GENIUS FORUMS

Pam, it's clear that you have discovered something special and that you are very passionate about it, which is great. And it's possible that the Unconditioned reality that you point to is the very same one that I point to. But it's hard to say because the language you use is very tightly bound to a specialized Christian metaphysical script.

It would really help me, and quite possibly yourself, if you could start finding other ways to talk about it, using a more natural form of expression. That would make it easier for me, and for others here, to see into the heart of your writing. And who knows, it might even help you become even more free in Unconditioned reality.

At the moment, you give the impression, perhaps unintentionally, of clinging to the specialized metaphysical script as though it were a life-raft in a stormy sea.....

David, in a nutshell:

The conditioned human mind of sense stands as if outside its source, the unconditioned Mind of All Things.

The conditioned human mind of sense seeks to understand its source, the unconditioned Mind of All Things.

In seeking to understand its source, the unconditioned Mind of All Things, the conditioned human mind studies its source using the same thought patterns it uses to remain bound to its conditioning, that of its belief that it is impossible to bridge the imagined gap between its conditioned beliefs and its unconditioned Reality. This thought pattern is the pattern of the subject/object split, which is always of a subjective-objective bias or preference, which leads always to conditioning, which can never understand the unconditioned Mind of its source. The viscous cycle of hitting that brick wall of belief in separation. That which is conditioned to human thinking, cannot realize that which is not. Simple logic.

So the question for the seeker of its source that has been trying to penetrate the veil between the two worlds of himself is: by what pattern of thought is this transformation made possible? By my understanding, logic can take you to the veil as a pointer to the nature of the unconditioned reality, but because logic is limited to the intellect of comparative analysis, it cannot act as a 'living bridge' of idea that will successfully support you and walk with you as you step beyond your conditioned mind and into your unconditioned Mind.

The living bridge of words that takes one beyond the logical intellect and that successfully lifts or pierces the veil between the two thought worlds of oneself, is that of Myth and of Metaphor. Why is Myth and Metaphor the Way to lift or pierce the veil of the intellect of logic and of reason? Because, the truth is, is that whether one is conscious of it or not, they are always living the myth and metaphor(s) of themselves. The logical mind usually rails at this statement, for it is of the belief that words can express absolutism, but when pressed to do so, of course, it cannot. Being that the logical mind is based on the subject/object split, no word is ever an absolute concept.

Accepting that the concept of self or conditioned mind is The Myth that is the granddaddy of every myth, sage and woman included [neither 'sage' or 'woman' are absolute 'things' so why beat a dead horse?] is the first step in making that break through from logic and reason into being the living expression of the walk into the Infinity of Oneself. What the walk of Myth and of Metaphor offers to the seeker of himself is the Way to fully embrace every aspect of self of which he has become attached, and then be liberated from this attachment. Living the way of myth and of metaphor is to be liberated from one's humanism of feeding off dead thoughts that have attached themselves to the walls of one's soul. Living the way of myth and of metaphor gives one a living platform of 'transparency' on which to stand while they are becoming unconditioned of their conditioning.

I use biblical references because Jesus was, of my experience of studying the ways of many masters, THE master of Myth and Metaphor. He did not originate the use of myth and of metaphor, as I pointed out in a previous post, but no one before him used myth and metaphor in quite the same genius as he did. Every word that came out of his mouth was his brilliance of knowing the truth that the conditioned mind was an emanation or expression of the unconditioned Mind, and being such, man's belief in dualism could be eliminated of the wisdom of this realization. Obviously, one is not restricted to the myths and metaphors used by Jesus, Gautama used his version according to his culture and learning, but for me, being raised of the collective western mind, they are a perfect match.

How to realize the wisdom of the living myth and metaphor of oneself? By bringing this wisdom to life!

I come to speak of the Genius of realizing you are a myth and a metaphor of Life, and the genius of walking this walk.

Whew! Any clearer? : )

pretty good, Pam, thanks.

Accepting that the concept of self or conditioned mind is The Myth that is the granddaddy of every myth, sage and woman included [neither 'sage' or 'woman' are absolute 'things' so why beat a dead horse?] is the first step in making that break through from logic and reason into being the living expression of the walk into the Infinity of Oneself.

From my understanding QRS haven't sponsored the belief that 'sage' and 'woman' are absolute things, rather that they arise as possibilities in the intricate web of causation. (why beat a dead horse).
The label 'woman' referring to a thought pattern trapped 'in the world'. (myth}
The label 'Sage' referring to : living expression of the walk into the Infinity of Oneself.

A = A gives rise to the possibility of it being knowable.
A thought is a projection. In the same way a movie projector projects an image onto a blank screen.
A thought is an object that hangs there in infinite spaciousness as an object. it is only in and of itself, has identity.
prince says:

Laird asks How do you define non-duality? = Laird asks How do you define non-duality? Laird asks How do you describe non-duality in detail? = Laird asks How do you describe non-duality in detail? Laird asks How do you argue for non-duality? = Laird asks How do you argue for non-duality?

