|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 8:20:05 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 7, 2022 8:20:05 GMT -5
Come on, man. I don't care who taught what. Just focus on the teaching. What does it say? If it makes sense, I will take it even if it came from your dog bow wowing it out last night. The Sermon on the Mount is in English. It must have been translated from Greek. Apparently, the language - at the time those words were supposedly spoken - was lost. Why attach importance to who said what? The language they have spoken is Aramaic not Greek. It was written in Koine Greek because the alexander the great has colonized that area 300 years ago of Jesus advent. So to evangelize the gospel, they had to write in Greek. Who teach what? You don't know, yes? Then you should not be claiming that you know the teaching is lost. Rather you should say you don't know. Teachings are not lost but altered when the days was passed by. 70 AD matthew and like were written and little diviation from what Paul has written and then at 120 AD John was written and once again little diviation. Likewise it goes on. Aramaic is still spoken today. www.aramaic.rocks/2020/02/is-aramaic-still-spoken-today.html |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 8:21:37 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 7, 2022 8:21:37 GMT -5
Where else can you know what Jesus taught? How do you know early writing differ from Jesus teaching? Paul finished his writing on 52 AD. Jesus died on 30 AD. Paul met Jesus brother in person Gal1:19. Come on, man. I don't care who taught what. Just focus on the teaching. What does it say? If it makes sense, I will take it even if it came from your dog bow wowing it out last night. The Sermon on the Mount is in English. It must have been translated from Greek. Apparently, the language - at the time those words were supposedly spoken - was lost. Why attach importance to who said what? Aramaic is still spoken today. www.aramaic.rocks/2020/02/is-aramaic-still-spoken-today.htmlThe oldest NT we have is in Aramaic, about 150 AD, The Peshitta. hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/9297/date-of-appearance-of-the-new-testament-in-syriac-peshittaSorry Gopal. The article suggests the first NT was written in Aramaic. I have read some studies on this in the past. Some guy studied idioms of Aramaic, and followed them into Greek. His conclusion was that the Greek NT had to have come from an Aramaic NT because of how some idioms were translated. Now, that's from memory, but a little research might verify it. It makes a difference Sree. We don't realize how much of our common language is idiomatic. It's raining cats and dogs. Greasy little spot. If your eye is single. Beating a dead horse. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. It's a piece of cake. Killing two birds with one stone. You've let the cat out of the bag. Spill the beans. Take a rain check. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 8:37:52 GMT -5
Post by zazeniac on Aug 7, 2022 8:37:52 GMT -5
You are the Emperor of Ice Cream. Hedonism and masturbation making us all blind. Look at the folks on ST. They can't see past their (imaginary) noses. Only you can fix this, sree. What is ST? Spiritual Teachers. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:00:34 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 7, 2022 10:00:34 GMT -5
Come on, man. I don't care who taught what. Just focus on the teaching. What does it say? If it makes sense, I will take it even if it came from your dog bow wowing it out last night.
The Sermon on the Mount is in English. It must have been translated from Greek. Apparently, the language - at the time those words were supposedly spoken - was lost. Why attach importance to who said what? The language they have spoken is Aramaic not Greek. It was written in Koine Greek because the alexander the great has colonized that area 300 years ago of Jesus advent. So to evangelize the gospel, they had to write in Greek. Who teach what? You don't know, yes? Then you should not be claiming that you know the teaching is lost. Rather you should say you don't know. Teachings are not lost but altered when the days was passed by. 70 AD matthew and like were written and little diviation from what Paul has written and then at 120 AD John was written and once again little diviation. Likewise it goes on. The teaching. You guys think that THE teaching is transmitted, and transmissible through words. Knowledge is transmissible. It can be passed from one to another like a family recipe. Even then, aunt Geraldine cooked grandma's pasta sauce like shit.
I know the Bible. stardust had a bad experience of Christianity in his family. My grandma's devotion to Jesus inspired me. I was dead set on a life in the priesthood as a Jesuit. Lost it halfway through college. It wasn't the hedonism in Sodom (NYC) and Gomorrah (LA) that killed it. It was THE teaching that freed me from the grip of the written word.
Why is it that masterpieces in music are always original works of prodigies and not transmissions? The magic of harmony is not in those dots and dashes of the musical score. It is in you, it always comes forth - ever new in the here and now - from within. You guys are using scripture like crutches. And now you are discussing the evolution of walking sticks.
If you want to explore THE teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, you must be able to not just walk on your own two feet but be able to fly like me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:03:28 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2022 10:03:28 GMT -5
The language they have spoken is Aramaic not Greek. It was written in Koine Greek because the alexander the great has colonized that area 300 years ago of Jesus advent. So to evangelize the gospel, they had to write in Greek. Who teach what? You don't know, yes? Then you should not be claiming that you know the teaching is lost. Rather you should say you don't know. Teachings are not lost but altered when the days was passed by. 70 AD matthew and like were written and little diviation from what Paul has written and then at 120 AD John was written and once again little diviation. Likewise it goes on. The teaching. You guys think that THE teaching is transmitted, and transmissible through words. Knowledge is transmissible. It can be passed from one to another like a family recipe. Even then, aunt Geraldine cooked grandma's pasta sauce like shit.
