2021/11/12

Unitive knowledge - desacralization

Web results

Synonyms for unitive and translation of unitive to 25 languages. ... Translation of «unitive» into 25 languages ... unitive knowledge of the godhead.

Definition of unitive in the English dictionary

The definition of unitive in the dictionary is 

  • tending to unite or 
  • capable of uniting. 

Other definition of unitive is characterized by unity.


===

Desacralization of knowledge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

In philosophy of religiondesacralization of knowledge or secularization of knowledge[note 1][note 2] is the process of separation of knowledge from its divine source. The process marks a paradigmatic shift in understanding of the concept of knowledge in the modern period. It has rejected the notion knowledge has spiritual and metaphysical foundations and is therefore related to the sacred. Although it is a recurrent theme among the writers of the Traditionalist school[note 3] that began with René Guénon, a French mystic and intellectual who earlier spoke of "the limitation of knowledge to its lowest order",[note 4] the process of desacralization of knowledge was most notably surveyed, chronicled and conceptualized by Islamic philosopher Seyyed Hossein Nasr in his 1981 Gifford Lectures that were later published as Knowledge and the Sacred.

Concept[edit]

In Nasr's assessment, desacralization of knowledge is one of the most significant aspects of secularism, which he defines as "everything whose origin is merely human and therefore non-divine and whose metaphysical basis lies in [its] ontological hiatus between man and God".[5] According to Nasr, secularism is an evil force that has caused science and knowledge to become desacralized. In this process, science and knowledge became separated and lost their homogenous character in the form of traditional knowledge.[6] The core idea of desacralization of knowledge is that modern civilization has lost the transcendent roots of knowledge by restricting knowledge to the empirical domain alone.[7]

Dictionary of Literary Biography states:

[Nasr's] central thesis is that true knowledge is profoundly and by its very essence related to the sacred. This idea, he argues, underlies the basic teachings of every traditional religion whether Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Islam or Christianity. Only in the Modern world, which he dates from the Renaissance, has the connection between knowledge and the sacred been lost.[8]

In Nasr's exposition, the words "to know" and "knowledge" forfeit their unidimensional character. In his view, knowledge proceeds in a hierarchical order from empirical and rational modes of knowing to the Supreme form of knowledge, that is, the "unitive knowledge" or "al-ma’rifah". 

Similarly, "to know" begins with ratiocination, which eventually culminates in intellection.[9] 

According to Nasr, by nature, knowledge is inseparable from being and therefore related to the sacred. To be human is to know, which ultimately means knowing the Supreme Self, who is the source of all knowledge and consciousness.[10] It is the post-medieval process of secularization and a humanism that has ultimately forced the severance of knowledge from being and intelligence from the Sacred.[11]

Stefano Bigliardi of Al Akhawayn University states:

Knowledge of the Absolute means knowledge of the existence of superior spiritual levels, of the interrelatedness of the phenomena of nature, of the interrelatedness of their respective elements, and most importantly, of the derivation of everything from the Absolute itself. However, the awareness (and therefore the usage) of Intellect according to Nasr has been lost, together with the awareness of the Absolute itself. In Nasr’s reconstruction such oblivion characterizes the whole course of human thought that, in its dominant manifestations, can be described as a continuous desacralization of knowledge.[12]

Nasr says modern science has reduced multiple domains of reality to a psycho-physical one. According to him, without a sacred vision, science became concerned with the changes in the material world alone. 

Because modern science has abandoned the notion of hierarchy of being, scientific theories and discoveries can no longer appreciate the truths that belong to a higher order of reality. Nasr says modern science is therefore an "incomplete" or "superficial science" that is only concerned with certain parts of reality while invalidating others.[13] It is based on the distinction between the knowing subject and the known object. Nasr says modern science has lost its symbolic spirit and the dimension of transcendence because it has repudiated the role of intellect in pursuing knowledge and truth by adopting a purely quantitative method.[14][15] According to Nasr, the structure of reality is unchanging but the vision and perception of humans about that reality does change. Modern Western philosophy, with no sense of permanence, has reduced reality to a temporal process. According to Jane I. Smith, this phenomenon is what Nasr identifies as the desacralization of knowledge and the loss of the sense of the sacred.[16] This loss of the sacred quality of knowledge necessitates a choice between a form of knowledge that tends to focus on change, multiplicity, and outwardness, and “one that integrates change within the eternal, multiplicity within unity, and outward facts within inward principles.”[17]

