To MAV Energy and Matter

[Guest guest]

Namaste DB:

 

It might be fruitful to question your desire to help me refine my

points. It feels more like you are jousting, or playing spirtual one-

up-manship.

 

All fine scholarship in whatever religious tradition one is most

inclined toward or steeped in does not prevent or negate the

influence of society on personal choices. Questioning claims made by

religion and/or tradition does not mean throwing everything out. It

simply means staying active in one's self/Self inquiry. You may have

leapt to conclusions from what I said, and delving into that would

be part of your own self/Self inquiry.

 

MAV

, "Devi Bhakta"

<devi_bhakta> wrote:

>

> Hi Mary Ann:

>

> You write: "I feel you have not understood my posts, but thanks for

> trying."

>

> In fact, I think that I *have* understood your meaning; my only

> intent was to perhaps help you to refine it, and recognize

> unintended implications of some of the ideas you are working with.

>

> You add: "I have not rejected anything positive that Hinduism or

any

> other religion has to offer."

>

> I am only going by your own words: "Until those cultures begin to

> reflect their wondrous spiritual claims in the way they conduct

> basic human relations, I think it's time to question the claims."

>

> It sounds like you're saying that when the lowest gross

> manifestations of a vastly diverse culture are unsatisfactory to us

> at a given point in time, that gives us license to disregard and

> dimiss the highest philosophical speculations and discoveries of

the

> precursors of that culture. In other words, you are denying the

> possibility of positives on account of the negatives. That may not

> be what you believe; I do not know. But it is what you are saying.

>

> You note: "Also, I am not typing consciousness as male - you said

> that was the Hindu teaching."

>

> That is only part of what I said. You may have skimmed over the

rest

> of my explanation, so I repeat it whole here: Very little in these

> systems applies universally. One of the texts I use most is Tripura

> Rahasya, which very clearly posits Devi as both Consciousness [i.e.

> Consciousness as Female] and the manifestation of that

Consciousness

> [i.e. energy/matter as Female]. I quoted another, similar line from

> the Yoginihridaya Tantra just yesterday. That is pure Shaktism;

> welcome aboard.

>

> *** I simply encourage people to become aware of the symbols or

> rituals they choose or gravitate toward ***

>

> No harm in that, unless the intellectual analysis of human-made

> symbols becomes an end in itself, obscuring the larger Truths

behind

> them. Symbols are merely culturally specfic signposts; they do not

> represent the thing itself as much as point toward it. They use the

> specific everyday world that the individual comprehends to point

> her/him beyond, toward what they do not yet comprehend.

>

> You may not like the symbol, because it does not reflect your

> reality or your cultural context. If you come across a Cyrillic

road

> sign in Russia saying Moscow turn right and Petersburg turn left,

> you -- not reasding Russian -- may say "What is this gibberish?"

But

> to the person of that culture, the signs bears important

> instructions. Likewise, what you see in an image of a Hindu deity

> may be radically different from what a person born and raised in

> that culture will see. Just as the Russian road sign wasn't

> effective symbolism for you, so the Hindu deity may not work for

> you. But that doesn't mean that it is gibberish; nor does it mean

> that the symbol necessarily carries (for a member of the culture

to

> which the symbol was intended to speak) all of the freight and

> baggage that your cultural context may attach to it.

>

> In fact, I would go even further and state that the problem in

> the "lowest common denominator" sectors of all religions occurs

when

> people grow too attached to the outward trappings and symbolic

> imagery of "their" system as opposed to that of other religions,

> rather than the underlying, unchanging, universal Truths that

> underlie them all. And that is where hate and intolerance begins,

> and where spiritual progress ends.

>

> PLEASE let me hasten to add that none of this is intended to

suggest

> that you are intolerant or that your spiritual progress has

stopped!

> *lol* Having had the pleasure of frequently speaking and

> corresponding with you on and offline for severasl years now, I

know

> that nothing could be further from the truth. My points are made

> only in the spirit of honest debate.

>

> Warmest regards

>

> DB