Vmarco

For you, the goal may be simply to check it out,...check out what some have been talking about. The term mind is looked at many ways. When many say mind, they're talking about the cerebra-centric, sciential mind that arises from the brain,...when the ancient Greeks said mind, they pointed to the center of the chest and said "thymos." Basically, you do not want no-mind,...you want to quiet the brain so to uncover the Heart-Mind. The term mind is as misunderstood as light. We see a physical (divided) light of Duality's electrodynamic spectrum,...but there is a purer light, the Undivided Light upon which duality effects its motion. http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/19563-oxymorons-that-hinder-awakening/page__st__32 ACIM says,..."the ego uses the body to conspire against your Mind (in this context the Mind has no relation to brain), and because the ego realizes that its 'enemy' (the Mind) can end them both (ego and body) merely by recognizing they are not part of You (the Mind), they join in the attack together. This is perhaps the strangest perception of all, if you consider what it really involves. The ego, which is not real, attempts to persuade the Mind, which is real, that the Mind is ego's learning device; and further, that the body is more real then the Mind is. No one in their right Mind could possibly believe this, and no one in Their 'right Mind' does believe it"

What is beauty? In response to the question: What about the beauty and goodness in the world? ACIM responds: "Following the above answer, we can see that the so-called positive aspects of our world are equally as illusory as the negative ones. They are both aspects of a dualistic perceptual universe, which but reflect the dualistic split in the mind of Man. The famous statement "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' is also applicable here, since what one deems as beauty, another may find to be aesthetically displeasing, and vice versa. Similarly, what one society judges as good, another may judge as bad and against the common good. This can be evidenced by a careful study of history, sociology, and cultural anthropology. Therefore, using the criterion for reality of eternal changelessness that is employed in the Course, we can conclude that nothing that the world deems beautiful or good is real, and so it cannot have been created by Reality. Therefore, given that both beauty and goodness are relative concepts and thus are illusory, we should follow the injunction to always ask ourselves: "What is the meaning of what I behold?" (text, p. 619; T-3I.VII.13:5). In other words, even though something beautiful is illusory, it remains neutral, like everything else in the world. Given to the ego, it serves its unholy purpose of reinforcing separation, specialness, and guilt. Given to the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, it serves the holy purpose of leading us to an experience of truth that lies beyond perception. For example, a sunset can reinforce the belief that I can find peace and well-being only while in its presence, or it can help remind me that the true beauty of Man is my Identity, and that this beauty is internal, within my mind and independent of anything outside it."V

Why do you have 200% less mental chatter when they are there? Or are you just not noticing it while among strangers? There are numerous ways to control mental chatter. How do you verbally chatter? Usually entails tongue movement, right? Many also move their tongues while thinking. So, stilling your tongue while alone and in your head, can help control the chatter,...like holding your breath to stop hiccups. Of course, mental chatter is a persistent problem of conditioning. There was a mediocre fellow who grew up in calif in the 50's-60's,...dropped out of high school, worked in minimum wage jobs for years. Then he began a process of letting of beliefs and conditions prompted by a bumper-sticker that read: "seek not love, but seek and find all the barriers you have built against it" His sole attention and intention rose above Maslow's Lowerarchy of Needs, and focused on realizing his Unborn Awareness. When he disrobed enough beliefs that unlearned all conditions back till he was 3 years old, he got into painting with oils,...and through that 3 year old consciousness is now an accomplished artist, getting five and six figures for his work. Imagine that,...the mental chatter of a 3 year old,...probably not too much,...not too much belief, not too much faith,...not too many conditions. "when you can disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garments (beliefs) and place them under your feet like little child and tread on them, then you will no longer be afraid". 1st Century Gnostic text Most little children don't have faith. V

No,...Gate Gate when used together, does not convey the same meaning as gate alone,...except to the sciential minded. Look at the familiar sanskrit neti,...it means 'not this',....so what does neti neti mean? Does it mean "not this, not this?' No,...neti neti means 'Not This, Not That.' Gate means to Go,...but gate gate means "to go, to come." It's like the flower,...you can brake it down scientifically, or emotionally,..or sensually,...but they do not describe to the essence of the flower. Same with faith,...all faith is a predisposition on the nature of the flow. To be in the authentic flow, the flow that proceeds from Unborn Awareness, the Awareness without condition, one must be actively honest,...faith must be let go. Faith and honesty are in direct opposition. V

