pamu wrote:Nowadays I do not take anybodys "understanding" of spiritual things too seriously.
Good for you, I would say, at last..."Have courage to use your own "understanding"... for reaching enlightenment, like the german philosopher Immanuel Kant would say.
http://www.eserver.org/philosophy/Kant/ ... enment.txt as he has written in this essay in 1784.
"Enlightenment is men´s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use ones´s own understanding without the guidance of another"...to this I would like to add, that to take the helping hand of someone else in this regard, is not allways bad, but finally, I think one has to stay on ones own bottom or feet, or mature understanding of ones spiritual self and ones relationship with others around us, and the Supreme as well, or what is your opinion? At ones last breath at the end of ones life, men is all on his own, although I think one could surely feel or be aware at that time, of the presents of someOne dear to him, if one has cultivated that awareness and ability to love and perceive that transcendental and Divine Person, also during ones lifetime.
Immanuel Kant continues: "There is more chance of an entire public enlightening itself. This is indeed almost inevitable, if only the public concerned is left in freedom. For there will allways be a few who... think for themselves, even among those appointed as "guardians" of the common mess. Such guardians, once they have themselves thrown off the yoke of immaturity,
will disseminate the spirit of rational respect for personal value and for the duty of all man...to think for themselves.
The remarcable thing about this is that if the public, which was previously put under the yoke by the guardians, is suitably stirred up by some of the latter who are incapable of enlightenment, it may subsequently compel the guardians themselves to remain under the yoke. For it is very harmfull to propagate prejudices, because they finaly avenge themselves on the very people who first encouraged them (or whose predecesors did so) For enlightenment of this kind, all that is needed is freedom. And the freedom in question, is the most innocuous form of all freedom to make public use of one´s reason in all matters."
.....to this I would like to add the writing I received recently from someone I know since many years. That person wrote to me: "We received the spiritual knowledge via the transparent medium of Srila Prabhupada, who is for us the founder acarya. Every guru receives the power to be guru from the founder acarya. Krsna liberates all those who are followers of His representative, and that reprezentative of Krsna for us was surely Prabhupada. Therefore it is important that we understand the teachings of Prabhupada and be faithfull to him. The teachings of other acaryas of the past, must be understood through understanding the instructions given of the founder acarya.
At the same time Prabhupada should not be imitated because he is special due to the teachings he gave to us and his spiritual realizations. He must be followed with a proper discrimination as Prabhupada himself would have liked it to be so.." end of quotation.
I must say by reading this, I could understand Kant much better and what he meant by writing "to remain under the yoke of immaturity..." in ones spirital understanding of things, I would like to add to this. But thats the personal opinion and understanding of the way to make spiritual progress towards that, our common spiritual goal and understanding in life, of the person, from whose message to me, I quoted above, and her own right to believe, that that would be the best, and only approach relating to this. I respect that.
Although I personally would have some doubts, if the Supreme Lord would indeed prefer, that one should have and develop only this kind of "mechanistic" approach towards the right understanding and realization of Him and ones own growing spiritual awareness in life, like Abraham H. Maslow the great american psychologist and psychoanalyst would say, and was describing in his book "Motivation and Personality". To me according to the experience and realizations I made in my life, I find there can be also another approach towards this, which seems to be more reasonable, and more practical as well, in this regard. What kind of approach that is? Well, I would say read the book I mentioned above, and you will be surprised of the deep understanding one can gain about this issue by reading it. It has something to do with seeing things in a more broader, more universal and humanistic way, directed towards the desired outcome of things and not only in this kind of mechanical way of approaching everything in life, even on the spiritual plain as if everything would function only as a kind of machine. And when the parts of this "machine" would not seize well or gear into each other in the way it should be, the whole "machine" would not "run or function well" in "producing" the desired outcome. It´s for me hard to imagine or think about, that the Absolute One, the Supreme, would be only a kind of "mechanical force" to Which or to Whom one has to subdue or submit only in this kind of "mechanistic" fashion. Who can love a "machine" or can a "machine" reciprocate or reply to ones love and personal nearness? Very unlikely, that this would or should have ever happened to someone...
The book appeared for the first time in 1954 by Harper and Row, Publishers, New York but I am sure it is now still available on the book market, like it was in Germany until recently.
Open up your mind and heart to new experiences of consciousness.
dear Pamu what is actually your real name? We just meet somehow in cyberspace with our messages. Nice to meet you again. Indeed some interesting questions you asked, I have at that time also no answer to them to offer.