A=A

An ego can appropriate this object to itself in order to give itself substance and validity in order to feel secure. An ego 'gives' the object meaning and holds forth from the image as a fixed way of being, as a weapon, as armour, gets to feel its an important player in some kind of tournament.
the possibility of Sage gets the identity of the object as an object projected into infinite spaciousness, its hanging there, gets the mirage of it, gets the damage attachment to it wreaks.

Gets access to Shakespeares pointers:
'A life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, that signifies nothing'.
'All the worlds a stage and we are players upon it'

The object appears as a thing of fascination that sucks the ego in like a hoover.

Why give it meaning?

It's empty and meaningless.

When this pattern me grokked that as 'what's so' this body quaked and trembled, this mind filled of astonishment, of admiration.

movingalways wrote:Diebert, you mentioned dukkha in your response to me as follows:

The nature of thought is full of gender, creed, colors and shapes - its content by its very definition not whole or perfect of pure. Truth lies actually there, the moment this is understood without rejecting thought for all its bias, its crookedness, its essential dukkha and general pain which lies at the very base of it, the basement where all the groundwork is laid.

The attainment of nirvana, which means "extinguishing", is the cessation of dukkha or suffering.

Cessation of suffering doesn't turn thought into something non-dualistic or "beyond the mind".

It seems important to stress this: one cannot purify ones own expression from relativity in the same way one cannot speak of an unconditioned mind or Mind. What you call "Myth and Metaphor" is to me not the tool specifically of wisdom: it's more the structure of language and human conceptualizing and experiencing. Perhaps a sage is more conscious of the myths and metaphors he's employing but he's not using them much different than anyone else who is already participating in them.

by what pattern of thought is this transformation made possible?

Causality is not a pattern of thought. But it makes that what's possible, possible.

step beyond your conditioned mind and into your unconditioned Mind

Only two things provide stepping into the unconditioned: death and unconsciousness (as one stops realizing how conditioned one is). Which one did you select?

Diebert: Only two things provide stepping into the unconditioned: death and unconsciousness (as one stops realizing how conditioned one is). Which one did you select?

I am assuming your interpretation of death is that of the physical withdrawal of one's breath from one's body. Correct me if I am off the mark. Death, for me, is a metaphor for the end of one way of thinking and the bringing to life of another way of thinking: the infinite unfolding of the thought continuum of I Am.

The steps of transformation of consciousness according to my understanding of thought to be an individual continuum of the law of the Spirit of life [the one infinite 'parent' consciousness], which means that it is the individual's responsibility to walk this walk of their own conscious awakening:

1. Being conditioned to the presenting realm of law, principles and patterns.
2. Of awakening to one's having been conditioned.
3. Of seeking the cause of one's having been conditioned.
4. Of discovering a vision of the unconditioned cause of having been conditioned.
5. Of stepping into this vision of the unconditioned cause so to be purged/purified of one's conditioning.
6. Of being obedient [self disciplined] to this activity of being purged/purified of one's conditioning.

Most individuals get as far as step #3, which leaves them to interpret cause from the 'ceiling' or 'veil' of the presenting realm of THIS law, principles and patterns, which in this realm, is that of sense interpretation/conditioning. Believing there is no way to pierce this veil between their conditioned consciousness and their unconditioned consciousness, they are left interpreting their unconditioned consciousness from the perspective of their conditioned consciousness.

Why Jesus was such a genius of consciousness, is that he showed the way of taking individual responsibility of being unconditioned of one's conditioned pattern of thought. Of the way to go beyond step #3 to be made able to step into #4, #5 and #6.

“Be still and know I am God.” “Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door shall be opened.” “And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.”

Note: Jesus never once referred to himself as being of any religious group, or of being religious at all. It is my interpretation, that Jesus came as a messenger of transcendence, and of this message, used the language of myth and of metaphor of Self [Father, Son, etc.] to express the transcendent realms of Infinite [Self].

Pam:Accepting that the concept of self or conditioned mind is The Myth that is the granddaddy of every myth, sage and woman included [neither 'sage' or 'woman' are absolute 'things' so why beat a dead horse?] is the first step in making that break through from logic and reason into being the living expression of the walk into the Infinity of Oneself.

Dennis: From my understanding QRS haven't sponsored the belief that 'sage' and 'woman' are absolute things, rather that they arise as possibilities in the intricate web of causation. (why beat a dead horse).

The intricate web of causation that bring about concepts such as 'sage' and 'woman' is the cause-and-effect realm of belief in dualism. It is true that there are infinite possibilities that one can manifest manipulating the dualities, but bottom line is, that all of possibilities remain within the realm of matter. Ahh, the assumption that man makes that the realm of matter is the only realm or emanation of its Source, Pure Consciousness, or Original Creation.

The label 'woman' referring to a thought pattern trapped 'in the world'. (myth}
The label 'Sage' referring to : living expression of the walk into the Infinity of Oneself.

A = A gives rise to the possibility of it being knowable.
Only in the subjective-objective realm of sense appearance.

