What if we misunderstood the Nothingness/Consciousness with GOD?

[Adamq8]

GOD is infinite imagination so it is not a particular thing at all, existence is so intervowen and complex that it cant be understod, it is like conciousness has infinite layers in it, creation happens in infinite dimensions everywhere,  but what the true form of GOD is , is light,  you never see light , you see illumination of objects and things,  God is formless LIGHT, and in it there are infinite possibilitys of everything,  like an usb so full of everything that it loops back around and is the creation but at the same time transcendent of IT.

God is not limited to anything, God is the awareness which shines light on infinite mind and creativity and order and CHAOS.

But GOD is limited to 1 thing, and that is it's oneness or that it IS, it can not not be. 

Thats why there is 1 ABSOLUTE Reality and our universe is a relative thing. 

Nothingness and everythingness is something GOD imagines. 

Prior to imagination there is : ___ 

[Vibroverse]

Alright, let's say it in this way. There is a God that is independent from you. Yes. But you are the way that formless God looks like when it looks like an object. 

[PopoyeSailor]

1 hour ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

Yes, I feel like everyone here is limiting God in some sense.

If we can not explain or understand Infinite God through our limited and individualized perspectives then why do we end up concluding that We are God? 

The limitation is only of the explanation. Not of the experience(State-less, Experience-less, Non-Experience) itself. A person who has tasted sugar does not need to question about the sweetness of the sugar. Only the person who has never tasted sweetness before will keep on wondering about the sweet taste. It is guaranteed that he is never going to understand it through spoken words in the form of theoretical knowledge. Direct experience of tasting the sweetness and intellectualizing about it through words are two different things existentially. 

Just like a colour blind person will never understand the meaning of color and visual reality by even an infinite amount of words with which one can explain it to him. Similarly, it is said that, an unenlightened person will never understand The Non-Duality - Labelled as NON-DUALITY, BRAHMAN, GOD, NOTHINGNESS, EVERYTHINGNESS(ONENESS), etc.. which are just labels. These words don't mean anything by themselves. Just tools used by individuated(Having a formed Mind) creatures to communicate about IT.

The only way to understand it is by direct experience. But, the real pickle is: Even in direct experience, it can present itself as anything and everything. It can present itself as Non-Dual Oneness; Nothingness; A GOD with a form as devotees experience it; A GOD but creation done with a separate agency; A GOD without agency; and infinite other formful or formless or something else.. something else... ways.

Like mentioned above you can certainly experience exactly the way you are thinking about it. But then, that would just be a single way out of infinite other ways you can experience it. BRAHMAN / GOD can always one up against itself. There is no restriction as to what or how it can be and cannot be.

It is something that doesn't have a particular designation, label, form, reality, truth, or anything for that matter. It is the very essence of the word Mystery. Even Unreality is just a state it can take; Even formlessness is just a state it can take; even Non-Existence is just a state it can take; even STATE is just a state it can present itself as. With it.. Eveything is... Without it.. Nothing is.. NOT EVEN NOTHINGNESS. 

Being from a Hindu background and having seen many sages from hinduism as well as other religions describing their experience of BRAHMAN / GOD as variegated ways through out history for thousands of years, and seeing each of them having unwavering faith in explaining what they experienced to be utter TRUTH and REAL. This has been confirmed that such is the case by Ramakrishna Paramahamsa by veryfing a few of these ways by direct experience. There are others sages in the past who have also been both Devotionalists as well as Non-Dualists at the same time.

My present undersanding of it is that GOD / BRAHMAN is like how I have described above. Of course there is much more to each of the ways it presents itself. But, the only way I can make sense of all of it is as I explained above.

One thing is for sure. There is no THE GOD or A GOD. There is just IT which presents itself as THIS & THAT. Any experience of experiencing THE GOD or A GOD is just simply a single way it is presenting itself.

Edited January 24, 2021 by PopoyeSailor

[Muhammad Jawad]

32 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Drop all your ideas about God from your culture

Should I drop that Idea as well: "God is all-powerful, Omnipotent, Infinite etc." These are also Ideas I got from my culture.

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

That's precisely backwards.. Start with your own direct experience. Not with the beliefs. 

According to my experience, all experiences are coming out of me. I am the creator of all of my experiences but I don't feel like I am God. I feel like there is a power/God bigger than me who created Me (Being/Soul/Consciousness) 

[The Buddha]

2 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

The One who lacks any kind of Power can not be a GOD.

