Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2022 16:35:09 GMT -5
You haven't considered the alternative that it was the crucifers who were distasteful? To be fair, Jesus poked them very hard, he was on a schedule, he needed to be crucified Friday. He was waiting for Passover to die. It was a Cosmic living drama. What!?!.. Else we'd never have had Good Friday?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 16:49:26 GMT -5
To be fair, Jesus poked them very hard, he was on a schedule, he needed to be crucified Friday. He was waiting for Passover to die. It was a Cosmic living drama. What!?!.. Else we'd never have had Good Friday? Exactly. During Passover in Jerusalem there were too many people to kill all the lambs for the Passover Seder in one day. So Jesus had the Passover meal with his disciples Thursday night. It's called Maundy Thursday. But Friday, while Jesus was on the cross, there were lambs also being slain for the other 'halves' Passover meal. Cosmic drama symbolism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2022 16:57:42 GMT -5
From where does the intent come? Where does the sky come from? Everything comes from the Consciousness. It is what we are. Consciousness cannot be known. I am not proclaiming this as a truth.
I don't mean to imply that not knowing is a cop out. I think this urge to find out is a distraction from "what is" (Krishnamurti). What is, is this goddam mess of an existence that needs attention.
You never shared why you wanted to kill yourself. If you ever did 'proclaim it as a truth', then you'd have to rewrite your whole worldview. Or rather it would get rewritten for you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2022 17:15:44 GMT -5
What!?!.. Else we'd never have had Good Friday? Exactly. During Passover in Jerusalem there were too many people to kill all the lambs for the Passover Seder in one day. So Jesus had the Passover meal with his disciples Thursday night. It's called Maundy Thursday. But Friday, while Jesus was on the cross, there were lambs also being slain for the other 'halves' Passover meal. Cosmic drama symbolism. According to Wikipedia.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passover_sacrificeAnd the Torah.. The eating of the lamb was done on the night of the Exodus from Eygpt. This is why it's replicated at Passover. It's only in Christianity that the leap is taken to call Jesus, the Lamb of God.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 23, 2022 17:48:52 GMT -5
Seems to me some people live their lives expecting, or even demanding answers to unanswerable questions. Some want guidance and clear rules and instructions as to how to live. I don't know enough to know how prevalent that is, and I'll refrain from my naturally cynical impulse in response to the notion. Christianity, in the forms of the institutions that propagate it, represents a state of social progression, or evolution, from the belief systems that people had before. Those beliefs were formed by a very different way of life from the late-stage agricultural revolution that is the context of Christianity. So maybe some of those beliefs are better or worse than Christian beliefs, it's situational. If you want a particular example of how the idea of the "evolution of Consciousness" is inherently flawed, there you go. This has absolutely zero to do with the evolution of consciousness. The evolution of consciousness is not about institutions or social progression. A higher state of consciousness can't be seen, doesn't even exist on the face of the Earth. > This< is something about the evolution of consciousness. So you have failed to get even a glimpse of things I've written about. We almost can't see beyond what we are, what we think we are, it doesn't even register. The cultural self filters out what does not correspond to itself. We see what we are. The cultural self can only see what corresponds to its own point of view. So your version of the "Evolution of Consciousness" seems to differentiate between animals and human beings and between human beings. It also seems to suggest that you'd be able to discern the effects of it outwardly, in the way that people act. We could say, for example (and really just for the sake of argument), that people symbolically allowing Jesus to sacrifice himself ritually is a refinement over killing animals or other people as a means of sacrifice. So, you see, I was drawing an analogy between genetic evolution and the general idea of the "evolution of Consciousness".
