Monomyth

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Joseph Campbell wrote frequently of what he called the "monomyth", what he considered to be the universal pattern of the "neverending story" of man's herioc journey to find his reason for being, and then, in the finding of this reason, to become and then be, this reason. From A Hero with a Thousand Faces: "A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man."

What this means, to this hero of her own journey, is that every person who sets out to accomplish Something or to realize Something and to share this Something with the world with the intent of making the world a better place, is an enlightened being, is a genius. The whole world may disagree with the Something that this enlightened being is attempting to bestow for the good of the All, but to the hero who holds unconditional faith in the "boon" of their discovery, these disagreements are of no concern.

For the hero who has accepted fully the call to realize Something, this Something becomes their Mistress, their Lover, their Master - their Everything. A hero who has fulfilled his vision is the man or woman who rests on this firm foundation of Self, until, or if, Something 'higher' calls him to explore what this Something 'higher' is.

The "Monomyth" as described by wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Monomyth

Post by Talking Ass »

Is there something higher than the Ipod? [Just a wee bit of a joke since it meets the criteria you mention. But not to make light of the topic (Diebert tossed 19 pages of Campbell at us in another thread) since it is really quite interesting, and not at all discussed here.]
fiat mihi
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Campbell is remarkable at times. But he was clinging to Jungian visions of a shared mythical "subconscious" a bit too much. The monomyth becomes way more powerful when seeing it in the light of ones own mind - each venture - each thought - each challenge to the universe it utters.

Awareness ventures forth from the world of sleep into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: each and every mighty impression coming back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man.

The most convincing etymology of the concept of hero I found is like the "warrior who has died honorably on the battlefield or his adventure". Any survivor was still just warrior, if he had the scars to prove his effort at least. But an effort could become heroic if one miraculously would have survived a battle where "one should have died" considering the risk and sacrifice involved. A supernatural aureole now being placed above the survivor as if he visited death but returned to live and die another day.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Diebert: The monomyth becomes way more powerful when seeing it in the light of ones own mind - each venture - each thought - each challenge to the universe it utters.
This vision is the only vision that saves one from the prison of the idea of the collective human mind.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movinglways wrote:What this means, to this hero of her own journey, is that every person who sets out to accomplish Something or to realize Something and to share this Something with the world with the intent of making the world a better place, is an enlightened being, is a genius
The intent of making the world a better place, is the devil's work. Only someone in ignorance would have the intent of making a place designed to be a trap, a better trap. It's our belief in the world that is our trap.
"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! Jesus, Luke 12:49
You do mention "unconditional faith" in the "boon" of their discovery yet you condition it by defining it as "the intent of making the world a better place."
movingalways wrote:For the hero who has accepted fully the call to realize Something, this Something becomes their Mistress, their Lover, their Master - their Everything. A hero who has fulfilled his vision is the man or woman who rests on this firm foundation of Self, until, or if, Something 'higher' calls him to explore what this Something 'higher' is.
There is no Self, there is an appearance of self. How solid can an appearance ever be? Something higher is calling each of us every moment, it's the degree to which we believe in the world that we miss this calling.
#
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Monomyth

Post by Talking Ass »

Cathy, you are operating within Christian categories with no enunciation of your specific relationship to those categories. Can you please describe to what 'world' one must perform allegiance to? If you quote Luke, will you also quote all parts of Luke and the other Gospels to? Or, as with Quinn, do you select out of that context a few phrases that support your personal interpretation negating the rest?
fiat mihi
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Something higher is calling each of us every moment, it's the degree to which we believe in the world that we miss this calling.
If you are being called, do you not still believe in the world?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

Talking Ass wrote:Cathy, you are operating within Christian categories with no enunciation of your specific relationship to those categories. Can you please describe to what 'world' one must perform allegiance to? If you quote Luke, will you also quote all parts of Luke and the other Gospels to? Or, as with Quinn, do you select out of that context a few phrases that support your personal interpretation negating the rest?
What is the context of Luke 12 then?

