FrostCloud Forums  

Go Back   FrostCloud Forums > Philosophy > General Philosophy

Greetings!

General Philosophy Thought-provoking, philosophical discussions.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-02-2009, 06:14 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
The road to heaven

All of us are running on the hidden road to heaven. What is heaven? It is our final happy destiny.

Our origin is celestial and also our final destiny. Our origin is in the unit of the absolute Being, without differences or divisions. We have created a way outside this unit in the illusion of the diversity of beings and in this illusion we experienced the temporality of pleasure and pain. But by pleasure and pain we can be aware of the true happiness, the power and peace of the absolute Being. The absolute Being is conscious of himself because he is reflected in the diversity of beings. The way to heaven is then to find the absolute Being in ourselves.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 03-02-2009, 09:00 PM
Ragi's Avatar
Ragi Ragi is offline
Introverted Excavator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 671
All the way to heaven
is heaven itself.


It probably seems superficially irrelevant to what you posted, but I think they're both saying the same thing at their heart.
__________________
Some of my art

When you smile it is like a song and I can hear it now
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-02-2009, 10:36 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
Heaven is not illusion. We are immersed in the illusion.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-03-2009, 08:06 AM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
That is true Wu. In fact it is true to the point of being scary. As in these are words from someone that acutally has a clue about something. Are you listening SWK?

In the end 'we' all encounter the same fate. What we bicker about on such forums is the time it takes to get there. I tell you from first hand experience direct knowledge of God and your own imortal indestructible essence knowledge cannot be had by anything you read or hear at all. By nothing intellectual whatsoever. In fact it is necessary to dispense with the mind altogether to have God experience through concentration leading to meditation. Regardless of this, we are all in a natural state of evolution. Some people have 100 lives to live or more -atheists and others only a few. The ones that have only a few once had very many like the atheists. We evolve through experience. The soul is the experiencer. The mind can only at best capture conceptions of such experiences -'maps' of them. But the map is not the territory. A map of Hawaii is not Hawaii. The only means of transcending the mind and ego ('I') is concentration leading to meditation. When you have an intuitive flash that is one thing. Samadhi is not a flash of intuition but a steady flow of it. When you know you are not your mind, let alone your physical brain and body, but an immortal indestructible soul - your perspective of life completely changes.

Other peoples theories of things are humorous at best. They are mind theories and mind theories ALONE. Direct knowledge of the fact that you are not your mind changes everything including and especially the way you SPEAK. That is why I say you TELL on yourself with your silly theories. How you need acceptance by peers on such silly theories. The acceptance of them constituting your reality. In this philosophy forum, it is the mind and ego that prevail. My intentions are to show that such prevalence is INSANITY/the mind can never know what is real. The soul is the experiencer. The mind can at best capture conceptions of such experience. The map is not the territory. Words (maps/abstract ideas) are not the experience. Certain experiences are not on your horizon because it is easier to flip the TV switch on or have another beer or whatever - anything - but practice concentration which is the hardest thing you will ever do. If you do not believe this is true, just try to stop thinking even for 10 SECONDS. You are not your mind. Your awareness is a SLAVE TO YOUR MIND. It takes enormous willpower to concentrate - separate awareness/consciousness from thoughts and things of the senses and each time you do so you shrink the power of your ego and it screams like a pig at any and all such control. There are no heros that slay dragons in the world. There are people that concentrate and control their mind and slay dragons IN their mind like the dreams of ego.

In the end -with or without your help (or more precisely your ego's cooperation) we all end up in the same place. We all evolve out of experiences that can be had on Earth because we have had them all in all our lives. Just like adults are no longer entertained by childrens toys - we turn inward - our consciousness/awareness turns inward for fresh experiences out of sheer exhaustion (natural causes). We discover we are the creator of all we attract. Cause and effect. Birth and re-birth by karmic desires. We become 'spiritual' in the words of the world. We turn inward and find that by controlling our desires we control both the inner and the outer. We control the mind and universe. Discover who we ARE. And by default - who we are NOT. As in we are not minds in bodies but immortal indestructible souls that were never born and cannot die.

