|
|
 |
FUNDAMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY ( FP )
Part II
FACING the ETERNITY
(PSYCHE and SUPERPSYCHE)
Chapter 10.
APOLOGIA for MASOCHISM
(ETHICS in the light of REINCARNATION)
Reincarnation is one of points where the science and religion, knowledge and belief contact closely.
|
10.7. FAITH and RELIGION
[ 41 ]
Reasoning on the God on the basis of occurring phenomena
certainly concerns to a subject of natur philosophy
I. Newton (1643-1727)
|
и
When we speak about someone, that he is a believer, we always and naturally mean, that he trusts in God, and exactly in God. However such concepts as belief, God are themselves not unequivocal at all.
It is possible (one ought) to distinguish two kinds of belief –
• an active personal confidence the God reality as a result of own experience, actually a doubtless knowledge, like as your belief that you read now these lines, and
• a passive having trust to religion authorities.
The problem of authority, the question who may be considered as authoritative has been mentioned here (see section 1.2 ). It was mentioned but not solved: it is always solved individually, conformably to a concrete problem/situation, and solved not always easy.
Religion is a social (public), dogmatized, ritualized form, system of God reverence, of appeal to Him, always including a certain cosmogonic doctrine, a part of which is notion about a person place in the Universe.
Each religion is multilayered in the sense that it contains notions, knowledge of several levels/layers of different comprehension depth - at least of three of them:
• intentionally simplified knowledges for such dilettantes as children, neophytes, etc.;
• popular knowledges for devoted; and
• arcanum knowledges for rather narrow circle of professionals; just owing that they are also named esoteric (secret), occult (obscured), etc.
[ . . . this fragment has not travslated yet . . .]
The term of God combines into itself very diversified views, the whole range of opinions, representations, concepts - from the SUPERMAN up to the ABSOLUTE, i.e. various right up to mutual discrepancy. There is here what to specify too.
First of all God is mentalum Being [UDI – see section 2.3 ] – mentalum, Idea, Spirit, Word.
And God is also astralum Being – astralum, Feeling, Soul, Love (it is pertinently to mention here Grigory Savvich Skovoroda (1722-94), spoken: without soul grass is hay, tree is fire wood, man is cadaver).
And God is also physical Being (the physical reality - substance and physical energy), the Universe.
The God is the universal beginning, a source and the reason of self-development of Being, but also is the numerous of personifications.
Whether God is personal?
Objectively – YES. Objectively, ontologically – each unity is personal, i.e. is presented by a separate mentalum object ().
Subjectively – it is possible, that NO. Subjectively – from the vulgar-anthropocentric positions, for the person, who doesn't able to see the whole behind set of its elements (to see a wood behind trees), to recognize and/or to feel himself as one of such elements – God is not a person, but an abstraction and incomprehensibility; if, of course, not to consider the more primitive position: the God has created a human being in the image and likeness of Himself – and, hence, the God is anthropomorphous.
However, an opposite point of view exists according to which discussions about God's essence, qualities or attributes are wrongful, inappropriate: Knowledge of Him is the lower step, falling. In our essence we possess Him. He is the reality of your life, our body, soul and spirit. So, how and what for to learn Him? (Vivekananda, 1897).
Devil is a personification of Harm, and in this sense is antagonist of God. But Harm is not something absolute; this notion is subjective in principle (let we repeat [see section 10.4 ]: A pike is not a harm objectively. It is the harm only for a crucian). On the one hand, Harm is those obstacles that hinder to achiev purposes, being sense of a human life, on the other hand – they give occasions, stimulus for efforts at achievement of these purposes (and, accordingly, for struggle against the Devil). Harm is a tool for influence upon incarnated essence, a stimulus for its progress. Therefore the Devil is a relative reality. A devil is a part, some aspect of God, of absolute reality. The devil can harm only with "God's sanction to do". But to understand, why God has tolerated a harm, is far not always a simple problem.
[ not travslated fragment ]
и
|
 |
|
|
