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

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis: 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?
Whatever comes out of our mouth is a reflection of the activity of analysis of our perception of two, which is the wisdom of conscience. If our analysis is to compare a thing with a thing, we are speaking from our human body conscience, or our Adam/Eve awareness of good and evil reasoning. If our analysis is to reconcile all things to God, taking no thought of good or evil, we are speaking from our conscience of soul-spirit union, our Christ awareness of love or undivided sight. Which means it is not conversation arising of our human conscience of dualism that transforms, it is the residing in the Christ conscience of reconciliation that is the transforming agent.
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.
Thank you, but what I write is not about being a human being. It is about being a soul giving itself to God, without question. The question must die if God is to become the consuming fire of one's conscience. As long as the question is alive, the dualism of conscience is not a subtle objectification of God for the sake of reconciling all things of our awareness unto Him, but rather, of tearing God in two for the sake of our conditioning to doubt.
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.
In the room we make that is empty of the question, there are words, yes, but they are words of the subtle dualism of the Christ or the Buddha reconciling this dualism unto its source, the light of pure awareness. Where the Christ or the Buddha is, 'few' is also. :-)
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

As long as the question is alive, the dualism of conscience is not a subtle objectification of God for the sake of reconciling all things of our awareness unto Him, but rather, of tearing God in two for the sake of our conditioning to doubt.
If I stand with God as a question.
What happens?

In ordinary thinking this will happen:
I draw back.
Uncertainty floods in.
I question God. I doubt God.
Then I have to believe ( theist).
or, disbelieve (atheist)

In transformational thinking this will happen:
belief in God sells God too short, it is God as a concept, it doesn't give the living, thrilling experience of God.
God has to be open as inquiry and gotten to know in a minty fresh way each day would constitute 'I stand with God as a question'.

belief in God is plastic.
concept of God is plastic.

"God is a judgemental, interventionist fellow, lurking in the wings, ever ready to appear dispensing punishment and reward'...
is a plastic understanding...because it's belief and concept.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Whatever is your understanding of God will reflect back to you the essence of the answer to your question to God. Why? Because you are not separate from your understanding of God. Which means that if you believe God is a human fellow like you who thinks in terms of good and evil, then that is the fellow who will answer your inquiries about conscience. The only transformation that happens in this relationship is one of going back and forth between thoughts of good and of evil, which means there can be no 'breaking through' the dualism of this God of self's judgment. In other words, one is caught in the hell of his human God.

However, the moment your understanding of God is that It is beyond every dual belief you could possibly have of It, that It is wholly invisible to your fragmented intellectual comprehension, then the questioning of God ends and the journey of God, in Christ [you] reconciling [absorbing/gathering] the world unto Himself, begins. This spot of surrender to the unknown God is the breaking through of one's human dualism, and it is here, in this spot of giving one's soul to the unknown invisible that transformation into one's own unknown invisibility begins.

This is why it is said that God is not mocked, and that no thought returns void.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

In my words, for me,
Is this what you are saying?

If I make a move on God conceptually and set the 'conception' in stone as belief.
That's all I've come up with,
except that the concept lives me and has me missing the experience of awe...
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis,

You are always in conscious union with your thoughts about the God of you, which means whatever you think God is, you are also, which means if it is awe that you want to be in this moment, you will be your understanding of awe, which means you will also be vulnerable to the God of absence of your understanding of awe.

The Gospel of Thomas speaks of this wisdom of being of the living father, the living word of "you are what you think you are" in verse 3:
Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."
My interpretation of Jesus' last statement in relation to your God of awe is that to be in conscious union with a God of the resurrected thought, 'awe', is to be in poverty of dependency upon the shadow of this resurrection.

Therefore, the goal of the one who desires to be liberated from this poverty of having to think upon a God who must be resurrected of the opposites of the earth to be known, is to cease thinking upon God in this way. The error most human minds make is in the assuming that if one cannot have their God of the earth, their God of question, they have no God at all. Not so. But what has to happen so that the living father of I Am can be the God of one's conscious union, is that one must be willing to sacrifice every earth idea of God, including awe.

This journey of sacrificing one's God of the earth then becomes their living father [living word], the Way of repentance and of reconciliation, of making the two one, described in scripture as "the consuming fire of God." What is being consumed? One's belief that the outer is separate from the inner [the arise of dualism], one's earth body of the opposites of resurrected, dead thoughts, aka, one's living soul/idea of self.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Pam,
Therefore, the goal of the one who desires to be liberated from this poverty of having to think upon a God who must be resurrected of the opposites of the earth to be known, is to cease thinking upon God in this way. The error most human minds make is in the assuming that if one cannot have their God of the earth, their God of question, they have no God at all. Not so. But what has to happen so that the living father of I Am can be the God of one's conscious union, is that one must be willing to sacrifice every earth idea of God, including awe.
I can't claim 'fullness of enlightenment'.
I can claim confidently 'beginner's mind'.
A movement into, an access to, a threshold into enlightenment, maybe the first rung on the ladder.
Beginner's mind constituted in astonishment, awe, wonder.
like a baby.

