|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 1:41:48 GMT -5
To what places, can you specify it, please? Every idea that aims to debate, project and imagine oneness as anything more than the absence of separation. Which would be well, everything you've been going on about for days (weeks?) now. So, I take the fact that separation is imagined to such irrelevant places as every idea that aims to debate, project and imagine oneness as anything more than the absence of separation. But you answer in the way that it became more complicated to understand what you mean. Can you just name those irrelevant places? I think I have all the reasons to be trying to understand this kind of knowledge for days(weeks) - spiritual teachers themselves seem to be teaching it thoroughly bad, because they are not good at it at all. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 1:42:31 GMT -5
So, I take the fact that separation is imagined to such irrelevant places as every idea that aims to debate, project and imagine oneness as anything more than the absence of separation. But you answer in the way that it became more complicated to understand what you mean. Can you just name those irrelevant places? He doesn't want to debate all those imaginary issues with you for all eternity, and I don't blame him. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 1:52:12 GMT -5
Yes, nothing else is left to say, Enigma, if you cannot coherently explain things about what you claim to be an expert in.
It is sad that you are trying to show off instead of admitting that you are not right. What a specialist in Oneness who doesn't know how to explain what it is! Who doesn't know that he is talking about the same things theologists have been talking for hundreds years!
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 1:57:59 GMT -5
Yes, nothing else is left to say, Enigma, if you cannot coherently explain things about what you claim to be an expert in. It is sad that you are trying to show off instead of admitting that you are not right. What a specialist in Oneness who doesn't know how to explain what it is! Who doesn't know that he is talking about the same things theologists have been talking for hundreds years! Have I claimed to be an expert/specialist or are you lying through your teeth? Which is it? |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 2:32:02 GMT -5
Yes, nothing else is left to say, Enigma, if you cannot coherently explain things about what you claim to be an expert in. It is sad that you are trying to show off instead of admitting that you are not right. What a specialist in Oneness who doesn't know how to explain what it is! Who doesn't know that he is talking about the same things theologists have been talking for hundreds years! Have I claimed to be an expert/specialist or are you lying through your teeth? Which is it? You may not have claimed but it's obvious that you tried to correct everybody and to disprove any other idea except Oneness. I don't know this word combination 'lying through one's teeth". I don't think I am lying. Specialist in Oneness is said with irony (no sarcasm). You have a very vague idea about Oneness. Because it is very COMPLICATED! NOT SIMPLE AT ALL. And you started presenting it as a soup of the day. |
|
|
|
Post by sherry on Mar 30, 2012 3:52:18 GMT -5
Have I claimed to be an expert/specialist or are you lying through your teeth? Which is it? You may not have claimed but it's obvious that you tried to correct everybody and to disprove any other idea except Oneness. I don't know this word combination 'lying through one's teeth". I don't think I am lying. Specialist in Oneness is said with irony (no sarcasm). You have a very vague idea about Oneness. Because it is very COMPLICATED! NOT SIMPLE AT ALL. And you started presenting it as a soup of the day. Arisha, I suspect it is indeed very, very simple and it is we who attempt to and insist on complicating it as defense against the very freedom we make noises about seeking...... |
|
|
|
Post by merrick on Mar 30, 2012 4:37:17 GMT -5
[That a human cannot experience God? It was said many times, by many, in all religions. Was it? Can you provide an example, say from the Bible? It is obvious even without any authorities or religious authorities having said that. Obvious to whom? It How is it possible to be sure that those experiences are experiences about God?  Did God in person inform you ? Why do you think it was God? Because he said he was? What if you misunderstood the message and the meaning of those experiences? Aren't you twisting the subject? Putting words into my mouth I never said? All I said was that to some people Oneness is not a theory, it is a reality for them. And that it does make sense to me. It is you who preaches dogmas here, posing as an authority on God, on Oneness... The reason I asked, 'Who says that?' was that I was wondering whether you were able to realize, not to say to admit, that it is your ego that does all these ramblings. Merrick |
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Mar 30, 2012 5:50:05 GMT -5
Arisha, would you call yourself a 'seeker'?
Just wondering.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 30, 2012 7:18:11 GMT -5
Arisha: When I use the word "oneness," I am pointing to living life free of imagined separation and free of the mind. The mind (intellect) remains useful, but it is not dominant, and thoughts are not attached to. I go about my business without imagining that there is a "me" going about "my" business. When the body/mind looks around, it sees and interacts with "what is" rather than a world of things and events occurring in space and time.