I know the Bible. stardust had a bad experience of Christianity in his family. My grandma's devotion to Jesus inspired me. I was dead set on a life in the priesthood as a Jesuit. Lost it halfway through college. It wasn't the hedonism in Sodom (NYC) and Gomorrah (LA) that killed it. It was THE teaching that freed me from the grip of the written word.
Why is it that masterpieces in music are always original works of prodigies and not transmissions? The magic of harmony is not in those dots and dashes of the musical score. It is in you, it comes forth from within. You guys are using scripture like crutches. And now you are discussing the evolution of walking sticks.
If you want to explore THE teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, you must be able to not just walk on your own two feet but be able to fly like me.
Bye. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:07:08 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2022 10:07:08 GMT -5
Come on, man. I don't care who taught what. Just focus on the teaching. What does it say? If it makes sense, I will take it even if it came from your dog bow wowing it out last night. The Sermon on the Mount is in English. It must have been translated from Greek. Apparently, the language - at the time those words were supposedly spoken - was lost. Why attach importance to who said what? Aramaic is still spoken today. www.aramaic.rocks/2020/02/is-aramaic-still-spoken-today.htmlThe oldest NT we have is in Aramaic, about 150 AD, The Peshitta. hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/9297/date-of-appearance-of-the-new-testament-in-syriac-peshittaSorry Gopal. The article suggests the first NT was written in Aramaic. I have read some studies on this in the past. Some guy studied idioms of Aramaic, and followed them into Greek. His conclusion was that the Greek NT had to have come from an Aramaic NT because of how some idioms were translated. Now, that's from memory, but a little research might verify it. It makes a difference Sree. We don't realize how much of our common language is idiomatic. It's raining cats and dogs. Greasy little spot. If your eye is single. Beating a dead horse. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. It's a piece of cake. Killing two birds with one stone. You've let the cat out of the bag. Spill the beans. Take a rain check. Nope. Only few of OT books were written in Aramaic and rest of them were written in Hebrew. And this Hebrew and Aramaic text were translated into Greek at Septuagint at 250BC and it was most careful translation. But all new testament books were written in Greek and especially koine Greek. None of them were written in Aramaic. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:11:10 GMT -5
Post by Reefs on Aug 7, 2022 10:11:10 GMT -5
The teaching. You guys think that THE teaching is transmitted, and transmissible through words. Knowledge is transmissible. It can be passed from one to another like a family recipe. Even then, aunt Geraldine cooked grandma's pasta sauce like shit.
I know the Bible. stardust had a bad experience of Christianity in his family. My grandma's devotion to Jesus inspired me. I was dead set on a life in the priesthood as a Jesuit. Lost it halfway through college. It wasn't the hedonism in Sodom (NYC) and Gomorrah (LA) that killed it. It was THE teaching that freed me from the grip of the written word.
Why is it that masterpieces in music are always original works of prodigies and not transmissions? The magic of harmony is not in those dots and dashes of the musical score. It is in you, it comes forth from within. You guys are using scripture like crutches. And now you are discussing the evolution of walking sticks. If you want to explore THE teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, you must be able to not just walk on your own two feet but be able to fly like me.
You mean the living truth vs. dry theories and concepts handed down from generation to generation? |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:19:05 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 7, 2022 10:19:05 GMT -5
The teaching. You guys think that THE teaching is transmitted, and transmissible through words. Knowledge is transmissible. It can be passed from one to another like a family recipe. Even then, aunt Geraldine cooked grandma's pasta sauce like shit.
I know the Bible. stardust had a bad experience of Christianity in his family. My grandma's devotion to Jesus inspired me. I was dead set on a life in the priesthood as a Jesuit. Lost it halfway through college. It wasn't the hedonism in Sodom (NYC) and Gomorrah (LA) that killed it. It was THE teaching that freed me from the grip of the written word.
Why is it that masterpieces in music are always original works of prodigies and not transmissions? The magic of harmony is not in those dots and dashes of the musical score. It is in you, it comes forth from within. You guys are using scripture like crutches. And now you are discussing the evolution of walking sticks. If you want to explore THE teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, you must be able to not just walk on your own two feet but be able to fly like me.
