Brainwashing

[Gretchen]

This thought occurred to me over the past days after reading about several articles on religion and misinterpretation and the like, so I did a search here on brainwashing, and the only reference I found was a comment made by David Quinn summing up his opinion on an article on Satanism, as follows:

This in itself wouldn't be too bad, but the belief-system itself isn't even remotely original. It's just a word-for-word regurgitation of standard postmodern dogma, which, funnily enough, just happens to permeate our entire culture. Even Oprah Winfrey would give it the big thumbs up. Looking at it just makes me want to vomit.

Is this the best you have to offer? A mindless regurgitation of what society already tries to brainwash us into believing?

I can only base my opinion on past experience as the Catholics do begin their training of children at a very young age. Catholic theology is taught the moment they walk into a private school and is required every day for the 12+ years they attend school.

I found a definition on the web of brainwashing:

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes.

In the paper yesterday, was a discussion of the Pope's academic discussion of Islam with various religious leaders explaining what was truly meant. I do not wish to go off into the Pope issue, but one religious leader stated that no religion should use its means to assist others in worshipping the religion itself, but God.

David Quinn hits the nail on the head when he makes the statement that society brainwashes others to believe a certain way rather than the truth.

As an aside, in running across other interesting sites, I read about Shamans who, although I am very unstudied at the idea, seem to follow this type of procedure to "heal" others.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I found a definition on the web of brainwashing:

Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes.

Apart from the debatable aspect of force, all religious and spiritual teachings are a form of brain-washing. The only thing that sets one apart from the other is the clarity of the water.

However to know what is 'clear' water, a brain must be washed first.

This leads to a catch-22 famously phrased by Jesus as: "You see the mote which is in your brother's eye; but you do not see the beam which is in your own eye. When you cast out the beam from your own eye, then you will see clearly to cast out the mote from your brother's eye".

[Matt Gregory]

I can see your point, Diebert, but I've never seen that word used with any positive connotations. Usually "brainwashing" means washing oneself of any brains one may have so some scripts can be installed.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I can see your point, Diebert, but I've never seen that word used with any positive connotations. Usually "brainwashing" means washing oneself of any brains one may have so some scripts can be installed.

Yes, of course, I'm aware of its usage.

But it's really not hard to see it's typical one of these words where it depends on if we value this person's basic convictions and attitudes to begin with, to want to protect them from destruction. Think about so-called 'deprogrammers' to save cult members. And it depends which scripts one values, if one wants them to see installed or not.

The word is basically a moral term, and that was my point.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I've heard it used in contexts before to point out the lack of connotation that it should have.

[Dan Rowden]

Passthrough noted:

I can only base my opinion on past experience as the Catholics do begin their training of children at a very young age. Catholic theology is taught the moment they walk into a private school and is required every day for the 12+ years they attend school.

Very true, but that's reflected in all religious settings. And, really, it's true in almost all non-religous settings as well, though arguably the non-religous ones encourage some measure of individuality and freedom of thought (but always within the parameters of desired social outcomes and values). But early stage brainwashing doesn't come much scarier than this: Jesus Camp


Dan Rowden

[Matt Gregory]

Diebert wrote:

Yes, of course, I'm aware of its usage.

But it's really not hard to see it's typical one of these words where it depends on if we value this person's basic convictions and attitudes to begin with, to want to protect them from destruction. Think about so-called 'deprogrammers' to save cult members. And it depends which scripts one values, if one wants them to see installed or not.

The word is basically a moral term, and that was my point.

It's just that I've always thought of the "wash" in "brainwashing" as more of a flushing type of "wash" rather than the cleaning type. I think the opposite of "brainwashing" would just be called "learning".

Yeah, it's definitely a moral term, that's what's so useful about it. You can say "Hey, you're brainwashing those poor children" and that one word makes it sound like something really bad.

I'm not nitpicking for the sake of it, I just think language is interesting.

