercy on me and
help momma with the bingo. And also, please take care of Fluffy in
Heaven. God bless America. Amen."
The crux of such a message is this:
- a) You have all the Power.
b) I have zero power.
c) Gimme.
Rather than such a meek and (frequently) selfish supplication, prayer must be a radical, political act of intense examination and change. Each prayer, however simple, needs to be as violently historically impactful personally as, say, the Declaration of Independence is to the United States. I'm not that anymore, I'm this now. It's alchemical, the transmutation of lead into gold.
Such a declaration must be made in a state of adult mindfulness, neither arrogant posturing or insincere grovelling. One must approach prayer like a Knight on the battlefield, with realistic appraisal of protagonist and opposing forces, of the terrain, acceptable losses, risk and stake. That such a required attitude is so rare is due largely to our cultural religious education – most people carry with them the idea that G@d is powerful cranky guy with a beard, and you have to ask him politely for what you want, as though writing a letter to Santa Claus. We pray as children because that's when we really, REALLY want something, and also believe sincerely that we can make it happen by praying hard enough. We train this muscle, this prayer-reflex, and that's what we draw upon later in times of crisis. "Oh please Jesus, please don't let me be pregnant, I'll stop doing x tomorrow ohpleaseohpleaseohplease..." It's relying on old programming instead of taking adult appraisal and responsibility. Anything that starts with "Dear Lord..." isn't prayer, it's trying your luck, and not dissimilar to begging for change on the sidewalk. I know I'm not really entitled, but aw c'mon, gimme a break, will ya?
The transformative assumption in prayer is that, out there, there is a way I'm supposed to be – more creative, more intimate, braver, fair-minded, compassionate, more spontaneous, adventurous, calmer, rooted, deliberate, responsible, raw – and that I can bring that ideal state to the here and now by listening to that rather than all the competing, clamorous voices that make it easier to be this. Such simple fervency should terrify you. You are tuning a smuggled radio to a secret frequency, and your discovery places your life – at least what you think of the life you've created for yourself – in unrecoverable danger. Whoever wishes to be born must first destroy a world says Abraxas. Cracking open the eye of Shiva, making an omelette. Real prayer demands no less than human sacrifice – the surrender of the old, horizontal self on the altar of real, attuned Self.
You are declaring a revolution, the overthrow of the powers which govern your life in favour of a profound, fundamental shift that unites your divinity with your humanity. There is an excellent article on this process here: Detonating the Mind Bomb - Punk Rock Vedanta. The real question is, if prayer is not radical, political, transformative, sexual, artistic, creative, scary, raw, intoxicating, and yes, punk rock, then why the hell would you want to have anything to do with it?
posted by Jordan Stratford
Image by Mad Priest
(From Experimental Theology)
Cabinets of Wonder
My friend was recovering from surgery. The tumor was entirely benign. “The doctor says it’s just a dermoid cyst,” she said. A what? We paused, as realization dawned. We had it: our search term. As any hypochondriac knows, a fresh new word from a doctor can set off a daylong orgy of medical Googling.
The word “dermoid” instantly popped the lid on a trove of primary sources, including a troubling collection of pathologists’ photos. My friend gasped. Dermoids are hideous, and more: they’re spiritually troubling. As malformed embryonic material, they have some human features, but the features are scrambled. Just one glimpse and I got that what-hath-God-wrought feeling. It didn’t help that a link or two away from the medical sites were sites with dermoid folklore, which connected such tumors to monsters and fables of the homunculus.
Patients who conduct extensive online research have become — no surprise — the scourge of physicians. Most doctors choose to dose patients with only the smallest effective levels of information. But digital-age patients have a high data tolerance. Medical Googlers tend to prefer the whole search-engine dragnet, which yields the data of everyone from snake-oil quacks, holistic shamans and huggy support networks to Mayo Clinic conferences.
Alas, as if doctor disdain weren’t enough to chasten the Googlers, graphic medical information turns out to be its own punishment. As I stared at the cyst pictures, my mind skipped through subjects medical, superstitious and existential. I kept thinking, We shouldn’t be looking at this. Monster tumors with inchoate eyes and teeth grow regularly in human bodies? This news flash belonged only in the hands of lab technicians, horror writers and maybe hard-core Balzac fans.
But what was most disturbing about the images was how often they appeared on nonmedical sites. Some people, it seems, look at the pictures recreationally. My friend recalled a scene in “Ulysses,” in which Leopold Bloom diverts himself with a 17th-century manual filled with weird obstetrical images (“infants cuddled in a ball in bloodred wombs like livers of slaughtered cows”). They’re all sick, I thought. To look at this stuff for fun, without my — my — pure motive of becoming informed. That’s just wrong.
