So much fear and mistrust.

But at least y'all are thinking about it. That is the prelude to commitment. If there ever is something that permanently satisfies the mind, you'll find it, If you're really looking for it.

So far not many of you show a real interest.

"To the intensely vehement, Soon" -Patanjali-

Lame inability to respond appropriately. Don't count on anyone committing to your religion of One; it is set to die like all other falsehoods and trivialities. Read some more books, have more experiences, think some more, develop more sympathy for your fellow beings, try contributing to society in a useful way and not as a gadfly, and for your own sake, learn to open your mind and escape your shell and solipsistic little world.

Oh, and stop trying to be manipulative. Of course you will respond by saying I'm projecting (another attempt at manipulation), but I think anyone reading your posts will pick up on it, and probably be put off by it. It's a sign of a bad teacher. If you had something substantive to teach, you would not have to rely on such shady practices.

Translation: I don't personally like what you have to say because it doesn't make me feel good.

C'est la vie

It's not a religion even though many have mistakenly transformed it into many religions. As for it dying, well It has been around since the beginning of humanity and it still lives and breathes in the hearts of the majority of the population of this planet.

Definitely the voice of god speaking to you, I'd listen if I were you.

A-haaa!

I fully agree! Marvellous.


Certainly not, and I quite liked your poison and map of downtown Cape Town analogy. In fact I've often trawled the streets of Cape Town in search of a particular kind of poison (known locally as Swazi), and been very grateful for the fact that I knew exactly where to go.

So yeah - I'm all for empirical research.

The Buddha himself said: "O monks and wise ones, do not accept my words simply out of reverence. You should subject them to critical analysis and accept them on the basis of your own understanding."

this is but a testament to the infinite ignorance and gullibility of mankind and all the more reason to stamp this lie out of existence.

Heh, good to see things are back on track

Same ole, same ole, for all of you?

back on track.....I don't think so? Let's push it.......

Can a picture in mind, paint a thousand words?

So where is "the source" of all this information?

Isnt everything in the mind? think about it

Absolute-ly

Cease from practice based on intellectual understanding, pursuing words, and following after speech, and learn the backward step that turns your light inward to illuminate your self. Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original face will be manifest.
- Dogen

The gift of fantasy has meant more to me than my talent for absorbing knowledge.
- Albert Einstein

Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but usually manages to pick himself up, walk over or around it, and carry on.
- Winston Churchill

Do you know who or what you are? Think about it. There are many illusions in life. The arguably tragic thing is that so many people of the past have lived their entire lives in illusion. They believed in their mental constructs, and took them to be the truth of things. They were confined within their human consciousness, and never looked beyond. They never saw the true potential of consciousness, nor realized the constructive nature of reality. They never realized that their 'truths' were simply mental constructs, including their own sense of self-identity.


Mental Constructs then? Okay?

Yet there is enough reason to believe, that if the consensus is that many will share the perceptable value of the construct, then it becomes a major illusion does it not?

So what do you say of all these people of science who are looking for "what Lies neneath." Looking to build a understanding in regards to the value of that mental construct?

Is it worthless to have the mind occupy such a intellectual pursuite? Say that if you did not find the correlation and cognitive value to such an insight, then what value is this science if it did not bring us to a closer undertsanding of what lies Beneath. Closer to the source?

You remember Robert Laughlin ?

So, you may call it "eastern influence" with a philosophical history? Baking bread, or perhaps playing with bubbles, using the explanations as a fundamental reality underneath that reality?

The idea that we can create something better than what we can't comprehend sounds a bit silly don'tcha think. If we don't understand what we have created now and how we created it, it would stand to reason that standing outside of it and judging it, saying "we should do better and create it differently" is like associating the creator with imperfection.

GOD -"Damn I wish I hadn't done that."

Perhaps if we are seeing it with human eyes it is the error of human interpretation that needs changing rather than the creation. Perhaps we believe creation is flawed because we don't see it correctly.
I suppose if you introduced a person to a world without familiarity there would be a lot of misunderstanding and confusion.
First find familiarity with being the creator, rise above judgment to find union and finally let go of attachment to absorb all of it to find the original desire.

There you will find something quite interesting.

Paragraph quoted from meta is a direct link to the opening statement of ths site. If you click on paragraph green it will take you directly there.