The body/mind has had experiences of wholeness/oneness and realizations that all separateness is imagined, so there is an intellectual understanding that the universe is non-local. This intellectual understanding is less important than a life lived in ordinariness without reflection.
The Bible says, "Be still and know that I am God." Anyone who follows that admonition, and realizes what it is pointing to, will be astonished. A mystical Christian might say that during experiences of cosmic-consciousness, in which selfhood is absent, one becomes one-with God, but most peeps on this forum see the issue somewhat more holistically. From our POV there is no one who can become one-with God because there was never anyone separate from the Vastness/Source/Oneness/God to begin with. Thus, there is simply the ordinary living of everyday life free from ideation. We only use words like "oneness" to point to everyday life lived free of the mind. There is just the drinking of coffee, talking with friends, going to work, and all of the other ordinary activities of everyday life without imagining any kind of separateness or specialness.
The realization of oneness, which is NOT the realization of oneness, can be attained, which is NOT an attainment, in this lifetime, which is NOT a lifetime. After such a realization, life is lived without knowing. There are no beliefs, no tenets, no teachings, no basis, no ideas that intellectually underlie this kind of life. If you look where these words are pointing, which is NOT a pointing, you will understand why I can summarize everything written here by saying, "The coffee I am sipping at McDonalds this morning is very tasty, and I hope you have a wonderful day." Take care.
|
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 15:08:09 GMT -5
This Oneness which is realized on the level of everyday occurrences is a wonderful thing. I have nothing against it.
I only don't understand why it is necessary to attach to it some special meaning which it never has. Or even to try to back it up with philosophizing. It becomes something ridiculous then.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 16:24:09 GMT -5
This Oneness which is realized on the level of everyday occurrences is a wonderful thing. I have nothing against it. I only don't understand why it is necessary to attach to it some special meaning which it never has. Or even to try to back it up with philosophizing. It becomes something ridiculous then. The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. But I can only speculate that there may exist in someone the dream of separation and suffering. If so, than perhaps there may or may not be the interest in seeking a resolution to the suffering. But I can't say what someones dream is like, so I really don't know, and neither does anybody else. Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 16:45:02 GMT -5
This Oneness which is realized on the level of everyday occurrences is a wonderful thing. I have nothing against it. I only don't understand why it is necessary to attach to it some special meaning which it never has. Or even to try to back it up with philosophizing. It becomes something ridiculous then. The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. Why not? People are born turned for this or that. Some people have an interest in philosophizing, and it doesn't depend on their feeling at peace with the world or not. What is really absurd is the irrelevant philosophizing which is about nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 17:23:48 GMT -5
This Oneness which is realized on the level of everyday occurrences is a wonderful thing. I have nothing against it. I only don't understand why it is necessary to attach to it some special meaning which it never has. Or even to try to back it up with philosophizing. It becomes something ridiculous then. The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. But I can only speculate that there may exist in someone the dream of separation and suffering. If so, than perhaps there may or may not be the interest in seeking a resolution to the suffering. But I can't say what someones dream is like, so I really don't know, and neither does anybody else. Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2012 18:27:41 GMT -5
This Oneness which is realized on the level of everyday occurrences is a wonderful thing. I have nothing against it. I only don't understand why it is necessary to attach to it some special meaning which it never has. Or even to try to back it up with philosophizing. It becomes something ridiculous then. Well the everyday occurrences can get bothersome for some of us. For example, I seem to be having some recent constant mental phenomena happening that adds a little bit of obsessiveness to the everyday occurances. Instead of just enjoying what is, THIS, as if this body wasn't even present, for example, I get what is plus a sort of mental fixation. All of the stuff happening right now, except for the mental fixation stuff, is fine, I don't have a problem at all, it seems. The idea of enjoying what is or THIS without such a fixation is hugely attractive, right now. Hence, pointers or discussion around the phenomena that keeps one from 'realizing at the level of everyday occurances' or howeveryouwannasayit is attractive, as there's a hope or feeling that maybe some insight will be gained and the peculiar fixation or whateveryouwannacallit will vaporize. This conversation is just happening. So what you call philosophizing could actually be therapeutic. Not that therapy is what is needed. Perhaps what is needed is wrapped up in some way with all this. Why the fuss, arisha? |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 18:36:11 GMT -5
The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. But I can only speculate that there may exist in someone the dream of separation and suffering. If so, than perhaps there may or may not be the interest in seeking a resolution to the suffering. But I can't say what someones dream is like, so I really don't know, and neither does anybody else. Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? I haven't experienced a lot of things. Are you saying that experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening? |
|
