How to find god in two easy steps

[Shadowman]

Just stop doing this...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=HEIVqiMR5EY

and stop doing this also OK...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2O15DXv3Vwg

That pretty much covers it,

Namaste/With Love,
tim




PS No it wasn't a typo, I meant god, dog would be getting it backwards. Unless you are a dog, in which case god would most likely be a dog, but then you probably wouldn't be reading this...

woof (just in case)

...who knows god may even be a chicken...



cluck cluck (best to be safe)

[Tony]

Hold on a minute...if I let go, where will I be?

[Tony]

..................?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=8O6IMYSSs7c

[Shadowman]

Exactly "where"* you have always been, in the "midst". (centre/source/sat etc)

(*technically speaking, where and when are dualistic concepts, and as such, only appear meaningful/consequential whilst identified with a relative subjective perceiver. Metaphorically speaking only the imagined thinking "I" can let go of illusions and awaken to the absolute I. The absolute I cannot let go, or go anywhere, for it never was attached to illusions, or in a particular time/space. Like the full moon reflecting in the lake, only the reflection can become distorted, not the moon itself.)

The thinking I is likened to the river, which runs into the absolute I, the ocean...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=pu7AR0-FRro

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=pU00jvfCUJk

When the lake (mind) is perfectly silent/still, the absolute I is reflected without distortion, this is the first step. All activity by the mind, even "letting go" or seeking god is like a puppy chasing its tail. In reality you are that which you seek, the tail and the nose are "one",

With Love
tim

[Tony]

The tail never existed and the nose never existed, and I never wrote this.
It is still fun swapping reflections.

[Tony]

This could be a fun thread.

God is in the dog,
the dog does not know it is God.
God knows why the dog does not know,
but the dog does not.
The flea on the dog is also God,
it too does not recognise it is God,
God knows.
We need to be kind to the dog,
because it is God,
the flea is a nuisance, but still God.
We have all been a dog,
we have all been a flea,
so we should empathise with their predicament.
but we do not, as we do not recognise God in us.

No empathy, no love.
Know empathy, know love.

[sirdipswitch]

Pie'n'eal

Excellent video, that shows the Sheeple at work.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=8O6IMYSSs7c

This shows precicely what's wrong with this world. They have been programed well.

[delfine]

And so it is:

[Mercedes]

Wholeheartedly,we need tons and tons of empathy!

[Camilo]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
This could be a fun thread.

God is in the dog,
the dog does not know it is God.
God knows why the dog does not know,
but the dog does not.
The flea on the dog is also God,
it too does not recognise it is God,
God knows.
We need to be kind to the dog,
because it is God,
the flea is a nuisance, but still God.
We have all been a dog,
we have all been a flea,
so we should empathise with their predicament.
but we do not, as we do not recognise God in us.

No empathy, no love.
Know empathy, know love.

Good one pie'n'eal. Still crazy after all these years (and I mean this as a compliment).

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
The tail never existed and the nose never existed, and I never wrote this.
It is still fun swapping reflections.

Words are a tool of the dualistic mind, and therefore can be tricky. Take the definition of the word exist below, where it is defined in both relative and absolute terms. The confusion arises in conjoining the two...

ex•ist
verb (used without object)

1. to have actual being; be: The world exists, whether you like it or not.
2. to have life or animation; live.
3. to continue to be or live: Belief in magic still exists.
4. to have being in a specified place or under certain conditions; be found; occur: Hunger exists in many parts of the world.
5. to achieve the basic needs of existence, as food and shelter: He's not living, he's merely existing.

Origin:
1595–1605; < Latin ex ( s ) istere to exist, appear, emerge, equivalent to ex- ex-1 + sistere to stand


If one looks with two eyes (ie the dualistic mind) the tail and the nose exist in form, but are temporary.

If thine eye be single (ie pure awareness), the tail, the nose, the dog and all else are, in actuality, eternal being. What was taken to be separate mass (e=mc) is actually a unified field. Samsara is Nirvana.

