|
Post by enigma on Jan 18, 2015 1:34:49 GMT -5
I referred to what 'causes' conditioning, and then noted that the person is not something more than that conditioning. If the second part confuses you, let it go for now. Every experience you have alters your conditioning; your beliefs, attitudes, fears, opinions, reactions, ideas... Of course it doesn't happen overnight. Conditioning is ongoing and changes continuously. (You were equating conditioning and habits) You're making some progress.. you've understood cause and effect, and you finally acknowledge 'time', the interval between events.. There is no cause/effect within creation itself. Time is an illusion. Still your mind and let go of your beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 18, 2015 1:38:58 GMT -5
You can't prove the nonexistence of God. I'm not interested in proving the nonexistence of God.. recall your realization/mirage/experience understanding... It doesn't matter if you are interested. The point is you said you could. "investigating physical actuality does reveal the absence of God"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2015 4:14:37 GMT -5
I'm not sure we see vulnerable in the same way. If I was feeling highly vulnerable, then I would be conscious of a fight or flight mechanism running under the surface. I mean a comfortable vulnerability.. an openness.. ? That's what I meant, though if it's safe it's comfortable, and if it's perilous, not so much, but is there a point to this line of inquiry, or is a general interest thing?I'm interested in the highly reactive anger that you describe. You said that you wanted to deny the anger you feel at yourself so I was opening up some ideas about how anger happens with other people.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2015 8:32:31 GMT -5
You're making some progress.. you've understood cause and effect, and you finally acknowledge 'time', the interval between events.. There is no cause/effect within creation itself. Time is an illusion. Still your mind and let go of your beliefs. See, you choose illusion over clarity, you haven't yet had the still-minded awareness.. you've created a nonduality religion in your mind, and set yourself up as its Pope.. Look at the time referenced for the first post in this thread, and the time noted for this post, are you suggesting that the interval between these posts is an illusion?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2015 8:40:37 GMT -5
I'm not interested in proving the nonexistence of God.. recall your realization/mirage/experience understanding... It doesn't matter if you are interested. The point is you said you could. "investigating physical actuality does reveal the absence of God" LOL.. you really do struggle to twist people's words, eh.. read it again, where does it say 'i can prove the non-existence of God'? there's nothing to 'prove', no evidence that there is a 'God'.. if the experiencer is observing physical actuality with the clarity of a still mind's awareness, there nothing that suggests the existence of 'God'.. 'God' is a mind's imagined explanation for what it can't really explain..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 18, 2015 9:00:45 GMT -5
(** looks up at thread title **) (** gales of hysterical laughter **)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 18, 2015 10:28:12 GMT -5
There is no cause/effect within creation itself. Time is an illusion. Still your mind and let go of your beliefs. See, you choose illusion over clarity, you haven't yet had the still-minded awareness.. you've created a nonduality religion in your mind, and set yourself up as its Pope.. Look at the time referenced for the first post in this thread, and the time noted for this post, are you suggesting that the interval between these posts is an illusion? There is only NOW.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 18, 2015 10:40:05 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if you are interested. The point is you said you could. "investigating physical actuality does reveal the absence of God" LOL.. you really do struggle to twist people's words, eh.. read it again, where does it say 'i can prove the non-existence of God'? there's nothing to 'prove', no evidence that there is a 'God'.. if the experiencer is observing physical actuality with the clarity of a still mind's awareness, there nothing that suggests the existence of 'God'.. 'God' is a mind's imagined explanation for what it can't really explain.. There's plenty of evidence that suggests there may be a God. It's an illusion that cannot be revealed by investigating physical 'reality'. There are many other illusions that cannot be seen through that way, and in fact may be reinforced, so the physical metaphors are imperfect, as are all metaphors.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 18, 2015 10:52:31 GMT -5
LOL.. you really do struggle to twist people's words, eh.. read it again, where does it say 'i can prove the non-existence of God'? there's nothing to 'prove', no evidence that there is a 'God'.. if the experiencer is observing physical actuality with the clarity of a still mind's awareness, there nothing that suggests the existence of 'God'.. 'God' is a mind's imagined explanation for what it can't really explain.. There's plenty of evidence that suggests there may be a God. It's an illusion that cannot be revealed by investigating physical 'reality'. There are many other illusions that cannot be seen through that way, and in fact may be reinforced, so the physical metaphors are imperfect, as are all metaphors. (** looks out window **)
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 18, 2015 15:17:12 GMT -5
LOL.. you really do struggle to twist people's words, eh.. read it again, where does it say 'i can prove the non-existence of God'? there's nothing to 'prove', no evidence that there is a 'God'.. if the experiencer is observing physical actuality with the clarity of a still mind's awareness, there nothing that suggests the existence of 'God'.. 'God' is a mind's imagined explanation for what it can't really explain.. There's plenty of evidence that suggests there may be a God. It's an illusion that cannot be revealed by investigating physical 'reality'. There are many other illusions that cannot be seen through that way, and in fact may be reinforced, so the physical metaphors are imperfect, as are all metaphors. Perhaps you could share some of the evidence you say suggests there may be a God...
