I have been talking about my philosophy for quite sometime now , you may have been following it , if not you can read all that I have said in my blog rp-space.blogspot.com
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > I would not advise anyone to demand a hermetic conception of cosmo-logy/gony > from a man if they are looking to understand his perspective. It should > suffice to find one's own need to understand and seek fulfillment, that > merely agreeing or disagreeing is not enough for this task. > > Is there more to your belief you could share? You may be surprised by the > reflection, or not.. > > On 5/27/2011 11:39 AM, RP Singh wrote: >> >> I am familiar only with the ancient Hindu Upanisads and the >> Bhagvadagita , besides I have read a little Psychology. I don't think >> you would reach the same conclusions on reading them , It took me >> three decades to formulate my belief and I know it is hard to digest >> but it is still better than the athiestic view that the majority is >> accepting nowadays. >> >> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Panta re ouden menai RP. I understand that it would be ignorant to ask >>> for >>> a science of mysticism but I am connecting the dots between everything >>> anyway. As I see it absolutes are models to help us conceive of systems, >>> metaphysical archetypes, a cross-section of imaginary points to reduce >>> the >>> flow of patterns into something we can grasp. I prefer starting with >>> overlapping spheres at times but that is irrelevant, a dismissable >>> geometric >>> aid. No matter how many times I've experienced spiritual insight I >>> repeatedly reformulate from the bottom up, I suppose that is restless. I >>> digress. >>> >>> On 5/26/2011 11:17 PM, RP Singh wrote: >>>> >>>> Ash , as far as we are concerned we are all real , we are neither >>>> inside nor outside the One . The One is immanent in us. When we say >>>> the world is an illusion it is because it is changeable and >>>> destructible. It is not permanent. >>> >>> I agree our experiences and nature cause misconceptions, some are >>> valuable >>> some not because they fit needs to an extent of limited perceptions. I >>> believe that all things are polymorphic in theory, and I think this >>> indicates that there is infinite potential explanation for things as they >>> are, and their interrelations. Fractal geometry grows from the egg, or >>> such. >>> Everything changes with a spark, which is the culmination of forces >>> driving >>> a substance to an extreme until critical mass and bam, noetic volition >>> (previously assumed to be spontaneous combustion or likewise concepts). >>> Between permanence and impermanence there is everything in between we >>> cannot >>> see due to limited perspective, and apparent dichotomies dissolve, >>> leaving a >>> permanence of change. The creative and conservative forces, and their >>> archetypal children become One and creation and destruction become the >>> illusion. Maybe. >>> >>>> Space and all that is in it has >>>> sprung from the One , and the One itself is pure Spirit. Our >>>> individual identities are for a time being only , in actuality the One >>>> is our real self. There is no such thing as my spirit or your spirit , >>>> there is only the One Spirit and it is the Absolute. >>> >>> If there are published works on the school(s) influencing these ideas >>> could >>> you reference them, or preferably your own work online (free)? Seeing it >>> all >>> at once helps. >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> But then either the phenomenal experience granted by this 'corporeal' >>>>> (apparently) state is occuring within or without or some x-position in >>>>> relation to One. Something is without a doubt occuring in some fashion, >>>>> as >>>>> we wouldn't be holding this conversation. If we are not within one, we >>>>> are >>>>> outside of one? Absolutes give me much trouble so I won't be diving >>>>> into >>>>> the >>>>> essence at this time looking to verify our claims. From what state does >>>>> this >>>>> perspective come from, to what or whom am I speaking (that this >>>>> knowledge >>>>> you propose comes from)? Maybe that is a better start, I apologize for >>>>> taking the infuriatingly dense student route. >>>>> >>>>> On 5/25/2011 11:50 PM, RP Singh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> If we think that we are part of the " Whole " we are sort of dividing >>>>>> up God. He then is no longer an entity but a composite of parts. The >>>>>> truth is that we are not parts but emanations which make His existence >>>>>> identifiable to our understanding. >>>>>> The reflection of the sun is a proof of the sun ;similarly the world >>>>>> is a proof of the Self. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Our consciousness makes us think that we are special , far removed >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> matter , but in reality we are mortal and it is the One Spirit in all >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> is immortal. " >>>>>>> I don't think that this must necessarily be the whole truth. What if >>>>>>> one >>>>>>> sees that all things are a part of the whole, that is the world >>>>>>> and/or >>>>>>> nature's way, and we perceive diverse phenomena by our natures >>>>>>> inextricably? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I find it interesting that you would say the reflection of the sun in >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> puddle is not the sun, what else is the sun but the forces of nature >>>>>>> which >>>>>>> are the same as in the puddle? Our focus may be pointed at a less >>>>>>> brilliant >>>>>>> and direct portion in comparison to the sun but it is shining through >>>>>>> nonetheless in everything if you know how or where to look. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 5/19/2011 10:04 AM, RP Singh wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is not a matter of perspective but the very nature of things. The >>>>>>>> world is dualistic by nature and God is Non-Dual.The world changes >>>>>>>> over time and is never in a constant state , whereas God remains the >>>>>>>> same always and is unborn , primeaval and indestructible--the same >>>>>>>> cannot be said of the world. It is so easy to say that I am the One >>>>>>>> , >>>>>>>> but when a needle pricks you you grimace , how can you be the " One >>>>>>>> " >>>>>>>> when you feel pleasure and pain , happy and depressed. Our >>>>>>>> consciousness makes us think that we are special , far removed from >>>>>>>> matter , but in reality we are mortal and it is the One Spirit in >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>> that is immortal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Molly<[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> How is it possible, from a non dual perspective, to perceive the >>>>>>>>> world >>>>>>>>> as dualistic in nature, and thus an illusion (and separate from >>>>>>>>> self)? By definition, this view would remain dualistic. I do think >>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> true that how we view the world forms our experience. From a >>>>>>>>> dualistic view, some are right, some are wrong. From a non dual >>>>>>>>> view, >>>>>>>>> all views are the One/many paradox that is One. How we view (and >>>>>>>>> experience) birth and death changes as we change. From a non dual >>>>>>>>> perspective, they are only states of transformation and not a >>>>>>>>> beginning or end. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On May 17, 2:07 pm, RP Singh<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In duality there is the relationship of the observer and the >>>>>>>>>> observed >>>>>>>>>> , the knower and the known , that is , there are two. In >>>>>>>>>> Non-Duality >>>>>>>>>> there is only One and the world which is dualistic in nature , >>>>>>>>>> remains >>>>>>>>>> what it is , just an illusion - i.e. subject to birth and death. >>>>>>>>>> God >>>>>>>>>> ,Reality or Atman is Non-Dual and duality is just its expression. >>> > >
