It is indeed, a real trick, to live our spirituality as our daily life, in the realm of our "now" experience. It is harder to understand from the outside of the door, steeped in our senses, passions and duality, that the door is of our own belief and construct, and from the other side, the inside, doesn't exist as a barrier but a threshold. Until we cross over the threshold and feel the illumination and know the infinite nature of our finite experience, it is not easy to understand that our finite experience, our senses, our ego, our passions, our humanity, is not only transcended but included when we cross the threshold and see that the closed door was never really there, except in our belief that it was. Our lives are the same. Our experience is vastly different because it is all spirit - there is only brahamn - and it includes all aspects of our being in perfection. Heaven. Within us and all around us. A matter of perspective.
On May 8, 4:42 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > Tinker, I have to wonder if you actually read and understand what > others post here. Five hours ago, I stated clearly that I believe that > the time has come for humanity to move beyond religion. As I have > repeatedly stated here, I am an agnostic/atheist. > > Nonetheless, it strikes me as pretty arrogant to simply dismiss all of > what people have thought and reasoned within a religious context > (particularly as, for most of human history, a non-religious > standpoint was simply inconceivable) as bullshit. It's like saying > that Caesar was a bad general because he didn't use tanks and have air- > support. > > Francis > > On 8 Mai, 22:19, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Fran, what you would expect is the BS of religions gone past failing > > for thousands of years. > > I am rude and crude in your face trying to get you to wake up from the > > apathy of those failed religions. > > > peace & Love > > > On May 8, 4:12 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Tinker, the tone of your posts doesn't particularly serve to make your > > > claim to have reached some new level of spiritual illumination > > > particularly credible. I would expect someone who claims to have > > > attained new spiritual insights to be courteous and compassionate > > > towards others who appear to be honest seekers - along the lines of > > > the old maxim, "by their fruits shall ye know them." > > > > Francis > > > > On 8 Mai, 22:04, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > My dear Lady, > > > > > He sounds to me like someone telling their grandfather he ought to > > > > find a lady and have some kids :-) > > > > I've been through all of that BS and it goes nowhere. > > > > I'm talking about taking action here and now to bring about the > > > > evolution of mankind to become spiritual beings. > > > > All of your spiritual beliefs are 'wannabe' what I'm talking about. > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > On May 8, 3:29 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Don't be so quick to dismiss what Justin is trying to tell you. There > > > > > is a truth for you there. > > > > > > On May 8, 1:07 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Guess again :-) > > > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > > > On May 8, 3:55 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > So, who’s right? Is it one out of the jumbled clusterfuck of > > > > > > > > spiritual > > > > > > > > beliefs? Or is it the Fact, that Life IS here and now. > > > > > > > > The ‘Dream of Utopia’ points at Life, not some spiritual other > > > > > > > > shit. > > > > > > > > That’s why I ask if it’s dead. > > > > > > > > Well Ok, but you are setting up a false dilemma. Above you have > > > > > > > capitalized the following words "Fact", "Life" and a double > > > > > > > capital of > > > > > > > "IS". > > > > > > > > Basically, if you consider what something is, like "its red" or > > > > > > > "its > > > > > > > round" you are considering its nature, or its essence. It is > > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > however to cease to consider what is and turn your consideration > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the fact that it is. When you do you transcend what life is and > > > > > > > consider the fact that it is, or to use your writing, the Fact, > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > Life IS. Now, it turns out that you can experience the fact that > > > > > > > life > > > > > > > is in some very, what are called, "profound" ways. You can either > > > > > > > appreciate its meaning fully or not. When you no longer are > > > > > > > considering what is but the fact that it is you are going beyond > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > physical to the metaphysical, or going beyond the natural to the > > > > > > > supernatural or going beyond the sensory to the extrasensory. > > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > the "some spiritual other shit" because it is not what is, but > > > > > > > rather > > > > > > > is the fact that it is. That is why it is "other" or > > > > > > > transcendent. It > > > > > > > is also Immanent meaning roughly "here and now." That is why "the > > > > > > > Fact, that Life IS here and now" IS "some spiritual other > > > > > > > shit"... it > > > > > > > just happens to be YOUR "some spiritual other shit". > > > > > > > > It turns out that the appreciation of the meaning of the fact that > > > > > > > life is in its fullest sense is the experience underlying all of > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > religions. The meaning of that experience is expressed, > > > > > > > indirectly > > > > > > > through the books and stories that constitute the religious texts > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > genuine religious activity and mythology is about the problem of > > > > > > > knowing what it means to be and is part of the intellectual > > > > > > > history of > > > > > > > mankind. > > > > > > > > You might think it is easy to know what it means. It is not. > > > > > > > > Now many activities and beliefs interpret these texts literally. > > > > > > > For > > > > > > > them God is basically like any other thing capable of either > > > > > > > being or > > > > > > > not being and they believe he "happens" to be. They interpret > > > > > > > religion > > > > > > > not existentially but essentially. They think it is about what is > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > the fact that it is. These people are fundamentalists. Their > > > > > > > interpretation is truly not even religious. It is just bad > > > > > > > science. > > > > > > > > However, when the religions are not interpreted essentially then > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > can see their value. Their value is in their appreciation of the > > > > > > > meaning of "the Fact, that Life IS here and now." So you raise a > > > > > > > false > > > > > > > dilemma between religion and what you are saying. > > > > > > > > With respect to Utopia I recommend that you read Kierkeguard on > > > > > > > despair "The Sickness Unto Death". He analyzes what despair > > > > > > > really is > > > > > > > and how one falls into its clutches. It is truly a very big > > > > > > > problem. > > > > > > > Utopia is not being realized because of something that is called > > > > > > > Maya > > > > > > > or illusion in the hindu literature. It is called original sin in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > christian literature. In the Hindu litterature it is noted that > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > suffering comes from a failure to realize the true nature of life. > > > > > > > > To put as close to your terminology as I can: When "the fact, that > > > > > > > life that life is here and now" fails to become "the Fact, that > > > > > > > Life > > > > > > > IS here and now" then there is suffering. > > > > > > > > You should be careful about prematurely cutting out the meaning > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > religions because you correctly realize that their literal > > > > > > > interpretation is false and even distracting. > > > > > > > > Now to the most important question: Is the dream dead. I think the > > > > > > > answer is no. Not even in the most evil would I say dead... or at > > > > > > > least not completely incapable of being resurrected. We know > > > > > > > basically > > > > > > > that there is this problem, the problem of Maya or original sin > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > there is this clouding of our vision but religious experience > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > happens. The real question can be posed in terms of the myth of > > > > > > > Lot > > > > > > > and his fleeing of his city. The dream is alive. We are like in a > > > > > > > game > > > > > > > with the stakes doubling. The technical capabilities we have for > > > > > > > communication now are making possible a major reawakening. They > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > make possible our destruction and these capabilities, the ones we > > > > > > > currently have are nothing compared to what is in the biological > > > > > > > design / neurology synergy. We are about to become very capable. > > > > > > > Are > > > > > > > we responding to it is the question. > > > > > > > > Good luck. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
