Well then we might be close to being on the same page in the interpretation of the scripture.

As for value. Do you see nothing of any truth in these words? How would you define wisdom?

Would you try and explain college physics to a 5 year old?
Is there a finite answer to any question?
What is the heart? Is it associated with attached feelings of love or unconditonal love, the love that supports all things, all choices all desires?
You mention feelings but what are feelings or what feelings are you associating with the heart?

Since you are convinced that I know nothing of Western philosophy then we will not discuss it. Let's stick to eastern since you find we have commonality there. I wouldn't want to make you uncomfortable in thinking that you won't be able to communicate with me in common terms.

lucid_dream, post Yesterday, 11:28 PM
NOTHING? You mean that you are NOT open-minded, RC, etc.? Then one of us must be from Venus, and the other from Mars. If this is true, then it is probably pointless for us to communicate in writing. No wonder we who live in the so-called "Judaeo/Christian West" cannot communicate with people and religions of the East, who often live in a different time frame. For example, with fundamentalist Muslims who still think in 12th-Century terms.

Meanwhile, it is interesting to speculate: What would it be like to have a verbal chat?
==============================================================
To my comment: "LD, I have no idea what you mean by: "I have had unfathomable (?) experiences, and now I am moving towards the next stage if my will permits it, before old age overtakes me. My time is short; hence my lack of patience" you responded: "You are a man of God by profession, and you do not know what I am talking about?" I prefer to think of myself as being IN G-D.

Then you added: NOW I understand it. Without pride, prejudice or malice I add: It seems to me it is you who don't understand your fleeting consciousness and, therefore, have difficulty explaining it to others. No problem. We all feel this way, at times.

Rick, I agree with what you say. You put it nicely. I would only note that reason is not the only guide to truth. Some of our experiences defy rational explanation and understanding.

Joesus, the term 'heart' means many different things, even in eastern philosophy, but so far as your choices are concerned, I would think it closer to unconditional love. Clarification on what heart means to you would be appreciated. I do not use that term in the spiritual sense because it is fluffy. I do see some value to the bible and in the passages you quoted, but the bible has done much more harm than is acceptable. A more desirable religious work would not contain myriad assumptions pronounced as truths and would not be responsible for the close-mindedness, intolerance, and violence that the bible and other works have begotten throughout history. I am not convinced you know nothing of Western philosophy, only that you may be receptive to some ideas from there that you may not be aware of. Out of curiousity, do you still experience awe and mystery, or do you consider all experience old hat? What are your thoughts on whether all of this has an overarching purpose beyond the personal?

Lindsay, you may choose to believe to be in God in the same way that shoes are kept in a box. .. whatever. If God is all, then we are of God. I am not referring to fleeting consciousness that changes daily or hourly, but to the fact that our self-awareness is a form of consciousness, and that all forms are transient. It would seem that you don't understand transcendent consciousness. You cannot learn these things by reading about them.

Just for kicks, I have reposted your rewording of my post with my comments in red:



Like I said before, Lindsay, there are no small edits I can make to your rewording to make it like what I originally said. You completely distorted what I said and even fabricated large parts of it. Why is that?

Holy ganesh droppings, Joesus is back? (more importantly, I'm back?!?) Are you looking for new converts Joesus?
Shouldn't you be spending your time in sadhana instead of enjoying tamasic indulgences such as blithering about on this message board ?

I come down from the mountain top on occasion to answer a call for help.

LD, I like the way you re-edited my quote. Thanks for taking the time to do this. It shows that, when we are willing, sometimes, communication is possible. I now understand you, much better. I hope this answers you queston: "Why is that?"

Keep in mind that I did not claim that I COMPLETELY and accurately understood what you were trying to say. This is why I gave the feed back. What I fed back to you is what I actually FELT you were saying.