Joesus:

I think what sounds silly, is that if one already understood that our observation of the basis of reality is indeed "seeing and being sightful of what already exists," while it may be indivdualistic, as a idea, such construct from appearance, could be manifested into other possibilties no doubt.

Playing with the illlusions, possibly?

But having such a view does not in anyway invalidate what may be implied or said about what God might think? That may be the mistake to think that what we think supplants what already exists as a potential?

Any "possiblility" would have been okay, had it been realized what one was doing, yet, being fully aware you are a particpant. That "creavtivity and imagination," are actualy tools that we use to desribe these indepth journies, to bring back the reailty of what could exist naturally.

QUOTE

Now that naturalism has become an accepted component of philosophy, there has recently been interest in reassessing Kuhn's work in the light of developments in the relevant sciences, many of which provide corroboration for Kuhn's claim that science is driven by relations of perceived similarity and analogy to existing problems and their solutions (Nickles 2003b, Nersessian 2003). It may yet be that a characteristically Kuhnian thesis will play a prominent part in our understanding of science.

I use paragraphs and picture sources as direct links and as secondaries.

I am pushing the boudaries of the internet. Forcing the issue of ownership as well as asking what new ways in which we shall use the internet. The basis of this thought held in regards to the visualization techniques, that amout from model consumption, and lead perspective into other areas.




Observation pays off? If you look into the realities that we currently write, how are we to say that what truly lies at the basis of this is reality? Is what, if held to what lies beneath?

You had to know what I am talking about here in terms of the nature of the harmonic oscillator?

Your eyes dont actually see, they only gather light, it is your brain that interprets this light into sight. Thus eyes are actually not a requirement for sight, it is simply the evolutionary mechanism for interpreting light in this world we call reality.

So how would you explain that then? How are your dreams manifest? What "mechanism" is the brain using?

its simply electrical signals in your brain, Shawn knows more about it than I do but essentially your brain interprets what your eyes see and changes it according to diffrent filters. In fact their is evidence that blind people may be able to see using some sort of secondary sight. This was tested by having them try to guess which symbol was on a card, they were simply guessing but they scored better than chance so the possibility exists

Joesus, the human interpretation is part of the creation, even when the human interpretation is critical.

Human interpretation is subjective.
In your case, you believe your interpretations of Christians, Islamic sheep and Buddhists is important.
With respect to your interpretation; in certain circles of thought, only a mother loves an ugly child.
Being critical at 6 is subject to growth and experience, at 80 being critical is subject to habit and belief.
Critical interpretation is subject to experience and wisdom or evolution of awareness and understanding.

Not everyone shares the interpretations of others, evidently being human is to be free to express the diversity of choice and belief. Although you are free to have your feelings and interpretations no one is bound to listen to them or to take them seriously. There is no freedom when one has an interpretation that one cannot let go of.
Being human is also subjective. If you still think and feel in an out of body or near death experience (when the body is clinically dead) then are you human?

Which leads to speculation of interpretation at it's source. If it is relative to being human then so is the gullability of Christians, Islamic Sheep and Buddhists, for critical thought then is subject to evolution of experience and awareness and any thought or interpretation is part of creation.
Adults are quick to break up a fight between arguing children over their perspectives, but as adults we find it necessary to protect our interpretations by killing one another.
Are you willing to fight for your interpretation and if so how far are you willing to go in that direction to unite your actions with creation? Do you draw lines in the sand when it comes to what is part of creation and what has priority over other parts of creation?

I'll use your own belief that Scientific interpretation is going to replace other interpretations of humanity.
What makes this belief any more real than any other jihad?

Joesus you may enjoy this:
http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5454

neti neti

hmm, I was thinking the other day about near death experiences, people claim to see heaven, in the way whichever religion describes it. Scientists explain this as the brains way of preparing for death, becoming emotionally and mentally ready. So is this simply further proof that we simply create what we want to see rather than what is really there?

Would that be all scientists? Maybe 10 or 4 or a handful?
Do you consider this proof?

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation04.html

No its not all scientists, I am refering to the generally accepted scientific explanation, im not stating it is true or false, simply giving the general concencus the scientific community has agreed to for now.

Do I consider your link proof? Well its as good as anyone elses opinion.

No I wasn't referring to the link, I was referring to your quote:

Is your scientific consensus proof?

The link, was just for shits and grins.