It begins with Jesus warning to watch out for the influence of the Pharisees, because they are hypocrites. He goes onto to explain that nothing is hidden, it's no good pretending you're something you're not, it's better to a be a simple murderer, than a murderer who then proclaims he is just. Saying that anyone who blasphemies man will be forgiven, but those that blasphemy god will be unforgivable.

Then a man suggests that Jesus can make the man's brother share his wealth with him, Jesus, basically says its not his job to judge nor divide over him. He then talks about possessions, saying beware all covetousness, that a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.

The subject then turns to worldly affairs that cause us concern, like feeding ourselves, or clothing ourselves, in fact Jesus asks us to not be concerned with our life in any way. Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things shall be yours as well.

The next part talks about selling our possessions, and treasuring what does not grow old, and storing these treasures in heaven, rather than in the world, where a thief may approach it or the moths may destroy it. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Finally he talks about never knowing when the moment will arrive to meet the master, that one must be prepared as a servant every minute and not fall back thinking the master will never come, saying that one who has heard the master's call and yet forgets the call, will be punished more severely than one who never heard the call in the first place.
12:49 I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled! 12.50 I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!
He seems to be saying a new life awaits but until the earth is destroyed he is restricted from his initiation into it. The whole context of Luke 12 is about not being concerned with worldly possessions, worldly treasures, or worldly justice, valuing honesty above judgment. If he's asking us to not be concerned with any of it, why would he come to make it better?

Why do you have to pledge allegiance to any world, is not "God" calling for your allegiance to him and him alone?

movingalways wrote:
Something higher is calling each of us every moment, it's the degree to which we believe in the world that we miss this calling.
If you are being called, do you not still believe in the world?
You're talking about me personally? If so, yes I was called, and it was but a whisper, a mere glimpse, a hint, now I am called, and it permeates every moment. We are called because we are in the world, the call becomes stronger the less faith we have in it (the world) until it (the calling) drowns out the world.
As a lotus flower is born in
water, grows in water and rises out of water to stand above it
unsoiled, so I, born in the world, raised in the world having overcome
the world, live unsoiled by the world

Buddha (563 – 483 BC)
#
cousinbasil
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:26 am
Location: Garment District

Re: Monomyth

Post by cousinbasil »

Cathy Preston wrote:He seems to be saying a new life awaits but until the earth is destroyed he is restricted from his initiation into it. The whole context of Luke 12 is about not being concerned with worldly possessions, worldly treasures, or worldly justice, valuing honesty above judgment. If he's asking us to not be concerned with any of it, why would he come to make it better?
The message is not to be attached to worldly possessions. This frees you in enormous ways and even in subtle ways. He did not say "not to be concerned" with it.
Why do you have to pledge allegiance to any world, is not "God" calling for your allegiance to him and him alone?
Why not give unto God what he requires, and likewise with Caesar?
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Monomyth

Post by Talking Ass »

You ask What is the context of Luke 12, but the fuller question is What is the context of the whole Biblical revelation, what are the core Biblical themes, and what is the Biblical vision for a transformed individual and world?

Luke is said to have been an associate of Paul, and if that is so it suggests a link philosophically between him and Pauline doctrines. And those doctrines have very much to do with temporal work within an earthly community, which is to say 'the world'.

The question Why do you have to pledge allegiance to any world? is a very peculiar one to my ears anyway. In Judaism there is only a focus on the world that we are now in. True, there did arise more radical sects within Judaism, but Judaism generally speaking remains situated within the field of the known and the 'real'. There is no other field, that I am aware of anyway. Where Christianity deviates from this sensibility in to my mind the point where it veers away from what is realistic and practicable.

