Experiencing God

[Ingledsva]

That you hate the expression does not make it less valid now than it was 2000 years ago. Your "pearls" are not mine and I am no more interested in them than you are interested mine. What's so difficult about that?

It is very simple.

YOU are not swine, for not believing in my "pearls," spirituality, or philosophy, etc.

And I expect the same from you.

This was discussed on page one.

It is wrong to refer to people as despised or dumb animals, just because they do, - or might, - disagree with your "pearls."

*

 

[Agondonter]

It is very simple.

YOU are not swine, for not believing in my "pearls," spirituality, or philosophy, etc.

And I expect the same from you.

This was discussed on page one.

It is wrong to refer to people as despised or dumb animals, just because they do, - or might, - disagree with your "pearls."

*

It's a metaphor. I have no problem with being the "swine" for your "pearls."

All this hyper-sensitivity and political correctness is really, really asinine.

True debate in which reasons are advanced, discussed, weighed and the issue decided upon in a rational way is an illusion. Research has verified that humans decisions and beliefs are determined by emotions rather than by reason. We ARE "dumb animals" -- dumber actually. No "dumb animal" would take offense at a metaphor.

 

[Ingledsva]

It's a metaphor. I have no problem with being the "swine" for your "pearls."

All this hyper-sensitivity and political correctness is really, really asinine.

True debate in which reasons are advanced, discussed, weighed and the issue decided upon in a rational way is an illusion. Research has verified that humans decisions and beliefs are determined by emotions rather than by reason. We ARE "dumb animals" -- dumber actually. No "dumb animal" would take offense at a metaphor.

"Illusion" or "emotion" still does not make putting down - other - calling them names, etc., - OK!

You think it is OK for me to say -

"Don't bother debating that with Agondonter! He's just swine!"

It is an insult, - and is not OK in reasonable society.

*

 

[Agondonter]

"Illusion" or "emotion" still does not make putting down - other - calling them names, etc., - OK!

You think it is OK for me to say -

"Don't bother debating that with Agondonter! He's just swine!"

It is an insult, - and is not OK in reasonable society.

*

Yes, it's okay. It's a metaphor, not an insult. And no reasonable society would see it as anything else.

 

[Ingledsva]

Yes, it's okay. It's a metaphor, not an insult. And no reasonable society would see it as anything else.

You can call it metaphor all you want. - Once you use it against people in the real world - you are insulting them.

*

 

[Agondonter]

You can call it metaphor all you want. - Once you use it against people in the real world - you are insulting them.

*

Their problem, not mine. It's a metphor, a descriptor. If someone is going to be that sensitive, it would be better for them and the real world if they never left their protective cave.

 

[Agondonter]

I am amazed that so many believers that have had "spiritual" experiences won't share their experiences with others. It ought not surprise me however, as I too have had "spiritual" experiences that I just will not share with anyone. I gather that the telling of such experiences puts one at risk of throwing one's pearls to the swine.

My experience of God has actually brought me to a point where I no longer require faith to believe in God. I am absolutely certain of his existence and presence in my life.

So I guess that leaves me with a question for those who have had God experiences. What do you think it was that you did which enabled you to experience what you experienced? What did you do to invoke God's attention?

Believers talk about their experiences not to convince unbelievers, but for the edification and mutual satisfaction of fellow believers. Given the intimacy and personal nature of the experience, any debate would indeed be like casting pearls before swine.

Like you, my certainty in God's presence in my life is etched in stone. I don't have anything to prove nor am I obliged to answer skeptics. I am the swine for their pearls.

Opening myself up to the Divine Milieu allowed me know the certainty of God's presence, but I only did so because I had nowhere else to go. It does not give me all the answers, but it does give me all the assurance I need to know that "God is in his heaven and all's right with the world."

 

[godnotgod]

It's a metaphor. I have no problem with being the "swine" for your "pearls."

All this hyper-sensitivity and political correctness is really, really asinine.

True debate in which reasons are advanced, discussed, weighed and the issue decided upon in a rational way is an illusion. Research has verified that humans decisions and beliefs are determined by emotions rather than by reason. We ARE "dumb animals" -- dumber actually. No "dumb animal" would take offense at a metaphor.

