The Question

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

From all that I have experienced from reading and dialoguing, there seems to be two core views of "God". That "God" is on an infinite continuum of the darkness of becoming, of a Self Inquiry of "why?" of which man is a part of this becoming continuum, or that "God" is an infinite expression of being of light [no question of "why"], and that man's sense of becoming is his darkness to be overcome or 'lifted.'

The first view, man's God of becoming, suggests, to me, a vision of hell, for there is no way to exit the question of "why?" Martin Luther King Jr. said "there is a tension at the heart of the universe." To me, this tension is this eternal sense of 'going somewhere' - the question - coupled with the realization that there is no where to go - that there will never be a definitive answer to the question. I reject this God who must question himself to realize Himself, not out of some childish desire to simply "stop the world, I want to get off", but that such a God makes no sense whatsoever. It is illogical to me that God would continue spinning on his spot of darkness of projecting matter born of "why" even though he has the wisdom that to do so, will bring him always back to the same spot of uncertainty and doubt.

And, does it doesn't matter how this eternally questioning God is envisioned in the mind of the believer, whether it is envisioned as an outcome of infinite causes or whether it is envisioned as extending from the mind of a personality God who judges his questioners as living by the right answer of the moment or the wrong answer of the moment? To me, both are the same vision of a turning wheel of self doubt.

I am aware that to end the question-of-no-answer within the mind of man, who, according to my wisdom, is the only 'place' where it exists, places man on a wholly different path, that is, of ending the question-of-no-answer. To awaken to the futility of the question, and to repent its asking. And to walk on this path of being purged of the question. To what end? To be lifted of the darkness of belief that the Creator of All Things needs to question "why?"
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

I think the question is real. It must have existed in God somewhere to be experienced here. I will say, very insightful that very few have even stopped to ask this question so, bless you sis. This is the question that the ascendant ones are wrestling with. I am surprised - in a good way - to see you here.

I think it is God transcending himself by and through your experience. He said "it is not good that man be alone." How did God know that and if it is not good what is it?

He desires to create, at the DNA and cellular level, a pure expression of what could only be termed a companion. When he sees himself realized through you, he is satisfied in completion of expression. Yes, desire is inherent in the transcendent else creation itself would not exist. This means; the Elohim has realized the intention of the ages by seeing itself in the state of being the One. To create a universe full of the express image to be transcended in the joy of unrestrained allowance of the limitless.

Good seeing myself in you and thank you.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Beingof1: I think the question is real. It must have existed in God somewhere to be experienced here. I will say, very insightful that very few have even stopped to ask this question so, bless you sis. This is the question that the ascendant ones are wrestling with. I am surprised - in a good way - to see you here.
Sometimes I am surprised to see myself here. : )

The question exists, of this you and I both acknowledge. And, yes, the question must exist in God somewhere to be experienced here.
I think it is God transcending himself by and through your experience. He said "it is not good that man be alone." How did God know that and if it is not good what is it?
In order for God to be transcending himself by and through my experience, He must also be of the Consciousness that is already transcendent to my experience, no? Allow me to provide scripture from Genesis 2 to expand upon what I mean, underlined for emphasis to show the difference between the Consciousness of the Father [Interpreter] of Genesis 1 and the consciousness of the Lord God of Genesis 2, who is the God [Interpreter] who said "it is not good for man to be alone." From verses 1 - 5, the consciousness of the Father who is nondual, not of breath, not of flesh is being expressed, with the consciousness of the Lord God of dualism, of breath and of flesh being expressed from verses 6 onward.
1Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
I see the consciousness of the Lord God as being an emanation or extension of the Consciousness of the Father, with all that is experienced as Adam/Eve, the serpent, and then, of the ascending Christ, as the Totality of the journey of the emanation, and of transcendence of the emanation.
He desires to create, at the DNA and cellular level, a pure expression of what could only be termed a companion. When he sees himself realized through you, he is satisfied in completion of expression. Yes, desire is inherent in the transcendent else creation itself would not exist. This means; the Elohim has realized the intention of the ages by seeing itself in the state of being the One. To create a universe full of the express image to be transcended in the joy of unrestrained allowance of the limitless.
To me, what you are describing is is the emanation or extension of the Lord God, which appears limitless to the Adam/Eve intellect of the knowledge of good and evil relativity [this is the deception of the serpent, who was the Lord God in disguise] but cannot be so because of the death of flesh and the withdrawal of the breath of life of the living soul, which is the fruit of this tree of dualism.

