Discussion in 'Sikhism' started by dhillon, Dec 28, 2011.
Welcome to the discussion Tony. Isn't the concept of Heaven itself dualistic?
yes it s very true. only egoist who wants to preserve their ego will go to heaven. yes if day and nite we praise the lord, then makes the destiny to him why elsewhere. if elsewhere it is called dualistic thoughts.
first we say we are been created from the image of god..then suddenly out of a blue we say we came from the soil,,and to the soil we return..this is a dualistic thought too. we forgot the creator then we came from him
You go on discussing dualism, then you state the most renowned example humans have invented...
God is love objectified
Man is love subjectified
If you truly understand non-dual reality, you understand this is something false. Indeed, this what Christians go on proclaiming of Jesus, that he is fully divine as well as fully man... it is because he transcends this duality - this is enlightenment.
The realization that there is only love - indeed, this is the root, and the mystery.
We say there is the Creator because we assume this has all been created... there has to be a beginning, else how did it arise? It is naught but creativity, and all is an expression of that.
We have fabricated the unmanifest to explain what has become manifest, we do not realize there is nothing which is unmanifest, the only limit is that of our own perception. The unmanifest points to that which is not usually manifest - that which is not made known by our normal senses. It is possible to perceive of it, but we cling too much to what we already consider fact.
is not creator and created dualism?
beginning and end?
can't we be all?
creator and created?
alpha and omega?
isn't time a man made construct to discuss things as we perceive them, dualistic?
Time is the perception of movement filtered through the mind... movement itself is peripheral though, the object of religion is to find that which is permanent, that which all else arises in, that which observes it all - it is you.
Thus the basic inquiry of Maharshi Ramana: "Who am I?"
Find for whom this "I" arises - as science is to the objective, religion is to the subjective, in the subjective you are trying to find out what is the nature of your awareness. In the objective, you are trying to find the nature of the universe.
Is universe and awareness another duality? Look and see, certainly object and subject is.
Wil, am obviously more on your side in the discusstion, but "[w]e say there is the Creator because we assume this has all been created... there has to be a beginning, else how did it arise? It is naught but creativity, and all is an expression of that" is very close to the core issue as I see it.
Without time there is no process and everything just is. But we (from the smallest nuclear particle to the Kosmos itself) percieve the change. Why else to phtons change from waves to particles and bad men into good ones? Creativity itself implies change, what is created, how does it work? Creativity is the light of the Divine that speaks directly to us and leads to change, to progress, towards unity and love.
There has been one major deleted component in each post here on this thread:
Dicussions on the topic of "Duality".
How has that occurred?
Show me a coin . . . and I'll show you it's flip-side.
Show me a the study of White-Light . . . and I'll show you it's spectrum of colors.
Show me a mother . . . and I'll show you mother-fornicator.
Show me a something . . . and I'll show you it's required "nothing shelf-space".
Show me a plank-time's worth of space . . . and I'll show you rising Real-estate Values in Iowa.
Show me a poor man . . . and I'll show you rich man.
Show me a beautiful woman . . . and I'll show you an ugly woman.
All eixsts together, and their differences are appreciated by the "Knower of the field".
The "Knower of the field" is a spirit-soul-in-the-material-world.
With all the opposites that compose the material-world's energy ---is there a market for renuncing all these polarities?
Even when you get to the real esoteric realms. Take Kabbalah, the Creator withdraws to Create and what is Created may be of the Creator, but not the Creator.
Right to the core
Here is duality enveloped in an indisputable singularity:
This is a 1.5 volt sample of Duality & Unity acting as One Unit.
Are you aware of how many mystics through history have been killed for stating the truth? Jesus is only the most noteworthy, but he has been a product of schools which became Kaballah and Hasidism later. Mystics rarely tell you absolute truth, they are interested in guiding you to know it yourself...
Look at your own reaction to my statement that I am God, you reject it straight away, but luckily I do not live in a country that kills for such statements. In reality it is just a declaration of am-ness, because both "I" and "God" are concepts of the mind - they are statements within dualism but not of reality. This also explains why they do not bring it in directly, if you believe you are God before encountering nonduality there will be many problems, your ego clings to it - it is perfectly true, but you have not realized it so it is wrong to say.
God is a verb, mind creates nouns to make sense of it.
Here is a difficult to grasp singularity of all possible angles:
The above displays all sorts of duality:
Clockwise & counter clock-wise
And, all such perameters happen to be reversible here, in the case of the sphere, and still without loss.
IE: "Clockwise & counter clock-wise" is reversible/interchangable by turning the globe upside down.
So the "top" can be reversed and proclaimed as the bottom. The left is "left" unless it's called the "right".
BUT, no parameter nullifies its equal and opposite inversion ---there can only be one outside and one inside "at-a-time". Thus there are absolute parameters that cannot be escaped.
Is that how the Prison Industrial complex operates?
Is that why so many are imprisoned and how the legal profession make such high salaries? Because of all the theological debates in Wild-West showdowns around the globe?
Well, firstly I am not the untutored you believe I am. Only such a one would not be aware of martyrs to the truth. Secondly neither Kaballah nor Hasidism have any real roots in the schools that existed in Jesus' time. And the line on who tells the truth is well-known
You miss so much of what I say. All is G!d. Not just you and your way. But you do not speak with the G!d/d!ss's voice. There is no "am-ness" there is only becoming-ness (read your Pali Scriptures). All is flux, not this being you create in your monkey-mind.
I say the dsame as you. The difference is that you believe in exclusivity and absoluteness and being; I inclusiveness, not-knowing, and becoming.
If G!d is a verb-- am-ness is an onymoron.
Jails are there for reflection and forced aloneness.
Crimes are there to deliver one to jail.
All is scripted, all has a purpose for the particular journey.
When have I accused you of not being tutored? I go on saying this is a barrier, but never that it isn't there. The titles though are irrelevant, of course, but Jesus was probably an Essene - a people that certainly knew the truths which these groups convey today.
I miss nothing, I simply go on saying "what is the point of understanding it logically?" You have not directly encountered that of which you speak, thus all that you say is for naught. All of your knowledge simply makes it more difficult to convey things to you, you want to correct, you want to prove your knowledge is superior.
I know nothing, I simply respond to your statement from my experience.
This is actually where we clash: I reject nonsense and try to focus the conversation towards truth, you seem to find this uncomfortable.
There is no knowing, and no becoming, you are it already, you just have to realize it.
I am not sure what this means... "onymoron"
I have simply knocked off the concepts from my earlier statement "I am God", do you not see this has to be the initial statement of awareness? That sense your awareness is so? How would you say this if not "I am", but the "I" is a linguistic device to refer to this instance of awareness, where names refer to other things which we become aware of. When it is free from this, there is just the sense of am-ness. This is what is being conveyed.
The verb for what is happening in this would be witnessing.
Separate names with a comma.