But it is very true that there exists that strain that emphasizes the 'My Kingdom.is not of this world' part.
fiat mihi
User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Monomyth

Post by Tomas »

Talking Ass wrote:True, there did arise more radical sects within Judaism, but Judaism generally speaking remains situated within the field of the known and the 'real'. There is no other field, that I am aware of anyway. Where Christianity deviates from this sensibility in to my mind the point where it veers away from what is realistic and practicable.
Every time my family has gone to Israel, we make it a point to go to the Western Wall and observe the religious (the Jews) bobbing their head and the others, the Christians, feeling the wall (with their hands, that is).

Images of the political class, Bush & Obama (with their kippah atop their scull) doing the same at The Wall.
Don't run to your death
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

Talking Ass wrote:You ask What is the context of Luke 12, but the fuller question is What is the context of the whole Biblical revelation, what are the core Biblical themes, and what is the Biblical vision for a transformed individual and world?

Luke is said to have been an associate of Paul, and if that is so it suggests a link philosophically between him and Pauline doctrines. And those doctrines have very much to do with temporal work within an earthly community, which is to say 'the world'.

The question Why do you have to pledge allegiance to any world? is a very peculiar one to my ears anyway. In Judaism there is only a focus on the world that we are now in. True, there did arise more radical sects within Judaism, but Judaism generally speaking remains situated within the field of the known and the 'real'. There is no other field, that I am aware of anyway. Where Christianity deviates from this sensibility in to my mind the point where it veers away from what is realistic and practicable.

But it is very true that there exists that strain that emphasizes the 'My Kingdom.is not of this world' part.
My use of Luke 12 as context was to show that the 12:49 quote was not a random sentence, but that it fit within the broader text preceding it. The core biblical themes were created by men who never truly understood the message of Jesus, the biblical vision is skewed by the more pressing motive of maintaining and growing the religion. So of course religion is concerned with the world, it's created by man, for man, even if the foundation is based upon something truly divine, it veers off into the mundane at every opportunity.

As for being realistic and practical, in my experience most religious people are anything but realistic, and the practicality they boast is more like a lack in ideals, take for instance the catholic church which bans birth control, yet millions of men and women who use birth control still consider themselves practicing catholics. If you can't agree on the groups basic tenets, why even be a member of it? It's also mildly interesting that many religious pro-life advocates, support the death penalty without question. I could go on, but I won't.
@
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

movingalways wrote:
Quote:
Something higher is calling each of us every moment, it's the degree to which we believe in the world that we miss this calling.

If you are being called, do you not still believe in the world?

You're talking about me personally? If so, yes I was called, and it was but a whisper, a mere glimpse, a hint, now I am called, and it permeates every moment. We are called because we are in the world, the call becomes stronger the less faith we have in it (the world) until it (the calling) drowns out the world.
I relate to that call and am very much enjoying our conversations. For me, it is all about how deep one is willing to go so that the Call no longer permeates but rather, becomes what one is. In other words, 'IT' defines their reason for being conscious, right here, right now. An example of the difference between becoming the reason and thinking about the reason can be found in your statement below:
He seems to be saying a new life awaits but until the earth is destroyed he is restricted from his initiation into it. The whole context of Luke 12 is about not being concerned with worldly possessions, worldly treasures, or worldly justice, valuing honesty above judgment. If he's asking us to not be concerned with any of it, why would he come to make it better?
It is you who speaks of the sage being truthful; where is the truth in the use of the doubting phrase "He seems to be saying?" I don't point this out to be judgmental, but rather, to explain the difference between contemplation of scripture that transform one into the light of their own knowing and thinking about scripture that keeps keep one in the darkness of reasonable analysis. Jesus said "I am the light of the world."
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:
movingalways wrote:
Quote:
Something higher is calling each of us every moment, it's the degree to which we believe in the world that we miss this calling.

If you are being called, do you not still believe in the world?

