There Can Be Only One

[freelight]

Some good questions, Paul.

What about the Totality is absolute and what is relative? - How do you see non-contingent reality and contingent so called 'realities' as being related or co-existing?

Since the Totality embraces utterly everything, it is non-contingent. There can be no circumstances external to it which can somehow change it or make it disappear.

By contrast, everything within the Totality is relative and contingent. Things relate to each other causally.

)============ excellent,...these were along my own lines of reasoning too.

What is absolute in our own being and consciousness? Is consciousness itself the Totality's own Mind consciously aware of Its own Being? Is this the I AM that eternally lives and is aware of all things?

Consciousness is necessary for the existence of things, but the Totality itself is non-dual in nature and cannot be described in terms of either consciousness or non-consciousness. It doesn't have any form at all.

)=========== I have been meaning to explore more non-dual teachings. One teacher maintains that the Absolute is non-dual, but he still refers to God as 'Mind/Infinite Intelligence/Consciousness'. Could we say that the Totality includes consciousness? It would appear that consciousness is native to MIND and that Mind is aware of the totality....pervading all that is. Do you mean by having no form at all....because the Totality is likened to infinite space and cannot be confined?

I would still have to explore your postulates about the Totality being 'purposeless' - I am somewhat of a theist along certain lines of thought, some aspects orthodox...others unorthodox. I also gather from other schools of theontology. I could accept that the Totality simply IS...and that is Absolute Truth. (this totality being the One Deity Being, the All, the ONE, etc.).

This is actually a very important point. Understanding the Totality's purposelessness is essential to understanding its fundamental nature. It enables one to grasp more easily the lack of inherent existence, and lack of inherent value, of all things, which is the key to understanding God.

)======== profound inferential,......as it is common for us in theology to focus on Life having a divine and sacred purpose.

When people project "purpose" onto the Universe, they are doing it for their own ego's benefit. They subconsciously want their egos to feel special, to make themselves feel they are part of a greater plan, to believe there is a reward waiting for them in the future.

)============ perhaps. But religiously we are taught to discover our true purpose for being and such will be our joy in finding out Gods will for our lives - finding our true joy and calling spiritually. Also it really racks the religious mind to accept the notion that 'I have a purposeless existence' - seems to make life somewhat bleak and senseless. Again we bring in the issue of 'meaning' - the enrichment of value supposedly granted by virtue of these things. Purpose and meaning often adds significance to our lifes journey, unless you can share more about how purposelessness and meaninglessness has any enhancing benefit to the all-ready mystery of our existence. We could be pure existentialists or ontologists I suppose and just enjoy being for the mere sake of being - will our realization of our being having no real purpose or meaning/value inference....actually bestow a kind of grace upon us? I shall look further into this.




paul

[Kevin Solway]

. . . finding out God's will for our lives

Given that "God" is another name for the Totality, then whatever happens is necessarily God's will, - no matter what happens. Nothing can fight against the will of the Totality, since there is nothing else than it. No opposition is possible.

All purpose is necessarily self-created, and is ultimately caused by that part of the Totality that is other than ourselves. Even if we are told what someone thinks our purpose should be, we can either accept it as our purpose, or make up our own purpose without prompting from others.

Even though everyone is necessarily acting out God's will, only those who are fully conscious of God are acting out God's will in full knowledge of what they are doing. There is a big difference between the two - as great as the difference between light and darkness.

Those who are acting out God's will in darkness, we say are possessed by demons, and are living in sin and evil.

[freelight]

. . . finding out God's will for our lives

Given that "God" is another name for the Totality, then whatever happens is necessarily God's will, - no matter what happens. Nothing can fight against the will of the Totality, since there is nothing else than it. No opposition is possible.

All purpose is necessarily self-created, and is ultimately caused by that part of the Totality that is other than ourselves. Even if we are told what someone thinks our purpose should be, we can either accept it as our purpose, or make up our own purpose without prompting from others.

Even though everyone is necessarily acting out God's will, only those who are fully conscious of God are acting out God's will in full knowledge of what they are doing. There is a big difference between the two - as great as the difference between light and darkness.

Those who are acting out God's will in darkness, we say are possessed by demons, and are living in sin and evil.

Hi kev,

Indeed,....if 'God' is All, the Totality, the Only ONE Deity Being....then there cant be any contrary or opposition possible to that Which is ALL. The allness must comprise a non-dual totality, an undifferentiated Unity, entirety. - the absolute is ONE Whole. However,....in the relative realm of things...like our finite world/universe...we have relativities where dualities, multiplicities appear to exist.

In theology we are taught that God is Light, Love, Truth, Spirit - if this is true,...then the Absolute is this State of constant perptetuity. How do we account then for all the apparent sin, sickness, lack, evil, etc. in the world? - enter the duality of good and evil. In metaphysics we are taught that God is the All-Good, the entirety of Love, eternal Light, - that God is All there is, the Only Presence and Power Being. However we still in our human perceptions behold the imperfections of mortality, human-ness, and all the toils of human suffering, etc.