[Gretchen]

George Weigel wrote an interesting article today: The Pope was Right. In the article he validated three important points the Pope was trying to make, one of which I have been hoping to see to fruition myself, as follows:

The pope's third point — which has been almost entirely ignored — was directed to the West. If the West's high culture keeps playing in the sandbox of postmodern irrationalism — in which there is "your truth" and "my truth" but nothing such as "the truth" — the West will be unable to defend itself. Why? Because the West won't be able to give reasons why its commitments to civility, tolerance, human rights and the rule of law are worth defending. A Western world stripped of convictions about the truths that make Western civilization possible cannot make a useful contribution to a genuine dialogue of civilizations, for any such dialogue must be based on a shared understanding that human beings can, however imperfectly, come to know the truth of things.

If we can't even get it straight amongst ourselves, how on earth can any reasonable dialogue be opened with other religions? There has to be a middle ground, a truth, a fine line that everyone avoids as if it were death itself. That place is where we should be.

So, here is a question...without religious leaders, would the truth still be revealed to those who truly sought it? Is religious leadership really necessary to bring all or even some people to the truth...or is it a dangerous minefield? There is an old saying, you can drag a horse to water but you can't make him drink. So, it would seem logical that of all who attend church, not all really seek the truth, they are there because it is what is expected, some even go so far as to delude themselves into the fact that if they follow this check-off list they will be free. How can so many be in this group or am I just a deranged former member of an organized religion?

I must say that I am thrilled to read Weigel's interpretation of what the Pope meant because it seems that he understands the nature of the beast. I will still continue to search for that religious leader that does not espouse the brainwashing of their own dogma. The Garden of Eden "was" a one time offer, wasn't it? *smile*

[Rhett]

.

If we can't even get it straight amongst ourselves, how on earth can any reasonable dialogue be opened with other religions? There has to be a middle ground, a truth, a fine line that everyone avoids as if it were death itself. That place is where we should be.

There may come a day where all kinds of leaders come to the Genius Forum to expand their understanding. Lets hope they develop the sense to do so.


.

[Tharan]

So, here is a question...without religious leaders, would the truth still be revealed to those who truly sought it? Is religious leadership really necessary to bring all or even some people to the truth...or is it a dangerous minefield? There is an old saying, you can drag a horse to water but you can't make him drink. So, it would seem logical that of all who attend church, not all really seek the truth, they are there because it is what is expected, some even go so far as to delude themselves into the fact that if they follow this check-off list they will be free. How can so many be in this group or am I just a deranged former member of an organized religion?

With or without religious leaders, the truth is revealed to those who truly seek it. Those who follow, find the messenger, with all his or her flaws.

We are always alone. Always have been, always will be, regardless of your feelings. Seeking communal experiences with what is essentially only yourself, is merely an attempt to hide the Abyss from your eyes. But an Abyss is not necessarily bad. Once understood, it seems silly to fear it. It is always there and here. Join it.

And then many things begin to change, such as individuals waking up and leave their organized religion. Not out of malice. It simply no longer has utility. They sense freedom.

[Nick]

But early stage brainwashing doesn't come much scarier than this: Jesus Camp

Yeah, that shit's scary as hell. It's just as bad as the muslim terrorist camps if you ask me. Who knows what crazy ideas those kids are gonna have when they get older. They're having a special on Jesus Camp on NBC tonight here in the states. I'm gonna have to catch that.

[NLPRN]

I think in addition to religion, wouldn't blindly accepting the expected rules within a society in-general be considered a variation of brainwashing? I am not speaking of universal expectations (i.e. don't steal from or kill another without provocation etc.) found in most societies.

Excluding independent minds with the insight and courage to peacefully co-exist with their neighbor using their own initiative, isn't many an average so-called "good citizen" of any society often little more than a parrot? Told what, when and how to behave and believe by its societal standards. There may not be a direct-link of force but if one doesn't "fit in", there is often the looming specter of persecution. Whether the perceived threat is real or simply accepted by the individual, the ramifications could have significant effects on quality of life.

[sue hindmarsh]

Being easily “brainwashed” has been an important evolutionary tool in human development. For without the pliability of young children's brains making it easy for them to accept what adults tell them - they wouldn't learn anything. These gullible little ones readily take on the mores and morals of their society. They also absorb the sense of responsibility to pass on to the next generation these same ideas – thereby ensuring that the religion and culture of their society continues.

From this, we can see that society is really just comprised of young children and older children ('adults') who have melded into lives that the children that came before them lived, and the children that came before them lived, and the children...

