If you accept the unconscious as a reality then what is a conscious awareness of the unconscious?
Is it a thought of the unknown, a knowing of the unknown, an experience of the unknown?

If you look into a mirror is the reflection you? If the universe is an emanation and you look into it, is it the creator? IF the Creator is infinite, is it possible to see with physical eyes the infinite?
The reflection is what we see with the physical senses. What the universe is beyond the gross level of sense that is habit and belief is much more than emanations of perception, it is essence itself. Potential and the absolute God are not something that can be contained in an experience, reflection then is what we wish to see or are able to see depending on our programs of interpretation and the evolution of our own awareness.


Not as long as the ego is the determinate judge. Above and beyond that all association to the permanence of the manifest becomes illusion and the becoming of God is seen as a projection of thought. The true underlying nature of reality is seen rather than the projections of individuality, in everything as it is perceived in projection.

A great man once said, I and my Father are one and my Father is spirit. Ego identifies with that which is of spirit. To be in the world but not of it is to be free of the ego.

J, Please answer your own rhetorical questionS. Me, I have no idea what you are trying to say.

You ask, "If you look into a mirror, is the reflection you? "

LGK: That's easy. NO!

J: If the universe is an emanation and you look into it, is it the creator?

LGK: IMO, the physical universe is an infinite series of emanations in all directions. Emanations are emanations; they are a pieces of GØD expanding into GØD.

J: IF the Creator is infinite, is it possible to see, with physical eyes, the infinite?
LGK: Can we see the infinite? Experience the eternal?

ATHEISTS AND AGNOSTICS, TAKE NOTE
GØD, IMO, is infinity and eternity. As to your question: There are some questions which have no meaning. This is one of them.
BTW, the verb 'to be' is the only very I use in conjunction with 'GØD'. IMO, GØD is not, in any way an objective being who does, or even wills, this, that, or whatever. For me, GØD does not will, or exist; GØD is will, or existence. This is why Orthodox Jews write about G-d, not about God. G-d, for them--and I agree--cannot be made into a three-dimensional and objective, even subjective, being.

LGK: Can people ever be sure that they are ego and illusion free?

I (ego) have no idea what the following means:

Those who have the ears to hear..... eyes to see...

Only reflections of it.

No the the thinking mind can't, only the heart can.

I guess I need a heart transplant!!!
Something tells me that we are WAY of topic. To keep us on it, please check out the latest thread by lgking.
I wonder who he is? Or was?

Not really, your choice of habits has removed you from the subtler levels of listening and experiencing. Meaning your heart isn't broken, just not used to its full extent or potential. You not understanding what I said is by your own choice.
You don't want to understand, if you did you would.

The original humans had great self-control and a mind that was impersonally nonattached to the body and so did not feel pain when the body was injured. ..But by increasing man’s attachment to the body and ego, and thereby his mental sensitiveness to their complaints…every impingement of discomfort, physical or emotional, great or small, creates a desire for appeasement…

Man should know that his struggle for completeness is born of delusion; for he already has all he needs within his inner powerful Self. It is only because he mistakenly imagines, while identifying himself with spiritually ignorant mortal company, that he is lacking in these divine endowments. He needs only to realize that everlasting fullness of hi soul treasure-house.

Satan/Ego tries to keep human beings deluded by greed, anger, fear, desire, attachment, and ignorance; so God uses the counterparts of self-control, calmness, courage, satisfaction, unattached divine love, and wisdom to bring man to His Divine Kingdom.

J--Or is it John Wayne?--quit the BS!

Please, dialogue in good old, clear and understandable Anglo Saxon.

I don't BS. I'd suggest you step out of the box and learn not just the language but seek the meaning.
Then come back and we'll discuss the subject.

Instead of trying to manipulate the subject matter into what is familiar to your beliefs It is possible to open yourself up to a subject by stepping into another mans perspective. That would require you tho to actually read the dialogue rather than skim through it and look for familiar territory and never leave your own house.

Dialogue is not restricted to narrow belief systems but to the nature of communication which actually requires one to listen, and absorb. Sometimes one has to allow for the knowledge and experience to communicate rather than to barge in with personal histories. This can take some time for those who have invested themselves deeply in habit.
As the saying goes, you can't always teach and old dog new tricks.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." Use imagination, but maybe not yours if it limits you to a narrow persepctive.....

Hmmmmm!!!! Now I know why I take no pleasure in dialoguing with the John Wayne ("I never killed anyone who didn't deserve it.) and/or wanabe guru types. They want people with no imagination of their own to absorb and submit to the wisdom they say they have to offer. And isn't it wonderful? I you are a willing and humble "old dog", in need of a meal now and then, they have some new tricks to teach you.

