The Winding Path – 214

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

[I’m resuming after a hiatus from editing and re-posting here. Much was said but it got left where it was.]

2016-03-01 14:10

[I’ve quoted the last paragraph but my comment was addressed to the entire comment in general. It is well worth reading. Epiphileon’s comment history is also well worth reviewing. He is quite sincere and balanced.]

Epiphileon – “There is another criticism I have heard. Naturalists, which is what those who hold to the notions I’ve described are sometimes called, have robbed themselves of wonder. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have been on many other sides of this issue, and I can assure you I have experienced more profound levels of wonder than I ever did as any kind of super-naturalist.

The coherence of nature is first and foremost the result of origination via the perfection of infinitude.

Be sure to give credit where credit is due.

2016-03-02 09:27

Epiphileon – “Sorry but I have no idea what that means.

[From Epiphileon’s original comment]
How is this system doing what it is? (at one level, being conscious)

How did this system come to be configured in this manner?

I’m not arguing with your understanding that these questions can be answered without going outside of nature.

There is nothing supernatural to be accounted for.

But…unless the underlying infinity is recognized, first and foremost, we just weave more webs of entanglement. Postponing enlightenment.

Simplicity before and within Complexity.

Infinite potential is absolutely perfect. This quality cascades throughout all expression of that potential as Existence/Experience.

Acknowledging this, we understand our relationship to it.

2016-03-03 11:40

Epiphileon – “Sorry Brmckay but I am still not getting what you are saying.
I get that you are not arguing against naturalism, even that you apparently accept it, but that is all I understood from your reply.

I would like to understand you position. I do not know what you mean by ‘underlying infinity’, something without beginning nor end I assume. So are you speaking of something outside of this universe, or something that this universe exists within, and is somehow sensible to us?

What do you mean by webs of entanglement, and how is it that we weave these?

I understand potential to be possibility, not to be an actual thing, as you seem to indicate. If that is so, what is it.

So expression of that potential, which I am temporarily assuming is some sort of uber-force, which creates existence which coexists with experience, and that perfection (really reaching here), proceeds from the infinitude, through all of the natural world, at successive levels from simplicity to complexity, with each level causing the next, and perhaps reflecting the original perfection, perhaps to varying degrees?

I am genuinely curious what you position is, not sure those questions help much, but I’m pretty sure they reflect the state of ignorance in my mind of what you are saying.

Thanks for the questions. (a rare thing really)

What I’m trying to point out is represented in the literature of the classical monist schools. Vedanta, Zen, Tao, Yoga etc. Just in case you have familiarity there, and got thrown off by my improvisations.

I do not know what you mean by ‘underlying infinity’, something without beginning nor end I assume.

There are the infinite sets we find in mathematics. These are the relative infinities. They have the quality of endlessness and possibly beginninglessness, but are unique and distinct from other infinite sets.

This represents the world of forces, phenomena, things, relationship, Change, This and That, I and Thou, Duality.

There is also the absolute infinitude of the Entirety. Or as I sometimes prefer, the Singularity. Everything and nothing. One without another.

This represents the un-carved block, the Source. Undifferentiated and Whole.

It is the absolute potential of nothing. Because there is no distinction between parts. This is the common ground. Everything; every phenomena, every thought and feeling is an emergent characteristic of this absolute infinity.

Just as the phenomena of “Space/Time” is an emergent characteristic of the dimensionless, eternal “Now”.

So are you speaking of something outside of this universe, or something that this universe exists within, and is somehow sensible to us?

Inside and Outside are terms from the relative viewpoint. In the more fundamental Truth of the absolute viewpoint, there is no distinction. The integrity is seamless. The parts are not different from the whole.

What do you mean by webs of entanglement, and how is it that we weave these?

Loosing sight of the bigger picture. Trapped in anthropomorphic and ultimately egocentric world view. The sense of ownership and realness of a separate self.

From that constricted viewpoint, we slice and dice, and mix and match, without the conscious benefit of the uninterrupted integrity.

I understand potential to be possibility, not to be an actual thing, as you seem to indicate. If that is so, what is it.

“Potential” is not a “thing” among other “things”, it is the source, and the foundation, and the thing itself.

Potential is the utter unlimitedness of infinity.

So expression of that potential, which I am temporarily assuming is some sort of uber-force, which creates existence which coexists with experience, and that perfection (really reaching here), proceeds from the infinitude, through all of the natural world, at successive levels from simplicity to complexity, with each level causing the next, and perhaps reflecting the original perfection, perhaps to varying degrees?

I’m hoping that the flatlandian aspects of this part of your comment are now apparent.

Language reaches its limit when trying to describe the unlimited.

Existence and Experience arise simultaneously. The complementarity of this pair is demonstrated in all relative phenomena.

Complementarity is the perfection of the undivided and ever-present Source, expressing as relationship.

2016-03-04 14:49

Epiphileon – “Wow, thank you so much, this is a view I was entirely unfamiliar with.
It almost seems like a mysticism without supernaturalism. That is just my immediate impression though. I need to spend more time digesting it though. I know I will have more questions.

Thank you. I am glad for this meeting and have read through a lot of your comment history.

I really like the integrity and balance to be found there. Others might benefit from doing so as well.


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 213

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

[From Disqus Blog: Discussion on Faith & Religion: Karmic Debt: Lynn Cunningham.]

2016-01-19 13:54

[Responding to blog post in general.]

The Sanskrit term karma means “work”, or “action”.

I like to think of it in terms of inertia.

The cartoon version makes it about “good” and “bad”, but really it is no different that the universal law of “cause and effect” applied to subjective experience.

It makes no sense to even consider it without also looking at the effect of “ahamkara” the “I maker” or Ego.

The personal and therefore relative sense of self that blinds the “individual” to its True nature. The absolute and therefore Singlular Self that is God. The undivided.

This confusion of identity results in the maze of relationships and opposites. This is “maya”. The illusion of “self and other”. The deeper into that maze, the more karma defines “reality”. Christians should equate this to “sin” or “The fall from Grace”.

Redemption from this situation is “moksha”, or liberation from the the entanglements of karma. It is the realization of, and subsequent actualization in ones experience, that God and I are One. Christians should equate this to “The Father and I are One”.

It’s not rocket science but does require attention to, and appreciation of the process.

Reincarnation, which is often associated with this understanding, is the acknowledgement that once a body, in this case the field of personal effect, is set in motion it tends to stay in motion. The mature understanding is that all experience is perfectly complementary to existence. If intention is on enlightenment then that is the fruition of the “work”.

Birth and Death is no more representative of ETERNITY than Birth, Death and Rebirth.

2016-01-21 15:32

Lynne Cunningham – “What about when, even though reluctantly, one does a deed that benefits someone else at one’s own expense, but one’s underlying intent was to ‘practice’ the principle of unselfishness? There are Bible scriptures alluding to this, (i.e., the parable of the widow’s mite, and others)…yet, isn’t there attachment/desire present even when attempting to raise one’s level of consciousness?

This world that we live in is best seen as an opportunity to practice.

Since “Awakening” cannot be mistaken for any”thing” else, what does it matter to what degree “we” are falling short.

By Grace we learn to recognize “gaining ideas”. The karma of that is instant and subtle.

If God is all, who bestows Grace? Who receives it?

2016-01-22 12:45

Lynne Cunningham – “That’s an interesting question! It might take awhile to formulate an answer.But meanwhile…why are there the artificial separations? Why are there many people? Why are there people at all? (though this might be going outside the scope of the original discussion) Still, one question brings on another. Why even ask questions when they, and the answers to them, would be in a way irrelevant?

Primordial infinitude of nothing, is infinite potential.

The emergent characteristic of infinite potential is Existence/Experience.

It’s own nature compounding upon itself.

In other words God, experiencing nature as limitation.

2016-01-19 14:08

Natalie D. – “Karma is Hindu, not Christian.

Karma is a fundamental quality underlying Creation.

Hinduism and Christianity are religions.

2016-01-21 15:49

Lynne Cunningham responding to the above – “That’s just why it’s easy to incorporate religions other than Christianity into one’s personal philosophy.

If we are interested in knowing God, then that is what will happen.

Attachment to a particular religion or philosophy will eventually give way to “enlightenment”. All distinction of this and that, good and bad, no longer needed.

2016-01-19 16:40

Natalie D. – “Christians don’t believe in karma, and definitely not in this world. We believe in grace.

For me Grace is the perfect complementary matching of my actions and intentions to outcomes.

When it comes down to it, everything that happens is custom made for each of us. We are guided constantly.

It is the nature of the great Truth that God is All.

2016-01-21 16:45

Lynne Cunningham responding to the above. – “My heart leaps with happiness to contemplate those things you’ve mentioned…but is ‘happiness’ a step in the right direction, or is it just one more face of ‘desire’? (I’m very attached to happiness! lol)

I’m happy that you are happy. But am well aware that tomorrow I may be sad.

That is the name of the game here, but the perfect complementarity of the pair is a clue.

2016-01-22 11:01

Lynne Cunningham – “The fact that sadness inevitably comes isn’t a daunting prospect, and actually brings happiness into sharper relief…one puzzling issue, though, in regards to the Christian idea of heaven is that people will ‘always be happy.’ How happy, or in what sense? I would imagine that the happiness then would be based in having only good people around and in not ever going through the wrenching experience of losing loved ones, and in not getting sick ever again. The thing is, we don’t KNOW. It’s all just speculation. That’s frustrating.

The Christian theology is dualistic and therefore can not come up with a different conception than you described.

I prefer a non-dualist or monist theology whenever I can find it,

God is not outside of creation. Therefore the absolute and the relative are interdependent.

This requires an ability to be comfortable “not knowing”. To accept fundamental paradox.

As for happiness and sadness; In the relative state of Creation, each is dependent on the other.

But in the absolute state as Creator, there is no division. No other.

For instance in the Hindu theology, or at least in schools like advaita-vedanta, the subjective experience of the nature of God is referred to as SatChidAnanda (Being, Consciousness, Bliss).

It is Ananda or Bliss which gets parsed into Happiness and Pain when filtered through the prism of relativity.

2016-01-22 15:31

Lynne Cunningham – “But wouldn’t it be boring to simply ‘be’ eternally, if awareness remains an element? To my mind, boredom = hell. (This demonstrates my present inability to extricate from dualistic mentality…can there actually be those for whom it’s possible?) Shades of Sisyphus!! lol

There is no should-or-shouldn’t attached to this. It is just what is possible.

The connection to the source being seamless. Ever present.

Part of the problem envisioning that, is the baggage of time. Which is a product of body and mind.

Eternity is a dimensionless and timeless state. As in just NOW.

It’s not an endlessly long time. That would indeed be difficult to fill with projects, and come up with rent for.

This is all beside the point anyway. Can’t think our way to heaven. It’s not a product of Mind.

2016-01-22 11:22

Lynne Cunningham – “We never know from what quarter the next round of unhappiness will come, and so can live happily (or at any rate, peacefully) in a sense of ‘suspended animation’ until it does.

The Yogis would guide us to a mastery of a non-reactive acceptance of “what is”.

Neither for or against. A non-grasping mind. Not This – Not This. etc.

But that requires an intuition of “enlightenment”. A readiness for “seeing” beyond the world of attraction and aversion. The love of the NOW.

2016-01-22 12:57

Lynne Cunningham – “Isn’t ‘love’ one big all-encompassing attraction zone? Would achieving enlightenment make irrelevant love as it’s commonly known? (That prospect seems un-desirable!)

How is love commonly known? Is it the turmoil finding and loosing it that we are attached to? Or, loving some and not loving others?

If it is a steady state, imperishable and constant, then I’d say that that is “enlightenment”.

Lynne Cunningham – “Perhaps we all find ourselves somewhere on the continuum… hopefully the tumultuous ‘drama’ version is outgrown as soon as hormones stabilize, at which time mature adults have the opportunity to experience love in ever-widening rings and formats. Altruistic love in particular has always intrigued me, the fact that people can and often do step far beyond their comfort zone for those they have never met. This, I would say, comes closest to my understanding of what would be a primary element of enlightenment.

2016-01-22 21:24

Lynne Cunningham – “We’re so programmed into reactive mode that it would surely require a great deal of practice to achieve an acceptance mentality…one hindrance would be those who interpret non-reactivity as weakness, and would prey upon it; survival pokes its nose above-ground! Dealing with one’s internal state of affairs seems challenge enough, but are there auxiliary techniques for dealing with external forces?

I only know from my own life. Not sure what your’s would be like.

This is just something one does with ones days. Like practicing music. There are stages. All happening at once sometimes.

An appreciation of synchronicity and significance. The feedback from events. The challenge of being honest. The challenge of catching yourself interpreting from a bias.

Road rage. And the layers of ego that arise as you try to distance yourself from it. Authentic mindfulness practice. …. eventually.

This is enough for now. Thanks again.

2016-01-19 15:37

Brian Le Blanc – “Christians are told that they have dominion over the land and the animals within it. Animals were put on this earth specifically for whatever we might need them for.

Never heard this before!!

In pre-Christian terms, aren’t you you talking about before the the big boondoggle? Surely that was a game changer. These days it’s just the prevailing attitude.

In Ecosystem terms, where we all live, we are food for each other.

The ideal of compassion and respect, would be due out of Love for fellow life forms. For all Creation. God’s proxy in this sometimes beautiful exile.

2016-01-22 10:42

Brian Le Blanc – “This is in your bible, Genesis 1:26-29 to be exact. Not to mention that prevailing theme that everything that we see and discover is ultimately created with our specific species in mind.

That was somebody in antiquity using their intuition to describe how things work. Having become aware as a human being.

My more contemporary take on this, i.e. “in God’s image”, means our sense of awareness is rooted in the Infinitude of God.

The “I am”.

Since that Infinitude is undivided. Our self awareness is God’s.

Any dominion over creation ought to flow from that understanding and be therefore harmless.

But, there is a glitch. You may have noticed this.

2016-01-23 10:13

Brian Le Blanc – “I actually agree with your view on the bible. It is the product of ignorant farmers with no clue about how the universe works.

And we now know how the universe works?

I do find it strange how you can still consider this book reliable in any way.

Not sure what “reliable” means but since I see God as All. I was able to find inspiration there. The red letter editions were helpful. A background in Yoga and other monist schools, even more so.

It is not that difficult to filter out the misleading interpretations that one encounters. They are quite predictable.

I do find it strange how you can still consider this book reliable in any way.

Reliable for what? I don’t need it to be anything. It is a powerful tale, and metaphor, but daily life is no less potent.

The value that a monist puts on equanimity comes in handy. It helps us to not add anything extra.

As for:

If you accept that thousands of other God’s have been created from uneducated opinions of ancient civilizations, why is this one any different for you?

There is evolution at work here. When Jesus says that “I and the Father are One” he’s bringing those bronze and iron age farmers and fisher folk closer to the REAL. It misses the point to make him a deity. That is just backsliding.

But why linger over any this? What’s next?


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 212

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2016-01-24 17:33

[Responding to Almostcertain2 who was responding to Little Bear. The disqus channel – Discussion on God, Spirituality and Religion – “God Explained”.]

Where does Time happen?

Depending on that answer, what about Mass? … Gravity? … Light?

2016-01-25 09:09

[Responding to Almostcertain2]

If a seed falls on rocky ground. Is it the seeds fault?

2016-01-25 09:58

Kevin Osborne – “…understanding requires context …

As to now there is only now IMO.

And NOW is the mother of all context. Though we wander far and wide.


2016-01-25 10:45

Try and reason here. – “Since we make things with purpose, I believe in some one who made everything around with purpose as well. It is consistent as with what is observable.

Little Bear – “Truth is experienced. That’s how you recognize untruth – which is the state we all currently occupy (as long as we perceive ourselves as separate).

[Responding to Try and reason here.]

The difference I observe here, is the difference between riding on the surface of the sea, and diving to its depth.


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 211

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2015-12-26 14:13

Psychedelics – “Not recognized by the Nicean councils..there were two

Little Bear – “Not all recognize Truth. Some only recognize the authority of Nicean councils.

Psychedelics – “Everyone has their own truths .. meditation and prayer will lead us.

Everyone has their own working hypotheses. Until, in the eternity of One, all approximations dissolve.

Any distinctions of this-and-that, of me-and-other, means that the fool still reigns.

2015-12-27 09:10

MADNESS – “There is only one truth. The rest are merely smoke and mirrors

Where is the one True truth? Where is it not?

2015-12-27 10:14

Faith Reasoner responding to Dr. Stephen Falken – “Only fools treat science and religion as enemies. Science simply shows the way God rules the universe at present. Religion teaches us how to value things, how to value people, how to be morally constructive, how to be in moral harmony with our creator.

B Mc responding to Faith Reasoner – “ ‘Only fools treat science and religion as enemies’….. They are Enemies if those In Religion Insist on Magic Tricks and as an Explanation for the Universes Mysteries….

We are all fools, each in our own way. Imposing science on religious myth being no exception.

Inappropriate rule mongering by any other name smells as rank.

2015-12-27 10:35

Jero Jones responding to Faith Reasoner – “You do not need to be Christian or religious to be morally correct, or to be a good person, people have been good without god since time immemorial. Science shows those with knowledge the utter futility of superstitious deities, and the immorality, and deception within religion.

What is “time”? What is “good”? What are “people”?

A knowledgeable understanding of God, shows the utter futility of the premise “without god”. Though, “without an idea of God”, might have been a plausible substitute.

Religion is optional yes, but your generalizations point more to a collection of biases, hardly discernible from “superstition”.

2015-12-28 08:19

Jero Jones – “I am not concerned with your semantics, my point was to show that man (or woman) do not need a god/deity/supernatural being or anything else to be good. A belief in a divine being that makes you “good and morally” superior over others, is a religious fallacy.

It was clear what you were saying. It was also clear that you are talking about cartoon versions of God, religion and probably science.

Cultivation of “good” comes by raising the level of play. Just tipping over the board proves what?

You summarized by saying:

A belief in a divine being that makes you “good and morally” superior over others, is a religious fallacy.

The better arguments I’ve been seeing here, stress that belief in God provides motivation and guidance. Life is lived with the purpose of cultivating a goodness that goes beyond mere perpetuation of DNA.

Your ears seem deaf to this nuance.

2015-12-27 10:53

Pleasenoreligion responding to Jero Jones – “I agree. Treating those in your community with kindness or empathy is in line with an animal /scientific instinct to survive in your community or clan or however you want to put it. People in a community that are theives, murderers and wife stealers would quic[k]ly become outcast and kicked out of the group, where the perpetrator would find it difficult to survive on their own. It’s the same thing that gives teenagers the immense drive to not be the outcast.
Alot of mammals that live in social groups display what we might see as altruistic behavior when all it is, is survival.

Avoiding religious terminology minimizes the risk of standing out in certain circles.

But what, or who “survives”?

Same questions arise and get ignored in different ways.

2015-12-28 13:18

Pleasenoreligion – “Who or what survives? I thought I made a clear, concise statement but I will try to help you understand in an even simpler way. Any living creature that survives by following social rules: wolves, monkeys, meerkats…and the most intelligent mammal – humans. Religion’s rules that require one to be altruistic is just a set of rules to ensure your survival and possible flourishing of your life. That’s all religion is about and the christian 10 commandments. (and please don’t get it in your head that I’m of another religion – attacking christianity as all religions have the same basic rules). Someone who doesn’t follow the basic ‘rules’ will become an outcast in society, and for one to flouish in life, they need connections, networking if you will, and people who give themselves a bad rep will be shunned to the outer edge of society. For example, who’s going to lend their name to a theif to get that person a good job. Or if that theif is down on his luck, would someone shelter the theif? No.
The main reason for the basic rules of any religion is to ensure one’s survival and flourishing.
It’s the same with social animals. If a female meerkat is promiscuous and breeds, it is kicked out of the clan and forced to raise the pups on their own, which isn’t a promising situation because meerkat pups need babysitting while the parent is off finding food. Only the dominant female is allowed to breed.

I hope I have cleared up any confusion for you.

Religion’s rules that require one to be altruistic is just a set of rules to ensure your survival and possible flourishing of your life. That’s all religion is about …

Yea, if exclusively looking through a microscope could actually provide a realistic perspective.

A few more laps around the block and the question of un-caused causation arises. The Real becomes interesting. Then the question; How to clear away the litter of theories and dogma once their job is done?

The beacon of Experience. The nature of Existence. Who are We?


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 210

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2015-12-23 08:27

IrrationalHumanBeing – “…The 1-size-fits-all American Dream model seems elusive, precarious, or non-fulfilling like all the leave-it-to-beaver, married-with-children and moving-on-up and huxtable myths.

Many folks are waking up every morning, teens and adults, and asking … is this my mundane purpose in life:

1. Graduate from HS or get my GED?
2. Get a dead-end poverty-wage job?
3. Go to JC or a 4-year college for an associates or bachelors?
4. Get a dead-end poverty-wage job?
5. Go to a university for a masters or doctorates?
6. Get a precarious lower-middle income job?
7. Have lots of singe person sex until what?
8. Find a monogamous lover … who probably cheats on me or me them?
9. Procreate and become a single parent or two-parents … and then divorce?
10. Get another degree cuz mine is useless, get another job cuz I hate mine, get another lover because we’re incompatible — start from GO … life stages 3 – 9 all over again, LOL?

11. Stop asking myself “What’s the meaning/purpose of my life … all human life?… and just humbly affirm that life only has the good, bad, and ugly meaning I and 7.4 billion other humans give it?

Let me meditate on these open-ended questions and hope the answers are forthcoming:)

There is a fortunate transformation waiting in the wings for everybody. Once one realizes that every moment is significant. The work begins. Your list of dead-ends describes the day-to-day of folks still huddled together at the bottom of the mountain.

For me it was at 21 when an intuition of enlightenment came. I now had something real to do. Life had one purpose. All perfectly expressed in this moment.

2015-12-23 14:24

IrrationalHumanBeing – “You speaking for 7.4 billion human beings?

I want to say, of course!, but realize that it depends on how you dissected my comment.

2015-12-23 17:24

IrrationalHumanBeing – “I took your wisdom at face value, albeit I 100% didn’t comprehend it. But that’s okay. I don’t grasp 99.99% of anything spiritual, god, or religious related. Maybe that’s how it’s supposed to be for some, many, or only me. I’m cool with that:)

I related to what you had said, and I threw in my 2 cents.

Now I find the “I 100% didn’t comprehend it” part, hard to imagine.

The unifying theme is the nature of God. Our common ground. All 7.4 billion and counting.

2015-12-25 08:29

IrrationalHumanBeing – “Oh, okay. So 7.4 billion humans, okay maybe many, minus myself, share a ‘belief in an invisible being’ and this ‘mass delusion’ connects us? Okay, I would partly agree with that. So have you persuaded DAESH (ISIS) to join this shared delusion? I sense they have their own version and its horrific violent, LOL.

I was talking in terms of True common ground. i.e. the un-caused cause.

The Experience of Existence.

You are surprising me with the this lesser god of us-and-them. Why worship at that alter? It is obviously a dead end.

2015-12-26 09:27

IrrationalHumanBeing – “No surprise.

You know humans create our gods, be it our romanticized version of a 21st century god … the same white-American-god that justified slavery, jim crow segregation, all subsequent racism, no vote for women and their second class citizenship, poverty wages for the poor, and never ending American imperialism wars … or all the other human gods that justified their historical and present day sins.

Yet humans still belive there’s some benevolent patriarch, definitely not divine female or non human attribute being, playing cosmic puppet master … according to some unknown master plan.

Nope, there’s just us and all those other species we have yet to become aware of and the infinite cosmos …. no supernature being, albeit I understand why many humans need this Mysticism Linus Blanket to maintain our frail sanity.

Happy Hoildays B. Much love to you and your family.

There are may stages to past through. “Supernatural” will fall by the wayside along with “skepticism”.

They only describe personal comfort zones. Habitual orbits and limitation.

“Infinite” on the other hand, has great potential to enliven one. At least it has for me. What is it really?

You seem done with this for now, and I don’t want to start chasing my tail, so I’ll say “thanks for the chat”, and wish you well too.


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 209

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2015-12-21 15:21

Little Bear – “My agreement isn’t necessary in order for what you believe to be true for you. Argument is simply dis-agreement. Why should that disappear? So that we can all pretend to get along?

Ceejae Devine – “Pretend? Isn’t finding common ground what we are all seeking here? No, I think once we get past disagreement, we can start focusing on sharing the beauty we know, building relationships, sharing ideas about how to improve our lives, sharing our stories with others who don’t know what to look for because there are a lot of people who are confused and sad and feeling hopeless.

Actually Little Bear is talking about the common ground.

Eternal, imperishable, undifferentiated and entire.

You are talking about your relationship to that. About being in orbit around it.

I’m not sure why, since the testimony of saints and sages is that reality is the Singularity.

2015-12-22 10:14

Ceejae Devine – “Little Bear’s reply was:

‘Finding a common ground? You must still be young . No.’

So I am not sure why you are telling me what he thinks.

I am not presenting theories about orbits. I don’t talk in abstractions. I have been presenting my perspectives from my concrete experiences. Perhaps the saints had the same personality types as many of the people in the “spiritual realm” that isn’t really spiritual because some of their views are just based on their personality types. Many spiritual people focus on the now, presence, love, stillness, and kindness as “spiritual” qualities, but they are simply a manifestation of at least one and perhaps a couple particular personality types.

“Reality is the Singularity?” What is that?

I experienced amplification in my mind as I spoke three words that described an object and something of that nature appeared the next day. I sat in a particular seat and another phenomenal event occurred that could not have occurred if anyone at the table had chosen different chairs. I was directed to follow a vague thought that led me to information about a number of concepts people claim are spiritual and found they aren’t so I wrote a book about the experience. There have been a number of other experiences that I prefer to tell as stories because that’s what they are. So that is my reality. God is active my life.

Synchronicity is the norm, in truth it is a constant. Because, we are not separate from God. No matter how it seems.

This is the “common ground”.

2015-12-22 10:14

Ceejae Devine – “Because no one has the Whole Truth, you just think you do. You proved part of my point, with your comment about stillness.

I only notice my experiences because of a reason you say is so? Quite the opposite, my experiences are so beautiful I can not not share them.

I have never heard anyone talk about the kinds of things I am experiencing, so I am not sure why you are telling me I am wrong in the way I am presenting them.

I share them because it is my choice. I don’t need to listen to men tell me because they have big, abstract perspectives about God, to go away, that my experiences and perspectives aren’t worthy enough to be part of the conversation.

What are you learning from the experiences? Where do they lead? I am not saying that God is not active in your life, only that it is inevitably so, since the fundamental non-difference from God is the fabric of reality.

Why are we fighting?

2015-12-21 15:53

Little Bear responding to Kevin Osborne – “You have to give up the personal (the ‘thing’ separate from the rest) in order to experience the non-personal (the EVERYTHING). It can be done.

Kevin Osborne – “In an instant, perhaps. Not necessarily abandonment of oneself, but my opinion.

Little Bear – “It only happens in the space of timelessness. In a moment of great attraction we drop the personal and enter that space (it’s only happened a few times in my life). The moment you’re back in time, personality is there again. Personality IS our identification with time. It’s our story. It has a beginning, middle, and end. But if you can drop the story (it actually carries weight – gravity – binding us to the horizontal plane), the lightness is literally out of this world amazing! We can’t abandon our personal self through an act of will EVER. Our will IS our personal aspect. It happens through powerful attraction. An attraction GREATER than our attachment to our selves.

Ceejae Devine – “You have your ideas and experiences about God. From what I found, it’s because you have a certain kind of personality. God connects with you via your personality. So that’s how you see God. God is connecting with me very specifically via aspects of my personality.

You only notice this because personality stops the flow to ponder the moments that it considers significant.

In reality as Little Bear is describing it from experience, the connection is seamless. Continuous. Perfectly still.

It is the illusion of separateness that makes things special or noxious. The personality creating a world of attractions and aversions.

This is the mortal coil. What is the point in cultivating it further, if it’s not the Whole Truth?


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 208

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2015-12-21 11:55

[Responding to Cole Puerto who is avid to introduce people to the prophecy called “The New Message” – by Marshall Vian Summers.

To quote from the official website: “Marshall Vian Summers is God’s Messenger for this time and the times to come, bringing a New Message from God. He is the Messenger for this millennium. Marshall is the most important person on Earth.”

Cole Puerto has been talking with Little Bear.]

To paraphrase, using different terms, and without the benefit of Little Bears direct confirmation:

Maintaining the dualistic view, contradicts awakening in Christ. i.e. Enlightenment. Moksha. The living Truth, that “I and the Father are One”.

God is relevant/relative as long as there is “Other”. But deliberately maintaining the separation, confounds awakening and perpetuates the “Fall from Grace”.

Where does this new message point to, as regards that aspect?

2015-12-22 10:06

Cole Puerto Mod – “I cannot summarize or explain the New Message. What understanding I have of this subject you mention above is conceptual seeing that I have not experienced it.

‘Awakening,’ as I understand it, is not some singular event. It is a process and a journey, and it certainly is not completed in this life. The physical universe is but a small part of God’s Creation. While we are here, we live with two minds – the personal mind or “ego” and Knowledge/Spirit. Uniting with Knowledge is what Christ exemplified in his life, and what all God’s Messengers have demonstrated. This is a piece of my oh so limited understanding.

I’d recommend this teaching, entitled ‘The Separation.’…

Thanks for the clarifying link. It is pointing to the same thing that we’re all talking about. Though, much more reading is required than I’m inclined to do, and I had to start skimming.

This understanding is indeed available within us. To me, the drama of a massive revelation is “something extra”. But it presumably has it’s place. Be nice if no wars ever get started over it.

2015-12-22 11:01

Cole Puerto – “It’s nice to hear you checked it out. It is certainly extensive.

There is the message for the individual as it relates to the uniting with Spirit or Knowledge; and then there is the message for the world. They are one and the same, and reveal what humanity must do to prepare individually, and collectively, for a changing future.

Not everyone can receive it but for those called to do so, there is no other pathway. This is my experience.