I know that.
there's things I don't know.
there's things I don't know I don't know.

You are taking me into 'I don't know' and 'I don't know I don't know' territory.
It's not familiar.
Are you familiar in that territory?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis: I can't claim 'fullness of enlightenment'.
Nor can I, for I do not know what this is. I can only be this moment of being dark to the fullness of my light.
I can claim confidently 'beginner's mind'.
A movement into, an access to, a threshold into enlightenment, maybe the first rung on the ladder.
Beginner's mind constituted in astonishment, awe, wonder.
like a baby.
Beginner's mind to you is awe and wonder; beginner's mind to me is that 'spot' beyond every human interpretation of their pure sense awareness, of which awe and wonder are included.

I do not comprehend any universally experienced reality ['truth'] except that of pure sense awareness. How one interprets this universal reality, well, that is up to them. Some interpret this spot of pure sense awareness as the rebirth of the human ego of individual dualism, as in Nietzsche's concept of the ubermensch. This, obviously, is not the foundation from which I live my post-pure-sense-awareness-of-me discovery. Me? I am of the school of thought that believes that my sense awareness is not the beginning point of my conscious awareness, that it is a veil that covers the conscious awareness of me that is aware of things in their formless state. And that it is my task, in this realm of being veiled of my senses, to think thoughts dedicated only toward this goal of being lifted of this veil.
I know that.
there's things I don't know.
there's things I don't know I don't know.
Like everyone, you will have to find out for yourself what it is "to know oneself." Question until you believe you have found the thought direction of you. Perhaps it will be neither of the outward direction of the ubermensch mentality or of the inner direction of the removal-of-the-veil mentality, perhaps you will discover something entirely different. If you do, I will be all ears. :-)
You are taking me into 'I don't know' and 'I don't know I don't know' territory.
It's not familiar.
Are you familiar in that territory?
I am familiar, by way of my living philosophy, only with my thought world of reconciling my sense awareness unto my spirit awareness. This is the world you enter when you enter the world of Pam.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Beginner's mind to you is awe and wonder.
It's always minty fresh. Doesn't matter how many years it's been here. It's always spanking new.
It can't deteriorate, age, break down.
It's always presenting a new face. There's always an original cut that hasn't shown up before.
The grass just grows automatically. Hello grass!. The grass comes out of it.
The dog comes out of it. Hello puppy!
The human comes out of it. G'day mate!
You can't distinguish it's existence from what it creates. It gleams in what it creates. It's undeniable reality.
It's smaller than a quark and bigger than a universe. You can't miss it. It's here, there everywhere. Up, down, before, after, under, above.
It serves and it rules with a steely-eyed indifference.
Everything starts with it, comes from it, and is claimed back to it.
It's there in every nook and cranny...actually there's nothing else there.
Astonishing?
Awed?
beginner's mind to me is that 'spot' beyond every human interpretation of their pure sense awareness, of which awe and wonder are included.
Is the 'spot' the minty fresh?
as in Nietzsche's concept of the ubermensch
wasn't he saying, why drag your feet around while immersed in this majesty of being?
be inspiring?
I get you as being inspiring in the way Pam can be inspiring.
is there anything not inspiring?
Inspired?

What's a veil?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Pam: Beginner's mind to you is awe and wonder.
Dennis: It's always minty fresh. Doesn't matter how many years it's been here. It's always spanking new.
It can't deteriorate, age, break down.
It's always presenting a new face. There's always an original cut that hasn't shown up before.
The grass just grows automatically. Hello grass!. The grass comes out of it.
The dog comes out of it. Hello puppy!
The human comes out of it. G'day mate!
You can't distinguish it's existence from what it creates. It gleams in what it creates. It's undeniable reality.
It's smaller than a quark and bigger than a universe. You can't miss it. It's here, there everywhere. Up, down, before, after, under, above.
It serves and it rules with a steely-eyed indifference.
Everything starts with it, comes from it, and is claimed back to it.
It's there in every nook and cranny...actually there's nothing else there.
Astonishing?
Awed?
No, because:

a) what you present to me of your minty-fresh world sounds lovely when you are speaking of puppies and grass and g'day mate, but how does your 'minty-fresh' view relate to the world of the extermination of six million jews, or the world of serial rapists or of child pornographers?

