Contents
part III: the person
'This
also shows what the identity of the same
man exists in
namely a participation in the same continued
life
by constantly fleeting particles of matter
that are successively vitally united to the same
organized body.'
John
Locke
(1632-1704) in:
'Essay Concerninbg Human
Understanding
- XVII, identity and diversity 6'
Introduction
Control,
identity en the ideal
In
part
II have
we dealt with the principles. With them we
arrived from the art of analysis at what we call
spiritual association, the spirituality. We saw
how the factor of time played a part in the
relationship between master and slave: the
spirit and the body. From part
I we
already knew that a pure consciousness is also a
matter of science; a matter of seeing things as
they are, of being free from illusion. If we
nevertheless find ourselves in a state of
illusion though, if it is so that, even though
we're scientifically in order and analytically
dependable engaged with the principle, we turn
out not to be unified in the self of the soul,
do we at that time say that we've fallen down.
Some or another way have we lost our way in the
fallen state and ran we into bewilderment. We
then have a psychological problem, a problem of
control; in the illusional state we have a
so-called problem of authority or we're not pure
anymore in the relation between spirit and body
then, we do not know any longer who the master
and who the slave would be. With problems of
authority one has illusions of control: either
one is paranoid on being controlled by others or
one landed in the illusion that the mission of
self-control would consist of the duty to
control someone else. In the fallen state does
one, departing from an individual illusion,
together with others slide down in a common
illusion of a 'society' finding itself in the
chaos of the state of no longer properly
cooperating people.
We have no
clue anymore what we're up to then, what we're
supposed to do, and who we are. We so have a
problem of identity, a problem with the
servitude and a problem with the knowledge and
are burdened with the assignment to solve that
problem. Like bees whose honey was stolen by the
beekeeper, we then get sugarwater, a surrogate
for temporarily relieving the greatest hunger
until the integrity is restored with us having a
grip again on our individual and communal life.
The problem of identity we solve provisionally
with ego-ambitions: better to keep up
appearances with an I-prophesy than give it up
all together. We likewise solve the problem of
servitude as well by laboring for the money,
even though we, with an indefinable and uneasy
feeling of estrangement, have our heart no
longer to it. It's a big lie that self-interest
not so precise with the rules, but O.K. And the
problem of knowledge we solve by reading out
aloud sermons with or without the help of
'thought-protheses' or books. Also fine, all
that pedantry of 'sir minister'. No longer
seeing it as clearly, no longer being as
conversant, one uses spectacles, one uses
'mentures' or a 'thought-prothesis', a
book.
That book also is but an artificial, not really
to the here-and-now adapted, fixation, but just
as with the glasses that have a fixed
lens-focus, is one satisfied with one's favorite
author or holy scripture for that matter. Thus
received e.g. the controversial novel
Catcher
in the Rye
of J.D.
Salinger
(born 1919) from 1951, a cult-status for being
the support and refuge for loners and dropouts
who lost it with the lies of bourgeois
materialism. The book shows, in the struggle for
adulthood of the leading character Holden, the
world of the 'phonies', the fake-people or the
hypocrites, but of course is the book itself
also but a fake-idea and factually thus caught
in a projection. With books holier the advise is
then 'judge not' or is it like Vyâsa says
(in S.B. 11.28:
1):
'be free from praise and criticism with regard
to someone else's actions'. All those before
mentioned cases of temporary solutions we call
the compensations of a failed identity, a failed
servitude and a failed integrity of knowing. If
we don't want to get sick of it, do we, in order
to remedy that, in fact consequently have to
reason back to the point where it went wrong,
were we came to a fall, but do we thereupon see
our way blocked by a couple of psychological
mechanisms. One apparently came to a fall, but
one has to keep one's faith in oneself and so
one made it a life of justifying the fall-down
and is one not just as easily capable any more
to figure out on one's own accord what exactly
the fall down or the rising to one's feet would
be. Something has disappeared into the
'unconscious'. And even though one so now
and then sees some half of the truth in one's
sleep or in an upsurge of intelligence, one very
quickly, like being one's own enemy, then pushes
that away again. For it's not possible to say to
yourself all the time that you're wrong, or were
wrong at all even, and that you'd be at odds or
not good-willing. Those who do engage in telling
that themselves without a further plan, find
themselves in the grip of a so-called
depression: they cannot retrieve their
self-esteem and motivation anymore for they are
overwhelmed by the contrary of a closet full of
things tucked away that all at once, in a
crisis, fell over them and crushed their
self-respect. Thus are we in our normal waking
state 'consonant with ourselves' as the
psychologists call it (viz. the social
psychologist Leon
Festinger
1919-1989), and are we our best friend as we
already saw in the Small
Philosophy of
Association,
and do we rather distrust the other than
ourselves with the notion: 'when I'm not able to
get on top of things, then you for sure neither
- but if you act as if you would then I for sure
are better off in facing the problem' - even
though I'm just as well down in the dark then.