I've leaned more towards a universalist cosmology...where ultimately all souls/creation will be restored, perfected in the Perfection of God(this having to take place thru 'time')...for even as we have postulated as a premise...if God is allready ALL there IS, the Totality....then there really doesnt need to be souls or a creation to be 'saved, redeemed, restored' unless we perceive that there has been a fall of some sort from Original Perfection. But here we also must consider Gods Nature and if it is All-good or is God good and evil? Can the All possess dual features? Absolutists claim that there is no duality! - that only God exists. We in our human senses and education though resist this grand idea as we look at the world thru our eyes...and not thru the eyes of the Totality. What many religionists find revolting or cant figure out....is if God is All...they assume that all evil and horrible events, tragedies, atrocities must therefore be 'God' or such cant be so...because God is only Good. So evil comes thru accident(natural disasters) and/or free will liberties of humans influenced by evil/depravity.

Your statement that some persons live out Gods will in darkness - does this mean that the persons have chosen to live in darkness/ignorance/sin....or is it Gods will for these particular ones to live in such a way? Still here it would seem that there is an element of free will at work, unless God is the one somehow fulfilling Himself thru evil(He being the sole function/motivator behind all things)...but one wonders how God who is Good can be delighted in evil? (evil may for a time seem to work towards a higher good it eventually being transmuted into good or to serve the greater One). So we have the mystery of evil.

Some feel that evil will ultimately be conquered and the New Day of Gods Kingdom will reign in supernal glory and His Light will be the all pervading Radiance thru-out all of Existence....He finally being totally realized as being All in all. (again this being worked out thru the perspective of time).

This is a wonderful subject...and I have been exploring it more in a theological, meta-ontological approach. I think some of you here have some great insights and challenges to bring to the fore on the nature of ultimate reality amid all the prevailing theories out there.


paul

[Blair]

This is a wonderful subject...and I have been exploring it more in a theological, meta-ontological approach. I think some of you here have some great insights and challenges to bring to the fore on the nature of ultimate reality amid all the prevailing theories out there.

If you see it as simply a "wonderful subject", to be discussed in an abstract way, you are missing the point, and pretty much wasting your time. It is the all-consuming question, not merely a subject.

Who is the authority on what is ultimate reality?

[Kevin Solway]

How do we account then for all the apparent sin, sickness, lack, evil, etc. in the world? - enter the duality of good and evil.

"Good" is what a person approves of, and "evil" (ie, not-good) is what a person doesn't approve of. And God (the Totality) fully determines what a person approves of.

Right there is the final answer to your question, in full. So you should never need to ask that question again, since you are now beyond it, and can discard it as you would an old pair of shoes you have outgrown.

In metaphysics we are taught that God is the All-Good

God (the Totality) is necessarily beyond good and evil, since there nothing other than itself.

However, consciousness of Truth/God is called such things as "All-Good" by those who value such a consciousness. But a person who does not value Truth might label it "All-Bad". Neither person is ultimately right or wrong, since the label "good" or "bad" is determined by the values which a person holds - and which are determined by God.

I've leaned more towards a universalist cosmology...where ultimately all souls/creation will be restored, perfected in the Perfection of God (this having to take place thru 'time').

From the perspective of God/Totality, there can be no "perfect" or "imperfect", since God is All, by definition. However, from the perspective of someone who values truth, there can be varying degrees of perfection - ie, varying degrees of consciousness of truth.

But if God has decided - which is to say that if God determines - that consciousness of truth in individuals will be eliminated entirely, then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

There is no law that says that consciousness of truth in individuals must increase. Cause and effect will determine the result.

consider Gods Nature and if it is All-good or is God good and evil?

From your statement it is clear that you haven't reached a clear idea of what "God" is, so when you speak of "God" you yourself actually don't know what you mean by the term, and therefore whatever you might say about God must necessarily be meaningless.

If "God" is the label given to designate the Totality, the All - the most powerful "thing" of all, that is everywhere and everywhen, and the necessary creator of all things - then it must necessarily include both good and evil, since it includes everything - by definition.

This question has now been resolved.

Can the All possess dual features?

By definition it must possess everything it is. Whatever appears - good, evil, life, death, etc - are, by definition, part of the All, part of God.

Absolutists claim that there is no duality! - that only God exists.

Only God exists, but duality consists of the parts of God. Just like there may be only one cake, but the cake is cut into a number of pieces. In this way you have both one and many.

In the same way a person has only one body, but his body is composed of many parts.

When you eat bread you really are eating the flesh of God, and when you drink water you really are drinking the blood of God, since they are all parts of his body.

We in our human senses and education though resist this grand idea as we look at the world thru our eyes...and not thru the eyes of the Totality.

Such people live in darkness.

What many religionists find revolting or cant figure out....is if God is All...they assume that all evil and horrible events, tragedies, atrocities must therefore be 'God' or such cant be so...because God is only Good.

Since they live in darkness, they do not know what is "Good". They are groping in the dark, the blind leading the blind, suffering in confusion, unable to see what is right before their eyes.

Your statement that some persons live out Gods will in darkness - does this mean that the persons have chosen to live in darkness/ignorance/sin....or is it Gods will for these particular ones to live in such a way?

When people are living in darkness/ignorance, they do so because they are caused to do so. They are caused to do so by all the causes of Nature, which is to say, by that part of the Totality other than themselves. They are caused by God. If a person chooses to live in darkness . . . and he must have some light to be able to do this . . . then he is caused to do so. And if he hasn't chosen his darkness - which is more normally the case - he has still been caused to live in darkness.

