Believe or disbelieve

[Nick]

Hi TheSeeker,

You may get some thoughtful responses in the Spiritual Development forum rather than Astral Chat (where the topic is likely to move off the front page quickly).

If you disagree with my moving this topic then please PM me and we'll move it back.


Very best,

[Meedan]

Seeker, you are dead right, believing is NOT ENOUGH, you have to KNOW. The following is extracted from another forum, it's by Tom Chalko.

"Beliefs have little to do with the Observable Reality of the Universe. At best, they are based on misinterpretation and misunderstanding of some Real Events. For this reason, believers do not feel any need to verify anything. They don't like to discuss alternatives and feel offended/upset if anyone dares to challenge foundations of their beliefs.

In contrast, those who aim to "know" constantly seek verification of their knowledge in Observable Reality. They constantly seek and analyse alternatives in search for "better explanation". To test their knowledge they make predictions of future events on the basis of their understanding of past and current observations of Reality. Any disagreement of their "knowledge" with observable Reality causes them to revise and rebuild foundations of their "knowledge" from scratch. Hence, those who seek to know are bound to change their understanding as they evolve.

It is important to note, however, that at any stage of their evolution their conclusions are determined and limited by their Intellect and their Imagination. Can anyone know anything that he/she cannot imagine or cannot understand?

Those who begin to know, become aware how much they do not know. Rather that getting depressed by self-admitted ignorance, they expand the context of their analysis and seek methods to improve their ability to understand. "


I HIGHLY HIGHLY [] recommend reading his book (it's short + free) www.thefreedomofchoice.com

[jc84corvette]

quote:Originally posted by TheSeeker

This is something I'm running across more and more in my life, or maybe I'm just starting to pick up on it.  People feel the need or whatever it is, to choose on any given topic, to believe or disbelieve.

Take christianity in my case.  I don't know much about christianity, even if I read the bible, I will only have read a book, I will not 'know' anything.  Now, if after, or prior to, reading that book, I had religous experiences that confirmed the bible.  I could then say I 'know' the bible to be true.  But, I don't personally think it's as black and white as that, but the truth is, I don't know.

My name on these boards is TheSeeker, because I seek to know, I seek to experience, I do not seek to believe.  From experiences I've had, I know I have a 'soul', I know we're all one, because I've experienced this.  I cannot convince anyone of this, nor do I care to, because I know, and your belief or disbelief is unimportant to me.  

I suppose there is one belief I do have, and that is that the truth lies within each and every one of us, that truth is there regardless of what knowledge I have acquired and what books I've read.

I am not calling anyone out, or any group out, I just wished to discuss this, and to hear some other opinions on it.

Most people when they read the bible, are confused and have many questions. Reading the bible does not teach you all about Christianity. I am sure you know that Scott.[]

Believing in things after you experienced is easy. After an experience, you would explore how, why, and why me for your first step. Then that will get you into other beliefes. Sooner or later your way ofcourse or you are on course because your mentaly tough (that was a bius observation).

Now about "the answer". What is really correct? What is really wrong? Well two things will and can guide you. One of witch is your religion and the second is your personality.

[James S]

Meedan's answer is a good one!

Belief is more like a filter - what you believe about something affects your perceptions, it affects how you deal with things you see and hear.

To truly experience something leads more to knowing than believing. It gives you something solid and definable to work with. I don't believe gravity works, I know it works.

You're right Seeker when you say the truth lies within us. This is important to know. That truth is tied in with our intuition, which many will say is our link with our higher self. It is this truth that will guide you to what is right for you. Be accepting of the truth that is within you, but at the same time, accept that someone else might have the same truth, but they just see it in a different way, as their higher self is guiding them in a way that is best for them.

Regards,
James.

[beavis]

That freedomofchoice ebook is very weird. It comes in a zipped file that is 22 bytes in size. It unzips to 252855 bytes. I saw many pages of text in it. I dont understand how it could be compressed to 11493 times smaller. Typical compressions only get 2-10 times smaller. The only way I can explain this is the computer lied about file size.

