Village Journals
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.
Bowl of Saki for November 23, 2006
Bowl of Saki for November 23
REASON IS LEARNED FROM THE EVER-CHANGING WORLD, BUT TRUE KNOWLEDGE COMES FORM THE ESSENCE OF LIFE. Hazrat Inayat Khan
Commentary by Hazrat Samuel L. Lewis: (Sufi Ahmed Murad Chisti)
The rational faculty is dependent upon something which is not in and of the mind itself. Either it accepts *a priori* concepts or intuitions or else it produces *a posteriori* conclusions drawn from external observations. The idea of *a priori* conclusions -- that is
to say, conclusions drawn prior to experience -- is good when they are founded upon faith, that is to say, the attunement of heart. But even intuition is of no value unless it is put into practice in life.
So far as the mind depending on the senses, not even the scientists do this. Some philosophers have falsely drawn conclusions by this method, but when the philosopher's reasoning is examined, it is generally found that he has assumed *a Priori* that conclusions must be *a posteriori*. In other words, it has been something other than reason which has proclaimed the value and supremacy of reason. This is the fallacy and dilemma of all worldly thinkers.
----------------------------------- ----------
ps: Remember the movie "What the Bleep Do You Know"
REASON IS LEARNED FROM THE EVER-CHANGING WORLD, BUT TRUE KNOWLEDGE COMES FORM THE ESSENCE OF LIFE. Hazrat Inayat Khan
Commentary by Hazrat Samuel L. Lewis: (Sufi Ahmed Murad Chisti)
The rational faculty is dependent upon something which is not in and of the mind itself. Either it accepts *a priori* concepts or intuitions or else it produces *a posteriori* conclusions drawn from external observations. The idea of *a priori* conclusions -- that is
to say, conclusions drawn prior to experience -- is good when they are founded upon faith, that is to say, the attunement of heart. But even intuition is of no value unless it is put into practice in life.
So far as the mind depending on the senses, not even the scientists do this. Some philosophers have falsely drawn conclusions by this method, but when the philosopher's reasoning is examined, it is generally found that he has assumed *a Priori* that conclusions must be *a posteriori*. In other words, it has been something other than reason which has proclaimed the value and supremacy of reason. This is the fallacy and dilemma of all worldly thinkers.
----------------------------------- ----------
ps: Remember the movie "What the Bleep Do You Know"