You mean the living truth vs. dry theories and concepts handed down from generation to generation? Of course. Truth leaves no tracks. I am not arguing for an abandonment of traditional values, an unfortunate development in the west. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 10:35:34 GMT -5
Post by zazeniac on Aug 7, 2022 10:35:34 GMT -5
I like the way you phrased that (sentence in bold above.) It speaks to me in a manner that could only come out from my own head. But you are mired in zen. Let's see if I can pull you out of that quicksand.
Cognition is thought itself. This is how I see it. I used reason to figure this out. I may be wrong. I am inquiring. You may question my reasoning, reject my perception of things and question that even. In this way, we can avoid shoving crap down each other's throat. We begin our exploration from ground zero. No acceptance of authority from me, you, Terry, Weber, Buddha, Krishnamurti, etc.
What is cognition? What is thought, and what is the relationship between these two things if they are related at all. I am in my garden now and I am looking at a maple tree. This foregoing statement describes a situation in which I, the observer, see place (where I am situated) and thing (maple tree). The thing exists at the moment of detection by the senses (touch, sight, smell, etc.). Cognition arises as the thing takes form based on remembered experiences drawn from the memory. Therefore, the cognition of the scene of the garden where I am looking at the maple tree is created by thought. This conclusion is rough and ready. Please feel free to take it apart as you see fit. Right. You've identified your position though there is no need to objectify the tree. Just breathe. Relax. Take your foot off of the thinking mind. Let it stop describing and inquiring.. it wants to. Just relax. Feel the tree through you legs. Feel it's roots through your feet. Straighten your back because this is what your body wants to do. Relax.. breathe. There is an exchange between you and the air surrounding you. Let your pores open to it. The tree has known you for a long time. There is an affinity in you for the tree and the space that it lives in. Don't be troubled by any external sounds. That's just life, swallow it down. Recognise how sharp the resistance that you've developed has become. It's hurting you, only. Drop it.. it's safe. Really. Be the Lamb that your Grandmother blessed.. just for a moment. Just enough to enrich your stability.. then let it go. There is a grown man sitting in your seat. We'd like to meet him. Really one of my favorite posts ever. Way above sree's pay grade and probably mine too. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Aug 7, 2022 10:51:52 GMT -5
One last word before I'm off to sit. My knee is 100% now Reefs.
BUT if you can't recognize yourSelf in all THIS, then yes, the intellect and senses are your limit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 7, 2022 11:44:48 GMT -5
One last word before I'm off to sit. My knee is 100% now Reefs. Glad to hear that. Good job! My flip turns are almost 100%. Going to upgrade to graceful flip turns soon, hehe. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 7, 2022 11:48:49 GMT -5
You mean the living truth vs. dry theories and concepts handed down from generation to generation? Of course. Truth leaves no tracks. I am not arguing for an abandonment of traditional values, an unfortunate development in the west. Did you look into the mystical tradition of Christianity? The mystical traditions of the major religions are usually more concerned with the living truth than with spiritual correctness or phonetics and grammar. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 11:56:08 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 7, 2022 11:56:08 GMT -5
My grandma was a devout Catholic. She went to church everyday to attend morning mass and ate her wafer (body of Christ). She always carried her rosary in her hands; and whenever I visited her, she would hug and kiss me, and made the sign of the cross...using her thumb to touch my forehead, right shoulder, left shoulder, and my chest. My grandma was a wonderful woman, an excellent cook, a matriarch who gave strength to and held the family together. Joe Biden should have his ass kicked for making fun of his own religion.
Religion is important to people. Without it, life would be too hard to bear. Hedonism, which is destroying our country, has become the religion of America.
And did your family break apart when she died? Oh yes. Within months, Grandfather suffered a brain aneurysm while having breakfast at his favorite Greek restaurant and died the same day. Mom's siblings all drifted away from her and from each other. And now, I am alone by myself to seek the pathless land. |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Aug 7, 2022 11:58:35 GMT -5
So you think you need to be free of self to understand what that would entail. I say I'm not and I do. That being conscious is enough for the time being. Although if necessary one should strive dilligently to live virtuously. And I nominate myself during our discourse as is only natural.
If you don't mind me being direct, I don't think you are free of self at all, and in fact consider some of the things you've said on the forum to be indicative of a particularly self-interested brand of spirituality. At times amusingly so. Which isn't gonna cut the mustard. So I colour you deluded in that respect. I don't need a test, I evaluate as I go, and fwiw I sense your next major breakthrough will have to come in the form of some sort of [self-]surrender and that that's unlikely to be any time soon. Besides I've recently come to see that this idea that self or identity view as the 'be all and end all' when it comes to suffering, is a particular Advaitan standpoint and one that contrasts from my preferred brand of spirituality. It's not about what you are or aren't, but rather what you do or don't, and that follows suit from clarity, quite naturally. Perhaps somebody might want to try to make the argument that ultimately action itself is always predicated on a false identity view and I'd be open to hearing about that. But from what I see folks generally mistake how deep that river runs. Anyway, I digress. Ok, let's get to work here. I have been wanting to respond to this when I first read it.