Mike Dubbeld
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-03-2009, 08:27 AM
bystander's Avatar
bystander bystander is offline
i drop teh drama bombs
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 328
Go to heaven and tell us how it is there.
__________________
"I think everyone goes through a rap phase at some point but eventually you realize that you should treat music like candy and throw the rappers away."- some stupid guy worth quoting
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-03-2009, 08:43 AM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
Mike: you have expressed the best way what I want to say. To be expert in expressing the inexpressible, this is wonderful. Is this is an art? There are perhaps many ways of expression but we consider that the one that understands understands without any special form of expression. The words will appear without sense to anyone who has not yet experimented.
By the way, what is SWK?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-03-2009, 09:16 AM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
Thankyou wu you are very kind. I have been doing this for a long time. Not many people listen. I am stupid because I believe in God. If I was not so stupid I would not believe in God. Thus, I went into big time math and science which to me are actually simply distractions but serve as weapons with which to defend myself from such accusations and today on these forums I do not find many running off to science to attempt to defend their positions any longer. Not to say I don't have a lot to learn myself.

SWK is SpudWithKnife a poster that has learned a lot of intellectual concepts of yoga but has failed in achieving what guru type yoga requires. I do not know how it is you wrote your original post. It is quite impressive but I am naturally suspicious so I must think of it as being more like politically correct.

In any case, thankyou for posting that. It is rare I can actually say such a thing. If we go into details I am sure we are going to disagree (that is what minds do!). My background is Satguru Subramunia/Swami Sivananda/Swami Vishnudevananda/Richard
Hittleman/Swami Rajarshi Muni/Swami Vivenakanda/Swami Vyasa/Kundalini Yogi Darshan Kaur Kalsa/and Sarabess Forster.Theres lots of others but that is my core philosophy with Subramunia/Hittleman and Vishnudevananda.

Please tolerate my very stern words - there are many many people on these forums that I do not get along with at all. I am sorry up front for my harsh words. From my perspective the world needs a wake-up call/I don't have very much to lose by anything I say!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-03-2009, 05:21 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
To believe in an absolute personal Being (God) is misunderstanding. Perhaps there are infinite personal gods and that has been intuited if not ever experienced. To believe or not in such gods is not the fundamental thing. But to become aware of the unique absolute Being is a net personal experience. It doesn’t deal with believing or not, it deals with elevating our highest senses of intelligence and intuition towards the recognition and conscience of the absolute unique essence. The way towards the Heaven is the discovery in us of this absolute essence.

Everything is part of this road. The essence of this road is its direction. In any position in which we are it is part of the way towards the absolute Being. Nothing changes, only the direction we give to our tasks. But we are like stopped in the road, we do not advance enough, we entertain ourselves only with which we see on both sides and what satisfies our ego and physical senses; someone calls it science; other one calls it religion, economics, education, policy, family, society, and so on. We are not conscious of such way; despite we are crossing it anyway. Why not to be conscious if it deals with the true sense of our existence? Is it not true that now we’ll have a real sense for which we do through science, philosophy, religion, and everything?

Perhaps as well as Mike has expressed it, I do not have much to lose by any thing I say here, on the contrary, I have a lot to win be it the fulfilment of the mission we all have on the Earth.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-04-2009, 05:15 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
The supreme principle.

The universal intuition of a Supreme Principle does not have to take us to imagine a personal God to our image. It does not have either to take us to identify it within some special religion. How we can deny the absolute Being in us if this Being is the principle of all existence or relative beings? Our individual personal being was nothing without that supreme creative principle. Is the Supreme Being putting itself under the misery of a personal individual being?

No, it was not so. This misery of the personal individual being is not real, it’s illusory before the supreme eternal conscience, but it appears like real in the apparent reality of any creation. It is easy to imagine how the apparent coexistence of the Supreme Being with personal individual beings could be possible. When we dream that we are miserable, that we enjoy and suffer within diverse circumstances it seems to us we are before an undeniable reality; but when we wake up, we smile when realizing everything was a dream.

We are the dreaming of the Supreme Being. Its creative power reflects in infinity beings or dreams. This Supreme Being is limitless in his creative power and can be perpetuated in the time and the space that are the scene of its creation. It deals then with trying to finish the dream; it deals with finishing all nightmares' sufferings of ours, we the beings still tied to the illusion.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-05-2009, 06:35 AM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
I would say this is a good post for the religion forum but it is full of atheists/people that have a lot to learn and Christianity and Judaism are from the bible part of the 'personal loving god' persuasion. It is not that God is not personal and loving. It is when these religions try to tell you this god particularly favors them.....

If you do not see the Light it is not because God does not like you (for not being a jew/christian/muslim etc) - it is because you walked under a tree. It is not what God does. It is what we do. If you cover yourself with ignorance (darkness) you do not see Light and stumble around in the darkness suffering self-inflicted injury.

