Return to Oneness

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

He has a bad case of it, must be a reason the source has brought him here to project his reflection on to others, these strongholds are very hard to shake from the system but it can be done, he needs to be stuck in a land full of Ubuntu peoples, they would clean him up.

Ubuntu Zeke.

Thank you, Mr. Mandella. No thanks on the tribal socialistic voodoo.

There is nothing that can clean anyone except Jesus Christ the righteous by His atoning blood and the indwelling of the Spirit of YHWH.

Your "source"... isn't. YHWH is the source, and you're looking into the mirror of yourself, not me. You're just too blind to see.

But always flip the script. That's the antichrist way.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Even more appropriately, there is the one fundamental reality that always IS,

More vehement declaration.

that underlies all, and is all.

More adamant proclamation.

It is this Infinite IS-ness that we may call 'God' or 'Brahman', or any other name by which our particular tradition or school subscribes.

More vociferous and arduous bloviation.

FALSE. -

There you go again. Only you have the truth, Mr. MegaMondoEgo. You can't possibly allow anything or anyone else to be or have any truth you don't assert and proclaim.

Your vomitous emissions have no foundation whatsoever. They're just demented opinion and preference. The impregnation of your unparalleled prelest giving birth to rampant hideosity of pure self as ultimately divine.

since the universal wisdom is reflected in all authentic schools where the light of truth resides,

Says the dufus guru of all things soulically depraved.

in various traditions, since the infinite Spirit is not limited to only one tradition, race, culture or language sub-set.

Says jethro the syncretist of all things unreal and invalid. You don't know what spirit even is. You can't.

'God' is omnipresent,....

How would you know? You don't know the one and only YHWH. You only know the fabricated counterfeit of your own prelest.

while there are 'ways' or 'methods' of re-turning to 'God',...

You wouldn't know. You haven't even known anything of the one true YHWH. There is no other "God". Yours is a figment of others' imaginations that you've absconded with by proxy. You have no relational affiliation with divinity in any manner, so you don't and can't know such things. Every you think you know is prelest.

the eternal 'way' is already inherent in reality itself, which is everywhere always present.

And you continue to declare and assert and determine, ad infinitum. It's as hilarious as it is ridiculous. You. Know. Nothing. And the more you press to know, the less you will know. It's a self-imposed spiraling vacuum.

The original nature of consciousness

NOT.

Reality already is what it IS, no matter what is superimposed, imaged, or conceptualized by the mind, which only appears as an 'after-thought' to that prior awareness.

pj

You have no foundation whatsoever to say anything about reality or much of anything else. You're deluded beyond measure.

You channel the old BATlavsky well. That's not a compliment. She was a lunatic.

 

[John Mortimer]

Great post!

Great post!

Hi John,

This reflects back to the "I" or the light behind the "I Am" as being 'impersonal', or we could even say 'pre-personal'...

Prior to the concept of the person, yes. I like the expression "pre-personal" because it does not exclude the personal and tends to break the duality of personal / impersonal.

...being that very God-presence that is the 'witness' of the mind and all its operations. - hence you can stand in or as that 'primal awareness' and be unaffected by whatever arises in consciousness.

And - when you really stop and think about it - could there be any greater gift of God than that??!!

Nisargadatta's teaching continually brings us back to the "I Am", but more essentially to that which is prior to even that 'cognitive reflection of itself', because it's the 'awareness' in which any and all reflections take place. - that awareness therefore remains ever original to whatever arises as an appearance in it


Namaste,

"Ever-Virgin"!



pj[/QUOTE]

 

[Zeke]

Thank you, Mr. Mandella. No thanks on the tribal socialistic voodoo.

There is nothing that can clean anyone except Jesus Christ the righteous by His atoning blood and the indwelling of the Spirit of YHWH.

Your "source"... isn't. YHWH is the source, and you're looking into the mirror of yourself, not me. You're just too blind to see.

But always flip the script. That's the antichrist way.

Ubuntu, you should try it some time.

 

[freelight]

being true............

being true............

Odd how you always declare aboslute truths, whether cataphatic or apophatic; but then you insist nobody else can ever do so.

Show me where I've declared 'absolute truths' unless I was considering 'The Absolute' itself (Brahman), and allowing that to be what it IS (IT by definition is indescribable, unthinkable, infinite, beyond finite comprehension, beyond words). Also, show me where I've insisted nobody can share and discuss their ideas, opinion, viewpoints on truth, since this is an open forum, and all ideas on 'oneness' of Life are welcomed to explore, debate and expand upon. Remember the topic, the purpose of the thread.

You're the one assuming spiritual superiority over all others and all else.

You'll need to provide evidence for this. Your claims and judgments go to show such as the prevailing attitude. Theosophy is open-minded, ever considering and respecting one's views. However when you come into a discussion with an arrogant, overbearing, over-reactive, hyper-judgmental demeanor,...that's a major red flag and shows something 'deficient' or 'warped' with the mentality espousing such behavior. You're the one pointing the finger, and pontificating, over and over again, marginalizing the subject, ad homining, and denigrating here.

You've mistaken this for being personal. I don't know you.

That is correct, yet you insinuate and make judgments on my person, and condescending, vile and disrespectful ones. You've not addressed or attempted to discuss the principles and concepts of the thread's subject, but continue to demonize and spread vitriol, disrupting the civil space here.

Everything's all fine unless/until someone dares say anything you can't engulf or encompass. You refuse to allow any singular truth that would disanull your nightmare of fantasy.

Thats your false perception/assumption. You are free to discuss or respond to the points and principles in the thread, but not to be rude, pious or condescending.

You can't see the pure ego of it.

There is no egoity intended in studying true principles or the fundamental reality, inherent to existence and its accompanying phenemona. However,...it may do you well to see your own 'ego-projections' interjecting all over the map here.

You can't tolerate anything you consider to be intolerance. You must continually force your Henotheism upon any and all who have the freedom to post here.

All views are open to discuss and debate, but remember the primary subject here...the unity of Life, Being, Consciousness. Henotheism or any 'ism' is not being forced on anyone.