False, not even God can make 2+2=5. Check this Osho video min 2:50 to 3:39

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy5-BcaGHpg

2 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

So GOD is also limited in his own natural boundaries? The One who can not go against its own nature can not be a GOD.

Yes and no. What you don't understand is that if God is truly boundless, what I'm claiming in my post: Then he MUST also be limited. Because in order to be without limitation, he must be also limitated, if not he would not be without limitation. If he is limiteless and has not limitation it cannot be limitless, because in limitless (infiniteness), there must also include limits, if you are excluding those you don't understand what truly limiteless means, so you are making a semantic error in what those words really point to. So you want to categorize God as only one side of the coin or only with up, when one exists the other MUST also exist. Therefore being God unity and One, he is the embrace of all those dualities.

2 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

Water can not be dry because Water is not GOD, Water is not omnipotent. But according to definitions GOD is all-powerful and can do anything.

It's a metaphore, when the wise points to the moon the fool examines the finger. If God is truly omnipotent then it must also have bounderies, because if he is omnipotent you are saying that he can't create a limit or a boundary to itself? So you are saying he can do absolutely everything, then I tell you yes therefore he creates also limits because he is infact Omnipotent. So for him to be All-Powerful he has also to create limits to himself because if not he woudn't be All-Powerful. Again you want up without down; cold without hot: they both represent temperature, the same thing: God.

2 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

According to your own answer, GOD has boundaries and limits of his own nature and he can't go against his own nature. Can't God change his own nature?

The fact that he has boundaries and limits is an expresion of his own nature, an expresion of limitless. No, because you are also caught up on the duality of change versus static. They are both the same in God's realm. You are creating a problem that doesn't exist just because god is the problem and the solution and none of both, and both at the same time and outside time. It doesn't make any fucking sense that is why God is beyond intellect and all dualities and categories you try to create.

3 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

Because I can not truly represent GOD through finite mediums or diagrams. My Diagrams are not 100% accurate truth.

Nope, in fact your drawing, surprisingly, represents in a very accurate what you don't want to see. From Oneness emerges everything, even dualities.

3 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

These things can not create something outside separate from themselves because they are not GOD. It's Understood but The GOD The Omnipotent why he can not go against his own nature? How he can be GOD if he is bound to the limitations of his own nature?

No because it's the same substance. As the tree becomes a chair then fire and then ash, it's the same substance all the time. Therefore as GOD is one It MUST be all things and no-things at the same time. That is why It is everything but also you feel different from him, because ass he is God he must also think and feel different from himself because he MUST experience reality from all it's points for Infinity. That is the eternal cycle of GOD playing with itself.

Quote

Wherever you are, you are in Consciousness and Consciousness is within you. This Cosmic Being resides in all beings. In the cavity of your Heart is Conscious Being, which directs you to see, smell, hear, activate your activities. This has to be worshipped, adored, honoured, wherever you go, whatever you do, whatever you listen, whatever you see. Then how can you forget? -Papaji

 

[Muhammad Jawad]

31 minutes ago, The Buddha said:

Probably one of the best content Leo has done

Thanks a lot for sending me the link :-)

8 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

These are all just words, all we are saying is just words. Experience is something, like, emotional and experiential. Now, you are a magnet in a sense, and if you keep being with those confusions active in your mind, then you cannot hear the answer, because you are busy with the question. There is then like no gap in your mind for the clarity to come to.

Right

50 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

It is a creation of God. And is also God.

Is that possible for GOD to create a "Moment" Separate from his own self? Or he doesn't have the power to do that? 

[Adamq8]

@The Buddha @PopoyeSailor  two really good explanation guys!

I appreciate them alot ?

GOD is that which is the case i would say , GOD is limitless and limited, but it is also limited to its imagination but gods imagination is limitless,  you see the paradox ?? 

Imagine a super computer which holds all the information possible ever in it

[Vibroverse]

And don't feel like you have little time. You have infinite time before you. 

[Hulia]

14 minutes ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

But I am not God, I feel like God has created Me (Soul/Being/Consciousness) who imagine a mind and that mind imagine a body and both mind and body imagine a world.   

If God created you (Soul/Being/Consciousness) than there should be a beginning of you (Soul/Being/Consciousness). Do you feel like you haven´t been always existing? That there was a time (time???) without you  (Soul/Being/Consciousness), before you  (Soul/Being/Consciousness) have been created?