You're talking about me personally? If so, yes I was called, and it was but a whisper, a mere glimpse, a hint, now I am called, and it permeates every moment. We are called because we are in the world, the call becomes stronger the less faith we have in it (the world) until it (the calling) drowns out the world.
I relate to that call and am very much enjoying our conversations. For me, it is all about how deep one is willing to go so that the Call no longer permeates but rather, becomes what one is. In other words, 'IT' defines their reason for being conscious, right here, right now. An example of the difference between becoming the reason and thinking about the reason can be found in your statement below:
He seems to be saying a new life awaits but until the earth is destroyed he is restricted from his initiation into it. The whole context of Luke 12 is about not being concerned with worldly possessions, worldly treasures, or worldly justice, valuing honesty above judgment. If he's asking us to not be concerned with any of it, why would he come to make it better?
It is you who speaks of the sage being truthful; where is the truth in the use of the doubting phrase "He seems to be saying?" I don't point this out to be judgmental, but rather, to explain the difference between contemplation of scripture that transform one into the light of their own knowing and thinking about scripture that keeps keep one in the darkness of reasonable analysis. Jesus said "I am the light of the world."
Interesting that phrase did make me pause, in honesty I can't speak with authority on something that is not completely clear to me yet. So the truth in my doubting phrase comes from my own lack of understanding. I've had glimpses of this in my own journey, therefore can't negate it outright, on the other hand I'm not much for speculation since you have to get to the end of one journey before you begin a new one. So in fact I have no doubt Jesus knew exactly what he was talking about. It's a matter of approach, I never take anything on faith alone, nor will I deny my own experiences. What I do understand is that the world isn't a world to be reconciled. its a world to be overcome, and it's this understanding that propels me forward into the unknown.
@
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Monomyth

Post by Talking Ass »

My referen e to the 'entire Biblical tradition' was to show that Luke 12:49 fits within an even broader context of religious definition that includes the specificity of that single sentence.

;-)

To say that those who compiled those traditions, who thought about them, dealt with them, did.not 'understand' what they were dealing with is an interesting interpretive thrust! To make the statement implies that you do. You'll find yourself in fine company and with a few souls very willing to exchange agreements with you. Quinn for example, Movingalways. Quinn also knows more than any living soul on the planet 'what Jesus meant' with an adamantine certainty...

A problem with your stance is that 'all is mundane' and that 'Hashem' (to distinguish a Jewish appreciation of god from the Christian) has always been a god deeply involved with a mundane human reality. You'd have a difficult time representing it differently. Still, you have every rigjt to make as radical an interpretation as you desire. Yet I would suggest that the 'greatest wisdom' of these Jewish Biblical traditions is exactly in the precise way those traditions focus within mundane life. It is hard.for some radical sorts to accept that THAT is what life is (and can be no other thing) and I will suggest that Judaism in this wide.sense represents the 'mature approach' to response to 'divinity'.

Unfortunately for us all (on the american scene) the field of Christian religiosity is.now dominated by the Southern Evangelicals on one side and the Catholic Roman Church on the other. Strung between bizarrely are.the Mormon Church, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, etc. But no one of these gets to assert definitively how Christianity.is to be conducted, and even what it is. I personally understand Walk Whitman as.carrything and expressing a truer energy of what 'Cheistianity' can be or what it.can invoke in people. But Whitman is exceptionally visceral and 'in the Earth' and the body,.and from the sound of it you'd see.him as a Devil's Messenger (as would David btw).

Also, there are vast areas of theological rumination that completely supercede any particular institution. Take for example Face of the Deep: A Theology of Becoming' by Catherine Keller. It is an extension of the 'theopoetical' adventure in theology of re-stating, re-vision, re-peesentation, that opens up into radically different.domains of thinking and experience.

