[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 304 KB, 1333x1000, MeisterEckhart-600039509-e39d06dc4c6948f190efc75b3626ef7e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17941053 No.17941053 [Reply] [Original]

Is he christianity but based?
Like none of the be nice for the afterlife bullshit but actually union with God in the here and now?

>> No.17941070

>>17941053
I'm trans btw not sure if that matters

>> No.17941090

>>17941070
>transitioning from man to god

>> No.17941118

Why is an afterlife unbased?

>> No.17941124

>>17941118
not the afterlife itself, but thinking if you follow ten simple commandments you are gonna get eternal happiness after you die and thus only focussing on getting that afterlife goodie.

>> No.17941130

>>17941053
what did he say? I don't know this dude but I think it is difficult for christianity to be based when almost everything it has to offer has been superseded by now

>> No.17941132

>>17941124
Thats not what Christianity teaches

>> No.17941134

>>17941130

“The eye through which I see God is the same eye through which God sees me; my eye and God's eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowing, one love.”

>> No.17941143

>>17941134
So he's a basic monist.

>> No.17941152

>>17941143
I suppose. I wondering if I wanna read him. Dualism is one the things I dislike and I feel he might be the based monist cure.

>> No.17941155

>>17941134
he sound like some marijuana jamaican person, lmao

>> No.17941165

>>17941152
You may as well read neoplatonism or hinduism instead. I hate people who use Christian mythology as a window dressing for an entirely different ontology

>> No.17941189

>>17941165
Yeah but I cannot "share" greek Neoplatonism with anyone. Whereas with Christianity you have a living or dying(if we're pessimistic) tradition which has rites, rituals and spiritual institutions through and with which you can commune. So christian monism would mean having my cake and eating it too.

>> No.17941202

>>17941189
How meaningful could that be? You would be knowingly bastardizing a tradition for something so trivial. Could you really sincerely perform the Christian rituals while being fully aware that their purpose is contrary to your belief?

>> No.17941215

>>17941202
But isn't Christ essentially the union of Man and God and thus the end for dualism? Is there no possibility for this?

>> No.17941231

>>17941215
Although Creation is subsistent on the Creator it is nonetheless separate. There is at once a union and also separation. Christians do believe in theosis. But returning to the Monad is not what we believe. There's a lot of nuance to the subject. You should read more standard Christian ontology before branching into alternatives

>> No.17941239

>>17941231
Yeah I'll read the bible first lol

>> No.17941272

>>17941231
What makes Theosis different from enlightenment or returning to the Monad, for that matter? Is it the same process cloaked in different verbiage and methodology? Or is the result unique?

>> No.17941315

>>17941272
Christianity holds a particular view that the human self is necessarily part physical. Even Adam had a physical body. The fallen man needs to be regenerated or renewed so that the corrupt elements are purged out and that man can again have a direct link to God. Thats why the Nicean Creed specifies that a Christian must believe in the ressurection of the body. So there is no disembodied soul and there is no ascension. There is no claim to losing individuality or abolishing multiplicity.
I'd like to explain better but desu I'm not really that good at it.

>> No.17941331

>>17941053
>Like none of the be nice for the afterlife bullshit
But the Christian religion was never this crass before Protestantism (not against Protestantism, but that 'liberal Christianity' developed through it).

>> No.17941337

>>17941090
Based.

>> No.17941361

>>17941165
>>17941202
> I hate people who use Christian mythology as a window dressing for an entirely different ontology
No you're just retarded and have a babby's understanding of ontology.

If we were to be as autistic as you, one couldn't mention Orphism or its influence in ancient Greece because it itself was strongly influenced by Egypt, hence a "bastardisation" different from the original. There is such thing as new and different traditions, and as all traditions have developed off those before them. Not saying you can't prefer Neoplatonism and Hinduism (lmao, good luck ignoring the differences between East and West), but it's just obsessively dogmatic to think "le Christianity corrupted the tradition", or to hold this cartoonish idea of monism as specifically non-Christian.