Bhagvadagita , besides I have read a little Psychology. I don't think
you would reach the same conclusions on reading them , It took me
three decades to formulate my belief and I know it is hard to digest
but it is still better than the athiestic view that the majority is
accepting nowadays.
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Ash <ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Panta re ouden menai RP. I understand that it would be ignorant to ask for
> a science of mysticism but I am connecting the dots between everything
> anyway. As I see it absolutes are models to help us conceive of systems,
> metaphysical archetypes, a cross-section of imaginary points to reduce the
> flow of patterns into something we can grasp. I prefer starting with
> overlapping spheres at times but that is irrelevant, a dismissable geometric
> aid. No matter how many times I've experienced spiritual insight I
> repeatedly reformulate from the bottom up, I suppose that is restless. I
> digress.
>
> On 5/26/2011 11:17 PM, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> Ash , as far as we are concerned we are all real , we are neither
>> inside nor outside the One . The One is immanent in us. When we say
>> the world is an illusion it is because it is changeable and
>> destructible. It is not permanent.
>
> I agree our experiences and nature cause misconceptions, some are valuable
> some not because they fit needs to an extent of limited perceptions. I
> believe that all things are polymorphic in theory, and I think this
> indicates that there is infinite potential explanation for things as they
> are, and their interrelations. Fractal geometry grows from the egg, or such.
> Everything changes with a spark, which is the culmination of forces driving
> a substance to an extreme until critical mass and bam, noetic volition
> (previously assumed to be spontaneous combustion or likewise concepts).
> Between permanence and impermanence there is everything in between we cannot
> see due to limited perspective, and apparent dichotomies dissolve, leaving a
> permanence of change. The creative and conservative forces, and their
> archetypal children become One and creation and destruction become the
> illusion. Maybe.
>
>> Space and all that is in it has
>> sprung from the One , and the One itself is pure Spirit. Our
>> individual identities are for a time being only , in actuality the One
>> is our real self. There is no such thing as my spirit or your spirit ,
>> there is only the One Spirit and it is the Absolute.
>
> If there are published works on the school(s) influencing these ideas could
> you reference them, or preferably your own work online (free)? Seeing it all
> at once helps.
>>
>> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Ash<ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> But then either the phenomenal experience granted by this 'corporeal'
>>> (apparently) state is occuring within or without or some x-position in
>>> relation to One. Something is without a doubt occuring in some fashion,
>>> as
>>> we wouldn't be holding this conversation. If we are not within one, we
>>> are
>>> outside of one? Absolutes give me much trouble so I won't be diving into
>>> the
>>> essence at this time looking to verify our claims. From what state does
>>> this
>>> perspective come from, to what or whom am I speaking (that this knowledge
>>> you propose comes from)? Maybe that is a better start, I apologize for
>>> taking the infuriatingly dense student route.
>>>
>>> On 5/25/2011 11:50 PM, RP Singh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If we think that we are part of the " Whole " we are sort of dividing
>>>> up God. He then is no longer an entity but a composite of parts. The
>>>> truth is that we are not parts but emanations which make His existence
>>>> identifiable to our understanding.
>>>> The reflection of the sun is a proof of the sun ;similarly the world
>>>> is a proof of the Self.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Ash<ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Our consciousness makes us think that we are special , far removed
>>>>> from
>>>>> matter , but in reality we are mortal and it is the One Spirit in all
>>>>> that
>>>>> is immortal. "
>>>>> I don't think that this must necessarily be the whole truth. What if
>>>>> one
>>>>> sees that all things are a part of the whole, that is the world and/or
>>>>> nature's way, and we perceive diverse phenomena by our natures
>>>>> inextricably?
>>>>>
>>>>> I find it interesting that you would say the reflection of the sun in a
>>>>> puddle is not the sun, what else is the sun but the forces of nature
>>>>> which
>>>>> are the same as in the puddle? Our focus may be pointed at a less
>>>>> brilliant
>>>>> and direct portion in comparison to the sun but it is shining through
>>>>> nonetheless in everything if you know how or where to look.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2011 10:04 AM, RP Singh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is not a matter of perspective but the very nature of things. The
>>>>>> world is dualistic by nature and God is Non-Dual.The world changes
>>>>>> over time and is never in a constant state , whereas God remains the
>>>>>> same always and is unborn , primeaval and indestructible--the same
>>>>>> cannot be said of the world. It is so easy to say that I am the One ,
>>>>>> but when a needle pricks you you grimace , how can you be the " One "
>>>>>> when you feel pleasure and pain , happy and depressed. Our
>>>>>> consciousness makes us think that we are special , far removed from
>>>>>> matter , but in reality we are mortal and it is the One Spirit in all
>>>>>> that is immortal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Molly<mollyb363@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.
>>>
>
>
0 comments:
Post a Comment