Buddha and Kierkegaard's stages

[1otherS]

Kierkegaard writes about the '3 stages in life's way' about this evolution in everyone's life.
From the aesthetic to an ethical approach to the ultimate life (according to him): the religious relation.
The first phase pertains IMO to fleeting happiness, stimulant addiction, other addiction.
Second phase: loyalty to the idea and practice of marriage.
Third phase: surrender of the will to God.
Now the rub is: which path is the right one? Right now I prefer to divide my time between the ethical and religious.
What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?

I hope you understand my point. If there's any confusion, ask questions and I'll elaborate.

[1otherS]

I see. I'll take this question elsewhere.

[Carl G]

Where will you take it?

Sorry you didn't get a response within the allotted 21 hours. It was Thanksgiving here in the States.

Good luck.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Now the rub is: which path is the right one? Right now I prefer to divide my time between the ethical and religious.
What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?

You ask that on a forum dedicated to enlightenment, truth, wisdom, absolute etc? Or do you see those as a possible loyalty to marriage too? In that sense your question becomes hard to answer seriously without some more explaining.

In a way the ideal is always ones god, so one cannot have as ideal the addictive stimulants and think about anything beyond that at the same time. The only possible answer is already included in your question that way really.

The impatience in your second post seems to tell me that you're more addicted to the instant stimulant of average internet discussion than you're realizing right now. So perhaps you mean you're dividing your time three way: between the body internal, body external and body eternal?

[1otherS]

Now the rub is: which path is the right one? Right now I prefer to divide my time between the ethical and religious.
What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?

You ask that on a forum dedicated to enlightenment, truth, wisdom, absolute etc? Or do you see those as a possible loyalty to marriage too? In that sense your question becomes hard to answer seriously without some more explaining.

Kierkegaard was a heavy-weight philosopher seriously involved with the objectives you just listed. Loyalty to one's wife is stepping-stone to supporting your dearest and also your people.

In a way the ideal is always ones god, so one cannot have as ideal the addictive stimulants and think about anything beyond that at the same time. The only possible answer is already included in your question that way really.

Point taken. I have a certain clinging to the web and books in particular. If I were to forego addiction and marriage, what's in store next?

The impatience in your second post seems to tell me that you're more addicted to the instant stimulant of average internet discussion than you're realizing right now. So perhaps you mean you're dividing your time three way: between the body internal, body external and body eternal?

True again, so... the only way is the ever way? Will there be results? should I be expecting these?

[edit: cleaned up tags to make the post comprehensible - admin]

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Loyalty to one's wife is stepping-stone to supporting your dearest and also your people.

Dedication to something bigger often takes away from the smaller, like ourselves, or our extended kin. It would be like serving two masters at the same time, and the smaller master has normally different concerns than the bigger master, to the point of being diametrically opposed.

So it might be a stepping-stone in one sense, it might as well function as a stumbling block in many others.

Point taken. I have a certain clinging to the web and books in particular. If I were to forego addiction and marriage, what's in store next?

If you don't have any idea, can there be any ideal? Can you phrase your ideal beyond marriage? The idea here is obtaining clarity on what it is you're really after, to get a good look at it.

True again, so... the only way is the ever way? Will there be results? should I be expecting these?

It's like marriage perhaps in that regard. The expected and the unexpected, some results you'll deeply appreciate, other results will make you wish you never started and it seems impossible to turn back now, or at least rather messy :) So something has to give.

[Alex Jacob]

"What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?"

In Indian religious life and philosophy (ie 'Hindu') they also divide the life into one of life's stages: Youth and student years (Brahmacharya); family life, professional life, social life, cultural life; and then one of letting go of all those connections: the life of the renunciant, one who is approaching death and looks upon 'eternity'.

Fundamentally, I do not at all grasp Kierkegaards more or less random choice to divide it up in this particular way. I run into problems on this forum because I state it, and the idea runs quite counter to traditional thinking here. The ideal here is this notion of some great 'value' that one is supposed to serve above and beyond one's ties to one's society, or one's family, wife and children. And at the top, as if it is in some wholly separate category, some utterly unrelated field.