b) I have personally been at the receiving end of your 'minty-fresh' gleaming world of 'awe', and that is, your subjective-objective projection upon my revelation of an event of my personal life, to the point of beginning a thread dedicated wholly to your 'fresh minty' interpretation of 'what Pam is about.' I do not consider this way of thinking to be either fresh or inspiring, more of the nature of gossip and chatter. I see no gathering of wisdom in the participation of such 'awe.'
Pam: beginner's mind to me is that 'spot' beyond every human interpretation of their pure sense awareness, of which awe and wonder are included.
Dennis: Is the 'spot' the minty fresh?
Obviously, according to my interpretation of your interpretation of the 'minty fresh,' no, it is not that.
Pam: as in Nietzsche's concept of the ubermensch

Dennis: wasn't he saying, why drag your feet around while immersed in this majesty of being?
be inspiring?
I get you as being inspiring in the way Pam can be inspiring.
is there anything not inspiring?
Inspired?
Of my knowledge of Nietzsche, he did not use the term 'majesty of being.'

And, as noted above, yes, there are things that to me, are not inspiring.
What's a veil?
A metaphor to suggest the covering of our pure spirit awareness of our sense body of thoughts.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

but how does your 'minty-fresh' view relate to the world of the extermination of six million jews, or the world of serial rapists or of child pornographers?
They're looking for happiness in all the wrong places!

I cannot tell if what the world considers 'happiness' is happiness or not. All I know is that when I consider the way they go about attaining it, I see them carried away headlong, grim and obsessed, in the general onrush of the human herd, unable to stop themselves or to change their direction. All the while they claim to be just on the point of attaining happiness....Chuang-tzu.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

The problem with 'looking for happiness' is in the looking and the happiness. To look for oneself to make oneself happy is to admit to oneself that one is not, in this very moment, 'happy' with themselves. Does one not have to be aware of being unhappy before they can seek happiness, and in the seeking for happiness, is not its duality, unhappiness, not kept alive in their consciousness, and in the consciousness of all who come into their presence?

Hitler believed happiness resided in his idea of a purified Germany, not only for himself, but for all Germans, and to that end, caused a great deal of unhappiness for the world, which to this day, is still being experienced. This is an extreme example, to be sure, but it is the extreme examples that can awaken us to the inherent problem with believing our "I"dentity exists 'out there' and is not already complete 'in here.'

How many philosophers have attempted to attain liberation by reliance on human idea(l)s, such as happiness, only to discover that they themselves could not live, in every moment of their existence, by the very philosophy they were expounding. Why? Because, where there is dualism, the thought of 'happiness' and 'unhappiness', there exists an awareness of impermanence and of the shadow of resurrection, and the 'kickback' factor of the unspoken opposite.

Why seek happiness when you are, in this very moment, of life itself, where no concept of happiness exists? Can you find that 'nondual' spot within you that is empty of your concepts of you, but is full of the pure awareness of you? And once found, can you stand on that spot so as to allow it to expand within you, so that eventually, that spot of nondual awareness becomes greater than your darkness of dualism that must look for you in grass, in puppies and other people? And, when you become so strong in the standing in this nondual 'spot' of you, that it becomes that open space within you that spontaneously absorbs any dualism you speak? This absorption of the dual into the nondual, within the light of man himself, is what I meant by 'to be in the world, but not of the world.'
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

I'm saying 'it' is always minty fresh.
You didn't read me.
I'm not talking about 'me' and 'you'.
me and you are mental constructs.

The ultimate truth of existence is comprehended by the term "emptiness" (sunyata), one of the subtlest and most sophisticated concepts in the philosophical armory of Mahayana Buddhism. Understanding sunyata entails the awareness that all things rely for their existence on causal factors and as such are devoid of any permanent "own-being" (svabhava). The purely relative existence of all dharmas [phenomena] taught by this doctrine entails the realization that the things of this world, the self (atman) included, are merely the reifications of conceptual and linguistic distinctions formed under the productive influence of fundamental ignorance (avidya). Insofar as things of this world derive their reality solely from a nexus of causal conditions (pratitya-samutpada), their nature, what they all share, is precisely a "lack" of self-nature.

Get beyond 'me/'you'.
where's the problem?
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Dennis Mahar »

The piercing, steely gaze of sunyata notices thusly:

Is the spontaneous appearance of grass, constituted in grass self-authoring?...No.
Is the spontaneous appearance of dog, constituted in dog self authoring?...No.
Is the spontaneous appearance of human being, constituted in human being self authoring?..No.

Is 'it' present in these appearances?...Yes.
Do these appearances gleam 'it'...Yes.
Are these appearances 'it'...Yes.

Is Hitler 'it'...Yes.

Does the condition 'ignorance' gleam 'it'...Yes.
Does the condition 'enlightened' gleam 'it'...Yes.

Does the condition 'separate me' gleam 'it'...Yes.
Does the condition 'separate you' gleam 'it'...Yes.

What is not gleaming 'it'...nothing.