Actually, I have studied the Abrahamic Faiths cover to cover,...in fact, in the 80's was considered an expert by members of the Westar Institute. Would be glad to respond to any historical questions. Why do people engage in such an absurdity as present-day Christianity? It does not take a degree in religious studies to see how this Christianity got its deep grip on society. History is quite clear regarding the roots of this deception, which was firmly grounded by the end of the sixth century. Theodosian laws, for example, condemned all non-Christians, thus promoting ardent persecutions of freethinkers, deists, pantheists, polytheists, pagans, and others whose confiscated property enriched the new church. Then came the barbaric reign of Justinian, which barred anyone outside specific neo-Christian beliefs from civil service, and whose forced baptisms upon Arabs encouraged the way for the establishment of the insanity of Islam. Christianity was spread through violence and now propagates its faith through the fortune raised from that violence. In the United States that is a serious felony, and their propagators are nothing less than accessory felons. V

Your post is proof that you waste your time,...you respond to to 2-3 sentences by saying my words are babble = to talk idly, irrationally, indistinctly and without meaning, in, as you mentioned, "an incoherent" foolish and meaningless fashion. The problem as I see it is quite the contrary,...as I shared a logically connected series of quotes (that is, coherent) in response to the question "WHAT MAKES [LIGHT] DIVIDED?"...your response surprizingly exposed a blustering ad hominem unbecoming of any reasoning person. I suppose for someone devoid of any meaningful contribution to the evolution of humanity, there probably "is no reason to avoid" as you mentioned, your continual ad hominem. As I wish to engage with admirable and prudent people, those who would at least attempt to read a response to THEIR QUESTION, and thus choose to not respond to your further ad hominem. V "It is easier to perceive error than to find truth, for the former lies on the surface and is easily seen, while the latter lies in the depth, where few are willing to search for it." Goethe

Glad to see you made it to the 6th sentence. The lengthy response was warrented. However, if you find my posts as babble, there is no reason to respond again. Please,...whenever you see my avatar, just think babble, and move on,...there is no reason for a person of reason like yourself to waste their time with my nonsense. V "Reason should be destroyed in all Christians." -- Martin Luther

Interesting. I am intolerant of the Interfaith Movement,..and see it as a supreme obsticle for the liberation of sentient beings. My intolerance arises from how faith steps between people and their direct experience. I'm especially intolerant of Moderates and Appeasers who enable fundamentals, for example: http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com/2009/03/do-moderate-christians-enable.html I'm also intolerant of how Christian's and Muslims treat Buddhists,...for example: "Fundamentalist Christianity poses a real threat to Buddhism, and while we can never hope to match the aggressiveness or organizational abilities of its proponents, we can very easily counter them by becoming familiar with Christianity's numerous doctrinal weaknesses" http://www.uq.net.au/slsoc/bsq/budchr8.htm My personal view is this: Such complete unity of separation enfolded within a simple belief A dissymphonic continuum whose reflection of preference serially esculate unremitting anguish Belief obscures reality entwines lifes learned patterns a stupefying absurdity manufactured from artificiality exploitively seeking diversions. Yet in a moment of unfeigned surrender between com-pression and ex-pression a reciprocal tremendum resplendently springs its metanoia dissolving repeated cycles of confusion. Metmorphesized winged inner sense true Compassion arising in the tranquility as flowinging fractal waves delight the blissful birthing of Beingness in softly ecstatic nourishing Life. V "When people say 'I have faith', what they really mean is 'I don't want to know the truth'." Nietzsche

