[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From my perspective, it seems that the premise that > God is doing all the doing has absolutely *zero* > implications for behavior, including how one thinks. > It's just a theoretical metaphysical point that's fun > to play with. (And if it happens to be true, it's God > who's having fun playing with it.) I agree with you here Judy, only I would add, that the insight into this mechanics, which can be on various levels, not just intellectual, is also a part of this unfolding or ripening. Its as much part of the lila, as starting out with a super-ego.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Comments interleaved: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" > wrote: > > > Kashmiri Shaivism (to the degree I'm familiar with it) seems > > to have the best take on assuming that God is the One doing > > all the doing and enjoying and the sooner we get on that train > > the more we participate in the divine experience. (Isn't this > > what Edg was saying?) > > If God is the One doing all the doing and enjoying, > what does "get on that train" mean, exactly? Aren't > we already *on* it, willy-nilly? > "Get on the train" means experiencing the process of having your attention drawn to itself. And, yes, we are *on* it, but have not yet *realized* it. > Or to put it another way, whatever "get on that train" > means, if God is the One doing all the doing, isn't > it God who determines whether we get on the train or > not? > I think the problem here is the huge disparity of understood status between the concept of an individual and the concept of God. If you think about whatever "Life" is (or the "Lifeforce principle") as the underlying "God" principle, it doesn't seem to be much of a leap to understand that this life is not "my" life but Life living *me*; Life expressing itself as me and my life. A piece of fruit on the tree starts out green or unripe and in its time it ripens and falls. The whole sequence is the "life" of the fruit; realization (to me) is the moment when this particular fruit understands its own ripeness (the expression of Life as ripe, full, perfected [but only in a sense]) and suddenly and irrevocably "falls". We experience our growth and enlightenment naturally and our own time. There is a sequence of growth that we may understand and feel as a process of cause and effect, but it may just be the ripening of wisdom, insight and realization of what It is that we are (and have always been) and expression of. > If it's up to us to get on the train, that means we > have individual free will, which contradicts the > notion that God is doing all the doing. The *feeling* we have and identify as free will may just be the unfolding of our life that really doesn't require individual attention. We talk about "our" bodies but we are almost entirely not in control of them, except in a very provisional and limited way; think digestion, breathing, circulation, immune responses, etc. All these automatic functions that we have mostly no influence on. > > I think this is what throws people like Barry so > badly off: they don't take the idea that God does it > all far enough, and they end up assuming what they're > arguing. > > From my perspective, it seems that the premise that > God is doing all the doing has absolutely *zero* > implications for behavior, including how one thinks. > It's just a theoretical metaphysical point that's fun > to play with. (And if it happens to be true, it's God > who's having fun playing with it.) > Yes, agreed. We all just do what we do, are drawn to what interests us and retreat from what doesn't. Our life trajectories seem to be mostly the aggregate results of random decisions, each individual decision not fundamentally different than "this tastes good" and "that doesn't taste good". Over time the distribution of all these individual decisions tend to create larger waves of predispositions that also interact with each other, moire-like patterns that define us as Marek or Judy or Barry or whomever. Marek
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kashmiri Shaivism (to the degree I'm familiar with it) seems > to have the best take on assuming that God is the One doing > all the doing and enjoying and the sooner we get on that train > the more we participate in the divine experience. (Isn't this > what Edg was saying?) If God is the One doing all the doing and enjoying, what does "get on that train" mean, exactly? Aren't we already *on* it, willy-nilly? Or to put it another way, whatever "get on that train" means, if God is the One doing all the doing, isn't it God who determines whether we get on the train or not? If it's up to us to get on the train, that means we have individual free will, which contradicts the notion that God is doing all the doing. I think this is what throws people like Barry so badly off: they don't take the idea that God does it all far enough, and they end up assuming what they're arguing. >From my perspective, it seems that the premise that God is doing all the doing has absolutely *zero* implications for behavior, including how one thinks. It's just a theoretical metaphysical point that's fun to play with. (And if it happens to be true, it's God who's having fun playing with it.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning wrote: > > > > There is no need to posit GOD as thinking your f.. mundane > > thoughts. OMG, give God a little more credit. If GOD thought > > your thoughts, the THOUGHTS would so f... blast you to > > NOTHINGNESS (Jai Sarte) -- its not even polite to imagine > > the carnage. > > LOL. I didn't read whatever post this is bouncing > off of, but I have to agree with new here. Like > God (if there were one) has nothing better to do > than think *your* thoughts. That's one bored-ass > God, if you ask me. :-) > > > Thoughts come because of your past mundane attachments. And > > your reaction to oncoming karma (responses based on learning > > and education -- again karma-based). > > Or (perish the...uh...thought), one could just > suck it up and admit that one has NO IDEA where > thoughts come from. That's the real story, as > far as I can tell, for everyone on this planet. > They make up stories about where thoughts come > from, but not one of them knows for sure. And, > unable to *admit* that they don't have a clue, > they make up stories and claim that those stories > are not only a clue, but *the* clue, "the Truth." > > Me, I don't have a clue where my thoughts come > from, and I don't really care. They certainly > don't come from God. If there is one, He/She/It > has far better things to do than create the stuff > that goes through my brain. > > > And why Randomness and Predetermination are the only > > two choices -- thats trip down blinders-on thinking. > > There are SO many more possibilities. > > Indeed there are. I don't believe in either. As > I said earlier, I DON'T KNOW, and doubt I ever > will. There are elements to life that seem > pattern-like, but that could happen without the > intervention of any kind of God. And there are > elements of life that seem random, and *that* > could happen *with* the simultaneous presence > of a God as well. > > I guess the bottom line for me is that, as new > suggests below, claiming that God "does every- > thing" and/or "thinks all my thoughts" sounds > a tad...uh...self important to me. It's like, > "God has nothing better to do than to plan all > the minutiae of my life and every detail of it." > Yeah, right. *That* is certainly likely. :-) > > Besides, who would really want to *live* in a > world that you have