Why is it not possible to promote a balanced relationship?

On what precise basis is Kierkegaard held up as an authority?

[Ataraxia]

On what precise basis is Kierkegaard held up as an authority?

It's a fair question.

He is representative of the religious aspect to the QSRH philosophy in my view.

[1otherS]

Loyalty to one's wife is stepping-stone to supporting your dearest and also your people.

Dedication to something bigger often takes away from the smaller, like ourselves, or our extended kin. It would be like serving two masters at the same time, and the smaller master has normally different concerns than the bigger master, to the point of being diametrically opposed.

So it might be a stepping-stone in one sense, it might as well function as a stumbling block in many others.

Point taken. I have a certain clinging to the web and books in particular. If I were to forego addiction and marriage, what's in store next?

If you don't have any idea, can there be any ideal? Can you phrase your ideal beyond marriage? The idea here is obtaining clarity on what it is you're really after, to get a good look at it.

1otherS: The goal is to kelp your kindred spirits in ever increasing ways till all of us reach clarity of self.

True again, so... the only way is the ever way? Will there be results? should I be expecting these?

It's like marriage perhaps in that regard. The expected and the unexpected, some results you'll deeply appreciate, other results will make you wish you never started and it seems impossible to turn back now, or at least rather messy :) So something has to give.

1otherS: Agreed, a 3-way split between the wifey might be quite the hassle.

So, what's Next? A balanced committment to God.

I'll give examples:

Abstaining from meat, animal products, stimulants incl hard drugs, mihuana, tobacco, alcohol.

Loyalty to kinship with God, the ideal that created you.

Fulfilling God's works: generosity to all
no envy
hate
greed
sloth
vanity
wrath directed at others

This will gradually boost their lot in life to the making of happiness
love of others
endurance in extreme hardship
near-perfection
eternity

What do you think?

[1otherS]

"What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?"

Why is it not possible to promote a balanced relationship?

1otherS: Like Diebert said: you can not serve two masters.
other maxim: You must shut the door behind you completely, in order to unlock the
front passthrough

On what precise basis is Kierkegaard held up as an authority?

1otherS: Life sure handed a test to SK: he was engaged to Regine which he deeply loved. The engagement got annulled because of K's faith-dilemma:

If I Marry her and have kids I'm not living the Word of Jesus Christ, who trusted me in becoming a perfect image of God Almighty. I need to break this tie, however precious it may be.

God needs my spirit in full: I will sacrifice all relevant objects to me:
bodily happiness

Romantic and erotic relationships

Lofty ideas disagreeing with Truth

This must be the road to the Kingdom of God

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Fulfilling God's works: generosity to all, endurance in extreme hardship, near-perfection, eternity

What do you think?

A more general, more encompassing list in my view is captured by this forum's banner: truth, courage, honesty, logic, masculinity, wisdom, perfection. You'll notice that there's no mention of 'love', 'compassion' and 'lack of [negative] emotion'. This is because these terms are grossly misunderstood and if used it's most often to cover for some lie, lust or cowardliness. But they're implied nevertheless. What do you think?

[Alex Jacob]

1otherS wrote:

"If I Marry her and have kids I'm not living the Word of Jesus Christ, who trusted me in becoming a perfect image of God Almighty. I need to break this tie, however precious it may be."

Funny how we can deceive ourselves and think we are doing it 'for God'.

[1otherS]

1otherS wrote:

"If I Marry her and have kids I'm not living the Word of Jesus Christ, who trusted me in becoming a perfect image of God Almighty. I need to break this tie, however precious it may be."

Funny how we can deceive ourselves and think we are doing it 'for God'.

Good point, I might be doing this for Self but there's also the saying: "We are all God's Sons and Daughters."

[1otherS]

Fulfilling God's works: generosity to all, endurance in extreme hardship, near-perfection, eternity

What do you think?