[TheSeeker]

I have downloaded the Freedome of Choice book, but I havn't had a chance to read it yet, I will try to read some of it today[].

Good point about belief being a filter James.  This is another reason why I choose to not believe or disbelieve, I settle with not knowing because I do not want to shape my perceptions around a belief.  I think having no expectations will give the most clarity in viewing any given situation.

[Nagual]

quote:I seek to know, I seek to experience, I do not seek to believe. From experiences I've had, I know I have a 'soul', I know we're all one, because I've experienced this.

While I agree that to know is way better than to believe, I'm going to play the devil's avocate...
While you don't believe in XYZ; you believe that you know XYZ from experience...  You believe you are right and made the correct interpretation of the experience.  But you could be wrong.  So you just pushed the belief a little further. []

[TheSeeker]

quote:Originally posted by Nagual

While you don't believe in XYZ; you believe that you know XYZ from experience...  You believe you are right and made the correct interpretation of the experience.  But you could be wrong.  So you just pushed the belief a little further. []

Ok, well now we're getting a little deeper.  In that case, I believe that "I know" I'm at work right now typing on the computer.  This would imply that everything 'I know' is subjective because it is all in my mind, so everything in that case would be a belief in your argument.  I think, that is what you mean.

But, maybe what your saying is closer to this:  I know I'm in love right now with someone.  Someone might say to me, you think you're in love, or you believe you're in love.  Well from experience, I know I am, but, I can't prove this to anyone because it's a feeling that only I can feel I cannot project this into you, for you to feel (or atleast I don't know how, hehe).  

I did not interpret these experiences, I felt them, I knew them, I realized them, but then again, I cannot prove this to you.  One might say that everything I ever experience is interpreted by me, through my 5 senses and 'other' senses, so the correct term I suppose would be that I did not 'analyze' these experiences, and draw conclusions.


*Thanks for playing devil's advocate, interesting argument.*

[Meedan]

Like my quote said:

"...It is important to note, however, that at any stage of their evolution their conclusions are determined and limited by their Intellect and their Imagination..."

Thus you're always going to be "believing" that you know, it's presumed.

[Nagual]

quote:I did not interpret these experiences, I felt them, I knew them, I realized them, but then again, I cannot prove this to you.

First, you don't have to prove anything to others; I was talking only for yourself.
You still have to interpret these feelings...

[TheSeeker]

I know what you're saying Nagual.  In the end basically everything is interpreted by me though.

By the way, what is your avatar from?  I like.

[Nagual]

Can't remember where I found it; I used google image search...

[parvati]

Re believing/disbelieving. Those aren't quite my categories, anyway I suspect that the ultimate spiritual truths will always escape us unless/until we somehow evolve beyond our human form and environment because our language, our ability to perceive etc etc are so heavily conditioned, firstly by our own physical constitutions and secondly  by the earth-environment and human-environment around us.  So whatever is "out there" has to be somehow translated into terms we can comprehend, ideas and images that are meaningful for US, with inevitable distortions.  Also, I think an excessively yes/no black/white mentality doesn't help understanding even in our human-all-too-human matters... just think how many inevitable conflicts and misunderstandings arise due to "irrational" psychological and emotional factors in everyday life, and how complex our relationships really are, even with ourselves, let alone with other people. And for instance: how could a gnat understand a galaxy? How could it BELIEVE in one even if it .. somehow .. was encouraged/induced to "realize" that it actually lives in one? Screwy example but it's the best I can do for now.

Other thoughts: how come these days no-one seems to remember the existence of "metaphorical" truths, "allegorical" truths? Levels of truth?  Both Kabbalists and medieval christians believed that a bible story, for instance, could have as many as 4 different levels/kinds of "truth", all equally TRUE: such as moral truth, allegorical truth, spiritual truth... so a fable or a myth could be profoundly TRUE, but at non-literal levels.