I noticed that one of the links to the cysts came from eBaumsworld.com, a wildly popular site for the Mad magazine set. EBaumsworld typically offers videos of skateboard wipeouts, mug-shot montages and bar-mitzvah embarrassments. In the midst of the har-har stuff, however, are darker pictures: deep gashes, prisoners talking explicitly about sex with a new inmate, bodies ravaged by crack cocaine. EBaumsworld also shows the execution of Saddam Hussein and videos of terrorist violence.
Another source of dermoid links was LiveLeak and the horrifying BigDucky, which feature videos of extreme real-life violence — including murders, executions and torture. On BigDucky, alongside a list of entries including “Islamic Extremists Behead Eugene Armstrong” and “Iraqi Terrorists Behead a Korean Captive,” ads run for ringtones, soft-core pornography and something called a “fart button.” Elsewhere, the site plays recordings of prank phone calls.
How did this juxtaposition happen? Certainly, there has always been in America a widespread audience for graphic material, as well as a widespread ambivalence about it. Interest in certain anatomical and scatalogical images is considered simply prurient. On the other hand, photographs of emaciated Somalians in the 1990s were considered required viewing for any American citizen seeking to understand the world. Equally mandatory were the disturbing tableaus from Abu Ghraib, which at the time of their discovery were plastered on front pages and projected at the center of human-rights conferences.
The Abu Ghraib images, as it happens, are always in heavy rotation on LiveLeak and BigDucky. What’s more, as LiveLeak meticulously compiles images of real-life violence from Iraq and around the world, it has unexpectedly become one of the most extensive public archives of war film. But if you turn to gross-out sites for news, whose company will you be in? That, I realized, was what chilled me most while I was examining the tumor photos. I had liked the idea of being an enterprising patient-advocate, an informed caregiver and even a gifted lay diagnostician. But that was when I was reading The New England Journal of Medicine. Once I found myself studying the photos near a fart button, or under the banner of “gross-out,” I wasn’t so self-satisfied.
You’re not supposed to look at disgusting stuff for the fun of it, right? It’s O.K. only when you’re learning something — how cruel people can be, how complex the body is or how you could intervene to improve the world. That’s why public television shows extreme violence on “Frontline,” or graphic images of childbirth.
But maybe that’s also why they show the stuff on gross-out sites. The prison-sex-interview video, according to an accompanying blurb on eBaumsworld, is intended as a deterrent to those who might risk incarceration. Images of obstetrical anomalies, as the blurbs on BigDucky say, are incentives for young people to use birth control. A video purporting to show a British airstrike on a Taliban complex drew comment on LiveLeak from around the world on American foreign policy and the ethics of aerial warfare.
And let’s not be naïve: the motives of journalists, human rights workers, documentarians and doctors who draw attention to nauseating images are not always pure. In his terrific book about nonfiction writing called “Follow the Story,” James B. Stewart argues that “writers cannot count on anyone to read their work out of a sense of obligation, moral duty or abstract dedication to ‘being informed.’ ” Instead, he says, the best stories in journalism engage an amoral quality in the reader: curiosity. Stories that are strange work best; we want to see what’s weird, what’s unexpected, what we’re not supposed to see.
We look at the Abu Ghraib photos, or skateboard wipeouts, or even dermoid cysts, because we’re curious. Curiosity powers every Internet vision quest. It’s nothing to be ashamed of. But we shouldn’t call it courage either.
Points of Entry
THIS WEEK’S RECOMMENDATIONS
POLITICALLY WHACKED OUT: The filmmaker Errol Morris classifies his movies as either “politically concerned” or “completely whacked out.” “Standard Operating Procedure,” his new documentary about Abu Ghraib, crosses those genres. By focusing on the role of photography, Morris both illuminates and obscures the practice of torture in the Iraqi prison. Watch the site errolmorris.com for news about the film, which had its premiere this month in Berlin.
STEP RIGHT UP: Founded in 2001 in Rochester, N.Y., by Eric Bauman and his father, Neil, eBaumsworld.com styles itself as “media for the masses.” To find out just what that means, you must turn to the site, now owned by HandHeld Entertainment. A resurrection of P. T. Barnum’s American Museum for the Web, eBaumsworld offers news of the weird, shocking, gross and hilarious from all over.
