Pope speech

[paulhope]

I never thought I'd say this, but after reading this speech, I'm a big fan of the pope.

Dad sent me the link to the speech a couple days ago with the note, "The Pope created a furore with this lecture, but for the wrong reasons." By "furore" (British spelling--who knew?) he was referring to the outcry by Islamic leaders against something mean a

Comments

[anosognosia]

I think these are very different movements. The Abrahamic "I" is the statement of absolute being, the establishment of an absolute ground, whereas the Hindu "I" is the genesis of the transcendental subject from the absolute ground. In the Upanishads, this is clear -- existence does not begin with this invocation of subjectivity. The distinction is also clear in early Gnostic myths, where the I who becomes confused by and identifies with phenomena, thereby producing the world, is not the absolute being, but rather the final emanation of being. It's a curiosity of the Abrahamic tradition that both of these movements (rather than just the second of them) is granted the statue of an "I". This is really how Christianity continues, theoretically, the Abrahamic tradition, by providing, in Christ, the model of an identity between the transcendent I of absolute being and the immanent I of subjectivity. For the Hindus absolute being personifies itself through the genesis of subjectivity, but is not, as in the Abrahamic tradition, already a kind of subject.

[force_of_will]

It's an interesting take, and not without merit. For the eastern religion, they also allow for a regression of their Gods i.e. their Gods have Gods.

It seems the same old limits of logic are to haunt us eternal...