Historical development[edit]

In saying "I think, therefore I am," Nasr contends, Descartes was not alluding to the "divine I" who proclaimed "I am the Truth" (ana’l-Haqq) through the mouth of Mansur al-Hallaj seven centuries before Descartes, the Divine Self which alone has the authority to proclaim I.[18][19]


The process of desacralization of knowledge began with the ancient Greeks.[20] According to Nasr, the rationalists and skeptics of ancient Greek philosophical traditions played a major role in the process of desacralization by reducing knowledge either to ratiocination or to cognitive exercise.[21] In substituting reason for intellect and sensuous knowledge for inner illumination, the Greeks pioneered the process of desacralization of knowledge.[22] Other major stages in the process of desacralization include the formation of Renaissance philosophical systems that had developed a concept of nature, which is independent and self-creative.[23] The process, however, reached its climax in the thought of René Descartes,[24] "the father of modern Western philosophy," who "made thinking of the individual ego the center of reality and criterion of all knowledge".[25] Thereafter, knowledge eventually became rooted in the cogito.[26]

According to the Dictionary of Literary Biography:

Nasr analyzes the modern desacralization of knowledge and the consequent eclipse of human intelligence ... ]The roots of the crisis, he says, go back as far as the rationalists and skeptics of ancient Greece, but more immediate and grave in effect was the humanism of the Renaissance which shifted the focus of knowledge from God to human beings and from the sacred cosmos to the secular order, and the full blown rationalism of the Enlightenment which reduced human knowledge to reason alone. Nasr contends that epistemology since Descartes has taken an increasingly reductionist trajectory in which the traditional doctrine of knowledge rooted in intellection and revelation was replaced by an idolatry of reason. Rationalism gave way to empiricism, with its tendency to reject metaphysics altogether; and empiricism has been followed by various forms of irrationalism, including existentialism and deconstructionism. The general course of modern history has been one of desacralization and decay, robbing humanity of intelligence and stripping the cosmos of beauty and meaning.[27]

Hegel is said to have taken a decisive step in the process of desacralization, turning the whole process of knowledge into a dialectic inseparable from change and becoming.[28][29]

Liu Shu-hsien, a Neo-Confucian philosopher, writes:

Nasr's critique of modem European philosophy has also presented a very interesting perspective. He pointed out that Descartes's individual was not referring to Atman or the divine I, but rather the "illusory" self, which was placing its experience and consciousness of thinking as the foundation of all epistemology and ontology and the source of certitude. After the Humean doubt, Kant taught an agnosticism which in a characteristically subjective fashion denied to the intellect the possibility of knowing the essence of things. This situation further deteriorated into the Hegelian and Marxist dialectics, as they denied that there is anything immutable behind the appearance, and this loss of the sense of permanence was characteristic of mainstream thought of modern Western philosophy. In the analytic philosophy and irrational philosophies that followed, the sacred quality of knowledge was completely destroyed.[30]

One "powerful instrument" of desacralization in history includes the theory of evolution,[31] which according to Nasr "is a desperate attempt to substitute a set of horizontal, material causes in a unidimensional world to explain effects whose causes belong to other levels of reality, to the vertical dimensions of existence".[32] He says the theory of evolution, and its use by modernists and liberal theologians including Aurobindo Ghose and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin has been a "major force" in the process of desacralization of knowledge.[33] According to David Burrell, the "roots of the betrayal" may be found "on the other side of Descartes", in the high scholasticism that includes the thought of Thomas AquinasBonaventure and Duns Scotus. According to Nasr, their syntheses "tended to become over-rationalistic in imprisoning intuitions of a metaphysical order in syllogistic categories which were to hide, rather than reveal, their properly speaking intellectual rather than purely rational character".[34]

Effects[edit]

For Nasr, the adoption of the rationalist branch of ancient Greek philosophy, particularly Aristotle, led to a shift away from sacred knowledge in the West.[35]