For example, in your last post to me you say, "You (Lindsay) completely distorted (twisted out of shape, misrepresented, falsified) what I said and even fabricated large parts of it." If I did this deliberately intending to make you look bad, you would be right. The fact is: That was not my intention. My intention was to get more details on the background of posters who want, I trust, a response.
===========================================================
BTW, to save time looking for the quote by LD--the one that I did NOT, intentionally. distort, here it is: Feb 15, 10:46 PM

===============

Now, I feel, we ARE communicating!

did somebody call you here? are you sure it wasn't your own inner cry for attention that led you to this nexus of babble?

Dan what is your position on this thread regarding unexamined assumptions and the worth of holy literature?

Consciousness emerges from chaos via unexamined assumptions, therefore they have value. However, if one is to completely understand reality, one cannot take up permanent residence in any less-than-fully-examined state.

If unexamined assumptions presuppose consciousness, then how can you propose that consciousness emerges from unexamined assumptions? You have the snake biting its tail.

Joesus, why would God's nature be such that, even though we are one with God, our consciousness can deceive us on this? Doesn't this imply malice on the part of God? Couldn't God have arranged it so that conscious beings are always conscious of being one with God? How could anything but a malicious God be responsible for so much of the illusions in everyday life that afflict billions of people on earth?

It could be... I see why you have been elevated to the position of God..

It is not an intrinsic requirement that consciousness form on unexamined assumptions, it is simply a matter of probability and opportunity. The probability of consciousness initiating in an omniscient state is exceedingly less probable than initiating in a 'veiled' state. It could happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. However, if a veiled form of consciousness manages to congeal out of the chaos, it may then offer selective pressure on its own physical substrate in the direction of its own need. This feedback yields the vector of the ascendency of consciousness over chaos that is dominated at early stages by chance but at later stages by design. This increasingly design-controlled process would culminate in Shawn's "singularity". At the core of this process is the bare sense of need, not any 'assumption'.

interesting

Point of reference.
God/Consciousness is not separate from creation as humans perceive themselves to be in the identity of being something other than God/Consciousness.

If you build a house and burn it down does the house feel some resentment for having been created and then destroyed?
Is there consciousness or a conscious connection between creator and created. If yes then does that apply to objects such as Trees, rocks etc. Does our concious thought have any effect on inanimate objects, time and space? Where does our consciousness end? If we die does our consciousness die?

Lets say that if Consciousness is consciousness and it is unaffected by Time and space but is very much aware of it. Then if you as a human no longer exist who or what are you? Do you continue to hang onto your memories of your life of presumed separation and suffering?

Let's say you have a choice to place your awareness in a point of reference that is not situated in the sparation of consciousness and manifest reality. There you do not identify with being afflicted by any outside source but are the one creating the scenario. Now the house is the body and you may do with it as you will without any predisposed attachment to mortality. Then the body is like a car or a set of clothes. They are useful in playing a role in achieving experience and creating appearances only.

Have you ever gone into a movie theater and watched a movie where you became absorbed in it temporarily feeling a wide range of emotions? Fear, excitement, passion etc. Ever cried in a movie?
Would you say there was some predisposed intent to make you suffer by influencing you into losing control of your emotional rationale. Would you say a film has that power?

We are what we want to be within the experience of what we are. Are you the body if the mind is aware of itself extended beyond the body in dreams and witnessing itself in action?

Point of reference...

So I guess my question becomes, why is God's nature so that billions of humans perceive themselves as something other than God? Does that not imply a malicious God? Why isn't God's nature such that we are all "born" with the ideal point of reference and are always fully conscious of our union with God? Is this beyond God's powers? Is God perhaps, less than ideal, less than perfect? Is God impotent or otherwise defective? Or is God malicious?

Point of reference.

There is only one.

Those billions of people perceived to be in separation are only suffering because you believe they are real and that they are suffering.

Each cell in your body uses neuropeptides and reciever sites to communicate with each other, if one senses something it is transmitted within the body to all of the other cells, but there is just one body.

