Qualities of a Spiritually Evolved Human

[Kunga]

Literalism is also a prison.

Thinking makes it so....

[Pam Seeback]

Thinking lifts earth's skirt.

[Kunga]

Thinking lifts earth's skirt.

LOL


Thinking is perverted...lol

[Pam Seeback]

And he must like what he finds 'cause he keeps coming back for more.

[Pam Seeback]

He's the restless branches on her rooted tree.

[Kunga]

And he must like what he finds 'cause he keeps coming back for more.

yeah...she's stripped naked now...her hands tied behind her back....

thinking about thinking...i thought of the passage in the bible...when adam and eve ate of the tree of knowledge...and discovered they were naked, and then covered themselves......what do you make of that !

[Pam Seeback]

Adam AND Eve couldn't see the Father of the earth, 'cause the Father's projection of the earth was in the way.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

When feeling is set free from its emotional prison and logic is allowed to be the handy-dandy little guy that he is, liberation is here now. 'Nuf said.

If you had ended that sentence with "Liberation is here now eternally without the possibility of delusion/suffering arising ever again", that would have been nuf said, but again you've avoided the point.

What makes you think that 'cause there's bliss or liberation or insight, etc, right now, that it will remain without change indefinitely?

[Pam Seeback]

Seeker: What makes you think that 'cause there's bliss or liberation or insight, etc, right now, that it will remain without change indefinitely?

The things of which we are aware are ever changing but the fact that things exist is the unchanging insight. Can one hold onto the unchanging insight that the truth of things doesn't change even though their appearance and names do? I don't know but what I do know is that when the insight of emptiness and impermanence is present, stress (suffering) is not present.

[Kunga]

Adam AND Eve couldn't see the Father of the earth, 'cause the Father's projection of the earth was in the way.

Translation :

Adam and Eve couldn't see God (Father of the Earth),
Because the Earth was more delightful than God ?

?

[Pam Seeback]

Adam AND Eve couldn't see the Father of the earth, 'cause the Father's projection of the earth was in the way.

Translation :

Adam and Eve couldn't see God (Father of the Earth),
Because the Earth was more delightful than God ?

?

An expansion of my sound-byte reasoning: the story of the Lord God-Adam-Eve of Genesis 2 is the story of confusing the reasoning of existence with an objective existence. This is the projection (ignorance) of the earth into ideology: "I have the truth, listen to me". The snake believed its reasoning was truth, Eve believed the snakes reasoning was truth, Adam believed Eve's reasoning was truth, the rest is history. The bible is a story of ignorance and wisdom. Wisdom: I reason myself into existence, you reason yourself into existence, neither one of us has the truth of existence.

Will you share with me your reasoning of "the earth being more delightful than God" in relation to the story of Adam and Eve?

[Kunga]

Well...didn't God forbid Adam & Eve to eat of The Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil ? They had free range of every other tree and it's fruits....except that one .....so they delighted more in Earthly things, than obeying God ?

(I haven't studied the Bible for decades).

I don't know what the scholarly interpretation or symbolism would be of this , I'm sure there are many interpretations...

I also found it interesting that when they ate of the forbidden fruit, they had to cover themselves, as before they were naked.
God was testing them ? Testing their love for Him ? Had they obeyed God, the Human race might have turned out as God intended (Peaceful like the Garden of Eden was, before Satan tempted them), instead of the Hell hole Man created by disobeying God.

So Man in his natural/naked state under Gods love and care (Good), was disrupted by Satan (Evil).
Man choosing to follow his own will instead of Gods will, and thus having to cover himself (unnatural),in shame, and forever suffer the consequences of disobeying God.

???

[Kunga]

So how can this translate universally ?

Our Natural State is Pure, Emptiness, the Void, Created/Uncreated(It's NATURAL), by God (The Perfectly Pure).
When we act unnaturally (un-pure, un-wholesome), we violate (sin) our true nature....
Thus there is suffering....

So the Tree of Knowledge (Of Good & Evil),
represents choosing to IGNORE/(IGNORANCE),
Our Natural State, and DESIRE, to taste something different (The Forbidden Fruit),
Which entailed having a choice, free will, independent thinking....duality....

When independent thinking (duality) occurs,
Separation Occurs.

You separate(thinking dualistically)
From God (The Non-Dual)

[Pam Seeback]

Kunga: You separate (thinking dualistically)
From God (The Non-Dual)

Yes, but what is usually missed is that the God of Genesis 2 is not the nondual God. Check your bible, was He of Genesis 2 not the original divider of the tree of life into the tree of knowledge of good and evil? And immediately after "growing" the two trees that once were one, did he not cause "a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads?" There are many more examples of the God of Genesis 2 being symbolic of the arrival of the delusion of "two", too many to mention in this post. The Lord God (ego God) is the epitome of the pot calling the kettle black. One has to go back to Genesis 1 to find "He" who is nondual, without an I, without an ego...And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

[Kunga]

You will have to resort to quoting exact scripture to explain what you're talking about Pam. But don't bother, I really have no interest in what mans interpretation of the bible is...there's been so much tampering...only a scholar could know what's correct....and even then he'd have to be a gifted, scholar.

Until then...I'm sticking with "I don't know" .
One can presume to try and figure it all out "Rationally", using "Logic" ...
but I don't really think man is qualified, as THE TRUTH is much larger than man is capable of comprehending.
Our brains are still evolving, and they are finite.
How can something Impermanent and Finite comprehend the Infinite ???
To think you know is pure arrogance.....IMO...


Isaiah 55:8-9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."

[Pam Seeback]

You will have to resort to quoting exact scripture to explain what you're talking about Pam. But don't bother, I really have no interest in what mans interpretation of the bible is...there's been so much tampering...only a scholar could know what's correct....and even then he'd have to be a gifted, scholar.