It's YOU who is all the passive ad hominem that you have noted.

Have I attacked your view with condescending, rude, vulgar descriptions or speech? Have I called it 'fecal matterial', and so many other repugnant words? your hate-speech is all over the place.

You don't allow disagreement, and you feed on it to turn it into Henotheism. You force others to accept other gods by syncretizing them into your little Ghostbusters trap of ecto-nothing.

Again, no henotheism or any 'ism' forced on anyone,....this is comical, if not a sad assumption. This is an obsession you need to let go of.

You don't know what love OR humility are; and you don't practice them in spite of presuming you do.

Can you prove this? You just said this wasn't personal. You dont know me. You havnt bothered to get to know me. But there you go judging my person. And you were talking about 'double-standards'.

It IS love that compels me to correct your double-standardized inequitous compunction of behavior.

No, it is a false equivocation of so called 'love', which is condenscending and denigrating. that's not love.

You'll never know actual love. You can't.

Again, assuming to be omniscient. You dont know me, but if you knew 'God' in reality, you'd never make the above statement, since every soul exists by God's own essence and potentiality, and that divine nature is love itself. One cant imagine that such statements continue to be projected, from a 'mind' assuming its own higher concept of truth.

You're a violently insistent interloper who's look in every wrong nook and cranny for something that can't be found in the manner of your search.

Can you show where I am being 'violent' ? You can ask fellow posters who have known me over the years here if you like. Unfortunately, I dont want this to be personal, as we are here to discuss subjects, principles, precepts, theology/philosophy and its various points of knowledge. You've continued to attack persons here, in your zeal to discredit the concepts or philosophical points. This only muddies the waters and diverts genuine research upon the subject with an open mind.

You'll never know the distinction between soul and spirit; and it's not a dichotomy in any sense you'll ever understand.

Using this 'distinction' card time and time again without explaining it or how it applies has proved inconsequential. :idunno:

You could if you'd repent and believe in Yeshua as the substance of YHWH, but that's not likely to ever happen after you've entertained every manner of prelest ever conceived by man or spirits.

Ah, that's the meal-ticket....I need to repent and believe in your 'theology' and version of 'God' to be saved....since only your 'theology' and concept of 'God' (YHWH) is the sole and absolute truth, or 'way' of 'salvation'.

Note that I make no claims as you do, but merely recognize a universality of truth and wisdom from the collective records of knowledge and human experience concerning the nature of existence, life and consciousness....from many different schools or religious traditions, since the 'esse' and 'ground' of reality is the same for all, albeit expressed in different words, forms and symbols.

Thats what the OP's original article on 'Oneness' is all about which wonderfully illustrates the 'City of One' being 'Jerusalem' in its 'heavenly' and 'earthly' archetypes, joining the two...as in the concept "as above, so below", so that earthly forms mirror heavenly ones, corresponding the invisible with the visible. The study of 'metaphysics' is at the heart here, which correlate substance and form.



pj

 

[freelight]

the dawning of I Am

the dawning of I Am

Prior to the concept of the person, yes. I like the expression "pre-personal" because it does not exclude the personal and tends to break the duality of personal / impersonal.

Exactly - I might add that I was thinking of the Urantia Book's concept of the 'thought-adjuster', which being the 'God-fragment' within the soul, is 'pre-personal' by nature, but corresponds with and may merge with the 'personal' aspects of the soul in its 'experience-complex', as it assumes individual expression and inter-relations with other souls.

And - when you really stop and think about it - could there be any greater gift of God than that??!!

Yes, it appears as a gift, but it is the True Self that has always been there anyways, as pure awareness. It appears as a gift as its own presence dawns upon itself as it were lol - that is the 'mind' becoming aware of its reflection as 'that'.

"Ever-Virgin"!

Ah, isn't that beautiful? ....and so it is.



pj

 

[Desert Reign]

You're a trip, that's for sure. You're a captive of your own depraved mind and the psychopathy of your guru mentors of nothingness.

Steady on there, mate. At this rate Freelight will begin to think you don't like him!

Even more appropriately, there is the one fundamental reality that always IS, that underlies all, and is all. It is this Infinite IS-ness that we may call 'God' or 'Brahman', or any other name by which our particular tradition or school subscribes.

Hi Paulie, I trust you are well. It is a while since I have commented on your posts in any significant way. I agree and believe that there is a reality which underlies everything. However, I specifically differentiate between reality and concept or imagination or dream or theory. Reality must be one. I feel sure any decent logician will point this out, without having to resort to any religious concepts. Reality as a whole must be self-actualising because nothing else is real. That's more than a tautology. It's what is called an autology.

I guess my issue with you is not the existence of such a thing but what you do (one does) with it. For both of us, this eliminates duality, which can't be a bad thing in my view, but for you it tends to remain a big mystery, whilst for me, it is just logic. It is true that this logic makes sense of everything but we need to move on in life from logic to actual specific living experiences. The autology allows us and indeed necessitates that we have such experiences, that there be specific, differentiated living organisms and conscious beings; these are both the objects of the autology as well as its expressions. But I feel that a focus on the purely mysterious elements of the autology (since it is no mystery at all but just logic) can actually distort the reality of it by ignoring the objects.

I hope you get the general gist. The above is not meant to be understood fully, just an invitation really. Alternatively I would be typing all night.

 

[freelight]

Soul diving.....

Soul diving.....

Steady on there, mate. At this rate Freelight will begin to think you don't like him!

The tone, demeanor and spirit of his posts are here for all to see. Now only if he will see and change his manners to something more kind and respectful, without being in continual 'defense' and 'attack' mode. Its immature, and unnecessary. There is no exuse for 'vitriol' in an open discussion forum, where ideas/concepts and points of view can be discussed civilly/respectfully.

Hi Paulie, I trust you are well. It is a while since I have commented on your posts in any significant way. I agree and believe that there is a reality which underlies everything. However, I specifically differentiate between reality and concept or imagination or dream or theory. Reality must be one. I feel sure any decent logician will point this out, without having to resort to any religious concepts. Reality as a whole must be self-actualising because nothing else is real. That's more than a tautology. It's what is called an autology.