Joesus, science allows us to understand and control nature to our advantage. Rationality underlies science. You don't value rationality, do you? Is that why you retreat to dogma for the dull of mind and speak out against science? It's like the blind speaking ill of those who can see. It's like sour grapes, wouldn't you say? How can you speak out against science when you are not in a position to judge? Do you understand science? Do you create science? Do you fully appreciate the mysterious puzzle of nature and its sacredness?

Just got back from visiting my old Alma Mater. It will take me awhile to get caught up on my reading. Glad to be back

You mean like global warming, contaminated ground water, polluted air, poisoned oceans, Pesticides in our produce, stockpiles of nuclear waste that science still can't find a way to control.
Don't take me wrong I know there is a lot of good intentions behind the ideas of science but unless science takes into account the spirit of creation that is the mystery of nature then it blinds itself to wisdom and proceeds in a direction of necessity created by belief.


That is the general idea however rationality is still subject to maturity and wisdom.

I value wisdom and the ability to step back from belief so that evolution can procede. However rationality based on belief and judgment often blinds one to evolution and often people make blanket statements regarding the reality of topics

You hear what you want to hear and you speak your own dogma regarding your beliefs in science.

Everything is relative.

I don't speak out against science in general. I speak out against ignorant blanket statements that science is the undeniable authority.
Yes I do and yes I created it all.
By the way did you know that the average life span of a doctor is only about 68 years old? This is the scientific representative that is the authority for most of us who want to live a long and healthy life. They have a shorter life span or lower life expectancy than ther rest the population that isn't scientifically educated on the human organism.

I do appreciate all parts of creation including what you call the dull of mind as a mysterious part of nature that science does not fully understand and cannot control. It attempts to take stabs at what it cannot control based on speculation. But the fact remains that if science did understand it would either be in control or stay out of the way to let nature take its course. Instead, it throws out speculative darts at a proposed target of belief which changes and evolves leaving a trail of poisoned air, food and water in its wake all for the good of humankind.

Now science that is developed with spiritual wisdom would be led by rational thought that would not be based on survival motivated by fear, or special interests and greed.
Science has come up with some great things, but the political wisdom of the peoples leaders who do not believe in the universal unity of all things have neglected many species of animals that have become extinct because of the lack of knowledge in the cause and affect that resulted from decisions to integrate scientifically developed products into the consumer market. Science cannot control the mindset that is wiping out the southern hemispheres greatest oxygen factory in the tropical rain forest, still burning fossil fuels and creating chemical reactions in the atmosphere which is destroying more forsts by dumping acid rain. etc etc.
There is the dull of mind who are addicted to the amenities of science like Television where the preachers tell you how to be popular by what kind of car to drive, what beer to drink.

Science in itself is a force of nature, the holy spirit in action, inspiration that is led by the heart of the soul to expand awareness but it is too often twisted by ego and greed to benefit the few rather than the many at a great expense to all of Humanity.
If all Humankind could align itself with its greatest good, to expand the whole by educating itself to the fact that we have within us the potential to do anything we want, and to encourage through the reinforcement of that reality rather than creating beliefs that some just don't have it there wouldn't be the competitive mindset that leaves some behind for the greater good of the few that deserve to have more because of prejudice.
Science is a word that can be applied to politics and religion.
What I teach is considered spiritual science by some. You call it dogma and continue to make blanket statements agianst it by attempting to blind yourself to what you want to hear and believe based on what I haven't said and the assumptions you make by filling in your own blanks.

Science implies intelligence, and for the scientifically minded who approach spirituality with an open mind rather than a closed mind I have always heard that science does not discount God as a reality but that it cannot yet measure spirituality or the factor that exists in the Universe that creates cause and affect.
Everyone approaches life with their own points of reference.
I believe that someone once said that "we live in a universe that is so vast that it cannot be contained in the mind of the human. We can hope to live in union with all that is, but to be so vain or arrogant as to claim we understand it all is not only pointless but a waste of time."

Now, now, Joesus, that's a little presumptuous.

Tell me how you created quantum field theory or general relativity. Or tell me of your understanding of non-Euclidean geometry or quantum electrodynamics. I'd love to hear!

Lucid, I think he may be referring to that fact that we all have our own little realities in which we perceive things. Everything we know, see ect, is naturally the brain modifying external senses and thus reality is created.

