Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Yes on different wisdom level it will be truth
-
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!
Truth
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
Yes on different wisdom level it will be truth
Trackdayguy
Speed doesn't kill, it's hitting the wall
If that's true, than are we talking about wisdom, or truth
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Spiritual wisdom is the highest truth there is.
I try not to talk about truth as other then spiritual part of life.
The common things people do in daily life does not interest me that much, but of course there is truth there too. physical world and spiritual world is a bit different.
I try not to talk about truth as other then spiritual part of life.
The common things people do in daily life does not interest me that much, but of course there is truth there too. physical world and spiritual world is a bit different.
Before I potentially go off on something resembling a rant, there's a few things that I think I should ask clarification about first:
- What are "wisdom levels?" How does one level up (obviously by earning at least 1 xp, but aside from that)?
- What is "spiritual wisdom?" How is this different from just "wisdom?"
- How can this "spiritual" wisdom be "higher?" What does that mean and how is it measured?
- What is a "higher standard" of morality? What does that mean and how is it measured?
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
First i have to say this is my understanding, others may see it different.
Wisdom level is maybe not the best word, but the more one cultivate a path and do it right, one start to understand the spiritual "unseen" part of the existance. what non believers would call superstition.
Spiritual wisdom is the wisdom one gain from cultivating a spiritual path again similar to wisdom level.
I use the word higher so it is more easy to understand, but when a person cultivate the spiritual path he/she gain more understanding of the teaching and start to see new information within the same teaching so example if one only study the text/book one time, you understand some, then when you study again and also cultivate the teaching in your daily life your understanding of the spiritual realms start to open to you.
Higher standard of morality is to not do any harm to others or you self, example no stealing, no lies, no jealousy of others. no hate in speach thoughts or action. a lot of this make your morality better "higher"
And it is not New Age it is basic Buddhism
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
I'd be interested to know how you define 'spiritual'. The standard definition is pertaining to or affecting the spirit or soul. For me this begs the question what is this 'spirit' or 'soul' and do you have any verifiable evidence that any such thing actually exists?
Earthling
David Henson
Show me, by link, one single debate that has taken place on these forums in the last 5 years. Just one and I would be surprised.
Ignore the first part of the video which is about abuse, as it has no similarity to anything I may present.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Truth is always in terms of a community of knowers who acknowledge and otherwise support that truth. How can it ever be any other way?
Some truths have much broader implications than others...some truths change outcomes predictably. Some truths enable new achievements in physical reality. Some truths save people's lives. Many don't.
Some truths have much broader implications than others...some truths change outcomes predictably. Some truths enable new achievements in physical reality. Some truths save people's lives. Many don't.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Spirituality means seaking of something bigger then our self, what is not the physical world but a realm we do not see wit our physical eyes.
being spiritual then to me means seeker of what is non physical but exist in other realms
As a Buddhist i do not see soul or spirit as eternal, so if i get reborn in a new life after this life, the person that is me now will not be same next life. but the "life force" in lack f a better word is there. But when we are in human realms we do not see the full truth of what/who we are in other realms. until we become enlighten "enlightenmet is waht buddhist seeks"
being spiritual then to me means seeker of what is non physical but exist in other realms
As a Buddhist i do not see soul or spirit as eternal, so if i get reborn in a new life after this life, the person that is me now will not be same next life. but the "life force" in lack f a better word is there. But when we are in human realms we do not see the full truth of what/who we are in other realms. until we become enlighten "enlightenmet is waht buddhist seeks"
Okay, cool... New Age jargon was not intentional. Some of the way you were talking about stuff sounded New Agey, and it drives me nuts... for reasons that I no longer need to go on a rant about. 
While I'm still not entirely clear on your usage of the word "spiritual" if you mean the "unseen" and in particular the otherworldly, it's certainly true that those who do not work with the otherworlds on a serious basis do not understand reality in the same way as those of us who have. I wouldn't put terms like "higher" to such differences (that word sounds too judgmental to me, as it implies alternatives are "lower" and thus deficient).
Morality strikes me as entirely unrelated to explorations of the "unseen" or occult, otherworldly, whatever you want to call it. Working with the otherworlds might inform one's moral context - you ask questions that others do not, for example - but on the whole, unrelated. I also strongly feel that transforming morality in to some sort of wang measuring contest (e.g., calling some person's standard "higher" and another's "lower") is entirely missing the point. Granted, I reject the construct of morality entirely and focus on virtue ethics so that probably has something to do with it.