no choice in, and no possible > effect on? That, after all, is the bottom line > of believing in either predestination or God- > running-everything. BORING. *This* is what some > people believe to give their lives "meaning?" > I can't possibly imagine anything *less* mean- > ingful than believing that you're some kind of > robot or puppet just acting out "God's will." > > But people are different, and some might just > find this belief the most inspiring thing in > the world. Go figure. > > > So rock on, if you need to get off on the image -- and > > illusion -- of GOD thinking your thoughts (just a bit > > grandiose and meglomanic are we?) I thought we left maya > > back at the last train stop. > > Exactly. > > It should be pointed out that most of the horror > conquerors and megalomaniacs the planet has pro- > duced claimed that "God thinks my thoughts." They > were "in tune" with "God's will." They knew what > God had in mind with His/Her/Its Grand Plan, not > only for them personally, but for everyone else. > > Yeah, right. We all see how well *that* worked out. > > Personally I think we're all a great deal safer > with people who believe "different strokes for > different folks and not one of us has a lock on > 'Truth'" than we are with people who believe that > they or others "know 'the Truth' and we should > believe them and do what they say." The latter > have fucked up this planet for centuries, and > have justified war after war after war after > atrocity after genocide by doing what God told > them to do as He/She/It was "thinking their > thoughts for them," and by convincing others > to do the same. > > Give me someone who thinks his *own* thoughts any > day, and who realizes it. That person is "handleable" > and can be kept under a modicum of control by other > people who think their own thoughts. They're not all > that likely to get totally out of control, in a mega- > death sense. > > But the ones who claim that God thinks their thoughts, > or that God is telling them what to do, or that they > "know" what God wants done? Scary as hell. Those are > the people this planet needs to be wary of, and to > never allow within a mile of having any kind of power > over others. > > Just my opinion, which is really mine. God had > absolutely nothing to do with creating it. > Its OK man. God still LOVES you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > **snip** > > > All good. > > I love yagyas. And some of the temples I have been to rock. > > And that both yagya and temple can revolve around a rock -- a murti. > > Can a rock create such feelings/experience/refinement? Why does it > necessarily need to be attributed to God or gods? > > I started exploring a premise some years ago -- that every, EVYRYTHING > was holy, HOLY. And that any such embodiment of holiness -- a tree, a > rock, the ground one walks on, could be made into a holy shrine. And > such a shrine could be cultured, through repeated, regular attenetion, > in person, to become enlivened (perhaps as when a murti is -- > "installed"). After "creating" a number of such mundane shrines, I see > nothing yet to contradict my original premise. > > And no need to attribute it to God's. Its simply anartifact of my > attention -- something I do know as real. > > (Is this the inner meaning of "Peter will be my rock". > > Similarly, Chopra said something on a tape, quite simple, > paraphrasing quite a bit with my own take-- "the same creative thing > that caused this beautiful flower to bloom, is the same thing inside > you that makes you bloom. To me,that has been a very unifying and > enlivening thought -- or premise -- over the years. And no need to > reference God or God's. They might be behind it -- but I have no > epistimology or empirical findings to necessarily support the God > premise. > **end** New, eggs-actly; what you/he said. But isn't the whole universe just a constant re-arranging of the furniture? Isn't consciousness itself just one more element within the equation (if not *the* element just constantly reconfigured)? There's a lot of great stuff is in the Ikea catalog, but if there's no one home getting the mail, ... Kashmiri Shaivism (to the degree I'm familiar with it) seems to have the best take on assuming that God is the One doing all the doing and enjoying and the sooner we get on that train the more we participate in the divine experience. (Isn't this what Edg was saying?) All this said, of course (and as Curtis pointed out in an earlier post), from the perspective of a privileged white male adult living in an affluent time and place with all the fussin' and fightin (and sufferin' and dyin') taking place elsewhere so I get to think about and explore these ideas at my leisure. Marek
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning wrote: > > > > There is no need to posit GOD as thinking your f.. mundane > > thoughts. OMG, give God a little more credit. If GOD thought > > your thoughts, the THOUGHTS would so f... blast you to > > NOTHINGNESS (Jai Sarte) -- its not even polite to imagine > > the carnage. > > LOL. I didn't read whatever post this is bouncing > off of, but I have to agree with new here. Like > God (if there were one) has nothing better to do > than think *your* thoughts. That's one bored-ass > God, if you ask me. :-) > > > Thoughts come because of your past mundane attachments. And > > your reaction to oncoming karma (responses based on learning > > and education -- again karma-based). > > Or (perish the...uh...thought), one could just > suck it up and admit that one has NO IDEA where > thoughts come from. That's the real story, as > far as I can tell, for everyone on this planet. > They make up stories about where thoughts come > from, but not one of them knows for sure. And, > unable to *admit* that they don't have a clue, > they make up stories and claim that those stories > are not only a clue, but *the* clue, "the Truth." > > Me, I don't have a clue where my thoughts come > from, and I don't really care. They certainly > don't come from God. If there is one, He/She/It > has far better things to do than create the stuff > that goes through my brain. > > > And why Randomness and Predetermination are the only > > two choices -- thats trip down blinders-on thinking. > > There are SO many more possibilities. > > Indeed there are. I don't believe in either. As > I said earlier, I DON'T KNOW, and doubt I ever > will. There are elements to life that seem > pattern-like, but that could happen without the > intervention of any kind of God. And there are > elements of life that seem random, and *that* > could happen *with* the simultaneous presence > of a God as well. > > I guess the bottom line for me is that, as new > suggests below, claiming that God "does every- > thing" and/or "thinks all my thoughts" sounds > a tad...uh...self important to me. It's like, > "God has nothing better to do than to plan all > the minutiae of my life and every detail of it." > Yeah, right. *That* is certainly likely. :-) > > Besides, who would really want to *live* in a > world that you have no choice in, and no possible > effect on? That, after all, is the bottom line > of believing in either predestination or God- > running-everything. BORING. *This* is what some > people believe to give their lives "meaning?" > I can't possibly imagine anything *less* mean- > ingful than believing that you're some kind of > robot or puppet just acting out "God's will." > > But people are different, and some might just > find this belief the most inspiring thing in > the world. Go figure. > > > So rock on, if you need to get off on the image -- and > > illusion -- of GOD thinking your thoughts (just a bit > > grandiose and meglomanic are we?) I thought we left maya > > back at the last train stop. > > Exactly. > > It should be pointed out that most of the horror > conquerors and megalomaniacs the planet has pro- > duced claimed that "God thinks my thoughts." They > were "in tune" with "God's will." They knew what > God had in mind with His/Her/Its Grand Plan, not > only for them personally, but for everyone else. > > Yeah, right. We all see how well *that* worked out. > > Personally I think we're all a great deal safer > with people who believe "different strokes for > different folks and not one of us has a lock on > 'Truth'" than we are with people who believe that > they or others "know 'the Truth' and we should > believe them and do what they say." The latter > have fucked up this planet for centuries, and > have justified war after war after war after > atrocity after genocide by doing what God told > them to do as He/She/It was "thinking their > thoughts for them," and by convincing others > to do the same. > > Give me someone who thinks his *own* thoughts any > day, and who realizes it. That person is "handleable" > and can be kept under a modicum of control by other > people who think their own thoughts. They're not all > that likely to get totally out of control, in a mega- > death sense. > > But the ones who claim that God thinks their thoughts, > or that God is telling them what to do, or that they > "know" what God wants done? Scary as hell. Those are > the people this planet needs to be wary of, and to > never allow within a mile of having any kind of power > over others. > > Just my opinion, which is really mine. God had > absolutely nothing to do with creating it. > Its OK man. God still LOVES you.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Curtis, Edg, great material. Curtis, for what it's worth, let me > offer my take on this from my own theism. > > Basically, what you write re your own atheism is what I feel, too. > All the gods are in me, in consciousness, and some of the forms or > concepts of god just tweak my consciousness; stimulate my > consciousness that makes me feel good -- opens me up and charges me > somehow. I don't have either the ability or clarity of experience to > articulate it any better than that; and I can't (and don't) claim > that god or gods exist independently of consciousness. I do claim > that many of the forms and concepts that flow from the Indian, and > mostly Hindu traditions, just do a number on me that makes me keep > coming back for more. > > I'm more subdued curently, but for a good long time my puja > table/puja room just kept expanding like some Hindu Roccoco coral > reef with iteration upon iteration of shrines, ghee lamps, bells, > cloths, garlands, pictures, murtis, etc. My GF is Haitian and it > really freaked her out because she could only relate to it through > the lens of her childhood and cultural experience with voodoo. I've > tried to explain to her that there's nothing weird about what I do, > just some sort of compulsive behavior to stimulate particular nerve > endings -- that's my best guess as to what's going on. > > If there is any independent being outside of my consciousness who is > pleased by my behaviors, I can't say and don't claim; but the mental > and emotional "take" I get when I regard an image of Saraswati or > Ganapati or Shiva or Guru Dev is just so fine that it's good enough > for me. For me, the forms themselves rearrange my mentality and my > personality such that I cherish the change. Similarly, the mantra, > and the puja and the more I incoporate all that stuff into my > everyday, ongoing life the smoother, happier, stronger, better it all > seems to go. > > Basically, like many here, I'm an empiricist who goes around > scratchin' and sniffin' and going with what feels right to me. So > far, so good. > > Marek > All good. I love yagyas. And some of the temples I have been to rock. And that both yagya and temple can revolve around a rock -- a murti. Can a rock create such feelings/experience/refinement? Why does it necessarily need to be attributed to God or gods? I started exploring a premise some years ago -- that every, EVYRYTHING was holy, HOLY. And that any such embodiment of holiness -- a tree, a rock, the ground one walks on, could be made into a holy shrine. And such a shrine could be cultured, through repeated, regular attenetion, in person, to become enlivened (perhaps as when a murti is -- "installed"). After "creating" a number of such mundane shrines, I see nothing yet to contradict my original premise. And no need to attribute it to God's. Its simply anartifact of my attention -- something I do know as real. (Is this the inner meaning of "Peter will be my rock". Similarly, Chopra said something on a tape, quite simple, paraphrasing quite a bit with my own take-- "the same creative thing that caused this beautiful flower to bloom, is the same thing inside you that makes you bloom. To me,that has been a very unifying and enlivening thought -- or premise -- over the years. And no need to reference God or God's. They might be behind it -- but I have no epistimology or empirical findings to necessarily support the God premise.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
TurquoiseB wrote: > Having gone over by one post, I will go over by two. > So shoot me or ban me for a week. > > Michael, I wasn't *speaking* to you in either of my > posts this morning. I didn't even have you in mind. > So *you* are speaking to someone else, someone in > your imagination (or God's imagination, if you prefer) > and don't really need an answer from me. > > I just rapped about what I tend to believe. Do with > it what you will. If you choose to get all bent out > of shape and insulted by it, I trust that it will > make you feel better to believe that God is really > the one being offended, not you. :-) > > I believe what I believe, and you are free to do the > same. I have never suggested otherwise. At the same > time, I am free to speculate as to *why* others may > believe as they believe, and what the repercussions > of that belief may be. *Just* as you do rather > often here, and in fact do in this very post. > > You have a *history* of overreacting anytime someone > challenges the value of belief in God or the value > of practicing bhakti. I'd look into *that* if I were > you, not other people's behavior. You claim in this > post that you'll say it once and then never say it > again. Yeah, right. You've done that before, too. > You claim that you don't want to argue, and then do > just that. You claim that you don't want to defend > your position, and then do just that. Physician, > heal thyself. > > If you can't handle people presenting views that > are contrary to yours without getting all upset, > *especially* when they're not talking about *you*, > I'd advise you to stay out of those discussions. > So, you can't handle it and you went over your posting limit, and you're all upset. > God *may* be dictating all your actions, but if so > He's becoming an enormous bore. Otherwise it's you. > Your call. > > Barry >
