is immanent in you but that doesn't make you God.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:32 PM, leerevdouglas@googlemail.com
<lee@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> Indeed, however we are taught that God is imminent throughout the
> creation, can you hear the birds sing, the man talk or the child
> laugh? Are you then not hearing God?
>
> Can you see trees change throughoput the seasons, the fish swimming in
> the river, and humanity bickering? Are you then not seeing God
>
> On May 25, 4:32 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> God is not someone you can see or hear , but He is someone you can
>> understand and for that you need a trained understanding.
>> Understanding can be trained through years of study and deliberations
>> and maybe not even then ,in which case you can rely on the words of a
>> sage in whom you have faith. In any case only a man of faith gains
>> knowledge because initially you have to have faith in someone or some
>> scripture , to learn English you have to have faith in your teacher.
>> Whoever God may be , good morals are a necessity for a virtuous life
>> and towards that end a person must strive.
>>
>> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:32 PM, 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 -
0 comments:
Post a Comment