So no wonder it is difficult to break this cycle – children of all ages don’t like change, and violently try to halt it. But if you do happen to break free, and truly ‘grow-up’, you are naturally going to be considered “dangerous” by these children, for now you are not like them - you are a “stranger”.

-

Not that this happens very often. Most people enjoy remaining as a child, because then they can just live life, and not have to think about it.

-
Sue

[Carl G]

Generally humans are hard to teach, easy to program.

[Gretchen]

So no wonder it is difficult to break this cycle – children of all ages don’t like change, and violently try to halt it. But if you do happen to break free, and truly ‘grow-up’, you are naturally going to be considered “dangerous” by these children, for now you are not like them - you are a “stranger”.

-

Not that this happens very often. Most people enjoy remaining as a child, because then they can just live life, and not have to think about it.

However, just in my personal experience with my young adult daughter, it seems that children, given a long tether, break free to "find" what they believe by associating with people who are contrary to every belief, value, moral in which they grew up. I have found, however, that she is coming to realize and understand why I did what I felt like I had to do. In going through this process, however, I began to question many of my own rooted notions of my belief system, finding my way here.

In some ways, you kind of answered my dilemma in other threads, in your comment that you do become a stranger to those "children".

And then many things begin to change, such as individuals waking up and leave their organized religion. Not out of malice. It simply no longer has utility. They sense freedom.

But freedom has it's price - the "Abyss". It can be likened to the story of Lot and his family fleeing Sodom and Gomarrah...you have this tendency to be the wife sometimes, but we all know what happened to her.

I think in addition to religion, wouldn't blindly accepting the expected rules within a society in-general be considered a variation of brainwashing? I am not speaking of universal expectations (i.e. don't steal from or kill another without provocation etc.) found in most societies.

I would tend to agree. We live in a neighborhood of people that have adopted a certain lifestyle, many of whom feel they are above the law because of their family name and social status. We moved here because it was close to our daughter's school, but it is almost Stepford. Thankfully, my husband and I are loners and don't need the comforts of the neighbors' company, but it is an interesting study in human nature.

Some of the children of these pillars of the community are now finding their way into federal prisons because they tried to live a life that they could not sustain through their own means. They pilfered through their inheritance in order to maintain this Stepford way of life...and the wives are even scarier. You eat in a local restaurant here and see the parade of them coming through and they all behave the same, look the same and have their children in the perfect clothes with their hair perfectly coiffed. The most complicated thought they have for the day, is should I join the Junior League or go to the Country Club for lunch.

Certainly, no one should be allowed to let their pets out of the house without a leash lest they might bite one of them or their children, but should you decide to take a jog one night while they are allowing their ever so large dogs jaunt freely in the yard and one takes off after your heel, they feel it is your fault for having teased the dog.

Then you understand why their children are future jail bait.

[Tomas]

1. Raised in a Lutheran cult (culture) and it's still imprinted certain messages "they" want implanted, they still there. Instance: Romans 6:23 ... For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Another is: 1st John 1:9 ... If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us of our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Yeah, things are gonna be soooo cool when the son of Light comes back with that terrible, swift sword-a-swingin' here and there. By crackey, the beheadings will multiply tenfold... you think the Muslims like to lop the hands of thieves? well, you just wait! human sacrifice and animal sacrifice will be a cookin' in ol' Jew-rue-salem.

Damn infidels of every religious persuasion!!

Better get right with Jesus before it's too late. Lest the Pope Rat-Zinger sics his old pals, the Nazi comrades, after your virgin rear-end for an old-fashioned reaming. A little torture does the body good and helps in the confession booth in case of the Alzheimer's moment. Every jot and tittle will be remembered - answer the question!

Brainwashing - what a beautiful thing :-)

ps- John 11:35 ... Jesus wept.



Tomas (the tank)
Vietnam veteran - 1971

[sue hindmarsh]

passthrough wrote:

I wrote: So no wonder it is difficult to break this cycle – children of all ages don’t like change, and violently try to halt it. But if you do happen to break free, and truly ‘grow-up’, you are naturally going to be considered “dangerous” by these children, for now you are not like them - you are a “stranger”.