Joesus is falsely identifying with the universe and speaks on behalf of the universe though my question was obviously about what he, as a person, has done with regard to science, which I suspect is very little or nothing, thereby confirming my claim that he is not in a position to speak about science except as an outsider who does not understand what it's about.

Mental masturbation Lucid. You're attempting to classify me within your personal system of measure, the same way you have clumped Christians, Islamics and Buddhists into categories of worth.
You really must get in touch with the fear of your own self worth.

Will you two ever stop?! Or will I have to go through the embarrassement of telling on you and having Shawn come and grab each of you by the ear and make you sit facing the corner till you patch up? I'm gonna start taking bets and make some money here! I'm predicting K.O. in a later round. LOL! Joesus, I'm begining to realize now that your posts really are important in this forum (and not just to keep Lucid busy). I guess this forum would not be the same without them, so keep them coming, please. Besides, you're inching closer and closer to becoming a God here (hard earned and well deserved, may I add). That in itself should be incentive enough, don't you think?

Joesus writes The cover story of the current edition of the United Church Observer--an award-winning magazine, BTW--is about creation http://www.ucobserver.org/
http://www.ucobserver.org/archives/pictures/may06_cover.jpg

WHAT IS YOUR CREATION STORY?
While respecting the creation stories of all peoples, including the one told by modern scientists, readers of the Observer are challenged to write their own creation story. Here is mine, in brief:

It is my humble opinion that once upon a time, before there was what we call space and time, as we know it, there was NO thing. This is not, exactly, the same as saying, there was nothing. That NO thing is what I call absolute spirit. As panentheism teaches, this is that which is in and through all things, or all matter. Matter and mind, as such, came later. To this spirit, I give the special name, GØD. I do this to make it clear that I am not talking about the "God" of theism--one who is separate and apart from the cosmos we know. Orthodox Jews, that is those who have a similar panentheistic view of the divine mind in all things, write the divine name as G-d, which, like GØD, symbolizes all that IS and exists. Within GØD, or God, we all live, move and have our being.

Because there were no things, or beings, with which to relate, this spirit, in my humble opinion, was totally unrelated to anything but itself. Relativity came later. In other words GØD was only potentially complete. At this point--and I agree that this is difficult to imagine--there was no light, and perhaps, no self consciousness as we know and experience it. As Genesis puts it, "Darkness was upon the face of the deep."

But in the fullness of time, in the midst of this chaotic darkness, light appeared. At first, it was an infinitely-small point of light which, in an instant, filled, as if it were a mighty breath of air, the whole of what we now think of as the cosmos. In the fullness of time, this light, acting like an indrawn breath, compacted itself into a primordial ball of matter, which, eventually, began to expand and to break up into billions of light-filled bits and pieces into forms which we call galazies, stars, planets, moons, comets, cosmic dust and the forms of life, including human beings, which appeared, as if by magic, and are still evolving, on earth.

Despite all our knowledge, philosophy, science and art today, much of life is still a great mystery. So far as we now know, all of life, including vegetables, animals and self-conscious human beings, exist only on planet earth, the one we call our home. Meanwhile however, it does seem reasonable to believe that, because there are billions of other planets in billions of galaxies, within and beyond the milky way, there is life, including the human kind, out there, in one form or another. It is highly possible that one day we will find out where these life forms are.

Some people, perhaps most of us, believe that, in a mysterious way, we, along with all things, are related to this mysterious spirit, which most human beings call God. Most Judaeo/Christian people speak of Him as a personal and masculine being, one who created us, as the Bible puts it, "in his own image", and who lives up there in a place called heaven. Bible-believing monotheistic Jews and Christians tell us that God hears and answers our prayers; that He is involved in space, time and history; deists, onther other hand, say that He is behaves like an absent landlord, and leaves all operations on earth to us, his creatures.

By the way, I abhor dogmatism aand the idea that there is only one true religion. I respect any religion that is built on a moral and ethical foundation and a which encourages us to respect all forms of life and to love this planet, even those who are not "religious". However, because I find it impossible to think of this mysterious spirit, in any way shape or form, as an objective being, I prefer to name this spirit using this special symbol, GØD.

