J. sent me a link to a 15 page booklet this morning, by a spiritual teacher named William Samuel, and I think it really tells it like it is! I have found that this booklet enhances what I've already thought and imagined about the truth of reality. The analogies that this book uses to describe reality are utterly clever.
Read it for yourself:
Two Plus Two Equals Reality
And now, just some questions to ponder that I've thought about today:
-The eye cannot see the eye. How does the eye know it exists? (And don't say "mirror"!)
-If everything is a manifestation of Being, why are thoughts considered useless? Thoughts are Being, too! If thoughts were not Being, there would be no thoughts!
-What was Being before Being? Has Being always Been?
-Did Being create itself?
-Will Being destroy itself?
These are just some things to think about, and also to discuss. Feel free to comment, and to ask your own questions should you have any.
I PROMISE that tomorrow I will respond to all comments I've received for the past couple of days.
28 comments:
...but how can I ask a question if I don't know what to ask? And, is it really a question if I already know the answer? mmmmmm.... :)
Good Question.
Well I don't totally agree with the 'ocean is not in the drop', for I do believe that the macrocosm is in the microcosm as a pattern, the pattern of ALL things at once, is fully in each of the little things inside the whole.
So really I realize that I don't know how the writer meant that statement, possibly he meant that the ocean is bigger than the drop and there are many drops in the ocean, so one drop cannot the whole ocean be. With that, I agree.
My apologies, I don't have the time to read the booklet. But it sounds worth the time, I hope you do read it all.
As to your questions, I think there is 'Pure Thought' that preexist all manifestations from that. And in our case, we HUMANS are supposed to be able to know PURE THOUGHT first hand, I believe this is really 'enlightenment' in its' fullest manifestation.
What I believe has happened is that us HUMANS have become preoccuppied with thought that is not pure, that is, thought that is less than Thought at the Pure level, and so, we have created a false or impure existence for ourselves from our own 'thoughts'.
The solution is to return to the Pure Thought and its' power to project itself as a perfect manifestation of a never ending unfoldment of all the good and constructive things and people and creatures that the Pure Thought is capable of, and this would be far more than we can even begin to imagine in our polluted thought state of being.
Was I right, than Being cannot destroy itself, it can RESTORE itself. And yes, I would say that Being (as Pure Thought) did create itself, and all the manifestations which are more than a single universe.
As to what this Pure Thought was before it was Being, I would have to say that it always was, and never began, not as if it had ever not been, and it will never end.
The thoughts that are considered useless are the polluted thoughts, those which humans partake of that are not really HUMAN in nature, but are destructive, hurtful, deceiving, dirty(as meaning those which keep one from become Pure Thought), and so on.
The eye is a projection instrument first then a receiver of that projection. Like this, the feeling and hearing, which are the same only different degrees of 'movement reception', this feeling/hearing brings in something, feels something, hears something, then the 'brain' translates it into 'an interpretation' based on an individuals ability to understand, and then, this interpretation is projected by 'mind' outward into our 'field of life', and then it reflects itself back to us.
So Karma is that realizing, interpreting, projecting, and receiving back. Hence the danger in 'bad thoughts or ideas' and the doing of them, they can be potent just from the 'eye power', even if there is no action involved. But those are easier to undo, actions are harder to undo, in them we take part by 'body', in the projection of our understandings into the 'real field' that reflects us back to us.
Sorry Sophia for such length, but your post and questions are wonderfully stimulating and I simply got carried away.
See you later.
Sophia, hope you don't mind, I decided to make a post from this and put it on R/R. Thanks for the great questions.
First, I'll look at thought. I limit thought to something occuring within awareness and want to be very clear that I differentiate thought from awareness. Jim's post uses the term 'PURE THOUGHT' which I would equate with the term awareness. I think he did a pretty good job of explaining the difference. I use the term thought below to mean the day to day images we carry with us as part of being a biological body.
