"Those who bow before the Lord are better than the atheists who don"t. The beleivers have a better chance of coping with life"s adversities as they have hope and fortitude, the non-believers only believe in the finite and are thus unable to bear life"s vicssitudes with equanimity."- Posted by RP at 00:14,Wednesday, 7 October 2009 I am Far from an athiest and you are contradicting yourself my friend!
On May 4, 10:54 pm, RP <[email protected]> wrote: > Everthing that is born is finite as it will certainly die. The > universe was born with the Big Bang and will disintegrate with the big > Crunch. All life is dualistic in nature, as a movie needs a screen > consciousness needs a sense. If the universe is continuously expanding > it doesn't mean that it will never disintegrate. To equate God with > the universe , is doubting his existence and you may as well consider > yourself to be athiests. If a hen can come out of an egg and god is > still there, then the universe can come out of the cosmic egg and God > be still there. > > On May 4, 12:58 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "God is pure consciousness, formless, unborn, eternal, indestructible > > and the source, the spirit and the end of all. We are conscious, have > > a form, are born, live and die. Our only solace is that we arise from > > him, are upheld by him and go back to him. He is the Truth and we are > > just his reflections and vanish when the vessel dies."-RP > > > I have to refer back to the origional post to respond to this.If God > > is the source then the big bang does not really count for much in this > > discussion. Furthermore, as the theory has evolved we find (and these > > are assumptions of course)that the universe is continually expanding > > and likely to expand infinitly. Also, if others are correct in their > > posts which state the universe and God are one and we are part of this > > universe (also assuming anything, in fact, exists) than we are not > > finite but infinite as well. Therefore arising from Him, being upheld > > by Him and going back to Him we become one with the eternal and the > > only thing that is dualistic is our perception of what is 'real' ie; > > the physical being or the vessel as you put it. I will go so far as > > saying that what we percieve as real is less real than what we cannot > > measure ie; the ethereal. > > > On May 4, 1:08 pm, RP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The universe started developing with the big bang and will > > > disintegrate at some time in the future. Duality is always finite. God > > > alone is infinite as he is non-dual. > > > > On May 4, 7:39 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "The "gods " would then just be super-beings who will be born with > > > > this > > > > universe and die with it , e.i. dualistic in nature"-RP > > > > > This would assume that the universe is finite, no? I fail to see the > > > > logic here. > > > > > On May 3, 10:14 am, RP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The "gods " would then just be super-beings who will be born with this > > > > > universe and die with it , e.i. dualistic in nature. > > > > > > On May 3, 5:42 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > Ifpure consciousness transcends human awareness then as Kant > > > > > > saysthe assertion of unity is only a hypothesis believed as an > > > > > > article offaith. What if the pre Greeks are righter about the > > > > > > nature of realitywith their notion of multiple "gods" a > > > > > > multiplicity of realities? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: RP <[email protected]> > > > > > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > Sent: Mon, May 3, 2010 8:05 am > > > > > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: God and I > > > > > > > Pure Consciousness, God, Atma , or the Self is non-dual and above > > > > > > awareness. Awareness implies dualism as it is not possible > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > The entire creation which is dualistic in nature springs from the > > > > > > non- > > > > > > dual and is like a hen coming out of an egg. i.e. all > > > > > > predetermined. I > > > > > > know that I have no company in this view , yet I have expressed it > > > > > > as > > > > > > basically I am truthful in nature. > > > > > > > On May 2, 8:14 am, ornamentalmind > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > “OM , most people don't want to die…” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I don’t know ‘most people’ nor their wants and desires, > > > > > > the > > > > > > > human organism as well as psyche does have a drive for life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “… or have so many desires like psychic powers …” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, I have no experience with ‘most people’ so do not know > > > > > > what > > > > > > > they want. As to psychic powers, it is true that I’ve heard > > > > > > precious > > > > > > > little from most of the people that I do know about psychic > > > > > > powers. > > > > > > > However, I cannot say the same about them having desires. It > > > > > > appears > > > > > > > that most people I know have quite a set of passions and > > > > > > desires. . . > > > > > > > attachments to all sorts of issues, things, attributes, > > > > > > hungers etc. > > > > > > > I make no value judgment about such things other than that > > > > > > which I > > > > > > > know…such thirsts do attract suffering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “…that they make so much of consciousness.” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And, my closer friends do have a focus on consciousness while > > > > > > my > > > > > > > acquaintances do not share much about consciousness itself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “… In my view there is only God, Atma Or Pure Consciousness. > > > > > > We are > > > > > > > all just his > > > > > > > reflections or have emanated from him…” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When observing things ultimate, I’d say we are of like minds > > > > > > here RP… > > > > > > > at the very least, have similar points of view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “… Maybe my reasoning is awry and you and others are right…” – > > > > > > RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are associating this response with my last post, I see > > > > > > no > > > > > > > contradiction. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding. The > > > > > > ‘reasoning’ I > > > > > > > criticized had to do with how I interpreted your words > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “..It would be simply a state of coma.Go and ask for general > > > > > > > anaesthesia for a few minutes, that would be your self- > > > > > > > realisation. ..” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, perhaps here it is I who don’t quite interpret your > > > > > > meaning > > > > > > > correctly. Only you will be the judge of that. Your above > > > > > > words, to > > > > > > > me, imply no awareness when self-realized…only “a state of > > > > > > coma”. From > > > > > > > what little experience I have here and what I have read from > > > > > > those who > > > > > > > have taken this path over the millennia, while we are living > > > > > > and > > > > > > > associated with a specific body (not dead), even though > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > states of consciousness can come and go where one is not > > > > > > attached to > > > > > > > ‘self’ nor appearances, there must be and is a consubstantial > > > > > > > recognition of both the absolute (no words/concepts) as well > > > > > > as the > > > > > > > “I”…that which thinks, has emotions etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “… But in that case also I am right, You will become one with > > > > > > God when > > > > > > > you get salvation and then there will be no individual I , as > > > > > > far as > > > > > > > you will be concerned. If I am not mistaken , you at least > > > > > > believe in > > > > > > > predeterminism , like me.” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Many issues in this small set of words RP…first, I’m not so > > > > > > sure that > > > > > > > the issue of being ‘right’ is that important to me here. I > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > discuss and share with you. We may not agree and this is fine. > > > > > > We in > > > > > > > fact may be fully agreeing and don’t know it due to the use of > > > > > > > subjective words and terms. There are many possibilities here. > > > > > > As to > > > > > > > one becoming ‘one with god’…I find that to be the case for > > > > > > everyone … > > > > > > > primarily demonstrated by divine omnipresence. Now, the term of > > > > > > > salvation doesn’t seem to enter into the discussion for me…at > > > > > > least > > > > > > > not when it comes to terminology. Perhaps you can elucidate > > > > > > here. As > > > > > > > to an ‘individual I’, we are in agreement in one sense at > > > > > > least. I > > > > > > > find that the common notion of ‘I’, ego etc., in any ultimate > > > > > > sense is > > > > > > > not real. However, since I and apparently most other human > > > > > > beings do > > > > > > > notice and recognize a ‘self’, whether it is mere appearances > > > > > > or not, > > > > > > > to ignore ‘I’ doesn’t seem to be the proper path to take. > > > > > > Lastly, as > > > > > > > to predeterminism, in one sense, yes, we share a similar view > > > > > > if not > > > > > > > the same. That is such a large topic that I won’t delve into > > > > > > it at > > > > > > > this time though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 1, 8:22 pm, RP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OM , most people don't want to die or have so many > > > > > > desires like > > > > > > > > psychic powers that they make so much of consciousness. > > > > > > In my view > > > > > > > > there is only God, Atma Or Pure Consciousness. We are all > > > > > > just his > > > > > > > > reflections or have emanated from him. Maybe my reasoning > > > > > > is awry and > > > > > > > > you and others are right. But in that case also I am > > > > > > right, You will > > > > > > > > become one with God when you get salvation and then there > > > > > > will be no > > > > > > > > individual I , as far as you will be concerned. If I am > > > > > > not mistaken , > > > > > > > > you at least believe in predeterminism , like me. > > > > > > > > On May 1, 4:57 pm, ornamentalmind > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “…There would be no I as that also requires > > > > > > > > > some sort of sense. There would be no thought as it > > > > > > would require a > > > > > > > > > memory of words or sound. It would be simply a state > > > > > > of coma…” – RP > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RP, thanks for responding to what I believe was my > > > > > > post. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