-

Not that this happens very often. Most people enjoy remaining as a child, because then they can just live life, and not have to think about it.

However, just in my personal experience with my young adult daughter, it seems that children, given a long tether, break free to "find" what they believe by associating with people who are contrary to every belief, value, moral in which they grew up. I have found, however, that she is coming to realize and understand why I did what I felt like I had to do. In going through this process, however, I began to question many of my own rooted notions of my belief system, finding my way here.

My use of the term ‘to grow-up’ is, I think, very different to your concept of ‘breaking free’. I’ve used it to signify a full-frontal attack on the ego, whereas I think you’re talking about a sideways movement of casting aside one set of superficial attachments to replace them with another set of equally superficial attachments – which appeases the ego. For example: some children brought up in families that value Conservation and Buddhism may, in their late teens, decide that both of these are “insane” and instead take up Materialism and Christianity to live by. They then mature into these values, and later on induct their own children into them.

Bucking at the system, or at your parent’s set of values, happens quite regularly in all societies, but rarely does it lead the individuals involved to deeply question such things as the veracity of love and coupling, or the existence of the self, or the nature of consciousness. It is this type of questioning that signifies a dramatic maturing in the thinking of an individual, for these questions challenge the ego at its very roots.

In some ways, you kind of answered my dilemma in other threads, in your comment that you do become a stranger to those "children".

Shared attachments to lies are the gel that keeps our society churning on. Questioning one of those attachments, such as ‘love’, automatically places you outside of society. You become ‘dangerous’ and a ‘stranger’ because you’ve stopped accepting and maintaining those lies.

-
Sue

[Gretchen]

Sue, perhaps you are correct about my concepts and thinking.

The other day I had a conversation with a guy at work who was discussing his church with me. I explained to him that church and preachers did not seem to, as Tharan put it so succinctly, have any utility for me anymore. He talked me into attending a “Growth Group” on Sunday (tomorrow) evening, all the while stating that he thought I would truly appreciate their pastor. He was surprised that the congregation (Church of Christ) even allowed the guy to stay on because of his “views” of Biblical translation. He further went on to state that the purpose of the “Growth Group” was to allow people the opportunity to “see” the church in action without actually having to attend church. After discussing some bits of philosophy with him, he was certain that I would be happy here. I decided to do a little research on this church before I attended this “Growth Group” on Sunday. As I suspected, nothing is new under the sun.

I am a Christian and I may never mature beyond that point. Frankly, I'm not sure I want to, but in Hebrews 8:

I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.

So here is where these churches seemed to have gone astray to me.

The Pharisees questioned Jesus about the wife who was shared amongst seven brothers, each of whom dies, leaving the woman to the next brother in line. They asked which brother would she be married to in Heaven. He answered: “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

Here, there is a separateness of physical with spiritual…(consciousness?)

And in Luke 17: "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

And, here, appears the Totality of all things.

So, what is the nature of consciousness? If I am part of a whole, then why am I not conscious of what was before my physical nature appeared and what is to become of consciousness after my physical nature rots in the ground? It is almost unanswerable to me because either my “brain” was “washed” or I am not at a point to really conceive of something I can only experience upon death…before that time, I cannot see what there is to discuss other than to stare into this "Abyss" confused.

Such is my dilemma and why I am here. If I said these things at this “Growth Group” they would think me bizarre based on their beliefs written on their website. They believe that it necessary to help others come to “know the Lord”. How can they do something that God has already done?

[sue hindmarsh]

passthrough wrote:

Sue, perhaps you are correct about my concepts and thinking.

You don’t know for sure?

The other day I had a conversation with a guy at work who was discussing his church with me. I explained to him that church and preachers did not seem to, as Tharan put it so succinctly, have any utility for me anymore. He talked me into attending a “Growth Group” on Sunday (tomorrow) evening, all the while stating that he thought I would truly appreciate their pastor. He was surprised that the congregation (Church of Christ) even allowed the guy to stay on because of his “views” of Biblical translation. He further went on to state that the purpose of the “Growth Group” was to allow people the opportunity to “see” the church in action without actually having to attend church. After discussing some bits of philosophy with him, he was certain that I would be happy here. I decided to do a little research on this church before I attended this “Growth Group” on Sunday. As I suspected, nothing is new under the sun.