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jan 18, 2015 15:26:56 GMT -5
There's plenty of evidence that suggests there may be a God. It's an illusion that cannot be revealed by investigating physical 'reality'. There are many other illusions that cannot be seen through that way, and in fact may be reinforced, so the physical metaphors are imperfect, as are all metaphors. Perhaps you could share some of the evidence you say suggests there may be a God...
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 18, 2015 15:43:11 GMT -5
Yeah. I would say the 'evidence' of God is found by looking at the improbability of the alternative, the alternative being that the unbelievably intricate and wondrous patterns of life are for no reason, an accident, random.
The structures of the universe are so synchronistic, so precise, so intelligent, so 'ordered' (even when they are in disorder), that it's hard to ignore the possibility of some kind of 'Creator' of all that is.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jan 18, 2015 15:58:21 GMT -5
Yeah. I would say the 'evidence' of God is found by looking at the improbability of the alternative, the alternative being that the unbelievably intricate and wondrous patterns of life are for no reason, an accident, random. The structures of the universe are so synchronistic, so precise, so intelligent, so 'ordered' (even when they are in disorder), that it's hard to ignore the possibility of some kind of 'Creator' of all that is. Yes, I'd agree it infers some kind of 'creator', but I wouldn't consider it evidence. Just a suggestion, really. It's also possible that this creator is in acutality simply creat ion - some synergistic happening of 'all that is' as opposed to some thing separate and/or prior.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 18, 2015 16:15:30 GMT -5
Yeah. I would say the 'evidence' of God is found by looking at the improbability of the alternative, the alternative being that the unbelievably intricate and wondrous patterns of life are for no reason, an accident, random. The structures of the universe are so synchronistic, so precise, so intelligent, so 'ordered' (even when they are in disorder), that it's hard to ignore the possibility of some kind of 'Creator' of all that is. Yes, I'd agree it infers some kind of 'creator', but I wouldn't consider it evidence. Just a suggestion, really. It's also possible that this creator is in acutality simply creat ion - some synergistic happening of 'all that is' as opposed to some thing separate and/or prior. yes, it's also why I put 'evidence' in quotations, it's not scientifically acceptable 'evidence'. On the other hand, I wonder about the 'rationality' of atheism...it doesn't strike me as very rational to chalk up the amazing patterns of life to being some kind of strange random reason-less accident. I'm not saying there is a God, but God makes more sense to me at the level of heart and mind than 'reasonless accident'. But I don't resonate with the idea of a 'separate' Creator.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jan 18, 2015 16:40:22 GMT -5
Yes, I'd agree it infers some kind of 'creator', but I wouldn't consider it evidence. Just a suggestion, really. It's also possible that this creator is in acutality simply creat ion - some synergistic happening of 'all that is' as opposed to some thing separate and/or prior. yes, it's also why I put 'evidence' in quotations, it's not scientifically acceptable 'evidence'. On the other hand, I wonder about the 'rationality' of atheism...it doesn't strike me as very rational to chalk up the amazing patterns of life to being some kind of strange random reason-less accident. I'm not saying there is a God, but God makes more sense to me at the level of heart and mind than 'reasonless accident'. But I don't resonate with the idea of a 'separate' Creator. I can understand all that. The use of the word Creator conjures up the separate business, in my mind anyway. Yet another troublesome word! The original conversation was interesting, though - that there's a lot that goes on in the world that can suggest that there's a God/Creator, especially in nature. But is it true? I don't think the answer to that is anything that can be arrived at by rationality or logic.
|
|