Still here it would seem that there is an element of free will at work, unless God is the one somehow fulfilling Himself thru evil

Since God is the All, by definition, he cannot be fulfilled or less than fulfilled. God himself cannot have free-will, since he is the All.

So we have the mystery of evil.

I have explained "evil" above, so that mystery is dispelled forever.

[freelight]

Who is the authority on what is ultimate reality?

Ultimate Reality Itself.

[freelight]

How do we account then for all the apparent sin, sickness, lack, evil, etc. in the world? - enter the duality of good and evil.

"Good" is what a person approves of, and "evil" (ie, not-good) is what a person doesn't approve of. And God (the Totality) fully determines what a person approves of.

Right there is the final answer to your question, in full. So you should never need to ask that question again, since you are now beyond it, and can discard it as you would an old pair of shoes you have outgrown.

)======== ok kev,.....it appears reasonable enough that we determine for ourselves what is good or evil - by this of course because there are relative perspectives and personal view points...there must always appear to be 'evil' as long as there exists that which is not approvable to one. By saying that 'God' fully determines what a person approves of...are you meaning that it is the law of cause/effect that is determining?

In metaphysics we are taught that God is the All-Good

God (the Totality) is necessarily beyond good and evil, since there nothing other than itself.



However, consciousness of Truth/God is called such things as "All-Good" by those who value such a consciousness. But a person who does not value Truth might label it "All-Bad". Neither person is ultimately right or wrong, since the label "good" or "bad" is determined by the values which a person holds - and which are determined by God.


)========== again can you explain the mechanism of how God is determining these things thru individual choices?

I've leaned more towards a universalist cosmology...where ultimately all souls/creation will be restored, perfected in the Perfection of God (this having to take place thru 'time').

From the perspective of God/Totality, there can be no "perfect" or "imperfect", since God is All, by definition. However, from the perspective of someone who values truth, there can be varying degrees of perfection - ie, varying degrees of consciousness of truth.

But if God has decided - which is to say that if God determines - that consciousness of truth in individuals will be eliminated entirely, then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

There is no law that says that consciousness of truth in individuals must increase. Cause and effect will determine the result.

)======= ok,....so what I'm getting is that within the Totality the law of cause/effect is eternally mediating/determining individual perspectives/choices of good and evil.?



If "God" is the label given to designate the Totality, the All - the most powerful "thing" of all, that is everywhere and everywhen, and the necessary creator of all things - then it must necessarily include both good and evil, since it includes everything - by definition.

This question has now been resolved.

Can the All possess dual features?

By definition it must possess everything it is. Whatever appears - good, evil, life, death, etc - are, by definition, part of the All, part of God.


)========== my sense has always been that within the Absolute exist relativities (many in the One, the One in the many). - many schools still however hold that no evil can exist within God whom they see as all-good. Perhaps their view is predisposed to their own preconceived ideas.

Absolutists claim that there is no duality! - that only God exists.

Only God exists, but duality consists of the parts of God. Just like there may be only one cake, but the cake is cut into a number of pieces. In this way you have both one and many.

In the same way a person has only one body, but his body is composed of many parts.


You betcha.

When you eat bread you really are eating the flesh of God, and when you drink water you really are drinking the blood of God, since they are all parts of his body.

Enter the Eucharist.

What many religionists find revolting or cant figure out....is if God is All...they assume that all evil and horrible events, tragedies, atrocities must therefore be 'God' or such cant be so...because God is only Good.

Since they live in darkness, they do not know what is "Good". They are groping in the dark, the blind leading the blind, suffering in confusion, unable to see what is right before their eyes.


)========= I see that being a realist includes embracing all aspects of reality - all the parts of the One, the Totality.

Your statement that some persons live out Gods will in darkness - does this mean that the persons have chosen to live in darkness/ignorance/sin....or is it Gods will for these particular ones to live in such a way?

When people are living in darkness/ignorance, they do so because they are caused to do so. They are caused to do so by all the causes of Nature, which is to say, by that part of the Totality other than themselves. They are caused by God. If a person chooses to live in darkness . . . and he must have some light to be able to do this . . . then he is caused to do so. And if he hasn't chosen his darkness - which is more normally the case - he has still been caused to live in darkness.

)======= interesting dimensions to explore. We could perhaps say there is a reason why some are in darkness, let alone choose darkness. - this reason being the dynamics of cause/effect. With this in mind....do you see the Church and other various healing ministries/metaphysical schools that employ their life/energy in the healing/restoration/upliftment of mankind as being futile? What about the power of prayer?

Still here it would seem that there is an element of free will at work, unless God is the one somehow fulfilling Himself thru evil

Since God is the All, by definition, he cannot be fulfilled or less than fulfilled. God himself cannot have free-will, since he is the All.

)===== But didnt you say that God could determine or decide something - wouldnt this imply that God has his own free will? As Infinite Intelligence He does whatsoever he chooses to his own delight and will. No?

So we have the mystery of evil.

I have explained "evil" above, so that mystery is dispelled forever.

Thanks kev - will keep researching until it is clear to me. But you probably know that not all will agree with your view. (not that that disqualifies it).




paul

[Blair]

Who is the authority on what is ultimate reality?

Ultimate Reality Itself.

It was a rhetorical question. Pretty blue text does not fool me. Neither does calling ksolway "kev" , what kind of a wimp does that?