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Having gone over by one post, I will go over by two. So shoot me or ban me for a week. Michael, I wasn't *speaking* to you in either of my posts this morning. I didn't even have you in mind. So *you* are speaking to someone else, someone in your imagination (or God's imagination, if you prefer) and don't really need an answer from me. I just rapped about what I tend to believe. Do with it what you will. If you choose to get all bent out of shape and insulted by it, I trust that it will make you feel better to believe that God is really the one being offended, not you. :-) I believe what I believe, and you are free to do the same. I have never suggested otherwise. At the same time, I am free to speculate as to *why* others may believe as they believe, and what the repercussions of that belief may be. *Just* as you do rather often here, and in fact do in this very post. You have a *history* of overreacting anytime someone challenges the value of belief in God or the value of practicing bhakti. I'd look into *that* if I were you, not other people's behavior. You claim in this post that you'll say it once and then never say it again. Yeah, right. You've done that before, too. You claim that you don't want to argue, and then do just that. You claim that you don't want to defend your position, and then do just that. Physician, heal thyself. If you can't handle people presenting views that are contrary to yours without getting all upset, *especially* when they're not talking about *you*, I'd advise you to stay out of those discussions. God *may* be dictating all your actions, but if so He's becoming an enormous bore. Otherwise it's you. Your call. Barry --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Barry. I haven't answered your other letter, I apologize. So I will > comment on this one, if I may. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > Me, I don't have a clue where my thoughts come > > from, > > Right. > > > and I don't really care. > > Wrong. Your whole post how much you care. > > > They certainly > > don't come from God. > > This is certainly contradictory to your above statement. If you don't > know were thoughts come from, and if you can not say for certain, if > there is a 'God' or waht exactly He /She /It exactly is, you cannot > make this statement. > > > If there is one, He/She/It > > has far better things to do than create the stuff > > that goes through my brain. > > Maybe yes, maybe not. Maybe its exactly this type of experiment which > is really of utmost importance in the universe. Maybe He / She / It is > just like a computer game designer, and you are one of the characters > in the computer game, and you are his test object to receive > artificial intelligence or / and a sense of a separate consciousness/ > identity. ;-) > > > > > I guess the bottom line for me is that, as new > > suggests below, claiming that God "does every- > > thing" and/or "thinks all my thoughts" sounds > > a tad...uh...self important to me. > > Why? Actually its not 'self'-important, but rather the opposite of it. > You are contradicting yourself in many ways. In one way you say that > you feel more 'free' when you have full authorship of 'your' action, > that you like to have fullest control etc. OTOH you complain that your > self gets too important if you don't have. > > > It's like, > > "God has nothing better to do than to plan all > > the minutiae of my life and every detail of it." > > Yeah, right. *That* is certainly likely. :-) > > It just doesn't mean that. Obviously assuming God to be all-powerful, > omnipresent etc, wouldn't have to make decission of the kind 'this is > more important, so I'll focus on this' There is no more important or > less important, everything is of the same value - ultimately. And if > you can do everything at the same time, if you are omnipresent, like > you are present in every elementary particle, you could just do > everything. Besides that I don't even believe God 'plans'. Planing is > something humans do. God lives in the present, in the here and now ;-) > > > Besides, who would really want to *live* in a > > world that you have no choice in, and no possible > > effect on? > > Actually you do without knowing. Thats the trick: You don't know, and > you are not even asked. > > > That, after all, is the bottom line > > of believing in either predestination or God- > > running-everything. BORING. *This* is what some > > people believe to give their lives "meaning?" > > If a computer game is boring to you or not depends on the intelligent > design, and on your sense of identification with the main characters. > Once your identification with the main character is lost, the game is > basically over. > > > I can't possibly imagine anything *less* mean- > > ingful than believing that you're some kind of > > robot or puppet just acting out "God's will." > > That we are seeking 'mean
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Hi Barry. I haven't answered your other letter, I apologize. So I will comment on this one, if I may. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Me, I don't have a clue where my thoughts come > from, Right. > and I don't really care. Wrong. Your whole post how much you care. > They certainly > don't come from God. This is certainly contradictory to your above statement. If you don't know were thoughts come from, and if you can not say for certain, if there is a 'God' or waht exactly He /She /It exactly is, you cannot make this statement. > If there is one, He/She/It > has far better things to do than create the stuff > that goes through my brain. Maybe yes, maybe not. Maybe its exactly this type of experiment which is really of utmost importance in the universe. Maybe He / She / It is just like a computer game designer, and you are one of the characters in the computer game, and you are his test object to receive artificial intelligence or / and a sense of a separate consciousness/ identity. ;-) > I guess the bottom line for me is that, as new > suggests below, claiming that God "does every- > thing" and/or "thinks all my thoughts" sounds > a tad...uh...self important to me. Why? Actually its not 'self'-important, but rather the opposite of it. You are contradicting yourself in many ways. In one way you say that you feel more 'free' when you have full authorship of 'your' action, that you like to have fullest control etc. OTOH you complain that your self gets too important if you don't have. > It's like, > "God has nothing better to do than to plan all > the minutiae of my life and every detail of it." > Yeah, right. *That* is certainly likely. :-) It just doesn't mean that. Obviously assuming God to be all-powerful, omnipresent etc, wouldn't have to make decission of the kind 'this is more important, so I'll focus on this' There is no more important or less important, everything is of the same value - ultimately. And if you can do everything at the same time, if you are omnipresent, like you are present in every elementary particle, you could just do everything. Besides that I don't even believe God 'plans'. Planing is something humans do. God lives in the present, in the here and now ;-) > Besides, who would really want to *live* in a > world that you have no choice in, and no possible > effect on? Actually you do without knowing. Thats the trick: You don't know, and you are not even asked. > That, after all, is the bottom line > of believing in either predestination or God- > running-everything. BORING. *This* is what some > people believe to give their lives "meaning?" If a computer game is boring to you or not depends on the intelligent design, and on your sense of identification with the main characters. Once your identification with the main character is lost, the game is basically over. > I can't possibly imagine anything *less* mean- > ingful than believing that you're some kind of > robot or puppet just acting out "God's will." That we are seeking 'meaning' is something you are making up. E.g. I am not trying to have meaning in