A thought is a projection. In the same way a movie projector projects an image onto a blank screen.
A thought is an object that hangs there in infinite spaciousness as an object. it is only in and of itself, has identity.

In the human conscious, yes, thought is a projection, but in and of itself, it has no identity until man applies his subjective interpretation, based always within the realm of time and of space, of remembered experiences. A tree is only a tree because of the appearance of language. Before the appearance of man's language, the form that is “tree” was nameless. Man makes the arrogant assumption that life begins with his naming of things. Before Abraham was, I Am. Before there were names, I Am That.

prince says:
Laird asks How do you define non-duality? = Laird asks How do you define non-duality? Laird asks How do you describe non-duality in detail? = Laird asks How do you describe non-duality in detail? Laird asks How do you argue for non-duality? = Laird asks How do you argue for non-duality?

A=A

A = A defines the object, but again, only within human consciousness, which again, makes the error of assumption that it brings the A to life by its definition of A.

An ego can appropriate this object to itself in order to give itself substance and validity in order to feel secure. An ego 'gives' the object meaning and holds forth from the image as a fixed way of being, as a weapon, as armour, gets to feel its an important player in some kind of tournament.

The ego represents the ignorance of man that creation of form has nothing to do with human consciousness that creates not form, but merely names it and manipulates it. Can you create a tree that is the conscious living thing of tree beyond your imaging of tree, naming it and giving it meaning?

the possibility of Sage gets the identity of the object as an object projected into infinite spaciousness, its hanging there, gets the mirage of it, gets the damage attachment to it wreaks.

Once the projected, imagined object has been named, attachment has happened. Why do I say that? The moment the ego names an object, it has contracted its field of awareness upon that object, and once contraction of awareness has occurred, the mind has entered the field of tension that is belief in dualism.

Gets access to Shakespeares pointers:
'A life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, that signifies nothing'.
'All the worlds a stage and we are players upon it'

The object appears as a thing of fascination that sucks the ego in like a hoover.

Why give it meaning?

It's empty and meaningless.

When this pattern me grokked that as 'what's so' this body quaked and trembled, this mind filled of astonishment, of admiration.

What you describe here what I describe as coming face to face with the realization that any meaning I give my subjective-objective projections is a transient one, here in one moment, gone in the next. That there really is no substance or essence [meaning] in the object-projection itself, that the substance and essence is of the Thinker Him/Itself, meaning unknown. For me, using an adjective or adverb is an application of meaning. "Stupid" "intelligent" "quickly" "slowly" - all words of human meaning, derived of human sense attachment. How can one claim to be in a conscious state of meaningless and then, wrap their duality attachments around form?

All my life I believed I was limited to this one realm of interpretation of form projection that is my belief in dualism. Until I encountered the wisdom of Tibetan Buddhism, which opened me to the wisdom of the bible. Not the Christian bible, but the bible of human consciousness and beyond.........

movingalways wrote:5. Of stepping into this vision of the unconditioned cause so to be purged/purified of one's conditioning.
6. Of being obedient [self disciplined] to this activity of being purged/purified of one's conditioning.

Any cause would count as condition, as limitation. Only what we know as totality could be regarded as unlimited and unconditional without creating a giant knot in our mind called ignorance.

a vision of the unconditioned cause of having been conditioned.

There's no use escaping causality, just as there's no use escaping the body, its aging, and all the possible mistakes in our perceiving and communication. You are not going anywhere, just in hazy dreams.

What about #7: surrendering limited and limiting notions like "Spirit of life" or "parent consciousness", not because they couldn't "exist" but because they'd merely "exist" in some fashion.

Hi Pam,
You're identifying 'woman' and 'sage' identically.

You're saying, in effect, they both exist in the same way, in a Zoo where the diet is 3 meals a day of statutory Suffering.


That only identifies the pattern named 'woman'.

The sage pattern is detached from the zoo.
A pattern that is empty of 'need for meaning' in order to feel secure.

Diebert:

There's no use escaping causality, just as there's no use escaping the body, its aging, and all the possible mistakes in our perceiving and communication. You are not going anywhere, just in hazy dreams.

I'm lined up in that.
How can you do 'Stop the World, I want to get off!' except as a flight of fancy.
The sage pattern groks 'what's so' of the world.
You Pam have grokked it, that's clear.
In 'grokking' it there's a pointing to infinity.
Are you going too far?

movingalways wrote:"Stupid" "intelligent" "quickly" "slowly" - all words of human meaning, derived of human sense attachment. How can one claim to be in a conscious state of meaningless and then, wrap their duality attachments around form?

What about terms like "snakes", "brood of vipers", "sons of hell", "hypocrites", "blind guides", etc? Was Jesus attached to form when he used these terms?

-

movingalways,
Your words are the seeds planted for this generations moment of awareness. It is for those who have reached for the stars and found within their generation of living now, to be the food and water which the intellect denies is the light of liberation which guides them from and through the thoughts of life and death.