[Matt Gregory]

This is a wonderful subject...and I have been exploring it more in a theological, meta-ontological approach. I think some of you here have some great insights and challenges to bring to the fore on the nature of ultimate reality amid all the prevailing theories out there.

If you see it as simply a "wonderful subject", to be discussed in an abstract way, you are missing the point, and pretty much wasting your time. It is the all-consuming question, not merely a subject.

No, I got it Prince. He's a theologian. He's trying to find ideas that appeal to everybody. That's what theologians do.

[freelight]

It was a rhetorical question.


)=====And the answer was not necessarily a 'rhetorical' one but for your meditation.

Pretty blue text does not fool me.

)=====Relax. Not everyone and everything is out there trying to fool you. What IS (Reality) is its own evidence. Truth is its own Authority.




paul

[Kevin Solway]

By saying that 'God' fully determines what a person approves of...are you meaning that it is the law of cause/effect that is determining?

Yes.

God (the Totality) is necessarily beyond good and evil, since there nothing other than itself.

can you explain the mechanism of how God is determining these things thru individual choices?

People are caused to choose one thing over another due to their past life experiences, education, genetic inheritence, and by all past happenings in the Universe.

Saying that "God determines things" is only a figure of speech, since God is everything. God is therefore not a "he" or "she", or an intelligence, etc.

so what I'm getting is that within the Totality the law of cause/effect is eternally mediating/determining individual perspectives/choices of good and evil.?

Yes.

many schools still however hold that no evil can exist within God whom they see as all-good. Perhaps their view is predisposed to their own preconceived ideas.

They think this because they have no idea what God is. If they knew what God was, they would know that good and evil are created by themselves. People create their own demons.

That is the meaning of the story of Adam who fell into the sin of the [false] knowledge of good and evil.

I see that being a realist includes embracing all aspects of reality - all the parts of the One, the Totality.

Yes, all things are connected, and evil doers are literally part of yourself, since your real self is the Totality.

We could perhaps say there is a reason why some are in darkness, let alone choose darkness. - this reason being the dynamics of cause/effect. With this in mind....do you see the Church and other various healing ministries/metaphysical schools that employ their life/energy in the healing/restoration/upliftment of mankind as being futile?

All things are futile, and harmful, apart from truth and understanding.

Such practices as you mention might sometimes work to temporarily relieve the more crude kinds of suffering, but always result in the further diminishment and spiritual death of mankind.

What about the power of prayer?

Any "prayer" that is not fully truth and understanding and a wise directing of will, has the power of evil.

But didnt you say that God could determine or decide something - wouldnt this imply that God has his own free will? As Infinite Intelligence He does whatsoever he chooses to his own delight and will. No?

No. Since "God" is a label for the All, it cannot be an intelligence. For one thing, it would have nothing to be intelligent about, since it is everything.

Saying that "God determines things" only means that all things happen through cause and effect.

[Leyla Shen]

Kevin wrote:

God (the Totality) is necessarily beyond good and evil, since there nothing other than itself.

People create their own demons.

Yes, all things are connected, and evil doers are literally part of yourself, since your real self is the Totality.

Saying that "God determines things" only means that all things happen through cause and effect.

Exactly.

[Jason]

People are caused to choose one thing over another due to their past life experiences, education, genetic inheritence, and by all past happenings in the Universe.

What if the past is an illusion or a hallucination? How can we know that the past effects the present in the normal way it is supposed i.e. how can we ever prove the link between past causes and the present effects which they supposedly lead to?

If all we can know for certain is that X was caused by the rest of existence(ie. non-X), wouldn't it be more accurate to leave out other finite causes(such as genetics, education, past etc in your above example). Using finite past causes to explain the existence of present finite effects is science.

[Kevin Solway]

People are caused to choose one thing over another due to their past life experiences, education, genetic inheritence, and by all past happenings in the Universe.

What if the past is an illusion or a hallucination? How can we know that the past effects the present in the normal way it is supposed i.e. how can we ever prove the link between past causes and the present effects which they supposedly lead to?

If we define the "past" as that which causes the present, that would solve the problem. Similarly, the "future" could be defined as that imagined existence that is caused by the present (and past).

Those definitions seem reasonable to me.

If all we can know for certain is that X was caused by the rest of existence(ie. non-X), wouldn't it be more accurate to leave out other finite causes(such as genetics, education, past etc in your above example). Using finite past causes to explain the existence of present finite effects is science.

True. I could have simplified the statement by saying that a person chooses one thing over another because of all the things which cause him to do so - regardless of what they might be.

Education would only be a definite cause of our choices if education were defined to be something which influences our decision making. Likewise with genetics.

[Jason]

People are caused to choose one thing over another due to their past life experiences, education, genetic inheritence, and by all past happenings in the Universe.

What if the past is an illusion or a hallucination? How can we know that the past effects the present in the normal way it is supposed i.e. how can we ever prove the link between past causes and the present effects which they supposedly lead to?

If we define the "past" as that which causes the present, that would solve the problem. Similarly, the "future" could be defined as that imagined existence that is caused by the present (and past).

Those definitions seem reasonable to me.

If all we can know for certain is that X was caused by the rest of existence(ie. non-X), wouldn't it be more accurate to leave out other finite causes(such as genetics, education, past etc in your above example). Using finite past causes to explain the existence of present finite effects is science.

True. I could have simplified the statement by saying that a person chooses one thing over another because of all the things which cause him to do so - regardless of what they might be.

