or by our actions. Just an opinion. It is in religion's interest to
create a standarized version.
On May 26, 3:40 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
wrote:
> Or perhaps the whole sphere and scope of 'knowing' God is so huge that
> we invent our ways to understand what God is?
>
> On May 26, 12:42 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps we design our own version of God.
>
> > I don't have to go to war to understand a battle in history, do I? And
> > I will never understand a car engine but drive a car anyway- though I
> > guess I could undertand an engine- I just choose not to do so.
>
> > Re the roof: the house was a Dutch Colonial design and I had admired
> > one across town so I copied the same paint scheme- mushroom siding,
> > white window frames and black shutters except the roof was pale green
> > instead of charcoal or black so we painted it. Actually, we should
> > have light roofs and yet I still prefer a dark roof. Office buildings
> > are using gardens on their roofs to control temps- back to the jungle
> > in the canyons of commerce.
>
> > Good for you- keeping your talents- for they can be lost or die.
> > Someone asked me to paint her garden last week but I haven't painted
> > in 8 years. A lot drained away when I drank and was depressed with my
> > empty nest but I think I have turned the corner and am usually happy
> > again plus my health is very good except for the smoking. Lately, I
> > have enjoyed cooking again- from scratch so this week was a chicken
> > barley soup, blueberry muffins, cake for strawberry shortcake, etc.
> > Instead of frozen or prepared foods I keep portions in the freezer.
> > When my children flew away, I could hardly bear to cook or eat.
>
> > On May 25, 9:02 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Perhaps Rigsy, I guess that depends on who you want to define the word
> > > perfect?
>
> > > I like the idea that perfection meaning nothing else needing changing,
> > > which means of course perfection is a stagnant thing. As we know
> > > nowthing stays still all is in flux.
>
> > > If you belive that the universe is equated with the body of God, then
> > > it is clear that the universe is always moving, and so in this way we
> > > can say that at least the body of God is not perfect. Umm perhaps
> > > then when we say that God is perfect it is purely spirit we talk
> > > about?
>
> > > Yes indeed we can attain knowledge without experaince, what worth is
> > > it though without the experiances? I think the old adage that
> > > 'practice makes perfect' is very true. Us older people both 'know'
> > > more about the workings of the world and have the 'expriances' to go
> > > with the knowledge, this is wounderfull thing yes?
>
> > > I'm still learning to play the guitar, I have read and am still
> > > reading many books, tracts, downloaed bits and bobs, but it is the
> > > practice that will eventualy make me a better guitar player. In a
> > > very real way the practice or the experiancine of some endevour feeds
> > > the knowledge of it, the more practical experiances of a sphere of
> > > knowledge you grab, the better you are able to 'know' it.
>
> > > Famouse writters when asked how to be a better writter offten simply
> > > reply 'Just write'
>
> > > As to why you would paint your roof a diffrant colour, well perhaps
> > > you got bored with the old one?
>
> > > I'm curious about many things, I have learnt over the years (through
> > > experiance) to rein such curisotiy in, or risk my little mind
> > > explodeing!
>
> > > On May 25, 2:38 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > This would indicate God is imperfect, lee. Even humans can attain
> > > > knowledge without direct experience.
>
> > > > Weren't you curious about why I would paint a roof a different
> > > > color? :-)
>
> > > > On May 24, 10:29 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com"
>
> > > > <l...@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> > > > > I'm reading a book of short stories at the mo, one called The all-at
> > > > > once man, by R A Lafferty has this concept of before the begining.
> > > > > Paraphrasing wildly then:
>
> > > > > Before the begining was a perfect sphere spinning at a ferocious rate,
> > > > > it didn't know any of this for there was nothing else by which to
> > > > > measure such things.
>
> > > > > An infantisimal speck appared and the sphere had now had something
> > > > > with which to relate, to measure it's own existance and dimenseons and
> > > > > movment, and thus time was born.
>
> > > > > The sphere found that is was not perfect and this was because it was
> > > > > spinning at such a rate as to deform, it soon deformed enough to
> > > > > explode and all that is comes for the broken sphere.
