On Becoming a God

Originally Posted by NoOne

It is your choice, if you don't want to engage in discussion and explain your points, just don't act all high and mighty as if you were privy to some secret information that the rest of us weren't. I agree with Running that you seem to have very little idea about the concepts being discussed here.

Don't get ****y with me like some kid that I won't let play with my toys just because your frustrated that I won't do what you want.

And you need to mature out of that " holier than thou /video game levels Style" perspective of spirituality because real awakening/ spirituality whatever you want to call it is not about obtaining any rank/ level/ devine top floor
Instead it is about the shedding of those things as well as all of the beliefs and concepts that we get indoctrinated with from birth.

So I don't look at it in a western context like you seem to do and so don't project your feelings of inadequacy/insecurity towards me .

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by MAYA EL

Don't get ****y with me like some kid that I won't let play with my toys just because your frustrated that I won't do what you want.

And you need to mature out of that " holier than thou /video game levels Style" perspective of spirituality because real awakening/ spirituality whatever you want to call it is not about obtaining any rank/ level/ devine top floor
Instead it is about the shedding of those things as well as all of the beliefs and concepts that we get indoctrinated with from birth.

So I don't look at it in a western context like you seem to do and so don't project your feelings of inadequacy/insecurity towards me .

As far as I can see, you are the one doing the projecting.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by running

again i say you have no idea if that's your level of experience.

Talk about 'smugness' as an "I don't have to take anyone who thinks differently than me seriously" self-teat succoring 'zone'!

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by NoOne

Yes, that sounds plausible, though we are really just guessing at this point as there is so little information to go by.

What I 'see is that there is surfeit of 'information' - so much so, that it is impossible to know the extent to which the way in which one's or oone's hypotheses-based world-view omits or (undervalues) significantly Life-valent factors.

Originally Posted by NoOne

I am guessing (and this is more a form of direct knowing or gnosis), that we agree on a life path before incarnating in this reality and part of it is learning the lessons we need to learn and grow as individuals.

Watch out, vastness-'seeing' oone! What I 'see' is that the ideas of 'direct knowing' and 'gnosis' like the ideas of 'absolute truth' (as opposed to 'relative truth') and 'divinity' (as opposed to 'mundanity' ) are very slippery slopes which more often than not 'lead' people to slide into a self (i.e. 'set' of ideas) reifying 'cocoon'.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by NoOne

You have not made and effort to explain your point, which sounds nonsensical on the face of it, so don't be surprised that people "aren't getting it". If you have already explained it elsewhere, then you should link to it or quote it. This is a discussion forum, after all.

I 'get' what MAYA EL is saying - maybe because I 'see' what she 'sees', too.

[lemex]

I think there is way too much focus of the body as well as the trement of god in the concept of a body. The difficulty one is not the body and one doesn't create the body. There is a time one no longer incarnates so one does not have to return, want to, or need to to accomplish this ascension. In the form of spirit/soul one gets to see the light created. Why would one return to ascend when already at that point?

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by lemex

There is a time one no longer incarnates so one does not have to return, want to, or need to to accomplish this ascension. In the form of spirit/soul one gets to see the light created. Why would one return to ascend when already at that point?

My understanding is that Just seeing 'the light' isn't enough to reach that (no longer re'turning') point, any more than just 'thinking the thought' of 'talking the talk'.

From my treatise:

"Simply ‘thinking the thought’ and ‘talking the talk’, i.e. just believing and socially affiliating with others who ‘confess’ and ‘proclaim’ their belief that [XYZ] is absolutely true, won’t result in a soul’s psychospiritually realizing the ‘eternally’ ongoing Life Jesus referenced. One has to actually ‘walk the walk’ of self-transcendence by really considering and intelligently (one might say, Solomonically☺) evaluating what most likely will and what most likely won’t serve to maximize the experience and expression of Love and Joy in The Flow of Life and then really (i.e. conscientiously!) choosing to do what(ever!) one consequently thinks and feels has the best chance of so serving – in other words, not just for one’s own self’s or any other particular self’s or set of selves’ Love and Joy ‘sakes’ – as one goes along, for the kind of Life Jesus spoke of to be ‘entered into’ and soulfully ‘lived’ thereafter.

This of course (as previously cautioned) requires that one not become smugly self-assured, by way of thinking and feeling that what(ever) one presently believes encapsulates the totality of the truth in said (or, for that matter, any other) regard, but rather that one tolerate and embrace the kind of uncertainty that accompanies awareness of the fact that there may well be more for one to learn and know and consequently do (or know and do ‘better’!), and hence that one always continue to open‑mind-n-heart-edly consider, evaluate and garner wisdom from what may – based on my own experience, I say will! – in retrospect be seen as having been ‘errors’ of omission and/or commission stemming from one’s not having been completely aware of the relevance of dynamically operational situational factors, which process of learning and development of greater awareness and adeptitude will only continue (over the course of one’s incarnational involvement) if one doesn’t sabotage its potential ever-ongoingness by presumptuously concluding that there is nothing ‘more’ for one to know or that there is no ‘better’ way for one to proceed in order to fully become and completely be self-transcendentally, i.e. holistically, Cosmic‑Spirit aligned. It is only by virtue of proceeding humbly in said regard that further experience of incarnational embodiment (wherein the exigencies of personal limitation and corollary experiences of frustration, pain, loss, etc. associated with selfhood serve as ‘task-masters’ and so, in effect, as ‘teachers’ of self‑transcendence) are eventually rendered passé."

[running]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Talk about 'smugness' as an "I don't have to take anyone who thinks differently than me seriously" self-teat succoring 'zone'!

what i responded about has nothing to do with what you or i or anyone else thinks. he was speaking to something that is not a belief or a project of thought.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by lemex

I think there is way too much focus of the body as well as the trement of god in the concept of a body. The difficulty one is not the body and one doesn't create the body. There is a time one no longer incarnates so one does not have to return, want to, or need to to accomplish this ascension. In the form of spirit/soul one gets to see the light created. Why would one return to ascend when already at that point?

The spirit is also a body, just a different kind. You must energise, build it up and raise its vibrations to a much higher level to be able to go into a light-body at death and achieve ascension or in other words, godhood.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by running

what i responded about has nothing to do with what you or i or anyone else thinks. he was speaking to something that is not a belief or a project of thought.

That's a convoluted kind of smugness, IMO.

To everyone else: Post 97 above shares what I think of that!