Panentheism, or, as I prefer to call it, unitheism, because of the way it defines the god-concept, makes it difficult to actually be an atheist. After all, who can possibly deny the reality of all that IS? Of course, because we have the power to choose between good and evil, anyone can choose to be a contra-theist. That is, we can refuse to be moral and ethical human beings. We can choose to live by the law of the jungle. Many so-called believers do it every day. Look at how mean we can be to one another.

Unitheism is more about orthopraxy. It is more about what we are doing with life than it is about orthodoxy--what we beliefs. Orthopraxy has more to do with deeds than it has to do with creeds. I suspect that this is what John had in mind when he wrote: "God is love."

And what is your story? [KEEP IN MIND. I will be re-editing this story further.]

Science is pretty limited when it comes to the story of the begining of the universe, isn't it? It leaves a lot of empty spaces. We are limited by our cognitive abilities to think or imagine beyond this space/time "buble" (as Plato calls it) we're trapped in. So my story starts four billion years ago (see? I am already being constrained in this trap) when cosmologists believe the universe started (but what was before that, and how?). Out of an infinitecimally small point beyond which time and space did not exist yet. And then the Big Bang. And then, here we are! The past doesn't exist and I can't do anyting about while I'm trapped in these conditions. Only the present matters to me, as it gives me the ability to help construct the future which does not exist either. But which is filled with all possibilities because, unlike in the past, I'm here and now ( what matters is OnlyNow... Hey, that name makes sense, now!). That's my story (full of empty spaces!).

moved too

I can hardly wait for your answer to this one, Plato!

Just click on the picture above, Code Buttons:)

Joesus, I am just making the observation that you are not scientifically inclined; in fact, your beliefs regarding the One and awareness would not stand up to scientific scrutiny even though you will incorrectly claim they are all beyond science. They are not. You are just afraid to expose your beliefs because you know they will be torn down. Confront your fear!

You are making your observation from the box you have created in which you standardize your perceptions of truth and worth. You chastize anyone who does not share your box.
I don't live in your box, and I don't share your judgments.

Well that's just the pot calling the kettle black, now isn't it?

The mirror is clear.

lol you guys are hilarious

Ha! Ha! Agreed!!!

Underlying the machinations of the ego are stable universal laws that support any belief and perception of reality. The meaning of you create your own reality extends multidimensionally from its point of origin (absolute/consciousness) through the belief systems of the mind in every stage of consciousness, from sleeping, dreaming, waking and even the lingering shadows of an unstable god consciousness.
Just as a child sees the universe differently than an adult so does the ego twist reality according to belief. Illusions are created through beliefs and often what is real is hidden below the surface appearances or reflections of those beliefs. The ego is a mechanism but a mechanism can be used in many ways and experienced in many ways. In the hands of an inexperienced driver a car can sometimes seem to extend itself beyond the driver in certain weather conditions such as driving in ice and snow. When one knows the mechanisms limitations then the mechanism is serving the master, but when the limitations are placed on the driver then the driver becomes a servant to the mechanism he/she has not mastered the mechanism.
When the driver begins to create mind created illusions about its relationship to the mechanism then the relationship twists into the fantasies that are created by the driver, who then is projecting from both inexperience and pride, to hide its fear of being out of control, to project its mastery, to create the illusion of control and stabilize its identity of being different than the mechanism creating more distance between creator and creation, between Self and self.
There never are any victims, for the conscious choices of the Self/self lead to expanded awareness or delusions of separation in unconsious programs of belief that begin to affect awareness, by obscuring clarity of ones relationship with reality in beliefs created through ego, and in pride created from fear and low self esteem.
Truth of the relationship of creation and creator exists in the universal laws of support, unconditional support, or Love, of the Creator for all aspects of creation. This universal Truth is twisted by egoic beliefs in division, of hierarchy created through judgments that are not from universal truth but from belief in separation, belief in limitations of the creator in the form of limited realities.
The ego is limited to the service of the creator, it in itself is not capable of independant creation other than in thought that is limited to the manifest reality. Consciousness itself is not limited to reality.
The human experience that is aligned with the ego and its boundaries of belief within the context of the relative is limited to the relative experience. The human that is aligned with consciousness itself is not bound by the ego and its beliefs and limited playing field.