The Christ principle is that which comes to set the captives free from the deception of the Lord God/serpent [veiled sense awareness] and shows the way to transcend the knowledge of the tree of good and evil.

I am smiling as I write these words, for man needs a vision of where he is standing, and, as is demonstrated on the board and every board, the vision is as individual as is the one who is expressing it. And, regardless of these countless visions of Wisdom, Life goes on about Its business of being Life. Should the last thread of human DNA return to the earth from whence it came, I do not seeing either the Lord God of the mist or the Father of pure spirit grieving for even one moment.

And to answer your question about whether 'IT' is good, whatever 'IT' is, how can it not be good and only good, since it IS Itself and of Itself? Even the darkest moment of the Lord God, is light to the Father.

It is good to communicate with one who 'speaks' my language. : )
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Moving:
BO1:
The question exists, of this you and I both acknowledge. And, yes, the question must exist in God somewhere to be experienced here. I think it is God transcending himself by and through your experience. He said "it is not good that man be alone." How did God know that and if it is not good what is it?

Moving:
In order for God to be transcending himself by and through my experience, He must also be of the Consciousness that is already transcendent to my experience, no?
All limits are being transcended is the state of the infinite.
Allow me to provide scripture from Genesis 2 to expand upon what I mean, underlined for emphasis to show the difference between the Consciousness of the Father [Interpreter] of Genesis 1 and the consciousness of the Lord God of Genesis 2, who is the God [Interpreter] who said "it is not good for man to be alone." From verses 1 - 5, the consciousness of the Father who is nondual, not of breath, not of flesh is being expressed, with the consciousness of the Lord God of dualism, of breath and of flesh being expressed from verses 6 onward.
The bruising of the heel to the head being crushed is the perceived limitations applied by the transcendent. The purpose is the expression of what could not be without limitation (or the perception of such). We learn to love the limit because without it - no express image or reflection of the face of God.

God is not playing chess - he is playing a very advanced game of solitare.
1Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
He went to sleep in you ;) - glad you woke him up from his Rip Van Winklehood.
3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
The Jewish mystics say that in the creation story is the secret of the universe.

Go easy on God, its his first time being you.
I see the consciousness of the Lord God as being an emanation or extension of the Consciousness of the Father, with all that is experienced as Adam/Eve, the serpent, and then, of the ascending Christ, as the Totality of the journey of the emanation, and of transcendence of the emanation.
Yup, God created God. The impossible was accomplished.
There can be no creation at all without limits so we learn to love them. All the while in a state of transcendent lifting of the veil of flesh.
BO1:
He desires to create, at the DNA and cellular level, a pure expression of what could only be termed a companion. When he sees himself realized through you, he is satisfied in completion of expression. Yes, desire is inherent in the transcendent else creation itself would not exist. This means; the Elohim has realized the intention of the ages by seeing itself in the state of being the One. To create a universe full of the express image to be transcended in the joy of unrestrained allowance of the limitless.

Moving:
To me, what you are describing is is the emanation or extension of the Lord God, which appears limitless to the Adam/Eve intellect of the knowledge of good and evil relativity [this is the deception of the serpent, who was the Lord God in disguise] but cannot be so because of the death of flesh and the withdrawal of the breath of life of the living soul, which is the fruit of this tree of dualism.