life, rather I try to live the Truth of my Soul. I am quite sure you don't understand, and I am not trying to convince you. But rather than speculating about the motivations of people, and psycho-analysing them, you could simply listen to them, and refere to what they acually say or explained, especially if they have done so countless times in the past, IF you would be interested remotely in a meaningful dialoque. Otherwise you just try to 'defend' your own position - which you dob't need to do - or denigrate and belittle others by misrepresenting what they actually said. > But people are different, and some might just > find this belief the most inspiring thing in > the world. Go figure. Yes, go figure. This kind of flaming will certainly not produce understanding of any sort. What do you actually want? Defend yourself? Get into an argument whose version of 'truth' -eh no, you would deny this - 'View', is more accurate etc. You somehow have to feel superior to those who have faith, and even though you claim that you 'don not know', you feel free to give loaded advice to everybody, aka 'keep on thinking for yourself, because you still can' > It should be pointed out that most of the horror > conquerors and megalomaniacs the planet has pro- > duced claimed that "God thinks my thoughts." They > were "in tune" with "God's will." They knew what > God had in mind with His/Her/Its Grand Plan, not > only for them personally, but for everyone else. Is this a compulsion you feel to talk like this, you can somehow not control? Why do you flame? Why do you do this? Really Barry, I don't understand your psychology here. You are an intelligent guy, so why do you come up with crap like this, knowing exactly that this is no what anyone here said. This is not the first time this topic of free-will and determinat
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is no need to posit GOD as thinking your f.. mundane > thoughts. OMG, give God a little more credit. If GOD thought > your thoughts, the THOUGHTS would so f... blast you to > NOTHINGNESS (Jai Sarte) -- its not even polite to imagine > the carnage. LOL. I didn't read whatever post this is bouncing off of, but I have to agree with new here. Like God (if there were one) has nothing better to do than think *your* thoughts. That's one bored-ass God, if you ask me. :-) > Thoughts come because of your past mundane attachments. And > your reaction to oncoming karma (responses based on learning > and education -- again karma-based). Or (perish the...uh...thought), one could just suck it up and admit that one has NO IDEA where thoughts come from. That's the real story, as far as I can tell, for everyone on this planet. They make up stories about where thoughts come from, but not one of them knows for sure. And, unable to *admit* that they don't have a clue, they make up stories and claim that those stories are not only a clue, but *the* clue, "the Truth." Me, I don't have a clue where my thoughts come from, and I don't really care. They certainly don't come from God. If there is one, He/She/It has far better things to do than create the stuff that goes through my brain. > And why Randomness and Predetermination are the only > two choices -- thats trip down blinders-on thinking. > There are SO many more possibilities. Indeed there are. I don't believe in either. As I said earlier, I DON'T KNOW, and doubt I ever will. There are elements to life that seem pattern-like, but that could happen without the intervention of any kind of God. And there are elements of life that seem random, and *that* could happen *with* the simultaneous presence of a God as well. I guess the bottom line for me is that, as new suggests below, claiming that God "does every- thing" and/or "thinks all my thoughts" sounds a tad...uh...self important to me. It's like, "God has nothing better to do than to plan all the minutiae of my life and every detail of it." Yeah, right. *That* is certainly likely. :-) Besides, who would really want to *live* in a world that you have no choice in, and no possible effect on? That, after all, is the bottom line of believing in either predestination or God- running-everything. BORING. *This* is what some people believe to give their lives "meaning?" I can't possibly imagine anything *less* mean- ingful than believing that you're some kind of robot or puppet just acting out "God's will." But people are different, and some might just find this belief the most inspiring thing in the world. Go figure. > So rock on, if you need to get off on the image -- and > illusion -- of GOD thinking your thoughts (just a bit > grandiose and meglomanic are we?) I thought we left maya > back at the last train stop. Exactly. It should be pointed out that most of the horror conquerors and megalomaniacs the planet has pro- duced claimed that "God thinks my thoughts." They were "in tune" with "God's will." They knew what God had in mind with His/Her/Its Grand Plan, not only for them personally, but for everyone else. Yeah, right. We all see how well *that* worked out. Personally I think we're all a great deal safer with people who believe "different strokes for different folks and not one of us has a lock on 'Truth'" than we are with people who believe that they or others "know 'the Truth' and we should believe them and do what they say." The latter have fucked up this planet for centuries, and have justified war after war after war after atrocity after genocide by doing what God told them to do as He/She/It was "thinking their thoughts for them," and by convincing others to do the same. Give me someone who thinks his *own* thoughts any day, and who realizes it. That person is "handleable" and can be kept under a modicum of control by other people who think their own thoughts. They're not all that likely to get totally out of control, in a mega- death sense. But the ones who claim that God thinks their thoughts, or that God is telling them what to do, or that they "know" what God wants done? Scary as hell. Those are the people this planet needs to be wary of, and to never allow within a mile of having any kind of power over others. Just my opinion, which is really mine. God had absolutely nothing to do with creating it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" > > Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come > from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to > inheriting,> meeky me. > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions > flitting> in the billows. > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of your > thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it > lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not > that there is anything wrong with that) > > Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is > "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning > personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this > stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our > mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > What you can't find is your perception without using this filter > overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want > some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence > without the belief overlay. > > Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an > explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not > that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more > from the creator of the universe. > > I tend to agree with Curtis. Realizing one does not think, volitionally, thoughts -- that they come effortlessly, is a good wonderful step,IMO. And