Forum

Guest  

Welcome Guest, posting in this forum requires registration.

Pages: [1]
Topic: Pseudo Humanism
Philip
Member
Posts: 1

Reputation: 0
Pseudo Humanism
on: November 26, 2010, 07:47

You use the term ‘Spiritual Humanism’ to refer to your specific take on Humanism. However, the Church of Spiritual Humanism, widely present on the internet and with branches and preachers in many countries, also make use of this term. In which way is your ‘Spiritual Humanism’ different from their version of it? I know they make freely use of rituals and other typically religious-related practices and ordain priests into their Church to perform marriages and so on. Do you subscribe to this kind of pseudo Humanism?


moller
Administrator
Posts: 68

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: November 27, 2010, 05:55

Hi Philip,


Thank you for this interesting remark and question.


My sense is that The Church of Spiritual Humanism offers much for those who still need rituals, dogma's and crutches to fill the psychological gaps created by their rejection of the god-paradigm. By handing out prieshoods without any any training, screening or regulating the activities of their 'priests' to perform all sorts of ceremonies, naturally this leaves their system vulnerable to charlatanism, abuse and general misconduct.

So, although I have no quarrel with the 'Church' per se, (I guess as is the case for me with all forms of dogmatic and ritualistic behavior), I do not in any way identify with what they are doing.

My work centers on encouraging folks to take a serious look at their own lives, the way they live, feel and think about things, and to discover for themselves to which extent they simply conform to standards set for them by society, and to which extent they are caught up in the misappropriation of powerful inner instruments which inhibit their freedom and intelligent participation in life.

I am not the least interested to create a following of 'Spiritual Humanists' or ask anyone to join some kind of organization other than perhaps assisting from personal experience in the process of helping others to understand themselves better and to free themselves from ignorance.

My work is not about me. Rather it is to bring a message of true liberation to anyone who cares to read my work and to engage directly in the process of their own freedom from self-imposed folly. I exit and become superfluous at the point where the message begins to do its liberating work for the individual.


I hope this brings some clarity to your concerns.

Hand in hand,

Moller.


Guest
Member
Posts: 8

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 00:47

Quote from moller on November 27, 2010, 05:55

Hi Philip,


Thank you for this interesting remark and question.


My sense is that The Church of Spiritual Humanism offers much for those who still need rituals, dogma's and crutches to fill the psychological gaps created by their rejection of the god-paradigm. By handing out prieshoods without any any training, screening or regulating the activities of their 'priests' to perform all sorts of ceremonies, naturally this leaves their system vulnerable to charlatanism, abuse and general misconduct.

So, although I have no quarrel with the 'Church' per se, (I guess as is the case for me with all forms of dogmatic and ritualistic behavior), I do not in any way identify with what they are doing.

My work centers on encouraging folks to take a serious look at their own lives, the way they live, feel and think about things, and to discover for themselves to which extent they simply conform to standards set for them by society, and to which extent they are caught up in the misappropriation of powerful inner instruments which inhibit their freedom and intelligent participation in life.

I am not the least interested to create a following of 'Spiritual Humanists' or ask anyone to join some kind of organization other than perhaps assisting from personal experience in the process of helping others to understand themselves better and to free themselves from ignorance.

My work is not about me. Rather it is to bring a message of true liberation to anyone who cares to read my work and to engage directly in the process of their own freedom from self-imposed folly. I exit and become superfluous at the point where the message begins to do its liberating work for the individual.


I hope this brings some clarity to your concerns.

Hand in hand,

Moller.


Is it your belief that the sense of I am can liberate itself from its own perceived circumstances?


toombaru


moller
Administrator
Posts: 68

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 08:35

Quote from toombaru on December 7, 2010, 00:47


Quote from moller on November 27, 2010, 05:55

Hi Philip,


Thank you for this interesting remark and question.