True judgment is what Buddha meant by the middle path. To make choices that expand awareness rather than contract. To evolve rather than devolve, this choice is what differentiates humans from animals, this choice is how one recognizes the heart and separates its voice from the voice of the mind that is shrouded in beliefs of separation rather than being clearly seated in union with all things.
This judgment is what gives one the ability to recognize the difference in moving towards a goal and moving further from it.
From the standpoint of consciousness itself direction is irrelevant, but from the awareness of the evolving soul choices are what create evolution and recognition of the Self in its relative status of being and being within creation.
Enlightenment is the Ascended status of the relative, and even if one should make choices to devolve within relative reality, who is to say whether or not one is at the crossroads of Ascension and how choice can make the difference in whether one makes the leap in one lifetime or many more?
Thinkers who would imply the "everything just is" idea, neglect the choice that exists to follow the heart.
The assumption is often made that the heart is the origin of all perceptions of choice.
The enlightened know that when the mind assumes that the special relationship with some one, or the new car, or new clothes are what it would have to find completion and fill the space called need, and identifies these things at the level of the heart in union with all things, that is called illusion.
The heart desires one thing, to always be in union with God and to expand that into infinite realities of experience. The ego that is subject to being more powerful than the driver becomes the master and no longer the servant.
Conscious choices and refinement of awareness puts the driver back in the drivers seat and keeps it there realigning the awareness of consciousness with its creation in experience of creator and creation rather than victim to creation and circumstance.
Judgement, that any choice no matter what it is and no matter what the outcome being without consequence is a contradictory idea when it applies to the evolving soul and its awareness that is seated in separation and deaf to the voice of the heart. In the relative choice has an affect. When the mind is seated in the heart and not in the relative then any choice is experienced as the manifestation of desire, but in the case of the mind that sits outside of the heart any choice will not do to bring itself into union.
There are many roads but not all roads lead to union, it only appears that way to the ones who are travelling because the road seems continuous. The choices that are made, set one on roads that expand and roads that contract and lead away from the goal.
In the terms of the relative if you want to get to California from Idaho, you would travel southwest rather than east, to get there in the shortest amount of time.
If you don't care how much time it takes and if you don't die in the course of taking the eastern route then you get there when you get there. Its just a choice. Enlightenment in one lifetime or many. It took you thousands of lifetimes to get where you are now, why not several thousand more...

From the awareness of Union, (consciousness witnessing itself) the relative is only the reflection of thought. From the awareness of ego identitification, pain, suffering, anger, judgment made in separation and illusion is the Hell described in the Spiritual texts of both the east and the west.
You aren't required to suffer, no one is required to suffer. suffering is a result of belief and the choices that lead to the beliefs in separation.
Suffering is not a "just is" proposition, suffering is an illusion created by the mind in its choice to ignore the heart.
Knowing the difference between illusion and reality begins with the intellect and grows within the experience of separation and enlightenment. It evolves within the path that is the discussion of the Self, choice to listen to the voice of the Self and the ego and the manifestation of that choice, the study of the Self/self. It is in the recognition of cause and effect that takes place within the manifestation of choice within the awareness of truth and illusion, leading to the awareness of Union with all things in the One, and separation in duality.
You don't have to experience anything for the benefit of the Self or for consciousness. Everything is already contained within consciousness. Consciousness by its nature simply creates and expands joy in creating and it needs nothing from anyone to achieve any need whatsoever. So any relative explaination for suffering being in service to god and creation is a lie.
Christ didn't suffer for anyones sins, he came and showed by example, there are no limits to the human condition other than those that are self imposed. If you are not free from limitation then you are living according to your own choice to set the standards of your own experience to the level that they are.
Some say Buddha represented the Truth and Christ was the way. One prepaared the intellect while the other was a living example of action through conscious choice.

Acceptance doesn't come without recognition, without choice, without the action to change ones points of reference. Understanding doesn't come simply from stating positive affirmations, it comes from rising above limitations created within twisted perspectives of reality into the experience of Union with the Self. One must have the Self/absolute as the reference point in all experiences or it becomes a secondary thought that is entertained along with the experiences that are following lesser points of reference based in duality.

Sorry, but enlightenment doesn't just happen to you.

SACRED IDLENESS

When was the last time you did absolutely nothing ?