And to those of the morrow who are awakened in this light of liberation, and walked through the mind, they will comprehend those who planted the seeds eons ago within the Son of Man eternal memory, walked not forward seeking enlightenment, but back through those memories of collective isms, myth, metaphors, superstitions, writing, and story telling to free themselves from their enslavement of the human conscious and unconscious belief in intellectual salvation, did so in order that they could be prepared to step into the Spirit of this light of this liberation.

No one will hear you here. They are to involved within the ego of memories they have accepted from the storyteller, the writers, the poets, the sages, the fortune tellers, and philosophers, ministers, atheist, and those who believe life compares the thinking of the woman against that of the man and divide the family of creation, which groans and suffers because of this thinking.

They will not hear you movingalways, because they do not know it is their memories which deceive them. And as long as this is the structure which the intellect bind man to on earth, it is also the structure which binds them in heaven, and they will never comprehend LOVE IS TRANSIENT.

So regardless of what obstacles that place before you, you have a platform and message, for "As the cold of snow in the time of havest, so is a faithful messager to those who send him, for he refreshes the soul of his masters." And your words must be given in the pureness of these words. "To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth." What is the truth? It is your truth. Adad of Assyria, Adonis, Appollo, Heracles and Zeus of Greece, Alcides of Thebes, Attis of Phrygiaes, Horus, Osiris, Serapis, Lao Tzu, The Buddha of India, Jesus the Christ all stood on such platforms, and all suffered to die, and died to live for this end and cause. It is your platform which will cause man to comprehend "mortality must be swallowed up of life."

This is why they will not answer your questions put to them.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

Hi Jufa,
It's too early for you to declare an end to Pam's innings, sit on your hands for awhile please.
Pam's getting a good enough listening.
I've got bases 1-4 covered in the 6 point game plan and let's see how we go.
I didn't realise Pam had gone over this before until I was looking over the archives today...in reading them a faint glimmer of possibility opened. Something about reason pointing to vision of infinity 1-4 then 5: 'stepping into that vision' as faith.
Is that going too far?
It shows up to me as dangerous, as making more meaning, just some more conditioned mind.
Apart from that, good to meet you Jufa, thanks.

movingalways wrote:5. Of stepping into this vision of the unconditioned cause so to be purged/purified of one's conditioning.
6. Of being obedient [self disciplined] to this activity of being purged/purified of one's conditioning.

Any cause would count as condition, as limitation. Only what we know as totality could be regarded as unlimited and unconditional without creating a giant knot in our mind called ignorance.

a vision of the unconditioned cause of having been conditioned.

A vision is needed so that one can walk a path of thought. Without a vision, we are lost/impotent when we confront the silence within ourselves that is our evidence of our unconditioned reality. When we begin this path of being purged/purified of our human conditioning, we understand that it is gradual 'ladder' of transparency/invisibility that serves to support, and then, when needed no more, is no more. The Buddha likened this to a boat that one travels upon between imaginary shore and imaginary shore, and when needed no more, the boat disappears.

There's no use escaping causality, just as there's no use escaping the body, its aging, and all the possible mistakes in our perceiving and communication. You are not going anywhere, just in hazy dreams.

You believe this for you, ergo, THIS is the world of Diebert. By your words, you are justified. I do not believe this of me, ergo, THIS is the world of Pam. By my words, I am justified. "As a man thinketh, so is he. As a man continues to think, so he shall remain." Thought is the very substance and essence of Life.

What about #7: surrendering limited and limiting notions like "Spirit of life" or "parent consciousness", not because they couldn't "exist" but because they'd merely "exist" in some fashion.

All human concepts eventually are surrendered, but they are needed until they are no longer needed. If you examine the living of your own life, you'll see that this is so. When you were two years old, your interpretation of self was completely different than it is now. Myth and metaphor is the language of 'being human', but the difference between myth and metaphor in the realm of 'being only human' and being purged of belief in 'being only human' is that when one is being purged of their humanism, Myth and metaphor points toward the invisible realm of omniety and not toward the visible realm of finiteness. In other words, the activity that is being purged or dissolved of our earth mentality does not produces images of the earth, except to reference the purgation of such.

Hi Pam,
You're identifying 'woman' and 'sage' identically.

You're saying, in effect, they both exist in the same way, in a Zoo where the diet is 3 meals a day of statutory Suffering.


That only identifies the pattern named 'woman'.

The sage pattern is detached from the zoo.
A pattern that is empty of 'need for meaning' in order to feel secure.

Dennis, every opinion man has is a need to feel secure, which by my comprehension, is his being tethered to the gravity of the earth, which is not a thing 'out there', but the very world of his interpretative living. If the Sage were truly detached from the zoo, he would see no zoo.

Diebert:
Quote:
There's no use escaping causality, just as there's no use escaping the body, its aging, and all the possible mistakes in our perceiving and communication. You are not going anywhere, just in hazy dreams.


I'm lined up in that.
How can you do 'Stop the World, I want to get off!' except as a flight of fancy.
The sage pattern groks 'what's so' of the world.
You Pam have grokked it, that's clear.
In 'grokking' it there's a pointing to infinity.
Are you going too far?