Education would only be a definite cause of our choices if education were defined to be something which influences our decision making. Likewise with genetics.

I don't get this. Isn't the cause of existence of any finite thing everything else but it? X is caused to exist because of non-X? When you say we can just define what causes something, that is the equivalent of saying X is caused by Y, or Z too if you want. In practice it could lead to something like "Peoples choices are caused by that fishbowl in the corner, and the second step of the Great Pyramid of Giza if you like, and also the fifth moon of Jupiter."

According to you, are there a finite number of finite things in your reality? Or an infinite number of finite things in your reality? When you are not conceiving or perceiving of a thing(ie it presents no appearance to you in any way) does that thing effectively cease to exist in your reality?

[freelight]

But didnt you say that God could determine or decide something - wouldnt this imply that God has his own free will? As Infinite Intelligence He does whatsoever he chooses to his own delight and will. No?

No. Since "God" is a label for the All, it cannot be an intelligence. For one thing, it would have nothing to be intelligent about, since it is everything.

As you may note I described God as Infinite Intelligence and not necessarily just 'an' intelligence among other intelligences. (as I alluded to on another post that God is not just 'a' spirit but God is Spirit). I have recently seen 'God' as Mind(as one of my teachers uses the term). - this includes the totality of Consciousness/Awareness - logically if God is MIND...then Mind is wholly/fully cognizant of its own Existence being the original, infinite Intelligence in which all things/beings are ever arising within,...since God is All that IS. This 'I AM' Presence is a dynamic Awareness. God as ALL must know His own Being and therefore is intelligent. This 'I' that I AM as an individuation of 'God' is mindful of my own existence - I call this cognitive ability or perception 'intelligence'. This is my present view.

Do you deny that God is fully cognizant/aware of His own Reality of Being - this including all that is within His Infinite Consciousness? I am curious as to your reasoning on how the All cannot be intelligent or how God cannot be referred to as being Intelligence. Is intelligence only a property of matter-ial existence and finite beings in a relative world...yet not a property or innate component within the Being of God, or the All? I hold to my view but would like to see the supporting logics for yours.

Saying that "God determines things" only means that all things happen through cause and effect.

In the relative realm, yes. I have heard however that there is a realm in the Absolute that is beyond any cause/effect dynamic - it is a realm of pure Existence or Being. I suppose one could assume that the primal state of the Absolute is causeless/effectless until it branches out and generates/creates/produces activity/dynamics that bring into being relativity - only in the interactions of relative dimensions/actions/motions does cause/effect fluxations transpire. Just a thought, because one teacher mentions that there is a realm - perhaps a pure ontological realm of God/Being that is prior/above/beyond any relative law of cause/effect. However it appears that as long as we live in this finite, relative dimension of things...the law of cause/effect is perpetual.



paul

[zarathustra]

freelight, this bunk has nothing to do with the discipline of philosophy...it is theological gargar...'I have heard there is a realm in the realm of the absolute beyond cause and effect it is called pure existence '- ha! ha! ha! bullshit beyond bullshit! a double serve of nothing

[freelight]

freelight, this bunk has nothing to do with the discipline of philosophy...it is theological gargar...'I have heard there is a realm in the realm of the absolute beyond cause and effect it is called pure existence '- ha! ha! ha! bullshit beyond bullshit! a double serve of nothing

Z, your generally pessimistic interjection has been noted,...but I await kevins reply. You may not find my meta-ontological observations/speculations substancial but you are entitled to your viewpoint. I recommend a good dose of theosophy for your intellectual ills. lol.


paul

[Kevin Solway]

Isn't the cause of existence of any finite thing everything else but it?

Yes. From a logical point of view the present is caused by the future, if we give the two a definitional relationship, which makes them interdependent - the present existing in relation to the future. But the future does not cause the present in time - it does so purely logically, outside of time.

But from a time-definitional point of view, the present is caused by the past, which is a causal relationship in time.

But we can now ask, "How do we know the past really existed, since all we can know for sure is the present moment? Is not the past only an empirical uncertainty - a theory suggested by mere empirical, fallible, observations? How, indeed, can we know with certainty, beyond the uncertainties of science, that time exists?"

We can know with certainty that time exists, purely logically, when new things arise that didn't exist before. For example, the very distinction between "past - present - future" doesn't exist until the distinction is made in one's mind. Now something must have caused the making of the distinction - the making of the present - and so we call it the past. The new occurence wasn't caused outside of time, in the manner that the future caused the present (above), but rather it was caused in what we call "time", which is a logical necessity, rather than an empirical supposition.

We can then ask: "How do we know for sure that something is a new occurance? How do I know that a particular distinction, for example, hasn't always been made? Since if we can't be certain there are new occurances, it follows that we can't be certain there is time."

And the answer is that we can know through memory.

I remember "B" but now there is "A" - a new occurance. Therefore, purely logically, there is time.

But can't memory be faulty? Yes, it is faulty when it is faulty, and it is not faulty when it isn't. Someone with a faulty memory cannot reliably affirm the existence of time. That is the situation with insanity. But a perfectly sane person (ie, enlightened), has a correct memory, and can distinguish one moment from the next through memory (which enables them to realize that A=A), and so is able to logically affirm time.

That's a long-winded explanation, but fairly exhaustive.

According to you, are there a finite number of finite things in your reality? Or an infinite number of finite things in your reality?