Hello DR,

Well, I suppose you'd have to go thru the thread here and the general collection of my past writings/research and studies to respond to the whole or any parts of those observations. I agree, the fundamental reality that IS, is 'One', indivisible in nature, Self-existing, uncaused, eternal, infinite, immeasurable, including all potentiality and actuality,...for convenience we often just call it 'The One and Only', or 'The All'. - by nature this reality has its own 'logic' which authenticates or proves itself, by the law of its own 'being'.

Autology, it is

We'll note that 'autology' is the "study of oneself", one's own inherent 'being' or 'existence', being 'Self-evident'. This supports the fundamental truth of the Advaita Vedanta (non-duality) school within the Hindu tradition, which points to the unborn, undying, unchanging 'Self' (Brahman/atman), so that 'absolute reality' and all forms of relative reality are within the sphere of that Self-knowledge. Such has been explored in past threads on 'Non-Duality', 'Hinduism', 'The Mighty I Am Presence', 'Divine Science', etc. - innate to the knowledge of 'oneself' is its own cognition. - two reknown sages in the Advaita tradition shared already are Ramana Maharshi & Nisargadatta Maharaj. Non-dualism is central to many traditions, because the 'oneness' of Spirit is inherent to existence.

See: Our Real Nature

I guess my issue with you is not the existence of such a thing but what you do (one does) with it.

There is nothing to do, but recognize that which is. All life unfolds of its own (potential), being a continuum of cyclic activity as the movements of nature and consciousness proves. At the Heart of all (as purely 'actual') is infinite potentiality.

For both of us, this eliminates duality, which can't be a bad thing in my view, but for you it tends to remain a big mystery, whilst for me, it is just logic. It is true that this logic makes sense of everything but we need to move on in life from logic to actual specific living experiences. The autology allows us and indeed necessitates that we have such experiences, that there be specific, differentiated living organisms and conscious beings; these are both the objects of the autology as well as its expressions. But I feel that a focus on the purely mysterious elements of the autology (since it is no mystery at all but just logic) can actually distort the reality of it by ignoring the objects.

The indescribable, infinite, boundless, dimensionless, unconceivable nature of 'God' or 'Spirit' is a given,....but this does not obscure or prevent our 'knowledge' (a reliable science) of 'God', as we see it manifest in nature and her movements. As noted earlier,....while the Great Immeasurable One is the original root and source of all that is, was or ever will be,....our cognitive abilities are just enough to discern or intuit the unknowable One, that reality that is beyond space or time, transcending mortal mind, since it is the 'light' and 'nature' of what is immortal itself that knows itself and can enlighten the mind, but at last the mind must surrender to what is prior to and beyond it.

Pure awareness IS (parabrahman). It is prior to consciousness and what appears as its contents (objects). No objects or appearances are rejected nor is material reality wholly 'unreal', although compared to Brahman, it is a perceptual illusion or 'maya',...since it is subject to birth, death, rebirth. 'Creation' is the play of 'God' in space time, an adventure of relationships, associations, inter-action....for this is what 'God' is about as far as material engagements go. We can hash out, order and coordinate the 'details', but the universals remain.

No problem with recognizing the 'Great Mystery', as well as the primal 'gnosis' at the Heart of it all. - here we have 'logic' and all its laws inhering...as well as what might appear 'illogical' to the mind, or 'unknowable'. - such is the paradox.



pj

 

[Desert Reign]

Autology, it is ...

We'll note that 'autology' is the "study of oneself", one's own inherent 'being' or 'existence', being 'Self-evident'. This supports the fundamental truth of the Advaita Vedanta (non-duality) school within the Hindu tradition, which points to the unborn, undying, unchanging 'Self' (Brahman/atman), so that 'absolute reality' and all forms of relative reality are within the sphere of that Self-knowledge...

There is nothing to do, but recognize that which is. All life unfolds of its own (potential), being a continuum of cyclic activity as the movements of nature and consciousness proves. At the Heart of all (as purely 'actual') is infinite potentiality.

Hi Paulie, thanks for your answer.

What ethical values arise from this belief? Are you saying explicitly that no ethical values can arise?

but at last the mind must surrender to what is prior to and beyond it.

Perhaps the same question comes to mind - what action is involved in this surrender?

Pure awareness IS (parabrahman). It is prior to consciousness and what appears as its contents (objects). No objects or appearances are rejected nor is material reality wholly 'unreal', although compared to Brahman, it is a perceptual illusion or 'maya',...since it is subject to birth, death, rebirth.

I don't understand this. Especially the bolded parts. If something is worthy to be called reality then it is real and that is the end of the matter. How then can you call it an illusion?

'Creation' is the play of 'God' in space time, an adventure of relationships, associations, inter-action....for this is what 'God' is about as far as material engagements go. We can hash out, order and coordinate the 'details', but the universals remain.

Again, I am not sure what this means. If 'creation' is 'the play of God' then it is real play. So it is real, not illusion.

 

[freelight]

expanding insight............

expanding insight............

Hi Paulie, thanks for your answer.

What ethical values arise from this belief? Are you saying explicitly that no ethical values can arise?

I would gather 'ethical values' are inherent to one's true nature, and their 'potential' of expressing themselves. I don't believe I've ever denied the reality of 'ethical values' however they relate, or see how that by just abiding in the 'Universal Being' that one IS (as pure awareness), in any way negates or prevents divine values from being realized or lived. If one is abiding in 'love', and as 'love', then that love will do as love does.

Perhaps the same question comes to mind - what action is involved in this surrender?

I think it includes detaching from the mind and its chatter, the noise of thoughts, ideas, worries, mental distractions....or learning to have a 'quiet reflective state', 'silent mind',....what is 'mindfulness' in the Buddhist tradition. The way of 'wu wei' of Taoism also describes this natural abiding in the flow of life, with no resistence, - it is called 'effortless doing' which sounds paradoxical...but experientially it might feel like that,...there is movement but the mind is not forcing anything along, but is cognizant and allowing of the flow to move in its natural currents. In this way the 'tao' is like water. In our theist nomenclature, this is essentially 'surrender to God'. - allowing grace to have its way.