It comes down to you making up your mind about what you value more – truth, or lies.

I am a Christian and I may never mature beyond that point. Frankly, I'm not sure I want to,

Yes, it is impossible to breathe the fresh air of the mountain tops when you are shut up in a cave down in the valley.

but in Hebrews 8:

I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.

Christians correctly slot into the “least” category, along with the other morons.

Christians have had over two thousand years to work out God – I think that is long enough. All they have done is used Him to pleasure themselves, and in so doing, they have made Him absurd. I therefore suggest that all Christians should be forbidden to speak of Him, or use His book ever again. They can keep their churches and rituals, but they’ll have to find some other dildo to ride on.

So here is where these churches seemed to have gone astray to me.

The Pharisees questioned Jesus about the wife who was shared amongst seven brothers, each of whom dies, leaving the woman to the next brother in line. They asked which brother would she be married to in Heaven. He answered: “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

Here, there is a separateness of physical with spiritual…(consciousness?)

You think so?

And in Luke 17: "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

And, here, appears the Totality of all things.

How did you come to that conclusion?

So, what is the nature of consciousness?

It is the nature of God.

If I am part of a whole, then why am I not conscious of what was before my physical nature appeared and what is to become of consciousness after my physical nature rots in the ground?

You have thought thus far – continue on.

It is almost unanswerable to me because either my “brain” was “washed” or I am not at a point to really conceive of something I can only experience upon death…before that time, I cannot see what there is to discuss other than to stare into this "Abyss" confused.

If you really were hell bent on understanding Reality you’d not be sitting “staring” – you’d be whipping your mind into action to find the answers.

Such is my dilemma and why I am here. If I said these things at this “Growth Group” they would think me bizarre based on their beliefs written on their website. They believe that it necessary to help others come to “know the Lord”. How can they do something that God has already done?

In that case, all that's left to do is beat and bludgeon God into giving up his secrets to you!

-
Sue

[Gretchen]

If you really were hell bent on understanding Reality you’d not be sitting “staring” – you’d be whipping your mind into action to find the answers.

Sue, were you always a thinker or did you have a past from whence you came where people, parents/guardians/teachers primarily, influenced or tried to influence your beliefs and thoughts...and then become a thinker? (ed. note, this is not a snappy response but a straight question)

I know your answer will have no relevance to my being a lazy thinker, but I am just wondering if you have been in this place where I am right now, and in your understanding of that place, know that I am being lazy vs confused. I haven't quite seen you as the teacher, you don't want to influence, and yet you seem to know the problem enough to point it out.

In that case, all that's left to do is beat and bludgeon God into giving up his secrets to you!

Obviously, this method hasn't proved successful to date. What it leaves me with is that I exist, for whatever reason, and that I have been placed by that same reason where I am to do the very best that I can with what has been given to me...it seems any other thinking beyond this is pure guessing game. The reason being God and the place His Kingdom...the revelation of which is here.

You also mentioned something about the veracity of love. This is supposed to be the quintessential element of this Kingdom, and yet it is always tainted.

I have a problem with love in that it comes with too many strings...people think too much and put too much into it that doesn't belong. I have been just as guilty in my past of such strings - it is intrinsically a part of the physical being that is hard to cut, but needs to be hacksawed...I believe you call these "attachments". I am getting to the point where I at least understand this much.

Love surpasses all the crap in life, or should. It should be as much a part of being that angel that Jesus spoke of as the Kingdom itself being of God. Love should be without condition, just there.

Ascent into Carmel
St. John of the Cross

So he that journeys on the road and makes the ascent to God must needs be habitually careful to quell and mortify the desires; and the greater the speed wherewith a soul does this, the sooner will it reach the end of its journey. Until these be quelled, it cannot reach the end, however much it practise the virtues, since it is unable to attain to perfection in them; for this perfection consists in voiding and stripping and purifying the soul of every desire.