you may GET IT the first time you get checked, or 20 years later when you are checked, or when you memorize the checking notes. Or never. Stealth Mahavakya. But attributing thoughts to God -- while nice and poetic, is neither necessary -- or even much of a compliment to God -- if She exists beyond Maya. (And "She" includes the prospect of a totally Gay, Queen God. All possibilities,all possibilities) ((If so, I vote for Lyood on Entourage). If God and Ishwara type exists (and SHE has not walked thru my walls -- nor has Ganesh (btw, did you see the new Albee play, "Waiting for Ganesh"?) then I give them enough credit to be Deist types -- and "exit stage left" -- as did yogi bear -- when they designed this latest gig (aka "creation"). There is no need to posit GOD as thinking your f.. mundane thoughts. OMG, give God a little more credit. If GOD thought your thoughts, the THOUGHTS would so f... blast you to NOTHINGNESS (Jai Sarte) -- its not even polite to imagine the carnage. Thoughts come because of your past mundane attachments. And your reaction to oncoming karma (responses based on learning and education -- again karma-based). And why Randomness and Predetermination are the only two choices -- thats trip down blinders-on thinking. There are SO many more possibilities. So rock on, if you need to get off on the image --and illusion -- of GOD thinking your thoughts (just a bit grandiose and meglomanic are we?) I thought we left maya back at the last train stop.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is really, rally great. Thanks Edg Ditto! > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Here's how I experience God. > > > > A closing of the inner eye. Then WHAM God speaks. > > > > All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my silence. My > > ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the > > witness, the thinker, the blessed. Only my silence can receive a > > thought. > > > > Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a flurry > > of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I have > > no pockets. I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with ballooning > > cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately. To me, the > > streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not even > > time to take a breath. What a lover God is to keep me brimming full > > of ideation. Who here can say otherwise? Who can say, "I author my > > thoughts." Or, "I'm on the thought committee, and I know the next > > thought that I'm scheduled to have." Or, "Each thought is ego approved > > and marketed." > > > > No one. It's all I can do to just accept the ecstatic flowingness. > > > > I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh? > > > > My soul seems to have won a thought lottery -- I'm rich. I'm > > experiencing a tsunami of thinking that just keeps coming into the now > > and obviating any need for memory. There's no such thing as the past > > when nowness so envelops me. I cannot escape the presence of God's > mind. > > > > In meditation, I've had a silence sandwich. You know, a slice of > > silence, meaty thought, a slice of silence, and ego for mayo. > > > > And yum yum, yum yum, yum, two bits. To savor one bite of that > > sandwich can overwhelm the palate with pleasure. > > > > Yet, most of my time is spent surfing a sea of thinking, noshing at a > > banquet of notions, and smelling the scents from a million flowered > > field. > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to inheriting, > > meeky me. > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions flitting > > in the billows. > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > > > Only my silence is dark enough to make His least glimmer bright. > > > > Only my silence is bright enough to make His least dot of dark POP! > > > > And then, suddenly, I see. > > > > It's not my silence at all. > > > > Even the silence is given to me. > > > > Edg > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" > > Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come > from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to > inheriting,> meeky me. > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions > flitting> in the billows. > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of your > thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it > lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not > that there is anything wrong with that) > > Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is > "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning > personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this > stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our > mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > What you can't find is your perception without using this filter > overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want > some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence > without the belief overlay. > > Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an > explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not > that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more > from the creator of the universe. > Boy, there's been some beautiful writing about atheism on here today chaps, it moves me, it really does. So often all you hear is the fear so many religious people have that athiests are immoral or not to be trusted because we have no "faith". Nice to know there are others out there who feel like me and have really thought about where they are and what life means. I've spent my life reading books about Darwinism and to me the real majesty of creation is how it has got here from nothing. The world seems so much more precious and just plain REAL once you really get what is going on, and it takes some huge mental leaps, not to mention an exercise in severe humility, to understand Darwin. I think it's one of the most misunderstood theories. To blame god or intelligent design for creation just takes things away from it IMO. And doesn't actually answer how things got started, it just pushes the answer further away. It's impossible to prove that something doesn't exist of course, I've just never felt the need to complicate things with gods. Or is that just a belief? No way to know. Man is a strange creature, it's no wonder to me we feel special and in need of an explanation of why we are different. It's just amazing we got the particular few things we needed to be us, a descended larynx so we can form a big enough range of sounds to have speech and a brain capable of utilising that speech as abstract thought and viola! the rest is history (literally). How easy it would have been for that never to have happened, self-awareness must be the rarest thing in the entire universe. Just think, the earth is here for 4 billion years and it takes that long before the first creature gets the wake up gene, what are the chances of it? Pretty slim I'd say, and it humbles me to think we could be the only beings in creation that are aware they are alone. Another astonishing thing is our brains came pre-adapted with the ability to "transcend", amazing experiences guaranteed! With capabilities like that could the history of mans inner spiritual life ever have been different? As you can see I like my world without god, it's more precious to me like that. But it's so easy to start taking things for granted, so easy to forget the big picture, so easy to stop feeling small. Reading these pages today nudged me awake, gave me things to think about. So thanks for that, I hope I can return the favour someday.
