|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 25, 2013 0:10:44 GMT -5
It obviously doesn't. There always are Ideas that are prior to All. First there exists an Idea. Then the concept, the thing, the action, - anything - come into being. The idea about love is the idea about love as such. .......What? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 25, 2013 0:12:25 GMT -5
I'm sure the (") button isn't working on his puter..... I'd rather think he wants to be seen as infinitely clever but has realized that his cleverness is finite so he has to constantly borrow from someone else. Well, now there's a thought.  |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Jan 25, 2013 1:33:02 GMT -5
It obviously doesn't. There always are Ideas that are prior to All. First there exists an Idea. Then the concept, the thing, the action, - anything - come into being. The idea about love is the idea about love as such. .......What? Your inability to see with clarity obviously prevents you from understanding a lot of things. You don't want to learn from the sources you don't trust, - it's a mistake. Learning from such sources doesn't mean to be wasting time on something that looks like absurdity to you. It means exercising your mind which may (and may not) reveal new perspectives about the things which are based on a different approach than yours. Ideas are prior to all that IS. They are prior to Nothingness. Because Nothingness contains all in its potentiality, (the ideas about potentiality and Nothingness as well.) But when zero is equal to all (though all is not equal to zero), we have a circumference which divides all into two parts : the inside part and the outside part. And there is also the sum of the inside part and the outside part which is another, and new zero. The difference between those two zeros is simultaneously the equality. The ideas about potentiality and Nothingness allow those two zeros to exist and to be manifested. The ideas about all that IS mean literally ALL. Subject and object, thing and action merge and are not differentiated. This is the type of ideas I am talking about. It's the human mind that sees differences - due to the three-dimensional world we are able to exist in. But the number of dimensions is infinite. The idea about Love does exist inside and outside the zero, creating by itself the two zeros, and the difference which is simultaneously an equality. As such it allows the two zeros to exist and to be manifested. As such the idea about Love cannot be differentiated from Love, and even from Not-Love. Otherwise we wouldn't have had this World even illusionary manifested. So, the idea about Love is Love as such, or 'the idea about Love as such'. So, Love does exist, and it obviously doesn't fail. The one who fails is you as you don't want to learn more than you currently know. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 25, 2013 3:37:03 GMT -5
If it is hate then there is mucho interference. We point to 'what is prior to/beyond concepts' because it is helpful sometimes, but its just a pointer, there is no such thing (by definition). In the end, its all conceptual or as Niz says ''a play of ideas''. So 'love' shouldn't be demeaned just because it is in the realm of the conceptual. I have no issue with talking about non-dual Love in certain contexts, but its a load of hogwash really. In reality, there is just 'love', either filtered or not. If we see it in the way Living presented it as "Love is all there is and you are that and I am that" then even filtered/unfiltered would be hogwash and love becomes a kinda meaningless word. Hate would then be love. Are you leaning into the Living direction? I would say that love and life go hand in hand, and so love is always present, and yet is 'muddied' by identification, conditioned beliefs and attachment. In this sense, its true that Love is all there is. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 25, 2013 3:39:56 GMT -5
Its fundamentally the same love. Why is that so hard to understand? It's not. A mountain and a molehill are fundamentally the same substance, but you would make one out of the other, and they are not the same. What? So you acknowledge that the love that the ''unrealized '' have knowledge of is the same love? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 25, 2013 3:40:50 GMT -5
We can embody love and also love, be love, choose love and extend love. Being loving, choosing love and extending love can be useful on the path to embodying love. Best find out what Love is, and what it is not, first. You might find Love doesn't need your choosing, extending, embodying tools. I'm not saying it needs it. I am saying that doing those things is useful and I am saying that embodying love doesn't mean we no longer choose love or extend love. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 25, 2013 3:41:35 GMT -5