There are as many things as you decide to divide reality up into. There is only one thing, two things, or countless things, depending on how you slice it up.

When you are not conceiving or perceiving a thing(ie it presents no appearance to you in any way) does it effectively cease to exist as a thing in your reality?

Yes, it effectively ceases to exist. But it may continue to exist if you conceive of categories such as "things I am not currently conceiving of" or "things which might continue to exist even though I'm not thinking of them".

[Kevin Solway]

As you may note I described God as Infinite Intelligence and not necessarily just 'an' intelligence among other intelligences.

Yes, you could call the All an "Intelligence", but I don't personally see the point in it, since it cannot make choices and decisions. It is the slave of its fate, just as we are. It can only ever be what it is.

The nearest God ever comes to what we normally call "intelligence" is through us. We are ourselves the intelligence of God, and it can achieve no more through this intelligence than we can.

This is the reason why Jesus was powerless to do very much, despite having his consciousness supposedly highly aligned with God.

God as ALL must know His own Being and therefore is intelligent.

God (the All) can only know his own being through us (ie, conscious beings).

Do you deny that God is fully cognizant/aware of His own Reality of Being

This can only be done through an aware consciousness, such as through enlightened beings, like, perhaps, Jesus, and the Buddha. Only such beings can truly say "I AM", and properly identify with the All.

Is intelligence only a property of material existence and finite beings in a relative world.

Firstly, there is no Infiinite apart from finite things. Finite, material things are the body of the Infinite. That's why your body is supposed to be your temple. The physical body is in reality a manifestation of spirit, and appears in that spiritual form to all those who have eyes to see.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna speaks to Krishna, and as he learns the ways of God, Krishna appears to him in ever more fantastic and otherworldly forms, with thousands of arms, etc. But as Arjuna's mind reached greater understanding and wisdom, Krishna finally appears to Arjuna as a normal physical person (though this is now perceived by Arjuna as a pure spiritual form).

The story covers the same issue.

..yet not a property or innate component within the Being of God, or the All? I hold to my view but would like to see the supporting logics for yours.

The division between the material and the spiritual is a false one.

If conscousnesses evolve that are able to perceive Truth, then they do, and if they don't, they don't. It all depends on what cause and effect dictates. It is up to Nature whether such consciousnesses evolve. That is what "God Willing" means - "Inshallah".

Saying that "God determines things" only means that all things happen through cause and effect.

In the relative realm, yes.

There is no Infinite realm apart from the relative realm. The relative realm is the body of the Infinite realm. Causality, which is of the relative realm, is the body of the Infinite realm. It is the workings of that body.

I have heard however that there is a realm in the Absolute that is beyond any cause/effect dynamic - it is a realm of pure Existence or Being

The Totality itself (God) does not change, so it is beyond any dynamic. It is the only thing beyond such dynamics.

... it appears that as long as we live in this finite, relative dimension of things...the law of cause/effect is perpetual.

So long as you cannot mentally step outside the normal perceived relative dimension - which is an illusion - and see it as from afar, and see what it really is, you will be tossed too and fro on the rollercoaster of standard human misery.

[sevens]

Kevin,

What are your thoughts on shamans? Using the Cosmos, Totality if you like, as a dynamic reflection, of your own, dynamic mind? - which, enables 'Dreaming' (heightened perceptual states) - Creating and constructing, the Life that you desire?

Scientifically, understanding what constitutes 'Faith'.

(Jesus, wanted to die)

'God'

is Unity -

Perception.

[Kevin Solway]

What are your thoughts on shamans? Using the Cosmos, Totality if you like, as a dynamic reflection, of your own, dynamic mind? - which, enables 'Dreaming' (heightened perceptual states) - Creating and constructing, the Life that you desire?

There are wise desires and unwise desires. Awareness of the larger picture (The Cosmos, Nature, etc) can be tapped to help achieve both of these. Drugs can help with such tapping, but drugs are more commonly used in the context of unwise desires, since wise people can achieve insight without drugs.

Scientifically, understanding what constitutes 'Faith'.

The Truth, once understood, is hard to believe. Brutal cause and effect as the law of the Universe, though very plain and simple, is hard to accept. So one requries faith. This is not anything like the blind faith of common religious followers, who have to believe things they do not know. Rather, it is a believing something you know to be true.

For example, one is justified in having faith that A=A. One need not doubt that A might not be A.

Jesus, wanted to die

Possibly. If he wanted to die because of how much he suffered, then he was not perfect in his faith and understanding.

[Jamesh]

David: Consciousness is necessary for the existence of things, but the Totality itself is non-dual in nature and cannot be described in terms of either consciousness or non-consciousness. It doesn't have any form at all.

Kevin: There are as many things as you decide to divide reality up into. There is only one thing, two things, or countless things, depending on how you slice it up.

I have always disagreed with the statement that the Totality does not have form. As far as I am concerned a set form is required in order for the universe to be infinite. By form I mean a process must occur that provides for continual creation and destruction. I also think we can understand this process at least in an abstract sense, and to have any understanding at all requires that we utilise forms in our thinking processes.

On the other hand I fully accept the comment from Kevin, which states that a particular form is anything we are caused to think of it as being, usually because it has some form of usefulness to us.