A crow caws.
A scientist sees a category with properties.
Sunyata sees a crow, a caw, a scientist categorising and sunyata itself.

You can't distinguish 'it's' existence from what it creates. It gleams in what it creates. It's undeniable reality.

Astonishing?
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

movingalways:
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?

Moving: 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.
Then what is the " knowing the spirit reality of oneself"?
BO1:You have painted yourself into a corner.

Moving: 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.
Because I have memory does not mean I am in a corner. It means I have awareness.

Awareness does not define your limits nor does your memory. These are defined by a belief. If you believe, for example, (I know you do not) " I am a physical body", then all of your worldview would be limited to this definition of what you can experience.
BO1:How could there possibly be a story?

Every single solitary story, no matter where or how contains a conflict.

Moving: 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.
That is because you left out your quote of what I responded to, this part:
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.
This is why I asked you how there could be a story.
We together now?
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.
If I formed the dust from the ground - then - I am beyond my story, yes?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Then what is the " knowing the spirit reality of oneself"?
It is the awareness that you are of the law of the spirit of life, of which being of the dust of the ground (belief in self) is but an extension or an emanation.

Because I have memory does not mean I am in a corner. It means I have awareness.
Awareness is not dependent on memory; however, memory is dependent on awareness. The 'corner' of memory is the creature emanation that is to be 'broken through' so that one can be released from the cycle of birth and of death of sense awareness and restored to their pure spirit awareness.
Awareness does not define your limits nor does your memory. These are defined by a belief. If you believe, for example, (I know you do not) " I am a physical body", then all of your worldview would be limited to this definition of what you can experience.
It is true that there are no limits in one's awareness, and though it is also true that one's memory can produce infinite thought patterns, none of these temporal patterns are of one's pure spirit awareness, which unlike temporal memory thoughts, is neither born nor dies.

If I formed the dust from the ground - then - I am beyond my story, yes?
Yes, precisely! And when this is realized, it is time to stop collecting dust (experiencing) no?
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

movingalways:
BO1: Then what is the " knowing the spirit reality of oneself"?

Moving: It is the awareness that you are of the law of the spirit of life, of which being of the dust of the ground (belief in self) is but an extension or an emanation.
This does create a duality.
If there is the state of being void of duality (and I know there is), why does the dust of the ground exist and therefore, duality?
,
BO1: Because I have memory does not mean I am in a corner. It means I have awareness.

Moving: Awareness is not dependent on memory; however, memory is dependent on awareness.
True.
The 'corner' of memory is the creature emanation that is to be 'broken through' so that one can be released from the cycle of birth and of death of sense awareness and restored to their pure spirit awareness.
It is impossible to forgo all memory. Memory, in fact, enhances the infinite.

To attempt to reformat the hardrive of ones memory is a futile attempt.

My question remains. If the infinite state is void of duality, why is there creation at all?
BO1: Awareness does not define your limits nor does your memory. These are defined by a belief. If you believe, for example, (I know you do not) " I am a physical body", then all of your worldview would be limited to this definition of what you can experience.

Moving: It is true that there are no limits in one's awareness, and though it is also true that one's memory can produce infinite thought patterns, none of these temporal patterns are of one's pure spirit awareness, which unlike temporal memory thoughts, is neither born nor dies.
If there are no limits in awareness, it is neither temporary nor limited to patterns. It is therefore, infinite.
If it is infinite, it is not limited to birth or death but remains in a constant state of reflection, yes?


"Master, how many lives have you lived"?
"As many times as I have been born."
"How many times have you been born"?
"I cannot remember."

Memory allows for logic of reflection.
BO1: If I formed the dust from the ground - then - I am beyond my story, yes?

Moving: Yes, precisely! And when this is realized, it is time to stop collecting dust (experiencing) no?
There are two components to reality.
The stillness of pure awareness. It never changes, from every memory. It was always the you looking out and observing from the time you were a little girl. This is the infinite nondual state of innocence that gives freely to all experience. This state of observation is without needs, properties, or judgments of any kind.

The infinite flux of experience - the unceasing nonstop change. The only constant in experience is the state of infinite change.

To enjoin these two halves of reality is where the balance of the razors edge of truth lies. Most will focus on one or the other and become imbalanced. It is the infinite stillness or observation of infinite flux or change.

I AM
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

This does create a duality.
If there is the state of being void of duality (and I know there is), why does the dust of the ground exist and therefore, duality?
Wisdom observes that the dust of the ground appears in the Godhead; however, its cause no man can know, and that of man's appearance of this ground [the appearance of the subjective-objective awareness of Adam/Eve] arises the dual interpretation of form to be 'good form' and 'evil form.'
It is impossible to forgo all memory. Memory, in fact, enhances the infinite.
The infinite cannot be infinite if it must pause to 'think about', remember, a finite event. This is the meaning of the appearance of the 'but' in Genesis 2, the darkness of the sense-dependent Lord God of the dust and the mist of the ground. The infinite Father of Genesis 1, unlike the finite Lord God of Genesis 2, is a seamless contemplation of consciousness, or omniety of being that is without darkness of the shadow of death of the past and/or future 'events.'