Thus there's never an end to the psychological
complexes and together we so go downhill when we
as 'friends of ourselves' do not manage to know
the compensations, to cut with them, as we
already saw, and then get out of it all together
with a better order of time being more grounded
in the discipline. To keep our health we have to
escape the temporary provision of compensations,
that bad system that separated time from place
and reduced it all to a linear rut and thus
disturbed our dynamical feeling of life of being
connected with the planet and with each
other.
With
one's looking for solutions arriving at the
compensations of the ego, the labor and the
books, we also get into trouble with the person.
The other may physically not rule us over, that
we have to do ourselves. That we remembered from
our education: we have to be grown up and take
our responsibility. Your daddy and mom aren't
there any  longer
and you even rejoice in it. But by making
yourself the authority will the other not just
like that be appreciative of or subservient to
that ego, for the other person knows that game
of compensations very well himself. We do not
without a problem expect the other to be holy in
following the principles and thus one assumes
that everyone must be compensating, for that's
something normal. The division stays and despair
dominates one's life-experience, for one carries
water to the sea with it: nothing is won with a
(notion of a) charade, there's no real progress
then. For the materially motivated ego of outer
appearances existing there for it's own sake is
not the solution really. And that's also true
for paid labor and books. If one does one's job
for the money only, one is not really dependable
and books most of the time are a lot of grousing
with a glaze of a partly self-invented world
from which one also has to wake up again to
discover that, even though one might dream, one
in reality is still implacably the slave of the
circumstances and the senses thereto, in stead
of being the master of one's fate. And thus we
are what the british psychiatrist
R.
D. Laing
(1927-1989) in the sixties called the,
circumstantially created, divided self of the
man who outside is a fool victimized by the
compensation culture with all her fake
appearances and conflicting psychology, but at
the inside is a god full of ideals and qualities
opposed to that with a certain frustration over
the inability to realize oneself, to prove
oneself.
This
section deals with the restoration of that
respect for the person that one in one's full
glory is at the inside, about the cure, the
becoming, which the psychologist
Carl
Rogers
(1902-1987) in 1974 called 'becoming a person'.
It's about the emphatically approached person
who consequently is able to get back on his feet
again with the realization of what actually the
fallen state would be, what exactly at the
moment would be his flaws of reasoning, his
errors, his confusion on norms, standards and
needs, and what his foolishness would be. But it
is also about the person not so much of
compensation, the person who is of God or who is
a god himself and who constitutes an ideal, is
the redeemer, the great leader, the savior, the
spiritual master, the hero and the great beacon,
the example, the source of wisdom and the
control over the universe in the flesh. The
latter is inevitable: desiring respect for the
person one is oneself, will the other person
also have to be respected, if one wants to put
an end to the discord of the material
ego-interest. The at first instance, more or
less being infatuated, realizing of the
inequality with a high - or sometimes too high -
opinion of that other person in the form of a
Great Personality, is there because of the
karmic reaction of tipping over to the other
extreme of having respect, for the control of
the equilibrium wasn't there without a problem.