But the metaphor you are using, and others like it which dehumanize or demonize, seals the argument that you are using against rational discussion. It is part of anti-Reason. While it may be true that emotions are involved due to personally-attached views, what is at the root of any approach to a discussion is a consciousness of clarity. IOW, clarity is what is driving the discussion, which can become crippled when someone throws a monkey wrench into the works, as when someone attempts to discredit the other participant, not via rational argument, but by using a degrading metaphor. Once a participant is seemingly discredited in this manner, there is no longer any discussion. In the worst case scenarios, a targeted individual or group becomes expendable, as when Hitler foisted the national Shadow upon the Jews as being 'untermenschen', ie; 'sub-human', which in this case resulted in the Holocaust.

I seriously doubt if the original words about pearls and swine came from the mouth of an enlightened being like Yeshua; most likely such words were put into his mouth by others.

 

[godnotgod]

Their problem, not mine. It's a metphor, a descriptor. If someone is going to be that sensitive, it would be better for them and the real world if they never left their protective cave.

No, it's YOUR problem as it originated from YOU. YOU are the one nurturing and foisting such a view onto others as legitimate, when it is not. It becomes your problem when others call you on it. I bet you think it's OK because you think it came from your authority figure that you idolize, therefore it MUST be OK. Using it is just a cheap way of trying to dominate the discussion with one-upmanship. It is the ego asserting itself, making itself look bigger or more important or correct than the other guy via deception.

I suspect the true meaning of the phrase was not to share precious intimate insights and experiences with those who cannot understand, and who would trample them underfoot or make a public mockery of them.

 

[Agondonter]

I suspect the true meaning of the phrase was not to share precious intimate insights and experiences with those who cannot understand, and who would trample them underfoot or make a public mockery of them.

Gee. No kidding? What you said here is in perfect alignment with what I've been saying. So why take it personally? Why take offense?

I guess it's to be expected in a politically correct and morally corrupt society.

 

[Ingledsva]

Gee. No kidding? What you said here is in perfect alignment with what I've been saying. So why take it personally? Why take offense?

I guess it's to be expected in a politically correct and morally corrupt society.

Because when you use it against people in discussions, you are calling them swine, - and it is personal.

*

 

[godnotgod]

Gee. No kidding? What you said here is in perfect alignment with what I've been saying. So why take it personally? Why take offense?

I guess it's to be expected in a politically correct and morally corrupt society.

You're missing the point.

Foisting one's Shadow onto others is a politically and morally corrupt act. Doing it creates a scapegoat that others then feel is OK to mistreat in the name of some recognized authority, such as 'God'.

It is enough to share your pearls with those who understand, and withhold them from others. It is unnecessary to scapegoat them, thereby turning them into targets for attack.

 

[Muffled]

There is nothing to see or hear via your sensory perception. The mystical experience is beyond the five senses. The spiritual world is that which cannot be seen or heard, and dwells in the realm of Silence and the Invisible. You don't hear or see anything because you are still attached to your BELIEFS, which are based upon thought, and thought is based on Reason, Logic, and Analysis, none of which work in the world of the spirit. IOW, you are not truly listening because your beliefs are in the way.

I believe you did not say that it was auditory silence or seeing visibility. Then I would agree with you but you said simply silence and invisibility.

Again the spirit world is not silent; it is only audibly silent; it is not without visions; it is simply without vision.

I believe this is a non-sequitur. I believe you are making an assumption that does not follow from anything I have said.

I believe reason and logic work well when it comes to spiritual concepts.

I believe I am listening and that my beliefs are not in the way.

 

[Muffled]

godnotgod said "When Jesus said 'Before Abraham was, I Am', there is nothing about Being that can be seen or heard. Being, which Jesus is referring to, is a state of conscious awareness, that is silent and invisible. It just knows, without words, without thinking. To 'see' and 'hear' what is in the world of Silence and the Invisible is to know, via your Being, That which Is, because 'That which Is', is none other than YOU. This is called 'divine union'. This is why the Hindus tell us: 'Tat tvam asi'; "Thou Art That", and why Deepak Chopra tells us: "The spiritual experience is the merging of the observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a Single Reality."

I believe again that the silence is auditory and that the spirit is not silent; that the visabilty does not come from the eyes but from what the intelligence can project.

