Do we take any of what we're learning seriously? I'm not talking just about the practical aspects we can implement into our lives from these religions, such as meditation, but also about the Atman, Krishna, reincarnation, Nirvana, etc.
In either case, I would like to know why.
Also, please at least take this post seriously, as well as the others. I'd like to engage in more discussion about what we're learning.
It depends on what you mean by "take seriously:"
ReplyDeleteIf you mean...
a) that we believe that there is an Atman, Krishna is the incarnation of a God named Isvara, sentient beings are reincarnated, and there is such a state of Nirvana that we can attain through yoga...
I can say that I do not know. I believe these things are possibly true (in that they have not been proved to be false). But I do not think of them as true when I talk about them in class or to others. I think of them as concepts which I am reading and learning about from books written most likely by people who did believe them, and which are possibly true but not something I am personally inclined to believe in. To use William James phrase, they haven't revealed themselves to me to be "Live Hypotheses." I am just not inclined towards actually believing them.
or perhaps you meant...
b) we take these concepts to be valuable, and we attempt to find out what is valuable about them and act in such a way that we experience this value…
... then I think I do "take them seriously." I do not really believe that there is an Atman (at this point), and I do not see myself truly believing this in the future. But I do believe that self-mastery is a necessary condition for living a good life, and I believe that the practice of yoga can be a good tool to achieve this. I read the material and think of the practices as a sort of stimulant to my own thoughts about what the good life is and how one should live in order to attain it. This is helpful for me, and I have learned a great deal by this method.
First, thank you for commenting. Second, I am glad that you do take it seriously. Third, I think that point a and point b are seemingly the same in their effect. One should not believe blindly, although an initial attempt to explore the concept may be necessary to see the value in the concept. Some call this initial curiosity "faith." And even more, some confuse faith with belief. Therefore some may call the initial exploration of a concept a belief because in a sense you must trust (another common word people use for believe) in the possibility of the concepts being trust. In either case of point a and point b there is an attempt to test the validity of claims presented in the concepts, and for different people at different times, this testing may produce different results. These results either negate the concepts possibility or they carry it further, in other words, elaborate it. In either case the result should be explored with steadfast scrutiny and in light of the concept that produced it - meaning, do not forget the thing that led you to your result, because that thing will always be in the result. To un-confuse that last remark, it is similar to a statement Edwin Bryan had made in his lecture. He said something of the cause is always in the effect.
ReplyDeleteAlso, because you recognize write, "I believe these things are possibly true (in that they have not been proved to be false)," I would say they are a "Live Hypothesis" to you. It seems to me that a "Dead Hypothesis" would be claimed false in all respects. Also, it could come back alive if perhaps at least one respect is not refuted