Nak Khid

nothing

Buddhists may say that the idea of a creator God comes out fear and clinging . Buddhists don't concern themselves with Go. It is not their focus However Paramahansa Yogananda says quite the opposite: Everything is God. God is the Eternal Consciousness, unchanging and indivisible, in which the illusions of time (change) and space (division) present an infinite variety of forms interacting in a progressive mode of past, present, and future. God is love. When you feel unconditional love for all, that is God. In devotees, of course, you feel the love of God more manifest, but still you love all, because even though hidden, He dwells in all. Being infinite, God cannot be limited to any form, human or stone; yet He is manifest in all forms. One can rightly say that God manifests in every man as well as in great saints, for He is present in all. The kingdom of God is not in the clouds, in some designated point of space; it is right behind the darkness that you perceive with closed eyes. You have to awaken in order to perceive that God is everywhere and to realize that you have been dreaming. All of you are sitting here in this dream, and you are part of the dream. There is no way to find God's love other than to surrender to Him. When great love for God comes in your heart, you do not miss human love. Loving the Lord, you can never turn back to lesser loves. In Him you will find all the love of all hearts. You will find completeness. Everything that the world gives you and then takes away, leaving you in pain or disillusionment, you will find in God in a much greater way, and with no aftermath of sorrow. Don't try to know God first; love God first. Then He will tell you everything. Leo: the mind of God feels like... pure, abstract, unstructured consciousness. Utterly impersonal and alien. Completely unlimited.

Yes, Psyched Substance and Joe Rogan have far exceeded their wisdom

For instance, a chimpanzee, a lion or a snake are they dualist or nondualist?

Think of the wisest people you have ever heard or read the writings of Then think of the most creative artistic things you have seen or heard or innovative ideas talked about Wisdom is not about new things like creativity. It's about understanding timeless, ancient truths. This is not about what you talents are. It's about if either wisdom or creativity could be magically enhanced in you but you could only choose one what would it be?

some chemicals make you think you know things

I don't think "Beware of unearned wisdom" is Jung. I am going to say it's miss-attributed until I see a reference to a verifiable Jung sources ________________________________________________________________ However it is sometimes associated with the letter below, pertaining to psychedelics p 80 Jung on Evil (compilation various sources, not his book title ) Two letters to Father Victor White in 1954, Is the LSD drug mescalin? It has indeed very curious effects— of which I know far too little. I don’t know either what its psychotherapeutic value with neurotic or psychotic patients is. I only know there is no point in wishing to know more of the collective unconscious than one gets through dreams and intuition. The more you know of it, the greater and heavier becomes our moral burden, because the unconscious contents transform themselves into your individual tasks and duties as soon as they begin to become conscious. Do you want to increase loneliness and misunderstanding? Do you want to find more and more complications and increasing re­sponsibilities? You get enough of it. If I once could say that I had done everything I know I had to do, then perhaps I should realize a legitimate need to take mescalin. But if I should take it now, I would not be sure at all that I had not taken it out of idle curiosity. I should hate the thought that I had touched on the sphere where the paint is made that colours the world, where the light is created that makes shine the splendour of the dawn, the lines and shapes of all form, the sound that fills the orbit, the thought that illuminates the darkness of the void. There are some poor impoverished creatures, perhaps, for whom mescalin would be a heaven-sent gift without a counterpoison, but I am profoundly mistrustful of the “pure gifts of the Gods.” You pay very dearly for them. This is not the point at all, to know of or about the unconscious, nor does the story end here; on the contrary it is how and where you begin the real quest. If you are too unconscious it is a great relief to know a bit of the collective unconscious. But it soon becomes dangerous to know more, because one does not learn at the same time how to balance it through a conscious equivalent. That is the mistake Aldous Huxley makes: he does not know that he is in the role of the “Zauberlehrling,” who learned from his master how to call the ghosts but did not know how to get rid of them again: It is really the mistake of our age: We think it is enough to discover new things, but we don’t realize that knowing more demands a cor­responding development of morality. Radioactive clouds over Japan, Calcutta, and Saskatchewan point to progressive poisoning of the uni­versal atmosphere. I should indeed be obliged to you if you could let me see the ma­terial they get with LSD. It is quite awful that the alienists have caught hold of a new poison to play with, without the faintest knowl­edge or feeling of responsibility. It is just as if a surgeon had never leaned further than to cut open his patient’s belly and to leave things there. When one gets to know unconscious contents one should know how to deal with them. I can only hope that the doctors will feed themselves thoroughly with mescalin, the alkaloid of divine grace, so that they learn for themselves its marvellous effect. You have not finished with the conscious side yet. Why should you expect more from the unconscious? For 35 years I have known enough of the col­lective unconscious and my whole effort is concentrated upon prepar­ing the ways and means to deal with it.”