I believe the evidence is to the contrary: Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith Jehovah:

I believe you can call anything divine union but it doesn't exist.

I believe a single reality is not a divine union. A gathering of Trump supporters is a singular reality but it is not a union.

 

[Muffled]

Muffled said "I believe Jesus is still in the body but it is true that the Spirit of God is invisible but not true that He is silent all the time. Considering that He is hearing our prayers it would seem highly unlikely that He dwells in silence."

godnotgod said "You are projecting and anthropomorphizing."

I believe I am doing neither.

Projecting: attributing to God what I can do. I do not go by that but by what God says in the Bible.

Anthropomorphizing: attributing physical functions to that which is not physical. Again I am not doing that, I am going by what God says in the Bible.

 

[godnotgod]

I believe you did not say that it was auditory silence or seeing visibility. Then I would agree with you but you said simply silence and invisibility.

I thought I was communicating with someone who was familiar with the spiritual world. Such people would know immediately what is meant by silence and invisibility. Being in The Silent World simply means your experience of reality without thoughts or words about what you are experiencing.

Again the spirit world is not silent; it is only audibly silent; it is not without visions; it is simply without vision.

All sights and sounds occur against the background of nothingness and silence, without which none could occur. We have been indoctrinated to focus on the foreground of life, what is moving and making noise, while ignoring the background. However, it is the background that is the Source of the world that is in the foreground as we experience it via the five senses. When Yeshua said 'I Am', he was saying he is at one with the background, the Source, and not of the foreground, ie; 'not of this world', which is the illusory world. 'I Am' is simply to be, without words or thoughts. It is to dwell firmly in the Silent World. So to enter into the Silent World is to enter into the world of true Reality, because it is beyond sights and sounds, beyond descriptions of reality, because it is Reality itself. We do not attach ourselves to the foreground, but to the Source of the foreground. The Source does not come and go as the foreground does, ie; 'my Word shall not pass away'. And lastly, when you enter into the Silent World, the ordinary world becomes transformed, so that what your rational mind thought was the case, is not actually the case.

Think about a fish. It is born into the sea, and so does not know it is in the sea. It's immediate focus is on the foreground of its existence, primarily food and predators. Likewise, we are born into the foreground of life, thinking it to be reality, never realizing the background out of which we emerged, and which is the true nature of Reality. So in order to get in touch with the background, we must quiet down the noise of the foreground so we can listen, instead of just hearing, to see, instead of just looking.

I believe this is a non-sequitur. I believe you are making an assumption that does not follow from anything I have said.

EVERYTHING you have said has pointed to your BELIEFS, as even this very statement demonstrates!

I believe reason and logic work well when it comes to spiritual concepts.

Reason and Logic cannot define the spiritual experience, but can lead up to its threshold. The spiritual world is not about any conceptual understanding, because it's experience does not originate from the intellect. You are not referring to spirituality, but to morality.

I believe I am listening and that my beliefs are not in the way.

...which is a statement that demonstrates your beliefs to be in the way.

 

[Muffled]

I thought I was communicating with someone who was familiar with the spiritual world. Such people would know immediately what is meant by silence and invisibility. Being in The Silent World simply means your experience of reality without thoughts or words about what you are experiencing.



All sights and sounds occur against the background of nothingness and silence, without which none could occur. We have been indoctrinated to focus on the foreground of life, what is moving and making noise, while ignoring the background. However, it is the background that is the Source of the world that is in the foreground as we experience it via the five senses. When Yeshua said 'I Am', he was saying he is at one with the background, the Source, and not of the foreground, ie; 'not of this world', which is the illusory world. 'I Am' is simply to be, without words or thoughts. It is to dwell firmly in the Silent World. So to enter into the Silent World is to enter into the world of true Reality, because it is beyond sights and sounds, beyond descriptions of reality, because it is Reality itself. We do not attach ourselves to the foreground, but to the Source of the foreground. The Source does not come and go as the foreground does, ie; 'my Word shall not pass away'. And lastly, when you enter into the Silent World, the ordinary world becomes transformed, so that what your rational mind thought was the case, is not actually the case.

Think about a fish. It is born into the sea, and so does not know it is in the sea. It's immediate focus is on the foreground of its existence, primarily food and predators. Likewise, we are born into the foreground of life, thinking it to be reality, never realizing the background out of which we emerged, and which is the true nature of Reality. So in order to get in touch with the background, we must quiet down the noise of the foreground so we can listen, instead of just hearing, to see, instead of just looking.