Somehow, at a certain level, I think ALL religions, and likewise all genuine spiritual teachings, are true... meaning that all can be valid paths for those who follow them wholeheartedly in the right spirit.

[Meedan]

I disagree parvati. Speaking for myself, I'm not a gnat. It is very likely that nature was created to inspire us to THINK, and to try and figure it all out. Why would we have intellectual limitations placed on us while we are in physical bodies?

As long as we don't start 'believing' things, - this includes blatantly false 'scientific' theories - while trying to figure it all out, it is fairly easy to arrive at some very logical and probable conclusions.

Nagual and Seeker, I agree that interpretation can even lead personal experiences to be 'wrong'. That is why you still must ALWAYS make sure what you have 'discovered' MAKES SENSE.

I saw a program about Near-Death Experiences on TV years ago. The show was heavily biased. A man was lying in a hospital bed, when suddenly he felt a pain in his chest. He then found himself above his body (the usual NDE stuff). He then saw A LIGHT... etc.

This was used AS PROOF THAT THE CHRISTIAN HEAVEN EXISTS!

Logic and common sense is important. []

www.thefreedomofchoice.com

[parvati]

Yeah I agree that seeing LIGHT in a near-death experience as proof that the Christian heaven - and NO OTHER (first thing that comes to mind is the Tibetan Book of the Dead, duh!!!) - exists is biased, propagandist, closed-minded... DUMB.

I try to compare reports of experiences (mystics, astral travellers, visionaries..) and interpretations, always keep an open mind, employ provisional "working hypotheses"... and above all, compare with my own experience and intuitions, try to see what "confirms" and what negates (that's part of what Bruce does - I really admire him for that)  - so probably, at least to some extent, we're saying more or less the same thing from different viewpoints? I think the fundamentalist brand of Christianity now apparently prevailing in the US has a lot to do with it - I've spent 30 years in Europe (Italy) where - strangely enough - the general attitude to Christianity seems a lot less dogmatic (but of course there are exceptions, some Catholics are extremely dogmatic, LOL!!). Anyway I think there's a lot more interest in "respectfully" comparing religious and spiritual beliefs and experiences and relating all that to what we have learned through scientific observation and experience (particle physics, astrophysics) ... could call it a kind of Tao of Physics approach?  That's more or less where I stand.

[Mustardseed]

It is an interesting differentiation and at times very blurred. When is believing knowing and when is knowing believing. Many of the things that people in the ages past ours "knew" seems now become obsolete and proved false. Many of the things only believed seems now proven to be true. It is subjective and very much according to the individual. You said seeker you will only accept knowing. Well what do you really know. What are beyond question. Make a list and challenge yourself again.

I saw an interesting movie way back called capricorn 1 I think. It was about a false mars landing filmed in the desert. I am not saying people did not walk on trhe moon but the principles are interesting.

As a Christian who also have OBEs I am very carefull in the Astral. The Bible warns that the Enemy will often appear as an angel of light. Appearances can be decieving, so can experiences. As I have grown and hopefully mnatured through my life this has come true for me.

The more I get to know, the more I realise I know very little. As I get older I realise more and more how deep the mysteries of life death and spiritual truths are. Only someone very spiritually proud, will IMO come across as knowing a lot "for sure", one of my "problems" with some of the very sweet moderators on the Pulse. They claim to know a lot. But do they really know or do they assume.

Regards Mustardseed

[TheSeeker]

Hello Mustardseed.  I'm not sure if I said I will only accept 'knowing', because I will also except 'not knowing'.

And yes, experiences can be deceiving.  I could be sitting in a mental hospital right now in a straight jacket imagining myself typing on the computer at work.  But, at some point you have to draw the line and say "I know".  I know I'm at work right now in the physical.  If I'm not, then oh well, I'm crazy and no one is reading this post anyway [].

I do not claim to know a lot about the truth of existence.  I listed two things 'I know', these are things that I experienced.  I only "know" what I experienced, and perhaps in the end, all I really know is what I experienced, whether or not those experiences explain anything is another question.