===============================================

I'd like to know what Kevin thinks about the striving of things to be infinite. What is the underlying cause that applies to all life forms that causes them to attempt to separate themselves from the universe (actually it applies to all things not just life). All things desire to encompass the universe within themselves.

Is this the godly spirit most people assume exists? That rather than becoming one with the totality, spirit rears its ugly head when we think of our relationship to all other things.

===============================================
Z…'I have heard there is a realm in the realm of the absolute beyond cause and effect it is called pure existence '- ha! ha! ha! bullshit beyond bullshit! a double serve of nothing

That might be so, but I believe in it. It is that portion of the universe that is presently without form.
Just lately I have been coming to the conclusion that Things are the opposite of what we think they are. I think the massier an object is the emptier it is of existence and that space is practically full of existence. I regard time as being this existence and that nothingness is areas of zero-time. I regard time as a accumulative creative force - one that does not require something first to be destroyed in order for it to create more of itself.

Why? Well as far as I am concerned things are constructed from the base level up of balanced combinations of existence and nothingness. Nothing can exist without these balances, that is all they are. All forms are various combinations of nothingness and existence. I think that nothingness somehow comes from rents in the spatial fabric of existence or time, and that gravity comes from this vacuum. Gravity is the universes impossible attempt to repair itself, by collecting nothingness together and placing it outside of the existing universe (but still within the realms of the totality.

Look, these are just a few ideas. I don’t grok what I'm on about fully as yet. One thing I do believe though is that light, radiation etc would not be able to travel through space if space was nothingness, and if one thinks of gravity as a force then the universe is clearly completely full.

[Kevin Solway]

David: Consciousness is necessary for the existence of things, but the Totality itself is non-dual in nature and cannot be described in terms of either consciousness or non-consciousness. It doesn't have any form at all.

Kevin: There are as many things as you decide to divide reality up into. There is only one thing, two things, or countless things, depending on how you slice it up.

I have always disagreed with the statement that the Totality does not have form. As far as I am concerned a set form is required in order for the universe to be infinite. By form I mean a process must occur that provides for continual creation and destruction.

Any process of creation and destruction must, by definition, be part of the Totality, so cannot apply to the Totality itself.

I also think we can understand this process at least in an abstract sense, and to have any understanding at all requires that we utilise forms in our thinking processes.

It's impossible to imagine a form for the Totality, other than to know that any particular form is not it. So we are least getting some idea of it, by contrasting it with what it is not.

I'd like to know what Kevin thinks about the striving of things to be infinite.

Conscious beings don't like to suffer, and so strive to alleviate their suffering. Of the many ways to alleviate suffering, the only truly effective and permanent way to alleviate suffering is through consciousness truth. In this way the knowledge of the Infinite has a gravitational effect on conscious beings.

What is the underlying cause that applies to all life forms that causes them to attempt to separate themselves from the universe (actually it applies to all things not just life). All things desire to encompass the universe within themselves.

I am not sure what you are saying here. Not all things experience desire, let alone the desire to encompass the universe within themselves. A brick does not desire to encompass the universe, so far as I can tell.

Human beings lack consciousness of the infinite because we have evolved to be in this state. For example, those with the most selfish (deluded) desire will desire the most children, or the most material wealth and property, or physical beauty, and will be deemed the most attractive sexual partners. They will breed more, and their traits will come to dominate the human gene pool.

[freelight]

Kevins comments in quotes below -


Paul wrote:

As you may note I described God as Infinite Intelligence and not necessarily just 'an' intelligence among other intelligences.

Yes, you could call the All an "Intelligence", but I don't personally see the point in it, since it cannot make choices and decisions. It is the slave of its fate, just as we are. It can only ever be what it is.

I see how this could be seeing the All as some kind of collective totality - the All comprising the collective consciousness/intelligence of all beings. However the school I am familiar with holds 'God' as the Original, Supreme and Only MIND in which all things/being are having their existence and the only Mind that is the 'I AM Awareness' within each and every individual within the All. Therefore,....the I AM Intelligence is an active living Awareness and can do, conceive, perceive and function fully as Intelligence in the most omni-versal and all-inclusive Way as such a Mind includes All...and is All. I am not sure if 'God' is a slave of Its own fate, but that divine Will ultimately shall prevail as Mind and its will is supreme and maintains Ultimacy....even amidst the apparent opposing forces or anomolies of cause/effect that seem to thwart divine Will. I do take this into a universalist purview theologically as universalism holds that all within 'God' must ultimately surrender/submit to divine Will because divine Love is All-powerful and ultimately irresistable. Asides from my theological leanings...I am willing to continue exploring your view for its own sake or how it fits into your cosmology.

The nearest God ever comes to what we normally call "intelligence" is through us. We are ourselves the intelligence of God, and it can achieve no more through this intelligence than we can.

A wonderful view to which I concur at a certain level - in the finite, relative realm....consciousness at this level appears to be a phenomena related to our existence in time/space(matter-iality) - although we can assume Consciousness before and beyond any incarnational existence. But for now....we experience things with-in consciousness related to our finite existence in this realm - this intelligence is and must be of God for there is no other Consciousness or Mind existing, God being the Sole One. In this sense we are an individuation of 'God' or 'Mind' and represent the Intelligence of the All/One as the ' I ' of the I AM - this seat of Being being our center of intelligent Self-Awareness. In this sense we are 'God' or 'Mind' expressing/experiencing thru the individuality of consciousness. Concerning the last end of your statement above......it would seem that God can only achieve or know the maximum of Intelligence that exists within our own Self-consciousness....because in truth there is only One Intelligence or Self that I AM. - this Mind is the Mind of the All, being All. So.... if we are the Intelligence of God, being God knowing, recognizing Its own Consciousness thru our individual awareness....then it is still Only the One being, knowing, conceiving, perceiving as the One Mind thru-out the Totality of Existence. Indeed, Universal and divine Intelligence centered, functioning and realized in the I AM that I AM is the only intelligence being and is therefore the summation of its own depth/capability of knowing.