It was you who started the Adam and Eve ball rolling. :-) What is on one's mind stays on one's mind until it is reasoned off one's mind. I was reasoning why the Lord God of Genesis 2 is the God of dualism. Whether or not you choose to reason with me to get Adam and Eve off your mind is up to you. This is what scriptures are for and why using them with this purpose in mind takes effort; to start and keep a blazing fire one first find good wood.

Until then...I'm sticking with "I don't know" .
One can presume to try and figure it all out "Rationally", using "Logic" ...
but I don't really think man is qualified, as THE TRUTH is much larger than man is capable of comprehending.
Our brains are still evolving, and they are finite.
How can something Impermanent and Finite comprehend the Infinite ???
To think you know is pure arrogance.....IMO...

This is not what is happening when the bible is being reasoned by oneself, for oneself. No different than reasoning the teaching of the Buddha or your guru. "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Isaiah 1:18

Isaiah 55:8-9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."

Indeed. Who knows why the wind blows? Who knows why a lemon tastes like a lemon? No one, not even God, for he IS these things. However, reasoning why one divides the taste of a lemon or the feel of the wind into good or evil is not the same thing as claiming one knows the lemon or wind of God.

[Kunga]

What is on one's mind stays on one's mind until it is reasoned off one's mind.

Yes...and I have been through this process before, I don't care to waste any more time on it....even Buddha had a "Creation Story" for those that wanted one.

Also Buddha considered The Cosmos, one of the "Imponderables" :

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[Pam Seeback]

movingalways wrote:
What is on one's mind stays on one's mind until it is reasoned off one's mind.


Yes...and I have been through this process before, I don't care to waste any more time on it....even Buddha had a "Creation Story" for those that wanted one.

Also Buddha considered The Cosmos, one of the "Imponderables" :

This is why one reasons their clinging to a creation story to get if off their mind. Is it off your mind?

[Kunga]

Is it off your mind?

Yeah...I just had to get it off my chest :)

[Pam Seeback]

[Kunga]

more like :

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_2RPsWSCwRZA/T ... 00/015.JPG

[Pam Seeback]

Well, not so heavy and comes with a smile. :-)

[Raven]

So how can this translate universally ?

Our Natural State is Pure, Emptiness, the Void, Created/Uncreated(It's NATURAL), by God (The Perfectly Pure).
When we act unnaturally (un-pure, un-wholesome), we violate (sin) our true nature....
Thus there is suffering....

So the Tree of Knowledge (Of Good & Evil),
represents choosing to IGNORE/(IGNORANCE),
Our Natural State, and DESIRE, to taste something different (The Forbidden Fruit),
Which entailed having a choice, free will, independent thinking....duality....

When independent thinking (duality) occurs,
Separation Occurs.

You separate(thinking dualistically)
From God (The Non-Dual)

The Dinosoars were receptive to 'albeit' God's creativity...God's Creation/mammals of the sort. If, Adam & Eve fell {which, they did-} man's recepticore wouldn't have been frail fate: but, the conjecture of another/man's...fate/fatale. Ohhhh read...the Bible. In, conjecture-with God's own creation came the dillusion...Man's own creation-of 'Dinosoars.' I.E. Man, didn't fall; the tree did.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Seeker: What makes you think that 'cause there's bliss or liberation or insight, etc, right now, that it will remain without change indefinitely?

The things of which we are aware are ever changing but the fact that things exist is the unchanging insight. Can one hold onto the unchanging insight that the truth of things doesn't change even though their appearance and names do? I don't know but what I do know is that when the insight of emptiness and impermanence is present, stress (suffering) is not present.

Perfectly put.

That is the only point I was making, though it is true and obvious one can be completely without suffering, there is no reason to assume such insight/liberation will remain indefinitely.

There is reason that shows it will not: such as that there is no permanent ego-substance, personality, selfhood, of any kind that one can expect will retain anything, insight, memory, bliss, whatever it is.

"I don't know" isn't the truth. You said it, the constantly changing appearances of the unchanging existence of reality is the truth.

One major flaw with reasoning is spelling out absolutes from limited observation/experience: i.e: It's warm today it will be warm forever.

Philosophy should be about certainty, a guess isn't the way to truth.

Taking the whole picture of truth: there has been suffering and delusion, I cannot say there will not be again.

Is outlined in words such as:
"Of this Samsara, a single lifetime constitutes only a vanishingly tiny fraction; hence, to be able to comprehend the first noble truth, one must let one's gaze rest upon the Samsara, upon this frightful chain of rebirths, and not merely upon one single lifetime, which, of course, may be sometimes not very painful."

It is a subject of much consideration, although I understand what is meant in the emptiness of words/meanings/distinctions such as "suffering", and although I can see such experiences are "transparent", it does not mean these things do not exist. The experiences are beyond words or absolute definitions, but also by way of insight, I do know that there is suffering.

As it stands, the statement that life is suffering is clear.
The statement that there is a way out of suffering is clear, but it does not say "it lasts forever even while one continues to experience existence".

Whether or not one must forever experience appearances is another matter, which is only relevant depending on whether you are certain suffering can be overcome in life or if it cannot be. I do know that possibly misinterpreted words shouldn't be our focus, you are the only one that could possibly find certainty for yourself. We can't purchase insight or borrow it, one either finds a certain conclusion or is forever swapping between opinions.

[Pam Seeback]

Seeker: We can't purchase insight or borrow it, one either finds a certain conclusion or is forever swapping between opinions.

Why do you think philosopher's of Self come to places such as these to discuss their subjective ideas of certainty?