The Christ principle is that which comes to set the captives free from the deception of the Lord God/serpent [veiled sense awareness] and shows the way to transcend the knowledge of the tree of good and evil.
True indeed. Good and evil is a choice. Even Judas Iscariot was an expression of consciousness as is the Devil.

He is the perfect Devil, is he not? The express image is effected to a state of reconciliation when we can look Satan in the eye and say "welcome; because you also are loved." Then we may hear - from the bowels of darkness echo back " I am love."
I am smiling as I write these words, for man needs a vision of where he is standing, and, as is demonstrated on the board and every board, the vision is as individual as is the one who is expressing it. And, regardless of these countless visions of Wisdom, Life goes on about Its business of being Life. Should the last thread of human DNA return to the earth from whence it came, I do not seeing either the Lord God of the mist or the Father of pure spirit grieving for even one moment.
Oh - but God did grieve. God experienced pain, that is why sowing and reaping or karma exist. God was suffering and is looking to resolve his own pain, that is why creation came to be and he attempted to finally sleep.
And to answer your question about whether 'IT' is good, whatever 'IT' is, how can it not be good and only good, since it IS Itself and of Itself? Even the darkest moment of the Lord God, is light to the Father.
Of course. It is difficult for most to think of the Totality of all God as experiencing suffering. I can assure you, he still is. You are helping in that you are expressing the nondual in a state of transcendent being.
It is good to communicate with one who 'speaks' my language. : )
Bless you sis.
Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Animus »

God is supposed to be the Uncaused

The Uncaused can not be wanting anything or asking anything. Something would have to cause it to be wanting or asking.

So let's say that God is perfect in every possibility.

This is hard to explain, but if God is perfect then God naturally creates. God creates because in and of himself there is nothing happening or going on, no existence. God's position is relative to existence (yet encompasses existence int he final analysis). We just need to know first of all what we are after, which is an explanation of reality. We all intuitively know what reality is, but when we first refer to God we are looking for the uncaused (not reality).

So the uncaused is of itself not a thing, any particular thing is determined and determinable in some way. And since the uncaused is no particular thing, it is as if it didn't exist at all.

Here is how I explained it to my girlfriend; when you go to sleep at night, and you don't dream, what do you experience during your period of unconsciousness? She says "Nothing" and I say "Not nothing, non-existence." "You experience nothing when you think of possibility." "When there is the possibility of there being something or no, then you experience nothing, but it is no more than a concept relative to something." "When you are unconscious you do not experience." Then I asked her "So, what would the universe be like if there were no one experiencing it?" she stared blankly "It would be like it wasn't" I said.

In similar fashion, for the uncaused it is as if it is not (keeping in mind that "as if it is not" is conceptual itself and what I really refer to here is unthinkable). So, there can't be simply the uncaused, the uncaused is in-back of the caused but is not the whole picture. Its kind of like if you have an infinite number of possible universes, and only one in which there is sentient life capable of perceiving the time that has elapsed, it is as if the time hasn't elapsed. Its as if, there always was sentient life.

That is to say that manifest existence does not come about simply because of some desire or cause, but is a complete unit from front-to-back. The future is as fixed as the past is indeterminate. In a way the experiencer is the beginner of existence, but incapable of doing so by itself, it needs the uncaused to do so, and it needs an intervening medium. So there is no need of an intention, other than to say that the intention is to exist. In that there is no question either, questions are what experiencers ask, the complete unit that is existence (God) does not ask questions outside of its experiencer. The experiencer asks questions because out of necessity it is not perfect, if it were perfect it would be the uncaused and two uncauseds don't make existence. The experiencer is, of necessity, completely ignorant from the onset and discovery is its function.

Anyway, I just don't think God asks Why or knows Why as merely the perfect uncaused. Or I think as you call it the emmanation.