The belief that it is impossible to forgo all memory is what the human mind of being conditioned to the earth, tells us is so [the serpent in the garden of the senses]. As long as we believe our minds that are attached to the past/future, we remain being recycled or recircled or reborn of the creature emanation.
To attempt to reformat the hardrive of ones memory is a futile attempt.
Who told you that?
My question remains. If the infinite state is void of duality, why is there creation at all?
Creation is the law of the spirit of life of awareness of the infinite I Am wherein no darkness of memory-duality exists. That which is of the dust of the ground is not creation, rather, it is the forming and reforming [remembering] of the law of sin and death, the law of the opposites, the law of the breath of the living soul. Check out Genesis 1 of the permanent creation of invisible spirit forms of the Father that 'are finished' (the nondual state) and Genesis 2 of the appearance of the law of gravity of the Lord God of the ever changing, dust forms of the mist and the ground (the state of dualism).
If there are no limits in awareness, it is neither temporary nor limited to patterns. It is therefore, infinite.
If it is infinite, it is not limited to birth or death but remains in a constant state of reflection, yes?
Awareness is indeed permanent and infinite and remains in a constant state of I Am contemplation, yes, with awareness of birth and death being one of these contemplations. A contemplation that reveals the temporal nature of birth and of death, therefore, its illusion, therefore, the need of transcending that which is illusory/not real.
"Master, how many lives have you lived"?
"As many times as I have been born."
"How many times have you been born"?
"I cannot remember."

Memory allows for logic of reflection.
We do not remember how many time we have been born, but the moment we realize that birth and death are of the temporal dust of the ground of our belief in dualism, and that we can transcend this 'making of what matters to us' so we can realize completely our nondual state of pure awareness, we begin to walk the walk of "God, in Christ, reconciling the world [of dust] unto Himself." Or as the Buddhas realize, step off the wheel of karma...
There are two components to reality.
There are two components to man's awareness of reality. This is a different insight than what you present above.
The stillness of pure awareness.


Man becomes aware of the stillness of pure awareness when he enters the wilderness/silence of his good and evil sense interpretations. Although he is made aware of his pure awareness by way of the stilling of his interpretative mind, he is not yet one with its infinite, nondual consciousness.
It never changes, from every memory. It was always the you looking out and observing from the time you were a little girl. This is the infinite nondual state of innocence that gives freely to all experience. This state of observation is without needs, properties, or judgments of any kind.
A memory changes in every moment of its reflection/recollection. When I was a little girl and 'this' happened, I can never recall that moment of happenstance of its exact essence-of-that-original moment ever. Whenever I recall 'this' event, it is always influenced by the good and evil thought continuum that is the sensing-intellectually expanded me since that event happened. This is what there is no such thing as an absolute 'truth.' Truth is in the living of 'this', a living awareness that can never be 'frozen' in a nondual state of innocence.

Sense recall is rooted in the tree of knowledge of good and evil, of which there is always a judgment applied. That is a good memory, or that is a bad memory is the inner dialoguing of the male/female ego of Adam/Eve of the dust of the ground.
The infinite flux of experience - the unceasing nonstop change. The only constant in experience is the state of infinite change.
Infinity cannot change, or there would be permanent chaos/darkness in the Mind of God.
To enjoin these two halves of reality is where the balance of the razors edge of truth lies. Most will focus on one or the other and become imbalanced. It is the infinite stillness or observation of infinite flux or change.
The nondual state is not a state of being made nondual; the nondual state is, was and always shall be - nondual. Reality is cannot be divided within itself and remain real. Only the man of sense awareness divides reality within himself.
I Am.


Yes, whatever it is you are aware of in this moment of being aware of you.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Movingalways:
BO1: This does create a duality.
If there is the state of being void of duality (and I know there is), why does the dust of the ground exist and therefore, duality?

Moving: Wisdom observes that the dust of the ground appears in the Godhead; however, its cause no man can know, and that of man's appearance of this ground [the appearance of the subjective-objective awareness of Adam/Eve] arises the dual interpretation of form to be 'good form' and 'evil form.'
You did not answer the question.
The question is not how but why?
BO1: It is impossible to forgo all memory. Memory, in fact, enhances the infinite.

Moving: The infinite cannot be infinite if it must pause to 'think about', remember, a finite event.
You said in an earlier post that awareness was infinite and I agree. For example: Look around you and start counting the objects in your awareness. We can quickly see there is an infinite amount of objects to be counted and yet - you are performing the hypertask in a finite amount of time.

