Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> The Absolute and Manifestation
Shawn
post Feb 08, 2003, 09:59 PM
Post #1


God
******

Group: Full Member
Posts: 1498
Joined: Jan 23, 2003
From: CA
Member No.: 9



an interesting excerpt:

The whole of this universe is therefore is as it were, a peculiar form, the Absolute is that ocean while you and I, the suns, and stars, and everything else are various waves of the ocean. And what makes the waves different? Only the form, and that form is time, space and causation, all entirely dependent on the wave. As soon as the wave goes, they vanish. As soon as the individual gives up this Maya, it vanishes for him and he becomes free. The whole struggle is to get rid of this clinging onto time, space and causation which are always obstacles in our way. What is the theory of evolution? What are the two factors? A tremendous potential power which is trying to express itself, and circumstances which are holding it down. The environments not allowing it to express itself. So in order to fight with these environments, the power is taking new bodies again and again. An amoeba in the struggle gets another body and conquers some obstacles, then gets another body and so on until it becomes man.

Now if you carry this idea to it's logical conclusion, there must come a time when that power that was in the amoeba and which evolved as man will have conquered all the obstructions that nature can bring before it and will this escape all the environments. This idea expressed in metaphysics will take this form: there are two components in every action, the one the subject, the other the object, and the one aim of life is to make the subject master of the object. For instance, I feel unhappy because a man scolds me. My struggle will be to make myself strong enough to conquer the environment, so that he may scold and I shall not feel. That is how we are all trying to conquer. What is meant by morality? Making the subject strong by attuning it to the Absolute, so that nature ceases to have control over us. It is a logical conclusion of out philosophy that there must come a time when we shall have conquered all the environments, because nature is finite.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 01:32 PM
Post #2


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



Simply remove the struggle that is caused by belief and reason and manifestation becomes the byproduct of desire/intent/awareness.
Time is the creation of ego to put things into a linear perception of how do I become. God is, Man is the expression of God, evolution is the idea of expression in relative terms.
There is only Now, always only Now, never anything other than now. Manifest reality is the changing of awareness within the absolute infinite now. What was, is and always will be.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 02:38 PM
Post #3


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=#msg14901 date=1066933929]
Time is the creation of ego to put things into a linear perception of how do I become.
[/quote]

umm, why would an ego create time? and why would it bother to put things into linear perception? Inquiring minds want to know. 8)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 03:35 PM
Post #4


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



[quote]umm, why would an ego create time? and why would it bother to put things into linear perception? Inquiring minds want to know. [/quote]
For the same reason you ask this question....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 04:17 PM
Post #5


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



do you like to dance?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 05:45 PM
Post #6


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



Classical, disco, hip hop or universal?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 05:50 PM
Post #7


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



tribal? wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 05:55 PM
Post #8


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



you lead.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 06:16 PM
Post #9


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



ohh noo, you see, I'm just a bear who enjoys watching others dance and I must say that you dance well. ;D Oh wait! My ego has just now created timelessness! I experience Past, Present, and Future at same time. My silly ego, what a silly little bear you are! Do you believe me? Do I believe you? And where is an open mind in all of this?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 06:29 PM
Post #10


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



Where is mind in this determination of time or timelessness and the watching of the other?
From where is the point of reference? In the universal One or the dual me and the other?

Nothing complicated about living in the world but not of it but the complication arises when making issues with reality as in purpose and final intent.
This is my dance from your perspective if you wish to sparate yourself from the known as the knower.
It is your dance if you unite the knower and the known and it is always your lead.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 06:42 PM
Post #11


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



Are you a monist or transcendental idealist? Have you considered that this Universal One is all in your head? Why would you want to unite my bear essence with your essence in some Universal One? Have you considered that maybe we're fundamentally different at the most basic level? In short, have you considered that there is no Universal One? If not, then where is the open mind in all of it?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 06:59 PM
Post #12