I know I.am on a.forum that caters to the needs of religious extremists and radicals bitten by unusual bugs---I know this. I do not oppose any of this but rather I place other (related) possibilities beside it. Only for the sake of 'conversation'.
fiat mihi
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Interesting that phrase did make me pause, in honesty I can't speak with authority on something that is not completely clear to me yet. So the truth in my doubting phrase comes from my own lack of understanding. I've had glimpses of this in my own journey, therefore can't negate it outright, on the other hand I'm not much for speculation since you have to get to the end of one journey before you begin a new one. So in fact I have no doubt Jesus knew exactly what he was talking about. It's a matter of approach, I never take anything on faith alone, nor will I deny my own experiences. What I do understand is that the world isn't a world to be reconciled. its a world to be overcome, and it's this understanding that propels me forward into the unknown.
Tell me how you will overcome the world without first reconciling its appearance in your consciousness? If you desire to do so, could you interpret this scripture for me:
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 2 Corinthians 5:19
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:
Interesting that phrase did make me pause, in honesty I can't speak with authority on something that is not completely clear to me yet. So the truth in my doubting phrase comes from my own lack of understanding. I've had glimpses of this in my own journey, therefore can't negate it outright, on the other hand I'm not much for speculation since you have to get to the end of one journey before you begin a new one. So in fact I have no doubt Jesus knew exactly what he was talking about. It's a matter of approach, I never take anything on faith alone, nor will I deny my own experiences. What I do understand is that the world isn't a world to be reconciled. its a world to be overcome, and it's this understanding that propels me forward into the unknown.
Tell me how you will overcome the world without first reconciling its appearance in your consciousness? If you desire to do so, could you interpret this scripture for me:
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 2 Corinthians 5:19

There is nothing to resolve it (the world) is perfect for it's purpose, I come to this understanding through resolution of self; not by seeing fault in the world around me.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy Preston wrote:
movingalways wrote:
Interesting that phrase did make me pause, in honesty I can't speak with authority on something that is not completely clear to me yet. So the truth in my doubting phrase comes from my own lack of understanding. I've had glimpses of this in my own journey, therefore can't negate it outright, on the other hand I'm not much for speculation since you have to get to the end of one journey before you begin a new one. So in fact I have no doubt Jesus knew exactly what he was talking about. It's a matter of approach, I never take anything on faith alone, nor will I deny my own experiences. What I do understand is that the world isn't a world to be reconciled. its a world to be overcome, and it's this understanding that propels me forward into the unknown.
Tell me how you will overcome the world without first reconciling its appearance in your consciousness? If you desire to do so, could you interpret this scripture for me:
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 2 Corinthians 5:19

There is nothing to resolve it (the world) is perfect for it's purpose, I come to this understanding through resolution of self; not by seeing fault in the world around me.
The activity that was addressed was reconciliation, not resolving. Indeed, the world is not to be faulted, indeed it is to be seen as being perfect for its purpose, but if you held this view absolutely and completely, would you still be hearing the Call? My point is that as long as the Call is being heard and heeded, the effects/affects of the dualism that is the appearance of the world are yet being cleaned away from one's consciousness, cleaned away and being reconciled to their Source. Was Jesus not still heeding the Call, was Jesus still not in a divided state of mind when, in the garden of Gethsemane, he cried out to the Father, if it be His will, to take the cup [of crucifixion] from him? Did Jesus not cry out even on the cross a demonstration of this "being cleaned away of dualism" when he lamented "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

In this case, making the world a better place is not about increasing the comforts of the world, or finding the cure for cancer, or sending someone into outer space, it is about showing the world that the cure for its suffering is to "hold every thought captive to Christ", to reconcile willingly, to Source, to Spirit, one's attachment to appearance.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:
The activity that was addressed was reconciliation, not resolving. Indeed, the world is not to be faulted, indeed it is to be seen as being perfect for its purpose, but if you held this view absolutely and completely, would you still be hearing the Call? My point is that as long as the Call is being heard and heeded, the effects/affects of the dualism that is the appearance of the world are yet being cleaned away from one's consciousness, cleaned away and being reconciled to their Source. Was Jesus not still heeding the Call, was Jesus still not in a divided state of mind when, in the garden of Gethsemane, he cried out to the Father, if it be His will, to take the cup [of crucifixion] from him? Did Jesus not cry out even on the cross a demonstration of this "being cleaned away of dualism" when he lamented "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