Dennis, it would be helpful for me, and I believe for you, if you would step into my thoughts as Diebert steps into my thoughts. Had you done that, you would have been confronted with the truth of you that you are not separate from the infinity of you. There is no 'near' or 'far' of you. You are the universe looking at Itself. You are the infinite you; you are the finite you. But, you cannot be consciously aware of both in the same moment. That is why the finite must disappear so the infinite can shine unhindered.

In my previous answer to you, I spoke of the you that is already formed of created laws, principles and patterns, and is being moved of these laws, principles and patterns this very moment, and of the you that merely projectes or manipulates form to suit his subjective-objective mood of the moment [your cause and effect world]. You are both patterns of thought, but again, when you are veiled to your infinite you, as you are when you are caught in the web of visible cause and effect, you are veiled to the wholeness of you, the completeness of you, the perfection of you and the purity of you. The REST of you, the PEACE of you, the HARMONY of you, the ORDER of you.

A little snippet of wisdom that might tweak you to see the difference between the two thought worlds of man, who is not separate from the God of himself [parenthesis mine]:

One day a group of scientists [philosophers] got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God [the creator of life]. They picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him. The scientist walked up to God and said, “God, we’ve decided that we no longer need you. We’re to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things [manipulate form], so why don’t you just leave us be.”

God listened patiently to the man and after the scientist was finished talking, God said, “Very well. How about this? Let’s have a man making contest.”

The scientist, with great arrogance said, “That would be fine.”

The Lord added, “Now, we are going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam.”

The scientist said, “Sure, no problem,” then bent down and grabbed a handful of dirt.

God said to the scientist, “No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!”

movingalways wrote:
"Stupid" "intelligent" "quickly" "slowly" - all words of human meaning, derived of human sense attachment. How can one claim to be in a conscious state of meaningless and then, wrap their duality attachments around form?

What about terms like "snakes", "brood of vipers", "sons of hell", "hypocrites", "blind guides", etc? Was Jesus attached to form when he used these terms?

No, Jesus was not attached to form when he used these terms. Note that there are no adverbs in that list, and only one adjective, "blind", which is used not humanly, as in "not being able to physically see form", but spiritually, to point to the unenlightened mentality of those who lead others 'to God' by way of their human/earth interpretations, causing them to form a God of themselves that is born of the earth as they are born of the earth and die of the earth as they die of the earth.

Jesus expressed righteous anger several times during his time on earth. Never, to my knowledge though did he use words that suggested that the God who was the Father [the Infinite God] was of time and of space, of cause and effect. These are qualities or characteristics of His/Its emanation, the Myth of the LORD God [the universal human mind] as described in Genesis 2. No one of flesh is separate from either vision of God, neither the Father of Infinite Interpretation nor the Lord God of finite interpretation. I and the Father are One. I and the Lord God are One. The question for every seeker of the God of himself, then, is: am I living of the Metaphor of the Father of Invisibility or of the Myth of the Lord God of visibility?

"As the cold of snow in the time of havest, so is a faithful messager to those who send him, for he refreshes the soul of his masters." And your words must be given in the pureness of these words. "To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth."

jufa, what I have come to realize is that very few men welcome “the cold of snow” of themselves when they are not ready for the “harvesting” of themselves. It was this way with me, when my cold snow wrapped itself around my security blanket of human words I believed to be of infinity, but were, instead, only my words of mis-directed longing to be realized of My infinity of Me. As you so correctly speak of those here who remain caught in their earth memories of themselves, so it was for me. As it remains for me, with the difference being that I am conscious of being caught and of being obedient and disciplined to dissolving these caught memories of "Pam."

I cannot speak for those of this forum, but for me, what was missing within myself that made me fearful of the “cold snow” of “[wake up!], pick up thy bed [of the earth] and walk [of the infinite way] was the knowledge that thought is always with me. Why is this so? Because I am [created] of Thought. There is never a moment when I am left in a 'void' where there is not a path of Word to support me and to guide me. “I will never leave or forsake you.” For me, this is the genius of Jesus. He realized that Life and Thought were inseparable Movers of I Am, regardless of the realm, sphere or dimension of movingalways. ; )

movingalways wrote:

movingalways wrote:
"Stupid" "intelligent" "quickly" "slowly" - all words of human meaning, derived of human sense attachment. How can one claim to be in a conscious state of meaningless and then, wrap their duality attachments around form?

What about terms like "snakes", "brood of vipers", "sons of hell", "hypocrites", "blind guides", etc? Was Jesus attached to form when he used these terms?

No, Jesus was not attached to form when he used these terms. Note that there are no adverbs in that list, and only one adjective, "blind", which is used not humanly, as in "not being able to physically see form", but spiritually, to point to the unenlightened mentality of those who lead others 'to God' by way of their human/earth interpretations, causing them to form a God of themselves that is born of the earth as they are born of the earth and die of the earth as they die of the earth.

Jesus expressed righteous anger several times during his time on earth.