Do you "pause" at the infinite field of awareness that you are right now experiencing? Does this mean your are not aware of the objects that is higher than can be counted?

Therefore; memory enhances the experience of your field (~) and therefore, Gods experience.
This is the meaning of the appearance of the 'but' in Genesis 2, the darkness of the sense-dependent Lord God of the dust and the mist of the ground. The infinite Father of Genesis 1, unlike the finite Lord God of Genesis 2, is a seamless contemplation of consciousness, or omniety of being that is without darkness of the shadow of death of the past and/or future 'events.'
Does the first God know about the second God?
The belief that it is impossible to forgo all memory is what the human mind of being conditioned to the earth, tells us is so [the serpent in the garden of the senses]. As long as we believe our minds that are attached to the past/future, we remain being recycled or recircled or reborn of the creature emanation.
You keep avoiding the question.
To attempt to reformat the hardrive of ones memory is a futile attempt.

Who told you that?
No one told me that - it is self evident that I remeber and always have. It is also the stunningly obvious in your posts that you experience the same.
My question remains. If the infinite state is void of duality, why is there creation at all?

Creation is the law of the spirit of life of awareness of the infinite I Am wherein no darkness of memory-duality exists.
If this is true, then you know nothing about it at all. You cannot speak of it as it is beyond your ken.
That which is of the dust of the ground is not creation, rather, it is the forming and reforming [remembering] of the law of sin and death, the law of the opposites, the law of the breath of the living soul. Check out Genesis 1 of the permanent creation of invisible spirit forms of the Father that 'are finished' (the nondual state) and Genesis 2 of the appearance of the law of gravity of the Lord God of the ever changing, dust forms of the mist and the ground (the state of dualism).
This is my question.
Why?
If there are no limits in awareness, it is neither temporary nor limited to patterns. It is therefore, infinite.
If it is infinite, it is not limited to birth or death but remains in a constant state of reflection, yes?

Awareness is indeed permanent and infinite and remains in a constant state of I Am contemplation, yes,
Contemplation of what exactly?
with awareness of birth and death being one of these contemplations. A contemplation that reveals the temporal nature of birth and of death, therefore, its illusion, therefore, the need of transcending that which is illusory/not real.
Is the nondual responsible?
How many times will you evade the question?
BO!: "Master, how many lives have you lived"?
"As many times as I have been born."
"How many times have you been born"?
"I cannot remember."

Memory allows for logic of reflection.

Moving: We do not remember how many time we have been born, but the moment we realize that birth and death are of the temporal dust of the ground of our belief in dualism, and that we can transcend this 'making of what matters to us' so we can realize completely our nondual state of pure awareness, we begin to walk the walk of "God, in Christ, reconciling the world [of dust] unto Himself." Or as the Buddhas realize, step off the wheel of karma...
This is profound sis.
There are two components to reality.

There are two components to man's awareness of reality. This is a different insight than what you present above.
As long as you do verbal gymnastics to avoid the pertinent - you can say this. You must answer ALL questions without avoiding any to experience the whole truth.

I am out of time and will be back.
Maranatha
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Movingalways:

Did Jesus sin when he said " eat bread and drink wine to remember me"?
He was asking us to remember him, did he fall into error?

If memory is the root cause of the problem, we should just use shock treatment of the frontal lobes to bring the Kingdom of God down maybe?
I know; lets all dunk our heads under water and take a deep breath to cure that awfull thing called memory?

I know this is biting sarcasm - but doggonit - you are not thinking here at all. You are simply ignoring reality and clinging to a blind belief system. I was hoping we could actually explore the mystery of the ages together sis.
BO1: There are two components to reality.

moving: There are two components to man's awareness of reality. This is a different insight than what you present above.
Is God separate from you? Why did Jesus say "make them one Father, as you and I are one"?
BO1: The stillness of pure awareness.

Moving: Man becomes aware of the stillness of pure awareness when he enters the wilderness/silence of his good and evil sense interpretations. Although he is made aware of his pure awareness by way of the stilling of his interpretative mind, he is not yet one with its infinite, nondual consciousness.
Ok - how in blazes - and answer the question without avoiding it for your sake - are you gonna do that without knowing anything at all?
BO1: It never changes, from every memory. It was always the you looking out and observing from the time you were a little girl. This is the infinite nondual state of innocence that gives freely to all experience. This state of observation is without needs, properties, or judgments of any kind.

Moving: A memory changes in every moment of its reflection/recollection. When I was a little girl and 'this' happened, I can never recall that moment of happenstance of its exact essence-of-that-original moment ever. Whenever I recall 'this' event, it is always influenced by the good and evil thought continuum that is the sensing-intellectually expanded me since that event happened. This is what there is no such thing as an absolute 'truth.' Truth is in the living of 'this', a living awareness that can never be 'frozen' in a nondual state of innocence.
No matter what you think right now, you only are aware of half of the reality. You are pretending the other half is not there by hiding it from yourself.