 As
a child one realized oneself maybe one's father,
as an adult that continues with the ideal of a
godhead who also carries the name of the Father
then. And for not a few consists the problem of
selfrealization of the fact that indeed Great
Personalities do exist, whether still around or
not anymore, to look up to and to learn from. To
rid oneself of the inequality is there, also
according the Great Personalities, the need of a
process of emancipation, a process of becoming
equal, a process of spiritual growth, a
therapeutic process. Out of fear for the false
ego of the man of appearances and lies, do we
therewith following speak of the holiness that's
supposed to be free from it and of which we hope
it is not sanctimonious like it is with e.g.
priests violating kids, popes who ordain the
death of others, sect leaders driving for
suicide and spiritual leaders out for their own
material advantage. We so speak of belief: in
the fallen state it is difficult to believe and
has one a problem of authority, but back on
one's feet one all of a sudden recognizes an
ally in that example that offers support and so
is thus finding faith in a leader, a Lord, a
therapist and/or a guru the way out of the
fallen state. And that's not only true for the
holiness, no, an artist honestly capable of
grousing at all the sanctimoniousness is
preferred over the obedient citizen who wasn't
quite as capable of being artful with that less
wanted presentation of the truth. Sometimes is
the interest of the ideal overruled by the
interest of it's manifestation. And that can be
a shocking discovery with the example of
therapists ending in bed with their clients or
gurus who almost incomprehensibly take over your
sexual karma and the rest of it.
With
the negation or recognition of the other in the
struggle for getting attention for one's own
person is it as with the legendary
Baron
Munchausen
who pulled himself by his own hairs out of the
swamp: 
once one in faith has been converted to the
positive confession, has one to realize a
position of being liberated, viz to serve the
cause, if one wants to escape one's swamp. That
other person one eventually is oneself and who
does manage to keep to the soul, serve the cause
and know his trade, must be clear in the eye of
one's mind. The dutch psychologist J. J. van der
Werff spoke in 1965 of self-image and self-ideal
in his book with the same name: it concerns a
division without which a human being
paradoxically can't be happy or even be healthy
and sane. One is necessarily divided being
honest about the fact that one inescapably as a
person is of limitations, faults, errors,
misperceptions, and miseries in one's material
life at the one hand, while at the other one has
to counterbalance with a self more durably
happy, more capable and of less faults and
errors. The way we from part one to part two
arrived from a person free from illusion that is
one with the universe at a person identified
with the matter of not being so sure anymore of
the oneness with the realization of the good and
bad of having principles, do we from that
innerly divided, analytically and spiritually
seeking man arrive at the ideal man we must
manage to realize, we must put faith in as an
ever on our approach receding horizon of
qualities and integrity who we within ourselves
have to realize as someone knowing his trade
(vedically: is the caittya-guru). And
thus do we, from the personal realization of our
inability, arrive at the problems of religion
and politics.  The
religion is the social organization of the
respect for the ideal person in the context of a
certain order of time, and the political
constitutes the actuality of the problematic,
but necessary respect for also the maybe not
always as holy person, in which one is engaged
in telling each other what actually should be
the order of time in 'reality', how late it
'really' is and how the book of law 'actually'
should look like. What would now be the priority
of the needs of the necessary succession of
deeds - like the humanist and psychologist
A.
Maslow (1908-1970)
put it - once we at the one hand religiously
know of the Original Person while we in terms of
behavioral science at the other hand have
accepted as being inevitable - with or without a
so-called peak-experience of being on our way -
what the ideal is of that person who in India is
called the purusha? How to tell each
other how late it is, or what we're up to, with
the religion and with the politics? Or .... was
it, as we already saw in part I and II, more a
matter of self-control and sense of reality,
that identifying ourselves with the great
example of self-control of the Controller of
Yoga, who in case of proven wisdom and
recognizable incarnation vedically also is given
the honorary title of yogis'vara?
Contents
section IIIa: the personal
Self-knowledge,
reformation and identity
'God,
like the tradition tells us,
has in His grip the beginning, the middle and
the end of all things
and in His fixed course, according
nature,
takes He everything to it's destination.
Him always accompanies
Dikè2,
of retribution
to all who do not fulfill the divine law.
Who wants to be happy and felicitous,
better respects her from the
beginning.'
