all the depending upon the level of evolution of the person...in nterms of awareness ..huh..
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:58 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > One may intuit a common connection but my experience indicates that people > vary on a continuum as to what meaning(s) are > attributed to this connectedness. Some hate to be connected to anyone or > anything. Others are exceedingly careful as to who or what they are > connected to and with, You get my point. I think the concept and the > experience of quintessential connectedness is a cop out from identifying > those connections that most meaningful to a given human being. What I am > saying is that human assign value to whatever they experience including the > experience of quintessential connectedness. No? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thu, Jul 8, 2010 8:32 am > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > There are many levels from the microcosm to the macrocosm! Here is an > > > excerpt from the paper that is linked above; > > > > > "In terms of collective consciousness, the developmental and spiritual > > > literature describes an evolutionary progression, leading to ever > > > widening circles of identification and care: from a particular group > > > (marriage, family, organization, etc.), to a community (geographic, > > > interest group, etc.), to a society or culture (national, ethnic, > > > tribal, etc.), to all sentient beings, to Nature (ecological > > > consciousness), to the globe (global consciousness), to the cosmos > > > (cosmic consciousness),24 and to the Kosmos (Kosmic consciousness).25 > > > The wisdom traditions assert that, ultimately, an individual “realizes > > > a Self-identity with Spirit.”"-Robert Kenny > > > > > Here is a working definition of the term; > > > > > "A mode of awareness, in which we directly experience, through an > > > intuitive felt-sense, our union with the interconnected wholeness of > > > life, and recognize ourselves in others. Our identity extends beyond > > > our individual boundary and embraces the collective, through a free > > > and conscious act of identification, rather than through definition by > > > convention or external authority."-Kenny > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 3:31 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > .. collective conciousness is like a an organism yeah..with each of us > > > > as the cells huh > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:17 AM, DarkwaterBlight > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps not kid. The asumption that parallel universes exist go hand > > > > > in hand with spirituality, enlightenment and collective consciosness. > > > > > The latter sometimes being described as parallel universe or at the > > > > > very least another dimension. The fact that information can travel > > > > > faster than the speed of light via collective consciosness goes > > > > > against physical "law" and hence implies that there are "holes" in the > > > > > so called empty space in our universe! Where do they go and come from? > > > > > These "holes" have been described in theory as mini white or black > > > > > holes and they exist every where! Through these holes (in theory) > > > > > there is an a flux of energy or feild that flows. > > > > > > > > > On Jul 7, 2:09 pm, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > i think we have deviated a lot fom where we started... > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:22 PM, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > No one can call his subjective beliefs as knowledge and my beliefs, > > > > > which > > > > > > > to me stand as proved, my opinions and insinuations. > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 10:39 AM, DarkwaterBlight < > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> You need only to prove to yourself what you believe my friend. ;) > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jul 7, 1:07 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > Prove to me and all that you are anything beyond this body as you > > > > > > >> claim. > > > > > > >> > Prove that you can be one with theTruth while still in this body. > > > > > > >> Whatever > > > > > > >> > you claim is just subjective and cannot be proved. How then can you > > > > > ask > > > > > > >> me > > > > > > >> > to prove what I believe? Is that not subjective also? What is God > > > > >> > or > > > > > > >> Truth? > > > > > > >> > Is that also not subjective? > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:25 AM, vamadevananda < > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > You speak as if you know. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Only let know what you know, beyond your opinions and > > > > > > >> > > insinuations ! ? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > On Jul 7, 9:16 pm, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > The so-called state of enlightenment or self-realisation is > > > > > simply a > > > > > > >> > > state > > > > > > >> > > > of awareness of the organism like deep-sleep state, > > > > >> > > > dream-state, > > > > > > >> awaken > > > > > > >> > > > state. Equating the individual self or ahamkara to the Self or > > > > > > >> Truth, God > > > > > > >> > > , > > > > > > >> > > > Atma is just human egoism and a desire of man to be supreme or > > > > > God. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:44 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > So I would be interested in how you shifted your attitude > > > > >> > > > > from > > > > > a > > > > > > >> > > > > relativistic subjective position like mine to what I imagined > > > > > you > > > > > > >> > > believe is > > > > > > >> > > > > an objective enlightened one? I am truly interested in the > > > > > steps > > > > > > >> you > > > > > > >> > > took to > > > > > > >> > > > > get there. I also appreciate the fact that beyond a certain > > > > > point > > > > > > >> you > > > > > > >> > > will > > > > > > >> > > > > probably say that words are inadequate to describe the > > > > > process. > > > > > > >> However > > > > > > >> > > some > > > > > > >> > > > > of the process is probably describable. No? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> > > > > From: ashok tewari <[email protected]> > > > > > > >> > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > >> > > > > Sent: Wed, Jul 7, 2010 9:25 am > > > > > > >> > > > > Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Cannot say much about your chain of thoughts, though > > > > > commonplace ( > > > > > > >> for > > > > > > >> > > > > they're the very same that held sway over me not so long ago > > > > > ), > > > > > > >> because > > > > > > >> > > they > > > > > > >> > > > > have roots and causes within you. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > The self is not negated but known. Which isn't being superior > > > > > - > > > > > > >> > > inferior > > > > > > >> > > > > but being true, without the least psychology we are all > > > > >> > > > > caught > > > > > up > > > > > > >> in. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:45 PM, <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> You are apparently saying that awareness can be pure (free > > > > > from > > > > > > >> > > > >> contaminating subjectivity hence by passing interpretation). > > > > > > >> Further > > > > > > >> > > that > > > > > > >> > > > >> the experience of 'pure' awareness enables the experiencer > > > > >> > > > >> to > > > > > > >> obtain > > > > > > >> > > an > > > > > > >> > > > >> assumed pre existing knowledge of everything. In that case I > > > > > am > > > > > > >> doomed > > > > > > >> > > to > > > > > > >> > > > >> experience impure awareness as it makes absolutely no sense > > > > > to me > > > > > > >> that > > > > > > >> > > what > > > > > > >> > > > >> ever I perceive does not necessarily involve something of my > > > > > > >> personal > > > > > > >> > > self > > > > > > >> > > > >> added to whatever awareness I have. Further if such pure > > > > > > >> awareness you > > > > > > >> > > claim > > > > > > >> > > > >> exists which I think equals the claims of the mystic's > > > > > assertions > > > > > > >> of > > > > > > >> > > > >> ineffability of such pure direct awareness - then to speak > > > > >> > > > >> of > > > > > the > > > > > > >> > > > >> unspeakable seems to me to be little more than an expression > > > > > of > > > > > > >> > > spiritual > > > > > > >> > > > >> narcissism. To me at my age of 73 - this talk translated > > > > >> > > > >> into > > > > > > >> human > > > > > > >> > > talk is > > > > > > >> > > > >> really saying something like: I know something you don't > > > > > know > > > > > > >> and > > > > > > >> > > what I > > > > > > >> > > > >> know is vastly superior to what you know and don't play word > > > > > > >> games > > > > > > >> > > with me > > > > > > >> > > > >> when I say no words can describe it because that is the > > > > >> > > > >> truth > > > > > and > > > > > > >> too > > > > > > >> > > bad > > > > > > >> > > > >> you don't know it. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> > > > >> From: Molly <[email protected]> > > > > > > >> > > > >> To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > >> > > > >> Sent: Wed, Jul 7, 2010 7:48 am > > > > > > >> > > > >> Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Very good! > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> On Jul 7, 3:58 am, ashok tewari <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > Telling doesn't help, as in wouldn't communicate. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > Try being without the relatedness you feel for things you > > > > > know, > > > > > > >> even > > > > > > >> > > for a > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > moment, as you do in the state of deep sleep, without > > > > > actually > > > > > > >> > > falling deep > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > asleep ! > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:47 AM, <[email protected]> > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > Pray tell. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > From: ashok tewari <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > Sent: Wed, Jul 7, 2010 2:12 am > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > Subject: Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > " Or do you somehow have special knowledge?" > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > I do. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:07 AM, <[email protected]> > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> Assuming you are a human and not the "God" you are > > > > > > >> describing - > > > > > > >> > > then you > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> can not be certain that > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> the assertions you are making about absolute reality > > > > >> > > > >> > >> are > > > > > > >> > > accurate. So we > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> are back to the position of Aquinas re > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> faith and reason. As a man of faith you can believe > > > > > whatever > > > > > > >> you > > > > > > >> > > wish and > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> obviously do - but in terms of > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> reason you apparently know as little for certain as the > > > > > rest > > > > > > >> of > > > > > > >> > > us. Or do > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> you somehow have special knowledge? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> From: vamadevananda <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> Sent: Wed, Jul 7, 2010 12:25 am > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> It is unknown to us humans. It is known to God, but > > > > >> > > > >> > >> not > > > > > in > > > > > > >> the > > > > > > >> > > manner > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> in which humans relate to things known to them or to > > > > > matters > > > > > > >> > > unknown. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> On Jul 6, 6:36 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > But -is the future known or unknown? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > From: Manfraco Frank Elder <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > Sent: Tue, Jul 6, 2010 2:20 am > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > Did I not say that the future is yet to come? So, we > > > > > live > > > > > > >> for > > > > > > >> > > the > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > future and whatever we do will effect the future. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > On Jul 6, 10:01 am, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > If all is known then why bother to live your life. > > > > > What > > > > > > >> is > > > > > > >> > > the point > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> if all > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > is already forgone? > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > From: Manfraco Frank Elder <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > Sent: Mon, Jul 5, 2010 6:03 pm > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Parallel Universes > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > My spiritual parallel universe is the cosmos, where > > > > > all > > > > > > >> > > records are > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > kept past and present is all there, the future is > > > > > yet to > > > > > > >> come > > > > > > >> > > and > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > nobody knows anything about it, in the cosmos of > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > the > > > > > > >> universe > > > > > > >> > > is where > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > God resides that is why God knows everything. > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > On Jul 5, 1:38 pm, "pol.science kid" < > > > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > I guess parallel universes have a slight > > > > > difference of > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- \--/ Peace