Problemo is that it's just a concept. So it basically could be hate in love clothing. Yes, which is what has happened in this here conversation.  Why, are you hating? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 25, 2013 3:44:57 GMT -5
If it is hate then there is mucho interference. We point to 'what is prior to/beyond concepts' because it is helpful sometimes, but its just a pointer, there is no such thing (by definition). In the end, its all conceptual or as Niz says ''a play of ideas''. So 'love' shouldn't be demeaned just because it is in the realm of the conceptual. I have no issue with talking about non-dual Love in certain contexts, but its a load of hogwash really. In reality, there is just 'love', either filtered or not. The Love that is pointed to prior to concepts is not hogwash. When Niz talks about a play of ideas, he's referring to the conceptual, obviously. I guess you think his pointing is just to distract you because all you can see is the finger waggling. Perhaps what would be useful to notice in much of what we call dualistic love are the qualities of absence. The lovers surrender themselves to each other. The mother places the welfare of the child above her own. Great heroism and compassion borders on the selfless. These aspects are hints, perhaps, at a Love that transcends the lover and all ideas of love. Most would admit that something about love is known to be unknown. The teacher is pointing to something more 'real' than your ideas about it. Its hogwash, because what is prior to appearances, the realm of ideas is.....nothing. Yes, talking about what is prior can be useful as a pointer away from conditioned beliefs, but that's it. In the end, the love that appears in the realm of appearances and ideas is the real deal, its the love that we all know, and the only reason you set yourself against it, is to set yourself above others. Again. The mother and the herioc person are not experiencing a different 'love'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:30:21 GMT -5
Negativity is born in the gap where love has been excluded. Gaps occur in places where we are afraid to see ourselves. - Deepak Chopra What a copy cat you are, Living!  You lean pretty heavily on Ramana to make your points, too, reefs. Enigma thinks he's Jed McKenna..... Geezus... get over yourselves. Innocence is the ability to give and receive love without holding on. - Deepak Chopra Someone reading Deepak lately? I read Deepak everyday. Adyashanti, and Aja. Vasistha. ZendancerGita, too. You. Not so much.  Insights bring truth, which is love in action. - Deepak Chopra Again. Yes. We share the same truth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:37:00 GMT -5
Today at 7:27am, heterodox wrote: Heterodox: This post seems to have been deleted. However, if all viewpoints are equal, why are you disagreeing with Top's and offering your own? Probably didn't make him look clever enough after he read the responses. Status report! Damage to shields, captain! Delete post immediately! I deleted it after receiving a phone call from my granddaughter. School was closed yesterday (weather) but they were still going to hold competitive cheerleading practice. The exact time for the practice hadn't been nailed down yet, but it was going to be within the hour. I was going to be driving her. So I deleted it... I felt the conversation unfolded rather nicely, anyway. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:39:14 GMT -5
I'm not disagreeing. Just sharing another viewpoint. You sure do have a lot of questions for an awake guy. You even have to deny it?  Nobody is denying anything |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:41:00 GMT -5
love becomes a kinda meaningless word. Explains a lot. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:43:52 GMT -5
Insights bring truth, which is love in action. - Deepak Chopra Again. I'm sure the (") button isn't working on his puter..... Quite a few buttons have been rather erratic on my computer during the course of the last few weeks. I'm guessing that's coz SOME people believe your hypocrisy regarding love, and how it's NOT AVAILABLE for them to explore, share, and act in accordance with until they're awake. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:44:46 GMT -5
Probably didn't make him look clever enough after he read the responses. Status report! Damage to shields, captain! Delete post immediately! There was also another post where he said he didn't delete the first one, but it's also deleted. Point it out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2013 5:51:22 GMT -5
I'm sure the (") button isn't working on his puter..... I'd rather think he wants to be seen as infinitely clever but has realized that his cleverness is finite so he has to constantly borrow from someone else. There is no someone else to borrow from. Maybe you're just not understanding what you're posting here. Could be a direct experience problem... |
|