I am not influenced by dualities when I recall memory, why are you? You cannot click your heels together and make it all go away.

You really should ask.
Sense recall is rooted in the tree of knowledge of good and evil, of which there is always a judgment applied. That is a good memory, or that is a bad memory is the inner dialoguing of the male/female ego of Adam/Eve of the dust of the ground.
Nope - doesnt happen with me, wanna know why?
BO1: The infinite flux of experience - the unceasing nonstop change. The only constant in experience is the state of infinite change.

Moving: Infinity cannot change, or there would be permanent chaos/darkness in the Mind of God.
Is the universe in constant motion? If it is, does this put God in a rubber room?
BO1: To enjoin these two halves of reality is where the balance of the razors edge of truth lies. Most will focus on one or the other and become imbalanced. It is the infinite stillness or observation of infinite flux or change.

Moving: The nondual state is not a state of being made nondual; the nondual state is, was and always shall be - nondual. Reality is cannot be divided within itself and remain real. Only the man of sense awareness divides reality within himself.
Does the man who divides exist within this reality?
If yes, you are avoiding the question and in denial of what goes on everyday in the world and have created an ark of fabricated escapism.
Get a grip and answer the question or ask me.
I Am.

Yes, whatever it is you are aware of in this moment of being aware of you.
The center of consciousness is everywhere and the edge is nowhere.
User avatar
nitinnsk
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:00 pm

Re: The Question

Post by nitinnsk »

movingalways wrote:Martin Luther King Jr. said "there is a tension at the heart of the universe."
First of all Martin Luther was a bitch.So now I'm pretty sure its tranquil at the centre of the universe.

Second,this thread could as well not exist as most people here have envisioned God as human-only better.
God's secrets are hidden in the Bible or the Koran or whichever scripture you can think of.In that case it would become common knowledge and reality is something for you to find out.


God didnt create you.You came here-with a choice.Why-To find out 'why?' and to become better.End of story.


P.S-Martin Luther King Jr.-I spit on your grave.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Pam Seeback »

Beingof1: Did Jesus sin when he said " eat bread and drink wine to remember me"?
He was asking us to remember him, did he fall into error?
My interpretation of Jesus' words above is that to eat bread and drink wine is to realize that nothing of the law of the Spirit of life, including the appearance of flesh, is sinful.
If memory is the root cause of the problem, we should just use shock treatment of the frontal lobes to bring the Kingdom of God down maybe?
I know; lets all dunk our heads under water and take a deep breath to cure that awfull thing called memory?

I know this is biting sarcasm - but doggonit - you are not thinking here at all. You are simply ignoring reality and clinging to a blind belief system. I was hoping we could actually explore the mystery of the ages together sis.
Beingof1, if you have followed my posts here on the Genius forum, you will see that they address the transcendence of memory as a continuum of the death of the idea of self. A gradual expansion of Jesus' commandment to “be in the world, but not of the world.” As for exploring the mystery of the ages, been there, done that. This is why I stopped seeking "what is God?" when I discovered the wisdom of the relationship of the appearance of matter [dualism] to Its Source. For me, the seeing of this vision was the re-solving of the Infinite God/finite world 'mystery.'
Beingof1: There are two components to reality.
moving: There are two components to man's awareness of reality. This is a different insight than what you present above.
Beingof1: Is God separate from you? Why did Jesus say "make them one Father, as you and I are one"?
Jesus said "make them one Father, as you and I are one", because of the very belief you express above, your belief that the truth of the God of reality, is that God is divided in two and is on a journey to "realize his other half or side." This is man's belief about God, which is not the truth of the Father, who is not two, but one. Which means it is man's task to undo this belief - ergo, the "making them one Father, as you and I are one." Note he said "are one", not "becoming one."

And no, God, the law of the spirit of life, is not separate from me, whether I am living within my belief in dualism or living within my spirit-realization-dualism-transcendence.
Ok - how in blazes - and answer the question without avoiding it for your sake - are you gonna do that without knowing anything at all?
You believe you know what is good for my sake, and of the spirit of love, I acknowledge and honor your concern for my welfare. To my knowledge, I have not avoided your questions.

Travelling a path of thought that is 'right' for the traveller is not the same as knowing something absolutely, as in THE TRUTH. I do not claim to have a truth, or the truth. Only the thought continuum that says “yes, this is your way.” What I say may seem evasive to you, but this is not my intent. I am very careful about the words I use. When someone implies they have “the truth, or a truth”, that's when the “guru” syndrome rears its ugly head. If I must use the word truth and relate it to others who relate to my words, I identify my journey as the living truth of Pam, and if what I say relates to your living truth of _____, they hey, we can walk and talk this living truth together. Be spiritual friends, so to speak.
No matter what you think right now, you only are aware of half of the reality. You are pretending the other half is not there by hiding it from yourself.