[sue hindmarsh]

passthrough wrote:

Sue, were you always a thinker or did you have a past from whence you came where people, parents/guardians/teachers primarily, influenced or tried to influence your beliefs and thoughts...and then become a thinker? (ed. note, this is not a snappy response but a straight question)

I was bought up in an average working class family who held no hard and fast beliefs about anything. This state of affairs obviously didn’t sit right with me for by the age of twelve I had dragged my younger brother to every church on our side of town in a quest to discover the truth about God. Not satisfied by anything any of them said, I took up looking to history and science for answers. Still not satisfied, I stopped asking questions and instead adopted a thoroughly hedonistic lifestyle. This kept me occupied for some time, that is, until I chanced on David Quinn. Through him, I was introduced to the work of Kevin Solway, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Lao Zhu. From that meeting, I once again began looking for the answers to my earlier questions. In the past couple of decades I’ve slowly but steadily made some progress at answering some of them.

I know your answer will have no relevance to my being a lazy thinker, but I am just wondering if you have been in this place where I am right now, and in your understanding of that place, know that I am being lazy vs confused. I haven't quite seen you as the teacher, you don't want to influence, and yet you seem to know the problem enough to point it out.

It is really impossible for me to judge where you’re at, because I’m not sure what your goal is. All I can say is that if your goal is to understand God, then all you need do is apply your mind to that task. But if, as you say, you might want to remain in your Christian mindset – then I am quite sure that the chances of you having a relationship with God will remain extremely low.

Sue: In that case, all that's left to do is beat and bludgeon God into giving up his secrets to you!

Obviously, this method hasn't proved successful to date. What it leaves me with is that I exist, for whatever reason, and that I have been placed by that same reason where I am to do the very best that I can with what has been given to me...it seems any other thinking beyond this is pure guessing game. The reason being God and the place His Kingdom...the revelation of which is here.

Whilst you remain ignorant of God's nature you cannot judge whether or not you are doing your "best". Acting through that ignorance, you could be causing untold suffering and misery to all around you. Best to first know God, then act.

You also mentioned something about the veracity of love. This is supposed to be the quintessential element of this Kingdom, and yet it is always tainted.

What do you mean by "tainted"?

I have a problem with love in that it comes with too many strings...people think too much and put too much into it that doesn't belong. I have been just as guilty in my past of such strings - it is intrinsically a part of the physical being that is hard to cut, but needs to be hacksawed...I believe you call these "attachments". I am getting to the point where I at least understand this much.

Yes, being heavily laden by attachments is the basis for all suffering and despair. This suffering, along with wanting to escape it, keeps most people well and truly occupied. Thus occupied, their minds are constantly distracted, which then makes it extremely difficult, if not entirely impossible, for them to think. And not being able to concentrate all your effort into thinking about God means that he will remain a mystery to you.

Love surpasses all the crap in life, or should. It should be as much a part of being that angel that Jesus spoke of as the Kingdom itself being of God. Love should be without condition, just there.

Can “love”, or anything else for that matter, really be "unconditional"?

Ascent into Carmel
St. John of the Cross

“So he that journeys on the road and makes the ascent to God must needs be habitually careful to quell and mortify the desires; and the greater the speed wherewith a soul does this, the sooner will it reach the end of its journey. Until these be quelled, it cannot reach the end, however much it practise the virtues, since it is unable to attain to perfection in them; for this perfection consists in voiding and stripping and purifying the soul of every desire.”

What do you think this quote means? Do you think "desire" has anything to do with love?

-
Sue

[Gretchen]

Can “love”, or anything else for that matter, really be "unconditional"?

It would seem only possible from the Original Source because once given it is then adulterated into striations of types and sub-types (“tainted”), which is why there will never be a true utopian society or even enlightenment unless there is an intervention.

Quote:
Ascent into Carmel
St. John of the Cross

“So he that journeys on the road and makes the ascent to God must needs be habitually careful to quell and mortify the desires; and the greater the speed wherewith a soul does this, the sooner will it reach the end of its journey. Until these be quelled, it cannot reach the end, however much it practise the virtues, since it is unable to attain to perfection in them; for this perfection consists in voiding and stripping and purifying the soul of every desire.”


What do you think this quote means? Do you think "desire" has anything to do with love?