Thoughts are not useless, only limited in usefulness. Thoughts are internal simulations of how the outside world might be (Dr John Lilly had a number of wonderful books on this many decades ago).
If you want to know how the agreement called the physical world works, thoughts are unsurpassed in their usefulness. They are great for predicting what will happen if I flip a light switch or don't stop at a red light or when the sun will be visible from where I live.
If you want to know where the physical world exists, thoughts are useless because the are inside the physical world. They are useless for describing themselves. They become endlessly circular.
This relates to the question about eyes. How does an eye know it exists? The question is not the right question. The right question is how do we know seeing exists? The answer is profoundly obvious, because I see.
Next comes the questions about being, what was before being, did being create itself, etc. This is again the wrong question. It has built into it a whole framework that includes the concept of time. Is "being" occuring "now"? Again, the answer is profoundly obvious, YES. There is no "before" or "always". These are only concepts based upon language and memory which is an event that is occuring "now".
Dig deeper into the assumptions and frameworks that surround linquistic questions. They build upon linquistic constructs that have no basis in experience, for example, a burning ice cube. Easily visualized and talked about, but with no basis in experience. "Not Being" is a head trip only, it has no basis in experience. Being is (quite literally). There is nothing to compare it to. It is in a catagory similar to a mathmatical axiom. No proof is required, no comparisons needed. Being is profoundly obvious. I verify it internally without any other reference or tools required. Will it be here "tomorrow"? Tomorrow is simply a language construct describing a similuation of an event that might occur.
Long winded, unclear, but isn't all language? Better to look and know for yourself.
Sophia,
"The eye cannot see the eye. How does the eye know it exists?"
Nice koan!!!
An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth.
Slap the other cheek!
There is no such thing as an eye, separate from the cheek, body, spirit or intelligence. The eye cannot stand alone.
What was Being before Being? Has Being always Been?
Did Being create itself?
Will Being destroy itself?
Being is change.
Be-ing is change-ing.
"If everything is a manifestation of Being, why are thoughts considered useless? Thoughts are Being, too! If thoughts were not Being, there would be no thoughts!"
Objects are probably thoughts in the mind of God or Being. And without thoughts, images, symbols words, ideas etc there will be nothing in the mind.
I believe all minds are within the mind of God.
There are no creatures or Creator. And no creation. Only mind. Which is God, intelligence, energy and matter. In that order. Or otherwise.
Sophia,
There's a therapy for worrying. I think I will try that.
Have a stress-free weekend!
I think I am suffering from "the sexualization of our society". It's everywhere. Especially internet. You can almost download it. ;>)
Well, it depends on what you are looking for.
I went to a fund-raising sale
at the local protestant church.
There were second-hand books,
hand-me-down clothes and curtains.
I needed something for my place.
I bought a huge wooden horn;
it'll make my room look primitive.
There's something about old men
and women that makes me think
they know what suffering is;
they are kind and sympathetic,
with quick smiles and answers.
Of course they could just give
everything away and not care
but they had to collect money
for their action and activities.
(I miss my children, everyone
and the birthday parties.)
A curious young woman asked me
if I come from Italy or Sicily.
No, I don't look like Tom Cruise
but perhaps my Latin blood
is clearly showing thru.
(I don't have the copperskin
of my Malay ancestors, tho,
my yellow skin is almost brown.
My grandfather had come from China
with a long pigtail interwoven
with golden strong abaca fibers,
my grandmother had told me.)
I needed something for the car
but had no idea yet but maybe
I'd go to this one-euro store -
everything used to be for a gulden.
This pretty young woman makes me
both self-conscious and excited;
she'll make a fool out of me.
We smiled at each other nicely.
But why suddenly am I getting
so much attention from everyone.
This must be due to suggestion
and my lack of concentration.
The girl at the green grocery
had a very exotic white looks
with finely chiselled cheeks
and marble-smooth complexion.
She stared at me steel-coldly
as if daring me to stare back.