Externalization and desacralization of knowledge has led to the belief all that can be understood is science in terms of information, quantification, analysis and their subsequent technological implications. The questions of religion, God, eternal life and the nature of the soul are all outside the realm of scientific knowledge and thus are only matters of faith.[36] The desacralized knowledge has affected all areas of culture, including art, science and religion, and has also had an impact on human nature.[37] The effect of desacralized, profane knowledge is felt within the value system, thought processes and structure of feelings.[38] Nasr says the desacralized knowledge and science affects the use of technology and has resulted in ecological catastrophes. It results in highly compartmentalized science whose ignorance of the divine destroys the outward and inward spiritual ambience of humans.[39][40]

Reception[edit]

According to Liu Shu-hsien, the process of desacralization of knowledge is not as bad as Nasr has anticipated. Shu-hsien says there is an overwhelming necessity for desacralization of knowledge within the domain of empirical science because the quest of certainty is no longer a viable objective.[41] According to David Harvey, the Enlightenment thought sought demystification and desacralization of knowledge, and social organization to free humans from their bonds.[42] Svend Brinkmann says of the need for desacralization of knowledge; "if knowing is a human activity, it is always already situated somewhere – in some cultural, historical and social situation".[43] David Burrell says in an explicitly postmodern world, scholars are more at ease with Nasr's criticism of "enlightenment philosophical paradigm" than ever before. Those who would argue "if knowledge cannot be secured in Descartes’s fashion, it cannot be secured at all" might have modern presumptions.[44]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Adnan Aslan, for example, comments that “The secularization process first began when a line was drawn between the realm of the sacred and the realm of the profane.” Humans asserted their freedom from God in a rebellion against Heaven. As a result, “the sacred qualities of the human faculty of knowledge were ignored, thereby initiating the process of secularization of knowledge.”[1]
  2. ^ In his review of Knowledge and the Sacred, Gerald Largo states that Nasr analyzes “the causes of the intellectual and spiritual chaos of modern times, namely, the eclipse of the sapiential dimension and the secularization of knowledge.”[2]
  3. ^ According to Aalia Sohail Khan, the traditionalists condemned “profane philosophy” and scientism “as the only legitimate manner of knowing the different levels of reality.” She says traditionalists critiqued modern science for “its reductionism and its imperial conceit and pretensions in claiming to be the only mode of knowing.” In contrast to postmodern critiques, which focus solely on the social and political repercussions of modernity, their main criticism of modern science was that it lacked metaphysical principles and was disconnected from Transcendental order and spiritual perspective. Their large body of work is founded on the “primacy of transcendence, sacred knowledge, value, truth and meaning created through intuition and revelation."[3]
  4. ^ In his 1927 book The Crisis of the Modern World, Rene Guenon criticizes “profane philosophy” and “profane science” or stated differently “the limitation of knowledge to its lowest order.” According to Guenon, this concerns “the empirical and analytical study of facts divorced from principles, a dispersion in an indefinite multitude of insignificant details, and the accumulation of unfounded and mutually destructive hypotheses and of fragmentary views.”[4]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Aslan 1998, p. 119.
  2. ^ Largo 1982, p. 219.
  3. ^ Khan 2017, p. 75.
  4. ^ Guenon 1927, p. 16.
  5. ^ Zebiri 1998, p. 53.
  6. ^ Stenberg 1996, p. 278.
  7. ^ Danner 1982, p. 247.
  8. ^ Allen 2003, p. 195.
  9. ^ Alkatiri 2016, p. 210.
  10. ^ Stone, Jr 2005, p. 1801.
  11. ^ Eaton 1983, p. 3.
  12. ^ Bigliardi 2014a, p. 120.
  13. ^ Widiyanto 2017, pp. 251, 252.
  14. ^ Widiyanto 2017, p. 252.
  15. ^ Bigliardi 2014, p. 169.
  16. ^ Smith 1991, p. 83.
  17. ^ Jawad 2005, p. 58, 59.
  18. ^ Nasr 1989, p. 34
  19. ^ Aslan 1998, p. 120
  20. ^ Alatas 1995, p. 97.
  21. ^ Bigliardi 2014a, p. 120.
  22. ^ Eaton 1983, p. 4
  23. ^ Bigliardi 2014a, p. 120
  24. ^ Eaton 1983, p. 4.
  25. ^ Heer 1993, p. 145.
  26. ^ Heer 1993, p. 145
  27. ^ Allen 2003, p. 195.
  28. ^ Nasr 1989, p. 38
  29. ^ Aslan 1998, p. 121
  30. ^ Shu-hsien 2000, p. 258.
  31. ^ Bigliardi 2014a, p. 120
  32. ^ Nasr 1989, p. 151.
  33. ^ Saltzman 2000, p. 595.
  34. ^ Burrel 2000, p. 642.
  35. ^ Howard 2011, p. 107
  36. ^ Saltzman 2000, p. 589.
  37. ^ Aslan 1998, p. 119.
  38. ^ Khan 2017, p. 80.
  39. ^ Bigliardi 2014a, p. 121
  40. ^ Bigliardi 2014, p. 169
  41. ^ Shu-hsien 2000, p. 264.
  42. ^ Harvey 1991, p. 13.
  43. ^ Brinkmann 2012, p. 32.
  44. ^ Burrel 2000, p. 642.

