-
Posts
-
So here’s the question: is this numinous validation, these “intuitive realizations of validity“, what reflective humans have historically interpreted as truth? If so, should we dismiss such feelingly experienced validation as something less than truth?
I do not dismiss it. Your intuitive realizations of validity are truth as you know it, as you feel it, experience it. But a person can deceive him/herself with “feelings” of one sort or another. There is a truth test. I’ll see if I can find it.
Perception of spiritual truth is feelingly experienced.
48:7:18 [#2]16. You cannot perceive spiritual truth until you feelingly experience it, and many truths are not really felt except in adversity.Is this it??
(1000.6) 91:7.5 The practical test of all these strange religious experiences of mysticism, ecstasy, and inspiration is to observe whether these phenomena cause an individual:
(1000.7) 91:7.6 1. To enjoy better and more complete physical health.
(1000.8) 91:7.7 2. To function more efficiently and practically in his mental life.
(1000.9) 91:7.8 3. More fully and joyfully to socialize his religious experience.
(1000.10) 91:7.9 4. More completely to spiritualize his day-by-day living while faithfully discharging the commonplace duties of routine mortal existence.
(1001.1) 91:7.10 5. To enhance his love for, and appreciation of, truth, beauty, and goodness.
(1001.2) 91:7.11 6. To conserve currently recognized social, moral, ethical, and spiritual values.
(1001.3) 91:7.12 7. To increase his spiritual insight — God-consciousness.
Yes! Thanks! Though they are talking about strange religious experiences. These do not constitute a truth test. I misspoke. I think there is another list, but I can’t find it.
One of the cosmic intuitions, duty, has bothered me for a long time. Duty? What duty? I had a bit of an ah-ha! moment in reviewing this reference.
16:9:1 [#1]The cosmic-mind-endowed, Adjuster-indwelt, personal creature possesses innate recognition-realization of energy reality, mind reality, and spirit reality. The will creature is thus equipped to discern the fact, the law, and the love of God. Aside from these three inalienables of human consciousness, all human experience is really subjective except that intuitive realization of validity attaches to the unification of these three universe reality responses of cosmic recognition.Where is duty in it? It must be the law of God – a communal self-consciousness, the consciousness of brotherhood, the imperatives of the golden rule – here on earth and all the way to Paradise and beyond..(196.5) 16:9.9 Self-consciousness is in essence a communal consciousness: God and man, Father and son, Creator and creature. In human self-consciousness four universe-reality realizations are latent and inherent:
1. The quest for knowledge, the logic of science.
2. The quest for moral values, the sense of duty.
3. The quest for spiritual values, the religious experience.
4. The quest for personality values, the ability to recognize the reality of God as a personality and the concurrent realization of our fraternal relationship with fellow personalities.
Where is duty in it? It must be the law of God . . .
Well, the reality recognition response of duty concerns judicial discretion which is the recognition of the difference between right and wrong. Discovering, recognizing, interpreting and choosing what is right when given alternative options is part of the reality of cosmic consciousness.
p192:3 16:6.7 Duty—the reality domain of morals in the philosophic realm, the arena of reason, the recognition of relative right and wrong. This is the judicial form of the cosmic discrimination.
But where does FACT come into this? Are there facts of duty? What would a spirit of fact have to say about choosing between right and wrong? Is there a factual right and a factual wrong? Nigel said that duty is “(2) the facts of relative right and wrong, . . “. What are the facts of relative right and wrong?
p192:3 16:6.7 Duty—the reality domain of morals in the philosophic realm, the arena of reason, the recognition of relative right and wrong. This is the judicial form of the cosmic discrimination.
But where does FACT come into this? Are there facts of duty? What would a spirit of fact have to say about choosing between right and wrong? Is there a factual right and a factual wrong? Nigel said that duty is “(2) the facts of relative right and wrong, . . “. What are the facts of relative right and wrong?