I backed down, smiled at her
and shyly said hi two times;
she's probaly used to this game
and I don't really blame her.
Outside I had seen her glance
at me with unconscious interest.
Once I stared at some girl
with my dark piercing eyes.
But I was tired and hungry,
depressed, sad and lonely.
She seemed a bit mesmerized
and let me thru; she's sweet.
She didn't really suspect it.
But I never did see her again.
Well, I'm still thinking of her.
Jon,
I suggest asking a question that you don't know the answer to. At least, that's what I normally do. ;) hehehe...
Hi Jim,
I agree with you that there is pattern in everything. I used the statement in the title of this post to try to say something similar to what William Samuel was saying. He used the examples of the alphabet and the numbers. He says, for instance, that it is no more possible to confine or define all of Being into one object alone, than it is to confine all of the alphabet into one letter. Since you don't have time to read the entire document, I'll paste here a quote from the document:
"The tangible 'universe' is the total of the objects of perception, and they are all perceived within this Awareness. One of these objects is this body called 'me' and 'mine'. Just who is this 'me'? This body is no more than any other object of perception within Infinite Awareness, yet the claim is that this particular body called 'me' contains Awareness within it. Is this not what mankind believes? “I am aware,” he says. “I have a mind of my own that is aware. This is my awareness and I want it to show
me abundant dollars, happiness, or something else.
"This 'me' who contains awareness is an impossible impostor and a liar from the beginning. It is no
more possible to imprison the Divine Awareness of Infinite Being and confine it within an object of its perception than it is possible to confine the alphabet to the letter A or jam the infinity of arithmetic into one number. All there is to 'mankind', to the old man who needs to be put off, is the belief that this Awareness here and now reading these words is confined within a body—that is beholden to a body—that it is the servant of a body—that it is the function of the body's brain or a personal mind."
What I meant by my title, is that the whole of the ocean is not confined into a single drop.
I also agree with you that Being has always been, simply because I fail to see how it could be possible that something could come from nothing. I think Being was initially pure Awareness before it manifested into this world and universe version of awareness. Maybe there were previous manifestations before this one. Maybe there will be other manifestations after this one. I cannot imagine what else could exist besides a world and universe, but then my mind can't comprehend Being fully, either.
I will check out your related post on your blog. I look forward to it. Thanks, Jim.
Hi Joe,
I liked Jim's post, too. I had the thought earlier today that all of this manifestation is one big thought, but more appropriately, I'd call it "Pure Thought", using Jim's term. Pure thought, or Awareness, just is, and does not differentiate between good or bad, like we do. Humans take pure thought and make it impure. The thing I'm having difficulties grasping, is that if everything just is, and nothing is really good or bad, then thoughts too should not be considered good or bad. They just are. So, I agree with what you said about thought being not useless but only limited in usefulness. Everytime we take a step in a certain direction, for instance, there is some thought involved. If there were no thought, we'd all just sit until we die, not even eating or relieving ourselves. So, to live in this physical world, thoughts are necessary. It's when we start thinking something is good or bad that we start to make them useless. It's like when I start trying to predict what the future will be like when my eldest cat dies. This causes worry and unnecessary suffering. I should just let be what is.
Your statement on the eye makes a lot of sense. It's just like when we're stating that we know we exist because we are aware. (At least, I know I exist because I am aware. I can't speak for you all!)
Thanks for your comments on this post, Joe. If you want to know my opinion, I think you are very wise. I mean, this comment of your contains a lot of wisdom, and I am happy that you have shared it with me and others.
Anonymous #1,
Here's another question for you. Does Intelligence know that it exists? Here's my thought on that question:
At the moment, no. It has amnesia, but it is only self-inflicted. I think over time, as our awareness increases, Intelligence will remember itself. I wonder what will happen to the Universe when that happens? I wonder if 2012 plays into this....
