Re: [Mind's Eye] Re: Non-Duality

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Ash <ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would not advise anyone to demand a hermetic conception of cosmo-logy/gony
> from a man if they are looking to understand his perspective. It should
> suffice to find one's own need to understand and seek fulfillment, that
> merely agreeing or disagreeing is not enough for this task.
>
> Is there more to your belief you could share? You may be surprised by the
> reflection, or not..
>
> On 5/27/2011 11:39 AM, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> I am familiar only with the ancient Hindu Upanisads and the
>> 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.
>>>
>
>