I and the father are one.

[Twig pentagram]

"I looked for God and found only myself and I looked for myself and found only God".
-Sufi proverb-

What do you think of this Sufi proverb? And how does it relate to the quote in
The Gospel of John attributed to Yeshua?

 

[Jainarayan]

I think the same way they relate to the Sanskrit Aham Brahmasmi ("I am God"); and Tat Tvam Asi ("You are That", referring to God). That is, our true Self (note the capital S) is one with Brahman (God). Better yet, to say our true Self is God.

 

[Twig pentagram]

I think the same way they relate to the Sanskrit Aham Brahmasmi ("I am God"); and Tat Tvam Asi ("You are That", referring to God). That is, our true Self (note the capital S) is one with Brahman (God). Better yet, to say our true Self is God.

Are you telling me that there is traces of apotheosis found in Hindu scriptures
too?

 

[Jainarayan]

According to Advaita (other schools have different views), we are non-different from God to begin with. We don't rise to the level of God or become deified. This can explain it way better than I can. Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Hinduism)

 

[Storm]

"I looked for God and found only myself and I looked for myself and found only God".
-Sufi proverb-

What do you think of this Sufi proverb?

Seems a more concise rendition of what JMS was saying with the lamp and the wall. Are you familiar?

ETA: For those who aren't:

If I take a lamp and shine it toward the wall, a bright spot will appear on the wall. The lamp is our search for truth, for understanding.

Too often we assume that the light on the wall is God. But the light is not the goal of the search; it is the result of the search. The more intense the search, the brighter the light on the wall. The brighter the light on the wall, the greater the sense of revelation upon seeing it! Similarly, someone who does not search, who does not bring a lantern with him, sees nothing.

What we perceive as God is the byproduct of our search for God. It may simply be an appreciation of the light, pure and unblemished, not understanding that it comes from us. Sometimes we stand in front of the light and assume that we are the center of the universe. God looks astonishingly like we do! Or we turn to look at our shadow, and assume that all is darkness.

If we allow ourselves to get in the way, we defeat the purpose; which is to use the light of our search to illuminate the wall in all its beauty - and in all its flaws.... And in so doing better understand the world around us. ​

And how does it relate to the quote in The Gospel of John attributed to Yeshua?

Couldn't tell ya. Perhaps Jesus was teaching the Trinity, perhaps mystic unity. Wouldn't presume to speak for him.

 

[Twig pentagram]

According to Advaita (other schools have different views), we are non-different from God to begin with. We don't rise to the level of God or become deified. This can explain it way better than I can. Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atman_(Hinduism)

Correction, traces of autotheism and pantheism in Hindu scriptures.:bow:

 

[Twig pentagram]

Seems a more concise rendition of what JMS was saying with the lamp and the wall. Are you familiar?

ETA: For those who aren't:

If I take a lamp and shine it toward the wall, a bright spot will appear on the wall. The lamp is our search for truth, for understanding.

Too often we assume that the light on the wall is God. But the light is not the goal of the search; it is the result of the search. The more intense the search, the brighter the light on the wall. The brighter the light on the wall, the greater the sense of revelation upon seeing it! Similarly, someone who does not search, who does not bring a lantern with him, sees nothing.

What we perceive as God is the byproduct of our search for God. It may simply be an appreciation of the light, pure and unblemished, not understanding that it comes from us. Sometimes we stand in front of the light and assume that we are the center of the universe. God looks astonishingly like we do! Or we turn to look at our shadow, and assume that all is darkness.

If we allow ourselves to get in the way, we defeat the purpose; which is to use the light of our search to illuminate the wall in all its beauty - and in all its flaws.... And in so doing better understand the world around us. ​

​

Im familiar now.

Couldn't tell ya. Perhaps Jesus was teaching the Trinity, perhaps mystic unity. Wouldn't presume to speak for him.

I understand.

 

[El_Majusi]

Very interesting subject which leads back to Monism. Jainyaran, thank you very much for your information. I see once more that Vedic is quite close to Avestan. "Aham Brahmasmi"in Avestan: "Ahura ahmi", "Tat Tvam Asi": "Tat/yat thwãm ahi".
I think the sufi proverb means that God both is and is not ourselves. As Jainyaran said, It is ourSelves. Everything that is good is God. So maybe it could mean that when one is looking for God as we represent It, It is not easily found, but in simple daily actions, and in the beauty of our soul, one can see God. What do you think of my interpretation?

 

[idav]

"I looked for God and found only myself and I looked for myself and found only God".
-Sufi proverb-

What do you think of this Sufi proverb? And how does it relate to the quote in
The Gospel of John attributed to Yeshua?

I like that proverb.

Very similar to:

"I and the father are one"

"When you have seen me you have seen the father"

In John 17 Jesus goes further to include others to be as one.

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.

Also in Matthew 25 there is an indication that what we do to anyone is all connected.

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

 

[Twig pentagram]

Very interesting subject which leads back to Monism. Jainyaran, thank you very much for your information. I see once more that Vedic is quite close to Avestan. "Aham Brahmasmi"in Avestan: "Ahura ahmi", "Tat Tvam Asi": "Tat/yat thwãm ahi".
I think the sufi proverb means that God both is and is not ourselves. As Jainyaran said, It is ourSelves. Everything that is good is God. So maybe it could mean that when one is looking for God as we represent It, It is not easily found, but in simple daily actions, and in the beauty of our soul, one can see God. What do you think of my interpretation?

I undersand it, I have one question though. If everything that is good is God
then what is everything that isn't good?