The complete electrodynamic spectrum is divided, simuluated, light. I did not say the electrodynamic spectrum is compete, especially in any sense as having any importance. Different people have differing opinions on Divided Light (that is, all positives and negatives perceived and unperceive within complete duality),...if I told you outright, it would be as a pearl tossed to a swine. The key word there is AS. As for what others,...try the ACIM or Russell's Secret of Light. In all my posts,...in 4 threads,...the subject has come up,...but I'm left feeling like Einstein describing relativity before Planck gave his blessings for others to appreciate it. As you replied to one of my posts,..."good luck." The physical world is very different than the Priests of Science and Religion spew. It is actually closer to this, "The foundation of the physical universe is motion; the ever-changing motion arising out of pairs of unbalanced conditions which must forever move to seek the balanced stillness of unity from which they sprang"However, that motion to return to source, which we see as energy, can never return to source, 1. it has never left source, and 2. it is not real. Motion or the condition called energy can cease, but it can never enter the Unconditional. Every object that can be perceived, not matter how at rest to the senses, is in motion. All form, and all emptiness, is in motion. "Change is an illusion of the senses due to motion. There is no change whatsoever in the universe. There is only an illusio of change set up by the two interchanging lights (positive and negative) that divide and multiply within moving matter and mass." "The senses are the audience for divided light's pulsations. The senses are a part of this illusion. Senses are electric. They belong to the universe of motion and do not respond to stillness. As motion itself is non- existent, so also are senses non-existent. The senses are but the imagined records of imagined motion, matter and change. The senses have no knowledge of what they sense. They merely record motion. The senses respond to motion in only one direction. They sense the forward flow of time but not its back- ward flow. If they could register both directions, they would become aware of the stillness of this zero uni- verse of seeming motion." The awareness of the backward flow of forward moving things is the consciousness of a Tathagata. "When our knowing exceeds our sensing, we will no longer be deceived by the illusions of our senses." "As man unfolds from sensed man to spiritual man he gradually becomes aware of the two-way motion of an effect; that two ways being the visible effect which responds to his senses and the invisible effect which he knows but does not sense. Gradually the time arrives in his unfolding when his full awareness of Cause voids all reliance upon sensation. He then rises above his sensing. He then knows the universe of motion for what it is instead of for what it seems to be. " "The entirety of this universe is divided into unbalanced pairs for the purpose of seemingly dividing Undivided Light into a universe of many ones. No matter what names we use to designate one pair from another, whether gravity and radiativity, male and female, positive and negative, charge and discharge, centripetal and centrifugal, generative and radiative, integrative and disintegrative, — all of them are similarly conditioned by the two opposite electrical condi- tioners. In other words, they are all being either compressed or expanded (yang-yin) if we use pressure terms; or charged and discharged if we use electrical terms. Both are the same. Likewise, all that are being compressed or charged by positive electricity are simultaneously being expanded and discharged by negative electricity to a lesser extent." "Likewise, all that are being expanded by negative electricity are simultaneously beiog compressed and charged by positive electricity to a lesser extent. This is a two-way universe in all effects of motion, and both opposite effects are expressed in both simultaneously as well as sequentially.' Light cannot be seen; it can only be known. Light is still. The sense of sight cannot respond to stillness. That which the eyes "feel" and believe to be Light is but wave motion simulating the idea of Light. Like all things else in this electric wave universe the idea of Light cannot be produced. Electric waves simulate idea only. They do not become idea. When man sees the light of the sun he believes that he is actually seeing light when the nerves of his eyes are but "feeling" the intense, rapid, shortwave vibrations of the kind of wave motion which he senses as incandescence. The intensely vibrant electric current mirrored into the senses of the eyes fairly bums them. They cannot stand that high rate of vibration. The eyes would be destroyed by such a vibration, but light would not be the cause of that destruction. Fast motion, simulating light, would be the cause. It would be like sending a high voltage electric current over a wire so fine that the current would burn it out. Man likewise cannot see darkness. The nerves of his eyes which sense motion slow down to a rate of vibration which he can no longer "feel." Man is so accustomed to the idea that he actually sees light in various intensities illuminating various sub stances to greater or lesser degree that it is difficult for him to realize that his own senses are but acting as mirrors to reflect various intensities of wave motion. But that is all that is happening. Every electrically conditioned thing in Nature reflects the vibrations of every other thing, to fulfill its desire to synchronize its vibrations with every other thing. All matter is the motion of light. All motion is expressed Ln waves. All light waves are mirrors which reflect each other's condition unto the farthermost star. This is an electrically conditioned wave universe. All wave conditions are forever seeking oneness. For this reason all sensation responds to all other sensation. Much controversy has arisen as to whether light is corpuscular, as Newton claimed it to be, or a wave (particle or wave). There is much evidence in favor of both theories. It is both. Light is expressed by motion. All motion is wave motion. All waves are expressed by fields of equal and opposite pressures of two-way motion. The entire volume within wave fields is filled with the two opposite expressions of motion — the positive expression which compresses light into solids, and the negative expression which expands it into space surrounding solids. All space within wave fields is curved. Curvature ends at planes of zero curvature which border all wave fields. These boundary planes of omnipresent magnetic Light act as mirrors to reflect all curvature into all other wave fields in the universe, and as fulcrums from which motion in one wave field is universally repeated. Light is all there is, and simulation of that Light in opposite extensions is all there is in the electric wave universe of sensing. The simulation of Light in matter is not Light. There is no Light in matter." Walter Russell 1947. When David Bohm and other say that "all matter is frozen or slowed down light",...it is more correct to say, all matter is slowed down simulated light. Divided light is simulated light.