My sense is that The Church of Spiritual Humanism offers much for those who still need rituals, dogma's and crutches to fill the psychological gaps created by their rejection of the god-paradigm. By handing out prieshoods without any any training, screening or regulating the activities of their 'priests' to perform all sorts of ceremonies, naturally this leaves their system vulnerable to charlatanism, abuse and general misconduct.

So, although I have no quarrel with the 'Church' per se, (I guess as is the case for me with all forms of dogmatic and ritualistic behavior), I do not in any way identify with what they are doing.

My work centers on encouraging folks to take a serious look at their own lives, the way they live, feel and think about things, and to discover for themselves to which extent they simply conform to standards set for them by society, and to which extent they are caught up in the misappropriation of powerful inner instruments which inhibit their freedom and intelligent participation in life.

I am not the least interested to create a following of 'Spiritual Humanists' or ask anyone to join some kind of organization other than perhaps assisting from personal experience in the process of helping others to understand themselves better and to free themselves from ignorance.

My work is not about me. Rather it is to bring a message of true liberation to anyone who cares to read my work and to engage directly in the process of their own freedom from self-imposed folly. I exit and become superfluous at the point where the message begins to do its liberating work for the individual.


I hope this brings some clarity to your concerns.

Hand in hand,

Moller.


Is it your belief that the sense of I am can liberate itself from its own perceived circumstances?


toombaru


Moller: Thank you Toombaru for this insightful question. And welcome to our Forum! Hope to hear more from you soon.


In reply to your question: Not at all. The fragment can never make itself whole. A mistake can't correct itself from within the parameters of the mistake itself. What I suggest is that as the 'I'-sense cannot 'liberate itself from its own perceived circumstances' is is our responsibility to discover how to become free from all self-generated impositions we place on the manifestation of our being as whole – without strengthening the 'I'-sense. I believe this is indeed possible and I describe such a path in my book with as much clarity as possible.


Guest
Member
Posts: 8

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 17:22

Quote from moller on December 7, 2010, 08:35


Quote from toombaru on December 7, 2010, 00:47


Quote from moller on November 27, 2010, 05:55

Hi Philip,


Thank you for this interesting remark and question.


My sense is that The Church of Spiritual Humanism offers much for those who still need rituals, dogma's and crutches to fill the psychological gaps created by their rejection of the god-paradigm. By handing out prieshoods without any any training, screening or regulating the activities of their 'priests' to perform all sorts of ceremonies, naturally this leaves their system vulnerable to charlatanism, abuse and general misconduct.

So, although I have no quarrel with the 'Church' per se, (I guess as is the case for me with all forms of dogmatic and ritualistic behavior), I do not in any way identify with what they are doing.

My work centers on encouraging folks to take a serious look at their own lives, the way they live, feel and think about things, and to discover for themselves to which extent they simply conform to standards set for them by society, and to which extent they are caught up in the misappropriation of powerful inner instruments which inhibit their freedom and intelligent participation in life.

I am not the least interested to create a following of 'Spiritual Humanists' or ask anyone to join some kind of organization other than perhaps assisting from personal experience in the process of helping others to understand themselves better and to free themselves from ignorance.

My work is not about me. Rather it is to bring a message of true liberation to anyone who cares to read my work and to engage directly in the process of their own freedom from self-imposed folly. I exit and become superfluous at the point where the message begins to do its liberating work for the individual.


I hope this brings some clarity to your concerns.

Hand in hand,

Moller.


Is it your belief that the sense of I am can liberate itself from its own perceived circumstances?


toombaru


Moller: Thank you Toombaru for this insightful question. And welcome to our Forum! Hope to hear more from you soon.


In reply to your question: Not at all. The fragment can never make itself whole. A mistake can't correct itself from within the parameters of the mistake itself. What I suggest is that as the 'I'-sense cannot 'liberate itself from its own perceived circumstances' is is our responsibility to discover how to become free from all self-generated impositions we place on the manifestation of our being as whole – without strengthening the 'I'-sense. I believe this is indeed possible and I describe such a path in my book with as much clarity as possible.