One will eventually see that the world is perfection, manifest existence is perfect, not merely the uncaused. What the uncaused tells us is that to be perfect one has to be flawed, because pefection in and of itself doesn't do anything or want anything, it has no reason to, so it creates reasons for things to happen, and that is perfection.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

All limits are being transcended is the state of the infinite.
Should the infinite step into the finite, it would cease being the infinite. Man wants to blend infinity with finiteness, to have his cake and eat it too; herein is the very core or crux of the appearance of the veil of ignorance.
The bruising of the heel to the head being crushed is the perceived limitations applied by the transcendent. The purpose is the expression of what could not be without limitation (or the perception of such). We learn to love the limit because without it - no express image or reflection of the face of God.

God is not playing chess - he is playing a very advanced game of solitare.
No man knows the intent of God, the mind of God. Why? Man is not a creator, man is a manipulator of matter. Including all forms of matter that are his thoughts about the intent of God. This is the wisdom of the Father of Genesis 1 [the Creator] and of the Lord God of Genesis 2 [the manipulator of the dust of the ground].

"God is not a man that he should lie." "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are my ways your ways, saith the Lord."
He went to sleep in you ;) - glad you woke him up from his Rip Van Winklehood.
No, I, as his emanation of matter, went to sleep in Him. He, as the Christ Principle, woke me up from my Rip Van Winklehood. Now, being that I am awake, I am the activity of consciousness that is "mortality being swallowed of Life."
The Jewish mystics say that in the creation story is the secret of the universe.
The creation story, yes, which is the story of The Lord God and Adam/Eve, the interpreter of the dust/mist of the ground. Creation Itself, the Father Himself? There is no story in the Father; He is without history, without time, without space and without matter. Clean off your dust, wipe away your mist, your story, and He appears.
Go easy on God, its his first time being you.
"For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." It is not the other way around as you present above.
Quote:
I see the consciousness of the Lord God as being an emanation or extension of the Consciousness of the Father, with all that is experienced as Adam/Eve, the serpent, and then, of the ascending Christ, as the Totality of the journey of the emanation, and of transcendence of the emanation.

Yup, God created God. The impossible was accomplished.
God already was God before the Lord God appeared in God.
There can be no creation at all without limits so we learn to love them. All the while in a state of transcendent lifting of the veil of flesh.
What you are suggesting is that matter creates matter, or flesh creates flesh. If this is so, when we lift the veil of flesh, will we not find more flesh? Again, what you present is the veil over your eyes of believing that the Lord God of appearance, of dualism, is the Father of Creation, of nondual ISNESS.
movingalways: The Christ principle is that which comes to set the captives free from the deception of the Lord God/serpent [veiled sense awareness] and shows the way to transcend the knowledge of the tree of good and evil.
True indeed. Good and evil is a choice. Even Judas Iscariot was an expression of consciousness as is the Devil.

He is the perfect Devil, is he not? The express image is effected to a state of reconciliation when we can look Satan in the eye and say "welcome; because you also are loved." Then we may hear - from the bowels of darkness echo back " I am love."
Yes, Judas was the perfect Devil, not because he chose evil over good, but because he remained in ignorance as to what belief in choice, in good and evil, really was - the appearance of the Lord God of time, distance, space and matter. Jesus had the wisdom Judas lacked; Jesus realized that when the Lord God of TDSM was eliminated from his consciousness, the Father of no-time, no-distance, no-space and no-matter would be fully revealed. This elimination of appearance or illusion was not complete until he cried out on the cross of the illusion of matter, which he bore of his faith in the revelation of the Infinite Father, "it [my finite thought world] is finished."

Satan represents the lie that consciousness/life begins with the appearance of matter.
Oh - but God did grieve. God experienced pain, that is why sowing and reaping or karma exist. God was suffering and is looking to resolve his own pain, that is why creation came to be and he attempted to finally sleep.
Again, it was the principle of Adam, of belief that matter is real that fell asleep, not the Father of finished Creation, the law of the Spirit of life. If the Father is asleep on the job, God help us all! :-)
Of course. It is difficult for most to think of the Totality of all God as experiencing suffering. I can assure you, he still is. You are helping in that you are expressing the nondual in a state of transcendent being.
If the Totality of all God is experiencing suffering, then, truly, we are trapped in hell for the eternity of our awareness.