 

[Twig pentagram]

I like that proverb.

Very similar to:

"I and the father are one"

"When you have seen me you have seen the father"

In John 17 Jesus goes further to include others to be as one.

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.

Also in Matthew 25 there is an indication that what we do to anyone is all connected.

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

It seems to me that some parts of the Gospels makes Yeshua sound like an
autotheist. While other parts make him sound like a pantheist or panentheist.

 

[Astravalon]

"I looked for God and found only myself and I looked for myself and found only God".

-Sufi proverb-

What do you think of this Sufi proverb?

Personally, I find the idea that I'm "as God as it gets" rather
depressing. Since I'm operating under the belief that I
have a relationship with Him, the thought that God isn't at
least partly distinct from me just seems anticlimactic. I
mean, I do believe we are one with Him to a degree --
including in the monistic sense of the term -- but I think
we're also distinct from Him. I'm not (yet) persuaded that
it's a 100% monistic arrangement.

" And how does it relate to the quote in

The Gospel of John attributed to Yeshua?

It may or may not relate, depending on how one defines that
oneness, I suppose.

I think the two can be one and yet distinct, similar to the
type of oneness a married couple is considered to have
where they still remain two distinct individuals.

 

[idav]

It seems to me that some parts of the Gospels makes Yeshua sound like an
autotheist. While other parts make him sound like a pantheist or panentheist.

Maybe but he never told people to worship him but to worship the father. The comments of being sons of god and one with god were more mystical ideas. When someone accused him of saying he was god he quoted the OT as saying we are all gods.

 

[Jainarayan]

Correction, traces of autotheism and pantheism in Hindu scriptures.:bow:

Afaik pantheism is probably in an extremely small minority of Hindu belief and sects. The major sects of Hinduism: Vaishnava, Shaiva, Shakta, and Smarta are all pretty much panentheistic.

As embodied jivatma (souls/living essence) we don't worship ourselves, because we don't perceive that we are one with God. We can say it, but we don't experience it. But we attempt to see divinity in everyone and everything. So to a certain extent, there's autotheism. Just my view, nothing authoritative.

 

[Jainarayan]

Very interesting subject which leads back to Monism. Jainyaran, thank you very much for your information. I see once more that Vedic is quite close to Avestan. "Aham Brahmasmi"in Avestan: "Ahura ahmi", "Tat Tvam Asi": "Tat/yat thwãm ahi".

That is indeed interesting. The languages are also closely related; it's not just a borrowing of vocabulary. Those phrases are cognate from a common ancestor language.

Some people don't like it to admit it, but there's a certain amount of cross-influence between the Vedas and the Avesta. Not being a scholar in it, I don't know which way the bulk of the influence went, and how much.

 

[Jainarayan]

I undersand it, I have one question though. If everything that is good is God
then what is everything that isn't good?

Remember, everything we see is creation, which is the play of God (leela). God is not touched by any of it. Good and bad are attributes of creation, not God. How did 'bad' arise in God's creation? That one is for the acharyas.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

"I looked for God and found only myself and I looked for myself and found only God".
-Sufi proverb-

What do you think of this Sufi proverb? And how does it relate to the quote in

The Gospel of John attributed to Yeshua?

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Font8960,Times New Roman]Take the famous utterance, “I am God.” Some people think this is a great pretension, but “I am God” is in fact a great humility. Those who say, instead, “I am a servant of God” believe that two exist, themselves and God. But those who say, “I am God” have become nothing and have cast themselves to the winds. They say, “I am God” meaning, “I am not, God is all. There is no existence but God. I have lost all separation. I am nothing.” In this the humility is greater.[/FONT][/FONT]

That seems to wrap it up.

 

[DreadFish]

Personally, I find the idea that I'm "as God as it gets" rather
depressing. Since I'm operating under the belief that I
have a relationship with Him, the thought that God isn't at
least partly distinct from me just seems anticlimactic. I
mean, I do believe we are one with Him to a degree --
including in the monistic sense of the term -- but I think
we're also distinct from Him. I'm not (yet) persuaded that
it's a 100% monistic arrangement.

It may or may not relate, depending on how one defines that
oneness, I suppose.

I think the two can be one and yet distinct, similar to the
type of oneness a married couple is considered to have
where they still remain two distinct individuals.

I very much relate to you here. I went through a time feeling exactly like this, and the idea that I might be God without God being distinct from me as well felt very lonely and really terrified me.

Now, somehow, it's almost a non-issue and I feel no fear from it

I think it's a result of seeing things through a different conceptual construction.

__

In regards to the OP, I have also shared the the sentiment that Jesus may be speaking in the same terms as that Sufi verse. I tend to relate Jesus to Sufis, he makes more sense from that perspective.

 

[Astravalon]

I very much relate to you here. I went through a time feeling exactly like this, and the idea that I might be God without God being distinct from me as well felt very lonely and really terrified me.

Now, somehow, it's almost a non-issue and I feel no fear from it

I think it's a result of seeing things through a different conceptual construction.

Yeah, I mean, to an extent I do take comfort in the idea
that there's at least some overlap between God and us. It
serves to make the relationship more firmly secured than if
we were absolutely separate and distinct from Him. So I
really don't want to just toss the idea out the window
entirely (at least, not always ).

Since my approach to God is in the context of the bridal
mystic, Oneness in the absolute sense would make this
Honeymoon feel like I'm just interacting with a mirror, lol!


-

 

[Twig pentagram]

I haven't read any post from any of the christians here on RF.