"Creation" ? it's a remnant of the Judeo-Christian upbringing

. . Here's the full 26+ minute video You know very little about Buddhism. Buddhists don't talk about God or love or a creator That is not their focus at all. The do talk about compassion What Leo talks about is different, more similar to Advaita Vedanta Two videos on Buddhism. The first on God the second on enlightenment. After that another video Worship of God in Advaita Vedanta . ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ . Worship of God in Advaita Vedanta | Swami Sarvapriyananda __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ . Below like Advaita Vedanta, Swami Mukundananda approach derives from Hinduism but is not focused on nonduality is less intellectual and lighter and is much more devotional in approach towards God. This is more similar to Bhakti yoga, two more videos in this thread >>> If you watch all of these videos you will understand more about Buddhism and variant Yoga philosophies in regard to God, GodS and enlightenment. If you get through them all, It will take a few hours I would like to hear your impressions

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-darkness/201704/the-world-is-not-illusion The idea of the world as an illusion is sometimes specifically associated with Hindu Advaita Vedanta (or nonduality) philosophy, but this interpretation of Advaita stems from a similar misunderstanding. The most influential Advaita Vedanta philosopher was Sankara, who lived during the eighth and ninth centuries CE. Sankara famously made three statements (later reframed by Ramana Maharshi and others): “The universe is unreal. Brahman is real. The universe is Brahman.” If the first two statements are taken alone and out of context — as they often are — then they suggest a duality between the world and spirit: the world is an illusion, and only spirit is real. But the third statement, which is often overlooked, completely reverses this. The third statement says that the universe is spirit, and so the universe actually is real. Sankara is not literally saying that the universe is unreal, only that it doesn’t have an independent reality. It depends on brahman for its existence; it’s pervaded with brahman, and it can’t exist without it. Ramana Maharshi (pictured), perhaps the greatest Indian sage of the twentieth century, held a similar view. He explained that the world is not unreal in itself. It becomes so when we perceive it purely in terms of its appearance and only see interacting separate objects rather than an underlying spirit. That world is unreal in the same way that a dream is unreal, because it’s based on delusion. But in itself, the world is inseparable from spirit. It’s a manifestation of spirit. This is exactly what wakefulness reveals — not that the world is an illusion but that the world as we normally see it is incomplete, a partial reality. In wakefulness, the world actually becomes more real, partly in the sense that it becomes more tangibly real and alive, more vivid and powerfully there, but also in the sense that it becomes infused with spirit. In wakefulness, we realize that there’s no duality, no matter or spirit, no matter or mind. We realize that the physical world and the spiritual world are one, with no distinction. The world is gloriously infused with spirit and gloriously real. Nevertheless, the idea of the world as an illusion is appealing to many people, as it offers a way of circumventing problems. If you’re facing difficulties in your own life, and if the world itself is full of the suffering of your fellow human beings, then it’s comforting and convenient to tell yourself, “Oh well, it’s all just an illusion, so there’s no need to worry.” In other words, it offers a means of spiritual bypassing, that is, using spiritual beliefs as a way of escaping issues that need addressing.

If time has a beginning it's not infinite

Self Inquiry

For me to have created breakfast there was a time prior to that point where I was sleeping and then taking a shower before making breakfast. The creation of the breakfast did not infinitely exist. Therefore if there was a point at which the universe was created that means the universe is finite. It is speculation to assume there was a point where it was created rather than always existed. However the universe might be finite. If that is the case it was created rather than has existed infinitely

if the universe is infinite it has always been there not created at some point

Some Monks make art but is often prohibited. If they make art it is often within religious or spiritual tradition guidelines not a personal expression of theirs. Creative pursuits are considered by them as another type of distraction an attachment ________________ And with creative people, some of them have been quite unbalanced with psychological problems. Yet they can produce fantastic art. Some people may have both talents, but most with such talents are more weighted to one or the other

why do you assume the universe was created rather than always existed?

It's a tough choice,

thank you

Is God Nature?

I mean creativity in the arts or sciences, new theories, inventions etc not a wise person assessing a new situation and applying what might be age old timeless wisdom about it

After 1,391 posts, you still can't answer this?

what are other drives?

I need a yes or no please

this is more specifically about separation and oneness, does it apply to animals

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/ Dualism This entry concerns dualism in the philosophy of mind. The term ‘dualism’ has a variety of uses in the history of thought. In general, the idea is that, for some particular domain, there are two fundamental kinds or categories of things or principles. In theology, for example a ‘dualist’ is someone who believes that Good and Evil—or God and the Devil—are independent and more or less equal forces in the world. Dualism contrasts with monism, which is the theory that there is only one fundamental kind, category of thing or principle; and, rather less commonly, with pluralism, which is the view that there are many kinds or categories. In the philosophy of mind, dualism is the theory that the mental and the physical—or mind and body or mind and brain—are, in some sense, radically different kinds of thing. Because common sense tells us that there are physical bodies, and because there is intellectual pressure towards producing a unified view of the world, one could say that materialist monism is the ‘default option’. Discussion about dualism, therefore, tends to start from the assumption of the reality of the physical world, and then to consider arguments for why the mind cannot be treated as simply part of that world. ____________________________________________________ Nondualism A nondual philosophical or religious perspective or theory maintains that there is no fundamental distinction between mind and matter, or that the entire phenomenological world is an illusion