. “what is society but evolving spirit...which is alone, naturally?”
But “spirit” as a universal non-dual unlimited consciousness has no evolution. It is. It’s our illusions of consciousness which shift, change, perhaps evolve. I see us as a connection between the illusion of self and thee universal whole which is everything in unity. (Advaita) We can only surmise from these view-points of the self, and yet. In brief moments we can also see/feel the expanse of the whole. Metaphorically, We are the union of a angel and a beast. A supposed blend of two opposing realms of awareness. Each allegedly to teach the other some sort of lesson. These are old metaphors but none the less, very useful in trying to get your head around the human being concept. Almost as if when the beast side of our being is the most robust and the spiritual side steps back and lets the beast take charge. But eventually the beast becomes broken and the spirit steps forward to lift and inspire the being and take charge of the beast. The great and noble surrender of the ego …………………… or crucifixion of the old self, to make way for the new self. As you see. These are not new ideas. . On Jul 30, 3:03 pm, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Marcus.I see what you're saying. > Should 'spiritual'...or spirit...be thought of as > awareness,consciousness,brahman,the absolute,thought,or what have > you...even bozo...all knowledge is spiritual.One could say,spirit > can't be defined,does the defining...spirit can't be created,does the > creating,etc..One is aware of spirit by means of being the aware > spirit...the spirit which is aware...on and on. > As far as society evolving...what is society but evolving > spirit...which is alone,naturally? > > On Jul 30, 8:36 am, Marcus <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > . > > > “might be called 'ordinary horse sense'?” > > > I feel sure “spiritual knowledge” is very basic to our being. It > > is ordinary horse sense. Its just that society has evolved in such a > > way that “ordinary horse sense” has been overlaid with a need to > > comply to the raining social order. Each generation is > > systematically groomed to conform and in doing so, we loose sight of > > our “ordinary horse sense” of spiritual knowledge. > > I am convinced that if left alone to evolve naturally, most humans > > would have a much greater spiritual knowledge. > > > This whole enlightenment gig is really just trying to undo the > > centuries of dogma and conditioning of the masses. > > > In truth ………… spiritual knowledge is more ordinary sense than > > capitalism, consumerism or religion. > > > We strive to return to our true nature …………………….. break free …….. > > > . > > On Jul 30, 1:49 pm, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Or do you think I am just showing off? > > > Yes or no? > > > Either way,would that be a form of spiritual knowledge? > > > > On Jul 30, 7:46 am, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 'Only You' is an old song sung by a group called the Platters.From the > > > > late 50's I think.Maybe early 60's.Either way,could this be a > > > > definition of spiritual knowledge? > > > > > On Jul 30, 6:32 am, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Ok...so only you is being asked.Will only you answer the question?Only > > > > > you can keep it to a simple yes or no,if only you prefers. > > > > > :) > > > > > > On Jul 30, 6:24 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > There is nobody else. There is only you. > > > > > > > God damn, RS you've really influenced me! > > > > > > : )) > > > > > > Sent via BlackBerry from Vodafone > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Rodger <[email protected]> > > > > > > > Sender: [email protected] > > > > > > Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:12:43 > > > > > > To: Advaita-Zen<[email protected]> > > > > > > Subject: Re: 'Spiritual knowledge' > > > > > > > I think the expression,'Use it or lose it' is spiritual knowledge. > > > > > > Does anyone else? > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 10:02 am, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Nice,Marcus...very grand definition.And not saying it isn't so. > > > > > > > But,I'm wondering...what do you think...could spiritual knowledge > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > be something less grand...something maybe 'ordinary'...something > > > > > > > maybe > > > > > > > what might be called 'ordinary horse sense'? > > > > > > > For instance,don't smack your thumb with a hammer?Don't spit in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > wind?Don't pull the mask off the Lone Ranger,and don't mess around > > > > > > > with Jim? :) > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 9:50 am, Marcus <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > In my opinion ………….. In my experience > > > > > > > > > Spiritual Knowledge is uncovered when the individual > > > > > > > > experiences an > > > > > > > > intangible connection with the universe. A feeling unlike any > > > > > > > > other. Euphoria and elation is felt as the apparent > > > > > > > > boundaries of > > > > > > > > the self disappear. A bit like feeling very big and very > > > > > > > > small at > > > > > > > > the same time. When felt it is unforgettable. All the > > > > > > > > universe > > > > > > > > seems to glow with warmth and kindness. As if the universal > > > > > > > > spirit > > > > > > > > and me are one. No time or dimensions, no separation. The > > > > > > > > universal “I am” is felt. > > > > > > > > > Spiritual Knowledge is experienced. When experience one knows > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > that the self can be and enjoys it. > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 2:19 pm, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The other person has never been another person either,Marcus. > > > > > > > > > > In your estimation,would the above fit into any definition of > > > > > > > > > 'spiritual knowledge'? > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 8:13 am, Marcus <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been another person. Or I don't remember. > > > > > > > > > > > Am I the same as other people ???? > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 1:15 pm, Rodger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Marcus, you weren't asked to define it for another.You > > > > > > > > > > > were asked for > > > > > > > > > > > your definition.Besides,I wouldn't be so sure that you > > > > > > > > > > > can't define it > > > > > > > > > > > for another. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 6:54 am, Marcus <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > Spiritual Knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6.5 Billion people exist today. Each unique. Each > > > > > > > > > > > > with there own > > > > > > > > > > > > potential Spiritual Knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > No-one can tell another what it is. The individual > > > > > > > > > > > > must uncover > > > > > > > > > > > > their own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > “How would you define that?” > > > > > > > > > > > > > No-one can for another. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because it’s about coming face to face with your own > > > > > > > > > > > > soul. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only you can do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 12:47 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pure ignorance > > > > > > > > > > > > > : ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------Original Message------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Rodger > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sender: Advaita > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Advaita > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: 'Spiritual knowledge' > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Jul 29, 2010 1:29 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How would you define that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent via BlackBerry from Vodafone- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