No man knows The Totality of God. No man knows about the Totality of God. What man does know, however, is the way of thinking that keeps him on the path of matter-attachment and the way of thinking that keeps him on the path of matter-detachment. The way of thinking of the poverty of spirit that acknowledges that no man knows the will, the thoughts, of God.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Animus: Then I asked her "So, what would the universe be like if there were no one experiencing it?" she stared blankly "It would be like it wasn't" I said.
Precisely!

When the object disappears, so does the subject disappear. What remains? Pure Awareness. What is the nature of this Pure Awareness that sees no object or subject? No man can say. And yet, there 'it' is. When this wisdom of Pure Awareness is first encountered, its revelation of wholeness, perfect, purity and completeness cannot be sustained. Why? The projection or emanation of the universe has been believed to be the totality of its life for so long, that it is the way of gradual transcendence of this belief that brings about complete liberation of attachment to appearing subjects and objects.

I relate to the essence of your vision when you say:
Its kind of like if you have an infinite number of possible universes, and only one in which there is sentient life capable of perceiving the time that has elapsed, it is as if the time hasn't elapsed. Its as if, there always was sentient life.
which I would rephrase to say:

God is the Consciousness of the laws, principles and patterns of the infinity of Himself, of which the universe of time, distance, space and matter, sentient awareness, is but one. Which means that until the law, principle and pattern of the universe of TDSM is transcended, one cannot become aware of the infinity of themselves, the Pure Awareness of I and the Father are One.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Movingasalways:
All limits are being transcended is the state of the infinite.


Should the infinite step into the finite, it would cease being the infinite. Man wants to blend infinity with finiteness, to have his cake and eat it too; herein is the very core or crux of the appearance of the veil of ignorance.
That is not what I said. Please look again at what I wrote above.
BO1:
The bruising of the heel to the head being crushed is the perceived limitations applied by the transcendent. The purpose is the expression of what could not be without limitation (or the perception of such). We learn to love the limit because without it - no express image or reflection of the face of God.

God is not playing chess - he is playing a very advanced game of solitaire.

Moving:
No man knows the intent of God, the mind of God. Why? Man is not a creator, man is a manipulator of matter. Including all forms of matter that are his thoughts about the intent of God. This is the wisdom of the Father of Genesis 1 [the Creator] and of the Lord God of Genesis 2 [the manipulator of the dust of the ground].
I agree, that is why I know the heart and mind of God.
I know even as I have been known. See - 1 Cor. 13

What animates your body, mind, and consciousness? Is it less than the infinite? Is God sharing his entire being with you?
"God is not a man that he should lie." "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are my ways your ways, saith the Lord."
We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.

However, as it is written:
“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived
the things God has prepared for those who love him."

these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.

“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”

But we have the mind of Christ.
-1 Corinthians 2 - selected quotes
He went to sleep in you ;) - glad you woke him up from his Rip Van Winklehood.


No, I, as his emanation of matter, went to sleep in Him. He, as the Christ Principle, woke me up from my Rip Van Winklehood. Now, being that I am awake, I am the activity of consciousness that is "mortality being swallowed of Life."
Same is as same is.
"For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His. Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest."
- Hebrews 4:10
The Jewish mystics say that in the creation story is the secret of the universe.


The creation story, yes, which is the story of The Lord God and Adam/Eve, the interpreter of the dust/mist of the ground. Creation Itself, the Father Himself? There is no story in the Father; He is without history, without time, without space and without matter. Clean off your dust, wipe away your mist, your story, and He appears.
I thought you just said:
No man knows the intent of God, the mind of God. Why? Man is not a creator, man is a manipulator of matter.
Man wants to blend infinity with finiteness, have his cake and eat it too
If God created, as you say here, there most certainly is a story. If God created, there was an action with intent.
This is the part you must reconcile.
Go easy on God, its his first time being you.