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Marek you really combined our divergent perspective, well done! I will always be fascinated by religious symbols and you presented one of the possible reasons why. If they are symbols,archetypes of our consciousness, they should have a profound effect when we dwell on them, even emotionally. I am happy at my end of the continuum in this discussion but I really admire your ability to grok all the extremes and come up with your own individual take. I once took a first date to an exhibit of voodoo temples that was in Baltimore and represented the biggest exhibit of them in the US ever before. They had dozens of complete alters. Voodoo really scrambles the images, Jesus painted on rum bottles and all sorts of unusual pairing of symbols. I was blown away by it all. My date...not so much! It put our first meeting in a bit too exotic a setting for her and that was really all I needed to know! The fact that your girl can hang with your interest is a great sign! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Comment below: > > ** > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > "I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes > from > > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" > > > > Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come > > from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > > > > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to > > inheriting,> meeky me. > > > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions > > flitting> in the billows. > > > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > > > And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of > your > > thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it > > lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not > > that there is anything wrong with that) > > > > Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is > > "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning > > personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this > > stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our > > mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > > > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in > the > > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > > > What you can't find is your perception without using this filter > > overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want > > some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence > > without the belief overlay. > > > > Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an > > explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not > > that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more > > from the creator of the universe. > > > **snip to end** > > Curtis, Edg, great material. Curtis, for what it's worth, let me > offer my take on this from my own theism. > > Basically, what you write re your own atheism is what I feel, too. > All the gods are in me, in consciousness, and some of the forms or > concepts of god just tweak my consciousness; stimulate my > consciousness that makes me feel good -- opens me up and charges me > somehow. I don't have either the ability or clarity of experience to > articulate it any better than that; and I can't (and don't) claim > that god or gods exist independently of consciousness. I do claim > that many of the forms and concepts that flow from the Indian, and > mostly Hindu traditions, just do a number on me that makes me keep > coming back for more. > > I'm more subdued curently, but for a good long time my puja > table/puja room just kept expanding like some Hindu Roccoco coral > reef with iteration upon iteration of shrines, ghee lamps, bells, > cloths, garlands, pictures, murtis, etc. My GF is Haitian and it > really freaked her out because she could only relate to it through > the lens of her childhood and cultural experience with voodoo. I've > tried to explain to her that there's nothing weird about what I do, > just some sort of compulsive behavior to stimulate particular nerve > endings -- that's my best guess as to what's going on. > > If there is any independent being outside of my consciousness who is > pleased by my behaviors, I can't say and don't claim; but the mental > and emotional "take" I get when I regard an image of Saraswati or > Ganapati or Shiva or Guru Dev is just so fine that it's good enough > for me. For me, the forms themselves rearrange my mentality and my > personality such that I cherish the ch
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Curtis, What part of "Even the silence is given to me" didn't you understand? What's being given is ALL THIS. God does not stint. Even the worst person is an utterly clean canvas for His art, and He never paints anything less than a masterpiece. Right now, the "experience of being you" is like, you know, hanging in a heavenly Louvre somewhere with God standing before it almost blinded by the light of it. If amongst all the gifts, there is a Plan with a big ribbon bow, a Mind in a package that rattles when you shake it, a Destiny unfolding inside thin wrappings, well, in this ocean of notions, it's understandable if one doesn't have the insight to open those packages first. The incandescent dazzle of dead dog's teeth has us all like toddlers on Christmas morning wading hip-deep in presents. Agoggitude-R-Us. I don't say that I know God exists -- only that Whatever is pleasing all of us so deeply -- so deeply that even evil desires are fulfilled as proof that the charm of creation cannot be dented thereby -- whatever "He" or "It" or "That" is, I am completely immersed in Him, It, That. If He is sentience blazing, or if It is cold physics grinding, I am in awe of the infinity of That. No thought can go beyond the fact of creation's utter particularity in populating the universe with worlds -- or minds with thoughts. Nothing is missing. Allness is there. Where's not God? Ask any scientist about subtlety. Ask any monk about the endlessness of expansion of self. Ask any mother what is seen in a child's eyes. Ask Arjuna why he could not gaze at God's true Face. I'll tell ya, this Hiranyagarba ball may all be only a dollop in the dark, but Indra would chop off his right arm to be It. Good enough for a definition of God to me. If somewhere beyond the cosmic boonies a Magnificence chuckles at my "selling out small," so be it. It is, after all, His thoughts, His silence, His artistry that I am so. And, His that you are you. His entertainment to see my pong and your ping. Your serve, Paddle Boy. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" > > Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come > from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to > inheriting,> meeky me. > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions > flitting> in the billows. > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of your > thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it > lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not > that there is anything wrong with that) > > Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is > "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning > personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this > stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our > mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > What you can't find is your perception without using this filter > overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want > some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence > without the belief overlay. > > Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an > explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not > that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more > from the creator of the universe. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Here's how I experience God. > > > > A closing of the inner eye. Then WHAM God speaks. > > > > All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my silence. My > > ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the > > witness, the thinker, the blessed. Only my silence can receive a > > thought. > > > > Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a flurry > > of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I have > > no pockets. I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with ballooning > > cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately. To me, the > > streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not even > > time to take a breath. What a lover God is to keep me brimming full > > of ideation. Who here can say otherwise? Who can say, "I author my