A more general, more encompassing list in my view is captured by this forum's banner: truth, courage, honesty, logic, masculinity, wisdom, perfection. You'll notice that there's no mention of 'love', 'compassion' and 'lack of [negative] emotion'. This is because these terms are grossly misunderstood and if used it's most often to cover for some lie, lust or cowardliness. But they're implied nevertheless. What do you think?

1otherS:
Nice. What happens when we trust on Love, compassion and emotion? Corrupted romance, a fall from Grace?

[Tomas]

.


-1otherS-
Kierkegaard writes about the '3 stages in life's way' about this evolution in everyone's life.

-tomas-
First, about some fellow who lived a couple lifetimes away from me he would be an interesting individual to have over for dinner.



-1 to 5-
From the aesthetic to an ethical approach to the ultimate life (according to him): the religious relation.

-tomas-
Yeah, there is that worldly side to all of us.



-1 to 5-
The first phase pertains IMO to fleeting happiness, stimulant addiction, other addiction.

-tomas-
When we met, it was love at first sight.


-1 to 5-
Second phase: loyalty to the idea and practice of marriage.

-tomas-
It worked/works for us, the fidelity has kept me on a leash, without the constraints of a worldly certificate from the governmental authorities who clearly don't know what's best for humanity.



-1 to 5-
Third phase: surrender of the will to God.

-tomas-
Please tell me you are referring to some/all of "natural instincts" without the introduction of mass media's appeal, (religious in the worldly sense)? Off the top of my small-minded head I dunno if Buddha & Kierkegaard had a woman in their bedroom but I know I have a wise counselor (an alter-ego) i.e. woman who presents her side of the equation, meaning a point-of-view from the female perspective.



-1 to 5-
Now the rub is: which path is the right one?

-tomas-
If you're referring to the famous "fork in the road" well, be sure to go with the gut-feeling and never look back. That road will alway be the difficult one, but at the end of life's journey be satisfied (reflect upon) that the path you chose fulfilled your innate self with happiness.



-1 to 5-
Right now I prefer to divide my time between the ethical and religious.

-tomas-
Some try wishing upon a star, some try running they don't get far.



-1 to 5-
What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?

-tomas-
At age-45, one begans to figure out that the lifestyle gotta change.

At age-50, one begins to take the excess to the trash bin.

At age-55, one regains control over the inevitableness of it all.



-1 to 5-
I hope you understand my point. If there's any confusion, ask questions and I'll elaborate.

-tomas-
The point seems to be that you have confusion and you're asking (individally) us to help you (and us) sort it out.

PS - Welcome aboard the Fun Machine.


.

[Alex Jacob]

1otherS wrote:

"Good point, I might be doing this for Self but there's also the saying: "We are all God's Sons and Daughters."

The question of 'what God wants' is simply vast and it has not been and may never be decided. However, from experience some have learned, that it is 'wise' to beware of paths that restrict access to women, or are hung-up about sex with women. Kierkegaard made a call on this, and we could never second-guess him. He may have discovered that he had some erotic attraction for men...or Heaven only knows what. The Christian religion, for various reasons (and likely none of them related to Jesus), preferenced celibacy, and there were some monkish sects developing anterior to Jesus' coming ont he stage (the Essenes) who had issues with women, but one really has to be careful when one feels, as a young man, that there is something 'wrong' with knowing women, having relationships, etc. Sometimes you just have to go through all of the experiences of life and not to isolate oneself from them.

[Carl G]

The question of 'what God wants' is simply vast and it has not been and may never be decided. However, from experience some have learned, that it is 'wise' to beware of paths that restrict access to women, or are hung-up about sex with women. Kierkegaard made a call on this, and we could never second-guess him. He may have discovered that he had some erotic attraction for men...or Heaven only knows what. The Christian religion, for various reasons (and likely none of them related to Jesus), preferenced celibacy, and there were some monkish sects developing anterior to Jesus' coming ont he stage (the Essenes) who had issues with women, but one really has to be careful when one feels, as a young man, that there is something 'wrong' with knowing women, having relationships, etc. Sometimes you just have to go through all of the experiences of life and not to isolate oneself from them.

