I was referring to your view on the realness of the absolute, which you finished with this last sentence:
There is no such thing as my spirit or your spirit , there is only the One Spirit and it is the Absolute.
The expression "there is", which you used twice in this sentence, seems to have a pointing function and therefore might cause some form of misunderstanding. Translating this expression into German, it means "es gibt". Literally translating the German back to English it reads: it gives. This, I thought, made it much clearer what I think you meant. Which obviously was a misunderstanding.
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:26 AM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
Gabby , if you were to give a re-translation of the full statement and
also tell us whom you are re-translating it would make things a bit
clearer to me.
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 1:20 PM, gabbydott <gabbydott@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since Pat hasn't shown up yet, let me support your stance with a
> re-translation of the "there is" you used, which looks as if it was pointing
> at something outside, which is not what I understand you wish to express.
> The re-translation from present time German is: it gives.
>
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:17 AM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> 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. 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.
>>
>> 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