Life, Meaning, Soul, and the Sacred

Jonathon,

What strikes me most, just now, is how subjective your definitions are. This is how I understand Buber to consider relationships that matter. But our scientific training sometimes gets in the way. Your definitions are mostly from the perspective of the observer—or better—the subject. This perspective I find most honest. Objectivity is a useful tool, but we mustn't claim it when it isn't present. So I like your perspective.

bill

Bill and Jonathan

Maybe this can fit somewhere into the discussion.  Buber is slow reading for me.  I really have to think.  One thing I like about him is the way he starts with simple symbols -- words that are foundational to human existence.

Anyway, I found this piece in "I and Thou", p9 in my edition...

"THIS IS THE ETERNAL SOURCE OF ART:   a man is faced by a form which desires to be made through him into a work.  This form is no offspring of his soul, but is an appearance which steps up to it and demands of it the effective power.  The man is concerned with an act of his being.  If he carries it thru, if he speaks the primary word out of his being to the form which appears, then the effective power streams out and the work arises."

What I see as helpful here is flow.  He refers to art, but I see this same kind of flow as necessary in comprehending I and You.  Does this make any sense or am I being too abstract?

reido

Reido,

I was reading about I and Thou on wikipedia. Its interesting to me. It reminds me of something I tried back in 2006 at a job I had. I tried my hardest to see everyone and everything in a 'real' light. That was, what I thought was the most real way to interpret everything I saw and was a part of. For instance, when I saw / was involved with a person, I thought about how their existence itself was Sacred, was a practical miracle. I was involved with a Sacred being who stems from the same Source as me - a hard journey of billions of years of many more billions of movements conscious and not, or who knows....but they were still Sacred by definition. I then thought about their own personal hardships whenever I knew about them. I remember thinking about being a kid, that me and this other person can play, can create, and can enjoy our existence the same way children do.

What I think I was doing was Loving that person. And it seemed to do something. My own mindset I'm guessing changed my face, posture, tone of voice, etc, enough to be transferred onto the person. I at least perceived, but really no I think its true, that our interactions were not typical. People were so positive, there was more laughter, more talking, and especially more bright smiles. This was at a call center btw, so I continued the experiment on the phone. That too had similar results. I loved my job because the feeling of all the positive energy made me feel so alive. I remember being very honest also in order to be 'real'. So I did politically incorrect things constantly...

I think there is a flow of some sort of energy. Positive energy begets positive energy. I think if you exalt continuously, its a type of prayer or meditation that has immediate effects on both you and the things you're interacting with.

Jonathan

I believe this works.  Maybe not with everybody, but in general, I agree that it makes a difference.  What I found in the workplace is that people are uptight and extremely reserved -- kind of like robots. 

Also, I understand that what you have described has universal application and potential.

reido

Jonathon

Hard questions...not easy to come up with a single definite answer.  If I meander a little, I can think in terms of the various manifestations of God.  Let's say a person says he/she has encountered God.  Take Jacob's Ladder for instance, where he wrestled with an angel.  My understanding is that the meaning can be more accurately described as a messenger.  Anyway, did Jacob actually have some kind of encounter with God?  Let's say he did, but what can I say was precisely what this consisted of?  Well, it was some kind of an encounter with God -- life changing according to the traditions.  "Change" would possibly be key to understanding the encounter.  I do not see the actual details of how this or that actually took place as being necessary, nor do I believe Jacob somehow became immune to failure as a result of his experience.  Maybe the idea of being willing to seek change and experience its difficulties and successes in life would be appropriate.

But what say if a person comes along in the 21st century and claims the same...that he/she has had an encounter with God?  Immediately, I think a great many people would focus on the details of the encounter and begin to analyze it, deconstruct it.  And they would be successful.  I have found Deconstruction to be much simpler than Reconstruction because the details never seem to get sorted out -- only more questions.

Well, here you have a small attempt at a great question. Maybe it will spring some new ideas.

reido