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" > > Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come > from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > > > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to > inheriting,> meeky me. > > > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions > flitting> in the billows. > > > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of your > thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it > lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not > that there is anything wrong with that) > > Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is > "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning > personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this > stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our > mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > > silence is God's sparking. > > > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > What you can't find is your perception without using this filter > overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want > some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence > without the belief overlay. > > Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an > explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not > that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more > from the creator of the universe. > **snip to end** Curtis, Edg, great material. Curtis, for what it's worth, let me offer my take on this from my own theism. Basically, what you write re your own atheism is what I feel, too. All the gods are in me, in consciousness, and some of the forms or concepts of god just tweak my consciousness; stimulate my consciousness that makes me feel good -- opens me up and charges me somehow. I don't have either the ability or clarity of experience to articulate it any better than that; and I can't (and don't) claim that god or gods exist independently of consciousness. I do claim that many of the forms and concepts that flow from the Indian, and mostly Hindu traditions, just do a number on me that makes me keep coming back for more. I'm more subdued curently, but for a good long time my puja table/puja room just kept expanding like some Hindu Roccoco coral reef with iteration upon iteration of shrines, ghee lamps, bells, cloths, garlands, pictures, murtis, etc. My GF is Haitian and it really freaked her out because she could only relate to it through the lens of her childhood and cultural experience with voodoo. I've tried to explain to her that there's nothing weird about what I do, just some sort of compulsive behavior to stimulate particular nerve endings -- that's my best guess as to what's going on. If there is any independent being outside of my consciousness who is pleased by my behaviors, I can't say and don't claim; but the mental and emotional "take" I get when I regard an image of Saraswati or Ganapati or Shiva or Guru Dev is just so fine that it's good enough for me. For me, the forms themselves rearrange my mentality and my personality such that I cherish the change. Similarly, the mantra, and the puja and the more I incoporate all that stuff into my everyday, ongoing life the smoother, happier, stronger, better it all seems to go. Basically, like many here, I'm an empiricist who goes around scratchin' and sniffin' and going with what feels right to me. So far, so good. Marek
[FairfieldLife] Re: My God
"I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh?" Here you are being honest, you don't know where your thoughts come from. This is human creativity at work and it is a wonder! > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to inheriting,> meeky me. > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions flitting> in the billows. > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. And here are you saying that you know that "God" is the source of your thoughts? I dig the poetry of it all but as an ontological claim it lacks uh, let's see...it lacks anything beyond a poetic notion. (not that there is anything wrong with that) Here is where it matters. When people claim to "know" that it is "God" who is feeding them thoughts. Perhaps we have a functioning personal mind under our conscious mind that is busy cranking this stuff out rather than a deity, what shall we call this part of our mind...oh I know an unconscious mind! > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > silence is God's sparking. > > I cannot find non-Godness. What you can't find is your perception without using this filter overlay on your experience, interpreting everything this way. Want some REAL silence? Try actually just experiencing your silence without the belief overlay. Personally I think you are a creative human and I don't need an explanation that your thoughts are a result of any God. It is not that what your are writing isn't good, but I would expect a bit more from the creator of the universe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here's how I experience God. > > A closing of the inner eye. Then WHAM God speaks. > > All thoughts present themselves to my silence and only my silence. My > ego, merely another noise in the brain, is not the recipient, the > witness, the thinker, the blessed. Only my silence can receive a > thought. > > Thoughts, each one of them, are found treasures -- and like a flurry > of cash wind borne along a street, I snatch 'em up even though I have > no pockets. I want to hoard-gobble 'em like a hamster with ballooning > cheeks, but each is so delicious I swallow immediately. To me, the > streaming of thoughts are like having a constant orgasm -- not even > time to take a breath. What a lover God is to keep me brimming full > of ideation. Who here can say otherwise? Who can say, "I author my > thoughts." Or, "I'm on the thought committee, and I know the next > thought that I'm scheduled to have." Or, "Each thought is ego approved > and marketed." > > No one. It's all I can do to just accept the ecstatic flowingness. > > I've never authored a single thought. As if. Every thought comes from > where I know not of. Suddenly just there. Impossibly there, and so > spendable, so vital. Manna pure and simple, I pick this sustenance > up off the ground-state. We're all wandering Jews, eh? > > My soul seems to have won a thought lottery -- I'm rich. I'm > experiencing a tsunami of thinking that just keeps coming into the now > and obviating any need for memory. There's no such thing as the past > when nowness so envelops me. I cannot escape the presence of God's mind. > > In meditation, I've had a silence sandwich. You know, a slice of > silence, meaty thought, a slice of silence, and ego for mayo. > > And yum yum, yum yum, yum, two bits. To savor one bite of that > sandwich can overwhelm the palate with pleasure. > > Yet, most of my time is spent surfing a sea of thinking, noshing at a > banquet of notions, and smelling the scents from a million flowered > field. > > That's God to me. An overwhelming giving of the earth to inheriting, > meeky me. > > He's not dallying on some distant throne with harping minions flitting > in the billows. > > He's here now -- in my face, my brain, my marrow. He's laughing > inside my atoms using my electrons like whirligigs. > > Each speck in space, each plink, plank and plunk, each twang in the > silence is God's sparking. > > I cannot find non-Godness. > > Only my silence is dark enough to make His least glimmer bright. > > Only my silence is bright enough to make His least dot of dark POP! > > And then, suddenly, I see. > > It's not my silence at all. > > Even the silence is given to me. > > Edg >
