Levels/Layers of Progression

[blossomingtree]

r6r6

With due respect, the intellect cannot reach the limitless, even as it is bound within it

Happy calculating though.

[MicroMacro]

Originally Posted by r6r6r

"Look", with what, specifically?

"look" where specifically, is this "heart" located?

Look with your knowing and your curiosity.
Look into the deepest inner most part of your self that you can sense. Heart is the word we use because there is no word for "IT". Does anything in particular make you smile on the inside? That's what is meant when the word heart is used.

Do not use your personality to identify what ego owns (wants/dislikes/opinions, etc). Give your self permission to open internally to truth. Truth is more than math.

Jonesboy may or may not agree with that.

[r6r6]

jonesboy--Even science says this.. look within if you want the answers.

Huh? There exists no scientific evidence of infinite local universes. You have been mislead or misunderstood what you heard or read.

Saying to "look within yourself" is not a valid answer to any 99% of humanities questions. imho and meaningless in the above regards

Yes, I have answered you at least 3 times already..

Yes and Ive quoted each new addition you have made. Still these four word definitions lack a sensible cohesive wholeness to me. Maybe I need to check dictionary definitions and it will all become clear to me.

This is a spiritual site is it not?

Yes it is called spiritual Forum and many topics get disscussed or posted. What part of Universe and all of its parts is not "spiritual"? What part of Universe is not spirit?

I have shown you Buddhist, KS and now Christian texts that same the same thing.If you can't think beyond scientific concepts and things.. again our conversation will just go in circles.Maybe the words of the Buddha will help.

Maybe that is because your words and concepts are circular reasoning that have not much content beyond a very narrow set of words and concepts that are not shared by most humans and nor any scientific understanding etc.

I'm a rational, logical common sense kind of person, and I question authority on matters of any nature. Nature = Universe = God = everything{ occupied space/XYZ/abc }.

I just asked you to look deeper than on earth.

I gave you a valid explanation regarding your question of where is the "I" and that was beyond Earth and any occupied or non-occupied space. You seemed to have missed, or ignored, most valid points of contention or answers I have given you.

This is basic stuff. In all traditions, you are the light which is all things. There is not one being that is in charge and the creator of all things.

Repeating a non-truth over and over and over even if healing chants does not make the concept of chant true. Visible light is EMRadiation{ photons } ergo a bosonic force that is well documented to exist for over 100 years now.

Non-visible{ to the naked eye } EMRadiation is also photons{ quanta/quantum }.

It is more we become like Siva, not cease into him or live in some place some where when we die.

"become Siva"? What is a Siva? How can some humans be a Siva and other not? I understand differrent levels of chemistry and some humans have this or that brain damage ex being in a coma, or not yet developed mentally or physical{ puberty etc }.

Thanks

Sure, your welcome Tom and I mean you no disrespect only wish for you to look beyond a narrow set of viewpoints to be more inclusive what it is you believe and how to express that in way that makes rational, logical common sense to the most amount of people who can also identify{ see, taste, smell, touch } what others say exist in some 17 levels, dimensions, layers, realms.

I know other realms exist, but there all related to either to the brain{ ex Rain man or others who have idiot savant genetics }, or,

some experiences I had in the 60's, or others have had{ superhuman } and I didnt,

or those things that we have some various levels of indirect evidence of i.e dark matter, virtual particles, dark energy )( and,

now with LIGO's detection of gravity ( ) waves, more direct evidence of gravitational force, that, connects all mass of Universe as a cohesive whole aka oneness.

r6

[blossomingtree]

With due respect, your experiences are not indicative of the possible fortunately ;)

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

r6r6With due respect, the intellect cannot reach the limitless, even as it is bound within it Happy calculating though.

Huh? What is this "limitless"? Again just words, concepts with no basis, nor referenc, no ration, logical common sense or scientific expalnation or evidence.

Healing chanting of words/concepts like "limitless" or "infinite" this or that repeatedly does not make a concept true.

That motion and rest is the same thing as the Heart Sutra Void=Form and Form=Void.The place where the light came into being by itself would be emptiness.

Form = shape = pattern = geometry ergo metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.

Form boards can be made of wood{ plywood, 2x's etc} or steel or whatever, The boards have a shape and define the shape of the liquid concrete that will harden like rock.
physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed. This was first discovered in late 1800's and central to laws of conservation.

So what is that light/energy and since we are talking Buddhism is there any reference to energy/light?

Visible light is bosons and Ive made this clear in this thread and many others for years around here.

Physical/energy is both fermionic matter and bosonic forces ergo observed occupied space. Not new news.