In other words, one rule for Jesus and another rule for everyone else .....

-

Dennis Mahar wrote:Hi Jufa,
It's too early for you to declare an end to Pam's innings, sit on your hands for awhile please.
Pam's getting a good enough listening.
I've got bases 1-4 covered in the 6 point game plan and let's see how we go.
I didn't realise Pam had gone over this before until I was looking over the archives today...in reading them a faint glimmer of possibility opened. Something about reason pointing to vision of infinity 1-4 then 5: 'stepping into that vision' as faith.
Is that going too far?
It shows up to me as dangerous, as making more meaning, just some more conditioned mind.
Apart from that, good to meet you Jufa, thanks.

Dennis, whether this is supposed good advise, or bad, I consider neither, for it is not your place to speak for movingalways and declare anything concerning her welfare or mentality as if it is a game of life one is playing, when it is living which is taking place. Moreover, what I have stated has went far beyond the highest hair upon your head, for I did not suggest movingalways to end her walk into Jerusalem, I am the one who place olives leaves before her as she rode the ass into the city. Re-read, if you want, and you will see I encourage her to walk among the bones of the dead and let the echos of the question: "can these bones live" fill her with the faith of knowing they are alive and the appearance is not the reality of what she sees.

Followers do not make plan, neither can they cover that which came before them an have place an shields upon their conscious and unconscious which baffle them as to which way others are going when they have not reached a pivotal point of comprehending where they themselves are.

Your fatherly advise given to me to sit upon my hands is your memory of stagnation concerning what you have done and moved no higher than the inner wall of the circle you cannot see beyond because you are blinded by the memories of eons of placement of things which makes you partial to the pain and pleasure those memories which keep you in the snake pit of vipers which continuously bit you and cause you anguish from the permanance of their game of remembrance. This is the game and inning you talk about, but even in remembering the pain and pleasure of them, you cannot analyze their why, when, what, who, and where they took root in your soul, unconscious, conscious, and mind.

And this is not our first meeting. Earlier, we communicated in the same vain as you an movingalways are now. You deserted that conversation abruptly when I took you into a place where you feared to go because you thought it was a game and I dispelled this notion. This is what I mean when I say "it is their memories which deceived them."

There is nothing here to prove or disprove as to who is right or wrong. There is no path of faith I can tell you is right or wrong for you. All anyone can do, and this includes all the Wise men which have came through our souls, unconscious, conscious, and minds, is point to you and I, to become responsible from speculations. When speculation is seen to be illogical to comprehending what is of the invisible from a visible material, dualiistic personality which cannot find reasoning nor logic as to why creation is, one will see their light and need no helpmeet anylong to assist them on their journey of living. Why? Because they will realize the journey and the walk of their every step is the foundation of their own thinking.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

David: What about terms like "snakes", "brood of vipers", "sons of hell", "hypocrites", "blind guides", etc? Was Jesus attached to form when he used these terms?

Pam: No, Jesus was not attached to form when he used these terms. Note that there are no adverbs in that list, and only one adjective, "blind", which is used not humanly, as in "not being able to physically see form", but spiritually, to point to the unenlightened mentality of those who lead others 'to God' by way of their human/earth interpretations, causing them to form a God of themselves that is born of the earth as they are born of the earth and die of the earth as they die of the earth.

Jesus expressed righteous anger several times during his time on earth.

In other words, one rule for Jesus and another rule for everyone else .....

David, Jesus was not like everyone else. He and Gautama were the only men of whom I am aware who realized that man is one with both his invisible I Am of Singular/Plural interpretations [the established creation of omniety] and his I Am of visible temporal-spatial [dual] interpretations, his subjective-objective attachment to form.

movingalways wrote: we understand that it is gradual 'ladder' of transparency/invisibility that serves to support, and then, when needed no more, is no more.

Need or no need, ones whole path and understanding, being, living and talking is still very much part of that 'old ladder' - it shaped and formed the being behind the words. It might have disappeared for the Buddha but you're conjuring it up again for the students. It "is" still there! Part of you and your expressing.

By my words, I am justified. "As a man thinketh, so is he. As a man continues to think, so he shall remain." Thought is the very substance and essence of Life.

One can believe whatever one is caused to and this will hardly ever change once ones path is fixed at a certain age. This is understood.

Myth and metaphor points toward the invisible realm of omniety and not toward the visible realm of finiteness. In other words, the activity that is being purged or dissolved of our earth mentality does not produces images of the earth, except to reference the purgation of such.

From my perspective these words you utter arise out of a being caught up in one of the many realms. It's clear you've found great comfort there and are providing it to others. It's not part of the way I'm walking though.

movingalways wrote:

Jesus expressed righteous anger several times during his time on earth.

In other words, one rule for Jesus and another rule for everyone else .....

David, Jesus was not like everyone else. He and Gautama were the only men of whom I am aware who realized that man is one with both his invisible I Am of Singular/Plural interpretations [the established creation of omniety] and his I Am of visible temporal-spatial [dual] interpretations, his subjective-objective attachment to form.