While I'm still not entirely clear on your usage of the word "spiritual" if you mean the "unseen" and in particular the otherworldly, it's certainly true that those who do not work with the otherworlds on a serious basis do not understand reality in the same way as those of us who have. I wouldn't put terms like "higher" to such differences (that word sounds too judgmental to me, as it implies alternatives are "lower" and thus deficient).
Morality strikes me as entirely unrelated to explorations of the "unseen" or occult, otherworldly, whatever you want to call it. Working with the otherworlds might inform one's moral context - you ask questions that others do not, for example - but on the whole, unrelated. I also strongly feel that transforming morality in to some sort of wang measuring contest (e.g., calling some person's standard "higher" and another's "lower") is entirely missing the point. Granted, I reject the construct of morality entirely and focus on virtue ethics so that probably has something to do with it.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Okay, cool... New Age jargon was not intentional. Some of the way you were talking about stuff sounded New Agey, and it drives me nuts... for reasons that I no longer need to go on a rant about.
While I'm still not entirely clear on your usage of the word "spiritual" if you mean the "unseen" and in particular the otherworldly, it's certainly true that those who do not work with the otherworlds on a serious basis do not understand reality in the same way as those of us who have. I wouldn't put terms like "higher" to such differences (that word sounds too judgmental to me, as it implies alternatives are "lower" and thus deficient).
Morality strikes me as entirely unrelated to explorations of the "unseen" or occult, otherworldly, whatever you want to call it. Working with the otherworlds might inform one's moral context - you ask questions that others do not, for example - but on the whole, unrelated. I also strongly feel that transforming morality in to some sort of wang measuring contest (e.g., calling some person's standard "higher" and another's "lower") is entirely missing the point. Granted, I reject the construct of morality entirely and focus on virtue ethics so that probably has something to do with it.
Actually we are not far from each other in understanding, i might not be the best to explain bcause English is my second language
but when you mention virtue and ethics that at is also a part of good morality then way i understand it 
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The moment we say that truth is relative is the moment we say there is no truth.
It is true that, as the Buddhist story goes, the different blind men perceive different parts of the elephant differently. However, the story assumes there is a real, true elephant.
It is true that, as the Buddhist story goes, the different blind men perceive different parts of the elephant differently. However, the story assumes there is a real, true elephant.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Truth put more in to daily life on earth, and less about the spiritual
there are types of truth: conventional truth (sammuti-sacca) and ultimate truth (paramattha-sacca).
These two types of truth are not exactly the same as relative and absolute truths. Rather than focusing on the universality or specificity of the scope of the truth, they focus on the intrinsicness of the truth - i.e., whether an object agrees with a truth by its inherent nature, or whether it is simply said to agree with it by external convention.
An example of conventional, extrinsic truth is in a fist. When you close your hand, a fist appears, almost by magic. When you open your hand again, the fist disappears. There was never anything intrinsic about the object that made the fist appear; only convention and recognition gave rise to the truth or falsehood of the arising of a fist.
An example of ultimate, intrinsic truth is in the pain felt when a fist connects at high velocity with a face. The fist and the face are only conventional descriptions of the reality, but the pain is intrinsic to the experience and thus said to be ultimately real. Also ultimately real are the vision of the fist coming towards the face, the feeling of the hardness of the fist and the softness of the face, and the sound of the fist connecting with the face.
In brief, conventional reality refers to entities, while ultimate reality refers to the building blocks that make up reality (i.e. experience). So, the entities of fists and faces are conventional, but the sights, sounds, and feelings associated with the experience are ultimate reality.
The importance of this doctrine is in establishing a proper paradigm for understanding reality. Because conventional truths are based on mental formations, they cannot aid in an understanding of reality. A permanent, satisfying, controllable convention can be conceived of, but it will never exist in ultimate reality. By delineating that which exists in ultimate reality, one can limit one's observation to those objects that will provide an understanding of how reality works.
For example, focusing on the concept of food as you eat, you will never come to see the nature of reality as arising and ceasing incessantly, because you are focused on something that is constant (but not really existing) - i.e. the food. As a result, you will easily conceive of it as good or bad, me and mine. If you focus on the experience of tasting and feeling as you chew the food, you will notice that you don't actually taste or feel the food always, your mind flitting between tasting, feeling, liking, disliking, thinking, etc., and you will come to understand the nature of reality, which in turn will allow you to let go of your attachments to good an bad experiences as you see that there is nothing truly desirable or undesirable about them.