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



I have considered and experienced the varying levels of duality.
What I have found in all experiences is the One essence that supports all ideas in form and identification. The hypnosis that overcomes the knower in identification with experience as essence is broken once one experiences the essence of all identities. When engaged it unites all identities and experiences at its subtlest level. Pure isness and stillness. The presence of that is much more than any limited definition in identity as a form or personality. From that point of reference there is no mind that is closed or open just universal mind.
You may wish to hold on to your bear, and separate me from you, but it does not mean we are separated, for there is nothing ever separate in the universe. Like the cells in a body that are always in close communication they work with the whole as the whole without the thought of being different or the thought of needing to be special.
In the microcosm of the Human personna the aspects of the whole are inherent in each and never separate in knowing or being. Only Ego separates and divides the whole into the many parts. It desires to be noticed and unique in and amongst the whole to build a level of self worth, only because it wishes to define the infinite universe and itself within it. From the platform of the absolute one there is no need because the infinite presence of the one is totally fulfilling due to the fact that you are the universe.
I and my Father are one, heaven on earth and that sort of thing.
But I can tell you are more interested in making a place for yourself in the universe as a blue bear.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 23, 2003, 07:16 PM
Post #13


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



History has taught me that people are willing to believe all sorts of fanciful notions. You may experience Oneness, but its a non sequitur to conclude that therefore everything is part of that Oneness. These fanciful notions do not describe all of reality. They're incommensurate.
You say "What I have found in all experiences is the One essence that supports all ideas in form and identification" but this may be a fantasy and it doesn't mean that the One essence supports all. Maybe my One essence is different from yours. At this point, we can't prove either side. It comes down either to belief and blind faith, or remaining open minded.
You say "Only Ego separates and divides the whole into the many parts" and since you believe you have seen through the falsity of the ego, you conclude the many is thereby false too, but this conclusion does not necessarily follow.
There are doors you have not opened yet. You see through one illusion only to see into another one. If you would be a master of disillusion, you must see past the illusion of illusions and past the illusion of non-illusions. You may experience the One as remaining constant throughout your experiences, but it does not necessarily follow that this One is all that exists. To identify oneself as One is to deny experience of Other. And even if we denied the experience of Other, it does not imply the Other does not exist independent of our experience.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 23, 2003, 10:33 PM
Post #14


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



[quote]History has taught me that people are willing to believe all sorts of fanciful notions. You may experience Oneness, but its a non sequitur to conclude that therefore everything is part of that Oneness. These fanciful notions do not describe all of reality. They're incommensurate. [/quote]
Indeed to compare one to another means nothing for any basis in truth has to have a point of reference. The diversity of God/Self allows infinite expression and interpretation and experience. Underlying all of that is the Self which is a constant. The experience of that even can change but in effect it never changes. This point of non changing stillness can be taken for an experience and an illusion when weighed against history in experience and everchanging points of reference.
I think therefore I am: a statement of being and a statement that says I am a something. The relationship built upon history and experience is built upon waking life and not the consciousness within that lives even while the body is not.
For those that have had death experiences and experienced the self amongst other aparitions know that the expeerience is as defining as the physical and so knows that the experience both in and out of body does not define the self for now there is no point of reference in history to compare reality. What physical history has accumulated now has limited impact when non-physical reality is experienced.
A dream an aparition of fantasy? maybe to the one who bases fact upon their own personal history and with a closed mind accepts no other possibility. The Self is multidimensional and is not limited to time or experience.

[quote] You say "What I have found in all experiences is the One essence that supports all ideas in form and identification" but this may be a fantasy and it doesn't mean that the One essence supports all. Maybe my One essence is different from yours. At this point, we can't prove either side. It comes down either to belief and blind faith, or remaining open minded.[/quote]
If you are open minded you cannot deny my experience as fantasy but as probability, for you cannot know my experience or reality if you deny that I can know yours or if you deny anything.
I have in fact experienced the essence of you, and it is me, it is Self. Fantasy you assume, possible reality then if not proven in any direction. Choice leaves your mind only open to what you have experienced and can know from your experience and what you have learned so far.
You would have to let go of any attachment to past impressions and experience to allow something different to impress itself upon your awareness, otherwise you continually recreate the same paradigm.

[quote]You say "Only Ego separates and divides the whole into the many parts" and since you believe you have seen through the falsity of the ego, you conclude the many is thereby false too, but this conclusion does not necessarily follow. [/quote] The many are the manifest from the interpretation of Self drawn forth from the absolute. It cannot be separated from the absolute or the Self, it (manifest reality) is a thought an aparition a chimera of the mind, but never that totality or the essence of the Self.