So now we know that energy is the base of our Primordial State and is what all things in all dimensions are made of.

Know we dont know that, beyond knowing that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, so your comments also do not jive with rational, logical common sense ex light does not come from any true void, or emptiness, light comes from electrons.

I hope I broke that down to show that everything is light/energy.

Saying light is energy is not the same as saying the body is light. You still not getting at the truth here.

Fermions and bosons are both physical/energy. The body reflects visible light, heat{ infrared } and emits infra-red as heat{ EMRadiation/photons }

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

With due respect, your experiences are not indicative of the possible fortunately ;)

With due respect I never made such a comment, implied, inferred or insinuated such concept.

I invoked experience so as to better, add clarity and specifity to Toms words/concepts. IF two people experience a similar thing then the better can communicate their concepts to each other, and others if there exists some commonality of experience.

Ex I tell you a triangle and you have some idea of what I'm talking about. Yet you dont know the specifics. Ive been trying to get clear specifics and more clarity from Tom for his words/concept

You may not know what a 3D volumetric tetrahedron is but when I show you a picture/graphic of one, then you know and you can better grasp all of the aspect that go along with comprehension of the wholeness of its existence in mind/concept or as an occupied space reality.

r6

[r6r6]

MicroMacro--Look into the deepest inner most part of your self that you can sense. Heart is the word we use because there is no word for "IT".

There was a movie called IT, I think was dressed as a clown. No word for God either, maybe, yet we see picture of man{ old? } with beard, or young{ long hair and beard }.

Does anything in particular make you smile on the inside? That's what is meant when the word heart is used.

Can you be specific as to what your "inside" is. I'm a human and fine visual, auditory or smells that make me smile{ externally i.e. my mouth/lips } and that is related to both metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts and my genetics ergo heart/emotions etc.

Do not use your personality to identify what ego owns (wants/dislikes/opinions, etc). Give your self permission to open internally to truth. Truth is more than math.

Ive been correcting Tom a few times as to when his statements are not true. Again with the "internal". Your going to need to be more specific as to what you mean.

Why do think that my having "ego"/I is problematic for me anywhere in all of my posts in this thread.

Jonesboy may or may not agree with that.

Jonesboy has only stated any agreement with me once in this disscussion. I dont think I'm off the mark, or stating any non-truths here. In fact the opposite.

r6

[MicroMacro]

Originally Posted by r6r6r

Can you be specific as to what your "inside" is. I'm a human and fine visual, auditory or smells that make me smile{ externally i.e. my mouth/lips } and that is related to both metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts and my genetics ergo heart/emotions etc.

What do you think it means? Write it down. Sleep on it. Then cross that answer out and try something else. Sleep on that one. Then cross it out and jot down something else. Which answer feels correct?

Ive been correcting Tom a few times as to when his statements are not true. Again with the "internal". Your going to need to be more specific as to what you mean.

How do you justify correcting someone that you don't understand? I don't need to be anything. The responsibility of your understanding - or not - is on you. Not me. I cannot make you understand anything. If you want to understand what is being discussed here it is important that you to try to see the content through a different perspective.

Why do think that my having "ego"/I is problematic for me anywhere in all of my posts in this thread.

Ego stands in the way of heart vision. Ego prefers to be the center of attention. But you don't seem to understand what is meant by that - you take it literally and relate it to seeing with your eyes. You're more interested in being right than learning something. As long as this is true - you already know everything. And everyone else is either wrong or not up to speed. I have to wonder why you chose to participate in this tread.

Jonesboy has only stated any agreement with me once in this disscussion. I dont think I'm off the mark, or stating any non-truths here. In fact the opposite.

What does his agreeing or disagreeing with you do to you either way? It's not about whether you're on or off the mark. It's not about the mark at all. You're thinking in terms of things that can be measured. There's more to life than using a ruler or calculator on it. How do you measure love?

Have you read this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

The idea here is that while some only know what they know - others understand a bigger picture (the person who wrote the story behind the picture, the illustrator). How they understand is a different story, but they know that there is more to knowing than cerebral calculations.

Some may see the big picture and some may only sense it, but they still know it's there.

Your posts remind me of the atheist who continues to show up to AA meetings - not to learn anything or share anything relatable, but to argue against the existence of something they choose not to believe in - which is a belief.

[Shivani Devi]

If there's one thing I know, r6...and everybody else out there...

Despite learning last night the exact point at which all of the atimarga schools of Shaivism diverged...from the Kaula (Lingayats) to the Kapalika (Aghori) to the Trika (Kashmir School) according to the Bhairava Stotrams....