In this case, making the world a better place is not about increasing the comforts of the world, or finding the cure for cancer, or sending someone into outer space, it is about showing the world that the cure for its suffering is to "hold every thought captive to Christ", to reconcile willingly, to Source, to Spirit, one's attachment to appearance.
You're splitting hairs, change the word to reconciliation then. Yes, the call is the totality, so it is heard through any appearance and every appearance. Once you come to the realization that what you once thought was "Subject and Object" is actually one thing dualism becomes moot. So then the appearance is not of duality, any appearance is the totality, perfect and complete. Jesus' expression of doubt is an example of the appearance not changing, nothing added, nothing taken away, it is the interpretation of the appearance that changes.

It is because you see filth, dirt, sin, evil, error, in the world that makes you attached to its disappearance.
@
User avatar
Talking Ass
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Questions Questions Questions

Post by Talking Ass »

Since the subject is 'monomyth' and since, Cathy, your vision and approach, from what you say, is very 'mono-', what exactly do you do with this knowledge? What activity does it inspire? I am genuinely interested to know: With your views and focus would you, will you, have children (or have you already?) Is 'God' a being or an entity that you consider 'real', that is personal (an entity with a 'personal' aspect?) If so, Does prayer move this 'god'? If the object is a total surrender to or involvement in 'God', where (if you'll permit me to ask it this way) does this 'god' reside? If God is not in this world, or in people in some way, how do you enjoy (excuse the word) your relationship with God? Do you have and do you desire relationships with others? For what purpose? Or, is all this talk of God really just a foil for something else, something else to be related to? How does your practice of your religion (is it a religion?) affect your day-to-day life? For example, are you a vegetarian and do you (or does your 'god') value non-harmfulness or does 'it' give you any other ethical proscriptions? I am hearing, so far, a great deal of 'abstract' definition, with references to the Gospels (which seems very odd since they are, on the whole, fictional accounts: stories with internal messages), but I desire to know in what concrete way(s) these abstractions connect to you. What is the goal of even holding to this God? A goal in the present? A goal in some (typically Christian) future? Why and for what reason would you respond to God in this way? Do you see your life as valuable or non-valuable? Do you communicate with other people in other religious traditions? If so, what traditions? What other 'teachings' do you feel correspond to your ideas and practices?
Last edited by Talking Ass on Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
fiat mihi
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy Preston: So then the appearance is not of duality, any appearance is the totality, perfect and complete. Jesus' expression of doubt is an example of the appearance not changing, nothing added, nothing taken away, it is the interpretation of the appearance that changes.
The appearance is of the totality, perfect and complete, appearance is not the totality, perfect and complete. When your eyes are closed, when your ears are plugged, when your mouth is shut, when the projecting mind is still, the totality is, you are, but where is the appearance of the totality that is also you? No where to be found.
It is because you see filth, dirt, sin, evil, error, in the world that makes you attached to its disappearance.


Please do not tell me what I see. Truth telling, remember?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:
Cathy Preston: So then the appearance is not of duality, any appearance is the totality, perfect and complete. Jesus' expression of doubt is an example of the appearance not changing, nothing added, nothing taken away, it is the interpretation of the appearance that changes.
The appearance is of the totality, perfect and complete, appearance is not the totality, perfect and complete. When your eyes are closed, when your ears are plugged, when your mouth is shut, when the projecting mind is still, the totality is, you are, but where is the appearance of the totality that is also you? No where to be found.
When your eyes are closed, when your ears are plugged, when your mouth is shut, when the projecting mind is still, there is the appearance of nothing, yet your blood goes on pumping, your breath goes in and out, there is Totality. It's a mistake to think "the appearance of nothing" is actually Totality. Nothing can't exist. If the totality was actually nothing, there would never be the appearance of anything, we would not be having this conversation, there would be no consciousness, no awareness, no mind. The totality is everything, no-thing exists that is not it, and there can only be the appearance of nothing, same as there can only ever be the appearance of things. If the Totality is everything how can any appearance not be it?
It is because you see filth, dirt, sin, evil, error, in the world that makes you attached to its disappearance.

