This is really useful, Sam, and has helped me think this through myself. I do struggle endlessly with this one. Thanks. I'd like to read more on this if it comes.
Thanks for clarifying your position. It's funny, I've run into someone with this same certainty about their spiritual path, but their belief instead was that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all the other religions are lesser revelations Krishna provided, Krishna devotion being the highest path. It was an interesting argument on why it's Krishna and not Jesus: he says Krishna was a more complete personality than Jesus (Krishna was all sorts of things, warrior, poet, philosopher, lover, etc.). Be that as it may, this comes up with theists a lot, they either think their revelation is the only true revelation or if not that, it is the highest or best revelation. It's probably best to acknowledge there is no one-size-fits-all spiritual path, and while there is probably a best path for a given individual or even group of people, that doesn't mean it's the best/truest path overall.
I don't know, asserting the primacy of a given tradition like that may be as bizarre as asserting the Amazon is superior to the Mongolian steppes. I wish I could get the various believers to just agree on one thing: your tradition is about the Infinite. Every spiritual tradition is about the Infinite, even the non-theistic ones. Then we blind men could finally start figuring out the elephant.
I have read this one. I ponder the need(s) for spiritual protection, and then there is the pragamatic construction of mutual defensible ( defencible ) space. The latter is an interesting American architectural concept from years back, which gives a place to neighbours to deter and prevent threat by looking out for one another. One might consider the continuity / evolution of wisdom traditions as they hybridised historically, despite the history? The constant child?
This is really useful, Sam, and has helped me think this through myself. I do struggle endlessly with this one. Thanks. I'd like to read more on this if it comes.
This is excellent. And I hope you’ll share if you have thoughts on a possible answer to the last question…
Thank you. So clear and straightforward.
Thanks for clarifying your position. It's funny, I've run into someone with this same certainty about their spiritual path, but their belief instead was that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all the other religions are lesser revelations Krishna provided, Krishna devotion being the highest path. It was an interesting argument on why it's Krishna and not Jesus: he says Krishna was a more complete personality than Jesus (Krishna was all sorts of things, warrior, poet, philosopher, lover, etc.). Be that as it may, this comes up with theists a lot, they either think their revelation is the only true revelation or if not that, it is the highest or best revelation. It's probably best to acknowledge there is no one-size-fits-all spiritual path, and while there is probably a best path for a given individual or even group of people, that doesn't mean it's the best/truest path overall.
I don't know, asserting the primacy of a given tradition like that may be as bizarre as asserting the Amazon is superior to the Mongolian steppes. I wish I could get the various believers to just agree on one thing: your tradition is about the Infinite. Every spiritual tradition is about the Infinite, even the non-theistic ones. Then we blind men could finally start figuring out the elephant.
I have read this one. I ponder the need(s) for spiritual protection, and then there is the pragamatic construction of mutual defensible ( defencible ) space. The latter is an interesting American architectural concept from years back, which gives a place to neighbours to deter and prevent threat by looking out for one another. One might consider the continuity / evolution of wisdom traditions as they hybridised historically, despite the history? The constant child?