Sources[edit]

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]


==

Godhead 의미



Godhead (from Middle English godhede, "godhood", and unrelated to the modern word "head"), may refer to:
Deity
Divinity
Conceptions of God

In Abrahamic religions

Godhead in Judaism, the unknowable aspect of God, which lies beyond actions or emanations
Godhead in Christianity, the substantial essence or nature of the Christian God


Brahman, the divine source of being, through which all emanates
Paramātmā, the "oversoul" spiritually identical with the absolute and ultimate reality
Svayam Bhagavan or Supreme Personality of Godhead, the divine person from whom all emanates
Trimūrti, the cosmic trinity of Trideva (Brahmā, Viṣhṇu, and Śhiva) or Tridevi (Sarasvatī, Lakṣmī, and Pārvatī)

====

Godhead (중세 영어 godhide , " godhood ", 현대 단어 "head"와 관련 없음)는 다음을 참조할 수 있습니다.

===
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Godhead-theology

Godhead

Arianism
In Arianism: Beliefs

Because the Godhead is unique, it cannot be shared or communicated. Because the Godhead is immutable, the Son, who is mutable, must, therefore, be deemed a creature who has been called into existence out of nothing and has had a beginning. Moreover, the Son can have no…READ MORE
Christian mysticism
In Christianity: Negative mysticism: God and the Godhead

The most daring forms of Christian mysticism have emphasized the absolute unknowability of God. They suggest that true contact with the transcendent involves going beyond all that we speak of as God—even the Trinity—to an inner “God beyond God,” a divine Darkness or Desert…READ MORE
Eckhart
In Meister Eckhart

Eckhart calls “Godhead” the origin of all things that is beyond God (God conceived as Creator). “God and the Godhead are as distinct as heaven and earth.” The soul is no longer the Son. The soul is now the Father: it engenders God as a divine person.…READ MORE


===

What is the Godhead?

ANSWER
https://www.gotquestions.org/Godhead.html

The term Godhead is found three times in the King James Version: Acts 17:29Romans 1:20; and Colossians 2:9. In each of the three verses, a slightly different Greek word is used, but the definition of each is the same: “deity” or “divine nature.” The word Godhead is used to refer to God’s essential nature. We’ll take a look at each of these passages and what they mean.
==
In Acts 17, Paul is speaking on Mars Hill to the philosophers of Athens. As he argues against idolatry, Paul says, “Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device” (Acts 17:29, KJV). Here, the word Godhead is the translation of the Greek theion, a word used by the Greeks to denote “God” in general, with no reference to a particular deity. Paul, speaking to Greeks, used the term in reference to the only true God.
==
In Romans 1, Paul begins to make the case that all humanity stands guilty before God. In verse 20 he says, “The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (KJV). Here, Godhead is theiotés. Paul’s argument is that all of creation virtually shouts the existence of God; we can “clearly” see God’s eternal power, as well as His “Godhead” in what He has made. “The heavens declare the glory of God;  the skies proclaim the work of his hands” (Psalm 19:1). The natural world makes manifest the divine nature of God.
==
Colossians 2:9 is one of the clearest statements of the deity of Christ anywhere in the Bible: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” The word for “Godhead” here is theotés. According to this verse, Jesus Christ is God Incarnate. He embodies all (“the fulness”) of God (translated “the Deity” in the NIV). This truth aligns perfectly with Colossians 1:19, “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ].”
==
Because the Godhead dwells bodily in Christ, Jesus could rightly claim that He and the Father are “one” (John 10:30). Because the fullness of God’s divine essence is present in the Son of God, Jesus could say to Philip, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).
==
In summary, the Godhead is the essence of the Divine Being; the Godhead is the one and only Deity. 
Jesus, the incarnate Godhead, entered our world and showed us exactly who God is: “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known” (John 1:18; cf. Hebrews 1:3).