I have not read your book but from what I have read, the sentient-awareness within you seems to have grasp the limitations of conceptual thought.


Your words echo the essence of the edgeless.


There is a profound problem that arises when the conceptual pseudo-reality gets a peek up its own skirts.


It cannot imagine or speak about anything that it has not objectified and in the creation of separate things it overlays and displaces the actual reality.


Here the I am is seen as the same phenomenon as the self-generated impositions (they are a mutual-co-arisings) and for it to free itself would by like a shadow basking in the sunlight or a whirlpool enjoying the quiescence of complete stillness.


I know,…… that doesn't offer the seeker anything to look forward to…..and no method to get to a place that exists only in their own imagination…….. and it won't sell any books or gather a following.


But once grasp the conceptual overlay is seen as a most mysterious and delightful shadow dance.


The center shifts to an awareness that has become everywhere.


And that is what the conceptual mind imagines as "enlightenment".


"You may come in." the voice said, "But you have to leave the little monkey outside."


toombaru


weallone
Member
Posts: 19

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 18:27

Hi, I am new to this spiritual humanism thing, but it sounds like it could just be another mind spinning con like so many of these sites that sell the truth in such pretty clothes and you look like quite an intense fellow from looking at your profile,though there is a softness there too. How will we know you are imparting something worthwhile? Can this spiritual humanism affect our lives in a positive way ? What's a simple starting point?

Must I give money,or is advice free?


From- weallone


Just another brick in the wall

Guest
Member
Posts: 8

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 18:34

Quote from weallone on December 7, 2010, 18:27

Hi, I am new to this spiritual humanism thing, but it sounds like it could just be another mind spinning con like so many of these sites that sell the truth in such pretty clothes and you look like quite an intense fellow from looking at your profile,though there is a softness there too. How will we know you are imparting something worthwhile? Can this spiritual humanism affect our lives in a positive way ? What's a simple starting point?

Must I give money,or is advice free?


From- weallone


There is no such thing as an empty box or free advise.


(where are all those face thingies…….I wanted to put a laughing one right here.


X


toombaru


TenthMan
Member
Posts: 20

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 7, 2010, 18:48

Hi,

I joined the "Forum" yesterday and am intrigued by the exchanges taking place… especially between toombaru and Moller.


TenthMan


moller
Administrator
Posts: 68

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 8, 2010, 11:54

Quote from weallone on December 7, 2010, 18:27

Hi, I am new to this spiritual humanism thing, but it sounds like it could just be another mind spinning con like so many of these sites that sell the truth in such pretty clothes and you look like quite an intense fellow from looking at your profile,though there is a softness there too. How will we know you are imparting something worthwhile? Can this spiritual humanism affect our lives in a positive way ? What's a simple starting point?

Must I give money,or is advice free?


From- weallone


Moller:

Yes. I guess I am quite intense about human development. Perhaps if you care to get a copy of the book, you might think otherwise, or just remain with this forum for a while. Its free, and you may pick up some udeful information with regard to your own path and how to break through from self-limitation. You are right if you suggest that this process I have been involved in for the better part of a life-time has indeed softened me up considerably. The hard edges seem to have disappeared by themselves. For this I am quite thankful, as it is one of the signs I regard as necessary for this process to become a sustainable way of living.

I guess the only the only way you may discover for yourself what the nature of my work is, is to enter into it as far as you may be interested. Only then could its value (or not) become self-evident. I, for one, is not inclined to convince you of the value of this enquiry. Either it makes sense to you, or it does not.


A simple starting point is to ask yourself if you are happy the way you are. If so, this would be a waste of your prescious time. If not, delving into my work may greatly relieve you from your self-imposed suffering.

Other than buying my book, I share vast sources of information with no strings attached. You are always most welcome to write here and see what you find.


moller
Administrator
Posts: 68

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 8, 2010, 12:11

Snip…..