Paul wrote:

God as ALL must know His own Being and therefore is intelligent.

God (the All) can only know his own being through us (ie, conscious beings).

Uh huh,..........because Gods Self-knowing and Intelligence is in the I AM Center of our own individual awareness. In this purivew....God as the Sole Mind Existing is the Original and Infinite Consciousness existing and knowing all that is knowable.


Paul wrote:

Do you deny that God is fully cognizant/aware of His own Reality of Being

This can only be done through an aware consciousness, such as through enlightened beings, like, perhaps, Jesus, and the Buddha. Only such beings can truly say "I AM", and properly identify with the All.

Yes, they achieved a heightened God-Realization with-in their connection or Unity with-in the I AM Identity. We too can achieve or attain such a realization if we abide and awaken to the Truth of the Absolute in our own individual consciousness.


Paul wrote:

Is intelligence only a property of material existence and finite beings in a relative world.

Firstly, there is no Infiinite apart from finite things. Finite, material things are the body of the Infinite. That's why your body is supposed to be your temple. The physical body is in reality a manifestation of spirit, and appears in that spiritual form to all those who have eyes to see.

Ah,......so it appears that the Infinite includes within its Totality a myriad of finite things, expressions, matter-ial forms, things/beings, universes, etc.
I can accept this idea that an indefinite variety of relativities exist within the Infinity of the Absolute.

The division between the material and the spiritual is a false one.

If conscousnesses evolve that are able to perceive Truth, then they do, and if they don't, they don't. It all depends on what cause and effect dictates. It is up to Nature whether such consciousnesses evolve. That is what "God Willing" means - "Inshallah".

Yes, I also realize that all must be made out of the same substance of and within Universal Mind. Your understanding of cause/effect is interesting as the law of Nature/God prevails thru-out, yet this seems to include in your View that some individuals may not evolve to God-realization/salvation or a perfect perception of Truth - the imperfections of those whose views are imperfect/dark/distorted appear to be temporary, unless you feel that Nature/God thru the law of cause/effect may finally bring to some individuals the fate of spiritual extinction, anihilation, termination, oblivion, or hell....this perhaps being a state that is non-redeemable or irreversible (I dont know your view here, and I am interjecting some common traditional religious perspective...as fate/destiny is assigned to souls in their spiritual journey - perhaps a new thread about souls fates/destinies relative to God and natural/spiritual law can be explored). I have held to a universalist View that Gods Love/Will will ultimately prevail because its His will that all be saved/delivered/restored...brought back into perfect Unity/Marriage with the ONE, the ALL....assuming that somehow souls have somehow fallen from the Original Order as is taught in traditional theology. Again, these things can be worked thru, discarding unnecessary doctrines for Truth if need be.

There is no Infinite realm apart from the relative realm. The relative realm is the body of the Infinite realm. Causality, which is of the relative realm, is the body of the Infinite realm. It is the workings of that body.

Are you familiar with Geoff Haselhursts theory of WSM (wave structure of matter)? He likens 'God' to Infinite Space and sees that all finite existence in the matter-ial worlds are the various and eternal expression of waves in motion(waves of space/matter) - the Sole Absolute is Infinite Space...while the finite universes within the Absolute are the relative motion-fluxations of space/matter. - He holds to a more pantheistic view of the Cosmos due to his understanding of metapysics relative to WSM. - can share link if interested. We've dialogued on his discussion forum yet he thinks I go beyond in my 'God' speculations as he is more grounded in science and empirical evidences.



Paul wrote:

I have heard however that there is a realm in the Absolute that is beyond any cause/effect dynamic - it is a realm of pure Existence or Being

The Totality itself (God) does not change, so it is beyond any dynamic. It is the only thing beyond such dynamics.

Yes, this was always interesting as we are taught even in scripture that the 'Lord' does not change. - the same yesterday, today and forever. So as posited above.....there is only change within the finite realms within the Infinite...- in the relative realm because such is its nature. - this is probably where cause/effect comes into being. But in the Absolute All or Totality....such is Causeless and effectless, being beyond any dynamic....all dynamics taking place only within the Relative.


Paul wrote:

... it appears that as long as we live in this finite, relative dimension of things...the law of cause/effect is perpetual.

So long as you cannot mentally step outside the normal perceived relative dimension - which is an illusion - and see it as from afar, and see what it really is, you will be tossed too and fro on the rollercoaster of standard human misery.

Wow, this is a great dialogue - In this I assume you are saying that while we live in this finite, relative dimension.....we can be afforded an enlightened View grounded in the Truth of the Absolute that will give us a transcendent Wisdom and strength that an otherwise unelightened mind could not enjoy.

Thanks for engaging me in this discourse...I sense more to learn here assuming we are both students and teachers.



paul