I don't understand this. Especially the bolded parts. If something is worthy to be called reality then it is real and that is the end of the matter. How then can you call it an illusion?

You'd have to first understand the Hindu concept of 'maya'. - essentially only 'Brahman' is the absolute reality, all else in the inter-actions of space-time creation (the relating of information and perception) is more or less 'relative', subject to distortion, imperfection, conditioning, change, disintegration, etc. Everything we 'sense' is subject to interpretation/conditioning, - the whole world arises as an illusion of the senses, superimposing upon the essential reality (pure Spirit-essence) a panorama of appearances, images, objects, forms,...like a mirage. Only the invisible reality and pure awareness behind the arising of all phenomena is the 'real', the 'essential', the 'unchanging', 'immortal', 'eternal reality'. While substances and forms "appear" and undergo various transformations....'Brahman' (Real God) is the real essence behind all, unborn, undying, unchanging.

There are two kinds of 'reality',...'absolute' and 'relative'. Of course, all that we experience in space-time relativity, has its own 'reality', but such is modified and conditioned by many factors, these transient images, movements, concepts, assumptions are not 'absolute', but ever 'relative' in their conditional domains. All is a part of the reality of 'experience' of course, but the 'absolute reality' is prior to and beyond all 'experience' (space-time perception), and is the ever-present timeless reality, the essence at the heart of all,...no matter what arises.

Again, I am not sure what this means. If 'creation' is 'the play of God' then it is real play. So it is real, not illusion.

All creation is the play of 'God' in the sense that 'energy' and 'consciousness' are inter-relating/unfolding their potential in every possible way, in every dimension, expanding information. All is only as real as it appears in space-time, while what is always 'real' is not an 'appearance' but the reality behind the appearance, or prior to it.

If you study how our eye works, its like a camera which reflects light off of various images and forms, transmitting that frequency to the inner mirror within so that images, shadows, lights, colours, depth, dimension, become definitive (perceivable). What we see in the world are but reflections of light, aggregates of atomic cohesion, giving us various impressions, revealing to our sense a world of 'appearances'. How real are these passing forms, images, perceptions? Yes, the 'Light' allows all these forms or images to 'appear',....but the subjective light (pure consciousness) behind the 'light' of the mind where these reflections are seen is the root of reality,...while the perceptions, appearances or interpretations vary, being subject to change, space, time. Essence is eternal/everlasting/infinite, forms and reflections come and go.

Anyways,...it appears its been awhile since we've dialogued, on the deeper levels. We've had some more extended discussions in the past, hopefully this might refresh our philosophies a bit.


pj

 

[Desert Reign]

I would gather 'ethical values' are inherent to one's true nature, and their 'potential' of expressing themselves. I don't believe I've ever denied the reality of 'ethical values' however they relate, or see how that by just abiding in the 'Universal Being' that one IS (as pure awareness), in any way negates or prevents divine values from being realized or lived. If one is abiding in 'love', and as 'love', then that love will do as love does.

You seem to be saying that it is possible to have ethical values. Which is a start. And of course I agree. I was rather looking for specific ethical values that flow naturally from 'abiding in the universal being' as you put it. Yet it seems there may be none. You mention love but it sounds like you mean it only as an example. One could quite easily have some other ethic such as courage and the result would be the same. I suppose another way of asking the same question would be 'What makes love good and hate bad?' If the universal oneness is prior to all action and thought, then perhaps it does not distinguish between good and bad?

I think it includes detaching from the mind and its chatter, the noise of thoughts, ideas, worries, mental distractions....or learning to have a 'quiet reflective state', 'silent mind',....what is 'mindfulness' in the Buddhist tradition. The way of 'wu wei' of Taoism also describes this natural abiding in the flow of life, with no resistence, - it is called 'effortless doing' which sounds paradoxical...but experientially it might feel like that,...there is movement but the mind is not forcing anything along, but is cognizant and allowing of the flow to move in its natural currents. In this way the 'tao' is like water. In our theist nomenclature, this is essentially 'surrender to God'. - allowing grace to have its way.

Personally I adopt a gentle, via media approach to involvement in the world. I have ambitions but if they are not fulfilled because something opposes them or something better turns up or causes priorities to change, then I don't tend to cry about it or get angry. I feel you have to both go with the flow as well as create the flow. If everyone went with the flow then the flow would stop. Conversely, if everyone tried to direct the flow, then the flow would also stop. Do you think what you describe as 'no resistance' is more like just following the flow rather than directing it? If so, do you agree that if everyone adopted that stance it would self-destruct?

You'd have to first understand the Hindu concept of 'maya'. - essentially only 'Brahman' is the absolute reality, all else in the inter-actions of space-time creation (the relating of information and perception) is more or less 'relative', subject to distortion, imperfection, conditioning, change, disintegration, etc. Everything we 'sense' is subject to interpretation/conditioning, - the whole world arises as an illusion of the senses, superimposing upon the essential reality (pure Spirit-essence) a panorama of appearances, images, objects, forms,...like a mirage. Only the invisible reality and pure awareness behind the arising of all phenomena is the 'real', the 'essential', the 'unchanging', 'immortal', 'eternal reality'. While substances and forms "appear" and undergo various transformations....'Brahman' (Real God) is the real essence behind all, unborn, undying, unchanging.

This sounds a lot like another form of dualism.

There are two kinds of 'reality',...'absolute' and 'relative'. Of course, all that we experience in space-time relativity, has its own 'reality', but such is modified and conditioned by many factors, these transient images, movements, concepts, assumptions are not 'absolute', but ever 'relative' in their conditional domains. All is a part of the reality of 'experience' of course, but the 'absolute reality' is prior to and beyond all 'experience' (space-time perception), and is the ever-present timeless reality, the essence at the heart of all,...no matter what arises.