===
What is the Godhead?

Godhead 신격이라는 용어는 킹 제임스 성경에 세 번 나옵니다. 사도행전 17:29; 로마서 1:20; 그리고 골로새서 2:9. 세 구절 각각에서 약간 다른 그리스어 단어가 사용되지만 각각의 정의는 동일합니다. “신성” 또는 “신성한 본성”입니다. Godhead 신격이라는 단어는 하나님의 본질을 가리키는 데 사용됩니다. 이 구절들 각각과 그 의미를 살펴보겠습니다. 
== 
사도행전 17장에서 바울은 화성 언덕에서 아테네 철학자들에게 말하고 있습니다. 바울은 우상숭배를 반대하면서 이렇게 말했습니다. “그런즉 우리가 하나님의 소생인즉 Godhead 신격을 금이나 은이나 돌과 같이 기예와 사람의 술수로 새긴 줄로 생각하지 말지니라”(행 17:17). 29, KJV). 여기에서 Godhead 신격(Godhead)라는 단어는 그리스어 테온(theion)을 번역한 것으로, 그리스인들이 특정 신에 대한 언급 없이 일반적으로 "신"을 나타내기 위해 사용하는 단어입니다. 바울은 그리스인들에게 말하면서 유일하신 참하느님과 관련하여 그 용어를 사용했습니다.
== 
로마서 1장에서 바울은 모든 인류가 하나님 앞에 죄인임을 주장하기 시작합니다. 20절에서 그는 말합니다. “창세로부터 그의 보이지 아니하는 것들 곧 그의 영원하신 능력과 신성이 그 만드신 만물에 분명히 보여 알게 되나니 그들이 핑계하지 못하게 하려 함이라”(KJV). 여기에서 신은 이론입니다. 바울의 주장은 모든 피조물이 사실상 하나님의 존재를 외친다는 것입니다. 우리는 하나님의 영원한 능력과 그분이 만드신 것에 대한 그분의 “신격”을 “분명히” 볼 수 있습니다. “하늘이 하나님의 영광을 선포하고 하늘이 그의 손으로 하신 일을 나타내는도다”(시편 19:1). 자연 세계는 하나님의 신성한 본성을 나타냅니다. 
== 
골로새서 2:9는 성경 어디에서나 그리스도의 신성에 대한 가장 분명한 진술 중 하나입니다. “그[그리스도] 안에는 신성의 모든 충만이 육체로 거하시느니라.” 여기에서 "신격"에 해당하는 단어는 테오테스입니다. 이 구절에 따르면 예수 그리스도는 성육신하신 하나님이십니다. 그는 하나님의 모든 것('완전함')(NIV에서는 '신성'으로 번역됨)을 구현합니다. 이 진리는 골로새서 1장 19절과 완벽하게 일치합니다. 
== 
신격이 그리스도 안에 몸으로 거하시기 때문에 예수께서는 자신과 아버지가 “하나”(요 10:30)라고 주장하실 수 있었습니다. 하나님의 신성한 본질의 충만이 하나님의 아들 안에 있기 때문에 예수님은 빌립에게 “나를 본 자는 아버지를 보았느니라”(요한복음 14:9)라고 말씀하실 수 있었습니다. 
== 
요약하자면, 신격은 신성한 존재의 본질입니다. 신격은 유일무이한 신이다. 성육신하신 신격이신 예수님은 우리 세상에 오셔서 하나님이 어떤 분이신지를 우리에게 정확히 보여 주셨습니다. (요한복음 1:18; 참조 히브리서 1:3).

====


===

Godhead (중세 영어 godhide , " godhood ", 현대 단어 "head"와 관련 없음)는 다음을 참조할 수 있습니다.

===
What is the Godhead?

