|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 4:52:37 GMT -5
Divinity expressing itself as ego can get very ugly. Another way to say it might be that babies aren't born bad, they are conditioned to be bad. Yes, exactly. The biggest reason I left the Protestant (Baptist) church in my 20's, really teens (all the nonsense about original sin). Original sin isn't a statement about your humanity, it's a statement about our culture and how our genetics have intertwined with that culture. A "nondualist" would say that it's not a statement about what you really are, but instead a statement about what everyone is conditioned into expressing in the course of their lives. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 4:55:28 GMT -5
Right. So given that there is a person, my belief is that we have to be able to hold evil within the energy of love and compassion. Of course we have to stand up to it as well. But judgement will not resolve evil, because evil and judgement co-exist. There has to be love and the recognition of innocence too. Wise and compassionate words spoken from within the relative context.  .. but there's no way to take "judgment" out of "evil". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2016 5:03:28 GMT -5
without giving any explanation about it? Sorry, but if you do not give a REASON why it makes no sense, that is extremely arrogant and irritating to people. You in fact prove that you do not understand at all. If you did ,you would actually adapt to my view, just like you think we wouyld adapt to yours if we really understood you. You see the problem here? It can not be solved. So i respect your experience, because i am an empath, i understand energetically why you think the way you do (you are not an empath, so there is no way for you to understand me in a similar way) but i am sure your explanation is incorrect. You can tell yourself a million times that you are superior to me, that does not make it a fact.You just do that because you have some deep insecurity...otherwise you would engage in other folk their experience and try and really understand them. It is like we both stand on a mountain, and you are looking at the sea, and tell me there is a lot of water there, and i am saying, no, i see land and villages, and the you tell me i am completely wrong and ignorant. Then i try to look your way, and i see a lake, not a sea. I try to explain it, and talk about my view,but you wont listen and reply with a confused smiley. something like that... Mountain view can't be compared here. Because we are not standing in two difference places we are standing in the same ground. When I invalidate your view, I have some valid reason, I know that that can't be that way, that's what I am invalidating it. I never fail to find the value in the right teaching. If yours consist of some value, then I would surely pay more attention to that, but in my view, you are entirely go wrong and also you are saying I am not paying attention. I have to pay attention to say you are wrong. and you never explain HOW you know that. That is because you really do not understand it. So you simply dismiss it without any explanation. i once gave an explanation about telepathy being a much better solution to a question you had. you said nothing in return. A discussion can not be like that it is a two way street, but you want me to go your way only. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:04:59 GMT -5
Technical questions like, 'If you're just an appearance, then why not give me your wallet and walk off a cliff.' hehe "heh heh 'cus there's a bus down there heh heh" |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:08:29 GMT -5
Yes, individual responsibility is a useful idea, but there is also the recognition that their context was such that there wasn't any other choice available. In the case of Hitler, it is really quite obvious that he thought he was doing the right thing. I take individual responsibility by recognizing my role in creating these expressions, so I heal the Hitler and Charles within me.  he needs more bandages!  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:12:05 GMT -5
But the point is we are not our conditioning. Our conditioning presents a false sense of self. So a whole long chain of nasty conditioning made Hitler. But the fact Hitler thought he was doing right does not negate any responsibility for killing millions of people. The fact Hitler believed he was doing right just means he was conditioned miserably. Until Trump has come to power like he has, I couldn't understand how the German people put Hitler into power. Now I understand perfectly how it happened. Now I can't believe America is in the position of having to choose between Hillary and Trump, it's quite bizarre, but it is what it is. But the American people have made this choice. Hitler hasn't come to power by election, he came to power through back door. Well, no, he actually did win an election and his party had control of the German parliament by way of coalition. Then, the history goes, he burned it down and blamed someone else and used the crises to seize dictatorial power. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:13:40 GMT -5
Technical questions like, 'If you're just an appearance, then why not give me your wallet and walk off a cliff.' hehe "heh heh"  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2016 5:15:26 GMT -5