Again, this sounds more like dualism. Surely, to be consistent with the notion of oneness, all phenomena must be described in a manner which is self-consistent? When you say 'has its own reality' and 'timeless reality' you seem as if you are admitting that what you believe is not unitarian at all but dualistic. In my view, I am much more unitarian (as regards what I believe about the universe) than you are!

All creation is the play of 'God' in the sense that 'energy' and 'consciousness' are inter-relating/unfolding their potential in every possible way, in every dimension, expanding information. All is only as real as it appears in space-time, while what is always 'real' is not an 'appearance' but the reality behind the appearance, or prior to it.

What we see in the world are but reflections of light, aggregates of atomic cohesion, giving us various impressions, revealing to our sense a world of 'appearances'.

Plato described the noumenal world as a world of ideas, contrasting with our world as a world of shadows, cast by the light of the realm of eternal ideas. What you are suggesting here seems very similar, at least by analogy.

How real are these passing forms, images, perceptions? Yes, the 'Light' allows all these forms or images to 'appear',....but the subjective light (pure consciousness) behind the 'light' of the mind where these reflections are seen is the root of reality,...while the perceptions, appearances or interpretations vary, being subject to change, space, time. Essence is eternal/everlasting/infinite, forms and reflections come and go.

Yes, that seems very much Platonic.

Anyways,...it appears its been awhile since we've dialogued, on the deeper levels. We've had some more extended discussions in the past, hopefully this might refresh our philosophies a bit.

Yes, it's good to talk again.

Happy New Year to you.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Okay...

Let me change the "tone" of my posts and transition to something that might be of value to anyone interested from either "side" of this fence.

Freelight... Would you consider, if it's within your perview of experience and knowledge, outlining an interactive summarizaton of Hermeticism (including/focusing on Alexandrian) and the Corpus Hermeticum; all relative to Enochiana (maybe especially Dee's Christianized version and Eight Day Apocalypticism), Rosicrucianism, Buddha-Dharma, overall Process Philosophy, and all things Neurothetical.

It seems that you think and function in a more confluential fashion, but I'm more interested in a semi-rigidity of compare/contrast structure that can outline where many of the various developed disciplines overlap and intersect, and reciprocate or perpetuate.

What I'm looking to do is develop a "switchboard"-type diagramatic organizational flowchart that can be visualized with demarcations of distinctions and interactivity. This contrasts to what I perceive as your "style" of melding them all together, which means I'm kinda looking for you to do the inverse of what you normally seem to do.

I'd love for you to include theurgy/alchemy, and Goetia (and accompanying angelology); and the various strands of the co-existing realms Yetzirah, Briah, and Atziluth; especially in relation to such writings as those from Dionysius the Areopagite that overlap more orthodox parallels from St. Thomas Aquinas.

There is some cross-over in some of this that was referred to by Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in regards to the advent of the (scriptural) Messianic Kingdom and such things as demoniac economies. My emphasis is to resolve many things from the pure Christian perspective.

I'm wanting to have a clearer illustrative image of the interweave and interface of where Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, Qabalistic philosophy, and the teachings of occultists like Plotinus, Prophyry, Proclus, Iamblicus, Ficino, Pico, Bacon, Trithemius, Paracelus, and Agrippa all "meet" relative to the alleged "multiverse" and the veracity of such practices as scrying, crystals, and mirrors, etc. for purported "secret wisdom".

Even if you consider many of these as "mythologies", I'd like to see your depth and breadth at integrating all this cohesively into some framework. Is that within your reach? (Honest, simple question; not adversarial.) Correct and clarify wherever necessary.

I'll make no bones about it that I'm not eligible for conversion to any of your syncretic pan-belief system in the least. But I'm also well aware of the pervasive pollution and dilution of the true Christian faith into endless schizm and powerlessness. So I'm looking to unveil the intricacies of the "web" between our two paradigms. There's an intimate interconnectivity, though you're at the ultra-tangential soulical extreme while I'm at the spiritual extreme (and ne'er the twain shall meet). There's a literal aggregate woven fabric for all the above and more, and I'm wanting to unravel it more cogently.

How's that for synergistic and productive conversation without compromise or feigned love? And I do truly love all who are in the world. My entire willful affection is for all to come to the knowledge of the truth instead of (and in spite of) whatever they desire to the contrary (including you) for their spiritual benefit.

Whatcha got? Are you versed in this broad spectrum of views? Thanks.

Edit to add:
In regard to Priscia Theologia, how does that differ from your discipline/philosophy? How does any/all of the above coallesce or diverge from your particular approach and those of Gnosticism, Pythagorean and Orphic literature, Chaldaean Oracles, and the aforementioned Neoplatonism and other similar categories?

And what is your position on Posthumous lives? Thanks again.

 

[freelight]

The Universal One......

The Universal One......

Okay...

Let me change the "tone" of my posts and transition to something that might be of value to anyone interested from either "side" of this fence.

Freelight... Would you consider, if it's within your perview of experience and knowledge, outlining an interactive summarizaton of Hermeticism (including/focusing on Alexandrian) and the Corpus Hermeticum; all relative to Enochiana (maybe especially Dee's Christianized version and Eight Day Apocalypticism), Rosicrucianism, Buddha-Dharma, overall Process Philosophy, and all things Neurothetical.

It seems that you think and function in a more confluential fashion, but I'm more interested in a semi-rigidity of compare/contrast structure that can outline where many of the various developed disciplines overlap and intersect, and reciprocate or perpetuate.

What I'm looking to do is develop a "switchboard"-type diagramatic organizational flowchart that can be visualized with demarcations of distinctions and interactivity. This contrasts to what I perceive as your "style" of melding them all together, which means I'm kinda looking for you to do the inverse of what you normally seem to do.

I'd love for you to include theurgy/alchemy, and Goetia (and accompanying angelology); and the various strands of the co-existing realms Yetzirah, Briah, and Atziluth; especially in relation to such writings as those from Dionysius the Areopagite that overlap more orthodox parallels from St. Thomas Aquinas.

