(01-11-2018, 01:47 AM)rva_jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I've been thinking a lot about not simply the fact that infinity realized awareness but that those of Ra describes another step "prior to" Creation: awareness achieving focus. This, I believe, is precisely the basis for a concept of separation in a unified all, because what is "focus" but a separation between a subject you're distinguishing from the unfocused background?
I've found Don's quoestion on this:
Quote:13.12 Questioner: Could you tell me how intelligent infinity became, shall we say (I’m having difficulty with some of the language), how intelligent infinity became individualized from itself?
Ra: I am Ra. This is an appropriate question.
The intelligent infinity discerned a concept. This concept was discerned due to freedom of will of awareness. This concept was finity. This was the first and primal paradox or distortion of the Law of One. Thus the one intelligent infinity invested itself in an exploration of many-ness. Due to the infinite possibilities of intelligent infinity there is no ending to many-ness. The exploration, thus, is free to continue infinitely in an eternal present.
I don't know if finity is really something separated from infinity. Infinity is not a number but all numbers are part of infinity. I imagine the exploration of concept of finity as an endless counting to infinity.
(01-11-2018, 06:43 PM)loostudent Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2018, 01:47 AM)rva_jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I've been thinking a lot about not simply the fact that infinity realized awareness but that those of Ra describes another step "prior to" Creation: awareness achieving focus. This, I believe, is precisely the basis for a concept of separation in a unified all, because what is "focus" but a separation between a subject you're distinguishing from the unfocused background?
I've found Don's quoestion on this:
Quote:13.12 Questioner: Could you tell me how intelligent infinity became, shall we say (I’m having difficulty with some of the language), how intelligent infinity became individualized from itself?
Ra: I am Ra. This is an appropriate question.
The intelligent infinity discerned a concept. This concept was discerned due to freedom of will of awareness. This concept was finity. This was the first and primal paradox or distortion of the Law of One. Thus the one intelligent infinity invested itself in an exploration of many-ness. Due to the infinite possibilities of intelligent infinity there is no ending to many-ness. The exploration, thus, is free to continue infinitely in an eternal present.
I don't know if finity is really something separated from infinity. Infinity is not a number but all numbers are part of infinity. I imagine the exploration of concept of finity as an endless counting to infinity.
I think the entire notion of dualizing presence and absence is paradoxical, all things always exist in both states of their potential to be and not be. Finite awareness is a play of states of perception and non-perception (my eyes seeing as my eyes, today being seen as without its effect of tomorrow, etc); infinite awareness is a state of absolute-perception and unpotentiated free will is one of absolute-non-perception.
The best way I could term this insight is that even a state of pure void is full in absence and even a state of infinity is empty in presence (although eternal, just a moment nowhen and nowhere outside illusionary references that are inter-relative ideas right?). The Source is like neither awareness or non-awareness, they are a dualistic potential of it with their own sub-potentials. The void is timelessly timeful and the plenum is timefully timeless, and so both are inter-dependant with no predominance over the other.
(01-10-2018, 10:11 AM)Stranger Wrote: [ -> ]It is a verbatim record of my conversation.
Hum. Is it something like channeling?
I think the main purpose of our existence is not something arbitrary or obscure. Love - the focus of unity is the given creative principle giving further focus. Focusing, evolving, cristalizing ... In creation everything comes from purpose and gravitates to further purpose. This is the very nature of creation. It is in all things. It is in our heart. Through Logos all things are coming into being and further revealing the Creator.
"But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it." (Deuteronomy 30,14)
Love is not a dead end. Not a nonsense but the absolute spring of meaning. It doesn't need further whys, because love is because of love.
"Love seeks no cause beyond itself and no fruit; it is its own fruit, its own enjoyment. I love because I love; I love in order that I may love." (Bernard of Clairvaux)
(01-11-2018, 11:34 AM)Billz Wrote: [ -> ] (01-11-2018, 11:10 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]But honestly as I said, I'm insane, or at least unorthodox. I strongly recommend you ignore me if my answer doesn't do you any help. In fact, I ask you to ignore me if that's the case.