Desire can be anything that can cause you to be distracted from focusing on God. I think the bottom line to this quote is that you cannot serve two masters, which is a prevalent theme in the Gospels. It also shows that by good works alone you will not achieve perfection because you are doing these works to serve your own purpose.

C.S. Lewis once said something to the effect that there are two people, one of a cheerful disposition who did not believe in God and another who was acerbic but did believe. He posed the question how much more cheerful would the first one be had he believed and how much worse off the other would be for not.

I have not even read through the first chapter of The Ascent. Like David Quinn’s piece, it is a lot to digest and I must read it in small doses, however, I have a comment…

The man is very logical in his argument and how he relates his argument with his translation of various Biblical passages, in fact, his logic gives cohesive meaning to the Bible. He was a Carmelite and led an extraordinary and difficult life. But the use of detachment does not make sense in ordinary life. I know you guys talk about attachments and the need to be rid of them, and what you say seems in line with where he is headed thus far, but here is the catch,

Does union with God, Enlightenment, go against nature itself? The desire and/or attachment a male has for a female creates yet another attachment in the form of a child, who then is not only their attachment but creates the circumstances for it to be attached to them…at least until they are independent, if that ever happens.

If you had pure detachment WITHOUT this unconditional love, would it not lend itself to some sort of dystopian society similar to that in the novel by Lois Lowry, The Giver. What is the point of being born if not into immediate attachment? In order to realize that this is what you should NOT want if you desire God? From where do we originate, some alternate state of being? If it was not in the natural order for there to exist attachments other than to God, why procreation? The fictional story of Adam and Eve would seem to lend an explanation for how beings come back to the realization that their first and only attachment should be to God, but then we are living in an alternate reality, are we not? You may call it delusion if you wish. Heaven would then be the antithesis, pure detachment and unconditional love.

God has to have a fingerprint on the human somewhere, and in Hebrews it is clear…No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. Even you, who were not immersed into the idea from birth, found your way there…more incredibly the desire (*smile*) was there at your very young age of 12, when some kids don’t even come close as they are going through confirmation in the church.

The only problem comes in when that knowledge becomes clouded by attachment and desire, but that pretty much begins at birth, no? It’s like if you’re not careful you’ll miss the parade.

What you guys seem to make easy for you is most difficult for me. To let go of your child who is grown has been most difficult…I can see the point, I can understand the why, and you can even still love, but severing the connector, the thread has been difficult. To make matters worse, that is just one of many. When you read what St. John opines as necessary to begin to communicate with God, it is almost depressing contemplating the mess you have gotten yourself into since day one. How do you unravel it all?

Thus occupied, their minds are constantly distracted, which then makes it extremely difficult, if not entirely impossible, for them to think. And not being able to concentrate all your effort into thinking about God means that he will remain a mystery to you.

This forum is called the “Thinking Man’s Minefield” The word “thinker” is often used in connection with experience with Reality. To think, to me, means to use your senses, your brain to understand about Reality. I truly believe that there is some fingerprint somewhere, like a homing device that you can either listen to or ignore…and thinking would be only a portion of how you come to understand and know God. Like an instinct, a craving, a need almost as base as the need to eat to live. It would also seem plausible that communication would be not one-sided either.

I had a mass cut out of my head behind my ear last year. I am headed for the doctor shortly to see if it has come back. In the interim, I am afflicted with an illness that they are not sure of the cause. It could be Meniere’s Disease or migraine variants, but the symptoms can include a migraine headache but the attacks are followed by severe vertigo and nausea. Medication can be taken at the onset of the attacks, but it sometimes works and sometimes does not work. The only thing that does work is to lie perfectly still and focus on an object or close your eyes, sometimes for hours. You cannot go to sleep because of the intense nausea.

Until I can get this under control, I would like to use these situations to really focus on clearing my mind, on trying to unravel the mess in my head, and focus on God, but how to begin? I am hoping that St. John’s work will eventually lead to an answer. And, as you say you have found some of the answers, how did you begin? By reading? I am working on that one, but I am trying to stay within the context of my education. It seems almost pointless for me to make sense of Buddhism or Tao or any other philosophical leaning at this stage of the game because I don't think that it is going to take certain philosophies to find God, but an inner search of some kind...to find that fingerprint, the mustard seed, the pearl...