[quote]There are doors you have not opened yet. You see through one illusion only to see into another one. If you would be a master of disillusion, you must see past the illusion of illusions and past the illusion of non-illusions. You may experience the One as remaining constant throughout your experiences, but it does not necessarily follow that this One is all that exists. To identify oneself as One is to deny experience of Other. And even if we denied the experience of Other, it does not imply the Other does not exist independent of our experience.[/quote]
You haven't understood the essence of the One. It does not deny anything, but unites all as one. All experiences all identities. Just as you have experienced being the child, the adolescent, the adult and the aged. You are niether just one or the other but all of them and much much more. Why limit yourself or any other to perception of being some thing or idea when "Being" is timeless and immortal?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 24, 2003, 08:36 AM
Post #15


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
Indeed to compare one to another means nothing for any basis in truth has to have a point of reference. The diversity of God/Self allows infinite expression and interpretation and experience.
[/quote]

it is not Self-evident that the Self exhausts God's power of expression, nor that it is in any way identical to it. The Self, to the extent that it constitutes our existential being, does not imply that it constitutes all being. Thus, it does not necessarily follow that the Self is God, unless you're willing to admit that you are not identical to the Self. In any event, God is something that we are a part of, but it is not necessarily something we are absolutely identical to. For God, insofar as God is defined as inclusive of any sort of existential totality, must encompass this thing we can experience as the Self. The experience of the Self is perhaps itself but a phantom of the brain, it is your own creation. To confuse your own creation with all of creation and with all that exists is an error.



[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
Underlying all of that is the Self which is a constant.
[/quote]


To say that the Self is a constant in all of your experiences is to say that this presence that you experience is always present. It is a statement about the endurability and sameness of your Self-awareness, given that this Self is something beyond the facade of ego. New experiences are normally readily integrated into our Self, but this is falling prey to the same mode of Self-integration over and over again. Your experience of Self as the sole reality may well be nothing more than your experience of Self as your own reality. It does not preclude the experience of Other or that which lies beyond the Self.


[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
If you are open minded you cannot deny my experience as fantasy but as probability
[/quote]

I accept your experience, but do not accept your conclusions or the way that you have interpreted your experience. And while I accept your interpretation as possible, it in no way constitutes the only possible interpretation.


[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
I have in fact experienced the essence of you, and it is me, it is Self.
[/quote]

this is a conjecture. If you were ever to meet a completely alien lifeform that had been around for much longer than humans and that was much more advanced than humans, you would have no idea whether it's essence was identical to this thing you experience as the Self. The Self may well be merely a human creation, born of the human mind. To conjecture that the Self constitutes the essence of other non-human minds, or of all possible minds, does not seem to have much evidence in support of it, and remains, nonetheless, a mere conjecture. While I recognize this conjecture as possible, I also recognize other possibilities. Namely, that this experience you call the Self may well be a merely human experience, and that it would be a mistake to identify it with God, for God is something that is inclusive of all that exists, and all that exists is inclusive of the Self. Thus, to identify the Self with God is to claim that a part of God is equal to the totality of God, and even if you maintain God's immanence, I would reply that God's immanence does not compromise his transcendence and that the part is not identical to the whole though the whole may well express itself in each part.



[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
You haven't understood the essence of the One. It does not deny anything, but unites all as one.
[/quote]

But then the One is not a totality, and as such, it is not God. It is your conjecture regarding the unity of all, but this does not invalidate the multiplicity. Both the unity and multiplicity, both the Self and Other, are expressions of God. To pay undue emphasis to the One is to take away or deny God's other attributes and modes of expression. The more that we experience the totality, insofar as our meager abilities enable us, the more that we experience God. But to claim absolute identity with God based on experience of One is an error.


[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14943 date=1066966439]
Why limit yourself or any other to perception of being some thing or idea when "Being" is timeless and immortal?
[/quote]

because I also recognize the validity of Becoming and Time. Recall Krishna's response to Arjuna in the Gita when asked about his identity during the cosmic vision.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 24, 2003, 03:22 PM
Post #16


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



Blah!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 24, 2003, 07:55 PM
Post #17


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



I think you should know that I do respect your experiences and am not in any way trying to invalidate them, though I do run into problems with your interpretations because, even though I regard them as possible, and perhaps on occasion even probable, I nonetheless can't rule out other possible interpretations. There's something about existing interpretations that doesn't seem right to me and that seems incomplete, and so I seek for the interpretations that have not been thought of yet and that will make all the pieces of the puzzle of our experiences and existence fall into place. This "Self is One is All" business, while I think there's certainly some truth there, nonetheless, I feel it's incomplete. It doesn't answer all of my questions. No current interpretations that I've come across answer all of my questions completely, and so I continue to seek for a better interpretation of my experiences, and of experiences and existence in general, finding little bits and pieces here and there, but still yearning for and striving towards a complete synthesis. And so, if I seem overly critical, often opting to play the role of devil's advocate, please understand that it's not out of any disrespect, but rather it's from my highest respect, for Truth.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 24, 2003, 09:47 PM
Post #18


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



What comes to mind is Achems Razor: All things being equal the simplest explanation must be true.

