Philosophical explanation of self, metta, and objective reality.

[Informer]

Edited November 3, 2011 by Informer

[C T]

Excellent thoughts, Informer (these are your own reflections, yes?).

 

 

Suddenly, i am reminded of a saying by Ryokan,

"Even though we ceaselessly ponder on all things wondrous,

how do we deal with each thing changing?"

 

 

Blissful blessings to all!

[Informer]

(these are your own reflections, yes?).

 

I think you are asking a trick question. These finger's typed it, yet it has roots in the inspiration from many, especially this community. I think that to say that it is mine could be considered a bit contradictory to what was written.

[zanshin]

Light is delayed, yet light is the fastest known thing in the universe, but awareness is now. How can awarenss be faster than light?

[manitou]

Your enlightened words just shot a beautiful arrow into my heart.

 

Addressing your first paragraphs, I see a natural conflict between scientific proof and informed intuition. It's a push-pull. Science always looks backwards in a sense; not being willing to issue a proclamation which hasn't been repeatedly studied, measured, and predicted. But underlying the slow process of scientific proclamation lies the original intuition; the person who took a leap out of what was previously proven scientifically and followed up on this flash of intuition by a lot of hard work.

 

It's all so very arbitrary, it seems. You're right, we can't all possibly interpret the same phenomena the same way from person to person; there are too many variables, as you point out. It's amazing how the concept of 'structure' figures into all of this, both scientific and philosophical. Within science, certainly one would benefit from following the structure of those who had gone before him, rather than reinventing the wheel with each new idea....and then taking off through the structure into the scientists' own destiny within the field. Is he a man who can take a leap of faith, or is he a man of the security of structure?

 

The same goes philosophically, in my view. We have thousands of spiritual and religious 'structures' all over the world. I, like you, think the only wrong one is the one that says all the other ones are wrong. But to get to the point where the voice in your heart, the very thing which prods up upwards always toward the light, is actually listened to and understood, there must be a supreme effort for the individual to understand his own Self to the core. It is at the core that one receives an astounding revelation, if we make it that far. By this time, the path structure is pretty much discarded. One sees path choice as just that; path choice.

 

I really like your metaphor of freeflowing energy getting stuck in the brain, thereby disallowing the free thought to circulate. I like to use a similar metaphor, the metaphor of us having a large circular glass lens in our chest. The lens is crystal clear at birth and becomes more opaque and discolored, even encrusted sometimes. Life is the thing that dirties our lens; the untruths we were told by well-intended people from the day of birth. Our assignment, 'should we decide to accept it', is to clean the lens in our spiritual and human being maturity. When the lens is clear once again, the true light does shine through and we are but an emanation of that which is true and part of all life. This light colors our every thought and deed when the Awareness is kept. (There's the rub, of course).

 

Sometimes, when I find myself getting caught up in a particular situation (because I wasn't in Awareness of Who I really Am) it only takes but a few moments to realize that I allowed myself to get caught up. the thing that surprises me at that point is realizing how very physical it is to regain the Oneness composure. In my case, first come the muscles; and deeper and deeper levels of muscle relaxation. Then comes the mind, the stilling. And the breathing. To regain the mindset becomes a nearly instantaneous thing after we've been doing it for a while.

 

It is then that the state of non-judgment and non-differentiation can come into play. When we realize at that moment that we are part of the golden weave and that it is all living and happening Now, then there is no room for anything but Love and understanding of every situation and person involved.

 

Informer, thank you so much for taking the time to put your thoughts into the forum. Quite exquisite, friend.

Edited November 3, 2011 by manitou

[Informer]

Light is delayed, yet light is the fastest known thing in the universe, but awareness is now. How can awarenss be faster than light?

 

Hi Zanshin,

That is a good question.

 

"So if we forgo using the light as a determining factor we can consider other senses or feelers to experience the elusive and truly objective now within the free awareness that all phenomena must arise."

 

Awareness is not obliged to be fast or slow, as that it where everything is racing too.

 

Hi Manitou,

 

Thank you for the kind words. I like the metaphor of a lens too. It is a sort of a looking, yet not in the literal sense. It's an attempt to coax people to the heart center, hehe.

(slyly)

[zanshin]

 

It was sort of dumb question that came to mind, I think awareness isn't faster but it permeates everything so doesn't have to travel.