This is based on the teaching of the Buddha while he was alive.
there are types of truth: conventional truth (sammuti-sacca) and ultimate truth (paramattha-sacca).
These two types of truth are not exactly the same as relative and absolute truths. Rather than focusing on the universality or specificity of the scope of the truth, they focus on the intrinsicness of the truth - i.e., whether an object agrees with a truth by its inherent nature, or whether it is simply said to agree with it by external convention.
An example of conventional, extrinsic truth is in a fist. When you close your hand, a fist appears, almost by magic. When you open your hand again, the fist disappears. There was never anything intrinsic about the object that made the fist appear; only convention and recognition gave rise to the truth or falsehood of the arising of a fist.
An example of ultimate, intrinsic truth is in the pain felt when a fist connects at high velocity with a face. The fist and the face are only conventional descriptions of the reality, but the pain is intrinsic to the experience and thus said to be ultimately real. Also ultimately real are the vision of the fist coming towards the face, the feeling of the hardness of the fist and the softness of the face, and the sound of the fist connecting with the face.
In brief, conventional reality refers to entities, while ultimate reality refers to the building blocks that make up reality (i.e. experience). So, the entities of fists and faces are conventional, but the sights, sounds, and feelings associated with the experience are ultimate reality.
The importance of this doctrine is in establishing a proper paradigm for understanding reality. Because conventional truths are based on mental formations, they cannot aid in an understanding of reality. A permanent, satisfying, controllable convention can be conceived of, but it will never exist in ultimate reality. By delineating that which exists in ultimate reality, one can limit one's observation to those objects that will provide an understanding of how reality works.
For example, focusing on the concept of food as you eat, you will never come to see the nature of reality as arising and ceasing incessantly, because you are focused on something that is constant (but not really existing) - i.e. the food. As a result, you will easily conceive of it as good or bad, me and mine. If you focus on the experience of tasting and feeling as you chew the food, you will notice that you don't actually taste or feel the food always, your mind flitting between tasting, feeling, liking, disliking, thinking, etc., and you will come to understand the nature of reality, which in turn will allow you to let go of your attachments to good an bad experiences as you see that there is nothing truly desirable or undesirable about them.
This is based on the teaching of the Buddha while he was alive.
i've heard it likened to a rorschach test, or black box test. not everyone will get out of it what was put through everyone because of varying levels of education, socialization, and experience.
Trackdayguy
Speed doesn't kill, it's hitting the wall
If spiritual wisdom is the highest truth, then we are talking about wisdom. Maybe using the word "truth" is unhelpful and creating confusion, when what you appear to be saying is truth is defined by wisdom.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Many religious people seek truth in a world full of lies; it is easier to remove the fallacies in a subject first, before trying to build on bad foundations.
Truth can not be seen, it can only be understood when all fallacies have been shown.
In my opinion.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
At the risk of beating a semantics horse, "truth" isn't "many ways" as you wrote:
* Truth has no falsity in it
* Lies/falsity is lacking some or all truth
Someone new to the journey has less truth, but anyone who has an untruth isn't "valid" in that subject. For example, a new Christian convert hasn't yet heard the Bible's teachings on sexuality and is sexually active outside marriage. They are saved, but have some falsehood in their belief system.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
There is ways to understand truth, it means just as you also state, a new person has less truth understood then the one who has gone forth for a long time. Example the sexuality, a person who not understand the teaching will not do correct due to his lack of understanding the truth, while a master wil understand the same truth to be he should not do sexual misconduct. when the student start to understand he/she sees the truth in more and more simiar to the master, meaning seeing more of the truth.
you can see it as a triangle. in beginning on see only one point. but when one have cultivated long time one see more and more, so the triangel get wider and wider with knowledge of the truth. Same truth but just a lot more detail and more clear to the practitionar
Earthling
David Henson
According to the Bible the spirit is an invisible active force, something that we can't see but that produces results. Wind. Breath. Mental Inclination. From the Greek pneuma which comes the English pneumatic and pneumonia, for example.
The soul is the life, the blood, of any living creature. Comes from a Hebrew word the root of which means "breather." It is the complete life of a person or animal. It's experiences, desires, etc.
You doubt these things exist because the traditional view of them is based upon Greek philosophy of Socrates and Plato, which were later adopted by apostate Jewish (around the time of Alexander) and Christian (around the time of Constantine) teachings.