Anonymous #2,
Here I thought I was so afraid of change, when it's not only happening all around me, it's what's happening to me this very moment! Kind of puts change in a whole new perspective.
Anonymous #3,
Loved your comment. What you said about the possibility of objects being thoughts in the Mind really resonated with me. I, too, have imagined this. Since those of us on this path generally believe we are dream characters, it follows that dreams are thoughts and so we, too, are thoughts.
I was thinking that the Creation is the Creator, really, but if Creator always was, then creation always was, too, which means, generally, that there was no creation, just always Be-ing. And if Creator never created anything outside of Himself/Herself/Itself, then it follows that there was no creation. *sigh* I hope I'm not confusing anyway, because I sure am confusing myself! I'll have to think on this more....
Thanks for your input.
Anonymous #4,
And what is that therapy? Not worrying? :)
Anonymous #5,
I know a lot of conservatives who would agree with you. :)
Sigurd,
Sometimes I still think of strangers that I know I'll never see again. Like that man I told you all about in an early post on this blog, the man that was sitting all alone in the restaurant. I believe we had some soul-recognition. Do you believe in that stuff?
Sophia,
Let me give you an answer from out of the blue:
I think every individual or ego, if you might call it, is an eye, ear, nose, skin of this Intelligence. Or to put it in another way, this intelligence looks at itself thru our eyes. And keeps bringing out eyes, ears, nose, skin to become more aware of itself.
We are the eyes of the universe. This universe is eye-ing itself thru our eyes.
You are beginning to think like I do. But don't worry. Being confused is quite normal. Stay confused and you will be all right.
Don't worry about all the anonymice. They're mostly from me.
"Sexualization of our society". I heard this at least two times on the radio, when I woke in the morning. It seems like our society is suffering because of this. We are running out of social workers, therapists and psychologists because of the problems associated with extra-marital relationships. Men seeking women, women seeking men, men seeking men, women seeking women, etc, etc, etc...
Worry therapy. I heard this too on the radio when I woke up a few days ago.
Well, worrying seems to be normal. If you try to suppress, you may end up becoming very lazy. Procrastinating all the time. Looking for men or women for friendship, dating or marriage, etc, etc, etc... But try to avoid CWS.
Sophia,
Don't worry. If you have enough animal magnetism, this guy will want to see you again. ;>)
As a matter of fact, I thought about this when I met Sophia, the social worker. Is this a classic example of the student meeting his or her teacher? Who is the teacher? Who is the student? We are both.
At a certain point without meaning to, we touched on the subject of synchronicity. That somehow everything is interconnected. That there is a reason for everything happening. Well, in my usual way, I denied this. And Sophia didn't want to contradict me, inspite of her own ideas... You know, she reminds me of my deceased sister, physically.
Sophia and I seem to have some close affinity, I won't tell you about it. Well, she seem to come from a background that is somehow related to the reason I am suffering miserably at the moment or at least in the past. She also has the same surname as my ex. This is not very surprising because the problem is quite common. And the surname is the most common surname there is in the country.
Never mind. It's not important.
Anonymous,
Population growth would support your theory. More eyes, ears, etc. to be aware of all this.
I see nothing wrong with men looking for women for friendship, or with women looking for men for friendship. I don't think that is called sexualization of our society. Most of my friends are men, really.
LOL Which guy will want to see me again? I don't know who you're refering to.
You are a skeptic, aren't you. To believe in synchronicity I think you have to experience it for yourself. I didn't even know what it was until all these coincidences started happening to me back in 2004. A good friend told me it was synchronicity. It was nice having a name for it, because I was about to look for information on the Internet about it.
Sexualization is real, it is a capitalist absorption of sex as a product to be packaged and sold, it is what the original beats and hippies of 50's and 60's were against, they opposed the packaging and merchandising of sex and romance, look around, sexualization is here and well, the hippies lost to drugs and gave up and in. C'est la vie.
Love that Sophia!
Post a Comment