It is only when the mind is transcended that the Light shines directly on us in its Dazzeling Brilliance. In the Light we know who we are and more importantly who we are NOT. We are not our ego-minds in bodies. Egos, minds and bodies belong to the universe but we as souls were never born and cannot die.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-05-2009, 06:34 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
The Universal Mind

Everything is mind. How could we define the Mind from an objective point of view if the mind is what defines anything? We cannot get out of the mental in order to define it. All what we can say is that everything is mental. To say that an objective world exists outside the mind is an error. Such real objective world would be only the creator of supposed objective representations and that by logic would not consist of the same representations. Between the supposed representations offered by the outer world and our personal mental representations doesn’t exist any real difference, only that they do not depend on our personal will. Therefore, the real outer world is only the creator or joint of sensorial stimuli of mental representations including those of personal imagination.

Which is the nature of such sensorial stimuli? We see it like creation, but surely we refused to admit that such creation is really carried out in each one of our individual minds. Let us see it this way: the human eye cannot see itself directly like being an eye; it needs a reflecting means for that, but its visual representation is not the same eye. On the other hand, luminous stimuli that constitute part of the outer world create visual images in the individual mind through the brain (note that the brain and the eye complement each other). It is not so simply that we look out through our eyes in order to perceive an outer world with objective representations as generally understood.

Therefore, if our body were by analogy constituted simply by our eyes, our individual mind would be constituted only by the sense of sight. We could not see us but through a reflecting means. Our own being would be only the receiver of light, but not its creator, then our individual being would not depend on this creative light.

Our individual nature is receptive; saying it with our example, perceiver of light, but not creator of light. What is then the nature of the creative light that does not depend on our receptivity to the same one? What would be this creative light without the receiver means of the same one? What would be the receiving individual mind without any creative stimuli?

Such affinity between the creator and the receiver must take to us to generalize the concept of Creation within the concept of the Universal Mind. If we are individually creative within our limitations, this creative power would be limitless within the concept of a Universal Mind.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-06-2009, 08:13 AM
Mike Dubbeld Mike Dubbeld is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,649
This is the sort of thinking I like to hear. Before I forget, I want to mention the subjective senses. The proprioceptors have nerve endings in our muscles, tendons, and joints. The visceral senses line the inner surfaces of our bodies. They are found in the mouth, along with the digestive tract and some organs. (p182 Philosophy the Art of Wondering by James L. Chrisian). These inner sensations cannot be experienced by other people but no one would deny things like headaches, muscle pain and stomach aches exist. They are subjective.

Satguru Subramunia teaches and I have discovered that for every sound ther is a corresponding color and form. For every sound there is a color and form. I also believe this extends to the sesnse of smell and taste. Music is geometry in time is the idea which I will elborate on. The entire universe including our minds is nothing more than forms. Our consciousness moves through thought(forms) and then we see through our eyes other forms. Whe hear something but we classify that sound with a word. And words are abstract objects. The abstract object 'dog' is how our minds classify thnigs that have 4 legs, bark, wag their tails and have fur etc. But no one has ever seen 'dog's' before. 'dogs' can be male or female, short or tall, brown etc. The category 'dogs' only exists in our mind as an abstract object/word. But these properties like barking etc are a SET of properties. Forms have very specific boundaries - you could say that every form is a SET of specific shapes. In other words you could analogize every word as something having a specific shape/form. So when consciousness moves from a thought(form) to the dog through the senses - it is bouncing from inward to outward - both inward and outward consisting of nothing but forms. (we smell a banana and we stuff that smell into the word banana with its banana set of properties or forms. All reality is a set of forms.

Now, it is not like that precisely. The above is simply to provide an example. Long ago (the Platonic dialogue Cratelus for starter 300 years BC in Greece) they argued whether or not all things had a real name or not. For example is the name of God God? Or Allah or whatever? Is a horse the real name of the critter and all other languages wrong? Until the 1960's Catholics conducted ceremonies in Latin because it was the Latin itself that santified the ceremony. The words were not Divine if they were not in Latin is the idea. During the European Enlightenment, science quickly did away with the funny idea only one word was the 'real' name of something. Now for the shocker. Science was not wrong but they are not right either.

Every object in the universe has a unique set of atoms and molecules. They have a unique form. Subramunia was right about the fact that every form has a sound (vibration). It is a scientific fact. You can take any form there is and deconstruct it into a unique set of waves that interact with each other and this process is called Fourier Analysis. Similarly, you can construct any form by waves and such an activity is called Fourier Synthesis. So, every horse being a unique set of atoms and molecules has a unique form and by SOME set of waves such a form can be created by Fourier synthesis. In that sense, then, all things in the universe have a unique name (vibration set) or 'Fourier fingerprint'.