EVERYTHING you have said has pointed to your BELIEFS, as even this very statement demonstrates!



Reason and Logic cannot define the spiritual experience, but can lead up to its threshold. The spiritual world is not about any conceptual understanding, because it's experience does not originate from the intellect. You are not referring to spirituality, but to morality.



...which is a statement that demonstrates your beliefs to be in the way.

I believe I am quite well versed in spiritual things. Context is everything. If you were referring to transcendent meditation then I would have known right away that you were talking about the silence and lack of vision of the physical mind but the mind must still be in receptive mode in order to have an experience. So I will ask what kind of experience there is without word or vision? I know of nothing in the spirit world that does not derive from those two except for a nudge on the psyche which is rare and usually comes unexpectedly and never from meditation.

 

[godnotgod]

I believe I am quite well versed in spiritual things. Context is everything. If you were referring to transcendent meditation then I would have known right away that you were talking about the silence and lack of vision of the physical mind but the mind must still be in receptive mode in order to have an experience. So I will ask what kind of experience there is without word or vision? I know of nothing in the spirit world that does not derive from those two except for a nudge on the psyche which is rare and usually comes unexpectedly and never from meditation.

Your response here is tell-tale.

You are not well versed in spiritual things; you are filled with religious beliefs.

The spiritual experience is not taught, as in 'well-versed'. It is not an accumulation of data, facts, and ideas that lead up to knowledge, but rather what comes when factual knowledge is subtracted; when the mind ceases its activities. It is not about thinking, but about seeing, not with the eyes, but with consciousness, that which is, and not what the mind thinks is the case. It is the experience of what is present before mind.

There is no mind that is in a receptive mode; there is transcendence of mind itself. Even in the world of perceptual reality, there can be experience without word or vision. The experience of coldness when you accidentally fall into a mountain lake is one without sight or sound, although sight and sound are involved. In the meditative state, once the discursive mind has become quiet, Big Mind can then come into play. This experience is completely silent and without imagery, and is a shift away from mind and into Pure Consciousness, which is silent and still, without color, taste, smell or tactile sensation. It is Unborn, Unformed, Uncaused, and Unconditioned.

It is obvious from your comments above that you are still attached to the world of perceptual reality: sight, sound, touch, smell, taste. The divine nature is an experience in Ultimate Reality, which is beyond mind and all perceptual reality. It is beyond self and it's idea of 'other'. The spiritual experience, in the words of Deepak Chopra, "is the merging of the observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a single Reality". This wordless, imageless experience is what mystics refer to as 'divine union'. When the drop of water has returned to the limitless ocean, there is no longer an individual drop; it has merged with the One.

The world of perceptual reality is about the conditioned mind; that of Ultimate Reality is about the awakened consciousness behind mind.
*****

Look, it cannot be seen - it is beyond form.
Listen, it cannot be heard - it is beyond sound.
Grasp, it cannot be held - it is intangible.
These three are indefinable;
Therefore they are joined in one.

From above it is not bright;
From below it is not dark:
An unbroken thread beyond description.
It returns to nothingness.
The form of the formless,
The image of the imageless,
It is called indefinable and beyond imagination.

Stand before it and there is no beginning.
Follow it and there is no end.
Stay with the ancient Tao,
Move with the present.

Knowing the ancient beginning is the essence of Tao.

Tao te Ching, Ch 14

http://terebess.hu/english/tao/waley.html

 

[Muffled]

Godnotgod said "All sights and sounds occur against the background of nothingness and silence, without which none could occur. We have been indoctrinated to focus on the foreground of life, what is moving and making noise, while ignoring the background. However, it is the background that is the Source of the world that is in the foreground as we experience it via the five senses. When Yeshua said 'I Am', he was saying he is at one with the background, the Source, and not of the foreground, ie; 'not of this world', which is the illusory world. 'I Am' is simply to be, without words or thoughts. It is to dwell firmly in the Silent World. So to enter into the Silent World is to enter into the world of true Reality, because it is beyond sights and sounds, beyond descriptions of reality, because it is Reality itself. We do not attach ourselves to the foreground, but to the Source of the foreground. The Source does not come and go as the foreground does, ie; 'my Word shall not pass away'. And lastly, when you enter into the Silent World, the ordinary world becomes transformed, so that what your rational mind thought was the case, is not actually the case."