As I said, it is irrefutable,...There is no Present in Time. It's not a theory, not a hypothesis, not a belief, it points to an Absolute truth. If you wish to attack it, because you're unopen to see it, that's your preogative. You can debate the illusions past and future all you wish. Dolano would say, "you must still enjoy your sufering" Unfortunately, this thread appears to be quickly digressing. I'm not a teacher, nor interact well in a grade school environment. For those other's, more interested in the topic, here's a grade school teacher that may help: One evening, while gathered in the big lounge at the Taliesin Fellowship, G. I. Gurdjieff was talking to some pupils, who were listening with attention. Frank Lloyd Wright, husband of Gurdjieff’s student Olgivanna, said, “Well, Mr. Gurdjieff, this is very interesting. I think I will send some of my young pupils to you in Paris. Then they can come back to me, and I’ll finish them off.” “You finish! You are idiot,” said Gurdjieff. “You finish! No. You begin. I finish.” “You know, Frank,” said Olgivanna, “Mr. Gurdjieff is right.” As regards “being and understanding,” Wright was a child compared with Gurdjieff. —C. S. Nott. Journey Through This World (152) V

Bohr's Law does not imply that so-called observers and the observed need a human connection, as if humans effect things into perceived reality,...only cerebral-centric interpretations implied that. Buddhists and pre-Buddha Bonpa's questioned the validity of the brain thousands of years before today's mediocre quantuum physics. Even the Maya of Mespamerica, knew more about physics then today's Physicists,...for example, zero upsets the logic of today's physics, whereas the Maya understood zero spiritually. With the exception of a few physics like Hawkings and Hartle, most physicists are about as close to understanding the empirical world, as a monkey in the night squats scheming how to capture the moon. Steven Hawking and Jim Hartle, in their No-Boundary theory, said that since time loses characteristics that separate it from space, the concept of a beginning in time becomes meaningless. That is to say, there was no Big Bang, no singularity, no creation, no Creator, no beginning nor end, because there is no time. Duality's reality is not much different from the dream you had last night,...while in the dream, you believed the dream was real. informer asked,...."Is light and it's interactions objective or subjective?" That's object-ive, sciential thinking. Undivided Light does not "interact",...divided light, the illusion that is perceived to be projected within the holgraphic cube the cerebra-centric call reality, is viewed both object-ively and subject-ively by the same stuff that is the illusion. Scotty believes,..."Everything is occurring as this present moment, and I can easily think/look/experience anything in the "now"." This is irrefutably false,...unfortunately, when a falsity is told long enough it is veiwed as something other than being false,...like the millennia of people believing the Sun revolved around the Earth. Absolutely nothing that is detectable in the universe is, or has ever been, in the Present. You, cannot "think/look/experience anything in the "now",...totally impossible. Of course you can continue believing that lie,...but it will never make it true. As Eckhart Tolle said "we need to draw our attention to what is false in us, for unless we learn to recognize the false as the false, there can be no lasting transformation, and you will always be drawn back into illusion, for that is how the false perpetuates itself" V

Many know me as V,...from Vicente or Vincenza,...I'm ambi-gender. It was suggested that I check out the thread on 'How to Recognize Enlightenment' posted by Goldisheavy, and found the comments and intercommunications delightful. For me, I consider everyone enlightened, that is, that everyone has an Unborn Awareness whose obscurity depends on the depth of conditioning. As far as recognizing a lightly veiled or unveiled person, for myself is rather easy. Lawyers, Physicians, Astrologers, etc., all have their own language,...so too does one who has, or is close to, uncovering Heart Mind. I would suggest that one who has uncovered Heart-Mind uses a very specific language,...not only a language that has the ability to discern the false as the false, as in neti-neti,...but one that also recognizes at least a single truth; because ultimately, all truth is the same and unchanging. Anything that changes cannot be true in an absolute way. A truth would be something like what the following words point to, "there is no present in time." One who understands this beyond conceptuality, thinking, and beliefs, has penetrated the veils of conditioning to such an extent that they can easily recognize a Tathagata. (Gate, Gate, Paragate, Parasamgate, Bodhi Svaha!...which is a simple definition of a Tathagata,...to go, to come, beyond going and coming, into complete going and coming, where enlightenment is welcomed,...one who understands the reverse flow of forward-moving things). For most however, a dedication to recognizing the false as the false will go a long way towards uncovering the Heart-Mind. As Osho said,..."anyone who gives you a belief system is your enemy"