Plato
quoted by Aristotle in: About the
Cosmos
 In
the search for the self of durable happiness and
knowledge we so cannot escape the person, nor
the necessity to respect that person, that one
is oneself as well, also in a material sense.
Therefore splits, filognostically, the respect
for the person itself up in a personal/religious
and a political/futurological section. With the
personal do we in our scientifically founded,
methodical selfrealization wrestle with the
holiness and the authentic experience of the
'Absolute Truth', and concerned with the
material interest do we wrestle with the
politics of time-systems, identities,
commentaries, the authority, the last word, the
advantage of doubt, the law, the economy, the
responsibility and the future, that we as adults
to it, as we just saw, with the necessity of a
certain self-ideal, also need.
From
part one we already knew to make for a good
division in accord with the order of nature, an
order which, lawful as it is, provides
certainty, offers the certain knowledge that
cannot be doubted by anyone. On the basis of
this certainty we in part two arrived at the
bold venture of learning the art to live with
the duality inherent to the analytical and with
the qualities inherent to the spiritual self we
cannot live without either with the philosophy
of liberation. Now, having arrived at the
interest of the person, are we faced with the
question that is classical: 'who am I?'.
Vedically the answer is simply 'soham'
which literally means 'I myself'. One also says
'tat tvam asi' or 'that thou art' to
indicate that the reality of the I contains a
relation with the reality and the principle
(tat) of the universe comprising the
other. Without that relation carries the
I-awareness with God no reality. The I without
the other is, considering the inevitability of
the duality, an illusion of separateness that
must be overcome with what vedically is called
karuna, dayâ, bhâva or
prema: kindness, compassion, affection and
love. From Plato we in the West learned also
that God, or better stated the way to God, must
be considered the good which with Vyâsa is
called sattva or the mode (guna)
of goodness (S.B.
7.15: 25).
Sinful acting is thus seen nothing but the
acting which, causing sorrow and grief, goes
against the goodness, and serving God is the
consequence of devoting oneself to this
realization of the I that then no longer is
called false but is called a soul, a
conscientious self of principles, of norms and
standards. As for the concept of God says
Aristotle in About the Cosmos: 'God is
one, but with many names, derived from all
phenomena he time and again brings about, he is
addressed ' .... he is called the son of kronos
and the Time (Chronos), because his existence
continues from the one endless eon on earth to
the other; ...I also dare say that 'Necessity'
is but another name for him, since he is the
invincible cause.' The discovery of this
True Self of the soul of this Original Person,
who thus according the greek root of philosophy
is also identified with the concept of time and
necessity, can, via the mode of goodness not
take place but along the ways of having respect
for the other who we, with ourselves included,
may not cause any grief. The ego in his
falsehood poises itself against the negativity
about all the rest that needs to be excluded for
the sake of material action, we saw in
the
NOT-paradigm of part
I.
That negation, that denial of saying no, is
essential for one's material action. It can't be
otherwise. For the practice of Christianity we
in Europe thus at the end of the Middle Ages
knew, with this saying in mind, Martin
Luther
(1483-1546)
who exposed the fallen state of the
fundamentalistic-dictatorial influence of the
Catholic Church. Result of his heroism was that
the church after due centuries of struggling on
was dethroned from that position of absolute
power and had to learn, just like any other
possible form of class-corruption, neatly and
modestly to settle for a normal position in
the
fields of
action
of the individual citizen as discussed in part
I. Christianity was at the end of the Middle
Ages no longer the same Christianity, but had
collapsed into a theology divided in itself, a
factually fallen culture that later on
difficulty facing the lesson of the philosophy
of Enlightenment as a lecture in adulthood and
(also religious) self-responsibility. Pope
Gregory's calendar-reform shortly after the
Middle Ages 1582 wouldn't be of much avail
against that confusion. There was more at stake
than the matter of the order of time. The system
in it's entirety didn't accord any longer with
nature, but the reformist/contra-reformist
restoring with a rule of time that respect for
the reality of God's creation couldn't revoke
the dividedness that had risen, despite of all
the burning of heretics and breaking of idols.