Well, I've realized it, so that makes three. And presumably yourself, that makes four. What about Lao Tzu?

-

Hi Jufa,

And this is not our first meeting. Earlier, we communicated in the same vain as you an movingalways are now. You deserted that conversation abruptly when I took you into a place where you feared to go because you thought it was a game and I dispelled this notion. This is what I mean when I say "it is their memories which deceived them."

Can you remind me where and when that happened please?

That part of me that has suffered mightily from investing in beliefs and other people does have its ear tuned for the possibility of gamesmanship.

You can see this existential me has suffered and clawed its way to step 4 and experiences some freedom in the World can't you?

What I'm seeing is Pam distinguishing the way God thinks as opposed to the way Man thinks.
'Stepping into a vision' looks to be accessing that God valence and thinking as God would think.
Pam's nailing of Man think is perfect.
Pam's exposition of God think leaves Man think with nowhere to go.
It's a thing of beauty this presentation and has me fascinated, thankyou for it.

Where we live together existentially is inside the House of Language and that's where God Think is showing up.
A sense of freedom is accessed in grokking the upstairs and downstairs and the what's going on in the House of Language.
Pam is definitely 'in' the house of language pointing out to infinity and so is QRS so I can't see a lot of difference in substance.
Just in style of presentation.
Blessings to all for a wonderful conversation.

Well, I've realized it, so that makes three. And presumably yourself, that makes four.

I hope he won't mind me saying so, but jufa as well, for it was his writings that awakened the wisdom of the law of the Spirit of life in me. That makes the head count five. :-)

What about Lao Tzu?

Lao Tzu as well, but for me, what is the unique genius of Jesus was his realization that not only is thought an infinite continuum and that man is an individual expression of that infinite continuum, that it is upon man to take responsibility for himself to awaken to the truth of himself, and once awakened, be disciplined and obedient to his awakening. To bear his own cross, which in this realm of being awakened of the infinite continuum is the thought-by-thought transcendence of his subjective-objective attachments. For me, it was Jesus' doctrine of taking your own responsibility 'to know God aright' [which, as we know is not the popular interpretation of his message] that made him a truly masterful teacher.

Plato's Cave Allegory, wherein Plato asserts that "Forms" (or "Ideas"), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality. Only knowledge of the Forms constitutes real knowledge.

Don't forget Plato.

On forms, Pam.

Does your God think pattern resemble David's Sage pattern?
Does your Man think pattern resemble David's 'woman' pattern?

With both of you pointing to Unconditioned mind?

In structure both metaphors look similar.

With all the emotion taken out of the environment it just becomes a disclosure of form.

As in Plato's metaphor there were the cave dwellers, then the guy who thought his way out of the cave and stepped out into the sunlight.

Hi Dennis, our first encounter was in the "Arbitrary Absolutism" thread. As a reminder I give you the following. Should you go to the original conversation, my August 20 reply to you you will find my answer embedded within the structure of your words in red.

Dennis Mahar wrote:
jufa:

Quote:
"do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with their God."

Right there you've made a pattern. Dennis, you have mistaken the need for and individual to reach for the brightness of dissolution of subjective objective separation as a pattern for whatever it is you state is a pattern which you have objectified yourself with.
Given it meaning. Sure I have given meaning to living, but that meaning proceeded me by "the law of the Spirit of Life" which has insured even you, myself, and all mankind of giving meaning to a pattern which cannot be named.
objectified it.Of course I have objectified my living, just as you have objectified yourself by using and accepting the label Dennis. Moreover, objectification is the structured law of the universe, for all of life and the living of it is automatically objectified in the subject of the obbject - And you and I are a subject of the object our that what we are awareness of.
made yourself an object. How could I make myself an object when I am already the object of my subjective thinking? I cannot make myself what I already am.
Made a Story to live into.[I did not have to make a story to live into, the story is living itself. But the program of living is dictated by our beliefs and system of thinking which is displayed by our manifested activities of believing we do not reap what we sow in ourselves and others.

it's empty and meaningless. Empty and meaning of what, you? If this is true why are you still participating in this conversation? Why have you not taken your life if you truly believe all is empty and meaningless? Beware though, in doing this, you will have followed a pattern, given it meaning, objectified it, objectified yourself, and made a story to live into because "death gives to life so life can live, life give to death so death can die."
there's nothing to get. There is never anything to get, because that which you are seeking you are, which means there is always something to discover about you which makes the emptiness you feel void and filled with the need to communicate meaning as you are doing here.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

I suggest, before you begin speaking on Plato's Cave, you go to my http://myspace.com/theoriginaljufa There you will find a synopsis of entitled 'THE THREE MAJOR PHILOSOPHIES." There you will find what you present of the "Cave" with a drawing, and digested information of what you are saying. If you are going to speak philosophy to this writer, you need to go to the link above and know he is well into not only the intellect of philosophy, but the psychology also. You will find Plato is not the only one discussed in the " 3 Major Philoshopy."