When will you find Truth? When you have exhausted the intellect to finally listen to your heart or when your heart finds the truth in the intellect?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 24, 2003, 11:30 PM
Post #19


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14979 date=1067050057]
What comes to mind is Achems Razor: All things being equal the simplest explanation must be true.
[/quote]

but what's regarded as simplest is not always so straightforward. For example, many people who first learn about physics think that Newton's law of gravitation is simpler than Einstein's general theory of relativity, and yet when looked at geometrically, Einstein's theory is much simpler than Newton's.

[quote author=Joesus link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14979 date=1067050057]
When will you find Truth? When you have exhausted the intellect to finally listen to your heart or when your heart finds the truth in the intellect?
[/quote]

On the face of it, Truth seems to admit of a dual nature. On the one hand, we can experience Truth directly through mystical or otherwise enlightening experiences, and yet on the other hand, our intellects demand rationalization, explanation, and in general, making sense of our myriad experiences and sense of identity. Should we disregard our intellects? I don't think so. Or rather, I am not in a position to disregard mine. Our experiences constitute raw material for our intellects to further process and make sense of. Correlating our experiences has its value too, to the extent that it reveals a universal intelligence in action, underlying the structures of our experiences. Our experiences give us glimpses into a Totality consisting of the sharpest contrasts of Being-Becoming, Time-Timelessness, Actuality-Potentiality, Meaningfulness-Absurdity, Substance-Form, Thought-Extension, Harmony-Discord, Representation-Will, Materialism-Idealism, Absolute-Relative, Tragedy-Comedy, Life-Death, Necessity-Chance, Real-Unreal, Design-Purposeless, Unity-Multiplicity, Individuality-Universality, Infinite-Infinitesimal, Perception-Action, Personal-Transpersonal, Transcendence-Immanence, Isolation-Communion, Self-Other, One-Many, Infinity-Zero, Existence-Nothingness.... and the list goes on and on indefinitely. The contrasts comprising this Totality cannot be exhausted with words. It is a Totality overflowing with such seemingly endless contradictions that I believe we must embrace it with our full being and consciousness if we are to remain faithful to Truth and if we are to synthesize our experiences and sense of identity into a coherent whole, the likes of which are wholly beyond words since muted awe seems the only apt response to the actual merging of the two strands of Truth and the realization and reconciliation of all contradictions into one all-encompassing vision and experience.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 25, 2003, 12:27 AM
Post #20


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



you seem awfully familiar, 'bluebear'

wink.gif

(p.s. Joesus, it's Occam's Razor smile.gif )
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:04 AM
Post #21


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



[quote author=Dan link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14999 date=1067059639]
you seem awfully familiar, 'bluebear'
[/quote]

yeah, I get that a lot. It's the mystery of mysteries. There seem to be a lot of incredibly cute and adorably cuddly blue bears that look just like me perhaps? ???
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:04 AM
Post #22


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



[quote](p.s. Joesus, it's Occam's Razor [/quote]

Thanks :smile.gif

The only problem I have with the intellect is that if it is not based in the essence of all of creation, manifest and unmanifest, it is based in the limited surface perspectives, trying to rationalize the unbounded or to put God in a box.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:14 AM
Post #23


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



Joesus, how can anything not be based in the essence of all creation? There is no other base! I think your idea of a separate 'surface' base indicates that you can't resolve how a manifestation of the essence of all creation can act blindly or destructively
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:26 AM
Post #24


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



what's the paradigm you're using, Joe? Is it that the 'formless' is absolute, whereas 'form' is relative?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
v3d4
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:43 AM
Post #25


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 11, 2003
Member No.: 532



[quote author=Dan link=board=34;threadid=367;start=0#msg14999 date=1067059639]
you seem awfully familiar, 'bluebear'

wink.gif

(p.s. Joesus, it's Occam's Razor smile.gif )
[/quote]
ha, i was gonna say the same thing, like ive heard your 'voice' before, bluebear. you are a very cute little bear too!