Yes it is
Yes but the intellect working with awareness is what leads to perception of awareness witnessing itself…
Choice is a construct of the intellect, a necessary proponent of movement within awareness for consciousness itself is not only stillness, and is not always reflecting its still status which is perceived through the intellect in its various states of evolution or states of being. The idea of choice being an illusion is a leader, a segue to expand awareness beyond dualistic awareness by threatening the ego and its pride so that the Self can be seen. Choice then becomes imortant in the identification of the Self and the self.
The ego never surrenders to anything that is not created of itself and the heart is a very small voice compared to the loud voice of the ego.
The nature of greed and fear on this planet is the living embodiment of the choice that is being made to follow the ego rather than the heart. If the heart were to be followed by everyone this reality would evolve instantaneously and all disease would cease to exist, all poverty would be unknown and all suffering obliterated for suffering is not of the heart.


When this is experienced one has felt and experienced the differences of creator and created and experiences both as the same. This is more than an intuitive feeling, it is like breathing, one can be aware of themselves breathing or occasionally let it into the awareness by engaging the minds memory and past experiences to check their position and make relevant conclusions, or be in it, stablilze it in every thought feeling and action rather than leave it lay behind the other intuitive thoughts and feelings. This'd be a choice.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and awareness to its ascended status. What it is in affect to ones abilities is irrelevant. There are no limits to the human condition other than those that are self imposed.

Mt 17:20 And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.


That is a belief. The mind full of chatter will hesitate at the point of surrender and change the outcome by adding to the road travelled. The mind filled with ego will superimpose the truth of bliss of creation to the creator and overlay the beliefs of the mind to its ideas of desire. It will grasp at objects for fullfillment that decay and dissapear.
Suffering is not of the heart and the heart does not desire you to suffer, suffering is the result of a choice to ignore the heart.

King James Version Titus 2
1 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

2 That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.

3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;

4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,

5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

6 Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded.

7 In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,

8 Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.

9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;

10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;



And perception is relative to the journey or point of awareness.
Are we there yet?


Yes and understanding follows expansion 0f experience and intellect. The enlightened also serve in capacity to lead those who seek, to direct choice so that it be productive in expansion of awareness. This has been the service of all masters of every age rather than to interpret action and words to be unnecessary and without meaning they surrender themselves to the direction of universal mind within the construct of the sphere which is created so that it may complete itself in the desire of consciousness itself as it creates from a desire to expand upon itself.


No this is the intellect thinking it has no choice and laying itself down to the belief that it has no way to rise above the present eexperience dragging the memory along and projecting it into the future paving the way for non-action, sloth, dispair and suffering.


Through the intellect of perception one attains harmony of reality, of creator and creation, of judgment within the construct that is choice to become the creator and affect the outcome of the creation thru the action of surrendering independant thought and becoming the one. Then one moves as the creator rather than the created in duality of thought.


Within the constructs of creation lay the realities of choice and of experience of separation (hell) and union (heaven). These realities persist because they are intended to be experienced. This is the desire and fullfillment of creator and creation. Goals are products of cause and affect. In relative states of consciousness these goals are mileposts of expression and experience of creator and created.
It is pointless to say to a child, "fly" after throwing them off of a cliff. This has no relevance within the mind of the child nor the leading of the heart to the intellects interpretation of reality.
If you stand in one pond you do not stand in another. If you stand in all of them then there is no other.
To say there is no goal is not correct nor is it wrong, it is a statement that applies to another pond, not the one that serves the intention of the whole in surrender but the one that serves you in your personal journey to understand yourself. You have separated yourself from your own creation by denying it in favor of what you call an enlightened ideal. You are experiencing the intuitive knowing of the goal of your life but do not sit there in it. You are thinking of what it is like to be there and do not be there. This is your goal but you do nothing but think about it.


Since you have accepted that the physical reality does exist then so must all of its concepts as the function of consciousness. Surrender yourself to all rather than one or the other.


Yes but not within the beliefs of duality, they are experienced as separate



Choice, or acceptance of separation is what creates suffering or the experience of suffering. Choice is the will of individuality that precedes surrender to the greater reality of union. The mind or intellect that is separate cannot find union without seeking the differences that lay before it in its own creation of illusions. Choice is the path.


Isness is not devoid of thought feeling and action at any level of experience or conscious awareness. Therefore acceptance of reality or illusion is the acceptance of what it includes.


Consciousness in and of itself does not expand this is true, but experience also follows expansion and not all experience is the experience of expansion or being the Self. That is why these conversations take place and why there are no blanket statements that apply to experience of the Self or its being.


