Quote:
|
Originally Posted by handy guy
...the term "God" is so freely and often used as if many of us are on the same page as to what God is or means; it's true that many of us could agree on a definition such as a higher universal truth and power but that also brings further tangents to define. The catch is that no matter how great the mind it can not really nail down God although it can work with aspects of God. Anyway I like the Taoist saying or pointer along the lines of, The Mystery of mysteries" which remains so, for any Mystery that gets nailed down is brought down.
|
Pretty much.
Through relating those tales to the one who calls himself "God-
Like", Daz saw those tales as illustrating his point entirely...if viewed in one way, yes it can be seen as supporting the stance he has taken on the matter...but that wasn't my point and purpose in relating them.
In regards to Maya, we all know and understand that physicality relates to physicality...covalent bonds see to that and so, to one who is in the realm of the physical, they will stand before the elephant or bus...the vehicle will run them down and it is "lights out, Charlie" and the body will die...but what really dies?
Is it anything other than the body that dies? Materialists will say "you are only the body and when you are dead, you are dead...nothing survives demise of meatsuit".
In the Bhagavad Gita it says "For the Soul, there is neither birth nor death..nor having once been, does it ever cease to be..it is unborn, undying and eternal. It is not slain when the body is slain"...and so, the one who believes that they actually die when run over by the bus is in that state of Maya...existence is relative... Consciousness is not dependent on existence...so yes, Buddha could have fallen on his sword, but that wouldn't have been relevant to the teachings so why bother doing that?
Aum Namah Shivaya