心神 ~

For myself, not putting things into practice, I am like one who looks at my face in the mirror and after looking at myself, I go away and immediately forget what I look like. Knowing that is better than not knowing, but putting things into practice would be best. I have a long way to go.

One understands the true nature of things through experience. My limited understanding is informed by a lack of experience, and reinforced by my personal environment. So not only can I not speak to the truth of whether every phenomena is an act of love and joy, it's not something that has been shown to me by those around me, because I am not in an environment in my day to day life with people who have experienced and comprehended the true nature of things. It has been my personal experience that life is joy and suffering, hope and despair, life and death. So I agree with this perspective. I don't know if we choose to come here. " To us, every phenomenon is an Act of Love, every experience is necessary, is a Sacrament, is a means of Growth. Hence, ”…existence is pure joy;…“ I don't believe every experience, every phenomena is an act of love, because I have acted in cruel, unloving ways. I have been at the mercy of cruel, unloving ways. Not all things are done in love. We may come here in pursuit of love and joy, but we come to a place of suffering to do so. To your point, is God love? Are we love? Are all things love? Again, I don't know. In the absence of experience, I only have questions. Do we separate from God to come here? If God is the ultimate source of love and joy, what is the reason we seek to separate in order to experience what we already are and were? Are we God experiencing itself? Is physical incarnation required for that? Are suffering, despair, and death acts of love? Acts of God, acts of ourselves, one and the same? What are we stripping away? Do we remove love to reveal love? If all things are love, why is this process necessary?

You're welcome to your beliefs and preferences. I have no interest in challenging them. You offered a quote, and I sought its source. I have no desire to read more from said source. That is all. Do I believe every phenomena is an act of love and joy? That has not been my experience, but I am one unenlightened person among many.

Thank you for the detailed write up! Clear and concise. We're in an Abrahamic discussion thread, and I did mention my starting point as The Gospel of Judas, so I understand why you think I consider it a Christian philosophy. But I recognize that Christian Gnosticism is simply a vehicle through which the knowledge was transmitted. Parallel to what you've shared, in the archive lecture on meditation, they write: (I formatted this quote incorrectly, apologies). Looking up this quote led me here. Any time I've come across them, Alister Crowley's works have never set right with me, and this passage does nothing to change that: Another search led to his commentary to the book of the law, in which he writes this about rape and murder: The more I read, I find everything he writes to be utterly abhorrent.

Wringer by Mammal Hands

I'm so sorry. I lost my fiance to testicular cancer when we were both in our early 20s. There are no good words, but I am truly sorry for your loss.

Protest away! Personally, I am not sure of anything. Just sharing a strand of thought I have recently been introduced to. I also don't believe we are "superior," which is why I included quotations originally, though I think advantage is a better word. The point is that, according to the Buddha (no text at hand, will try to figure out where I read it) we are uniquely advantaged in comparison to animals AND devas (and the devas are not typically considered devoid of intellect). Both exist in conditions that obstruct the ability to reflect on the nature of self, which many teachings indicate is the only means of escaping the cycle of Samara. And whatever advantage we have, we are still less than human until we undergo deep transformation (according to Gnostic thought, as well as in other traditions). I don't know the difference between Black and White Gnosticism, but the cosmology suggests that we are creations of the Demiurge, an imperfect creation of Sophia, herself a lower emanation of the Monad, the Mother-Father Godhead. That were are divine sparks imprisoned in matter and our true home is in the Plemora, far beyond the physical realm. I'm not sure how someone who believes in the cosmology reconciles the origins of the teachings with a positive view of physical life and incarnation, but I'd be interested to learn more in that regard.

I wasn't suggesting you do. I think we are animals, really. We're not superior to other animals, especially physically. But many believe that we are. We simply have a quality that other animals lack, and they have qualities that maybe we share, but we are deficient in.

Yes, I think that is what I'm understanding from Gnostic thought, although the lectures I've been reading incorporate similar teachings of Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, Christianity, etc. So I'm not promoting anything as superior, just sharing.

Keep in mind, I'm only relaying information I've read. I recently read the Gospel of Judas which led me to looking into additional Gnostic teachings. I've been reading through this lecture archive: https://glorian.org/learn/courses-and-lectures/lecture-archive I especially enjoyed this one about the ego and the animal nature, and this one about meditation. The three brains refers to the mind, the emotion, and the genitalia. Other animals only operate with the emotional brain and the sexual brain, whereas we have both of those in addition to the intellectual brain. Within Buddhism, though there is suffering in the human realm, it is a preferable birth to the hell, animal, and even deva realms. Animals cannot contemplate their nature, and while Devas likely can, they are in a much more comfortable realm that makes it easy to be unconcerned with escaping samsara. So our intellectual brain makes us "superior" to animals, but it is also a place from which our ego expresses itself. Lust of the mind, if you will. So it is a tool that helps us, but also hinders us.

Yeah, that's true. And I suppose the Gospels, although not in the same literature style, are repetitive in a way. I caught your post about unconditional love. I agree, I think. I think affection is conditional. I think very few beings have experienced the essence of love. Gnostic thought says that we are not human, we are not the true Hum-Manu. We are the intellectual animals, a beast with three brains instead of two. It is the brain that allows us to observe and comprehend our animal nature, our demanding ego. Various teachings suggest that after constant and deep observation, contemplation, understanding, and releasing of the ego, then we become human. Hum-Manu. And that that crystal clear state of connection to the source, to the tao, etc is love. It's not a feeling, it's the the divine spark freed from the animal ego.

The Buddha's teachings are similarly so. I believe it was a helpful technique for oral transmission. Honestly, when I read the Suttas, I do mentally skip forward through repetitive bits. I understand why teachings developed in that way, though I don't know that it's exactly the same for the Upanishads.

@Cobie & @Nungali I know we're being silly here, or at least it seems so, but I'm curious: Does the word expound mean to lecture? Or is it to make something clear? Or something else? Is it disrespectful to discuss one's views on life and love with a spouse? As I mentioned, I'm not familiar with the Upanishads, so perhaps misogyny abounds. But it seems a shame to dismiss his views on love because he shared them with his wife. Perhaps in other texts, she shares her views with him as well. Maybe you've already visited the article, but this is the passage that was shared: I think standing on its own, the concept is clear and rings true to me. Would there have been more value and virtue in this thought if it were expressed by Maitreyi to her husband?

Thank you for writing this and sharing it. "The testimony of realized masters (and direct experience) will clearly show that love is not an emotion. It is a fundamental quality of Being. For those who haven’t had the direct experience yet, the testimony of masters is the only recourse. Many nondual (advaita) masters across various traditions have said emphatically, that the Self/Being IS Love. We can start with the Brihadārańyaka Upanishad, where the great sage Yajnavalkya expounds the true nature of love to his wife Maitreyi." I have yet to read the Upanishads, and the verse / section (?) you included was a beautiful introduction.

In the village, though No voice rings out, no bird sings Nothing here remains

Thank you @Sir Darius the Clairvoyent, and sorry for the delay. I love art that features landscapes and dreamscapes, and that incorporates themes of nostalgia, isolation, reflection, light, dark, duality, unity. I love blue, green, orange, and gold colors. I would like to be an artist, but I'm not quite. I've tried my hand at painting, love the idea of it, of the process. But it's difficult and tedious, and I can be impatient. I have colored, as in coloring books, since I was a child (though it's been a year or two since I have). It sounds juvenile, but it's my most in-depth art process. I don't think, I just do. I will color for a long time, adding layers and layers of colored pencil until the page is vibrant. One day I'd like to try my hand at pottery. I have it in my mind that it will be meditative for me in the same way as coloring, but I don't know yet. I don't have a lot of art in my home. I lean toward minimalism, I don't like to be consistently visually overstimulated, and I also like to be able to easily dust and wash the walls. Maybe one day I will find something that speaks to me, and I will want to display it. But for now, when I'm in the mood to browse paintings, I do it online. All the same questions to you: what appeals to you artistically? What images and themes are you drawn to, and do you incorporate art and aesthetics into your environment or daily life? After catching up, I see Sir Darius has been banned. If anyone else is interested in having this chat, please feel free to join in.

pink camellias' sacred fragrance fills my heart; divine passion blooms

I've read a few discussions on finding a good teacher. I would like to know what one should do to develop personal discipline to become a good student worthy of a good teacher, especially as a student coming from a Western culture. (Apologies if this is not the right section for this question.)

Home (collaborative album) by Shaman's Dream and Geometrae

Love, love, love the duduk. - Hicaz Here in the Darkness by Canberk Ulas

I would like to know this as well.

Glass Beams, Live in Amsterdam

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. (Rev 12:1) Because the moon is positioned under the body and the sun, opposite the stars, is it possible it is symbolic of a dark (new) moon?

Is that because they both mark the beginning of a cycle?