• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Did Rumi Know?

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
“I searched for God and found only myself. I searched for myself and found only God.” - Rumi


John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
Interesting. For what it's worth, that's a strange paraphrase of John 1:18.

The text of the original says:

θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε [;]
God no-one has-seen ever-yet;

μονογενὴς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς
only-son who is in the bosom of-the father

ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο
that has-explained.

Texts that add θεὸς after μονογενὴς (so reading 'only-son god' as in your quote) represent a later theology in which Jesus is being declared a god; that is, the extra word is a later Trinitarian gloss.
 
Last edited:

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
That's a strange paraphrase of John 1:18.

The text of the original says:

θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε [;]
God no-one has-seen ever-yet;

μονογενὴς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς
only-son who is in the bosom of . father

ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο
that has-explained.

Texts that add θεὸς after μονογενὴς (so reading 'only-son god') represent a later theology in which Jesus is being declared a god; so the extra word is a later Trinitarian gloss.
but is it a problem; if man is the image/personification of God?
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
but is it a problem; if man is the image/personification of God?
I see the Abrahamic god as made in man's image; and as society has grown more sophisticated, so there's been a retreat from this beginning ─ first from being a member of the Canaanite pantheon to a monogod to a modern god defined largely by what [he]'s not, and no statement of what [he] actually is, on offer.

Which means that if one engages in introspection, one may find identity between one's self and one's concept of God, but only because one wants to interpret the experience that way ─ an option available to some if they want it.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
In the East, it is common for people to know and acknowledge those who have realized God. Rumi, Shams, Kabir, Ramakrishna, Milarepa and many others are on that list.

In the Bible, as far as I know only Matthew 5:48 expresses this idea of people becoming God - realizing the state of the "Father":
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I see the Abrahamic god as made in man's image; and as society has grown more sophisticated, so there's been a retreat from this beginning ─ first from being a member of the Canaanite pantheon to a monogod to a modern god defined largely by what [he]'s not, and no statement of what [he] actually is, on offer.

Which means that if one engages in introspection, one may find identity between one's self and one's concept of God, but only because one wants to interpret the experience that way ─ an option available to some if they want it.


alan watts in christianity and the myth.


when one becomes self-conscious, or feels divided from something then man falls like adam and eve, like peter trying to walk on the water. when we become aware of self as an aspect of the whole, we raise the kundalini like buddha and the universal mind, like lifting up the serpent in the desert and mankind. if we believe that it can only happen through another as factual and historical truth, we are forever incapable of realizing it for self.

when our countenance is down depressed we see ourselves as alienated from some thing. when we accept the myth, the belief, the theory, we become the personification/realization of that idea/concept. once the two become one there is no illusion of individuation except in form, I AM that i am.

behold i come like a thief, blessed is he who stays awake lest he go like adam & eve and they should realize their shame.

"'If you can'?" said Jesus. "Everything is possible for one who believes."
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"when one becomes self-conscious, or feels divided from something then man falls like adam and eve, like peter trying to walk on the water."
That seems enormously exaggerated to me. Self-consciousness can lead to social awkwardness, and being divided from one's emotional support can require adjustment and rebalancing, but those are familiar phenomena that don't alter the cosmos.
when we become aware of self as an aspect of the whole, we raise the kundalini like buddha and the universal mind
What's 'the universal mind'? If it's universal, why do we need cell phones?
if we believe that it can only happen through another as factual and historical truth, we are forever incapable of realizing it for self.
Since there are only two ways for things to happen, as an aspect of our physical mental processes, and as an aspect of objective reality, that doesn't look like an accurate statement about reality.
"'If you can'?" said Jesus. "Everything is possible for one who believes."
Then either no one has ever believed, or that statement is wrong too.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
In the East, it is common for people to know and acknowledge those who have realized God. Rumi, Shams, Kabir, Ramakrishna, Milarepa and many others are on that list.