Coordinate Apotheosis, I found the LOO and continue my research here on this forum. It didn't take long to find you to discover that you tend to be abrasive and rude. I thought about blocking you completely because of my initial reaction, but felt that maybe I was being a little too hasty, so I decided not to decide.
I'm glad I haven't reacted to your natural state of insanity, in which I find much to entertain and enjoy. Actually, I feel a lot of kinship in much of what you say. I don't always agree with what you espouse but I always find it enlightening. In most cases, you force me to rethink my opinion and possibly my position. I may not change my opinion but I look forward to your participation.
I have enjoyed you in most discussions and I believe that we would be good friends, given half a chance and I'm glad to have met you here. Be well and be blessed!
I greet you in love and light of the one infinite Creator!
I'm... kind of disturbed but glad you've found joy in my posts. I have not found joy in those posts, in fact I've found extreme guilt, grief, irresponsibility, and sorrow in the realization of being a slave to my bad parts...
I often use my nonfilter on here to make up for my lack of mirrors in real life, I'm just a lonely jerk who lashes out.
And I don't really know what to do about it anymore having seen how bad I've become. . How easily I take offense, and how stupid I am and can be. I cry about it a lot.
I hate it, how I get sucked so easily into the emotions of anger and lose myself to them.
Jade, SMC, Monica, Anagogy, Dante, and possibly others, blatzaddict, and maybe more have all been subjected to my terror. And there's no way to take those things back. With the exception of Dante unless he starts being nicer, I regret all of it and find no words can do that sorrow any good.
You don't want to be my friend, you'll only get hurt.
But thank you for the good wishes, I hope to one day never again be these horrible ways...
No one here for the most part deserves that. I am rude and abrasive, I'm monstrous and the worst part is
I don't want to be.
I never thought that seeking creator or the point to this all would end up bringing me to these feelings, to
this me.
It's weird how it all goes. It scares me in all honesty.
(01-12-2018, 11:07 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]Jade, SMC, Monica, Anagogy, Dante, and possibly others, blatzaddict, and maybe more have all been subjected to my terror. And there's no way to take those things back. With the exception of Dante unless he starts being nicer, I regret all of it and find no words can do that sorrow any good.
I'm sure none of these people dwell much on it.
Just accept and understand that all you felt were charges you were carrying, they required to be released because they itensify when stagnant. The best way to not repeat is to make peace with it.
(01-11-2018, 06:43 PM)loostudent Wrote: [ -> ]I've found Don's quoestion on this:
Quote:13.12 Questioner: Could you tell me how intelligent infinity became, shall we say (I’m having difficulty with some of the language), how intelligent infinity became individualized from itself?
Ra: I am Ra. This is an appropriate question.
The intelligent infinity discerned a concept. This concept was discerned due to freedom of will of awareness. This concept was finity. This was the first and primal paradox or distortion of the Law of One. Thus the one intelligent infinity invested itself in an exploration of many-ness. Due to the infinite possibilities of intelligent infinity there is no ending to many-ness. The exploration, thus, is free to continue infinitely in an eternal present.
I don't know if finity is really something separated from infinity. Infinity is not a number but all numbers are part of infinity. I imagine the exploration of concept of finity as an endless counting to infinity.
I definitely don't think finity is separate from infinity in an ultimate sense. I think this concept of "focus" is key for exactly that reason: the difference between experiencing unity and separation is a matter of perspective, what you choose to focus on. Ergo this quote from Ra:
Quote:This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things.
Because we choose to have this separate experience, we choose to have a focus upon a subset of our totality, and that subset achieves manifestation as a function of the invented media called time and space. This is the great mystery of awareness, which seems to wrap up within itself a subject/object dichotomy that makes Creation possible: one cannot be aware without positing a subject having awareness and an object of which the subject is aware. However, this awareness in general, and the manner in which it manifests in the Creation in particular, is just one mode of possibility.
I heartily agree with Elros that this seems to be a matter of perspective and not essence. Duality is a mental model we employ to make sense of this within the limits of our understanding, but the thing we are attempting to model is much richer than the model conveys (although I will say that duality seems to recur throughout the Creation, across densities and experiences, but this could be merely a consequence of our limited perspective). This is one way of understanding why the intellect, the tool designed for reasoning about a space/time, is so ill equipped for reasoning about greater reality or even time/space. There's nothing wrong with the model of duality as long as one avoids the error of reducing one's entire horizon to only that which conforms which the model.
(01-12-2018, 11:07 AM)Coordinate_Apotheosis Wrote: [ -> ]I often use my nonfilter on here to make up for my lack of mirrors in real life, I'm just a lonely jerk who lashes out.
And I don't really know what to do about it anymore having seen how bad I've become. . How easily I take offense, and how stupid I am and can be. I cry about it a lot.
I hate it, how I get sucked so easily into the emotions of anger and lose myself to them.
CA: I never suspected that you were or are infallible. I believe that you and I share much of the same types of personality traits and commit many of the same foibles. I'm learning better control of myself and I have faith that you will also.
I appreciate your honesty, although brusk, to be very valuable. And, this type of venue, printed or typed, makes things more clear rather than less, in my opinion. The fact that I have corrected this post no less than four times before completing it verifies my belief. Some people will be offended no matter what you say if you don't parrot their opinion. I've learned to overlook those disparities.
However, my point to all this is that you make me stop and think. Your different perspective gives me reason to double check myself. THAT is invaluable because of the thought provoking way you present your often opposing opinion, courteously even when sharp or barbed.
I am sorry that you are so tortured by your nature. But, have faith and keep working on it. You can change and will when you find your balance. Until then, I call you friend.
Be well and be blessed. I greet you in love and light of the one infinite Creator!
Hi Billz, I have bolded thep parts which got me interested in your seeking. That's just meant as food for thought, as a mean to reflect on your conceptualizations of the creator.
Quote:However, as I reflect on what I've read, I don't remember Don asking or Ra stating our purpose. Why are we here? Is this reality an experiment in experience and collective growth for everyone. I know when we transform to 4D that we'll spend time in between densities reflecting on our personal growth and what remains for our ultimate evolution to the next Octive(s). But I still don't recall a concise answer to "why are we here?" More to the point, why did we ever leave the Creator?
First off, I don't think we can leave the creator, that would imply that something isn't the creator. The idea that the creator is some outside being playing with toys as if this creation was totally external to him is a popular belief among religious background. Although I think it creates a paradox to externalize the creator from it's creation or to conceptualize the creator as all the things while some of the things wouldn't be in accordance with the creator as many religious beliefs pretend. The LOO instead suggest that the creator IS the creation, that it is actively taking part in it, and experiencing it, rather than being outside of it. I think that makes much more sense to me.
Quote: I did not read anywhere that the Creator was not omniscient and therefore cannot accept your shifting focus as anything more than mirrors to misdirect the point. I will agree that the Creator enjoys the knowing of itself through out experiences, like a father enjoys the successes of their children. But I believe that it was implied in the text that the Creator was omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent; i.e. Infinite Energy and Infinite Intelligence.
When speaking of omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence, it seems to me that we indirectly apply the idea of awareness or consciousness to these terms. But what does awareness or consciousness mean? To me it implies the very idea of experience or observation, that is that there is a subject and an object. In short, that there is duality. That means that at this state the creator is split, then it is not united. It seems to me that when we attribute the creator some kind of similar awareness to ours but with some kind of wholeness to it, we are essentially projecting our own understanding of our consciousness to the concept of god. But that seems to me like a limiting idea, to think that the creator would even be limited to awareness is a farfetched claim in my opinion. If consciousness requires duality, then god may be much more than consciousness. The root of the word even mean: con (with) scio (seperation). Although there are many interpretation to the latin roots, some would describe the second part of the word as meaning 'together' but that imply a certain form of seperation doesn't it?
Quote:If that is true, then following the semantics of the argument to the end actually points out that the Creator desires to know, from our experiences in our lives at whatever density/octave, the "how" of what we have employed in resolving the issues of our lives. The "why" of our existence then becomes a contradiction to the concept that the Creator as omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. If the Creator already knows "everything," then he/she doesn't require the additional knowledge that we might provide because it's redundant and therefore superfluous. This "why" premise then indicates a flaw in the Creator. For me, this indicates a flaw in Ra's written dialogue. I will accept that Ra's knowledge is incomplete because Ra admitted on more than one occasion that Ra didn't know everything. Therefore, the flaw in the logic of my supposition is a limitation of Ra and not a possible flaw with the Creator.
You see, the creator is everything, and so cannot be without flaws. It is in fact all of the flaws. Can you see now how we are limiting our own perspective by projecting our own limits to this idea of limitlessness? The creator that is infinite and contains everything must by definition contain all those opposites, else it is very paradoxal. And so the creator contains limits, flaws, unconsciousness, unawareness. That's not to say there is no bigger consciousness behind everything, but there is a distinction I believe between what we consider to be oneness, unity, the source, the creator, no matter how you want to call it, and consciousness.
My personal conclusion, and according to the LOO is that the one thing prior to consciousness is beingness, meaning it is the only thing that is impossible to seperate from the rest. But again that's just my deduction.
Night Owl, thank you for your reply. You honor me with your time, consideration and your opinion. I appreciate everything you have said.
I reflect what Ra said during one interview about using our word forms to communicate and how limiting our language can be in discussing the Creator and creation. I accept that we most likely are unable to posit the actual existence of the Creator within our limited abilities, language and concepts.
However, my heart, soul and mind still seek, every minute of every day, to find the source of my love and yearn for the oneness of which you speak. I would corrupt Nietzsche's quote: (cogito ergo sum) "I think, therefore I am," and adapt it to myself, "I am, therefore I seek!" My love for my Creator and every thing else is boundless in that it is part of infinite energy. So, I search,...and these are the questions that haunt me.
I greet you in love and light of the infinite Creator!
It's the second time I read this, so I think I should point it out:
The phrase "cogito ergo sum" is from René Descartes not Friedrich Nietzsche.
Sorry, just want to be help.
This guy gets under my skin sometimes but I think it's because he is absolutely right.
(01-13-2018, 10:30 AM)Billz Wrote: [ -> ]Night Owl, thank you for your reply. You honor me with your time, consideration and your opinion. I appreciate everything you have said.
I reflect what Ra said during one interview about using our word forms to communicate and how limiting our language can be in discussing the Creator and creation. I accept that we most likely are unable to posit the actual existence of the Creator within our limited abilities, language and concepts.
However, my heart, soul and mind still seek, every minute of every day, to find the source of my love and yearn for the oneness of which you speak. I would corrupt Nietzsche's quote: (cogito ergo sum) "I think, therefore I am," and adapt it to myself, "I am, therefore I seek!" My love for my Creator and every thing else is boundless in that it is part of infinite energy. So, I search,...and these are the questions that haunt me.
I greet you in love and light of the infinite Creator!
Language is indeed a very limited form of communication. The problem with words is they essentially are abstractions from the concepts they try to point at, and so they never quite reach the intended destination, just inform that there is a destination to this information. Not to mention, we usually try to describe abstract emotional experiences with these words, and that's something that is hardly achieved, or even properly understood. We must do our best to fill the blanks. It's also very hard not to use our own experience to seek the creator. We just need to be careful not to circle around our own limits, a tendancy that is akin to 'humanocentrism', although it can be subtle enough that we don't see it at first.
(01-13-2018, 01:31 PM)sjel Wrote: [ -> ]This guy gets under my skin sometimes but I think it's because he is absolutely right.
Sorry, but I don't agree with Sadhguru and other gurus who say that life is without purpose. They give only examples of a finite purpose like winning a medal. The infinite purpose of life can only be the Infinite Creator itself. This journey of seeking is without end.
"Ideals are like stars; you will not succeed in touching them with your hands. But like the seafaring man on the desert of waters, you choose them as your guides, and following them you will reach your destiny." (Carl Schurz)
The creator is so dense and infinite that it contain both purpose and non-purpose. They exist as corelations at all times. Sadhguru is both right and wrong and/or neither.