THE MORGUE IN THE MUSEUM: “Bodies: The Exhibition” opened in Tampa, Fla., in 2005; it has shown or is still showing in Madrid, Buenos Aires, Barcelona, Cincinnati, Branson, Mo., Prague, Lisbon, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Las Vegas, New York, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Washington. Polymer-preserved cadavers are artfully displayed to reveal various functions and oddities of the human body. Check it out, and the video online: Bodiestheexhibition.com.
Please take a look at "Your Personal Theology, Writing Your Own Creed" (pg. 4-2-1-)
Last week, we brainstormed:
"(Who) What is Jesus Christ?" and "What is a Human Being?"
We then broke up into groups of three to winnow down the list to 3 or 4 items ( from 20 +)
Next week, we will list "What is the Holy Spirit?" and "What is Love?" and then subdivide into smaller groups to continue the discussion and then to write a creed together for our group.
Please read the excerpt from "Prayer of Manasseh" in the Common Lessons book ( 4-2-4) as well as the Apostles' Creed.
Note in "Faith and Belief" (4-10-1 -- 5) the differences between FAITH , BELIEF, FOUNDATIONAL BELIEF, EMERGENT BELIEFS, CONVERSION, and CONVICTION.
Our lists for last week were:
Jesus Christ :
A Man who broke free, light, embodied the Love of God, Trinitarian, a man, a man who lived and emphasized the centrality of love and interdependence, a minister to people, a rebel, a cause, God Incarnate, a Superstar, a Healer, Misunderstood, a man who brings an addictive plausibility to miracles, a man who helped to provide a useful guide to behaviours which encourage maximal growth and minimal destruction, shows potential of Humanity, the Misunderstood who Understood, the first Judeo-Christian, One who wasn't afraid to love, who laughed a lot, a harbinger of Love.
Human Being: or Humanity is:
a God-Creature, One thing we have for sure in common when conflicts arise (our humanity is our commonality), Capable of being Christ-like, Potential & Promise, Held hostage by fear, sometimes confused as a group, uniquely free - willed, Innately perfect, An outer expression of God, Players who think they are the pieces that they are playing with , selfish, and prone to self-destroy, persistently ego-centric and stubborn, always searching and never satisfied, intermittently violent and self-destructive, can be unconditionally giving, not in control, a wave of beauty that thinks it is flesh, potentially altruistic, Incomplete without God, Persistently seeking something or someone to worship, advancing it's knowledge, storytelling.
****
Our small group discussions took up the rest of the evening.
To be continued...
Collect:
GOD YOU ARE THE SILENCE BEHIND THE SOUND
HUMOR
THE GREAT ENCOURAGER
OUR FOOTING.
WE PRAY THAT OUR CREATIONS STAND.
THAT WE MAY HEAR YOU IN THE SILENCE
THAT WE MAY LIVE IN PEACE
TO LOVE AND SERVE THE LORD
AND TO PARTY.
AMEN.
"What is a life of depth? Is it to have a lot of deep experiences? Spiritual experiences? Enlightenment experiences? Or, are we immediately off the track when we envision any kind of experiences which would fill a life of depth? Important questions.
To really live a life of depth is to not depend on any experience at all - whether profound or not. Rather it is to let each experience point you back to the void from which it arose, to the state present before the experience itself.
To see each experience as your own perception of conditions continually emerging from the stillness of emptiness is half of it. To be reminded by experience (rather than hypnotized by it) to Return is the other half. So to live a life of depth, experience becomes the finger pointing back to the Before. It’s a reminder."
- G. Bluestone
*******
"The way of awakening and freedom requires that we ask ourselves, with all of the earnestness, honesty, and humility at our command, just this one fundamental question:
“Am I willing to live this moment with as much attention and affection as possible, or am I going to do something else?”
- Scott Morrison
****
"So, to put it in a negative way, you can't do anything to change yourselves, to become better, to become happier, to become more serene, to become more mystical. But if I say you can't do a damn thing, you can understand this negative statement in a positive way. What I am really saying is that you don't need to do anything, because if you see yourself in the correct way, you are all as much extraordinary phenomena of nature as trees, clouds, the patterns in running water, the flickering of fire, the arrangement of the stars, and the form of a galaxy. You are all just like that, and there is nothing wrong with you at all."
- Alan Watts
***
"Of so many great teachers I've met in India and Asia, if you were to bring them to America and get them a house, two cars, a spouse, three kids, a job, insurance, and taxes, they would all have a hard time."
- Pir Vilayat Khan
****
{Quotes from Whiskey Rivers Commonplace Book}
****
Think about your own thoughts, ideas, feelings and beliefs regarding, God, The Universe, Human Beings and Human Nature. What is the authority for the main beliefs?
If you were to write a creed, expressing your core beliefs, what would it contain?
***