[PyroPsion69]

I don't like the idea of faith so much. For me, faith sounds a lot like a bunch of sheeple (sheep people - people who always follow the bandwagon) buying into propaganda because they want to be "saved." People don't know what to think about religion, so they will believe anything they are told, instead of questioning their existance and the validity and logic of their religion. [feels rant coming on]

First is the heaven/hell thing. According to Christian theory, souls are created and brought to this Earth and encarnated as humans. After a life of 0-100 years depending on anything, they die, and are judged, and depending on how they "contributed" are either put in eternal bliss forever or damned for the rest of time. First, where do all these new souls come from, and what is the point of just sticking them on the eternal plane forever? People have argued with me that since God is all powerful he can put as many people in a place as he wants, its infinite. But I think God is a lot more logical than people give Him/Her credit for. What makes more sense if you think about it is a progression of spirits, from a lower/underworld/hell, to the next plane (this physical), to the astral, then up to the eternal plane, and you can move up and down. I think there is also a very good possibility that there are other worlds you might be incarnated to. But do people stop and think about this? No, they believe the first thing they are told.

For things you believe, the most inportant thing is experience, because only experience can begin to verify something as true. When you can't experience it first thing, the next best thing is to think though it, rather than believe anything you are told.

[Mustardseed]

[First is the heaven/hell thing. According to Christian theory, souls are created and brought to this Earth and encarnated as humans. After a life of 0-100 years depending on anything, they die, and are judged, and depending on how they "contributed" are either put in eternal bliss forever or damned for the rest of time.]

That is not entirely correct.It is not as simple as that. The teachings in the Bible are often very different from the teachings of the churches. It would seem that this level of human existance is the first level man in Born into. Actually it might be the second as some verses indicate a pre existence in the Spirit or higher astral levels. However when this life starts we are here to learn some very important things for our soul. They seem to vary for each individual but it is always involving the ability to and understanding of the concept of Free will. some make the right choices and reap the rewards and some do not and also reap. It is a bit like a school.


[First, where do all these new souls come from]

From God

[and what is the point of just sticking them on the eternal plane forever?]

The eternal plane as you call it has many thousands of levels and worlds so to speak and the point is to learn.]

[But do people stop and think about this? No, they believe the first thing they are told]

I think you do not give enough credit to people. Many question and seek and look around. This is the narrow path the Bible speaks of. At some point in life I am sure you believed in simpler thinks but you also evolve in your understanding.

[For things you believe, the most inportant thing is experience, because only experience can begin to verify something as true. When you can't experience it first thing, the next best thing is to think though it, rather than believe anything you are told.]

Yes that would be good ways of learning I agree. I would not be so hasty to judge Christianity though. It has a lot of mystical sides to it, all to be believed by faith. Churches and religious hypocrites you have always with you but do not make them your point of focus , this is humanity for you.

I think it was the famous historian Toynbee said : there is nothing wrong with Christianity the only problem is so few ever tried it.

[TheSeeker]

This is something I'm running across more and more in my life, or maybe I'm just starting to pick up on it.  People feel the need or whatever it is, to choose on any given topic, to believe or disbelieve.

Take christianity in my case.  I don't know much about christianity, even if I read the bible, I will only have read a book, I will not 'know' anything.  Now, if after, or prior to, reading that book, I had religous experiences that confirmed the bible.  I could then say I 'know' the bible to be true.  But, I don't personally think it's as black and white as that, but the truth is, I don't know.

My name on these boards is TheSeeker, because I seek to know, I seek to experience, I do not seek to believe.  From experiences I've had, I know I have a 'soul', I know we're all one, because I've experienced this.  I cannot convince anyone of this, nor do I care to, because I know, and your belief or disbelief is unimportant to me.  

I suppose there is one belief I do have, and that is that the truth lies within each and every one of us, that truth is there regardless of what knowledge I have acquired and what books I've read.

I am not calling anyone out, or any group out, I just wished to discuss this, and to hear some other opinions on it.