I liked the idea I came across in my seeking. Please forgive me for not being about to cite it.
I am writing from memory.
Suppose that without the veil there is sheer unity and love. Sounds extremely comfortable.
When I'm comfortable, my limits are rarely explored. Also, the sheer amount of light and love could be overwhelming.
If you are made of light, surrounded by light everywhere... It is hard to really see anything in such homogeneous setting.
I agreed with some Theosophical readings that suppose that the universe goes into emanations of day and night, or breathing in and out.
In one there is a state of rest, or sleep and dormancy. However, it supoosadely awakens with an emanation that cause everything in this platonic perfection to vibrate just enough to cast shadows. These shadows are analogous to the opposite/competing idea or duality in all things.
Suddenly things can be seen in the contrast, giving hope for consciousness to take notice.
Perhaps with so much light it is difficult to notice the tiny details, where as under the veil, stumbling in darkness with our tiny light, we can see things much clearer.
I remember it being suggested that before the veil and polarity there was little reason to seek the creator and greater understanding.
Perhaps our higher selves have a very good reason we choose to be here, but knowing such would miss the point entirely.
(01-08-2018, 03:02 PM)Billz Wrote: [ -> ]I know we are to love, to strive for Unity and to forgive. Those are actions that we are to strive to achieve that will help us in our journey. Loving will alter the positive alignment and forgiveness will enhance everyone's position. No one would argue these very good points.
However, as I reflect on what I've read, I don't remember Don asking or Ra stating our purpose. Why are we here? Is this reality an experiment in experience and collective growth for everyone. I know when we transform to 4D that we'll spend time in between densities reflecting on our personal growth and what remains for our ultimate evolution to the next Octive(s). But I still don't recall a concise answer to "why are we here?" More to the point, why did we ever leave the Creator?
From what I have gathered, it is for the evolution of consciousness.
At this moment I'm here to love another with the deepest love I've ever felt. I think all moments come to now.
I'd read in a book that, the very reason for the existence is for God to experience Himself.
It’s probably been answered but Ra did speak on the purpose of life: the purpose of life is the development of all that we are: mind, body, and spirit. It’s simple really.
[/quote]
Quote:I remember it being suggested that before the veil and polarity there was little reason to seek the creator and greater understanding.
Yes! When one knows they are light and knows they are love and is in union with The Creator, why would they seek anything more? Is there anymore to seek from that perspective?
Ra does speak of the Matrix of the Spirit being "less motile" and does not have the characteristics of dynamic motion.
Quote:The Matrix of the Spirit is difficult to characterize since the nature of spirit is less motile. The energies and movements of the spirit are, by far, the most profound, yet, having more close association with time/space, do not have the characteristics of dynamic motion
Also, there is a quality of depth that can be ascertained in third density thus adding to the Creator's knowledge of itself by our mere movement through third density.
Ra speaks of this great dynamic tension that is created when this is played out.
Quote:Ra: I am Ra. We would only comment briefly. It is generally correct. You may fruitfully view each Logos and its design as the Creator experiencing Itself. The seed concept of the significator being a complex introduces two things: firstly, the Creator against Creator in one sub-Logos in what you may call dynamic tension; secondly, the concept of free will, once having been made fuller by its extension into the sub-Logoi known as mind/body/spirit complexes, creates and re-creates and continues to create as a function of its very nature.
Moving around in the darkness has its benefitial uses...I guess one could say.
(02-14-2021, 02:59 PM)schubert Wrote: [ -> ]for fun
Yeah I strongly believe that the Creation is
supposed to be fun at all times. I guess there's a bug down here, it does not always seem fun.
(02-14-2021, 04:27 PM)Patrick Wrote: [ -> ] (02-14-2021, 02:59 PM)schubert Wrote: [ -> ]for fun
Yeah I strongly believe that the Creation is supposed to be fun at all times. I guess there's a bug down here, it does not always seem fun.
It is fun, though
synecdochically.
If that's optimal, however...