I believe He is saying that He is the source. I believe there is no background of nothingness and silence.

I believe "not of this world" implies another world and that neither are illusory. I believe there is an illusory world that He and we can create and be in but that does not exclude the existence of real worlds.

I believe there is no living being without words or thoughts. It would be like telling a rock to move around and enjoy life. Our God is a living God.

 

[godnotgod]

Godnotgod said "All sights and sounds occur against the background of nothingness and silence, without which none could occur. We have been indoctrinated to focus on the foreground of life, what is moving and making noise, while ignoring the background. However, it is the background that is the Source of the world that is in the foreground as we experience it via the five senses. When Yeshua said 'I Am', he was saying he is at one with the background, the Source, and not of the foreground, ie; 'not of this world', which is the illusory world. 'I Am' is simply to be, without words or thoughts. It is to dwell firmly in the Silent World. So to enter into the Silent World is to enter into the world of true Reality, because it is beyond sights and sounds, beyond descriptions of reality, because it is Reality itself. We do not attach ourselves to the foreground, but to the Source of the foreground. The Source does not come and go as the foreground does, ie; 'my Word shall not pass away'. And lastly, when you enter into the Silent World, the ordinary world becomes transformed, so that what your rational mind thought was the case, is not actually the case."

I believe He is saying that He is the source. I believe there is no background of nothingness and silence.

He is saying he is one with the Source, which is the Father: "I and the Father are One", which is to say that Jesus and the Father are of the same ESSENCE, but not of the same FORM. The 'Father' is the Creator, the source of all that is; the background of existence against which all things exist. However, jesus also says that he is 'not of this world', meaning he is not about what is created, but about the source of the creation; not about 'existence' but about 'Being', which is 'I Am', and not 'I exist', because existence is in Space and Time (ie; 'history', as Abraham was), while Being is not in Space or Time: it is eternal and infinite. Abraham was born and died, a product of history; Jesus is Unborn and Deathless, 'not of this world', even though his flesh was, since he had two natures. Campeche?

There cannot be sound without the background of silence; there cannot be something without the background of no-thing-ness. You know black because of white; good because of evil; right because of wrong; light because of darkness, etc, etc. Think about it.

I believe "not of this world" implies another world and that neither are illusory. I believe there is an illusory world that He and we can create and be in but that does not exclude the existence of real worlds.

Illusions come and go, and so does this 'material' world. The real world Jesus is referring to that he IS of, is the world that does NOT come and go. "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My Words shall not pass away."

Matthew 6:19-21

19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:


20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:


21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

We call this parable 'The Lilies of the Field', AKA 'The Wisdom of Insecurity'.

Putting stock in this world can only bring suffering, because it does not last, and it does not last because it is an illusion.

I believe there is no living being without words or thoughts. It would be like telling a rock to move around and enjoy life. Our God is a living God.

Pure Consciousness is already in place BEFORE words or thoughts. It is because of Pure Consciousness (ie; The Infinite, the Source; the background, etc.) that all things (ie; 'all forms') can exist, but all things are temporal, even ourselves. Only Pure Consciousness is real, as it is permanent and formless. It is already in place before all things come into being. It is the background to Everything, and out of which Everything comes. All forms emerge from the the ocean of formlessness, just as all ocean waves emerge from the formless sea.

Rocks do move around, but imperceptibly to ordinary human perception. This entire 'material' Universe is in constant flux, because it is an illusion. An illusion must continue to move, as movement is crucial to it's ability to portray itself as real. Once it's movement ceases, it vanishes, and what is left is only what is real, which is That which is creating the illusion in the first place. All atoms in the Universe are in vibration. That vibration is what creates the illusion of material reality. All of the mass of the atom is virtual in nature. It is not real. Only That which is the source of the vibration; of the mass; is real. We call that Source The Unified Field, which is none other than Pure Abstract Intelligence; The Absolute; Brahman; The Ground of All Being; The Infinite; Pure Consciousness; Tao; The Changeless; The Void; Ultimate Reality; God, etc.