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 23, 2022 17:50:32 GMT -5
Oh, boo hoo poor little defenseless sree. You think ginning up some fake victim-drama is the " answer", then? I'm just saying laughter can't help being laughter. sree can't help being sree. You have no idea what you are like, really. Today may be a first, two birds, one stone. It's not so easy to see oneself. Can the eye see itself? No, not directly. I'm going to use sree as an example. Almost from the moment he arrived we could all see something amiss. Most people hung in there, we wanted to see if he had something. We started pointing things out. He rejected everything. Then, after many weeks, he became vulnerable, open. Then he threw up the barriers again. Like sree does not see himself, or is not honest about it, laughter doesn't see what he is like, how he treats people. sree was not quite a "Roy", almost. It was not easy for sree to say, I don't know. He finally said it concerning some things he posted. That's huge. laughter can't help being laughter. The second step is for laughter to see laughter. See objectively, impartially, for laughter to see laughter the way laughter sees sree, the way sree doesn't see sree. sree is trying, several posts he says, I don't know, tell me, I'm here, I want to know. That's the first step, to admit to oneself one doesn't know. Does laughter like what he is? Of course. So sree is much more along the way than laughter. laughter is very happy and content being laughter. Second bird, one > stone<. This is why it's difficult for sdp to dialogue with the ND view, there is a possibility of being two. That which is seen, that which sees, personality, the "boatman", and essence, the real self. Attention and awareness is the Way. Now, maybe for once, try not to read this from your own perspective. Only by saying, I don't know, can we move into the unknown. There's really no reason for you to expend this sort of effort, because I don't trust your perceptions.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 17:56:52 GMT -5
Exactly. During Passover in Jerusalem there were too many people to kill all the lambs for the Passover Seder in one day. So Jesus had the Passover meal with his disciples Thursday night. It's called Maundy Thursday. But Friday, while Jesus was on the cross, there were lambs also being slain for the other 'halves' Passover meal. Cosmic drama symbolism. According to Wikipedia.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passover_sacrificeAnd the Torah.. The eating of the lamb was done on the night of the Exodus from Egypt. This is why it's replicated at Passover. It's only in Christianity that the leap is taken to call Jesus, the Lamb of God. Yes, Paul did that.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 17:59:11 GMT -5
I'm just saying laughter can't help being laughter. sree can't help being sree. You have no idea what you are like, really. Today may be a first, two birds, one stone. It's not so easy to see oneself. Can the eye see itself? No, not directly. I'm going to use sree as an example. Almost from the moment he arrived we could all see something amiss. Most people hung in there, we wanted to see if he had something. We started pointing things out. He rejected everything. Then, after many weeks, he became vulnerable, open. Then he threw up the barriers again. Like sree does not see himself, or is not honest about it, laughter doesn't see what he is like, how he treats people. sree was not quite a "Roy", almost. It was not easy for sree to say, I don't know. He finally said it concerning some things he posted. That's huge. laughter can't help being laughter. The second step is for laughter to see laughter. See objectively, impartially, for laughter to see laughter the way laughter sees sree, the way sree doesn't see sree. sree is trying, several posts he says, I don't know, tell me, I'm here, I want to know. That's the first step, to admit to oneself one doesn't know. Does laughter like what he is? Of course. So sree is much more along the way than laughter. laughter is very happy and content being laughter. Second bird, one > stone<. This is why it's difficult for sdp to dialogue with the ND view, there is a possibility of being two. That which is seen, that which sees, personality, the "boatman", and essence, the real self. Attention and awareness is the Way. Now, maybe for once, try not to read this from your own perspective. Only by saying, I don't know, can we move into the unknown. There's really no reason for you to expend this sort of effort, because I don't trust your perceptions. Maybe I wrote it for sree.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 18:14:07 GMT -5
This has absolutely zero to do with the evolution of consciousness. The evolution of consciousness is not about institutions or social progression. A higher state of consciousness can't be seen, doesn't even exist on the face of the Earth. > This< is something about the evolution of consciousness. So you have failed to get even a glimpse of things I've written about. We almost can't see beyond what we are, what we think we are, it doesn't even register. The cultural self filters out what does not correspond to itself. We see what we are. The cultural self can only see what corresponds to its own point of view. So your version of the "Evolution of Consciousness" seems to differentiate between animals and human beings and between human beings. It also seems to suggest that you'd be able to discern the effects of it outwardly, in the way that people act. We could say, for example (and really just for the sake of argument), that people symbolically allowing Jesus to sacrifice himself ritually is a refinement over killing animals or other people as a means of sacrifice. So, you see, I was drawing an analogy between genetic evolution and the general idea of the "evolution of Consciousness". I said exactly the opposite. How do you not see I said exactly the opposite? You shouldn't use the term evolution of consciousness, unless it means something to you, specific. There are plenty of ordinary words to talk about your point. Don't try to snow me with reverse engineering (of intended meaning). The evolution of consciousness has nothing to do with animals or Darwin's evolution or the evolution of culture. In my linked post from I think it was 8 years ago, I explained somewhat the meaning of evolution of consciousness (although I didn't use those words in the past post, linking pointed to the correspondence).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 23, 2022 18:34:32 GMT -5