"For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." It is not the other way around as you present above.
"God is in you of a truth."
" Christ in you, the hope of glory."
"nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."
" you are in Christ and Christ is in you and Christ is in God."
"Greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world."
Etc. etc. etc.

And the way we can know the mind and heart of God:
"I do not even examine myself ... but the one who examines me is the Lord."
Moving:
I see the consciousness of the Lord God as being an emanation or extension of the Consciousness of the Father, with all that is experienced as Adam/Eve, the serpent, and then, of the ascending Christ, as the Totality of the journey of the emanation, and of transcendence of the emanation.
So you do know the mind of God after all?

Who then, are you debating with?
Yup, God created God. The impossible was accomplished.


God already was God before the Lord God appeared in God.
How do you know this?
There can be no creation at all without limits so we learn to love them. All the while in a state of transcendent lifting of the veil of flesh.


What you are suggesting is that matter creates matter, or flesh creates flesh. If this is so, when we lift the veil of flesh, will we not find more flesh? Again, what you present is the veil over your eyes of believing that the Lord God of appearance, of dualism, is the Father of Creation, of nondual ISNESS.
Nope - you got me completely wrong. Look again please and do try not to put me in a previous conversation box.
movingalways:
The Christ principle is that which comes to set the captives free from the deception of the Lord God/serpent [veiled sense awareness] and shows the way to transcend the knowledge of the tree of good and evil.

BO1:
True indeed. Good and evil is a choice. Even Judas Iscariot was an expression of consciousness as is the Devil.

He is the perfect Devil, is he not? The express image is effected to a state of reconciliation when we can look Satan in the eye and say "welcome; because you also are loved." Then we may hear - from the bowels of darkness echo back " I am love."

Moving:
Yes, Judas was the perfect Devil, not because he chose evil over good, but because he remained in ignorance as to what belief in choice, in good and evil, really was - the appearance of the Lord God of time, distance, space and matter. Jesus had the wisdom Judas lacked; Jesus realized that when the Lord God of TDSM was eliminated from his consciousness, the Father of no-time, no-distance, no-space and no-matter would be fully revealed. This elimination of appearance or illusion was not complete until he cried out on the cross of the illusion of matter, which he bore of his faith in the revelation of the Infinite Father, "it [my finite thought world] is finished."

Satan represents the lie that consciousness/life begins with the appearance of matter.
Well said
Oh - but God did grieve. God experienced pain, that is why sowing and reaping or karma exist. God was suffering and is looking to resolve his own pain, that is why creation came to be and he attempted to finally sleep.


Again, it was the principle of Adam, of belief that matter is real that fell asleep, not the Father of finished Creation, the law of the Spirit of life. If the Father is asleep on the job, God help us all! :-)
He learns a great deal by and through your experience.
Of course. It is difficult for most to think of the Totality of all God as experiencing suffering. I can assure you, he still is. You are helping in that you are expressing the nondual in a state of transcendent being.



If the Totality of all God is experiencing suffering, then, truly, we are trapped in hell for the eternity of our awareness.
Nope - you are the answer, that is why you are here.
No man knows The Totality of God. No man knows about the Totality of God. What man does know, however, is the way of thinking that keeps him on the path of matter-attachment and the way of thinking that keeps him on the path of matter-detachment.
You say this above.

And then this?
The way of thinking of the poverty of spirit that acknowledges that no man knows the will, the thoughts, of God.
You are contradicting yourself.
If all you can know is matter attachment then you cannot possibly know if you know the mind of God or not, true?

I mean, how would you know what you do know?
Maranatha
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

The answer to the question arrived a long time ago.

People who make much ado of God and Scripture in the human conversation,
collectively turn to the rest of us and make a move,
the move is,
We're OK, you're not.

In that move the rest of us are deemed to be handled.

Then these people turn to each other, making much ado of God and Scripture and find differences in each others interpretation of God and Scripture,
and make another move,
the move is,
I'm OK, you're not.

