eternity. Eternity is because of the Self and not vice versa. If you
remove the illusory coatings of individualities the one Self shines
through and whether I know it or not I will continue in eternity. I am
the Self and this RP Singh or Lee or Orn are just illusions because
these are but identities whereas The real I or Self is unborn ,
primeaval and indestructible. The self-sense has a beginning and an
end , the Self or Atman or God is the core of all individualities and
is One and is Eternal.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:42 PM, leerevdouglas@googlemail.com
<lee@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> Indeed RP, as we know that is part of my belife structure also. Yet
> unless you have reached God in what ever manory your faith defines for
> you, can it be said that you, mean you RP Singh of here and now, will
> continue into eternity?
>
>
>
> On May 4, 3:22 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lee, eternity to my mind is no imagination but a fact. This universe
>> came to be and will disintegrate but that is not the end of Creation ,
>> there have to be other universes in parallel and there is a continuity
>> in Creation-- I mean that no matter how many universes disintegrate
>> there are still other universes.God is incomplete without Creation and
>> so the concept of eternity is valid and a " fact ".
>>
>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:32 PM, leerevdoug...@googlemail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> <l...@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
>> > Hey OM.
>>
>> > I guess what we are talking about are forces. I see that perhaps you
>> > do not count time a s force, or that perhaps our understanding of what
>> > time is must be constrained by the type of being we are.
>>
>> > Yes I agree that the reality maynot be wholey how we percive it to be,
>> > as you know this has been my stance for a long while now.
>>
>> > Back to forces though. We still don't know how gravity works, but we
>> > are sure that such a thing exists, we see it's effects all around us
>> > and can apply sciences to measure it. Like time we can see the
>> > effects of it. Now I'll not discount the idea that the effects of
>> > time may be down to something else entirly.
>>
>> > The thing with imagining enternity or existing within it, is that it
>> > is just imaginagtion isn't it. I can also imagine that I'll a tall
>> > man with broad shoulders, but the reality of the situation is I am
>> > not.
>>
>> > On May 4, 10:34 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> Lee, I sense that what we perceive as being 'external' - energy and
>> >> movement - is that. However, beyond this, our notions of what things
>> >> are...even the letters and associated words for SETI... only exist in
>> >> thought...no where else.
>>
>> >> As an aside, for those who may have missed it, SETI has been defunded.
>>
>> >> And, no, I didn't miss your caveat. I just disagree and suspect that
>> >> having thought about what one thinks is real, which does include the
>> >> concept of time, all one's lifetime...the notion of time becomes so
>> >> ingrained in one's world view that it is assumed to be an actual thing
>> >> rather than merely a thought.
>>
>> >> Yes, when one *thinks* about such things, they appear to be real. The
>> >> operative words here are "appears to be". As a mental exercise Lee,
>> >> I'll ask you to do your very best to imagine existing in
>> >> eternity...that which has no beginning and no end.
>>
>> >> Got the vision?.....from this perspective (the actual 'reality'), time
>> >> just is meaningless... especially if one also imagines no perceiver(s)
>> >> involved anywhere at all.
>>
>> >> On the other hand, I do know that there is life and that we, as human
>> >> beings do think and project our understandings upon the fabric of what
>> >> we project as being 'external' to ourselves. I don't deny this...it is
>> >> obvious that we do. It's just that what we project comes from mind and
>> >> not from whatever is actually there. What is actually there is not
>> >> what we perceives as time...it isn't color (except clear light as TTS
>> >> notes...something I've been contemplating for years now...something
>> >> that to the rational/thinking mind just can't be grasped)...it isn't
>> >> SETI...it isn't shape...it isn't anything that human senses perceive
>> >> and then apply some sort of belief about what is being
>> >> perceived...based upon previously attached beliefs. We don't in our
>> >> everyday mode perceive reality as it actually is. We do use
>> >> conventions mind agrees upon...for practicality's sake...its just that
>> >> in any ultimate sense, these conventions are nothing more than
>> >> that...they are not what is actually there. Remove the observer (and
>> >> associated senses) and what exists? Get it? No thinking...no
>> >> thoughts...no concepts...no words...no notions of reality....
>>
>> >> No, this isn't the conventional approach to things ontological nor
>> >> epistemological....yet, the exercise can be of enormous value in my
>> >> experience. No, I'm not attempting to impose a belief system upon you
>> >> or anyone else...in fact, it is almost like a diminution of belief if
>> >> anything at all!
>>
>> >> So, yes, how does one think about not thinking!!!
>>
>> >> Well...we have gone down this road quite often Lee...and you stop
>> >> after only a couple of paces which is fine.
>>
>> >> For me, I hunger to know beyond my own set of beliefs...which are
>> >> almost all things that I've attached to long ago and were formed based
>> >> upon words...and, not having created those words...there is little
>> >> that I actually know associated with these terms fed to me by others.
>>
>> >> To do this search, deconstruction [of beliefs] seems to be one method.
>> >> It isn't a road often traveled nor does it seem to be for everyone. So
>> >> be it!