Or, in other words, nothing.

[1otherS]

I've went through the women-issue thoroughly. Now I want to stay loyal to The One.
The tricky part to this(again): How do I go about this?

[David Quinn]

On what precise basis is Kierkegaard held up as an authority?

It's a fair question.

He is representative of the religious aspect to the QSRH philosophy in my view.

I reject that subdivision.

Kierkegaard was no more religious than Nietzsche or Buddha or any other thinker of the Infinite. And when I offer my coldest, driest reasonings on this forum, I am being just as religious as Kierkegaard was in his poetic odes to God.

This division between "religious" and "non-religious" doesn't apply to spiritual men, or to any aspect of their behaviour. They have the same approach and same vision in everything they do.

Purity of heart is to will one thing, observed Kierkegaard.

-

[David Quinn]

Kierkegaard writes about the '3 stages in life's way' about this evolution in everyone's life.
From the aesthetic to an ethical approach to the ultimate life (according to him): the religious relation.
The first phase pertains IMO to fleeting happiness, stimulant addiction, other addiction.
Second phase: loyalty to the idea and practice of marriage.
Third phase: surrender of the will to God.
Now the rub is: which path is the right one? Right now I prefer to divide my time between the ethical and religious.
What do you prefer, which one is your ideal?

The purely religious is obviously the highest ideal, but until one has the strength and wisdom to abide there permanently, one should make use of aesthetic and ethical aspects as aids.

The aesthetic is useful because it can stimulate heart-felt emotions about God (e.g. via mystical experiences) and thus provide one with renewed enthusiasm for the task. The ethical is helpful in ironing out bad habits which distract one from God. So they both have a role to play.

Interestingly, Nietzsche also described a three-stage path in Thus Spake Zarathustra, although the categories he created were different:

The Three Metamorphoses

Three metamorphoses of the spirit do I designate to you: how the spirit becometh a camel, the camel a lion, and the lion at last a child.

Many heavy things are there for the spirit, the strong load-bearing spirit in which reverence dwelleth: for the heavy and the heaviest longeth its strength.

What is heavy? so asketh the load-bearing spirit; then kneeleth it down like the camel, and wanteth to be well laden.

What is the heaviest thing, ye heroes? asketh the load-bearing spirit, that I may take it upon me and rejoice in my strength.

Is it not this: To humiliate oneself in order to mortify one's pride? To exhibit one's folly in order to mock at one's wisdom?

Or is it this: To desert our cause when it celebrateth its triumph? To ascend high mountains to tempt the tempter?

Or is it this: To feed on the acorns and grass of knowledge, and for the sake of truth to suffer hunger of soul?

Or is it this: To be sick and dismiss comforters, and make friends of the deaf, who never hear thy requests?

Or is it this: To go into foul water when it is the water of truth, and not disclaim cold frogs and hot toads?

Or is it this: To love those who despise us, and give one's hand to the phantom when it is going to frighten us?

All these heaviest things the load-bearing spirit taketh upon itself: and like the camel, which, when laden, hasteneth into the wilderness, so hasteneth the spirit into its wilderness.

But in the loneliest wilderness happeneth the second metamorphosis: here the spirit becometh a lion; freedom will it capture, and lordship in its own wilderness.

Its last Lord it here seeketh: hostile will it be to him, and to its last God; for victory will it struggle with the great dragon.

What is the great dragon which the spirit is no longer inclined to call Lord and God? "Thou-shalt," is the great dragon called. But the spirit of the lion saith, "I will."

"Thou-shalt," lieth in its path, sparkling with gold--a scale-covered beast; and on every scale glittereth golden, "Thou shalt!"

The values of a thousand years glitter on those scales, and thus speaketh the mightiest of all dragons: "All the values of things--glitter on me.

