Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Tension

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Copied and Pasted From Gururatings:

 

GuruRatings/message/58877

 

 

GuruRatings , " Melody " <melodyande@c...> wrote:

> > At 02:26 PM 6/9/05, Melody wrote:

> >

> >>But yes - it's as if there is some

> >>kind of impulse inherent in thought,

> >>just like in what we traditionally

> >>call 'life'

> >>

> >>to 'work' towards continuity.

>

>

> It came to me upon awakening this

> morning, that what I write may be

> only 1/2 of the 'story'.

>

> It strikes me that also inherent in

> 'life' -

>

> at least human life,

>

> is the impulse to 'work' to

> 'return to its source'.

>

> It may well be that when someone says

> " in my soul, I know...... "

>

> they are responding to the impulse

> in them that seeks the ending of that

> 'experience' of duality even as

> they live -

>

> an ending of the experience of

> being separated from 'the whole'.

>

>

>

> Such a notion would explain the

> 'double mindedness' in people -

>

> the competing inclinations to

>

> both survive and to 'die' -

> all at the same time.

>

>

> I'm reminded of the yin yang

> symbol, and how each 'half'

> contains part of the other half,

>

> which suggests to me that each

> of the 2 inate impulses described

> above, may also contain a kind of 'seed'

> in each -

>

> such that there is continually

> this connection between the 2

> impulses -

>

> perhaps being the very tension

> that gives birth to religions.

>

>

> I wonder if 'morality' isn't

> a way to kind of placate the

> second impulse while giving

> most attention to the first?

>

>

> What if 'ego' (using the

> Eastern definition, not the

> Freudian one)

>

> were nothing more than the

> reflection of conflict between

> the two impulses?

>

> What if the two impulses

> weren't seen or experienced

> as oppositional?

>

> What if it were possible to

> 'die' and still 'live'.

>

> What if that's what is meant

> when the sages say that 'ego' is

> not 'real' -

>

> that it's a kind of 'tension'

> that's built on nothing more

> than a 'misunderstanding'?

>

> musing aloud again,

> Melody

 

Very nice Melody. It reminds me of the work of Eric Voegelin. Are you

familiar with his writings? He constructs a two pole tensional device

as you have here to explain many matters in experience. He is worth a

good slow read. I recommend first his " Order and History, Volume V In

Search of Order " about the precise nature of transcendental

experiences and second " Anamnesis " a revisitation of the former. It is

to best read in that order.

 

His collected works can be viewed here.

 

http://www.umsystem.edu/upress/voegelin/voegelin.htm

 

Two cents worth below on a four pole metaphor.

 

Another way to conceive the " tension " is that ongoing between four

implicit poles. Existence, as a spatiotemporal experiential reality,

non-existence or nothingness, which seems where existence inexplicably

emerges from, becoming, the transient arisings and appearances and

their impermanence and falling, and non-thingness, the irreducible

sense of " a ground beyond things, words, conceptions, the ineffable. "

If the tension is allowed to function, maintained by questioning and

answering, responding and responding between these poles, one will

sense being, extinction, becoming, and ineffableness. Seeking,

dwelling in, settling on, clinging to any one pole brings its fruit of

being, extinction, becoming, or ineffableness or some mix or confusion

of when more than one pole is sought. Seeking one pole or another or

more than one creates " tension " that is, the sense of a " pulling back "

towards the other poles, however subtle it may be, creating tension

between the one(s) sought and the others ignored. The dimensions of

the poles are imaginary, and have been set in the mythopoetics of

living in daily life, inherited so to speak in a taken for granted

manner and becoming the undergirding of search, find and create. Being

so constructed, alerts to the irreducible inability, incapacity, to

know the how, why, what, when, where of any thing and in not accepting

that as is there is the constant search, find and create of living as

we are.

 

Lewis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...