[Adamq8]

GOD is ungraspable,  we can through some experiences draw some conclusions about it but it is infinite so we can never reach the end, it is so VAST.

God is simultaniously YOU but you are also a creation of GOD, you are not god but at the same time YOU ARE GOD.

The Absolute is unknowable because it is everything.

But get this, you are co creating everything, there is only 1 awareness, cause awareness is prior to a where and a space. It loops around and it is impossible to catch the All.

1 awareness = infinite states of conciousness = infinite creations. 

There is layers upon layers upon non layers , even non existence is a creation. Thats the mindfuck

[Javfly33]

@Muhammad Jawad Yes. That's exactly what he's doing now. Colours forms, thoughts, are appearing. "He" is not quite there. He is projecting all of that from itself.

But take a look, you are that.

Notice that you are literally that.

So what's the problem? ?

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

If we can't ever answer this question then why just end up on our search for truth and just conclude that "Ok, I am not going further. Leave it. I am God". We can not conclude that We are God till all questions are answered very clearly

I will try to put this as simple as possible. This question comes up time & again:
If there’s only One Thing (non-duality) how do you explain all the apparent ‘many things’ we see manifested? Our bodies? The hard solid ground? The water we can see.. feel and drink? The atoms.. quarks and other particles of apparently ‘real’ matter that make up water.. earth and bodies?

(Apparently, indeed. Science has already confirmed all atoms are 99% space.. less than 1% “matter.”)

Unfortunately.. You are  asking for a mind-based.. mind-understandable answer.. and insisting ([“non-objective] answers won’t help”) on limiting the answer to something the dual.. subject/object-based mind can comprehend.

“If there’s only One Thing, which means all body-minds are illusions or projections.. could you please explain what that illusory body-mind is…to my illusory body mind:-) See the problem?

It’s like a person’s shadow. Can a shadow explain what’s casting it.. or jump up and become the person casting it?

Your right eye is a non-duality. You only have one right eye. It cannot see itself as a non-duality. That would take a second eye sitting outside the first eye, looking back at it…and then you’d be back to duality.

Within your nighttime dream.. you always think you are your body and your body is real. When a dream car swerves towards you.. your dream body jumps out of the way to avoid getting hurt. Your dream is created by just One Thing.  Your mind. No one else’s. So it’s just One Thing, creating all these many things. Real things, or at least.. you’re quite certain their real” while you’re dreaming. But then you wake up.. and you see they were just projections from your One Thing.

Your waking dream is no different. “It just seems to be more continuous and last longer,” as Ramana Maharshi said, “but a dream projection, nonetheless.” At the Absolute level.. it’s obvious there is only One Thing.. or more accurately, NoThing. The Unmanifest. The Void. In enlightenment, or what you call ‘transcendence,’ we can get a fragrance of that.

But we can only be The Absolute.. Not know it.   because The Absolute can not know Itself. That would take two.. right - The Absolute and a separate “knower.” Then it wouldn’t be The Absolute anymore.. it would be a duality.

So what can we do? We can know that the One Non-Dual Thing is ‘in the background’ behind all duality, projecting itself through The Everything.. including our bodies.

[Adamq8]

@Someone here Beatiful brother!!✅?

[Jonty]

38 minutes ago, The Buddha said:

False, not even God can make 2+2=5. Check this Osho video min 2:50 to 3:39

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy5-BcaGHpg

Amazing video. Thanks so much for sharing. 

[Someone here]

@Adamq8 ❤️

[Nahm]

2 hours ago, Muhammad Jawad said:

But I think there is a difference between GOD & the paper.

I am Sam
Sam I am

That Sam-I-am
That Sam-I-am!
I do not like
That Sam-I-am

Do you like
Green eggs and ham

I do not like them,
Sam-I-am.
I do not like
Green eggs and ham.

Would you like them
Here or there?

I would not like them
Here or there.
I would not like them
Anywhere.
I do not like
Green eggs and ham.
I do not like them,
Sam-I-am

Would you like them
In a house?
Would you like them
With a mouse?

I do not like them
In a house.
I do not like them
With a mouse.
I do not like them
Here or there.
I do not like them
Anywhere.
I do not like green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Would you eat them
In a box?
Would you eat them
With a fox?

Not in a box.
Not with a fox.
Not in a house.
Not with a mouse.
I would not eat them here or there.
I would not eat them anywhere.
I would not eat green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Would you? Could you?
In a car?
Eat them! Eat them!
Here they are.

I woould not,
Could not,
In a car

You may like them.
You will see.
You may like them
In a tree?

I would not, could not in a tree.
Not in a car! You let me be.
I do not like them in a box.
I do not like them with a fox
I do not like them in a house
I do mot like them with a mouse
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere.
I do not like green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

A train! A train!
A train! A train!
Could you, would you
On a train?

Not on a train! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! Sam! Let me be!
I would not, could not, in a box.
I could not, would not, with a fox.
I will not eat them with a mouse
I will not eat them in a house.
I will not eat them here or there.
I will not eat them anywhere.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Say!
In the dark?
Here in the dark!
Would you, could you, in the dark?

I would not, could not,
In the dark.

Would you, could you,
In the rain?

I would not, could not, in the rain.
Not in the dark. Not on a train,
Not in a car, Not in a tree.
I do not like them, Sam, you see.
Not in a house. Not in a box.
Not with a mouse. Not with a fox.
I will not eat them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere!

You do not like
Green eggs and ham?

I do not
Like them,
Sam-I-am.

Could you, would you,
With a goat?

I would not,
Could not.
With a goat!

Would you, could you,
On a boat?

I could not, would not, on a boat.
I will not, will not, with a goat.
I will not eat them in the rain.
I will not eat them on a train.
Not in the dark! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! You let me be!
I do not like them in a box.
I do not like them with a fox.
I will not eat them in a house.
I do not like them with a mouse.
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere!

I do not like
Green egss
And ham!

I do not like them,
Sam-I-am.

You do not like them.
So you say.
Try them! Try them!
And you may.
Try them and you may I say.

Sam!
If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.

Say!
I like green eggs and ham!
I do! I like them, Sam-I-am!
And I would eat them in a boat!
And I would eat them with a goat...
And I will eat them in the rain.
And in the dark. And on a train.
And in a car. And in a tree.
They are so goodm so goodm you see!

So I will eat them in a box.
And I will eat them with a fox.
And I will eat them in a house.
And I will eat them with a mouse.
And I will eat them here and there.
Say! I will eat them anhywhere!

I do so like
Green eggs and ham!
Thank you!
Thank you,
Sam-I-am

?

[PopoyeSailor]

12 minutes ago, Nahm said:

I am Sam
Sam I am

That Sam-I-am
That Sam-I-am!
I do not like
That Sam-I-am
.

.

.

.
I do so like
Green eggs and ham!
Thank you!
Thank you,
Sam-I-am

?

Whosoever originally written this, surely they were tripping hard.... 

I like it.

[Nahm]

Dr Seuss’s first book was repeatedly rejected, 27 times in a row.

After facing 27 heart breaking rejections, Dr Seuss was heading back to his apartment to burn his first book. It was on his journey back that a chance encounter changed his future forever.

As he was walking to his apartment along Madison Avenue he bumped into an old Dartmouth College friend, Mike McClintock. McClintock, by chance, had just started working that very morning at Vanguard Press children’s section as editor. A few hours later the two had signed a contract to publish Dr. Seuss’s first book, “And to Think that I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” after it had been rejected 27 times.

That book was never as popular as his later works, but it launched his career. Dr. Seuss was later quoted as saying “If I had been going down the other side of Madison Avenue, I’d be in the dry-cleaning business today.”

[Vibroverse]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

Dr Seuss’s first book was repeatedly rejected, 27 times in a row.

After facing 27 heart breaking rejections, Dr Seuss was heading back to his apartment to burn his first book. It was on his journey back that a chance encounter changed his future forever.

As he was walking to his apartment along Madison Avenue he bumped into an old Dartmouth College friend, Mike McClintock. McClintock, by chance, had just started working that very morning at Vanguard Press children’s section as editor. A few hours later the two had signed a contract to publish Dr. Seuss’s first book, “And to Think that I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” after it had been rejected 27 times.

That book was never as popular as his later works, but it launched his career. Dr. Seuss was later quoted as saying “If I had been going down the other side of Madison Avenue, I’d be in the dry-cleaning business today.”

Amazing. Never let anyone let you down. Noone is an authority. 

[PopoyeSailor]

https://genius.com/Dr-seuss-green-eggs-and-ham-excerpt-annotated