For me it is already familiar, and as indicated, the knowledge is “placed” within us already. As I’ve often explained to Christians, the Bible is unnecessary, confusing and inefficient in light of the of the Holy Spirit. Though, the point is seldom well received.

Here’s to hoping that we all outgrow that which isolates us, one from the other.

2015-12-23 09:13

Cole Puerto Mod responding to Kevin Osborne – “A Zen saying I like is: ‘Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water; after Enlightenment, chop wood carry water.’

The building of character is the chopping wood and carrying water.

The beauty of the addage:

Before Enlightenment chop[ing] wood carry[ing] water; after Enlightenment, chop[ing] wood carry[ing] water.

, is for me, in the ordinariness it emphasizes. Seamless and matter of fact.

No “gaining ideas”. Nothing added.


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 207

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

[Responding to Matt Cavanaugh’s response to the the blog post “Do we need Philosophy when we have Science?” by Ben Conroy.]

You think machines can do science without us providing a “meaningful” context for it?

It’s true that “meaningful” is all over the map, that’s the nature of it. It’s called “Life”.

Philosophy really is a waste of time, if it continues to pose questions that Science has already answered.

Within the spectrum of relative existence, no question is ever finally answered. There is only the next, more holistic, context to examine.

The process is philosophy. Whether it serves science or art.

[Commentary from the Blog post: “Yes, Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God (But Here’s What That Means & Doesn’t)“, by Benjamin L. Corey.]

2015-12-18 15:07

It should be obvious to anyone, that there is only one God. Period.

It should also be obvious, that religion is not God.

But alas, it isn’t so, and understanding that there is only God, gets lost in the weeds.

2015-12-18 16:34

Maria Anderson Huston – “Contradictory views cannot both be true. Either Jesus was the son of God or he was not.

In the infinite potential of God, all is true. Who are we to argue with it?

It is the habit of seeing in contradictions that keeps us confused. And our confusion that makes us mean.

Since we choose to think that God has sides to choose from.

2015-12-19 14:29

Maria Anderson Huston – “The God of the Bible is truth, not a lie. Thus, not contradictory.

God is Truth and certainly not contradictory. But you saying the above, is an approximation.

Same for anything I say. But I will still ask, “What does that mean, ‘The God of the Bible’ “?


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 206

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.

2015-12-18 13:41

[Responding to Sabio Lantz.]

The illusory nature of the sense of “I” as object? This is nothing new of course.

And reading the Paul Bloom article, along with the comments here, I wonder at the constricted application of “dualism”. So carefully groomed to serve the Godless point of view.

But why?

It is such a small step from that insight, to at least an intuition, of the actual non-dualistic unity of reality. Beyond time. Self included.

Unless there is a policy against it.

2015-12-28 11:28

[Responding to Sabio Lantz.]

Monkey vs. Cat gods? This is a description of relativity. Underlying it, the Singularity expressing as both and neither.

And advaita? Like for Ramana Maharshi, it is a convenient catechism once one starts talking about IT. A finger pointing at the moon.

If you find an answer to the question “Who am I”, by whom exactly was it found?


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs

The Winding Path – 205

For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.


[Responding to nanyummyify.]

Get rid of the “randomness” idea. Understanding that the perfect, unbounded nature of infinitude, is expressed as creation. Permeating itself throughout itself.

Evolution of life forms, laws of physics, chemistry, sentience all share the common ground of Infinite Singularity.

If you still need to separate evolution and adaptation, consider the relativity of time, and that all creation takes place in this single moment. Eternally.

2015-12-13 09:50 (approximately)

IWannaBTheGuy responding to nanyummyify – “Earth has had billions of years to cook up life.

All of that, in this single dimensionless moment.

Evolution in reality is trial and error, not random chance nor intelligent design or any form of ‘miracle’.

Infinitely distributed parallel processing. The nature of absolute infinitude. What’s not miraculous about it?

Our genome has a lot of junk code. In fact, 8% of the entire human genome came from dormant retroviruses, you can look it up yourself. Where’s the intelligence in that?

Nothing exists in isolation from the context. The context, if honestly examined, is the Entirety.

Being indifferent to the wonder of it, is a choice, but not the only one possible.

2015-12-13 10:18 (approximately)

[Responding to nickj14711.]

Consider that the infinite potentiality of no-thing, inevitably results in some-thing.

The rest, as they say, “is history”.

But, then, if we are honest about it, we must consider the situation where-by, the infinitude of no-thing, having no where to go, somehow remains.


Alms and Patronage

Posted in logs