Godhead 신격이라는 용어는 킹 제임스 성경에 세 번 나옵니다. 사도행전 17:29; 로마서 1:20; 그리고 골로새서 2:9. 세 구절 각각에서 약간 다른 그리스어 단어가 사용되지만 각각의 정의는 동일합니다. “신성” 또는 “신성한 본성”입니다. Godhead 신격이라는 단어는 하나님의 본질을 가리키는 데 사용됩니다. 이 구절들 각각과 그 의미를 살펴보겠습니다. 
== 
사도행전 17장에서 바울은 화성 언덕에서 아테네 철학자들에게 말하고 있습니다. 바울은 우상숭배를 반대하면서 이렇게 말했습니다. “그런즉 우리가 하나님의 소생인즉 Godhead 신격을 금이나 은이나 돌과 같이 기예와 사람의 술수로 새긴 줄로 생각하지 말지니라”(행 17:17). 29, KJV). 여기에서 Godhead 신격(Godhead)라는 단어는 그리스어 테온(theion)을 번역한 것으로, 그리스인들이 특정 신에 대한 언급 없이 일반적으로 "신"을 나타내기 위해 사용하는 단어입니다. 바울은 그리스인들에게 말하면서 유일하신 참하느님과 관련하여 그 용어를 사용했습니다.
== 
로마서 1장에서 바울은 모든 인류가 하나님 앞에 죄인임을 주장하기 시작합니다. 20절에서 그는 말합니다. “창세로부터 그의 보이지 아니하는 것들 곧 그의 영원하신 능력과 신성이 그 만드신 만물에 분명히 보여 알게 되나니 그들이 핑계하지 못하게 하려 함이라”(KJV). 여기에서 신은 이론입니다. 바울의 주장은 모든 피조물이 사실상 하나님의 존재를 외친다는 것입니다. 우리는 하나님의 영원한 능력과 그분이 만드신 것에 대한 그분의 “신격”을 “분명히” 볼 수 있습니다. “하늘이 하나님의 영광을 선포하고 하늘이 그의 손으로 하신 일을 나타내는도다”(시편 19:1). 자연 세계는 하나님의 신성한 본성을 나타냅니다. 
== 
골로새서 2:9는 성경 어디에서나 그리스도의 신성에 대한 가장 분명한 진술 중 하나입니다. “그[그리스도] 안에는 신성의 모든 충만이 육체로 거하시느니라.” 여기에서 "신격"에 해당하는 단어는 테오테스입니다. 이 구절에 따르면 예수 그리스도는 성육신하신 하나님이십니다. 그는 하나님의 모든 것('완전함')(NIV에서는 '신성'으로 번역됨)을 구현합니다. 이 진리는 골로새서 1장 19절과 완벽하게 일치합니다. 
== 
신격이 그리스도 안에 몸으로 거하시기 때문에 예수께서는 자신과 아버지가 “하나”(요 10:30)라고 주장하실 수 있었습니다. 하나님의 신성한 본질의 충만이 하나님의 아들 안에 있기 때문에 예수님은 빌립에게 “나를 본 자는 아버지를 보았느니라”(요한복음 14:9)라고 말씀하실 수 있었습니다. 
== 
요약하자면, 신격은 신성한 존재의 본질입니다. 신격은 유일무이한 신이다. 성육신하신 신격이신 예수님은 우리 세상에 오셔서 하나님이 어떤 분이신지를 우리에게 정확히 보여 주셨습니다. (요한복음 1:18; 참조 히브리서 1:3).

====
짧게 결론:

Godhead=Godhood=신격
기독교가 아닌 종교에서도 이용하려면,
- <신성한 존재의 근원>이라고 생각하는 것이 좋겠다.
- 그러면 Divine Ground와 같은 것이라고 생각해도 좋을 듯하다.
주의: 신격은 신이 아니라 그 근원, 본질
===


