|
Ahhh...so mixing pantheons would be to take a bit from here and a bit form there? That's exactly what I do. Acknowledging the collective schools of thought, the achievements of all thinkers thoughout history, but accepting that they are all just approximations of something we are incapable of experiencing directly. Therefore, to me, one as is good as the other, as they all indirectly approach the same subject.
The case against mixing pantheons, as I see it, would be that it might be a muddled, meandering path, as one conflates themes for which the intended symbolism is incongruous, thereby losing track of the value of the individual teachings in question. I understand that the lack of discipline in following a prescribed path might lead one in circles, or worse. That, however is not a concern of mine, personally.
I aim directly towards the same-ness in everything. I want, least of all, to be specific. That's just what works best for me. Remaining open to the mystery, trying to see past what is illusory, and approaching every day, and every action, as the divine.This also makes the most logical sense, to me, and I don't accept a rift between logic and spirituality, as they are two aspects of the one-ness of everything.
__________________
******************
There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there
it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your
expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever
gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio
|