There is some cross-over in some of this that was referred to by Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in regards to the advent of the (scriptural) Messianic Kingdom and such things as demoniac economies. My emphasis is to resolve many things from the pure Christian perspective.

I'm wanting to have a clearer illustrative image of the interweave and interface of where Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, Qabalistic philosophy, and the teachings of occultists like Plotinus, Prophyry, Proclus, Iamblicus, Ficino, Pico, Bacon, Trithemius, Paracelus, and Agrippa all "meet" relative to the alleged "multiverse" and the veracity of such practices as scrying, crystals, and mirrors, etc. for purported "secret wisdom".

Even if you consider many of these as "mythologies", I'd like to see your depth and breadth at integrating all this cohesively into some framework. Is that within your reach? (Honest, simple question; not adversarial.) Correct and clarify wherever necessary.

I'll make no bones about it that I'm not eligible for conversion to any of your syncretic pan-belief system in the least. But I'm also well aware of the pervasive pollution and dilution of the true Christian faith into endless schizm and powerlessness. So I'm looking to unveil the intricacies of the "web" between our two paradigms. There's an intimate interconnectivity, though you're at the ultra-tangential soulical extreme while I'm at the spiritual extreme (and ne'er the twain shall meet). There's a literal aggregate woven fabric for all the above and more, and I'm wanting to unravel it more cogently.

How's that for synergistic and productive conversation without compromise or feigned love? And I do truly love all who are in the world. My entire willful affection is for all to come to the knowledge of the truth instead of (and in spite of) whatever they desire to the contrary (including you) for their spiritual benefit.

Whatcha got? Are you versed in this broad spectrum of views? Thanks.

Hi PPS,

I appreciate the change of tone on your part and the interesting direction and request of yours naming many specific schools and teachers in the effort to clarify and inter-relate various concepts, however,...I've laid out and shared many schools, commentaries, resource links already in this thread, giving amply material for further creative dialogue and interaction, based on the foundation of the unity of all things, or the fundamental principle of 'oneness' at the heart of all. My more 'free' approach calls those to explore their own be-ing in the context of the Greater Be-ing.

My style is more fluid, intuitive, and 'confluential' (as you note), as I draw from various schools and information systems as they come to me, which are reflections of various traditions or learning-systems I've adventured over the years, and still ever learning and expanding. I currently identify as a 'theosophist' (seeker of divine wisdom, student of universal truth).

I plan to share some more quotes from recent articles from Gerald O'Donnell (shared in my OP and thru-out the thread with his permission), with commentary and open space for creative insights from posters, which is what the forum is about, a free flow of ideas, drawn from the primal unity at heart, the One God-Presence, the Infinite I AM and all atmans who share the One Life in their various individual expressions. - the great Advaita Vedanta teachers and perennial philosophers from all traditions, continually call us to recognize our very root, the ground of existence, the heart and soul, which is the heart of Brahman. I see Spirit and Consciousness as free,...so I branch out on those wings, and let them go where they will


I'f you'd like to start a thread on any one of the schools mentioned above, you're welcome to. I'm keeping it somewhat simple here, and focusing on 'Oneness' which doesn't necessarily need a technical denomination or particular school of philosophy to incorporate it, although each school may explain it with their own terms and nuances.

Edit to add:
In regard to Priscia Theologia, how does that differ from your discipline/philosophy?

Well,....while truth has been given from antiquity, its not limited to the past since revelation is progressive, especially in the context of evolution. I'm more a 'perennialist' at heart.

Former thread: For theists: Views on Perennialism/traditionalism.

How does any/all of the above coallesce or diverge from your particular approach and those of Gnosticism, Pythagorean and Orphic literature, Chaldaean Oracles, and the aforementioned Neoplatonism and other similar categories?

All comes from The One and returns to The One. As you know, all these schools relate because they draw from universal laws and principles. Each school has their own 'nuance' or articulation of a fundamental knowledge all share. What I've done here is share various perspectives from different thinkers on the subject of 'oneness' and my own intuitive reflection on the subject. By engaging in 'creative dialgoue' we allow the logos within to express itself, co-creatively.

And what is your position on Posthumous lives? Thanks again.

Not sure what you mean by the term exactly, except it could relate to Reincarnation?



pj

 

[JosephR]

Okay...

Let me change the "tone" of my posts and transition to something that might be of value to anyone interested from either "side" of this fence.

Freelight... Would you consider, if it's within your perview of experience and knowledge, outlining an interactive summarizaton of Hermeticism (including/focusing on Alexandrian) and the Corpus Hermeticum; all relative to Enochiana (maybe especially Dee's Christianized version and Eight Day Apocalypticism), Rosicrucianism, Buddha-Dharma, overall Process Philosophy, and all things Neurothetical.

It seems that you think and function in a more confluential fashion, but I'm more interested in a semi-rigidity of compare/contrast structure that can outline where many of the various developed disciplines overlap and intersect, and reciprocate or perpetuate.

What I'm looking to do is develop a "switchboard"-type diagramatic organizational flowchart that can be visualized with demarcations of distinctions and interactivity. This contrasts to what I perceive as your "style" of melding them all together, which means I'm kinda looking for you to do the inverse of what you normally seem to do.

I'd love for you to include theurgy/alchemy, and Goetia (and accompanying angelology); and the various strands of the co-existing realms Yetzirah, Briah, and Atziluth; especially in relation to such writings as those from Dionysius the Areopagite that overlap more orthodox parallels from St. Thomas Aquinas.

There is some cross-over in some of this that was referred to by Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in regards to the advent of the (scriptural) Messianic Kingdom and such things as demoniac economies. My emphasis is to resolve many things from the pure Christian perspective.

I'm wanting to have a clearer illustrative image of the interweave and interface of where Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, Qabalistic philosophy, and the teachings of occultists like Plotinus, Prophyry, Proclus, Iamblicus, Ficino, Pico, Bacon, Trithemius, Paracelus, and Agrippa all "meet" relative to the alleged "multiverse" and the veracity of such practices as scrying, crystals, and mirrors, etc. for purported "secret wisdom".