An inescapable fact of life is the fact of relationship. Duty pertains to the fact of relationship. Judicial discrimination pertains to determining the relative righteousness of relationship/s based on the facts and evidence of the situation. The fifth level of the golden rule, the moral level, helps explain it.
147:4:8 [#4]“5. The moral level. And then when you attain true philosophic levels of interpretation, when you have real insight into the rightness and wrongness of things, when you perceive the eternal fitness of human relationships, you will begin to view such a problem of interpretation as you would imagine a high-minded, idealistic, wise, and impartial third person would so view and interpret such an injunction as applied to your personal problems of adjustment to your life situations.Mara wrote: Duty pertains to the fact of relationship.
That’s a pretty good response but I don’t think it addresses the question about what the facts of right and wrong are. The fact of relationship does not tell us what is right or what is wrong, it merely gives us the opportunity to discover the meaning of rightness and wrongness. But what of the facts of rightness and wrongness? Facts are not morality. They may be the building blocks necessary to make judgments concerning rightness and wrongness, but the facts themselves are not reality when it comes to morality.
If facts were the soul determinant of morality, then people could make decisions based solely on black and white inflexible facts. There would be no need to consider personality, mercy or compassion. Morality decisions would become purely mechanical based upon factual and nonfactual information, something any android could do.
Maybe I’m not being very clear here, but I’ll try again. Facts are building blocks, a framework with which to think. Facts of causation function on the fundamental level of reality. Duty must consider facts when making judgments concerning right and wrong, but that does not mean that there is a factual right or wrong. If that were so, then moral rules could never bend; they would be fixed and uniform. Thou shalt not kill would not have any opportunity for interpretation. Duty, or morality, must allow for interpretation.
There are only three elements of reality: facts, ideas and relation. Duty has to do with ideas, meaning, philosophy and wisdom. Duty is a higher level of reality than mere facts.
Mara wrote: Duty pertains to the fact of relationship.
. . . but I don’t think it addresses the question about what the facts of right and wrong are. The fact of relationship does not tell us what is right or what is wrong. . . .
The fact of relationship does not tell us, but this cosmic intuition functions to reinforce what is right. In the technique of perfection there is always to best and right way to do things. (25:4:17)
195:7:4 [#4]Paradise values of eternity and infinity, of truth, beauty, and goodness, are concealed within the facts of the phenomena of the universes of time and space. But it requires the eye of faith in a spirit-born mortal to detect and discern these spiritual values.Thanks to all for joining in! Mara, your timely insights are thrilling, and Bonita, your comments and criticism is always spot on!
Regarding “Spirit of Fact”, let’s treat that offending phrase merely as a clumsy place-holder for some better way of describing one of the many ways in which the Divine Minister serves her creation: that role which makes it possible for we humans to “discern reality”; that role which, for humans, so perfectly complements the role of Michael’s “Spirit of Truth”.
Bonita wrote:
“Facts are part of the material intellect, not the soul. Meanings are experienced within the soul by the personality and then expressed by the personality using the material intellect. […]”
Nicely put. However, are facts not part of the morontia intellect? Either way, for those of us still trudging along using <adjutant emulation> instead of cosmic mind, were not the mundane facts of human life the very first thing we had to learn to deal with? Surely we should expect intimate help from mum in this phenomenal endeavour? I mean, to Michael of Nebadon and the Divine Minister, what could be more extraordinary than a human child, wrestling with the facts discovered in her circle of interest, then making a choice? During that child’s discovery and choice, in what capacity was the Divine Minister serving that precious child?
I agree that as we grow and start a cycle of feedback between soul and human mind, it becomes increasingly possible to experience the meaning of those facts we discern about material, moral, spiritual and personal realities. But as I understand it, the three cosmic intuitions make it possible for us to discern such facts even before we can truly experience their meaning. For example, even as tadpoles our ability to discern the fact of personal religious experience, should make the concept of fact more interesting than mere dry number or dusty box.