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.com

http://myspace.con/theoriginaljufa

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OpenUp_YourMind

Plato's Cave Allegory, wherein Plato asserts that "Forms" (or "Ideas"), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality. Only knowledge of the Forms constitutes real knowledge.

Don't forget Plato.

On forms, Pam.

Any knowledge that one gleans of the forms that are not material [which I identify as being 'of spirit'] is not THE knowledge of God, for being that God is infinite, it is impossible to have knowledge of his unconditioned Mind of infinity. The only knowledge man can have of the permanent spirit forms of creation is knowledge that suggests its nature via the use of human language, such as 'infinite', 'omnipresent', 'whole, complete, perfect and pure' 'of the law of the Spirit of life,' to name a few. What is different about this human language that points to the unconditioned Mind of God and that which projects via subjective-objective attachment is that these words do not produce an image of sense, an image of the earth.

Does your God think pattern resemble David's Sage pattern?
Does your Man think pattern resemble David's 'woman' pattern?

With both of you pointing to Unconditioned mind?

In structure both metaphors look similar.

I cannot speak for David's wisdom and how it relates to mine; only he can do that.

With all the emotion taken out of the environment it just becomes a disclosure of form.

Whenever one speaks of images of the senses, there is always emotion present, for emotion is of the earth thought body. This is why it is important, when being purged of one's subjective-objective projecting interpretations that one learn the language that is void of human adjectives and adverbs. I am not suggesting that they never be used, for this is impossible as long as one remains in the world as they are being purged of the world. For example, when one's car breaks down, they have to be able to talk to the mechanic and tell him or her what is wrong with their car, or the car won't get fixed. When one goes to Walmart, and can't find what they are looking for, they have to able to communicate this to the sales clerk, or they will leave the store without the item they wanted to purchase. Cause and effect in the world of sense applied to one's daily living. Man cannot know THE cause nor can he know THE effect, but he can be aware of what needs to be done to move from point A to point A so as to complete an activity of his material [illusory] living.

However, when you write expressly for the purposes of being purged of these attachments to material form, which is what I do when I come to forums such as these, I leave my human adjectives and adverbs where they belong: held within my consciousness to be resurrected as needed. I write this way for one purpose and one purpose only, as a way of being purged and purified of my conditioned consciousness. From my studying of the words of Jesus, and the path that he demonstrated, this was his living meaning of I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. The walking of the talk of being unconditioned of one's humanism.

Allow me to use the metaphor or symbol of the cross to express what I mean. The horizontal of the cross of me, is my subjective-objective world of sense attachment to form. The vertical of the cross of me, is the unconditioned Mind of me. When I stand in the centre of the cross and do not move to the right of me or to the left of me into my world of human adjectives and adverbs [images] of attachment, I am being true to the vertical of me, and in being true to the vertical of me, I am not giving life to the horizontal of me. And, in not giving life to the horizontal of me, I am eliminating it, thought by thought, in my consciousness. In the bible, this absorbing, within oneself, their material body, thought by thought, is expressed as thusly: “precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little.” This level of obedience takes practice and discipline, but as in the human realm of learning how to use/manipulate matter, practice does indeed makes perfect.

As in Plato's metaphor there were the cave dwellers, then the guy who thought his way out of the cave and stepped out into the sunlight.

And, when he steps out into the sunlight, he has indeed make progress. Few get to this point of Self Realization of form. But he is not done, for he has not yet removed the “sun” [sense awareness - the God of man's Idea] from his light. Nor has he begun languaging, for himself, the nature of the forms that abide in the unconditioned Light of Creation. As stated above, it is not until he begins this journey of using human words to light a path for himself of transcendence, that he truly becomes one with the Living Metaphor of the ascension of himself.

When will he “be finished” of the sense realm completely and “be wholly gathered up” unto the infinity/invisibility of himself?” He cannot say, no man can say, and for this reason, he is humbled of the Infinite Thought Continuum of which he knows not. “Of myself, I can do nothing. It is the Father in me, who does the work.”

movingalways wrote:

Well, I've realized it, so that makes three. And presumably yourself, that makes four.

I hope he won't mind me saying so, but jufa as well, for it was his writings that awakened the wisdom of the law of the Spirit of life in me. That makes the head count five. :-)

Jufa? That wouldn't have occurred to me.

Are you personal friends with Jufa?

movingalways wrote:

What about Lao Tzu?

Lao Tzu as well, but for me, what is the unique genius of Jesus was his realization that not only is thought an infinite continuum and that man is an individual expression of that infinite continuum, that it is upon man to take responsibility for himself to awaken to the truth of himself, and once awakened, be disciplined and obedient to his awakening. To bear his own cross, which in this realm of being awakened of the infinite continuum is the thought-by-thought transcendence of his subjective-objective attachments. For me, it was Jesus' doctrine of taking your own responsibility 'to know God aright' [which, as we know is not the popular interpretation of his message] that made him a truly masterful teacher.

What evidence do you have that Jesus did this and not Lao Tzu? How have you determined that Lao Tzu didn't "take responsibility to know God aright"?

-