Yes, despite finding why it is I can never find anything I learned about all this online or in any books:

netra-tantra has a secret chapter known as mahAbhichAra for the performance of fierce abhichAra rituals that is not present in the published version. This section of only taught within the tradition of the dIk****a-s of the netra system...

Yeah, sure I had 'gurus' IF you could call them that...all the traditional shamans of Bali and Java and all the spirits who go around expounding the Tantric Agamas, then show you things like Borobudur and Prambanan Temples with a "here's a 3D model of the Shri Yantra...and here is how each level corresponds to a realm/loka within the human body...etc".

However, having known all of it...being able to read the Akashic records like a bed-time story book...there is still a limit to my knowledge, r6.

There is still only so much that the human mind can know, even if you are like Nikola Tesla or Stephen Hawking.

Yeah, I am a 'genius' too, according to all those tests, and I'm always learning new things, but I try not to let myself ever become 'proud' of my knowledge, because after all is said and done, it ain't mine...I'm just 'borrowing' it...but from the most obscure of sources out there!

Still, one can become trapped within what they know and confined by it and I also 'know' that what my heart feels goes way beyond words here...way beyond anything I can ever 'know' or what I have been taught. It is just pure, total, unconditional love that has its own 'knowledge base' that can only ever be interpreted by the mind!

If/when I feel that to max extent...oh boy. Down I go for the count.

[r6r6]

What do you think it means? Write it down. Sleep on it. Then cross that answer out and try something else. Sleep on that one. Then cross it out and jot down something else. Which answer feels correct?

I dont feel sleepy and the same thing could be stated to Tom, you or blossom.

How do you justify correcting someone that you don't understand?

Some of comments I do understand, other I ask for more.

I don't need to be anything. The responsibility of your understanding - or not - is on you. Not me. I cannot make you understand anything. If you want to understand what is being discussed here it is important that you to try to see the content through a different perspective.

Just as I told Tom, .."you can try.". Or not as the case may be, or using circular non-logic Ex heart = consciousness = everything = chi etc type definitions and others I specifically menntioned to Tom at the time.

Ego stands in the way of heart vision.

I disagree as you if not others seem to think ego.I is a negative, irrespective heart and all else that humans experience.

Ego prefers to be the center of attention.

That is only one option and you seem to think it is the only option.

But you don't seem to understand what is meant by that - you take it literally and relate it to seeing with your eyes. You're more interested in being right than learning something. As long as this is true - you already know everything. And everyone else is either wrong or not up to speed. I have to wonder why you chose to participate in this tread.

Yes, I am interested in what is true, and Ive done my best to make that avialable to Tom, it some places.

No I do not take all of his, my yours or others comments literally because heart/emotion//chemistry is inherently linked to metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts in humans. We see and feel with both. Body{ chemistry } and mind/concepts.

What does his agreeing or disagreeing with you do to you either way? It's not about whether you're on or off the mark. It's not about the mark at all. You're thinking in terms of things that can be measured. There's more to life than using a ruler or calculator on it. How do you measure love?

Yes, truth is important and expressing truth is as significant as expressing non-truths because words/concepts have power.

MicroMacro--Have you read this?
The idea here is that while some only know what they know - others understand a bigger picture (the person who wrote the story behind the picture, the illustrator). How they understand is a different story, but they know that there is more to knowing than cerebral calculations.

I said basically the same things to Tom, and listed lots I dont know, however, I corrected him where his comments were in error and stated that I believe it is he who has a narrow set of viewpoints i.e. it is he that is not seeing the bigger picture.

Some may see the big picture and some may only sense it, but they still know it's there.

Not significantly relevant to my comments in this thread specfically to those I repeated to you from other replies to Tom. Your off the mark micro-macro, or at least putting your focus incorrectly on my viewpoint not Toms, as he presented it.

Your posts remind me of the atheist who continues to show up to AA meetings - not to learn anything or share anything relatable, but to argue against the existence of something they choose not to believe in - which is a belief.

If Tom, you or others dont accept the truths Ive offered and think you are the ones with the bigger picture{ broader set of viewpoints and truths }, then you can ask me to take a hike.

We all will eventually take a hike from this thread like so many others we have left behind.

My original response says a lot, and the others may clarify my position.

Another avenue is for me to be ignored. That will show me, eh?.

People go to AAA for help, I did not come to this thread looking for help. I read Toms first post and he ended with comments and/or questions. IF Tom wants me gone, then goodbye to all and to all a goodnight.

r6