Bonita wrote:
“All three responses have to do with the discernment of REALITY, […]”
Agreed! And to me, this implies discerning facts about that REALITY. Here, let’s expand our concept of fact to include its root meaning [facio, factum] — something “made”, or made actual (actualized), or made real (real-ized). Now consider how each of the three derived domains (material, mindal, spiritual) not only has its characteristic gravity and characteristic form of light, but also a characteristic set of facts (actuals) and relationships between those actuals. And let’s not forget the domain of personality. In paper 12 section 3, we discover that this primary domain also has a characteristic gravity, and elsewhere I’ve speculated that LOVE is the characteristic form of light in this domain. So what about facts? Does the personal domain have its characteristic facts?
In paper 112, the “fact of personality” pops up:
” […]. On subabsolute levels this seventh or totality dimension is experiencible as the fact of personality. This supreme dimension is an associable absolute and, while not infinite, is dimensionally potential for subinfinite penetration of the absolute.” (1226.13, 112:1.9)
Regarding the role in which the Divine Minister of Salvington serves to makes it possible for all her local universe children increasingly to discern reality, her technique no doubt matches the need of the child. So (maybe) what begins as a simple ministry — the Meaning of Facts — (maybe) that ministry evolves with the child? As we are weaned from adjutant dependence, maybe Bonita’s “discernment of REALITY” becomes increasingly possible ?
PS: here’s another interesting use of the concept of fact:
” […]. But since all creature experiencing registers in, and is a part of, the Supreme, when all creatures attain the final level of finite existence, and after total universe development makes possible their attainment of God the Supreme as an actual divinity presence, then, inherent in the fact of such contact, is contact with total experience.” (1287.5, 117:5.14)
thanks again!
Nigel
Nigel Nunn wrote: Nicely put. However, are facts not part of the morontia intellect? Either way, for those of us still trudging along using instead of cosmic mind, were not the mundane facts of human life the very first thing we had to learn to deal with? Surely we should expect intimate help from mum in this phenomenal endeavour? I mean, to Michael of Nebadon and the Divine Minister, what could be more extraordinary than a human child, wrestling with the facts discovered in her circle of interest, then making a choice? During that child’s discovery and choice, in what capacity was the Divine Minister serving that precious child?Are you talking about a child before entering the 7th psychic circle? If so, that child does not have a morontia intellect. The first five adjutant mind spirits are part of the impersonal cosmic mind (56:2.3) and are not part of the personality of the Divine Minister (36:5.16). They are only part of her consciousness (36:5.4) thus lack the ability connect with the reality recognition responses of the cosmic mind; reality recognition requires personality. The lower adjutants do not repercuss in the Supreme (36:5.16). The maximum comprehension of reality can only be accomplished within the Supreme (0:3.20). Moreover, it is the Adjuster who gives the feeling of reality to the mind (102:3.12) and it is the Adjuster who participates in the process of self-revelation and self-realization. The recognition of reality is a cosmic technique of self-revelation (16:6.10). There is no self-revelation without the Adjuster. And the child does not have access to the Adjuster, Spirit of Truth or Holy Spirit until entering the 7th psychic circle.
But let’s see what happens without the Adjuster, Holy Spirit or Spirit of Truth, when a child has only the lower adjutant mind spirits to wrestle with the facts discovered in its circle of interest. The second adjutant mind spirit, the spirit of understanding, coordinates the spontaneous and automatic association of ideas within the child’s mind This spirit is the gift of acquired knowledge, the phenomenon of quick reasoning, rapid judgment, and prompt decision (36:5.7). Facts are about knowledge and the Holy Spirit is not necessary for the accumulation of knowledge; it is a very low adjutant function. The third adjutant mind spirit, the spirit of courage, forms the intellectual root of moral stamina and spiritual bravery. When enlightened by facts it encourages evolution within the channels of intelligence.(36:5.8). Then, there is the fourth adjutant, the spirit of knowledge, which provides curiosity, adventure, discovery, the scientific spirit (36:5.9). And finally the fifth adjutant, the spirit of counsel, which urges cooperation and harmonization with others (36:5.10). All of this occurs without any help whatsoever from the Holy Spirit.