(paraphrase - As myself all is real, apart from Self nothing is real - Nisargadatta)

The unified field however, unlike manifest or apparent energy forms/matrixes, cannot be measured by science. As energy frequency rises from physical to emotional to mental it becomes increasingly subtle, and harder to “observe” or measure with scientific instruments.

The “unified field”, the totality, god, pure awareness, or whatsoever you wish to call it, has no mass at all, hence it cannot be divided, or threatened, or harmed, or affected by any apparent manifestations which appear within it. The pictures on the movie screen, and the characters, do not and cannot affect the screen, nor are they, in actuality, separate from the screen.

So, while the tail and nose (and the writer Tony) may be said not to exist separately from god, it would be nihilistic to say that the substrate eternal being (which allows for their appearance) itself does not exist.

I covered this distinction between anatta (no self) and Self in more detail below for those interested ;

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post474681

Namaste/With Love
tim

PS Link fixed, thanks Chris

[Tony]

There is essence and there is essence love,
There is essence love and there is expression love.
A cauliflower has neither.
Sentient beings are more fortunate.
As long as I am sentient I have Buddha potential.
As long as I am Buddha, I will express that potential.
It is all about, expressing love, empathy ans essence.

No me, Know love.

[greybeard]

Re post 11----the link does not work-- try this one.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post474681

Chris

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)

There is essence and there is essence love,
There is essence love and there is expression love.
A cauliflower has neither.
Sentient beings are more fortunate.
As long as I am sentient I have Buddha potential.
As long as I am Buddha, I will express that potential.
It is all about, expressing love, empathy ans essence.

No me, Know love.

God is love, essence is God
as below, so above
essence without love
would be very odd

Both are in a caulifower
A sentient being however
reflects in the relative mind
that absolute power

But relative perception
distorts the reflection
a limited view and love is askew
absolute realization
balances the equation
then all around
only love and essence abound

No relative me, Know absolute love
Then fly eternally free
completely without fear
be as you truly are
in peace, bliss and unshakeable LOVE


With Love/Namaste
tim


PS Thanks for correcting the link Chris, you and Tony are shining lights on this forum, a beacon for those with ears to hear. The greatest gift, the truest empathy, is to assist others to awaken from the dream. To express love and empathy both assists that awakening, decreasing the hold of the ego, and ultimately is the perfect manifestation of that awakening in relative form ie a Siddhartha, a Jesus or a Ramana.

[Tony]

In interviews with teachers, I would nod to the queue outside and ask, "Do I have to be like them?" Not that they were wrong but....?
There was never an answer, but realised we just have to be the way we are, and manifest to suit the situation.


Sometime we may pacify or magnetise or enrich or destroy an ego-centred situation....everything depends.


Tony

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
In interviews with teachers, I would nod to the queue outside and ask, "Do I have to be like them?" Not that they were wrong but....?
There was never an answer, but realised we just have to be the way we are, and manifest to suit the situation.


Sometime we may pacify or magnetise or enrich or destroy an ego-centred situation....everything depends.


Tony

Respectfully Tony,

It is your personality which asked the question, compares, judges, acts or reacts.

I am referring to what Siddhartha called the Tathagata, what Jesus called the Father and what Ramana called the Self.

While that reality defies any meaningful description, and must be directly realized to be known, it itself does not act (like the screen on which the movies are projected). For it is whole, eternal and undivided. The illusion of action and separation are aspects of the mind/maya/samsara.

Given the difficulty in adequately describing this state, even with metaphors and parables, I prefer to focus on the means* by which others may realize it for themself, after which words become superfluous.

With Love/Namaste
tim


*

[Tony]

That question was in the past.

[Tony]

....come to think of it I'm bloody sure the Buddha, Jesus and Ramana had a few questions before enlightenment! It's good to know that enlightened beings were sentient, and we can follow in their footsteps.

[Shadowman]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
That question was in the past.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=dZfGTL2PY3E

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=O7fXfCZ4sB4

With Love/Namaste
tim

[conk]

Posted by pie'n'eal (here)
That question was in the past.

And the answer is timeless.