In theology one of the first things you learn is how to categorize religions. The most consensual basis of such categorizations is according to God, soul and universe. Some have all 3 (Christianity and Judaism) some have 2 (Sankhya) and others one (Brahmanism). When you think of all of physical reality as merely a huge set of forms (including the mind (which is actually a form filter set by ego/ahamkara), it can be categorized as 'Created'. You have Creator and you have Created/the Universe which I am saying is nothing but a huge set of forms through which consciousness moves.

Desires in minds are - what else? Forms. How consciousness gets bound to these forms is what karma is about. (Karmic desire) Liberation/Freedom in yoga is about freedom from bondage of consciousness to all these forms (including body-forms).

It goes a lot further than this. I said every form has a vibration. Mantra and specifically Sanskrit originated with the idea that the Sanskrit word was the real name of the thing indicated. It was a Divine Language. But today, even though some believe it still is most believe the actual Sanskrit vibrations were lost over thousands of years until today only one word remains in which they all agree is the real name of the thing indicated. That word is AUM. AUM is the real name of God. Here is how mantra works. when you intone a mantra the vibration is said to be the sound equivalent of the form. By intoning the mantra, therefore, you call up the form of the entity in your mind. So why do all Indians at least and myself think AUM is the name of God? Because this word captures the entire spectrum of sounds that can be produced by the larynx in the throat with the voicebox. As such it contains all vibrations that can be produced by humans. Put another way - if God did have a name, it is reasonable to assume that this Vibration would contain all other vibrations. AUM may not be the name of God, but if a human using the properties given to humans to express sound with - AUM would be the closest thing a human could produce. You can see this on a voice spectrum analyzer by the way. You can Fourier analyze any sound on one of these devices.

The chakras are vibration centers they associated with such mantras - each having their own vibratory rate/characteristics/bija mantras/root sounds. I could easily talk at length about this however I just want to point out that the idea that all things in the universe have a unique 'real' name (what I call its Fouier fingerprint) is the basis of spells and incantation magic. They arose out of Indian chakras. Pharaoh was so fearful of such spells he (as did the rest of the Egyptians) had his 'real' name and an alias for which only his mother knew his real name. The idea was that if a foe knew your real name, they could cast a spell against you. (Of course this is all baloney because how could his mother know his 'real' name? Just because your mother gives you a name it does not mean this is your Fourier fingerprint!) This to show how powerful the idea of 'real name' has been historically. In his Patanjali Yoga Sutras we hear 'and when the yogi makes samyama on x, he gains the power of y'. A whole list of powers given in Vibhuti Chapter 3 of those sutras. Samyama is concentration leading to meditation and samadhi. From this samyama, a yogi comes to know the 'real name' of a 'form' and thus gains power over it is the idea. People then want to tell me that since no one has the powers talked about in the Sutras, that what Patanjali says must be baloney. But that is only because there are so few people that do have the ability to acquire samyama in the first place that there are not more people walking around with psychic ability.

Currently I am learning quantum mechanics with the perspective that all physical reality can be thought of as forms (and their corresponding vibrations/waves/Fourier fingerprints). 'Solid' objects I believe (including our bodies) have a great deal to do with standing waves. I would tell about Margaret Watts Hughes and Madam Finlang and Itzhak Bentov (Stalking the Wild Pendulum) and their adventures in using vibration to construct forms not having any idea what Fourier anything is but this post is getting rather long. Bodies in my scenario are the path of least resistance/what you get/happens when a specific set of waves come together. Desires being forms - have waves that result in bodies from single-celled creatures to trillion celled humans. All the interaction of consciousness with waves producing what we call as forms ' the universe'. In quantum mechanics something is a wave until you look at it. Then it becomes a particle/body/specific form with specific properties. The looking basically freezes the waves in an instant of time into what we call the universe (of forms).
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-06-2009, 01:32 PM
wu_wang's Avatar
wu_wang wu_wang is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 547
Philosophy as net personal "science"

I have to start off from the very beginning. I do not have to start from theories that in fact contradict my conviction that nothing exists outside my mind. I shouldn’t speak by the others because each one of us would have to do the same reflections. Let us say better: nothing real exists outside the mind of each one. This is for me a clear principle of philosophical verification; I would not have to accept verifications outside the personal experience of each one. If factually I accepted them that is another question, but then I’d rest falsely on supposed theoretical truths; I could spent my whole lifetime trying to understand theories by others formulated which finally would have no special value for me. As logical consequence I don’t try that others accept my philosophical reflections; what I am really trying is to show somehow the form as each one could think. It is indeed why I want to participate in this forum.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-06-2009, 04:49 PM
SpudWithKnife SpudWithKnife is offline
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,131
You didn't say that objects are unified with the mind. You said they were independent of the mind. That is correct. The idea that God is a light (the NDE) and that you can exist in that light and know simultaneously that you are part of that light but seperate from it just shows that the light is an object to your mind. Otherwise there would be nobody there to cognise the light in the first place. There would be no way of KNOWING that the light existed.