In that way they have deemed to have each other handled.

There's another move,
it is,

it's empty and meaningless
cousinbasil
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:26 am
Location: Garment District

Re: The Question

Post by cousinbasil »

Animus wrote:One will eventually see that the world is perfection, manifest existence is perfect, not merely the uncaused. What the uncaused tells us is that to be perfect one has to be flawed, because perfection in and of itself doesn't do anything or want anything, it has no reason to, so it creates reasons for things to happen, and that is perfection.
Right, time and space, room to grow. Perfect implies no more can be added or done. Perfect would not need time and space. If I am not inferring too much, you are saying perfection necessitates love.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Dennis Mahar wrote:The answer to the question arrived a long time ago.

People who make much ado of God and Scripture in the human conversation,
collectively turn to the rest of us and make a move,
the move is,
We're OK, you're not.
I was talking and responding to scripture being quoted by a specific person. If you do not know scripture or were not being responded to, how were you being treated?
In that move the rest of us are deemed to be handled.
Most do create boxes that they fit others into; how is that working for you?
Then these people turn to each other, making much ado of God and Scripture and find differences in each others interpretation of God and Scripture,
and make another move,
the move is,
I'm OK, you're not.

In that way they have deemed to have each other handled.
Are you trying to handle me?
There's another move,
it is,

it's empty and meaningless
Good luck with that meaningless pursuit there.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

You just made a move.
Get it?
every breath you take.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Beingof1: I mean, how would you know what you do know?
I know nothing. Everything I write about is the fruit of releasing my interpretation of matter as if it is real. I recognize no absolute or objective truth anywhere in the world of thought, for thinking is an expression of dualism-relativity.

What I discovered on my road to the core of every thought I think, is that whatever subjective-objective visions of dual-relativity that come from that core are of two directions of intent: either of pride that one knows the truth of themselves or God, or the humility of realization that because of the cloud of dualism covering their eyes/I, no such truth exists. Either way, there is a story to tell.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Your move Pam,
is that there is no move,
which is a move,
in the moving always.

Is that it?
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

movingalways wrote:
Beingof1: I mean, how would you know what you do know?
I know nothing. Everything I write about is the fruit of releasing my interpretation of matter as if it is real. I recognize no absolute or objective truth anywhere in the world of thought, for thinking is an expression of dualism-relativity.


Then you cannot possibly communicate at all - can you not see this?

You have painted yourself into a corner.
What I discovered on my road to the core of every thought I think, is that whatever subjective-objective visions of dual-relativity that come from that core are of two directions of intent: either of pride that one knows the truth of themselves or God, or the humility of realization that because of the cloud of dualism covering their eyes/I, no such truth exists. Either way, there is a story to tell.
How could there possibly be a story?

Every single solitary story, no matter where or how contains a conflict.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

You have painted yourself into a corner.
I'm getting that sense too, particularly in the expression 'in the world not of it'.
Which is impossible.
Ultimately the inquiry leads to non-duality.

'in the world not of it' discloses separation and gives the mood aloofness which suggests ego trip.

We can't say things like,
in the world,
not of the world,
belong here,
don't belong here,
want to get out of here

All those have intentionality, which fails to disclose true nature.
coming at it with the copulative verb,
gets us to,
I am World,
or better,
World,
or simply Tao!
that understanding gives the mood peace,
or simply true nature.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

movingalways wrote: I know nothing. Everything I write about is the fruit of releasing my interpretation of matter as if it is real. I recognize no absolute or objective truth anywhere in the world of thought, for thinking is an expression of dualism-relativity.
Beingof1: Then you cannot possibly communicate at all - can you not see this?
The very nature of communication is based on a sharing of individual-collective relatedness of sense awareness, which as I already identified, has nothing to do with the knowing the spirit reality of oneself.
You have painted yourself into a corner.
Every sentient being of a sense-memory is painted into the same corner of his moment by moment sense memory recall. This is the emanation of the creature of which Eckhart spoke in Diebert's thread on the poverty of spirit. Breaking free of the corner is the task of the one who no longer desires to be a memory to himself, regardless of how moral or objective or logical such a memory-self is believed to be.
How could there possibly be a story?