BTW, if you feel I am describing myself here, for heaven's sake, do not allow me to persuade you to dialogue with me.
BTW 2, anyone, if there is a better term than B.S., please let me know. If its use offends anyone, I apologize.
BTW 3, at university my professor of philosophy wisely advised: Don't waste your time trying to wade through page after page of a boring long-winded book, which makes little sense to you and does not grab you attention relatively soon. Very few books are worth reading all they way through.

Personally I find that people with no creative imagination tend to flare up or run when they don't understand what they are getting themselves into. The ego always finds a way to separate the situation into victim and victimizer, so they can feel they are justified when they react.

Sorry Reverend for irritating you sense of pride, but I think you want others to join you in your wisdom and what you have to say and it reflects itself in your paranoia.
Really, I'm not invested in what you do, and I don't have to remain silent in the face of your refusal to expand beyond your own definitions, nor am I singling you out in the process. What I am in process of is free expression regardless of the insecurities other feel when they compare their own beliefs to what I express. This detachment without being apathetic gives me freedom to speak without a need for a following, or the need to convince you or anyone else by appealing to personal pride and to manipulate the lesser nature of the ego in others.

The ones who I find interest in are those who are not so easily threatened and by their own imagination can dialogue in Unity rather than in separation of being greater or lesser by their own attachments to the insecurities of identification with personality and pride.
Those that I teach are never subservient. I demand they respect themselves not idolize themselves.

Old dogs sometimes offer wisdom of experience but then if their dialogue is limited to the past and that past is relevant to personal aggrandizement, one must take carefully what is useful and discard what is obviously not. If I was hungry and asked for food for thought from someone who has nothing to tell me of what I want to know I would find by example the old dog who barks alot to attract attention to themselves but say nothing or know nothing of what I want to know are just old dogs who are living their life out in the house they have chosen. Everyone has beliefs and they are subject to change... unless your an old dog who can't, or won't. Most old dogs have lost their childlike innocence and have psychological aversions to anything they don't understand or immediately relate to. Basically the cup is full with no room for more.
Rather than isolate myself to one house I would like to think I'm part of all houses tho I'm by preference of choice not subject to being confined in any one house nor locked out of any can live in any house of my choosing. By making a choice I don't have to isolate myself, nor do I isolate or judge others who can't agree with my ideals or those I don't understand, that would be egoic and childish on my part.
Humility is often relative to ones personal perspectives that are based on the house they have attached themselves to.....


Better yet, don't put dialogue into a box with the intention of manipulating others to conform to personal ideals of righteousness and conformity.
Take what comes to you like it is a gift from God and then connect yourself to your environment and your experiences rather than to separate your life into victim and victimizer.
It is better to look for God than to look for where God is not.
This actually allows you to experience God in others and in yourself at the same time without the delusion of emptiness and evil overtaking your senses.

As a wise little green enlightened master once said: Fear leads to anger and anger leads to violence.

BTW: I never killed anyone, tho I might have had a hand in the death of a few ego's.
To make any assumptions or possibly emotional projections such as might exist in your opening statement..
"Now I know why I take no pleasure in dialoguing with the John Wayne"
...and to bring it closer to being on topic,.. may be because you see wingism as your reality rather than God as the reality.
I'd say you've taken a position....and in the process, and more importantly, by your own design, put me in another, the antithesis of being in the world but not of it.

C'est la vie



I used to think the Bible was long winded and of no interest until I grew up and learned to appreciate it for what it contained and where it came from. By my own ignorance I often (in my short tempered pride) would glance through something without any comprehensive understanding and label it as worthless and useless, but that was my choice and my immature judgment.
A Philosopher would do an injustice if he or she were to project their weakness of pride and ego, and try to teach it to others. Actually they wouldn't be much of a philosopher, same way most Men of God know nothing of God tho they spend their whole life talking about God.
Jesus spent some time discussing this fact with regard to the pharisees and sadducees of his time. Not much has changed in that respect even in this day.
You being as old as you are may have a memory of your old philosophy teacher but that person is dead and buried most likely. What he left behind as an impression will soon also be dead and buried, if what was passed on was a rule or ideal of personal limitation and judgment.
That is always the fate of ignorance.

Discordia, what happened to you? Did the current dialogue bore you to death, as it did me. If you fail to see this new post I will not blame you.

Dec 26, 2007, you wrote:

If you are around, more on this, when I return.

Evidently Discordia hasn't had any interest in Brain Meta since January 11th. (short timer, less than 3 months)
Nothing to do with the current dialogue most likely. You might have to look for other discordant buddies, to compliment or share your recent death in boredom.