So your version of the "Evolution of Consciousness" seems to differentiate between animals and human beings and between human beings. It also seems to suggest that you'd be able to discern the effects of it outwardly, in the way that people act. We could say, for example (and really just for the sake of argument), that people symbolically allowing Jesus to sacrifice himself ritually is a refinement over killing animals or other people as a means of sacrifice. So, you see, I was drawing an analogy between genetic evolution and the general idea of the "evolution of Consciousness". I said exactly the opposite. How do you not see I said exactly the opposite? You shouldn't use the term evolution of consciousness, unless it means something to you, specific. There are plenty of ordinary words to talk about your point. Don't try to snow me with reverse engineering (of intended meaning). The evolution of consciousness has nothing to do with animals or Darwin's evolution or the evolution of culture. In my linked post from I think it was 8 years ago, I explained somewhat the meaning of evolution of consciousness (although I didn't use those words in the past post, linking pointed to the correspondence). Yes I know you denied the outward effects here, but in what you linked backed to you specifically mentioned animals and the role of "self knowledge". So now you're saying, that "self-knowledge" would have no outward signifiers?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 18:56:28 GMT -5
I said exactly the opposite. How do you not see I said exactly the opposite? You shouldn't use the term evolution of consciousness, unless it means something to you, specific. There are plenty of ordinary words to talk about your point. Don't try to snow me with reverse engineering (of intended meaning). The evolution of consciousness has nothing to do with animals or Darwin's evolution or the evolution of culture. In my linked post from I think it was 8 years ago, I explained somewhat the meaning of evolution of consciousness (although I didn't use those words in the past post, linking pointed to the correspondence). Yes I know you denied the outward effects here, but in what you linked backed to you specifically mentioned animals and the role of "self knowledge". So now you're saying, that "self-knowledge" would have no outward signifiers? Notice there is a progression in the post, throughout the post, animals got left behind. I don't know how you could link animals to self-knowledge. self-knowledge is self-knowledge, it's personal, interior, private, it's knowledge concerned with the self, the false self and the true self. If a person that can access a higher state of consciousness wants to remain hidden, they will remain hidden. A higher state of consciousness has no necessary utility on the face of the Earth. I've already said that, today, I guess you missed that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2022 18:59:49 GMT -5
According to Wikipedia.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passover_sacrificeAnd the Torah.. The eating of the lamb was done on the night of the Exodus from Egypt. This is why it's replicated at Passover. It's only in Christianity that the leap is taken to call Jesus, the Lamb of God. Yes, Paul did that. Yes, Paul ascribe the meaning of salvation on the event of crucifixion.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 23, 2022 19:11:26 GMT -5
Yes I know you denied the outward effects here, but in what you linked backed to you specifically mentioned animals and the role of "self knowledge". So now you're saying, that "self-knowledge" would have no outward signifiers? Notice there is a progression in the post, throughout the post, animals got left behind. I don't know how you could link animals to self-knowledge. self-knowledge is self-knowledge, it's personal, interior, private, it's knowledge concerned with the self, the false self and the true self. If a person that can access a higher state of consciousness wants to remain hidden, they will remain hidden. A higher state of consciousness has no necessary utility on the face of the Earth. I've already said that, today, I guess you missed that. Because what you are describing is a progression, iow, an evolution. I didn't link animals to self-knowledge, I'm simply commenting on the process as you've described it. This particular idea about the "evolution of Consciousness" is yours. And again, you're putting this new word in my mouth, that of "utility". I didn't write that, you did. Do you think the Christian symbolic ritual sacrifice of Jesus represents a progression from the alleged Aztek practice of human sacrifice? Bear in mind, that's just to set the table as to the notion of evolution, progression. My original point was that we see change, but that some things get better, and other's get worse, so that your opinions as to the impact of original sin on the collective subconscious would represent things getting worse. My original point calls the nature of these progressions into question, altogether. Try not to take it so personally.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 20:28:24 GMT -5
Notice there is a progression in the post, throughout the post, animals got left behind. I don't know how you could link animals to self-knowledge. self-knowledge is self-knowledge, it's personal, interior, private, it's knowledge concerned with the self, the false self and the true self. If a person that can access a higher state of consciousness wants to remain hidden, they will remain hidden. A higher state of consciousness has no necessary utility on the face of the Earth. I've already said that, today, I guess you missed that. Because what you are describing is a progression, iow, an evolution. I didn't link animals to self-knowledge, I'm simply commenting on the process as you've described it. This particular idea about the "evolution of Consciousness" is yours. And again, you're putting this new word in my mouth, that of "utility". I didn't write that, you did. Do you think the Christian symbolic ritual sacrifice of Jesus represents a progression from the alleged Aztek practice of human sacrifice? Bear in mind, that's just to set the table as to the notion of evolution, progression. My original point was that we see change, but that some things get better, and other's get worse, so that your opinions as to the impact of original sin on the collective subconscious would represent things getting worse. My original point calls the nature of these progressions into question, altogether. Try not to take it so personally. I will make one more point, to clarify. There is no collective evolution of consciousness. The evolution of consciousness is always and only individual. It's the real meaning of individuation. And it comes only by conscious efforts, by a single-one-"person" mind-body. Up until making conscious efforts, non-volition applies, rules. Before conscious efforts, there isn't a person, only a seed. sree's boatman, is fragmented, not-whole. The boatman is nothing and leads nowhere, it is what's imaginary. An actual person comes to be, only through conscious efforts (and voluntary suffering, that is, trying not to escape suffering). Conscious efforts involve working with attention and awareness. Attention and awareness exist outside of and apart from the boatman. They are the point of germination of the seed. And Gurdjieff has his own version what original sin is. (I mention that only because you mention it).
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 23, 2022 20:40:20 GMT -5
or you could just fall in love and call it a day ...f, you are back, I knew you would not desert us...
|
|