Every single solitary story, no matter where or how contains a conflict.
First you ask me how there possibly could be a story, and then, you say that every story contains a conflict. This is itself a conflicted view, so perhaps for you, conflict is truth.

I know of no creature of DNA who is not a slave of their history. For the creature called man who is covered not only of his sense history, but of his intellectual history, he must use his history to exit his history. That is, to use the language of the metaphorical Creator Self that swallows or absorbs the mythical, forming self of the dust and the mist of the ground.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis: I'm getting that sense too, particularly in the expression 'in the world not of it'.
Which is impossible.
Define for me what these words mean to you before you tell me the living of them is impossible.
Ultimately the inquiry leads to non-duality.
And when you arrive to your discovery of your non-dual you, and yet continue to divide your world into dualities, what is this saying to you about you?
'in the world not of it' discloses separation and gives the mood aloofness which suggests ego trip.
Any mood of aloofness you get, is your mood.
We can't say things like,
in the world,
not of the world,
belong here,
don't belong here,
want to get out of here
Why, because you say we can't?
All those have intentionality, which fails to disclose true nature.
coming at it with the copulative verb,
gets us to,
I am World,
or better,
World,
or simply Tao!
that understanding gives the mood peace,
or simply true nature.
If this were so, you would see my words as coming from this same spot of 'simply Tao', and would not be telling me what I can and cannot say in my "Tao of Pam."
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Just tracking the concepts Pam and the mood they carry.
Conversations happen as mildly combative.
Concepts are putting ground in what is groundless and as I write and put some ground in, I get, as I write, how another can rip the ground away from me.
So, I find your voice has integrity Pam, arising as it does in a sea of voices..arising in a sea of integrities and not so integrities..

There's something about 'the voice', as it were, that is not the words that issueth but the 'from' out of which the words issueth..

It's the 'from' that is my Listening to..

It's the 'from' that vanishes all the grand conceptualising...

And remembers me to true nature..that is always/already 'Siren Calling'..
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis: And remembers me to true nature..that is always/already 'Siren Calling'..
Siren calling
Hearing sun,
Skin of words
On fire.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

There's nothing to say,
yet in saying that something is said..

What is a conversation?

A rig?
Like equipment to ride on.
That's going where exactly?

Just for the sake of it?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

A conversation is a dance of revelation and of transcendence, and of this dance, the mystery of one's being is known. Reason, to me, is as mysterious as love. Both reason and love are of the dance of relationship, but only love knows its depth.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

A conversation is a dance of revelation and of transcendence, and of this dance, the mystery of one's being is known. Reason, to me, is as mysterious as love. Both reason and love are of the dance of relationship, but only love knows its depth.
The overwhelming instance of conversation
appears to be thrown as social animal exchanging noises?
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

A conversation is a dance of revelation and of transcendence, and of this dance, the mystery of one's being is known. Reason, to me, is as mysterious as love. Both reason and love are of the dance of relationship, but only love knows its depth.
So, what you're talking about is a possibility conversation has for transformation that is not merely exchanging noises?

Is that your conversation with conscience?


If there's one thing paramount about being around you, for me it's the opportunity to be reminded of what's possible for conversation. I'd also say it's the opportunity to be reminded of what's possible for being for human beings.
What I get from you is being fully expressed in speaking that doesn't require talking a lot.
These are a few of my favourite things.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: The Question

Post by jufa »

A conversation towards, or with another is always a conversation of raisisng the dead of ones self, for it is always a remembrance of that which has filled the speakers of events in their lives which are resurrected to live in the moment of their lives now, which eliminated the reality of what is taking place now and is given to complete the task of today.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
Locked