ho
movingalways wrote:Please do not tell me what I see. Truth telling, remember?
So then you tell me: why are you attached to disappearance of the world?
@
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Monomyth

Post by Pam Seeback »

When your eyes are closed, when your ears are plugged, when your mouth is shut, when the projecting mind is still, there is the appearance of nothing, yet your blood goes on pumping, your breath goes in and out, there is Totality.
Yes, and when my blood stops pumping, when my breath ceases going in and out, there is Totality. The physical or sentient is dependent on the Totality, but the Totality is not dependent on the physical, the sentient, to be the Totality. This is my point. This aspect of the Totality that causes the breath, but is beyond the breath, is the Something that calls to me. And because I am not separate from anything of me, including the breath of me, and everything that comes into my breath awareness, including you, I am called to speak of this invisible Something.
movingalways wrote:
Please do not tell me what I see. Truth telling, remember?
So then you tell me: why are you attached to disappearance of the world?
I do not understand my viewpoint to be one of being attached to the disappearance of the world. I have already explained my viewpoint in another thread, the content and context of which you ignored, but I will try once again. When one is in ignorance, finite things appear to be different, A appears to be related to B, B to C, C to D, etc. When one is awake, finite things are realized to be the same, A = A, cockroach = the universe, they are not related to one another, they 'simply' are. Upon realizing this, one's view of the world of finite things changes completely [see my signature]. Is not the light that is love the not seeing any difference anywhere in the world? Where in light can contrast be seen? And, once one is breathing this love, living this love, of what use is the world of finite things, except to reconcile them in every moment with their Source.

As you can see, my view of the world is anything but that of filth, sin and evil. You told me you wanted to overcome the world. What did you mean by this?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Questions Questions Questions

Post by Cathy Preston »

Q: Since the subject is 'monomyth' and since, Cathy, your vision and approach, from what you say, is very 'mono-', what exactly do you do with this knowledge?
A: Well at this particular moment I'm sharing it, other than that I cannot say.

Q: What activity does it inspire?
A: It inspires peace, acceptance, honesty, joy, nature, to live naturally and with ease.

Q: It I am genuinely interested to know: With your views and focus would you, will you, have children (or have you already?)
A: I have one who is grown.

Q: Is 'God' a being or an entity that you consider 'real', that is personal (an entity with a 'personal' aspect?)
A: God is not separate from Totality, God is not separate from me, God = Totality. Infinite and unbounded God is neither personal nor non-personal.

Q: If so, Does prayer move this 'god'?
A: God, the Totality, the ALL, infinite and unbounded, everywhere you look, every moment you experience, perfect and complete there is nothing to ask for.

Q: If the object is a total surrender to or involvement in 'God', where (if you'll permit me to ask it this way) does this 'god' reside?
A: God resides in me and outside of me, anywhere and everywhere, as Totality, it is infinite. There is no place it does not reside.

Q: If God is not in this world, or in people in some way, how do you enjoy (excuse the word) your relationship with God?
A: God is not in the world, the appearance of the world is God, God is not in people, the appearance of people is God. Enjoyment arises as God (the Totality) shines through me.

Q: Do you have and do you desire relationships with others?
A: I'm having a relationship with you, I don't desire a relationship, they occur naturally.

Q: For what purpose?
A: I have no goal, though sometimes a purpose is obvious, like offering a ride. I see people as not different from me, I see them as me, I see them as God.

Q: Or, is all this talk of God really just a foil for something else, something else to be related to?
A: Are you asking me if I sell amway or something?

Q: How does your practice of your religion (is it a religion?) affect your day-to-day life?
A: I have no religion, day-to-day I experience awe at the wonder of it ALL, the Totality, God. I strive to live as honestly and naturally as I can.