>
> > > > > A similar thought occours in the set of books called Conversations
> > > > > with God. The premise is that God is, and God is all knowing, but
> > > > > being all knowing God decided that knowledge without experiance is
> > > > > worthless, hence the creation of matter out of the spirit of God.
>
> > > > > I'm not sure on this idea, but you who know me, know I am taken with
> > > > > the idea of matter from spirit.
>
> > > > > On May 24, 1:49 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > We have one mortal life but our spirit lives on through our works and
> > > > > > relationships. Our body is like the transport that our spirit drives.
> > > > > > Why then, would God be lonely and create Adam and Eve in the flesh?
> > > > > > What did he lack with the angels? All myth, of course.
>
> > > > > > On May 23, 10:46 am, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > All matter and all individualities are emanations from the One Self
> > > > > > > and it is in the nature of emanations to be dualistic. I know it hurts
> > > > > > > our pride to accept that we are mortals and have only this life , but
> > > > > > > if we change our perceptions a little and identify ourselves with the
> > > > > > > One Self instead of this body, then we would be having the right
> > > > > > > perspective and really be the One and only Atman.
>
> > > > > > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:31 PM, leerevdoug...@googlemail.com
>
> > > > > > > <l...@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I think perception is route to realisation perhaps.
>
> > > > > > > > Perception first, followed by evidance that such perceptions are valid
> > > > > > > > (if only subjectily in some cases) leading to realisations.
>
> > > > > > > > As to the Blake quote.
>
> > > > > > > > My and my oldest son where having a convo last night, I can't really
> > > > > > > > recall what it was about, but I asked him if he thought it at all
> > > > > > > > possible that a 'thing' can act outside of it's 'nature'.
>
> > > > > > > > Perhaps it is the nature of man to have blinkered perceptions. Like
> > > > > > > > the fly dog visualy percives in black an white, perhaps human kind
> > > > > > > > simply cannot percive any other realms than it is capable of?
>
> > > > > > > > On May 21, 12:12 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> I see your point, a good one too. At what point does perception
> > > > > > > >> become realization. But I would say that there is much more to
> > > > > > > >> perception than sensory perception. As William Blake pointed out: "If
> > > > > > > >> the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man
> > > > > > > >> as it is, infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all
> > > > > > > >> things through narrow chinks of his cavern."[
>
> > > > > > > >> On May 19, 7:19 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
> > > > > > > >> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >> > Hey Molly,
>
> > > > > > > >> > Is such a thing truely a perception or a realisation?
>
> > > > > > > >> > I used to live with a bloke who is colour blind, we rented our place
> > > > > > > >> > from two lesbians, and so his perception of the colour of his bedroom
> > > > > > > >> > was grey. The bedroom was to my eyes coloured pink, but he knows that
> > > > > > > >> > he is colour blind and although not sure of what colour I saw (until
> > > > > > > >> > he asked me) he realised that his perception was not correct.
>
> > > > > > > >> > So we can have a realiastion that our perceptions may not be correct.
>
> > > > > > > >> > On May 19, 12:09 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >> > > How is it possible, from a non dual perspective, to perceive the world
> > > > > > > >> > > as dualistic in nature, and thus an illusion (and separate from
> > > > > > > >> > > self)? By definition, this view would remain dualistic. I do think it
> > > > > > > >> > > true that how we view the world forms our experience. From a
> > > > > > > >> > > dualistic view, some are right, some are wrong. From a non dual view,
> > > > > > > >> > > all views are the One/many paradox that is One. How we view (and
> > > > > > > >> > > experience) birth and death changes as we change. From a non dual
> > > > > > > >> > > perspective, they are only states of transformation and not a
> > > > > > > >> > > beginning or end.
>
> > > > > > > >> > > On May 17, 2:07 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >> > > > In duality there is the relationship of the observer and the observed
> > > > > > > >> > > > , the knower and the known , that is , there are two. In Non-Duality
> > > > > > > >> > > > there is only One and the world which is dualistic in nature , remains
> > > > > > > >> > > > what it is , just an illusion - i.e. subject to birth and death. God
> > > > > > > >> > > > ,Reality or Atman is Non-Dual and duality is just its expression.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comments:
Post a Comment