Like Thomas
Kuhn
(1922 - 1996) pointed it indirectly out in 1962
with his study about the nature of the
revolutions of scientific paradigms, followed in
the year zero the thought model of Christianity
a revolutionary way that model of Judaism and
followed Islam seven centuries later
historically with the same heroism the Christian
vision, whereupon next after the revival of the
greco-roman culture in the Renaissance around
1650 followed the culture of Enlightenment
with at least as much rebel valor. Enlightenment
thrived on the eroded religious authority which
in fact already since the rise of Islam with the
repression of their argument of time had to face
it's decay. Islam had developed the praying to
the position of the sun with the discovery by
Mohammed
(571-632) in the seventh century after Christ of
that 'opportunity in de religious market' and
had thus risen to success over the Christians
who outside the monasteries weren't that
conscientious with the order of the times of
prayer. For during the Middle Ages was the
julian calendar with it's kalends and ides-days
there only for the monastics, for the citizens
it had been abolished as early as with the roman
emperor Constantine
the Great
(272-337).
But
the islamic uniformity and one-sidedness of that
option was thus to the logic of the fields of
human action also doomed to perish
(fundamentalistically). With the philosophy of
Enlightenment
came not just the Church to a fall but also
Islam and was she, since the historical
turning-point of the siege of Vienna in 1683
where the Ottoman rule of Islam was defeated by
the polish king Jan
III Sobiesky
(1629-1696), assigned her further as historical
to be denoted use and position. The idea of
enlightenment which, in a violent manner facing
itself politically, in the enlightened democracy
of today still finds it's expression in the
motto of the European Union of 'oneness in
diversity', was not an original idea of Martin
Luther though, who only from a sober and
self-responsible properly being versed in the
scripture in a reformatory way had preached
against the indulgences, and not so much had
aimed at a diversity of religious and scientific
practices. Also for him there was but one Lord.
The notion of oneness in diversity in the
enlightened multicultural sense we find back,
these days politically with the modern rise of
the spirit of democracy, with another religious
reformer of the period: the vaishnava
saint and avatâra S'rî
Caitanya
Mahâprabhu
(1486-1543), who with that motto in India had
attacked the false authority of as well the also
there dominating rule of Islam, the dry theology
of books and the caste-system. He was the
factual Lord of that notion of enlightenment and
it was He who put forward as being the most
important Bible in that theology the
S'rîmad
Bhâgavatam
or the Bhâgavata
Purâna
as being the one essential story of the person
of God as being the Fortunate One, which had
flowed from the hand of our filognostic
philosopher of duty Vyâsa.
 Even
though Luther defended a principle of religious
purification, still was his ego-motivated effort
for a Bible readable to each, the not cherishing
of any celibate preference and not selling of
indulgences any longer, a material effort. The
principle of the spiritual union of the church
founded on the, in fact gnostic, sanctity and
sainthood, which one indeed rarely finds with
normal and also clerical mortals, was dropped by
him as being impure. And that made his action
material. He was of no mercy with the material
digression of the unholy fathers of the church,
but was with the neglect of the sanctity of the
spiritual union himself a materialist also; or,
as the guru Osho it in so many words explained
to his 'new men': 'the one saying no is not free
from it yet'. With Luther we can observe how
fundamentalism - see also the
page about the fields with part
one -
itself is also a form of materialism: in pushing
itself off against the more moderate, political
'materialistic' people of compromise and with
the exclusion and even killing of alleged
sinners do they, just as catholic contrareform
itself also again did, make for a false ego not
really willing to be of sacrifice for the needed
reconciliation. Religious fanaticism is there of
a lack of philosophy so explained one day
Swami
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Prabhupâda
(1896-1977),
the leader of the Hare
Krishna's
to them, one day sighing about the reprove at
their address of being sectarian. And too much
of philosophy gives one the dry, loveless
books-estrangement of the scientists, he added
thereto. Therewith seemed also of the sanctity
the austerity in celibacy, that is not just
respected by the catholic orders, but also,
together with the analysis, the penance and the
yoga is respected in India as a holy principle
of spiritual knowledge, altogether false with
the fall of catholic Rome. Martin Luther though
being a hero, was not a saint in this sense. He
had, be it with some difficulty and noble
protection, like a Jesus not to carry the cross
of violence of the Reformation which indeed had
to be carried by the monasterial celibates who
were persecuted here and there, whether they
were corrupt or not. In fact was that cross in
that period of spiritual confusion about the
norms and standards on the shoulders of Lord
Caitanya, who with his grace for the karma of
philosophical scholarship and religious
sanctimoniousness also for real sacrificed his
sane mind (and before that his marriage) and
thus for that matter may be considered the
Christ of it. Luther married, not sacrificing
his sane mind for the sake of his devotion to
God, simply modestly and in solidarity with the
common man, with a by the populace from her
convent banished nun. With him, and the rest of
the thus reacting Christians - as for the mob
follows the leader - flared up in that thus
found material self-interest of a simple, but
sacramentally also commendable and not
unholy,
desire for offspring, a political struggle in
the period that would fuel many wars more on the
way to what we now, in search for the factual
authority of reform and the notion of
enlightenment, call the ideal of democracy.