Those billions of people are part of a much larger body and a much greater consciousness. You choose to identify with the smaller or larger.

You have decided that you suffer, yet consider this. In the animal world does a cat wish it were something else, or that it might be more or less successful if it was in a different environment or does it be just a cat?

You might be taking for granted that others share your resentment of a God that you were programmed with in your childhood, that didn't save you from the experiences of living a crappy life that didn't meet your expectations.
You could be attracting like minded people that meet the needs of your beliefs to project your reality experience. (With an occasional distraction created by the heart to point you to something greater)

I find that in any case no matter what the belief, what you put your attention on grows. Since you have decided that God has dissappointed you, you are not willing to give up your position until God gives you something greater than your own present experience.

God made man in his own image. Since the image is always changing you're just clinging to one, and are finding it painful to give it up. Since God created Man in his own image then its not up to a God outside of you to change anything, its up to the God within you to make it change. You just may be taking the long way around the barn in your present course of action. (not that it matters since God has all the time in the world...)

so I guess my question becomes, why is it in God's nature to permit people to perceive illusions? Why does a sense of separateness sometimes accompany the state of being conscious? Why isn't God's nature so that conscious beings are invariably conscious of their oneness with God? Sounds pretty malicious on God's part to me.

Note that I never said that God disappointed me, nor should you take to reading that into my words. I am just asking questions, out of curiousity, and because I want to know other people's answers, particularly yours since you seem to believe that everything is perfect as is.

So my beliefs are the cause of the state of my external environment? i.e., if I believe that there is no Joesus, then the solipsistic 'yoga' that is frequently posted under the name 'Joesus' will also cease?

It sounds malicious to you because that is the way you choose to see it. What better way to experience the power of God in you than to have the power to see it any way you wish to see it?



No you didn't say God personally dissapointed you, but in your posts you have a real thing about God not living up to anyones expectations, pointing to the discrepancies you see and experience in the religious community, and the relationship to the written word.
You also made mention of your own experience in which you made a point of expressing how dissapointing that was..
I would say, that you being dissapointed in everyone else who believes in God as an Ideal, and in your determination that they are sheep without any sensibility, and through your own logic, assume God is responsible (if God exists) to set the record straight.

Then how do you see it? What are your answers to my questions above, or do you not even believe they're valid questions? If you don't believe they're valid questions, then what sort of God permits invalid questions to be asked? Is this not malicious?

There is a difference between disappointment and dissatisfaction. I am dissatisfied with people's childish notions of God and of their need to believe in foolishness. I am dissatisfied with my own limitations, and of human limitations in general. I am not necessarily disappointed. Please do not try to change this discussion into something it's not. I have legitimate dissatisfactions and questions, and you are trying to belittle it by sidestepping my questions and saying it's all in my head and that there is a problem with the way I am experiencing things. That's not very helpful, or honest for that matter.

I could use your logic and argue that the fact that you are satisfied with everything suggests to me that there is something seriously wrong with you and the way you are experiencing things. If you are satisfied with everything, then where is the motivation for spiritual and intellectual growth, and for changing the world. Being satisfied with everything is a prescription for laziness. Joesus, are you a sloth?

No, you, with your beliefs in what you experience as real, communicating with others who also believe their experiences are real share a common belief that everything that is experienced is real according to the real interpretation of the person experiencing it.

Take a kids toy away and the kid screams thinking it is losing something. The average adult thinks he/she'll get over it. Take away a country boys prize 4 wheel drive and he may not see it the same way as he would with his kid who lost his toy 4 wheeler.
People place value on their attachments and this includes toys, relationships, feelings etc.

One person says I lost my girlfriend and I'm suffering. Someone loses their arms and legs and can't feed him/herself, then losing a girlfriend seems like an afterthought not worth of any attention.
Suffering is a state of mind. The mind and body are interconnected but the body does not rule the mind.
As long a like minded people like to wallow in their misery they will agree they are suffering. No one likes to suffer alone

As for me.... you brought me here Dan, the thought of getting rid of me isn't as strong as your desire to have me in your universe.
It's like masturbation, your'e afraid to admit you like it or do it, but you still do it anyway. It's one of those things you wish you could openly embrace.