Read The Leap Online by Steve Taylor and Eckhart Tolle | Books

Read The Leap Online by Steve Taylor and Eckhart Tolle | Books

Start reading

Remove from Saved
Add to list

Download to app

Share

The Leap: The Psychology of Spiritual Awakening


By Steve Taylor and Eckhart Tolle

5/5 (5 ratings)
435 pages
14 hours

Included in your membership!
at no additional cost

Description


What does it mean to be enlightened or spiritually awakened? In The Leap, Steve Taylor shows that this state is much more common than is generally believed. He shows that ordinary people — from all walks of life — can and do regularly “wake up” to a more intense reality, even if they know nothing about spiritual practices and paths. Wakefulness is a more expansive and harmonious state of being that can be cultivated or that can arise accidentally. It may also be a process we are undergoing collectively. Drawing on his years of research as a psychologist and on his own experiences, Taylor provides what is perhaps the clearest psychological study of the state of wakefulness ever published. Above all, he reminds us that it is our most natural state — accessible to us all, anytime, anyplace.








Listen to Tales of Wonder Audiobook by Huston Smith

Listen to Tales of Wonder Audiobook by Huston Smith

Start listening

Remove from Saved
Add to list

Download to app

Share

Tales of Wonder


Written by Huston Smith

Narrated by Michael McConnohie

5/5 (7 ratings)
5 hours

Included in your membership!
at no additional cost

Description


“In this delightful autobiography, Smith tells us how he became the dean of world religion experts. Along the way we meet the people who shaped him and shared his journey—a Who’s Who of 20th century spiritual America: the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., the Dalai Lama, Aldous Huxley, Timothy Leary, T.S. Eliot, Thomas Merton and Pete Seeger.... A valuable master class on faith and life.”
— San Francisco Chronicle Book Review

As Stephen Hawking is to science; as Peter Drucker is to economics; and as Joseph Campbell is to mythology; so Huston Smith is to religion. Tales of Wonder is the personal story of the author of the classic The World’s Religions, the man who taught a nation about the great faiths of the world, and his fascinating encounters with the people who helped shape the 20th century.

Religious
All categories

Tales of Wonder - Huston Smith

Search | Scribd


Results for “Tales of Wonder Huston Smith”

2,210 results in English. View all language results.
Explore By Content Type




Tales of Wonder: Adventures Chasing the Divine, an Autobiography
AuthorHuston Smith
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars(5/5)

Remove Tales of Wonder from Saved

The World's Religions, Revised and Updated: A Concise Introduction
AuthorHuston Smith
Rating: 4 out of 5 stars(4/5)

Remove The World's Religions, Revised and Updated from Saved

The Huston Smith Reader
AuthorHuston Smith
Rating: 0 out of 5 stars(0/5)

Remove The Huston Smith Reader from Saved

And Live Rejoicing: Chapters from a Charmed Life &mdash; Personal Encounters with Spiritual Mavericks, Remarkable Seekers, and the World's Great Religious Leaders
AuthorHuston Smith
Rating: 0 out of 5 stars(0/5)

Remove And Live Rejoicing from Saved

Enlightenment Town: Finding Spiritual Awakening in a Most Improbable Place
AuthorJeffery Paine
Rating: 1 out of 5 stars(1/5)

Save Enlightenment Town For Later




Audiobooks 1 resultView Moreresults in audiobooks



Tales of Wonder
AuthorHuston Smith
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars(5/5)

Remove Tales of Wonder from Saved

Articles 16 resultsView Moreresults in articles
Carousel Next


Tales of Wonder - Huston Smith


UPLOADED BY
SkyDragon3

Download Tales Of Wonder - Huston Smith
Remove Tales of Wonder - Huston Smith from Saved


Huston Smith, Bridge-Builder Extraordinaire


UPLOADED BY
Cidadaun Anônimo

Download Huston Smith, Bridge-Builder Extraordinaire
Save Huston Smith, Bridge-Builder Extraordinaire For Later


Save Clark Ashton Smith For Later

A Seat at the Table Huston Smith in Conversation With Native Americans on Religious Freedom


UPLOADED BY
Shemusundeen Muhammad

Download A Seat At The Table Huston Smith In Conversation With Native Americans On Religious Freedom
Save A Seat at the Table Huston Smith in Conversation With Native Americans on Religious Freedom For Later

Huston Smith - Forgotten Truth - The Common Vision of the Worlds Religions


UPLOADED BY
Stanley Stephen

Download Huston Smith - Forgotten Truth - The Common Vision Of The Worlds Religions
Remove Huston Smith - Forgotten Truth - The Common Vision of the Worlds Religions from Saved