Fine, so be it, Luther we thus mustn't hold
responsible for the dissension of the
Reformation opposing the Contrareformation, and
so he didn't think of it himself either. Of
course may only the Lord himself reform His own
religion and not just a human being with
material needs like Luther who was but the
immediate cause. From Luther we may learn that
normal karmic persons cannot exist in the spirit
only, but also have to carry a material burden
with the democratic notion of the equality of
being one in diversity; a notion which thus with
Vyâsa in the Bhagavad
Gîtâ
already thousands of years before was called
ekatvena prithaktvena bahuda and with
Caitanya anew was preached as the end conclusion
that says acintya bhedâbheda
tattva: an inscrutable reality of oneness in
diversity.
A
computer is nothing w ithout an operating system
and a therein operating program, and so it is
also the other way around. So also is man not
really man without a mutually agreed upon
peace-loving societal order and a personal
conviction or spirit evolved therein, making for
the integrity and the functioning of the person
in that system. And thus is there also with the
necessary negation
of the inescapable ego with it something like
the being attached to the goodness of the
platonic God with which we cannot as easily
abandon the selfhood that manifests itself time
and again with the normal mortal that is
karmically connected to mother earth, so that
more values are needed than just the one of
goodness to do justice to God in terms of
eternal values. With Lord Caitanya as the actual
Lordship of Reform and defender of the
philosophy of Vyâsadeva, we so find
therefore, next to his very emotional relations
or mellows (rasas) with the holy name
that in ecstasy was sung by him, the s'uddha
sattva values of the s'auca, tapas,
sathya and dâya as explained by
Vyâsa (in S.B.
1.17: 24),
or the need of the respectively with the to the
values with the good of God finding of the
purity of body and mind, penance, truthfulness
and a nature-loving compassion. For the goodness
with oneself without compassion might imply
violence against others (including plant and
animal); might imply a lack of penance in not
sharing with 'lesser ones'; might imply a lie in
the description of reality because of which the
goodness in fact turns out to be an illusion;
and, with a lusty type of goodness being
estranged and lonesome, imply the faithlessnesss
of the inability to live the connectedness; or
as Vyâsa puts it: (S.B.
11.25: 35)
'Being connected should he also, free from
depending on it, conquer the goodness so that
he, with his intelligence pacified in being
liberated from the gunas, as an individual soul
giving up on the cause of his being conditioned,
achieves Me.'