Even if you consider many of these as "mythologies", I'd like to see your depth and breadth at integrating all this cohesively into some framework. Is that within your reach? (Honest, simple question; not adversarial.) Correct and clarify wherever necessary.

I'll make no bones about it that I'm not eligible for conversion to any of your syncretic pan-belief system in the least. But I'm also well aware of the pervasive pollution and dilution of the true Christian faith into endless schizm and powerlessness. So I'm looking to unveil the intricacies of the "web" between our two paradigms. There's an intimate interconnectivity, though you're at the ultra-tangential soulical extreme while I'm at the spiritual extreme (and ne'er the twain shall meet). There's a literal aggregate woven fabric for all the above and more, and I'm wanting to unravel it more cogently.

How's that for synergistic and productive conversation without compromise or feigned love? And I do truly love all who are in the world. My entire willful affection is for all to come to the knowledge of the truth instead of (and in spite of) whatever they desire to the contrary (including you) for their spiritual benefit.

Whatcha got? Are you versed in this broad spectrum of views? Thanks.

Edit to add:
In regard to Priscia Theologia, how does that differ from your discipline/philosophy? How does any/all of the above coallesce or diverge from your particular approach and those of Gnosticism, Pythagorean and Orphic literature, Chaldaean Oracles, and the aforementioned Neoplatonism and other similar categories?

And what is your position on Posthumous lives? Thanks again.

What would you like to discuss about these highlighted topics?

I know freelight is competent of talking about them but I used to study the ways of Hermes Trismegistus and Hermetic traditions.

As far as the 72 of the goetia goes, I have left that as well. But can sure tell you all about whatever you wana know.

But as in respect to what freelight says below a new thread or PM would be better not to derail the topics,as they are very deep and could be lengthy.

I'f you'd like to start a thread on any one of the schools mentioned above, you're welcome to. I'm keeping it somewhat simple here, and focusing on 'Oneness' which doesn't necessarily need a technical denomination or particular school of philosophy to incorporate it, although each school may explain it with their own terms and nuances.

 

[freelight]

delivered as promised......

delivered as promised......

You seem to be saying that it is possible to have ethical values. Which is a start. And of course I agree. I was rather looking for specific ethical values that flow naturally from 'abiding in the universal being' as you put it. Yet it seems there may be none. You mention love but it sounds like you mean it only as an example. One could quite easily have some other ethic such as courage and the result would be the same. I suppose another way of asking the same question would be 'What makes love good and hate bad?' If the universal oneness is prior to all action and thought, then perhaps it does not distinguish between good and bad?

If we consider the non-dual One Itself, it is prior to duality, so in that realm of pure 'Be-ness' (as H.P Blavatsky terms it) there is no good or bad, there is no-thing distinguishable or different from the One Essence Itself, being itself, all Alone, the One and Only. Only in the dualizing world of interaction, duality, relativity do distinctions or polarities of 'good/evil', 'light/darkness', 'day/night', 'positive/negative' appear as in contrast. - on the surface, its just an 'appearance'.

'God' is God. Absolute Reality. One. All. Non-dual. - only in the play of relativity (space-time creation) do the constrasts of 'information' relate. God remains what God IS, no matter what concepts arise. We naturally attribute to 'God' all goodness, love, light, truth, beauty, knowledge, wisdom....for these are positive attributes we naturally hold affection towards, while their 'contrasts' exist wherever the potential for them to manifest exist, in the world of creation (where 'light' and 'shadow' appear).

Personally I adopt a gentle, via media approach to involvement in the world. I have ambitions but if they are not fulfilled because something opposes them or something better turns up or causes priorities to change, then I don't tend to cry about it or get angry. I feel you have to both go with the flow as well as create the flow. If everyone went with the flow then the flow would stop. Conversely, if everyone tried to direct the flow, then the flow would also stop. Do you think what you describe as 'no resistance' is more like just following the flow rather than directing it? If so, do you agree that if everyone adopted that stance it would self-destruct?

I think we 'go with the flow' as the major undercurrent of Life (the Tao) carries us, while we can 'direct' or 'modify' those currents (to an extent) according to your own choices. In this case it becomes a matter of 'coordination'.

This sounds a lot like another form of dualism.

Its a matter of understanding the 'dualism' that appears upon the background of the one non-dual reality. The One is universal omnipresent essence/awareness.....all 'else' is 'appearance' which brings the illusion of dual perceptions (subject/object, observer/observed, unknowing/knowing, etc.). Dualism is a kind of 'creative play' of the non-dual One, the 'dreaming dance' of 'God' imaged by 'Nataraja', the cosmic-dancing from of Shiva. -

View attachment 18405

Again, this sounds more like dualism. Surely, to be consistent with the notion of oneness, all phenomena must be described in a manner which is self-consistent? When you say 'has its own reality' and 'timeless reality' you seem as if you are admitting that what you believe is not unitarian at all but dualistic. In my view, I am much more unitarian (as regards what I believe about the universe) than you are!

Ahhh, not so fast - the Oneness of all that IS, maintains.... no matter what 'inter-actions' or 'relations' arise within the Ocean of its primal oneness, since that One is indivisible in essence, although divisions, dimensions, movements arise in the sea of space in its various permutations and energy-formations. As you know, my unitarian-universalism/pan-entheism remains intact, and as a theosophist in general (as pertains to the esoteric/divine wisdom)...the fundamental unity of all forever holds. - the arising phenomena that appears does so in relation to the various movements that flow as their potential for existence blooms. Not everything that 'appears' is absolutely 'real',...and we come back again to the concept of 'maya'. The absolute reality is always behind all that is relative or phenomenal. The absolute is 'absolute', while all else is relative. The One essence is 'original' and 'infinite', while forms and their 'apparent' relations, dimensions and associations (finite, limited, and conditioned) appear to the senses.

Plato described the noumenal world as a world of ideas, contrasting with our world as a world of shadows, cast by the light of the realm of eternal ideas. What you are suggesting here seems very similar, at least by analogy.