Q: For example, are you a vegetarian and do you (or does your 'god') value non-harmfulness or does 'it' give you any other ethical proscriptions?
A: I am not a vegetarian, any valuation if required rises within the moment it's required. There is no pre-judgement.

Q: I am hearing, so far, a great deal of 'abstract' definition, with references to the Gospels (which seems very odd since they are, on the whole, fictional accounts: stories with internal messages), but I desire to know in what concrete way(s) these abstractions connect to you.
A: Jesus is a fiction then? I connect to Jesus because his message is clear to me.

Q: What is the goal of even holding to this God?
A: There is no goal, there is no holding on, there is relaxing and letting go. There is only appreciation of each moment as it occurs naturally, with ease.

Q: A goal in the present? A goal in some (typically Christian) future? Why and for what reason would you respond to God in this way?
A: Because it's natural.

Q: Do you see your life as valuable or non-valuable?
A: There is no "my life" so it can be neither valuable nor non-valuable. The Totality, the ALL, God, is infinite and unbounded and as such is neither valuable nor non-valuable. It is everything; against what or who would you rate it?

Q: Do you communicate with other people in other religious traditions?
A: Yes

Q: If so, what traditions?
A: Any tradition.

Q: What other 'teachings' do you feel correspond to your ideas and practices?
A Many teachings have some portion I relate to.

Ok, that was a lot of questions.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Monomyth

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:Yes, and when my blood stops pumping, when my breath ceases going in and out, there is Totality. The physical or sentient is dependent on the Totality, but the Totality is not dependent on the physical, the sentient, to be the Totality. This is my point. This aspect of the Totality that causes the breath, but is beyond the breath, is the Something that calls to me. And because I am not separate from anything of me, including the breath of me, and everything that comes into my breath awareness, including you, I am called to speak of this invisible Something.
There is no physical. There is only Totality appearing as physical. The Totality is infinite, unbounded, mind appearing as sentient (conscious) or non-sentient (unconscious). The Totality calls to you now, right here, not beyond breath, not beyond this moment. The realization of non-inherent self, of Totality is only possible when you believe yourself to exist, you only believe yourself to exist when you are born, you only breathe when you believe you are born into the physical. Realization of Totality occurs, not beyond the breath, but because of the breath. Do not let a second pass pining about the beyond.

movingalways wrote:I do not understand my viewpoint to be one of being attached to the disappearance of the world. I have already explained my viewpoint in another thread, the content and context of which you ignored, but I will try once again. When one is in ignorance, finite things appear to be different, A appears to be related to B, B to C, C to D, etc. When one is awake, finite things are realized to be the same, A = A, cockroach = the universe, they are not related to one another, they 'simply' are. Upon realizing this, one's view of the world of finite things changes completely [see my signature]. Is not the light that is love the not seeing any difference anywhere in the world? Where in light can contrast be seen? And, once one is breathing this love, living this love, of what use is the world of finite things, except to reconcile them in every moment with their Source.

As you can see, my view of the world is anything but that of filth, sin and evil. You told me you wanted to overcome the world. What did you mean by this?

So you're saying that you and me are the exact same thing, that because you are the universe, and I am the universe there is no difference between us? This may be well and good but there are obvious differences between things, and unless you are deaf, dumb and blind you recognize this. The one thing that all things have in common is that they (and us) lack an inherent existence, all things are dependent upon something else to exist. Tree = Totality appearing as Tree. Me (Cathy) = Totality appearing as Cathy. You = Totality appearing as you. It's not that the Totality erases difference, it erases inherent existence. There is no-thing nor nothing that is not it. The Totality, infinite and unbounded neither existing nor not existing, neither originating nor ceasing, neither born nor unborn. The only thing that has to be reconciled is the belief you exist separately from source, or from anything, this is the purpose of the world, to bring you on the journey back to source, to Totality.
Locked