The
personal part of our filognosy thus commences
with the individual story of this writer. Not
that my small I-ness would be that important,
but because my person knows the history which
illustrates this development of being attached
to the good,  towards
the being detached in the goodness which is so
essential to the progress of escaping from the
prison and the hopeless stupidity of civil
attachments. For the question at hand is here:
how in God's name does one get as far as, e.g.,
a Christian to occupy oneself with Hinduism, the
inevitable cultural consequence of respecting
Vyâsa? What exactly was the need thereof,
how does such a life-experience build up? Of
course am I personally but one of the many
examples of people who, lost in modern time, had
to reconsider things for themselves with the
notion that the classical order of christian
society is not quite fully of understanding and
prepared to welcome someone with all the twists
of our modern fate. The order of the world is
the order of the world and Christianity, like
Judaism and Islam is but a historical part of
it, however indispensable they on themselves are
for so many. And so met the writer of this in
his life, departing from the christian cross,
with other cultures of the sun, moon, order and
gnosis, who contributed in the love for the
knowledge which in the end amounted to the
filognosy of this site. The ongoing realization
with this was that repressive progress, the
evolution at the cost of previous developments,
constitutes no real progress. A tree is healthy
together with its roots and so is our political,
democratic and postmodern, enlightenment healthy
with the vedic root, even though it is, like the
Gîtâ (15:
1-4)
puts it, a tree up side down that with it's
roots touches the sky, and with which one has to
break in the end when the jog is done and the
tools may be cleared away. One gains experience
all together and everything else that is found
with it simply complicates the matter. The fact
that there are material improvements taking
place as e.g. the tape-recorder finding digital
recording technologies or of the phone evolving
into the communication over the internet,
doesn't mean that that culture or school of
learning of the medium that historically
preceded another institute of civilization
wouldn't be of any use anymore or wouldn't have
a right to exist any longer. The vinyl-record is
still around, despite of CD's and also is the
radio still there despite of the t.v. Despite of
the internet are there still books and despite
of Christianity is there still Judaism too, just
like the culture is still around of the 'sons of
God' 
who arriving from beyond the mountains -
possibly the far east thus - exerted their
influence upon the Jews, like the Bible-book
Genesis describes it in the chapter on the
Ancient Times. So too do we later on in the
political section arrive at the conclusion that
with respect for a certain history of the norms
and standards we simply have to count with the
different views there are in the world and that
we so also have to count with the different
personalities, divine or not, like they are
taken together filognostically at this site (and
in the
book thereof)
with the different sections mentioning them. In
fact is only non-repressively operating the
respect found for the human rights and a proper
idea of emancipation in de direction of the
beatitude, and so is it safe to say that only
with a syncretic approach, a kind of filognosy
as expounded here, a realistic respect for the
person and his association and a politics of
mutual commenting is possible that offers a
future to all. The repression that was born from
a lack of talent leads corrupting to
dictatorship, but the filognosy that leads to
respect for all the different views leads, as
was described already in the Small
Philosophy of
Association,
to the balance of a true democracy, to a more at
the human identity of the soul directed
representative democracy which no longer defeats
itself, just like a couple of football-teams all
the time do, with a new option of sovereignty
with every election.
First
of all is it with this outlook thus of
importance to offer my own story as an example
and as a proof of the viability and necessity of
the filognosy for each. Even though not everyone
shares the same - and thus better to recognize -
experience or evolution in life, even though
there are many roads that lead to the same
political Rome of the actual respect for the
person,  still
is every path traveled a gate to the future to
the disposition of each. That is the proven use
of a self-description one just as well may
consider a failure of the dominance of the false
ego as a success in selfrealization in the
interest of the greater soul of the world
population in it's entirety and God with all
living creatures and universes to it in
particular. To begin with myself are there two
pages with sayings. First a page with
quotes
of people other than me, the way I happened to
find them left and right about in particular the
subject of time and the order of wisdom. Like
the aphorisms
on the next page that came to me as separate
ideas, must they, not always wise or even
hilarious as they are at times, not all be taken
as serious. The page with my own sayings is
called the Gray
Page
for that reason. They are partly absurd
thoughts, impulses or emotional expressions
sometimes just meant for fun or to serve another
emotional reason. After having presented myself
on a next page in the section called
The
Mirror of
Tim'
where I tell the story of how I arrived at my
filognostical sense of order, is there room for
a page on which I further deliberate on
gurus
and therapists and
focus on the special incarnations of God in the
present age. Next follows a page about the idea
of time
realized
religiously,
the way one sees it with the different world
religions, and is there as an introduction to
next
section
a page about my
personal struggle with the times of the modern
political
quarrel.