Yes it contains no thing. but for relative purposes, the idea that we serve the Self through experience leaves us separate and that it has a need rather than a nature to it. The idea is to lead the mind to expansion of thought and experience rather than to absolute statements. This is the process of evolution of awareness.


No I don't, do you? If you are the Self then what you do benefits yourself rather than a separate entity, which is the point. But of course you knew that....


A process that involves choice to meld the absolute stillness of the male (vertical staff of the cross) with the female (horizontal staff of the cross) as it moves outward and to sit at the bindu point or intersection of both and become the hermaphrodite. To bring both into union one has to be able to stay seated in the stillness and accept all aspects of creativity the feminine earth breath that is creation itself and the stillnes of the absolute unchanging, rather than to divide consciousness from its creation and to identify it as a thing or non thing.



Yes a process of choosing to separate the mind created illusions of the ego from that which is eternal.


The relenquishing of the relative boundaries of the ego is the choice one makes. That one choice becomes the one eternal choice for all eternity, the only choice that exists.


No making it happen is not the issue or the idea. Acceptance of reality follows the choice to let go of all thoughts that stand before the one true reality. It doesn't happen on its own it follows the choice to avail ones self to Truth or illusion

Where is the substance to these posts? Joesus, when you say "Through the intellect of perception one attains harmony of reality", you realize this is empty fluff, right? For starters, intellect and perception are two different things, so there is no 'intellect of perception'; that term doesn't make sense except in some fluffy way. How do you expect to have a dialogue with anyone when you don't even use words in the right way and don't respect their meanings? It comes across as awefully fishy when you don't play by commonly agreed upon rules for verbal communication.

Are you creating these nonsensical word combinations and verbose fluff because you're trying to hide the fact that you have nothing substantive to say? All smoke and mirrors?

Intellectual perception of reality is subjective. In your case perception is relative to the boundaries or rules of your belief in reality. Given enough time the intellect can expand beyond the limits of reason to embrace more than just a select group of ideas. I say given enough time because eventually as you hold onto your ideas which lead the body into death and reoccuring birth and death, of your physical bodies that are being projected fporward from your beliefs, your soul will bang its head against the wall until it realizes that banging its head against the wall is resulting in the same painful experience lifetime after lifetime of resentment and stress in the manifestation of problems that are separate from you and your creation.
Take this thread for example. "The spiritual laziness and gullibility of Christians, Islamic sheep, Buddhists, and others."
You make reference to what you perceive thru the separated intellect of the ego, rather than the united intellect of an awakened Consciousness. You have placed these beings outside of yourself and seek to fix an external problem. The problem only exists in your perception of reality which is ruled by an unawakened intellect.
Awaken the intellect to allow the perception of Truth and your illusion of problems don't exist in the same form and experience. The problems become spiritual insights into the nature of your personal choices to believe in who and what you are.

If one falls into the hole of their beliefs and cannot see a way out, one who sees ( the greater potential that lives within ones self) does not jump into the hole to join them, it extends itself as the helping hand of potential to lift or raise conscious awareness out of the hole of belief and habit.
Whether you decide to take the hand (choose to evolve) is a choice. You can have your rules, if you wish, and remain common to the group paradigm you choose to believe in, but then, who is being a sheep?

That is such a cop-out. In other words, according to you, the problem of world hunger and world poverty is all in my head and in my perception of things. In other words, according to you, everyone else who doesn't subscribe to your warped solipsistic worldview is wrong and are ruled by an unawakened intellect. I think it's obvious who needs to wake up here!

Your warped worldview, Joesus, revolves around the assumption of atman=brahman, which may be interpreted to mean that your experiental essence is equal to the essence of everything. You have no basis for this assumption. You, you're whole entire consciousness and whatever you experience as your essence, are nothing but transient form that will dissolve and change form when your time is up. You are as ephemeral as your warped worldview, but you just can't bear to admit it so you hide behind your fantasies and delusions.

For once in your life, come clean!

If you had any substance to your thoughts and ideas, you would attempt to express them more rigorously, perhaps even scientifically, or at least in a way that they may be deemed falsifiable. Any thoughts and concepts that are not falsifiable are worthless lies. So where is the falsifiable truth in what you say?

and who is the wolf in sheep's clothing?