I don't mind honest observations; and I like your coming to the point. There is nothing wrong with stating what you see, and you see me as deluded. What does this mean? Doesn't your conclusion say not only that I am deluded but also that you know what freedom of the self is? How could you tell that I am deluded?
Yes, or at least that I think I have a better idea. No, not so much. I'm proceeding on the basis that I'm not deluded, naturally. I don't think that necessarily follows. I don't think you have to be "free of the self" as you put it, in order to understand what that would entail. Similar to how I might know smoking is bad for me but continue to do it. Admittedly that's not a great metaphor, but I spose I'm making a distinction there between knowing something and realising it. And I mean realising in the truest sense, as in being the embodiment of, (intransitive verb?, I'm not sure). But realising, in this case, would entail the cessation of the arising of those patterns we are calling self. It's an odd idea isn't it that we could know something we haven't necessarily fully realised. Hard to wrap your noodle around. I understand it might be a hard sell. I'm basically saying that I consider myself to have better insight into the nature of egoic/ self-referential patterns, and the extent to which they are not only still prevalent in my experience, but perhaps can even be said to underpin certain aspects of mundane experience itself. Or the extent to which they arise intrinsically within the structure of specific aspects of mundane experience, might be a better way of putting it. Like interaction for example. I'm saying that in being able to know and recognise these patterns in myself, and what constitutes them, I'm also able to know and recognise them in you. I mean, able to know to what extent they arise in conjunction with any expression/experience itself, which is to take some of the personal back out of the equation. Doing so also entails what I've been calling 'being conscious/present'. Which is to say I consider myself less caught up in those patterns. In a sense more objective. So, the ability to do so comes through a combination of the aforementioned insight and presence. It's very difficult to get any of this across even remotely concisely and in plain English. But with that in mind. Firstly, I'm saying I recognise and accept that those egoic patterns are still playing out here, but that because I'm conscious of the fact, therefore I'm not deluded about that. Secondly, I'm saying that you are misguided in your assertion that it's not happening there, when it's evident enough that it still is. Which I consider to be the case with you both because I can see it clearly enough as it happens, and because the criteria I deem for it not being so, hasn't been met. What I mean by that last part is that, even superficially, I consider your(s and mine) very lifestyle (the current system itself), isn't really conducive to fully no-selfing. But rather it is conducive to the continued reinforcement of egoic/self-referential patterning, however subtly. Even though you think you've opted out. I know other folks will have different opinions about all that. And it's true there are realisations that will largely undermine that situation. But in the biggest picture there's deeper ramifications to that sort of continued action we are talking about here, the 'engagement with the patterns' I mean. Anyway, some of the guys have mentioned sensing some contradiction in your posts. For example, in one breath you claim to be entirely selfless, and in the next breath you talk about those less fortunate than yourself as merely stains on your idyllic lifestyle. That sort of sentiment, the very nature of the expression is selfish in nature. Most will understand that intuitively, and tbh I feel like somebody would have to be operating pretty unconsciously to not see that particular contradiction. Even a reasonable degree of intelligence should suffice, and you strike me as a pretty smart guy yourself. (That's why we sense there may be an element of trolling going on with you). Now you might take the position that, ah but I know I'm consciousness. It's all just consciousness, so all that's just happening of its own accord. And you, (ouroboros) are reading selfishness into it ... but it literally can't be the case, because of what I (sree) have seen. If so, that doesn't really hold water. So I'll head that one off at the pass. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 7, 2022 12:57:20 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 7, 2022 12:57:20 GMT -5
Of course. Truth leaves no tracks. I am not arguing for an abandonment of traditional values, an unfortunate development in the west. Did you look into the mystical tradition of Christianity? The mystical traditions of the major religions are usually more concerned with the living truth than with spiritual correctness or phonetics and grammar. I hate to come across as one who knows. Spirituality is not a past time for me. This is a dangerous world, and I am it. There is no security. I live as a man on the wire, a face climber ascending a mountain. One wrong move and it's curtains. Please pardon my impatience in conversation.
Christianity is mainly cooked up to create a context for Jesus. Each of the major religions has its own unique central message that comes through even in English. And every one echoes the same thing: a cry in the emptiness calling out to me.
The only exception is Islam, Judaism, Hinduism. I am not ruling them out. They have not caused me to look closely into them. I did study the Hadith but it contains pithy sayings in the vein of George Bernard Shaw. No mysticism.
Mysticism is all around me. I feel it. Like satch, I can only see its forms with my intellect and senses. It disappears - like a deer slipping into the forest - when there is noise of human conflict and strife.
It comes when there is quiet, as Krishnamurti intimated. Conventional life is noise. In that din, there is danger. When we keep walking across busy highways, we are going to get hurt.
|
|
