Post by lizamez on Apr 15, 2016 3:24:49 GMT
Why is Faqir Chand’s experiences important in understanding the projective nature of religious visions and nature?
Faqir Chand explains that the reason behind the visions is the product of your own inner development. He says there is illusionary nature behind many religious visions and miracles. Faqir Chand understands where these visions come from and does not conform to the idea that god or one of the saints sent him a mental message about his life or what is going to happen. He believes your inner guru projects these images and visions. That everyone receives different types of love and affection. And this type of perfection to your ideal is coming from your Guru. But he does not speak of the Guru as a person but as knowledge or correct understanding of one’s self. He feels so correct in his idea about visions that he “began preaching his belief that all saints are ignorant about the miracles or inner experiences attributed to them.” As said in The Unknowing Sage, by David Lane, some masters claim to know about their subtle interactions with disciples and that certain visions may not be merely due to extreme faith or concentration. I believe this is a way they are being convinced of Faquir’s idea of visions coming from our mind.
What is meant by the phrase “philosophy done well is science; philosophy done poorly remains philosophy.”
Saying “philosophy done well is science “is saying after many attempts you can either get a result or not. That is how it works when it comes to science. You follow the scientific method and with all of the information you may get an answer. And as many say if you cannot test something to prove it to be right or wrong and it is neither, then it is true since we cannot say it is not. But if philosophical outlooks are done poorly then they will continue to be theories and nothing more than just thoughts and some self-proclaimed knowledge. Even comparing science and religion is an example of this. How science can prove what religion believes to be all mighty and righteous. Creating these thoughts that contradicts those of religion or even questioning anything that one could believe to be untrue. These thoughts are where philosophy arise but to not prove them to be true will continue to be thoughts but if you try to prove them or even experiment with them like Socrates where he questioned the people of the city and proved that what they believed in isn’t all true. Or even Heraclitus and his experiment with burying himself in the cow dun. The result wasn’t what he wanted but he created the idea that water, air and fire were the main substances that made up the earth. But he proved it with science.
Faqir Chand explains that the reason behind the visions is the product of your own inner development. He says there is illusionary nature behind many religious visions and miracles. Faqir Chand understands where these visions come from and does not conform to the idea that god or one of the saints sent him a mental message about his life or what is going to happen. He believes your inner guru projects these images and visions. That everyone receives different types of love and affection. And this type of perfection to your ideal is coming from your Guru. But he does not speak of the Guru as a person but as knowledge or correct understanding of one’s self. He feels so correct in his idea about visions that he “began preaching his belief that all saints are ignorant about the miracles or inner experiences attributed to them.” As said in The Unknowing Sage, by David Lane, some masters claim to know about their subtle interactions with disciples and that certain visions may not be merely due to extreme faith or concentration. I believe this is a way they are being convinced of Faquir’s idea of visions coming from our mind.
What is meant by the phrase “philosophy done well is science; philosophy done poorly remains philosophy.”
Saying “philosophy done well is science “is saying after many attempts you can either get a result or not. That is how it works when it comes to science. You follow the scientific method and with all of the information you may get an answer. And as many say if you cannot test something to prove it to be right or wrong and it is neither, then it is true since we cannot say it is not. But if philosophical outlooks are done poorly then they will continue to be theories and nothing more than just thoughts and some self-proclaimed knowledge. Even comparing science and religion is an example of this. How science can prove what religion believes to be all mighty and righteous. Creating these thoughts that contradicts those of religion or even questioning anything that one could believe to be untrue. These thoughts are where philosophy arise but to not prove them to be true will continue to be thoughts but if you try to prove them or even experiment with them like Socrates where he questioned the people of the city and proved that what they believed in isn’t all true. Or even Heraclitus and his experiment with burying himself in the cow dun. The result wasn’t what he wanted but he created the idea that water, air and fire were the main substances that made up the earth. But he proved it with science.