the thing im left wondering, affter going thru all that is, is it useless to even talk about this?

somebody please let me kno if im going off on a mad tagent, but it seems that there is a kinda self-referential thing goin on here that i cant get past.
just like you can say with language "this statement is false" and Godel showed you can do the same thing with math, is consciousness in the universe thinking about consciousness in the universe (or 'of the universe' or even the cosmos considering itself, whatevr way you wanna say it) is this the ultimate self referential trip?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluebear
post Oct 25, 2003, 02:02 AM
Post #26


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 58
Joined: Oct 13, 2003
Member No.: 651



[quote author=v3d4 link=board=34;threadid=367;start=#msg15011 date=1067064215]
you are a very cute little bear too!
[/quote]

awww, shucks! you're making me blush! wink.gif


[quote author=v3d4 link=board=34;threadid=367;start=#msg15011 date=1067064215]
it seems that there is a kinda self-referential thing goin on here that i cant get past....is this the ultimate self referential trip?
[/quote]


the observer trying to catch herself as the observed. Do you think that this self-referential trip is produced by duality, by separation of perceiver and the perceived? Does this self-referential trip still occur when one dissolves away such duality by entering into the unitive state? I'm not going to try to answer these now. I just wanted to throw these questions out before heading for bed. Hopefully, I'll dream about this self-referential trip instead, cause roller-coaster rides can be fun sometimes.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 25, 2003, 03:18 AM
Post #27


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



[quote]Joesus, how can anything not be based in the essence of all creation? There is no other base! I think your idea of a separate 'surface' base indicates that you can't resolve how a manifestation of the essence of all creation can act blindly or destructively [/quote]
I'm not sure of this separate surface base you are referring to. Creation is not blind or destructive, nor without intelligence.
Interpretation into relative explanation has given description to nature, or in vedic terms the Gunas. Creation destruction and the tension of intelligence that keeps the process active by its nature to give impetus to the other aspects. But this is only interpretation.
Below all action is pure stillness of the absolute. From that is consciousness/intelligence and manifestation of energy in multidimensional levels of awareness, as the nature of consciousness in activity.
Any name you give it is irrelevant for no particular name can lock it into definition. Only in relative terms within the construct of relative boundaries does meaning occur in labeling energy/Spirit in any form or in its formless state.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 25, 2003, 12:07 PM
Post #28


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



[quote]I'm not sure of this separate surface base you are referring to.[/quote]
you said it, Joe! right here:
[quote]if (the intellect) is not based in the essence of all of creation, manifest and unmanifest, it is based in the limited surface perspectives[/quote]


as for denying that blindness or destructiveness of intelligence is possible, I suggest you are actively in denial and are literally interpreting events so that they will fit your preconceived notions. You believe it should be so, so you interpret the world to make it so unto yourself.


smile.gif



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post Oct 25, 2003, 01:11 PM
Post #29


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



[quote]you said it, Joe! right here:[/quote]
I say a lot of things, yet I am not always in synch with your interpretations of what I say or how you interpret life.

[quote]as for denying that blindness or destructiveness of intelligence is possible, I suggest you are actively in denial and are literally interpreting events so that they will fit your preconceived notions. You believe it should be so, so you interpret the world to make it so unto yourself.[/quote]
That is your definition of life and what I have been saying about the way you see it, me and my ideas.
I don't deny anything other than limits to experience and perceptions of reality.
You say Tomato I say Tomahto.... :-*
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Oct 25, 2003, 02:31 PM
Post #30


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



[quote]I say a lot of things, yet I am not always in synch with your interpretations of what I say or how you interpret life.[/quote]

you must have attended 'Lame Cop-Outs 101' in enlightenment school



[quote]That is your definition of life and what I have been saying about the way you see it, me and my ideas.
I don't deny anything other than limits to experience and perceptions of reality.
You say Tomato I say Tomahto.... [/quote]
yes, but you are also unable to prove that limits do not exist. All you do is claim it and say that the evidence is available only if I join your religion
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th July 2019 - 07:28 PM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

BrainMeta is supported by:

The Neurological Foundation & CerebralHealth.com

BrainMeta is enhanced by:

UVISI: Universal Virtual Intelligence Singularity Infinity
info@uvisi.com