Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Karen Celeste Hilfman

Quote by Karen Celeste Hilfman

“When we risk being open, vulnerable and honest about our struggles and our joys, the fullness of who we are emerges and connects us to one another at a profound, authentic level. Sharing our stories allows us to take the risk of coming out from behind masks that separate us from one another and from ourselves. Experience has taught me that the pattern of hiding behind masks and disconnecting from authentically engaging in life is at the root of some of our greatest struggles in the times in which we live. We are experiencing an epidemic of loneliness rooted in the destructive powers of judgment, shame, blame and guilt. We are experiencing a culture that is numb to some of the deepest travesties of human history as we sooth ourselves with over-consumption of things, addictive substances and repeated mindless patterns. Too often, we are cut off from the roots of meaning at the core of our being as we strive to survive by fulfilling shallow expectations, rather than allowing ourselves to be nourished by the rich of wisdom and the vision of collaboration that is deep within us. Sharing our stories connects us at the deep level of our profound longing for community, creativity, compassion and acceptance.”

Quote by Karen Celeste Hilfman

Work

The Mended Mirror: Reflections On Life: Wholeness In Brokenness

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Karen Celeste Hilfman

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Karen Celeste Hilfman. more

You May Also Like

“All appearances are vast openness, Blissful and utterly free. With a free, happy mind I sing this song of joy. When one looks toward one's own mind - The root of all phenomena - There is nothing but vivid emptiness, Nothing concrete there to be taken as real. It is present and transparent, utter openness, Without outside, without inside - An all pervasiveness Without boundary and without direction. The wide-open expanse of the view, The true condition of the mind, Is like the sky, like space: Without center, without edge, without goal. By leaving whatever i experience Relaxed in ease, just as it is, I have arrived at the vast plain That is the absolute expanse. Dissolving into the expanse of emptiness That has no limits and no boundary, Everything i see, everything i hear, My own mind, and the sky all merge. Not once has the notion arisen Of these being seperate and distinct. In the absolute expanse of awareness All things are blended into that single taste - But, relatively, each and every phenomenom is distinctly, clearly seen. Wondrous!”

“The statement that the essence of the human being consists in being-inthe-world likewise contains no decision aboutwhether the human being in a theologico-metaphysical sense is merely a this-worldly or an other-worldly Creature. 115th the existential determination of the essence of the human being, therefore, nothing is decided about the "existence of God" or his "nonbeing," no more than about the possibility or impossibility of gods. Thus it is not only rash hut also an error in procedure to maintain that the interpretation of the essence of the human being from the relation of his essence to the mth of being is atheism. And what is more, this arbitrary classification betrays a lack of careful reading. No one bothers to notice that in my essay "On the Essence of Ground" (1929) the following appears (,,, 2~, note I): "Through the ontological interpretation of Dasein as beingin-the-world no decision, whether positive or neptive, is made concerning a possible being toward God. It is, however, the case that through an illumi- .,tion of transcendence we first achieve nn adeqrcnte concept of Dnsein, with respect to which it can now he asked how the relationship of Dasein to God is ontologically ordered." If we think about this remark too quickly, as is usually the case, we will declare that such a philosophy does not decide either for or against the existence of God. It remains stalled in indifference. ~hus it is unconcerned with the religious question. Such indifferentism falls prey to nihilism. Rut does the foregoing observation teach indifferentism? Why then are particular words in the note italicized - and not just random ones? For no other reason than to indicate that the thinking that thinks from the question concerning the uuth of being questions more primordially than metaphysics can. Only from the truthofbeing can the essence of the holy he thought. [I~z] Only from the essence of the holy is the essence of divinity to he thought. Only in the light of the essence of divinity can it be thought or said what the word "God" is to signify. Or should we not first be able to hear and understand all these words carefully if we are to be permirted as human beings, that is, as eksistent creatures, to experience a relation of God to human beings? How can the human being at the present stage of world history ask at all seriously and rigorously whether the god nears or withdraws, when he has above all neglected to think into the dimension in which alone that question can be asked? But this is the dimension of the holy, which indeed remains closed as a dimension if the open region of being is not cleared and in its clearing is near to humans. Perhaps what is distinctive about this world-epoch consists in the closure of the dimension of the hale [des Heilen]. Perhaps that is the sole malignancy [Unheil]. But with this reference the thinking that points toward the truth of I)eing as what is to be thought has in no way decided in favor of theism. It can he theistic as little as atheistic. Not, however, because of an indifferent attitude, hutoutofrespect forthe boundaries that have heen set forthinking as such, indeed set by what gives itself to thinking as what is to be thought, 1)). the truth of being. Insofar as thinking limits itself to its task it tlirects the human being at the present moment of the world's destiny into the primordial dimension of his historical abode.”

“The problem became more acute over time, especially with modernity: modern life produced many new areas of human activity and knowledge, whereas Islamic jurisprudence kept offering the same old rules that were now too archaic or too inadequate. The ethical rules humanity developed for these new areas were “un-Islamic,” so they were unaccepted. The result was ethics-free zones in which one could surf at will.”