Eternally Active Inactivity
In truth, the 'Fundamental Activity' can only be caused by the 'Causeless Inactivity'.
ALL 'things' and 'events' (including 'ourselves') are actually arbitrarily delineated, impermanent 'features' of this Fundamental Activity, which is commonly known as the universe. If the ceaseless change that is this Activity had an absolute beginning, that beginning would also be the ending of a prior 'beginningless absence of change'. If it had an absolute ending, that ending would also be the beginning of a subsequent 'endless absence of change'. Such a situation is an absolute impossibility. Therefore, this Activity MUST be eternally cyclic. In an eternal absence of Activity, there is only the completely structureless, ever-changeless, infinite symmetry of the Causeless Inactivity. For this reason, It's eternally cyclic Activity can ONLY be the 'structured ever-changing asymmetry' that it is. However, the true nature of the Causeless Inactivity (that is to say, the actual reason WHY It is 'active' rather than 'inactive', why 'experiencing' apparently happens at particular 'times' and 'places' within It's Activity, and in turn, why an illusion of multiplicity, separateness and duality seems to arise in the most complex of these experiences) is absolutely unknowable.... |
Quote:
Whatever we think we know, something hidden may arise that contradicts it, including the conclusions you have reached and this:) Where does that leave us in terms of the spiritual seach if the end of it cannot be based on what we think we know? We can still resonate with ideas based on a match between the vibration/frequency of our minds and those ideas, fundamentally the idea that 'We' must already be the 'Eternally Active Inactivity' if there is nothing else 'real'. |
'cause' trips me up from time to time but that is linear thinking. What the mind typically thinks of as a cause is actually 'part' of a continuity.
If existence could not be perceived does it exist? Maybe, but it would matter not. If I stood imperceptibly in front of someone I may as well not exist to them. Same could be said about perceiving self. If one could not perceive self does self exist? The answer would be hard to explain but suffices to say, it would not matter to matter as matter is known. |
Any answer may be contradicted sooner or later. Resonance does not depend on answers.
|
There is no true division thus no origin/ cause.
Only the appearance of cause by way of the appearance of division. |
I absolutely agree with both of you, and at the same time, I whole-heartedly stand by my OP. ☺
|
Quote:
Yes and if that resonates the search for connection has passed a significant point. All that remains is to include what you find it difficult to accept as Oneness manifest (particularly all aspects of your own thoughts and feelings). In the end it is usually seen that there is no alternative other than that acceptance otherwise there is no escape from the dillema. But of course the dillema itself (the very state you are already in) is not disconnected, just not gathered in yet as Oneness manifest. :) |
Quote:
So you have locate me in a dilemma have you? You are either projecting or assuming or both. Steady now... |
Quote:
Ok. Lets rephrase that. From a nondual perspective, whatever state you are already in, is already Oneness manifest. If you do not feel that, it is already Oneness not feeling it:) However one may struggle to change one's state, connection to Onenesss cannot be increased, for Oneness is already all states and connection already complete. |
Quote:
You seems under a spell. Snap out of it. :biggrin: |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums