Moksha

@Adamq8 ? ?

I was just pondering the last sentence: Go forth, therefore, brethren, on your journey, for the joy of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world. Teach the dharma which is beautiful at the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful at the end. Let not any two of you go together. I believe the Buddha was pointing out that every teacher has his own path, and teaching (or debating) with someone else is bound to lead to confusion. Just as there are many paths to enlightenment, there are many paths to teaching. The only thing that is required is integrity, and that is only possible with individuality.

Now is also an illusion. Only the timeless is real.

Maybe not the truth, but a deeper perspective on one facet of the truth, which happened to me this week.

@SpiritualAwakening It takes two to Consciously tango.

My 2 cents: Leo's response feels clean. Also, I looked up his video on Zen Devilry, and he is correct. I see a lot of it here, but that is ok too.

Pretty sure Yoda is post-35, at least he was, before he became timeless.

So much nicer being on the non-pointy side of the arrow. ?

@Keyhole I don't know. A soul, most likely. Is it possible that even a soul, at some point, ultimately dissolves back into the God that created it? Good question. I guess I would want to know why the later is more prevalent. What is the mechanism for it? In the real world? I am looking at a manifestation of the later right now, in which I could gaze at it and perhaps come to some sort of understanding but I find its presence intimidating. Perhaps the latter only appears more prevalent from your current experience, and there is an ultimate balance that must always be maintained when all perspectives collapse? I'm not sure. Generally I just wait until I go through death, and then I get another hint. From what I know, it all stays energetically. If anything can be expressed, what would prevent everything from being expressed? Is there any limit to diversity? I don't think so, not entirely. I think that there is another form of order - or disorder, that guides our lives. A higher plan? Yes, I resonate with that.

Thoughts arise, but thoughts can also be directed, like a straight arrow to the heart of its target.

Loved that show as a kid. Little did I realize the profundity of "There can be only One".

This could be a conscious discourse, or an epic ego battle. I vote for consciousness

@Keyhole Some questions to ponder if you like: Is it possible for God to create anything that cannot be destroyed? Can Love, Order, Life, and Beauty exist without Hatred, Chaos, Death, and Ugliness also existing? Is Creation infinite, or is it limited? If infinite, is it not inevitable that all forms that can be created, must be created? Is it possible that, as localized Conscious entities, we create our own reality? If so, what determines the reality that we create?

? that the penultimate step, just before freedom, is realizing love. Yes, it's all hilarious, but this is the part that resonates with "me".

Even better, there is no time, and there is no you, to worry about living forever. Enjoy your changeless, eternal Self.

Pearls before swine, or as the Gita puts it: Do not share this wisdom with anyone who lacks in devotion or self-control, lacks the desire to learn, or scoffs at me. Those who teach this supreme mystery of the Gita to all who love me perform the greatest act of love; they will come to me without doubt. No one can render me more devoted service; no one on earth can be more dear to me. I remember in my first psychology class, meeting with my Mormon professor to ask him about free will. The conversation could have been so much richer, if he had your level of awareness.

It depends on the level of Consciousness of the people engaged. Tolle talks about having political conversations with other relatively Conscious people. Enlightenment doesn't mean you don't have opinions; it means you don't identify with those opinions. To me, this is the perfect cosmic soup for any kind of discussion. Two Conscious people, sharing their perspectives, without attachment to the outcomes of their discussion. That is true discourse.

Damn, I wish I had a teacher like you back in my college days.

Debates are inherently conceptual, and very rarely eventuate in enlightenment. The teacher with an unwilling student is better served by moving on. Might other people learn from the debate? Maybe, but even they are likely to see as they currently see, and leave as they already are.

I hear you, but it's a case of damned if you do or don't. Publicity has a tendency to superinflate egos. Take Donald Trump. Would you prefer to feed his ego by debating him at one of his rallies, or to just ignore him? In Leo's case, ignoring isn't the best option either, because it makes him look like he has something to hide. Welcoming honest criticism in a more limited setting seems like a reasonable compromise.

You could similarly ask for a proper picture of an electron. At that level of inspection, our illusion of particular cohesion begins to fray at the edges. Reality is no longer "this" or "that", but "from which perspective".

As I see it, our creative ability is limited by our degree of localization. The more Conscious we are, the more freedom there is for creation. As the part of us that is unconditioned Consciousness, we already effortlessly create everything.

We're all in it with you man You don't have to wait for the next life, start dissolving your ego here and now. It will hate you for it, but it is no match for unconditional love.

Openly inviting criticisms and complaints is hardly staying in your comfort zone.