The very idea that God can only be experienced by an altered state of consciousness through yoga and meditation and/or drugs really goes a long way to proving that God doesn't actually exist. Why would God design a world like this where people with healthy brains cannot perceive Him and people with altered states of consciousness (which states are prone to hallucinations and delusions) can? Doesn't make any sense. Seems like God is having a laugh. So God makes it potentially dangerous territory before you can possibly realise Him. What a joker.

If you believe God is light, or the trikuti as you put it, then describe the look of this light and describe the experience you have of it. Is it surrounded by a tunnel like the NDE? I can guarantee you that your description of this will not be duplicated by any other person and hence it is not scientific in the slightest. That's why i know beforehand that you will make up some excuse not to describe that experience. Prove me wrong.

The mind is not just thought. it is awareness plus thoughts. I'm sure it is possible to seperate the two somehow but only in hindsight. As soon as you try to capture your awareness it takes another thought to do it. That is why i don't believe you can actually exist without thought and know anything. An awareness that has the ability to know itself independent of thought is an oxymoron. Or rather, it is more like a philosophical theory that has no practical basis in reality.

Again, heaven is just an idea that is not independent from a mind and brain. There is no way you can even communicate the idea of heaven to anyone else without using your mind to do it.

Saying that atheists are new born souls doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. That is like saying that the infinite God can grow by creating new souls in time. A complete contradiction. It also suggests that religious people are more advanced spiritually than non-religious people, which, if you look around this planet, is just absurd. It is actually the opposite of that - religious people are less advanced. We know they are less advanced because they read "holy" writings literally and they take part in meaningless ritualism seemingly without even knowing why they are doing it or what it means. To seperate the literal reading of holy writings from the practice of rituals based on those writings in the religious mind is some kind of warrant for physical violence against spiritual people. Or at least it seems to translate that way. They are more uptight about their God belief than the existential angst of an atheist is about their non belief.

Also, there are atheists that do believe in an afterlife. So Mike's idea that atheists are immoral because they don't fear the consequences of their actions with relation to reward and punishment in the afterlife simply doesn't hold water. Mike doesn't seem to realise that there are many different types of atheist just like there are many different types of theist.

It is all but too convenient for people like Mike to say "there is a God" and "there is an afterlife" but "there are no words to describe them". That is an excuse and cop out. The difference between an experience in this world and an experience out of this world is that the former is evidentially based and CAN be experienced whereas the latter is complete subjective conjecture that cannot be experienced except in the minds of those prone to suggestion.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-06-2009, 06:58 PM
Ragi's Avatar
Ragi Ragi is offline
Introverted Excavator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpudWithKnife View Post
It is all but too convenient for people like Mike to say "there is a God" and "there is an afterlife" but "there are no words to describe them". That is an excuse and cop out.
I don't think that is necessarily true. Language is a map for the eternally present flux of reality and Mike has asserted over and over (and I think accurately) that "the map is not the territory."

I also think that you and Mike both make a lot of assumptions created by the use of this language by forgetting that it is only a map. If either of you followed this line of thought to its conclusion you would realize that talking about God, and light, and minds, etc. are just utilitarian sounds empty of intrinsic meaning.

In other words, not only is it not a cop out, but you're entirely missing out on God/the afterlife/heaven/hell/the people around you/etc. going on all around you right now by using a map (language) instead of opening yourself to the territory (even using the word "territory" is missing the point).

You're both essentially trying to put a flowing river into a bucket to study a flowing river (and so am I by posting this).
__________________
Some of my art

When you smile it is like a song and I can hear it now
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Watchers TruthInArt Religion 9 08-16-2009 06:22 PM
Heaven Follower Religion 2 03-12-2007 05:52 AM
Big Business Buys Silence Of Toll Road Critical Newspapers ArghMonkey Politics and World Events 6 02-04-2007 01:19 AM
Discourse on the Two Paths of So Called Christianity - The Genuine and the Counterfei iris89 Religion 580 01-22-2007 04:03 PM
existance of heaven otana Religion 10 10-27-2005 12:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:23 PM.



Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2008 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
Hosted and Maintained by The IceStorm Network