All values have already been created, and all created values--do I represent. Verily, there shall be no 'I will' any more. Thus speaketh the dragon.

My brethren, wherefore is there need of the lion in the spirit? Why sufficeth not the beast of burden, which renounceth and is reverent?

To create new values--that, even the lion cannot yet accomplish: but to create itself freedom for new creating--that can the might of the lion do.

To create itself freedom, and give a holy Nay even unto duty: for that, my brethren, there is need of the lion.

To assume the right to new values--that is the most formidable assumption for a load-bearing and reverent spirit. Verily, unto such a spirit it is preying, and the work of a beast of prey.

As its holiest, it once loved "Thou-shalt": now is it forced to find illusion and arbitrariness even in the holiest things, that it may capture freedom from its love: the lion is needed for this capture.

But tell me, my brethren, what the child can do, which even the lion could not do? Why hath the preying lion still to become a child?

Innocence is the child, and forgetfulness, a new beginning, a game, a self-rolling wheel, a first movement, a holy Yea.

Aye, for the game of creating, my brethren, there is needed a holy Yea unto life: ITS OWN will, willeth now the spirit; HIS OWN world winneth the world's outcast.

Three metamorphoses of the spirit have I designated to you: how the spirit became a camel, the camel a lion, and the lion at last a child.--

While Nietzsche's child corresponds with Kierkegaard's religious ideal, his two lower categories were different. Instead of the aesthetic and the ethical, he talks about breaking away from conventionality and challenging everything, thereby emphasising different aspects of the path.

On the other hand, Nietzsche was big on the aethetic (he loved music and altered states) and the ethical (he was very self-disciplined), while Kierkegaard used his life to break away from conventionalty and challenge everything. So they were very similar at root, even though they emphasised different aspects.

-

[1otherS]

I did not know that Nietzsche excerpt, thanks David. I prefer studying Kierkegaard now,however.
If you had to pick 3 Essential Kierkegaard pieces to aid everyone, what would they be?

[David Quinn]

The Kierkegaard material on my site is great reading - here

Kevin Solway's compilation of his material within Venom Crystals is also very stimulating.

Other than that, I recommend his journals, as well as his pamphlets against Christianity.

-

[1otherS]

I've went through both of these works. I've also read Seducer's Diary, Philosophic Crumbs, Banquet and Stages on Life's Way.
You want to discuss excerpts?
Here's one:
"Nothing is more certain. Coming close to God brings catastrophe. Everyone whose life does not bring relative catastrophe has never even once turned as a single individual to God; it is just as impossible as it is to touch the conductors of a generator without getting a shock."

-1otherS-
Go with God=going against Mankind.
Renouncing the aesthetic and being loyal to one woman seriously reduces STD's and global population. Becoming loyal to God only completely ruins this Body we call Planet Earth and re-introduces us all to Spirit.

[David Quinn]

I've went through both of these works. I've also read Seducer's Diary, Philosophic Crumbs, Banquet and Stages on Life's Way.
You want to discuss excerpts?
Here's one:
"Nothing is more certain. Coming close to God brings catastrophe. Everyone whose life does not bring relative catastrophe has never even once turned as a single individual to God; it is just as impossible as it is to touch the conductors of a generator without getting a shock."

That's the main theme throughout his work and echoes the main theme of the Gospels - although you wouldn't know it if you just listened to Christians.

Opening up to God involves being assaulted on all levels, both inwardly in the form of one's own conscience and outwardly in the form of clashing openly with the deluded human race.

Go with God=going against Mankind.

Or more accurately, against the delusions of mankind, including those within oneself.

Renouncing the aesthetic and being loyal to one woman seriously reduces STD's and global population. Becoming loyal to God only completely ruins this Body we call Planet Earth and re-introduces us all to Spirit.

Not sure what you mean by this. I'm sure the earth will continue unscathed in the hands of a wiser human race.

-

[1otherS]

The Earth will survive in a more cerebral, less instinctual way when we are to follow Kierkegaard's advice.

Do you agree?