When andy states that there is a context where they are equals he's not really stating a position based on a nondual pointer. He's making a statement from a position of confusing the relative and the absolute. To say that Charlie Manson did what he did based on delusion because the perfection of his true nature was obscured from him by personal identification, would be a nondual pointer. The relative and absolute are clearly defined differently in my understandings. I would say those words too, but to me it's not a pointer, it is literal. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2016 5:17:59 GMT -5
Right. So given that there is a person, my belief is that we have to be able to hold evil within the energy of love and compassion. Of course we have to stand up to it as well. But judgement will not resolve evil, because evil and judgement co-exist. There has to be love and the recognition of innocence too. Wise and compassionate words spoken from within the relative context. .. but there's no way to take "judgment" out of "evil". 'evil' is already a judgement. So I might say that something is evil, but its spoken from the relative. I might even say that something is 'absolute evil' lol but it is still spoken from the relative. Absolutely, evil doesn't exist. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:21:05 GMT -5
This is on par with my question put to E about 'why marry your wife' if your just guessing she is real . There are qualities, properties, characteristics and such likes that she and anything pertains .. We assign / associate / attribute as such to virtually everything we perceive / relate to . If we don't associate certain things with certain things, then we would be asking the blow up doll how was your day instead of asking the misses .. Other people and things with various qualities appear in my experience and I interact with them. I'm having trouble seeing how you turn that into a problem to be solved on some basis of real or unreal. The twisted up stealth version of objective reality, remember? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:23:11 GMT -5
Please try reading what was said instead of imagining what was said, or maybe you just dont really get it, in which case, say so. The relative is hierarchical and always remains relative. It has to. Only in the absolute context are all ideas,forms and contexts equally valid. The fact that the absolute transcends the relative doesn't stop the relative from being relative, but it does create a paradox. It means that all aspects of god are fundamentally divine, perfect, sacred....or of God. No aspects are excluded or judged in the absolute because there is no hierarchy or difference even. "Equally valid" has no meaning where there is no hierarchy. You're trying to equate where equating makes no sense, so you find a paradox of your own making.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:27:00 GMT -5
Perfection means absence of error, absence of mistake, absence of anything being wrong. All the King's horse and King's men ARE perfectly placed in the absolute context, and the perspective you offer is perfect as is mine. In the relative context, my perspective is clearly better than yours hehe. I don't think you or E understand the paradox of absolute and relative contexts, but I'm pretty sure you deny having an absolute context in your perspective, so that might be why. Paradox is always mental confusion, and should be a clue to you to slow the orbital velocity. He needs to maintain speed for the gravitational slingshot maneuver in the voyage to Uranus. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:31:14 GMT -5
"Equally valid" has no meaning where there is no hierarchy. You're trying to equate where equating makes no sense, so you find a paradox of your own making. . The absolute context itself is absent all hierarchy, but I am also fine to talk about that in positive terms i.e it's ALL sacred, it's ALL perfect, it's ALL valid, it's ALL divine, it's ALL innocent. Consider these to be pointers if you like, I don't care. The key point is the relative is hierarchical, the absolute is not. The absolute transcends the relative, which means that...paradoxically...there is no more hierarchy between absolute and relative. Thus form is formlessness and formlessness is form. is.  Pop quiz, who said this? "Both tree and beauty are merely concepts appearing in space-like, ever present awareness. Don't settle for mere concepts. All words are merely pointers. Discard the pointers". |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:33:27 GMT -5
Paradox is always mental confusion, and should be a clue to you to slow the orbital velocity. There's nothing wrong with confusion. Confusion blurs the boundary between conceptual polar opposites. It blurs the boundary between truth and falsity, absolute and relative, emptiness and form. There is a time to talk in such way that creates a clear distinction between them, but ultimately all conceptual boundaries have to collapse. That's where confusion comes in. It's actually a darn good thing that there is confusion because without it, folks would remain stuck in their experience of being separate. Yes, the confusion of not-knowing can become quite intense and heady, exhilarating at times, even. But it's a means to an end. Not meant as a semi-permanent state of living. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 23, 2016 5:38:52 GMT -5
I can certainly understand why you write reply in single line, he he  I no longer have the energy for discussion with some of these peeps.  Not much point to it anyway. |
|
.. but there's no way to take "judgment" out of "evil". 