>>
>> >> On May 4, 1:47 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Hey Om,
>>
>> >> > Don't be shocked mate you might have missed this bit:
>>
>> >> > ' I must though disagree with you about concepts not existing without
>> >> > somebody to concive of them. Sure I could probably think of a concept
>> >> > or two where this is applicable, time though is not one of them.'
>>
>> >> > I like you exanples OM, but we know in a scientific way what colours
>> >> > are, and yes without the eyes to sense them, they still exist. The
>> >> > same with sound waves, yes of course with out the ears to hear and the
>> >> > brain to make sense of them, we can ask do they really exist, but the
>> >> > answer must be yes.
>>
>> >> > Think of it like this. SETI have been listening to radio waves from
>> >> > space for many years now, prior to SETI being setup, where these radio
>> >> > signals simply not there? Yes of course they where, we just didn't
>> >> > have the now how to listen to them.
>>
>> >> > There is a valid reason why we call somethings inventions and others
>> >> > discoverys.
>>
>> >> > I'm trying hard to Grok yoru meaning but you know that old fashioned
>> >> > reasoning keeps interfearing.
>>
>> >> > On May 4, 5:43 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > "…Naaaa I do not think that is what you are saying. " – Lee
>>
>> >> > > Lee, in many ways, it is exactly what I'm saying.
>>
>> >> > > First, a few examples: Color – we perceive color(s)…and different
>> >> > > people perceive colors differently for one another too. And I'm not
>> >> > > even thinking about the color blind nor the totally blind here. With
>> >> > > no human brain, what we know as color just will not exist. There may
>> >> > > be some sort of vibration/movement in the universe but there will be
>> >> > > no color because it takes a human being to see them. Please don't add
>> >> > > other life forms to the equation, the principle is the same. No
>> >> > > perceiver, no color.
>>
>> >> > > That is only one thing. How about country music? Again, while there
>> >> > > may be vibrations/movement, without a person to 'translate' these
>> >> > > vibrations into what we call country music, there just isn't any such
>> >> > > thing. It is a concept (country music) and doesn't exist without mind.
>>
>> >> > > I really was shocked when you said that you disagreed with me about
>> >> > > concepts not existing without a perceiver/thinker! Just how could say
>> >> > > a concept of 'freedom' exist without mind? It just doesn't.
>>
>> >> > > Adding a little more, when you bring in 'labels', yes, all concepts/
>> >> > > words (labels) are subjective and without mind they just don't exist.
>> >> > > Even when there *is* mind things like say the earth can be
>> >> > > deconstructed into atoms and/or molecules etc…stuff that is not what
>> >> > > we think about as being the planet. I haven't gone into this very
>> >> > > deeply but hope you grok.
>>
>> >> > > On May 3, 9:36 am, "leerevdoug...@googlemail.com" <l...@rdfmedia.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>>
>> >> > > > Hahahah OM old chap, you and I have been round and around on manny
>> >> > > > matters, as you say though this is just fine.
>>
>> >> > > > Yes of course the perception of time is a construct of human thought,
>> >> > > > it is as I say the way we measure decay.
>>
>> >> > > > Yes of course if we do not project time upon the eternity then time
>> >> > > > cease to have any meaning.
>>
>> >> > > > Yet all that we know is contained in the universe and it is clear that
>> >> > > > within this universe time exists independant of human thought.
>>
>> >> > > > All that is physical, all that is matter is subject to decay at a
>> >> > > > certian rate, this is time working.
>>
>> >> > > > Do you belive then that whatever is apart from the universe does not
>> >> > > > come under the juristriction of time? Are you saying that this thing
>> >> > > > we call God in some places is not subject to time, and that this is
>> >> > > > also true of anything not composed of matter but spirit instead? If
>> >> > > > so then obviously I agree.
>>
>> >> > > > I must though disagree with you about concepts not existing without
>> >> > > > somebody to concive of them. Sure I could probably think of a concept
>> >> > > > or two where this is applicable, time though isnot one of them.
>>
>> >> > > > Before the Earth cooled down enough for life to start here a period of
>> >> > > > time had passed, and although nobody was there to measure how much
>> >> > > > time had passed, we can now do just that.
>>
>> >> > > > Time then like light, exists independant of a mind to think of it. In
>> >> > > > fact are not all concepts our striving to understand what it is we
>> >> > > > sense around us? There must then be forces to sense for us tho strive
>> >> > > > to understand. Language is just labels we attach to things to enable
>> >> > > > us to communicate about them. Are you really saying these things
>> >> > > > would not exist if there where no mouths to utter the labels? Naaaa I
>> >> > > > do not think that is what you are saying.
>>
>> >> > > > On May 3, 2:09 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > > > Lee, we've gone round and round about 'no-time' on more than one
>> >> > > > > occasion and in different forums.
>>
>> >> > > > > So, I have little hope in making this notion acceptable to you which
>> >> > > > > is
>>
>> ...
>>
>> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
0 comments:
Post a Comment