all formulations are wrong

I agree with you ‘absolutely’! :stuck_out_tongue: haha…
about truth probably just not ‘existing’. :astonished: :stuck_out_tongue:

It is kind of obvious that there is no ‘the Truth’ in the objective sense. Truth is always about something, and it is always subjective. I don’t think you have to be a nihilist or a scientist to get there. My sister knows this. My 12 year old cousin does. Don’t get all posh about this.

What makes you less than a philosopher is that (if that is the case) you can’t see your own truth.

This realization does not make a philosopher, though - This is what makes a man.

Yes, all religions would be vastly improved by a wedding of Diana and Jove, of the male and female principles. What we understand best is our relationships with other people and with things. Religions or philosophies that deny such relationships have historically caused culture wars. The paternal Abrahamic religions vs the maternal “witchcraft and occult” gave us the Inquisition. Kant’s trancendental nonsence has given us the excuse to look away from what we are.

What is truth? If it is not something beyond individual well-being, it is a lie, simply from its inability to incorporate the connectivity of life and matter necessary for our survival.

Ok, I am reassured.

And is this Self not the imagining Being?

Well, this is most fitting:

“One must realise that war is shared [i.e., that it creates a bond] and conflict is justice, and that all things come to pass in accordance with conflict.”
[Heraclitus.]

“The real community of man, in the midst of all the self-contradictory simulacra of community, is the community of those who seek the truth, of the potential knowers, that is, in principle, of all men to the extent that they desire to know. But in fact this includes only a few, true friends, as Plato was to Aristotle at the very moment they were disagreeing about the nature of the good. Their common concern for the good linked them; their disagreement about it proved that they needed one another to understand it. They were absolutely one soul as they looked at the problem. This, according to Plato, is the only real friendship, the only real common good. It is here that the contact people so desperately seek is to be found. The other kinds of relatedness are only imperfect reflections of this one trying to be self-subsisting, gaining their only justification from their ultimate relation to this one. This is the meaning of the riddle of the improbable philosopher-kings. They have a true community that is exemplary for all other communities.”
[Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind, Conclusion.]

Yes. Now I think you understand the idea behind the phrase ‘lust for truth,’ wrong as it may be as a formulation. Lust for more of itself - desire for more imagining, for more truth.

I’m not sure what you mean by “deconstructing reason.” Could you explain this please?

I see reason as a way of thinking. To deconstruct that one needs another way of thinking. Reason is most effectively used by language. Hence, thought beyond language.
Reason, logic, starts at Hod. Netzach is irrational, or cannot be understood rationally. For me the tower, the path between Hod and Netzach, is the first path where logic is deconstructed; one sees how reason comes into being under certain conditions. (which I have attempted to describe in the listing of the sephirot) Understanding the construction of reason - understanding that it is a construct - is to deconstruct it.
Does this make any sense to you at all? Just curious.

do they really? that’s cool, where did they ‘learn’ that, in school?, did u teach them?.. :astonished:

or did they come up with that by themselves after suffering years of dissapointment with how hard life can be…haha. :wink:

I guess they just didn’t buy the truth-fairytale in the first place. And nobody insisted that they should.

Hi Jakob!
would you mind posting the link about the kaabalah again please?.

I don’t remember where it is, and I want to start learning the ‘real’ system …
not the stuff that comes up if you do a search in google (mostly new agey britney/madonna stuff).

I have 1 question though… not that I’m scared or anything…(well maybe a little :stuck_out_tongue: )
I read somewhere once that you can only start learning the system when yo are 40 or older… :astonished: huh?

Oh yeah, that’s probably true.
“The thing about wisdom is not becoming wise too soon”
Ad kabbalah is not even wise. It’s a plaything for old bored intellectuals. Leave it is for the weary…

"Unnatural asceticism (involvement in special-purpose exercises) is typically the consequence of plebeian profanation and wanting to run before one can walk. It is the mendacious misappropriation of those practices and customs which of necessity may belong only to a higher kind of man.

Take for example breathing exercises - today there seems to be ten thousand different widely published ways to practice them, but all of these are upon serious examination revealed to be misguided and harmful prescriptions, a patchwork of homeless shreds.

Natural Asceticism, understood as the strictly informed practice of things that belong to one’s station on the great “Ladder of Becoming”, can often be distinguished by its virginal character, it is “secretive”, plain-looking and does not advertise itself." -Weary Locomotive

:smiley:
could you post the link, please?
or is that ‘‘only after you are 40’’ thing true?. :astonished:

I think I’ve given you more than enough information.

Looking back, the way to deconstruct reason is Tipharet, which requires contradiction.

Any thought has a form otherwise we could not distinguish different thoughts. Therefore any thought can be expressed by a well developed language.

I think reason only means something when it means something to ourselves. What does that mean? That we are made of many reasons, and that we reason those reasons in our very existing. Experience is the reasoning of our own reasons in context of reasons that are not yet us or that we are not yet aware of how they are us.

I’m order to reconcile something, contradictions much be used. Otherwise reconcile would mean nothing at all. Experience is the will to reconciliation in the sea of contradictions. But why? Not only because that is what we are but also because that is what builds reality. Motive power, meaning, will to power. Only a noob would deny the process because it involves some things that are “wrong”. Life is too deep in itself to be touched by the reasonings of noobs, philosophical or otherwise.

Yes. Reality always unfolds between “poles”. One needs to have more than one of these poles, perspectives, to even exist.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194877&p=2725195#p2725170