What follows next is a page specifically about
the Game
of Order,
a complete site in itself, that everybody has to
learn to play if he wants to consider himself a
winner and an committed person - as far as I am
concerned a filognostic. At last is there a page
about the
basis of vedic
knowledge
on which this entire site actually was built.
It's beyond the scope of this site to deal
extensively with the complete of the vedantic
commentary written by Vyâsa, but with a
general introduction to that flute in the hands
of Krishna, his hero and Lordship, and the
discussion of a couple of elementary chapters
and nuclear verses which especially emphasize
the connection between the order of time and the
person of God, will religiously committed this
section be completed.
The
pictures:
-
The modern painting is of Mordecai
Ardon
and is called 'For the fallen souls'; it
is the center piece called the 'Card house' from
a triptych
of 1955 - '56. It is painted in oil on canvas
and is part of the collection of the Stedelijk
Museum in Amsterdam.
-
The picture with the glasses and the book
indicates to what extend a book equals a pair of
glasses, works like spectacles.
-
The man underneath is the anti-psychiatrist
R.
D. Laing,
from the sixties who emphasized the
environmental factors of the societal system as
possible maddeners.
-
The picture of Christ is a painting of Antonio
da Correggio (1489 - 1534) titled 'Christ
presented to the people' (Ecce Homo); it is
from 1525-30 and consists of oil on a panel
measuring 99.7 x 80 cm, and is situated in the
National Gallery of London.
-
The picture of the bust is an etching of
Gustave
Doré
(1832 - 1883) and shows Baron von
Münchhausen. A
literary
character
known for his grandiose adventures. His story
was also filmed
by Jerry
Gilliam.
-
The Buddha is a picture of Maha-Asta
Caitya, the great teacher of inner
renouncement, it is from Khara Khoto, Central
Asia. It is from before 1227 from the Tangut
Dynasty and can be found in the Hermitage
Museum.
-
The nun with the poor child is Mother
Theresa
(1910 - 1997), the holy Sister of Compassion
doing her charitable work in India.
-
Underneath a portrait of Martin Luther (1483 -
1546), painted by Lucas Cranach der Ältere
in 1529. Luther was the theologian overturned
the catholic order with his struggle against the
corruption of the church with her indulgences.
He translated the english text from the Bible in
German and thus popularized the text. He is
considered the leader of the Christian
Reformation.
-
The painting with the monk shows Luther during
the defense of his theses in the
reichstag in april 1521 in Worms in the
presence of emperor Karel V. Luther refused to
revoke anything of what he had
written.
-
The painter with the dancer shows Lord
Krishna
Caitanya
Mahâprabhu
(1486-1543)
who brought the reform of vaishnavism which
contested the rule of Islam in India, the
caste-system and the dry book-knowledge. His
message was 'chant the names and spread the
message of the Bhâgavatam'.
In the West he is known as the Lord of the Hare
Krishna's.
-
The painting of Christ with the nuns is of
Alessandro Magnasco (1667-1749), and is called
'Christ Adored by Two Nuns' and is from
1715, oil on canvas, 58 x 43 cm, at home in the
Galleria dell'Accademia in Venice.
-
The green painting of mother earth with her grip
on the person is of Frida Kahlo and named
'The Love Embrace of the Universe, the Earth
(Mexico), Me, and Senor Xolotl', and is of
1949, oil on canvas, 27 1/2 x 23 7/8 and can be
found in the Collection of Jorge Contreras
Chacel in Mexico City.
-
The picture below represents the filognostic
cross in which the pranava as the form
and yoga-mantra of God, the sun, the moon and
the celestial sky is respected on the basis of
the gnosis that mediates in the relation between
science and religion.
-
The tree upside down is a banyan representing
the knowledge of the world which roots in the
heaven of transcendence.
-
The gate with the light opens one's eye for the
still unknown but brilliant future reserved for
the person of good will in the
filognosy.
-
The hands with the flute represent the hands of
Lord Krishna who bedazzles us with His love for
the harmony of nature.
Footnote:
2:
Dikè: personification of justice
considered the daughter of Zeus and Themis.
De
site lineair als een perfectie van de causale
illusie:
|