I am not influenced by dualities when I recall memory, why are you? You cannot click your heels together and make it all go away.

You really should ask.
One of the “wisdom of the ages” of which you speak, and the wisdom of which I now reside, is the wisdom of the metaphysics of dualism. Which is not the wisdom of a reality-cut-in-two wherein one half is in darkness and the other half is in light, rather, the metaphysics of dualism is that there is a belief that there are two minds in God, or two sides to God, a belief that is metaphorically represented as the veil of the cherubim with the turning, flaming sword in Genesis 2. The turning, flaming sword is man's darkness of belief that God becomes conscious when matter appears in man's consciousness. That God needs to "see himself and interpret himself" in order to be God. That God "desires to know" God. The awakened one realizes this error by stilling the turning, flaming sword within himself, and seeing that God the Father knows Himself NOW, has always known himself NOW, and shall always know Himself NOW.

The moment you name something, as Adam named form, you are influenced by a duality. The duality of subject-object. The moment you then apply an “I think” to that name, you have then eaten from the knowledge of the tree of [the duality of] good and evil.
Is the universe in constant motion? If it is, does this put God in a rubber room?
The motion of thinking that arises of the turning, flaming sword does indeed put God in a rubber room, but only the God of the human mind of the turning, flaming, sword. The Spirit of God Himself, no.
Does the man who divides exist within this reality?
Yes. As a man thinks, so is he. As a man continues to think, so shall he remain. And, when he ceases dividing, the same law of the spirit of life applies.
If yes, you are avoiding the question and in denial of what goes on everyday in the world and have created an ark of fabricated escapism.
It is interesting to me that you acknowledge that man is not just a physical body, but that if I suggest that the physical body be disrobed, which is the dying of one's dual beliefs, you think I “have created an ark of fabricated escapism.”
Get a grip and answer the question or ask me.
I have answered your questions, every one. Now, your turn. Tell me how God can, in truth, be divided into two 'things' and also, in truth, remain the whole of himself.
The center of consciousness is everywhere and the edge is nowhere.
This statement is of no value to me unless you can explain to me how I attain such a consciousness. Especially if I continue dividing it in two.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Moving:
I have answered your questions, every one. Now, your turn. Tell me how God can, in truth, be divided into two 'things' and also, in truth, remain the whole of himself.
Let me try again - please pay attention.

Why did God create an environment of the experience of dualism if he is already complete and in a state of nonduality? If God is perfect why a universe at all?

Now do not avoid the question by explaining how man creates these dualities.

The question is why, why, why, why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why ,why? Why did God create?

If God is perfect and complete WHY did God create? Did you get the question yet?

Did you get this first of the two questions yet? It is not how man mangles Gods duality - it is WHY there is duality in a nondual God?
User avatar
nitinnsk
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:00 pm

Re: The Question

Post by nitinnsk »

Its not that God NEVER created,he did but not in the way you are perceiving it to be.You have chosen to be here.I've already said so but in more detail this time.In the words of Adi Shankara(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara:



"This entire universe of which we speak and think is nothing but Brahman [infinite consciousness]. Brahman dwells beyond the range of Maya [illusion]. There is nothing else."



Also He said human consciousness had begun as a ripple that decided to leave the ocean of consciousness the "timeless, space less and eternal".When it awakened to itself in this 'disconnected' state, the myth said, it forgot that it was part of the infinite ocean and felt isolated and separated.

Hope this helps.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

Apparently the question will remain one as when we have a tough one, it is easier to ignore it and let someone or something else do our thinking for us maybe?
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: The Question

Post by Beingof1 »

nitinnsk wrote:Its not that God NEVER created,he did but not in the way you are perceiving it to be.You have chosen to be here.I've already said so but in more detail this time.In the words of Adi Shankara(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara:



"This entire universe of which we speak and think is nothing but Brahman [infinite consciousness]. Brahman dwells beyond the range of Maya [illusion]. There is nothing else."



Also He said human consciousness had begun as a ripple that decided to leave the ocean of consciousness the "timeless, space less and eternal".When it awakened to itself in this 'disconnected' state, the myth said, it forgot that it was part of the infinite ocean and felt isolated and separated.

Hope this helps.
If the universe is infinite consciousness that interpenetrates everything, it is impossible "to leave the ocean of consciousness." There is no place that it is not. There is some truth in what you say but it still does not answer 'why'?

Will someone ever ask or shall we just pretend the answer has already been given?

No? For sure, whatever you do, do not ask me that question. Why, that would devalue comfy land.
Locked