All Is Consciousness

I haven't written yoff yet Sid!

You're not just an ass-headed fruit-cake! : D

Then look harder Sid-star! Have the right-heart for them and crowning your-self won't be a pro-blem! ; D

 

with my whole heart, I agree.

 

Well, I must forgive Sidda because he is from Florida, the most fundamentally born again state in the Union. To have any higher experience there is like demanding to be shouted down. It's not like he's from California where to have any higher experience is considered normal and on par.

Big fish in small (awareness) pond, as opposed to small fish in big (awareness) pond. Bound then to be eaten. A few cliches like rebirthing stream, four hearted flame, rebrightnessenment, and he's bound to gain a few converts in the Freudian and antimystical Florida. But in a vertual pitstop for the wayfarers of Hip Forums, such trite verbaiage is pretty fallow.

I just asked that our thread starter come down to our low stratum and to please describe his experience of higher things in a way that added to insight rather than pulpitizing our heads with yet another gavel and earful of catch phrases.

One person has listened to Chuck Berry and learned strict 4/4 timing and melodies, and then discovers Led Zeppelin and has a huge awakening. Yet another grew up on Led Zeppelin and thinks only a bit of Chuck Berry. Who is right? These two will never agree.

 

There are many good philosophers in the music world and in the company of emotive vibration, they can be very stimulating. As I suggested to siddha, there are people who know what they are doing, they are actors, enjoy them.

I know that is not what you alluding to, just an aside, that we can find inspiration anywhere.

I'm not sure that anyone's knowledge isn't polly-anish that is not intimately familiar with depravity.

 

Yes, as my guru for the first half of my life said "Knowledge is structured in consciousness." I simply hate know-it-alls. Has Siddha studied Dzogchen? If not then he still has a world of experience and understanding ahead of him. Has he studied Daoism? Then he knows little of alchemy. Western Occultism? Then he has little knowledge of hierarachies of powers and how to invoke, evoke, banish.

Maybe he has the one pivotal screw and he knows how to tweak it. I would say that's love. Little trumps love, if anything. How to love? How to forgive and love those who beat one down. How to love in a mechanical society where back stabbing is the norm.

Can the trumpet-of-all teach this without posturing some after life and some superlative beyond everybodies ken. The problem with the other preacher of love is that those who love as based in those words find it hard to love those who don't also adhere to them. Instead of love for the different they feel pity which isn't the same.

I want a teacher who can teach love that is not based on difference, or based on a transcendent similarity, but based in what is normal.

That is a very hard teaching to learn or teach, but one worth undertaking.

 

Not sure what happened with the weird post of mine below. Very strange. Oh well, moving on.

Dzogchen is pretty much parallel with Enbrightenment. What Dzogchen lacks is the teaching of the right-heart and the resurrection current (and the yoga that follows). I have an original Tao Te Ching (among others versions of the same work) from 1944, first edition, and one of the first translations in the west. The book of Enoch will teach you all the hierarchical stuff you want to know. As far as love being taught without some kind of transcendental connection that is not possible, all love is sourced through the transcendent, but simple love in a mechanical way is compassion, based on shared suffering: Ramana died from cancer.



:daisy:

 

Whoa fellas.

Love is without condition, particularly if it is transcendent, therefore it is beyond what can be taught, however we can remove the barriers we have erected against it.

 

Love is as varied as any emotion. And like all emotions it has an object. Sometimes some people can feel a love for all. But this is uncommon. Rascists, many think, feel nothing. But that is untrue. They can feel intense love for their own kith and kin.

Unconditional love is certainly not the norm. And as commonly said, the thin line between love and hate is because often one loves what one imagines, not what is the reality.

Love also develops. That wouldn't be true if love started out unconditionally. There's a difference between male and female love. Men love when something acts as they would like while women can love regardless of the things temporary changes. Therefore it is said that women love unconditionally while men love conditionally.

That, of course, is a cliche. Dividing lines in lovingness vary.

 

I say all this because if Siddha is still trying to get us to go to his blog to learn what he has written then he is either a spammer, or only loving conditionally enough to give knowledge to those who act in a certain fashion.

Otherwise he will explain the basis for his catch phrases here.

I have noticed lately he has been playing the hurt feelings card like we are so wrongful to him that we judge him harshly. Oh woe is him. That guilt tripping isn't gonna work here.

 

What is really going on? I simply stated if my writings are not attractive, or something your not interested in then let that be the case. Or you could could address the yoga of the right-heart from which I have talked about, or whatever, even keep doing what you are doing, but I am not offended, have not been offended (restated this point), and will not be offended. Maybe if the attempts to get me mad or offended would stop a conversation could develop. How many times is it necessary to make your point that my writings and/or teachings of Realization are not good, from the heart or silly. I am simply having fun with all the condescending stuff, and yes, I am aware of my condescending comments.


:juggle:

 

What I mean is there is no condition that prevents love, nor can love be described. In my model of things, love is extension, love is what we are. Unconditional love is certainly the norm. That attachment, longing, romance, familial associations, are called love, is also certainly the norm. Attachments, affections develop, love in my model is indelible impulse.

Your model of the difference between male and female love is beyond anything I have observed.

 

You my friend are not listening. No one is trying to make you angry or offend you, whereas you have reacted as though you are offended, restating the point that you are not offended. Maybe if you could just be, rather than take on airs, we could get a conversation started.

 

Ok. It appears this thread is done. I will post a new commentary of mine. See ya'll there.

:sunny:

 

you are entitled to my devotion to the extent you are devoted to me, No you will not see me there.

 

We could count Christ as a "genuine geezer" though. He's alright:2thumbsup:

I was raised christian but stopped believing when I found out that Adam and Eve et al were made up stories. And Noah. Turns out there was no flood.