Toombaru:


I have not read your book but from what I have read, the sentient-awareness within you seems to have grasp the limitations of conceptual thought.


Your words echo the essence of the edgeless.


There is a profound problem that arises when the conceptual pseudo-reality gets a peek up its own skirts.


It cannot imagine or speak about anything that it has not objectified and in the creation of separate things it overlays and displaces the actual reality.


Moller:


>>There is a profound problem that arises when the conceptual pseudo-reality gets a peek up its own skirts.


It cannot imagine or speak about anything that it has not objectified and in the creation of separate things it overlays and displaces the actual reality.>>


My sense is that such a problem as the one you describe here is not inevitable. Thought is not in innate conflict with reality. It is one expression of it, and my sense is that it is up to us to make a clear distinction between the reality thoughts project, and the direct experience of the thing to which thought points. Much depends on our awareness in any moment of 'pseudo-reality'. 'Pseudo reality' is not a fundamental problem within thought. Rather it appears when we mistake thought for the only reality present when it describes or communicates things.

Thought is absolutely necessary for humans to function. Even to write this letter is to make use of thought, memory etc. But such thought, as integral to our human experience of diversity of appearances, is not separate from the wholeness of experience in that moment – unless we allow ourselves to be unaware and to fall into the trap of mistaking thought for the only reality present in such a moment.

Thought is not the factor in duality, separation or fragmentation. Unawareness of what precicely is happening in the here and now is, is.


Guest
Member
Posts: 8

Reputation: 0
Re: Pseudo Humanism
on: December 9, 2010, 01:33

Quote from moller on December 8, 2010, 12:11

Snip…..


Toombaru:


I have not read your book but from what I have read, the sentient-awareness within you seems to have grasp the limitations of conceptual thought.


Your words echo the essence of the edgeless.


There is a profound problem that arises when the conceptual pseudo-reality gets a peek up its own skirts.


It cannot imagine or speak about anything that it has not objectified and in the creation of separate things it overlays and displaces the actual reality.



Moller:


>>There is a profound problem that arises when the conceptual pseudo-reality gets a peek up its own skirts.


It cannot imagine or speak about anything that it has not objectified and in the creation of separate things it overlays and displaces the actual reality.>>


My sense is that such a problem as the one you describe here is not inevitable. Thought is not in innate conflict with reality. It is one expression of it, and my sense is that it is up to us to make a clear distinction between the reality thoughts project, and the direct experience of the thing to which thought points.


(toombaru)


The mere fact that the word "reality" is coined indicates the problem.

Mind invents a concept that it then imagines represents an actuality.

Instead of representing an idea the word becomes an object itself and then other words are used in an attempt to define it.

There is no such thing as "reality".


The problem cannot be resolved within the arena in which it arises.


The "way through" is to apprehend the nature and result of the objectification process and not in the manipulation of it.


(Moller)


Much depends on our awareness in any moment of 'pseudo-reality'. 'Pseudo reality' is not a fundamental problem within thought. Rather it appears when we mistake thought for the only reality present when it describes or communicates things.


(toombaru)


The sense of self arises concurrently with….and is no different than….the objectified reality.

It has no existence outside of that arena.


(Moller)

Thought is absolutely necessary for humans to function.


(toomabru)

There is no objectification in very young children and no sense of self.


Even to write this letter is to make use of thought, memory etc. But such thought, as integral to our human experience of diversity of appearances, is not separate from the wholeness of experience in that moment – unless we allow ourselves to be unaware and to fall into the trap of mistaking thought for the only reality present in such a moment.

Thought is not the factor in duality, separation or fragmentation. Unawareness of what precicely is happening in the here and now is, is.


(toombaru)

It is conceptual thought…the separation and naming of things….. that creates the conceptual overlay that is mistaken for reality.


Pages: [1]
WP Forum Server by ForumPress | Lucid Crew
Version: 1.8.2 ; Page loaded in: 0.025 seconds.