Yes, although there are some differences between vedic/buddhist metaphysics and neo-platonic forms and well as similarities, as it relates to the 'perennial wisdom'. I enjoy an east/west synthesis.

My current dive into Theosophy and the various ascended master schools is coming full circle as far as connecting various 'dots' in the greater matrix as it were.

Everything that is, was, and will be, eternally IS, even the countless forms, which are finite and perishable only in their objective, not in their ideal Form.

- H. P. Blavatsky

~*~*~

Happy New Year to you.

A wonderful new year of more adventures




pj

 

[Zeke]

I'll make no bones about it that I'm not eligible for conversion to any of your syncretic pan-belief system in the least. But I'm also well aware of the pervasive pollution and dilution of the true Christian faith into endless schizm and powerlessness. So I'm looking to unveil the intricacies of the "web" between our two paradigms. There's an intimate interconnectivity, though you're at the ultra-tangential soulical extreme while I'm at the spiritual extreme (and ne'er the twain shall meet). There's a literal aggregate woven fabric for all the above and more, and I'm wanting to unravel it more cogently.

Every Christian sect claims the other ones are out of the pure stream of faith, what makes you think your version is the right one?

 

[freelight]

All streams come from and pour back into One Ocean

All streams come from and pour back into One Ocean

Every Christian sect claims the other ones are out of the pure stream of faith, what makes you think your version is the right one?

Yet 'truth' is beyond denomination or human qualifications.

~*~*~

I believe in the fundamental Truth of all great religions of the world. And I believe that if only we could, all of us, read the scriptures of the different Faiths from the stand-point of the followers of those faiths, we should find that they were at the bottom, all one and were all helpful to one another.

Belief in one God is the cornerstone of all religions. But I do not foresee a time when there would be only one religion on earth in practice. In theory, since there is one God, there can be only one religion.

The one religion is beyond all speech. Imperfect men put it into such language as they can command, and their words are interpreted by other men equally imperfect. Hence the necessity for tolerance, which does not mean indifference towards one's own Faith, but a more intelligent and pure love for it.


~*~*~

Religion should pervade every one of our actions. Here religion does not mean sectarianism. It means a belief in ordered moral government of the universe. It is not less real because it is unseen. This religion transcends Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, etc. It does not supersede them. It harmonises them and gives them reality.


~*~*~


One Spirit, Many Forms

The need of the moment is not One Religion, but mutual respect and tolerance of the devotees of the different religions. We want to reach not the dead level, but unity in diversity. The Soul of religion is One but it is encased in a multitude of forms. Truth is the exclusive property of no single scriptures.

The forms are many, but the informing Spirit is one. How can there be room for distinctions of high and low where there is this all embracing, fundamental unity underlying the outward diversity? For that is a fact meeting you at every step in daily life. The final goal of all religions is to realise this essential oneness.


-Mahatma Gandhi (all quotes)

pj

 

[RevTestament]

Yet 'truth' is beyond denomination or human qualifications.

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

 

[freelight]

That which ever IS

That which ever IS

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Yes, for 'truth' or 'reality' by nature is fundamental to existence, and universal. Reality is the very actual esssence behind all conditions that arise in space.... here, now and forever. In the nature of existence, which includes the heart or root of it, is the one God-principle or Intelligence, whereby all else exists or relates in the cosmos. Our commentaries on the essential unity of all things in this thread elaborates and explores this.

Newbies to the thread are encouraged to read the OP and as much as the thread as possible before joining the dialogue, to better inform themselves to add appropriately.


pj

 

[freelight]

2013 message commentary continued.....

2013 message commentary continued.....

~*~*~

Continuing commentary on Gerald's 2013 message from the One, from here

Nothing exists in a vacuum: no reality, no perception. So do not turn a blind eye to the realities of others, no matter how far they seem to operate from yours, for at the level of The One-and-Only there is not distance nor any sense of location. Everything is interconnected. Everything affects each other. Every one and every thing is One.

At the heart level, the inner most essence of the smallest atom to the periphery of consciousness and beyond, one indivisible substratum sustains the space wherein all creative movements enjoin, arise and inter-act.

Understand that if you do so and forget that very notion, events will then be made to exist in your reality who will remind you that no other is “another” far away; so that his or her fate and sense of happiness shall become your fate and sense of happiness. Remember this.

Down beneath the surface-forms and appearances....ever abides the universal being and awareness, indivisible in essence, yet individualized in form.

Soon only the Song of Love will be heard.

The original song of creation springs from the Mother-light of pure harmony and beauty, reintegrating chaotic elements into perfect symmetry and order. When the heart and ears are 'circumcised' (cleansed and purified)... song of the eternal is ever 'humming', the eternal OM.

The cacophony of all others shall not even remain a memory

In the purity of the One and its absolute reality...all discordant voices are outshined, dissolved, disintegrated in the absoluteness. All that is relative is allowed to exist and relate within so many conditional factors and variables, but ever harmonized in frequency and vibration.

On this point the issue of 'memory' is very interesting, for even 'God' is said to 'wipe out' our transgressions and 'remember' our sins no more. In the absolute itself there can exist no sin, no conception whatsoever ('God' being 'unborn', 'timeless', 'deathless'), for it is prior to and beyond any space-time relativity, distortion, interpretation, language. In the timeless, there is no 'time' for anything 'else' to exist, but the unborn.

The instruction to be 'perfect' even as Our Heavenly Father is perfect, refers to the love-principle which is perfect harmony radiating from the heart-core where all spirit-souls are already one with God. All gestures of misperception, division, separation, fear....bring the effect or appearance of 'sin' (whose end is death, unreality, error, negation, insanity), therefore only the purity and power of love can make whole again, restore, heal, correct, re-align, recover one's original integrity.

You are all invited to partake in that new Song - the only Song there really is, was, and will ever be, at the level of the One and Only Being there IS.

A symphony is incomplete without each element, component, instrument and player joining in concert.



- source-article: here



pj