In the Bible, as far as I know only Matthew 5:48 expresses this idea of people becoming God - realizing the state of the "Father":
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Vedantic saying is: The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.
...

The problem, I think, is that many begin to claim to have become Brahman, without qualifying. But at another level, at the essence level, there is only Brahman.
 
Last edited:

atanu

Member
Premium Member
That seems enormously exaggerated to me. Self-consciousness can lead to social awkwardness, and being divided from one's emotional support can require adjustment and rebalancing, but those are familiar phenomena that don't alter the cosmos.

The point is more profound. Let me use a metaphor. A wave may be conscious of being only a wave and forget entirely that essentially it is the ocean itself. The world views of a single wave and an ocean are not same.

What's 'the universal mind'? If it's universal, why do we need cell phones?

Because we have assumed separateness.
 
Last edited:

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The worldviews of a single wave and an ocean are not same.
I take it the single wave is the individual and the ocean is the sum of individuals? While we have such phenomena as crowd behavior, social conformity and so on, there is no equivalent of a single entity, the overarching 'sum of all individuals'.
Because we have assumed separateness.
Assumed? I can demonstrate separateness to you if you wish.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I take it the single wave is the individual and the ocean is the sum of individuals? While we have such phenomena as crowd behavior, social conformity and so on, there is no equivalent of a single entity, the overarching 'sum of all individuals'.

How would a wave know the ocean?

Assumed? I can demonstrate separateness to you if you wish.

Waves are separate. That can be demonstrated. No big deal.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
That seems enormously exaggerated to me. Self-consciousness can lead to social awkwardness, and being divided from one's emotional support can require adjustment and rebalancing, but those are familiar phenomena that don't alter the cosmos.
low self-esteem in relation to other can lead to passive-aggressive behavior.


What's 'the universal mind'? If it's universal, why do we need cell phones?
Infinite Intelligence

no-hiding theorem - information cannot be created or destroyed, it's simply transferred at the quantum level

people don't 'need' cell phones. people need mindfulness

Since there are only two ways for things to happen, as an aspect of our physical mental processes, and as an aspect of objective reality, that doesn't look like an accurate statement about reality.
either the belief is assimilated and practiced, or realized; otherwise it's just a tree bearing no fruit, or salt that has lost it's saltiness.

Then either no one has ever believed, or that statement is wrong too.
there are people who believed they were christ, god, buddha.


Mansur al-Hallaj

Rumi

Jesus

Siddhartha Gautama

Sai Baba

et al

and finally you, go on, make a wave.

you're not just a drop in the ocean, you're a mighty ocean in a drop - rumi
 
Last edited:

atanu

Member
Premium Member
A wave knows nothing.

A human knows some things by instinct, and the rest by sensory input.

Ocean-waves model is a metaphor.

Then how is it relevant to assert that we have 'assumed separateness'?

Replace 'assumed' by 'ignorant notion' if you wish. Or replace 'assumed' by 'apparent'.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Infinite Intelligence
That exists only in the imagination. It's not found in reality.
no-hiding theorem - information cannot be created or destroyed, it's simply transferred at the quantum level
I'm skeptical of many things, and the notion of 'information' as something different to 'data' is one of them.
people don't 'need' cell phones. people need mindfulness
The owners of shares in Apple, Samsung, Lenovo and Huawei are solid in disagreeing.

And if there really were a 'universal mind' then we really wouldn't need cell phones.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Ocean-waves model is a metaphor.
And in my view not a helpful one. If I wish to make a clear statement, I make it as well as I can, and use metaphors only for backup.
Replace 'assumed' by 'ignorant notion' if you wish. Or replace 'assumed' by 'apparent'.
You say you understand separateness, and at the same time you assert it doesn't exist.

I regret to report I think that's nonsense. Separateness is built into reality. The only place things that might be called universal are found are in strictly defined notions in physics eg 'the energy of the vacuum', where they're fully automated and anyway aren't accessible at the human scale.
 
Top