 

I like the lens metaphor too, but sometimes it even shatters, melt it down and start over. As within so without, I live in a broken world.

[manitou]

Light is delayed, yet light is the fastest known thing in the universe, but awareness is now. How can awarenss be faster than light?

 

 

Maybe the speed of thought is faster than the speed of light. Perhaps the Big Bang was the original thought gyrating at the speed of Thought - and after the Big Bang because of atmospheric interference light was slightly slowed down.

 

Anything faster than the speed of light would be simultaneous appearance, I would think. Perhaps we're adjoining the concept of separate realities here, all happening on a slightly different dimension depending on vibrational intensity.

[XieJia]

 

There is not really a separate self to own at all. Owning requires two individual things: one to do the owning and one to be owned.

 

The reflection is a construct without any inherent existence of its own. This the foundation in which every thought arises. The true nature of awareness is before any thought, let alone, knowing can take place.

 

 

 

Hi Informer,

 

Love everything you wrote.

 

Question:

 

What is the nature of Free Love?

The one that doesn't have any giver or receiver.

 

[Informer]

Hi Informer,

 

Love everything you wrote.

 

Question:

 

What is the nature of Free Love?

The one that doesn't have any giver or receiver.

 

 

Hi XieJia,

 

Thank you. You make a good point about the nature of Free Love. As it is, one may impose their own meaning on "Free Love" as the meaning wasn't made clear. Some equate love to sex, which I think is more subjective than objective. That difference should definitely be distinguished. Thanks!

 

[ATMA]

Hi Informer,

 

Love everything you wrote.

 

Question:

 

What is the nature of Free Love?

The one that doesn't have any giver or receiver.

 

 

I think I can field that one for you, Informer.

 

Well then.

Free love aka Real love aka pure love. Is all just human fallacies. Ego turds. Not that human made up stuff. Not that possessive, needy, depraved crap. Not those things people call love. That's all just desire and fear. That you and I need to swag off in order to reach true unity. There is only one stream of consciousness, god, love, reality whatever you want to call it. It's absolutely pure. Pondering at what people call love is pondering one pixel on the computer screen of oneness whilst denying everything that surrounds it. Then realising it isn't even a pixel it's just a peice of sticky dirt on the screen of oneness and scraping it off with my finger nail.

 

I love your question but your question isn't about love. Understand?

 

Ommmmmm.

 

 

PS

Good post informer.

Ommmmm.

Edited November 4, 2011 by ATMA

[XieJia]

Sorry, it seems that I didn't made myself clear.

 

 

Free Love meaning when you cultivate compassion for the world and it returns as a part in all.

 

In Free Love; I meant Free 'Metta'.

Compassion in its sense without any giver or receiver.

 

 

[C T]

 

Compassion in its sense without any giver or receiver.

Exactly!

 

The whole idea behind the practice of Metta, Karuna, Mudita and Upekha rests on there being no 'self' to give anything... only then can true giving arise.

[Informer]

I think I know what you mean XieJia, This was a paragraph in the original rough draft, I must have overlooked implementing it. :

 

"Once love is encompassed within pure awareness, we can practice that feeling of love for oneself. This love is unbound in a pure awareness without limit and occurring in the objective now that can be freely radiated outward to include the entire universe without exception. When that which is going is also returning from where it came from. When it is seen that it is not a part of you, but you a part of it. You are not only sending it everywhere, but it is returning as everything includes you. There is a resonance that is interwoven through quantum entanglement to create the collective heart of humanity in the perpetual now. Much like the example of the endless self that is perpetuating infinity in the past, yet perpetuating love objectively now, indefinitely."

 

Then I changed it to this:

 

"Once love is encompassed within pure awareness, we can practice that feeling of love for oneself. This love is unbound in pure awareness without limit and occurring in the objective now that can be freely radiated outward to include the entire universe without exception. When the love which is going forever outward begins returning, it may become obvious that it is not a part of you. Instead, you realize that you are a part of it. You are not only sending it everywhere, but it is returning as everything includes you. There is a resonance that is interwoven through quantum entanglement to create the collective heart of humanity in the perpetual now. Similar to the example of one who is perpetuating infinity in the past, yet perpetuating love objectively now, indefinitely."

 

I think that is what you mean?

Edited November 4, 2011 by Informer

[XieJia]

I think that is what you mean?

 

Yes.