|
Post by sunshine on Aug 28, 2014 5:03:39 GMT -5
That's an idea that not only can be questioned but has no basis other than the idea that one must create the other, which really just boils down for a demand for an explanation of something that is inexplicable. Just for fun, we could say consciousness is it's content. I´d say, GOD,or consciousness, if u dont want to use the word God, is the empty space in an atom, and matter, life, mind, float ´´on top of it.´´and are at the same time made of it. consciousness uses, on our planet anyway, evolution as its method of integration into what seems to be ´´un´´consciousness--matter life mind--but that illusion of ´´unconsciousness´´is just because matter had no eyes or sense to experience consciousness we just need to see more, better,deeper, and we are evolving toward a species which will be closer in touch-see-feel--with that original consciousness we can use mind, will, consciousness, to acces that original source-- the fascinating thing is, what will happen when a certain point has arrived --of total integration and that is where immortallity in the body(a different body from ours,obviously) comes in. there are already people, who have reached an unprecedented depth of integration, never described before--(Satprem in ´´on the way to supermanhood--f.i.´´) mind you quantum physics says that the empty space of one single atom contains a trillion times more energy than all the stars and galaxies in our entire universe combined. harnassing that energy by means of consciousness,(and WILL) is basically what integral yoga aims for.A superman will arrive from our midst,eventually-- and we shall re-create this whole planet--and a whole lot of other things beyond our present capacity of imagination. (maybe that is what was meant by´´a new heaven and a new earth´´)
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 5:54:43 GMT -5
That's an idea that not only can be questioned but has no basis other than the idea that one must create the other, which really just boils down for a demand for an explanation of something that is inexplicable. Just for fun, we could say consciousness is it's content. In honor of the belated report of the rinzai master's death ..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 5:57:59 GMT -5
How 'bout I give you one? You want one? sure. I loved it when she appeared in my face. That was you dreamin' old man, but I'll hook you up. Here, close your eyes and smile ... you ready for it now?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 5:59:10 GMT -5
There are a gazillion apparently separate things in the universe. Apparently separate because in actually everything is interdependent upon everything else. Without oxygen on this planet, for example, there is little life. What lives here without the sun? Without space where would a sun be put? And all these gazillion things share the same enlivening principle of existence (consciousness) without which nothing would have being. They share the same impetus to grow from seed to full maturity. They share the same alotted life cycle...birth, period of existence, and death. In these ways, the apparently separate are actually very much rooted in a fundamental oneness. To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. Blunt works too! Blunt is good!
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 28, 2014 6:39:38 GMT -5
There are a gazillion apparently separate things in the universe. Apparently separate because in actually everything is interdependent upon everything else. Without oxygen on this planet, for example, there is little life. What lives here without the sun? Without space where would a sun be put? And all these gazillion things share the same enlivening principle of existence (consciousness) without which nothing would have being. They share the same impetus to grow from seed to full maturity. They share the same alotted life cycle...birth, period of existence, and death. In these ways, the apparently separate are actually very much rooted in a fundamental oneness. To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. There you go again with the exacting dogma that excludes all other views. The fact is that everything in the material universe points to the One Immaterial Reality. When the mountains become mountains again they do not stand in isolation but are seen as wholly dependent upon the Consciousness Whose dream produces and sustains them.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 28, 2014 6:41:47 GMT -5
To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. Blunt works too! Blunt is good! And apparently so does bootlicking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 8:22:54 GMT -5
sure. I loved it when she appeared in my face. That was you dreamin' old man, but I'll hook you up. Here, close your eyes and smile ... you ready for it now? not at all dreaming. Whilst we were chatting, she was right in my face. When were you born young man?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 8:44:33 GMT -5
To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. Blunt works too! Blunt is good! Farmer, my brother farmer, and my other brother farmer all like these posts! and I know fer a fact that neither frogs nor bunnies wear boots
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 9:26:15 GMT -5
To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. There you go again with the exacting dogma that excludes all other views. The fact is that everything in the material universe points to the One Immaterial Reality. When the mountains become mountains again they do not stand in isolation but are seen as wholly dependent upon the Consciousness Whose dream produces and sustains them.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 9:27:13 GMT -5
Blunt works too! Blunt is good! And apparently so does bootlicking. (** slurrpy snicker **)
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 9:29:02 GMT -5
The reason to point away from material interconnectivity as not what is referred to by nonduality is quite obvious. "Oneness" gives the mind a place to rest. A conceived object to assign as what is meant by the pointer, but the pointer has no abstract meaning.
In seeing "One" there are two.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 9:29:53 GMT -5
Blunt works too! Blunt is good! Farmer, my brother farmer, and my other brother farmer all like these posts! and I know fer a fact that neither frogs nor bunnies wear boots (** likes the same post twice **)
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2014 9:33:22 GMT -5
That was you dreamin' old man, but I'll hook you up. Here, close your eyes and smile ... you ready for it now? not at all dreaming. Whilst we were chatting, she was right in my face. When were you born young man? oh, I see that you've already had your facial and the resulting obscured view has you meandering in la-la-land
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 28, 2014 10:47:39 GMT -5
To be blunt, that's not what oneness is. Interdependence is not the demonstration of oneness, but simply an artifact of oneness. Oneness is not the working together of parts. The parts themselves are merely an appearance. If oneness is the case, there are no parts. The word refers to the literal absence of twoness. There you go again with the exacting dogma that excludes all other views. Oneness is not a matter of point of view. Noticing the interconnected nature of things may be useful, but is a distorted reflection of oneness in the mind, subject to those mental boundaries. I'm pointing away from what's being reflected in the mind, to the inconceivable. There are many ways to approach the ineffable because it lies deep in the center of all inquiry. This is one way. When the mountain returns, it is no longer 'out there' and depends upon nothing. It comes to YOU as YOU. The mountain IS consciousness. Better to suspend the mental barriers for a moment that seem to separate you from the mountain, and then all that is left is to feel that intimacy and know it as YOU. If you wish, you can also do this with your mate, as this is another way to the ineffable. It may look like a joining, but you will find that it is an awakening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 11:55:51 GMT -5
Why go the God route at all? Seems complicated. Either consciousness arises out of matter or matter arises out of consciousness. If matter comes first then you have to answer the question of where matter came from. Stephen Hawking thinks he has answered that, merely because of the quantum nature of reality. I don't think this gets us anywhere, you can't get something from nothing. The quantum nature of reality had to come from somewhere. Anyway, Consciousness-first makes the most sense to me, answers more questions. This is in answer to a few other posts as well......... sdp The God answer fits for most questions. But as we've gone along there are more detailed and compelling answers that can be supported with evidence. Just because a question doesn't currently have an answer other than God doesn't mean there won't be one someday. Why does the sun go across the sky like that? Well there's a god named Apollo who has a job to pull it across like that. Well it's because men live on earth and since we're a reflection of God and all things center around God, the sun revolves around the earth. How did this all begin? Well God made it happen about 2000 years ago in six days.... The question 'which came first matter or consciousness?' has built within it all sorts of assumptions that would need to be teased out. Does matter exist? What is it? Does consciousness exist? what is it? Can something be said to come first? ... Many of these subquestions are pretty fresh and alive right now. God as an answer, if looking at it's function in answering questions, is continually losing its power relative to explanations provided by science.
|
|