What is so malicious about being able to ask questions? Perhaps you are getting the answers to your questions but facing in the wrong direction. Eveyone is so fixated on instant gratification. True appreciation of life is in the accumulation of all the gifts rather than jumping like a monkey from one tree to another seeking the ideal banana throwing away each piece of the puzzle because they don't have the patience to assemble the pieces


Not a sloth, lazy at times but what inspires me is the expansion I get from embracing each moment and experiencing each moment with open arms rather than with prejudice by dragging the past into the present moment. It requires a conscious choice, rather than to let the mind operate out of habit.
Being dissatisfied can be a good motivator, but you have to be willing to put down the old for the new rather than dragging the past with you and comparing the new with the old. As long as your arms are full carrying the old crap around you can't really embrace much of anything new.
There is always more than one dimensional reality to our experiences and we can expand our awareness to experience even the worst moment in a new way if we aren't experiencing from judgment. One mans junk pile is another mans treasure.

so I can't believe you away but I can cause suffering in others by believing them to be suffering?

I don't think that is what I said but if you want to mentally masturbate, I'll sit back and wait for you to finish..

that's too bad. Thinking can be quite useful when applied properly.

Comprehension is useful too. But you have to be paying attention

....differentiating signal from background noise!

nice to see you back, Dan and Joesus. So what's new with both of you?

mostly the same except it looks like I'll be gettin' hitched in June

There were two exceedingly important factors involved in my decision to resurface. (well, maybe three). First, I noticed that I am being surpassed in total number of posts by certain unnamed board villains. Second, Joesus dared to speak. Third, I was bored. I don't know how long I'll be interested this time around, but maybe I'll redevelop an addiction and spam the board for a while.

trip
everytime I look at your picture, the word 'whoa' comes to mind. It's like the Oracle hasn't yet convinced you that you are the One.

congratulations, Dan, and good luck. I hope you won't debate like this with your wife. I wasn't expecting you to stick around, but it was nice to see you drop in again.

funny thing
My fiance's father is a gita-preaching swami based in Tiruvannamalai, India. He was high in the Maharishi organization in the early 90's.

Now that's funny...

Will you be celebrating Mahasivaratri with the family this coming weekend?

Since the family (except for the girl) is in India, I can probably avoid it. The yoga taught by her father supposedly doesn't focus too much on deities and rituals, although he does have some priests at his ashram who do pujas for all events like this since Arunachala is a hotbead of Siva worship.

Welcome back, Dan. PhD in hand, I assume? Congrats on that and on your engagement, too.

The last time I looked: PhD, stands for post hole digger; or, piled higher and deeper. It can also mean: knowing more and more about less and less, until we know everything about...nothing.

Hey, I resemble that!

Rick, if it truly offends, I can dissemble it.

Obviously no offense was taken. Therefore, I conclude: All is well!

So I guess we can safely conclude that we all need to examine our assumptions more closely at times; all of them. However, Dan's point about assumptions and consciousness is interesting.


Lindsay, I hadn't heard about the piled higher and deeper before. That's funny (seriously). What would you say M.D. stands for?

I will tell you what The Rev. stands for: The revolving one. Comes the revolution, I hope I will not be revolving, too fast... Now, I will leave it to you to reveal what M.D. stands for.

BTW, I will be away, on vacation in Florida, from this Sunday until March 21.

I just noticed this post, Rick. I wasn't blowing you off by not responding. I am not yet done Piling it high and Deeper, but I am ever closer. And thanks for the congrats


yeah, it all makes sense to me now. I'm a natural born seer. I impress myself daily, sometimes more than once

My 2 cents on this thread...

Both Joesus and lucid_dream exhibited some sentimentality. I may be wrong.

