Post by gurthbruins on Nov 12, 2011 12:03:30 GMT -5
Sam Reifler : the greatest guru.
Wrote "I Ching" 1974.
The numbers below refer to hexagram numbers.
The "comments" are mine.
06. "All beliefs of all men are sequins on the robe of the One and All."
Comment:
Sequins are objects of beauty, they beautify the robe, which implies a wearer. Who is this wearer?
The All. The universe of all possible conceivable and unconceivable things. We cannot conceive it, yet we can conceive the concept of totality. We are able to conceive of the All, and this All is obviously only One, and can never be more than One. Two universes are inconceivable, because the concept of totality will immediately unite them into one.
The All contains all things. Does it contain God, or is it God? How can God be less than the All?
He cannot. Nor can he be more than the All, more than Himself.
So we simply define God as the universe, which no-one will bother to doubt does exist. Why use the term God at all? If we choose, there is no reason why we should not dispense with it. I have suggested the name Oa instead. But universe would do. As Lesedi said on Isidingo, "Maybe the universe does not want...". Just remember, the universe contains everything.
The whole thing is to perceive the Unity. A Unity cannot be both good and evil, and it cannot be either if it excludes everything else. It is, simply, beyond good and evil.
Where we make the mistake is when we fail to continue to see the All as One, and start focussing on what we conceive of as separate parts of this Unity. But there ARE no separate parts - they are all connected into a single, organic whole. If you look at an animal, you see all the parts working in harmony to create a perfect organism. Who can doubt that the organism of the All is even more harmonious and perfect?
It seems otherwise to many; what I have experienced is the gradual disappearance of this illusion, which comes to seem largely presumptuous. It is based mostly on our egotistic prejudice that each of us is a separate entity with its own "rights". So we end up with the concept of a disharmonious world with many sets of conflicting "rights". All illusory: there are no "rights".
To take this to the final realisation:
"There are no legitimate considerations."
Meaning that everything is egotistical supposition, blind prejudice, purely relative and unimportant.
Further Comment:
All sequins are equally beautiful: the beliefs of Adolf Hitler are as beautiful as the beliefs of the Dalai Lama. There are no good guys and bad guys. There are only guys acting their written roles in the Divine Drama, which treats of the illusion of "good" and "bad". We can see that the "bad" guys are as essential to the drama as the "good" guys: they cannot be deleted from the work of art, are intrinsically NECESSARY and so to call them "evil" is meaningless. If the illusory "evil" were to be abolished, then the illusory nature of "good" would immediately become evident.
The equally divine quality of all the parts of Oa is insisted upon in the following quotation:
(08. Seeking Union)
"MOKSHA: As long as you do not recognise every man as your brother - you will not find it. As long as you do not recognise that every table is your brother - you will not find it. As long as you do not recognise that the midnight sky is your brother - you will not find it."
REFORMULATION OF QUOTE 1:
(06. Conflict)
MOKSHA: "You are not spiritually free because you cling anxiously to one metaphysical image of the Universe. You feel threatened by other concepts of God. But every system is a reflection of the One and All. All beliefs and all denials of all men are only sequined mirrors on His robes."
Wrote "I Ching" 1974.
The numbers below refer to hexagram numbers.
The "comments" are mine.
06. "All beliefs of all men are sequins on the robe of the One and All."
Comment:
Sequins are objects of beauty, they beautify the robe, which implies a wearer. Who is this wearer?
The All. The universe of all possible conceivable and unconceivable things. We cannot conceive it, yet we can conceive the concept of totality. We are able to conceive of the All, and this All is obviously only One, and can never be more than One. Two universes are inconceivable, because the concept of totality will immediately unite them into one.
The All contains all things. Does it contain God, or is it God? How can God be less than the All?
He cannot. Nor can he be more than the All, more than Himself.
So we simply define God as the universe, which no-one will bother to doubt does exist. Why use the term God at all? If we choose, there is no reason why we should not dispense with it. I have suggested the name Oa instead. But universe would do. As Lesedi said on Isidingo, "Maybe the universe does not want...". Just remember, the universe contains everything.
The whole thing is to perceive the Unity. A Unity cannot be both good and evil, and it cannot be either if it excludes everything else. It is, simply, beyond good and evil.
Where we make the mistake is when we fail to continue to see the All as One, and start focussing on what we conceive of as separate parts of this Unity. But there ARE no separate parts - they are all connected into a single, organic whole. If you look at an animal, you see all the parts working in harmony to create a perfect organism. Who can doubt that the organism of the All is even more harmonious and perfect?
It seems otherwise to many; what I have experienced is the gradual disappearance of this illusion, which comes to seem largely presumptuous. It is based mostly on our egotistic prejudice that each of us is a separate entity with its own "rights". So we end up with the concept of a disharmonious world with many sets of conflicting "rights". All illusory: there are no "rights".
To take this to the final realisation:
"There are no legitimate considerations."
Meaning that everything is egotistical supposition, blind prejudice, purely relative and unimportant.
Further Comment:
All sequins are equally beautiful: the beliefs of Adolf Hitler are as beautiful as the beliefs of the Dalai Lama. There are no good guys and bad guys. There are only guys acting their written roles in the Divine Drama, which treats of the illusion of "good" and "bad". We can see that the "bad" guys are as essential to the drama as the "good" guys: they cannot be deleted from the work of art, are intrinsically NECESSARY and so to call them "evil" is meaningless. If the illusory "evil" were to be abolished, then the illusory nature of "good" would immediately become evident.
The equally divine quality of all the parts of Oa is insisted upon in the following quotation:
(08. Seeking Union)
"MOKSHA: As long as you do not recognise every man as your brother - you will not find it. As long as you do not recognise that every table is your brother - you will not find it. As long as you do not recognise that the midnight sky is your brother - you will not find it."
REFORMULATION OF QUOTE 1:
(06. Conflict)
MOKSHA: "You are not spiritually free because you cling anxiously to one metaphysical image of the Universe. You feel threatened by other concepts of God. But every system is a reflection of the One and All. All beliefs and all denials of all men are only sequined mirrors on His robes."