Nigel Nunn wrote: But as I understand it, the three cosmic intuitions make it possible for us to discern such facts even before we can truly experience their meaning. For example, even as tadpoles our ability to discern the fact of personal religious experience, should make the concept of fact more interesting than mere dry number or dusty boxNo, I believe you have that a bit wrong. The cosmic mind reality recognition responses require the Adjuster (16:9.1). To the human and personal mind, reality and divinity are inseparable; there is no discernible reality without the presence of Deity. And personal religious experience is a truth, not a fact. [By the way, use the phrase the fact of is meant to emphasize the validity of something and separating it from mere opinion or theory, but it doesn’t speak of its reality because reality requires experience. For instance, the fact of personality is not the reality of personality. The fact of personality is recognition of the validity of its existence; the reality of personality is an experience with the source of personality, the Universal Father.]Nigel Nunn wrote: Agreed! And to me, this implies discerning facts about that REALITY. Here, let’s expand our concept of fact to include its root meaning [facio, factum] — something “made”, or made actual (actualized), or made real (realized). . . . So what about facts? Does the personal domain have its characteristic facts?Okay. So what’s the meaning of factual and factualize then? Facts about reality are not reality; they are relative to reality. Factual and actual are two different things entirely. Factual is something discoverable and interpreted by mind whereas actual is something made real by personality action. Actual reality experience requires personality identification with Spirit because reality is experienced as self-realization, the self becoming more real, more like spirit. The personal domain unifies facts with spiritual values.
Nigel Nunn wrote: . . . the Meaning of FactsYes, the Divine Minister supplies us with mind of various levels, but meaning is the appreciative consciousness of values (100:3.4). The mind cannot perceive value without a Value Sorter (196:3.17). It is not the Holy Spirit or the Divine Minister who is responsible for meaning recognition. The accumulation of facts alone will never result in the recognition of reality because spirit is the “highest personal reality,” and the goal of personality existence (12:8.12-13). Spirit does not result from a protoplasmic accumulation of facts or from the assimilation of meaning from facts; it requires that meanings become transformed into truth by the mind presence of the spirits of the Father and the Sons (101:6.4).
. . . what could be more extraordinary than a human child, wrestling with the facts discovered in her circle of interest, then making a choice? During that child’s discovery and choice, in what capacity was the Divine Minister serving that precious child? [. . .] But as I understand it, the three cosmic intuitions make it possible for us to discern such facts even before we can truly experience their meaning.
I think so. The ministry of adjutants cease once we leave for mansonia. Here is a reference addressing the precious child.
112:2:6 [#3]In all concepts of selfhood it should be recognized that the fact of life comes first, its evaluation or interpretation later. The human child first lives and subsequently thinks about his living. In the cosmic economy insight precedes foresight..[. . .] Regarding the role in which the Divine Minister of Salvington serves to makes it possible for all her local universe children increasingly to discern reality, her technique no doubt matches the need of the child. So (maybe) what begins as a simple ministry — the Meaning of Facts — (maybe) that ministry evolves with the child? As we are weaned from adjutant dependence, maybe Bonita’s “discernment of REALITY” becomes increasingly possible ?
.
In leaving the adjutant ministry behind on the native planet, we will then become dependent on morontia intellect. (112:6:10)
.
Regarding “fact” and “truth”, I wonder if there is such a thing as “fact-truth” or, if you like “truth fact”? I ask because in my research on this topic I found several references in which the revelators inform us about the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of men.
170:2:1 [#4]The Master made it clear that the kingdom of heaven must begin with, and be centered in, the dual concept of the truth of the fatherhood of God and the correlated fact of the brotherhood of man.194:0:4 [#4]The gospel of the kingdom is: the fact of the fatherhood of God, coupled with the resultant truth of the sonship-brotherhood of men.188:4:13 [#4]Human salvation is real; it is based on two realities which may be grasped by the creature’s faith and thereby become incorporated into individual human experience: the fact of the fatherhood of God and its correlated truth, the brotherhood of man. It is true, after all, that you are to be “forgiven your debts, even as you forgive your debtors.”Are truths facts? Are facts truths? Are they mutually exclusive? I do not think so. But I will think some more about this interesting topic.
I think a fact is fact regardless of recognition or response by any mind except Original Mind or Creator Mind but truth lies in the intersections of facts (all creatures/beings considered facts or entities). Truth, to be true to any being, must be experienced; unlike facts which are facts regardless of any beings’ acceptance or knowledge of them. Facts and truths share much but are distinct I think one from another. The Revelation is filled with both and uses phrases like….the fact of this truth and the truth of this fact in ways that do not suggest they are exactly interchangeable but co-dependent in some way?
Does these quotes help?
130:4.10 The eye of the material mind perceives a world of factual knowledge; the eye of the spiritualized intellect discerns a world of true values. These two views, synchronized and harmonized, reveal the world of reality, wherein wisdom interprets the phenomena of the universe in terms of progressive personal experience.
189:2.6 Truth having to do with spiritual realities and eternal values cannot always be built up by a combination of apparentfacts. Although individual facts may be materially true, it does not follow that the association of a group of facts must necessarily lead to truthful spiritual conclusions.
118:3.3 Truth is inconcussible — forever exempt from all transient vicissitudes, albeit never dead and formal, always vibrant and adaptable — radiantly alive. But when truth becomes linked with fact, then both time and space condition its meanings and correlate its values. Such realities of truthwedded to fact become concepts and are accordingly relegated to the domain of relative cosmic realities.
196:3.2 There are just three elements in universal reality: fact, idea, and relation. The religious consciousness identifies these realities as science, philosophy, and truth.
Another thing to be considered when reading about fact and truth is that when you see the phrases: the fact of or the truth of, it is meant to be like a figure of speech. When using those phrases they are indicating that something is not just conjecture or a matter of opinion. Also, the seeming incongruence of calling something both a fact and a truth indicates that whatever they are talking about can be viewed from different viewpoints, for instance, from a scientific viewpoint or a religious viewpoint, a material viewpoint or a spiritual viewpoint, etc..
Another way to look at it is that fact is inflexible, uniform and represents quantity, whereas truth is flexible, interpretable and represents quality.
I think a fact is fact . . .
Thanks.
Does these quotes help?
Thanks.
. . . the seeming incongruence of calling something both a fact and a truth indicates that whatever they are talking about can be viewed from different viewpoints, for instance. . . .
On the face of it, your comment seems to make sense. But is that the whole truth? Here is a “literal truth”.
2:1:11 [#1]Divinity and eternity the Father shares with large numbers of the higher Paradise beings, but we question whether infinity and consequent universal primacy is fully shared with any save his co–ordinate associates of the Paradise Trinity. Infinity of personality must, perforce, embrace all finitude of personality; hence the truth — literal truth — of the teaching which declares that “In Him we live and move and have our being.” That fragment of the pure Deity of the Universal Father which indwells mortal man is a part of the infinity of the First Great Source and Center, the Father of Fathers.Here is a “literal truth”. […]Here is a “truth-fact”:32:3:6 [#2]The farther down the scale of life we go, the more difficult it becomes to locate, with the eye of faith, the invisible Father. The lower creatures — and sometimes even the higher personalities — find it difficult always to envisage the Universal Father in his Creator Sons. And so, pending the time of their spiritual exaltation, when perfection of development will enable them to see God in person, they grow weary in progression, entertain spiritual doubts, stumble into confusion, and thus isolate themselves from the progressive spiritual aims of their time and universe. In this way they lose the ability to see the Father when beholding the Creator Son. The surest safeguard for the creature throughout the long struggle to attain the Father, during this time when inherent conditions make such attainment impossible, is tenaciously to hold on to the truth-fact of the Father’s presence in his Sons. Literally and figuratively, spiritually and personally, the Father and the Sons are one. It is a fact: He who has seen a Creator Son has seen the Father.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.