Sentiment is a lamentable condition of the human kind. This is no illusion.

We should do away with it, completely, and achieve unity so we would never feel we are truly separate from one another.

Union exists in and of all things. The only reason one doesn't see it or experience it is because of the personal realities that are placed between the inner and the outer.
Compassion is different than sentiment when it comes from a place of knowing.
God/The Heart is always leading one to the greatest thought one can have,... and just a bit further...

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=13987

I agree but I tend to like to discuss things from a more pragmatic point of view.

At the moment I think that while unity may be achieved by enhanncing the brain (including wiping sentiment), there might always be a certain level even above that, which can only be achieved by spirituality and a lot of meditation. But maybe even that can be duplicated some day.

Yet the prospect of people rising even to that lower level, would be quite spectacular IMO.

Points of view are relative


The word spiritual might imply the idea that there is something innate wihin us that connects us at all levels. The idea that it is real may lead us to find that connecting the inner with the outer is within the power of our being. Finding anything simply follows a search on some level whether intellectual or through intuitive resources. Meditation is the focus of attention.

There is a theory I found interesting, that at one time according to Egyptian, possibly Atlantean glyph translation, there were 3 ways that were being used to achieve enlightened awareness.
1. The old fashoned way being that certain people who were conscious enough to be aware of the Union between the unmanifest and the manifest allowed their beliefs which were inspired by their intuitive awareness had focused their attention on this reality to expand their experience of it. They in turn cognized no. 2. which is the passing on of certain aspects in universal laws ofTruth as a clear medium or voice in the capacity of Teacher to the student guiding the student towards their own experience.
Gaining knowledge of the affects of focus on manifest reality these individuals cognized the process of alchemy to combine spirituality and Science, #3. to create soma which when ingested boosted the molecular link between the subtle and the manifest allowing the experience of exhalted perception, or 6th sense and expanded intuition and vision. The idea being that if one was evolved beyond the basic need of the ego to cling to the fear of survival and see beyond the idea that the body rules the mind then the experience would be something that would propel the user into new experiences of the Self rather than scare the crap out of a superstitious person who might only believe the new experiences were dreams or hallucinations.

The theory was that those that would follow the inspiration of the heart to meditate or focus the awareness on that which was inherently true in all things were the clearest channels of Universal mind leading the secondary and third levels of consciously aware humans into a unified civilized structure that was without fear, greed, jealousy, sickness and even death.


I find that the external tools no matter what they are if used properly will give one the experience that they desire. True spirituality is in the expanding of unified principals that unite all beings and things. The Gifts of spiritual union are useless to those who are one sidedly seeking to achieve only material wealth. And material wealth loses its glitter when not integrated with the balance of spiritual awareness due to the fact that feelings, attachments to objects and the experiences of those objects never last. You can get tired of a good thing and there is no appreciation without the contrast of opposites and spiritual awareness.
The mind has to balance itself with both the manifest and unmanifest for neither stands or exists without the other. God cannot exist without Science or the expansion of intellectual knowledge because without the intellect there is no perception of creation being created by the creator. Science cannot exist without God because God is the underlying aspect of all beliefs, perceptions of reality and inspiration.
Even tho the ego believes in itself and its individual points of reference and thinks it can do without one or the other it still doesn't change the fact that Truth exists regardless of belief.

Pragmatism is an ideal that doesn't always lead to union when an individual takes sides in the debate between the realities of science vs God.
I think when you say you like to be pragmatic, that you are saying you're commited to sticking to a certain point of reference and would rather speak in terms of your own thinking and experience.
Combining wisdom and experience allows one to observe objectively rather than living subjectively on one side of the track carrying judgment and living with an attachment to things being a certain way.
All things being relative to something, the universe is only a reflection of the thoughts that we entertain as we create our own reality.
Ultimately you can look at it any way you wish but likes and dislikes are most probably going to be personal.

Some people like Miracle Whip

that's your point of view