The Debate of God.

[godnotgod]

As in purpose?
More like effect.
I believe God to be the Cause.
And the universe (one word) is the effect.

To what end, Thief? Why did God create the world?

 

[Ouroboros]

The localised "i" is handiwork of nature. But the localised "i" points to universal awareness. And who will deny the freedom of the universal awareness to feel "I" through many forms?

That's beautiful. :bow:

 

[godnotgod]

If there is the fullness, can we grant a Self to that? Or is it in ego's power to deny that?

It is, but the question here is whether the universe is a seriously conceived event.

The localised "i" is handiwork of nature. But the localised "i" points to universal awareness. And who will deny the freedom of the universal awareness to feel "I" through many forms?

The localised self, in seeing itself as separate from universal awareness.

In 'feeling "I" ', did the universal awareness become so lost in Identification, so taken in by it's own maya, that it forgot It's true nature?

 

[Thief]

It is, but the question here is whether the universe is a seriously conceived event.



The localised self, in seeing itself as separate from universal awareness.

In 'feeling "I" ', did the universal awareness become so lost in Identification, so taken in by it's own maya, that it forgot It's true nature?

'It' did not forget.
'It' is a clean slate.

As is indicated in Genesis.....
'And the Lord did breathe into him a soul.'

 

[atanu]

It is, but the question here is whether the universe is a seriously conceived event.

It is there in the perception. Must have been conceived.

In 'feeling "I" ', did the universal awareness become so lost in Identification, so taken in by it's own maya, that it forgot It's true nature?

No. But the karma accrued to the mind, wherein the universe exists, will complete. The mind and its objects and the Self-Atman are not at same level. The Atman is ever untainted. But the mind and its objects will run their course. Just as in a film. An actor can enact 3 different roles. In reality, the actor is actor. But in the play he is under contract to play the 3 characters.

 

[godnotgod]

It is there in the perception. Must have been conceived.



No. But the karma accrued to the mind, wherein the universe exists, will complete. The mind and its objects and the Self-Atman are not at same level. The Atman is ever untainted. But the mind and its objects will run their course. Just as in a film. An actor can enact 3 different roles. In reality, the actor is actor. But in the play he is under contract to play the 3 characters.

As originally conceived, there is play, but such play soon became serious, as the actor took his role seriously. Otherwise, how can the self have become the deluded nature it has become? Somewhere in the process, the divine nature conceived a deluded view, perhaps intentionally, as a means of adventure.

 

[godnotgod]

'It' did not forget.
'It' is a clean slate.

As is indicated in Genesis.....
'And the Lord did breathe into him a soul.'

If it did not forget, how is it that the creature it created and then breathed its own life and consciousness into fell into the trap of Sin?

 

[Thief]

If it did not forget, how is it that the creature it created and then breathed its own life and consciousness into fell into the trap of Sin?

A misread on your part.

'It' did not forget......would be the Man.

Man is a clean slate at birth.
No names....no memory....

God created Man....so says scripture.
I agree.

 

[godnotgod]

A misread on your part.

'It' did not forget......would be the Man.

Man is a clean slate at birth.
No names....no memory....

If tabula rasa were the case, how did Man understand God's command not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit? Man did not yet have a language, nor a reference to know right from wrong. In short, Man was a clueless dumbkopf!!

"Duh!...don't do WHAT?....g'wan!"

 

[atanu]

As originally conceived, there is play, but such play soon became serious, as the actor took his role seriously. Otherwise, how can the self have become the deluded nature it has become? Somewhere in the process, the divine nature conceived a deluded view, perhaps intentionally, as a means of adventure.

In dream, no one knows that the dream objects were not real. But the Seer, being apart is not a dream character. But all this can make sense only by being the Seer -- and that, scripture teaches, is the ultimate attainment and is the rarest of rare.

From this POV, I do not agree with glib talk of most New Age preachers. But that is me, a mere dream character.

 

[Thief]

If tabula rasa were the case, how did Man understand God's command not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit? Man did not yet have a language, nor a reference to know right from wrong. In short, Man was a clueless dumbkopf!!

"Duh!...don't do WHAT?....g'wan!"

Nay....Adam walked with God hundreds of years....so says Genesis.
Plenty of time to learn communication.

 

[godnotgod]

Nay....Adam walked with God hundreds of years....so says Genesis.
Plenty of time to learn communication.

But if Adam communicated and communed with God for hundreds of years, why did he then turn against God and eat of the Fruit forbidden by God? After that many years of instruction, did he fail to understand God's command? Or perhaps God was a poor teacher; or that Adam had Attention Deficit Disorder. Or.....

What good was God's instruction and communication to Adam when Adam clearly failed to understand God's message?

Come now, Thief: you're making no sense.

But WE know exactly why Adam & Eve ate of the Fruit, now, don't we, Thief?

 

[godnotgod]

In dream, no one knows that the dream objects were not real. But the Seer, being apart is not a dream character. But all this can make sense only by being the Seer -- and that, scripture teaches, is the ultimate attainment and is the rarest of rare.

...and yet, the Buddha himself, who attained Supreme Enlightenment, tells us that Buddha Mind is none other than Ordinary Mind.

"I chop wood and carry water.
How miraculous!"

and.....

"Before Enlightenment, sweeping the floor;
after Enlightenment, sweeping the floor."

 

[Thief]

But if Adam communicated and communed with God for hundreds of years, why did he then turn against God and eat of the Fruit forbidden by God? After that many years of instruction, did he fail to understand God's command? Or perhaps God was a poor teacher; or that Adam had Attention Deficit Disorder. Or.....

What good was God's instruction and communication to Adam when Adam clearly failed to understand God's message?

Come now, Thief: you're making no sense.

But WE know exactly why Adam & Eve ate of the Fruit, now, don't we, Thief?

Some say it was a test....and they failed.

I say it was a test to be sure the acquisition of knowledge out weighed the consequence of dying.

In that light....Man became the creature he was intended to be.

 

[godnotgod]

Some say it was a test....and they failed.

I say it was a test to be sure the acquisition of knowledge out weighed the consequence of dying.

In that light....Man became the creature he was intended to be.

Judging from Man's current predicament, I'd say he falls far short of that intent.

 

[atanu]

...and yet, the Buddha himself, who attained Supreme Enlightenment, tells us that Buddha Mind is none other than Ordinary Mind.
"I chop wood and carry water.
How miraculous!"
and.....
"Before Enlightenment, sweeping the floor;
after Enlightenment, sweeping the floor."

Yes. But Buddha is rarest of the rare. It is like a lion's roar in a dream, one is forced to break away.

 

[atanu]

...and yet, the Buddha himself, who attained Supreme Enlightenment, tells us that Buddha Mind is none other than Ordinary Mind.
"I chop wood and carry water.
How miraculous!"
and.....
"Before Enlightenment, sweeping the floor;
after Enlightenment, sweeping the floor."

But I do not agree that the above two make the understanding complete. What about the freedom from rising and setting?

 

[Thief]

Judging from Man's current predicament, I'd say he falls far short of that intent.

Nay....we live to learn.
And some of us take great risk and peril in so doing.

 

[godnotgod]

But I do not agree that the above two make the understanding complete. What about the freedom from rising and setting?

Read carefully. They both include freedom from ALL duality, in that they recognize that the Ordinary and the Miraculous are one and the same experience.

 

[godnotgod]

Nay....we live to learn.
And some of us take great risk and peril in so doing.

You mean with all the mistakes made due to learning, we put others at great risk and peril.

"With every mistake
we must surely be learning,
while my guitar gently weeps."