Love = God = Brahman = Christ = Buddha = YOU!
I don’t care about what people believe. I’m talking about definitions. When someone says “God” do you say “no thats not for me” or do you translate the word into your locally appreciated term?
I’m still surprised at the number of people who HAVE seen through the labels to find the reality of it. Are most people on here understanding that love is God or does this still seem illusive.
No matter the name: Universe, Atman, Brahman, energy, God, love, I AM light, Christ, bliss; whatever. Are we in agreement that we are talking about the something that feels beyond us until we realize that we are that (Love / God / toilet paper roll)?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
@chemicalspike, Jesus says, “I AM the way the truth and the life” I say that too. I am the way the truth and the life. I also say, you, in your ultimate nature, You are the way the truth and the life. Hence the title of my post. So if we agree on this point then your imagined disagreement can vanish. Or if you must let it continue, so it shall be.
We are who we are. No more no less. In truth an obsession with “we” or rather “I” is an obsession with self. Something you train to let go in buddhism,
On to the second point the first two sentences don’t correspond to the opening title. See the above statement. You=I=Self=Illusory.
@chemicalspike With all due respect you defeat your own argument by continuing to write. Every human has a whole that they are trying to fill (haha get your mind out of the gutter). Humans need “something”. Some people call that something God, other people claim it is themselves or music or their friends, but they all need “something”.
“We aren’t. We’re perfect and we’re not empty. You don’t need anything more than you”
Bullshit. If that were true then you would isolate yourself and be in complete bliss. But you NEED something. You are devoting a portion of your to what you wrote in this discussion, which is something other than yourself. You admit that you need something more than yourself by arguing back. And if the term arguing bothers, then consider it sharing your opinion. Either way you wouldn’t be doing it if all you needed was yourself to be happy.
That isn’t need that is function. The notion of Atman doesn’t mean a cessation to desire or a cessation of human function it merely means that you do all of these things on a different level.
Also you attain this state through years of study and meditation and I’m not there yet :)
@chemicalspike, You confuse me. The notion of Atman as something to do with the body being a vessel and the soul separate. Desires are functions of the flesh, or body. Do you consider your fleshly desires part of the soul? Do you consider your soul to be human, that is to say of the species homo sapien sapien (yes i think the correct category has two “sapiens” haha) I would think a Hindu would consider the sould completely separate from the body, since it is, after all, just a vessel.
@chemicalspike, The you that says “I’m not there” does not exist. If attainment is available, why not today? Who you are, will be the same 10 or 20 years from now. Who you are is not on the other side of an experience. Who you are is not thought. Who you are is the same as you were at birth, and before. Otherwise how could you connect memories together to say, “I did this” or “I went there”. It’s so simple. You are like the string connecting all the human experiences that you have had. How could you be anything else? The laughing buddha is laughing at his own silliness, thinking why did I think this was hard?
So the ‘you’ that you pretend to be, simply is not real. The real one is present, not as an individual will, but as cosmic consciousness. It is only the imagined sense of self that feels it must get somewhere. For one who has realized ‘the self is all there is’, there is no where to get to.
By saying, “I am this, just this, and it’s whole” you are bridging the gap mentally, but not experiencing the fruit of real understanding. It is one thing to have words, and another to have the light shining as your own awareness, in conscious experience. Why do I go through all this? Because I know you are me. There is no other reason than because I love you as myself. Love (God) has a profound quality that I am willing to explore, without an ounce of frustration or anger to build. Because the root is pure, so are the branches. If you really were who you say, “just this” then we would have nothing to say. But our words are honing in on where “just this” is mixed with some other identity. It all goes. Every once of doership. There is no doer, and there never was.
By feeling small, you create a big state that must be attained. I’m saying the one who has both big and small is absolute awareness. What is absolute awareness? It is the principle of seeing the continuity of experience. Read that again: YOU are the principle of continuity of experiencing. You are that who knows you exist. It is not a metal game, but a pointing to the real you. In the awareness that you are the continuous experience, all notions of attainment vanish. This is the true state. This is the eternal bliss. It is what you already are. The bliss of the self never changes, and that is why it is blissful. You are like the sky, and clouds are your bodies and various experiences in those bodies. They never stay in the sky.
That is why I find your statements to be mixed. They are a mental / physical habitat.
You say we are complete. And yet you say, I’m not there yet. See the contradiction that your mind is creating. There is no need to believe in what the mind says. Use your direct experience to prove it to yourself. Can you not exist? Look right now! A piece of the sky can drift along with a cloud, saying “I’m complete” but what will the sky do when the cloud starts to vanish?
So the complete one is real and always will be but the ‘i’m not there yet one’ never existed. It can take years for the ‘I’m not there yet’ to dissolve from the mind, but it never has the power to eclips who you really are. This is why I say you are equivalent to Buddha and Christ. That is You, right now, watching these scenes, having this experience. This is the light, and it is nothing other than who you are.
The you that wants to disagree is only a mental artifact, and never existed. You cannot disagree with someone telling you to verify your own experience unless you are just stuck in a mindset of disagreement. I’m actually giving you a new opportunity to look, and you want to talk about Buddhism in an imagined world of form. Who is the one who likes the ideas of Buddhism and the form of the world that those thoughts support? Consciousness does protect itself form knowing itself too early.
In a way you are being asked to go beyond, by agreement with your true self telling you that you are allready whole, allready like the saints. But something small wants to say,
“No, I’m just me, just this, how could I know? And I don’t want to believe in fairy tails”
And my advice is to stop telling them, and step into the absolute awareness that is calling you.
“But that doesn’t make sense” you say. “How can I call myself if I am already that”
And I would reply, it seems that who you are calls out to who you are not, simply to see the real one appear in absolute clarity. Then by seeing who you are not, you can all the more sense who you are, in this age old and mysterious game. There is a play to it. And until you see the play, it feels serious, like “I’ve got to get it”, until you see that you are not anything that has the capacity to change. Then life, as you know it takes on a completely new flavor, not simply human, but as a divine one having a human experience. How lovely it is to be YOU. At least agree with that.
all this choking up over a word. not trying to undermine the thread, nor suggest that language is by no means quite definitive in our lives (the old nursery rhyme, sticks and stones, is actually rather untrue in my eyes, words scar, but also heal) but i sense that some peoples’ stifling of the expression may stem from their previous stigmatisation as a result of association with religions- and thus something we are all somewhat fighting: naive beliefs. of course, this is definitely not what we all have had somewhat assumed, and if this thread has helped me it has allowed me to realise that yes, religions are plagued by unquestionable ignorance and ungodly urgency for fame but that does not mean that they should take the word god with them (i never thought i would be defending the use of any word so fervently, but heck here I am). even when I would never see myself even using said word in public (due to said associations) i think what the originator of this post and many others are enthusiastic about is defining that ever so elusive disposition we humans inevitably face: confirmation of existence through idolatry. whether we seek truth (while naively believing, i might add, that the absolute does indeed exist), a divine entity, material possessions or we inevitably deify those who we perceive to have divine talent, insight or physical features (those who we are known to aspire to is quite a cause for concern if you ask me), such reprisal stems from the quiet urgency to save us from doubt and give us something to do as well as love. quite simple really, anything metaphysical though and i’m outta here!
@healingchime, I agree with PDC that it simply isn’t true to say that I am the same as God or Buddha those are concepts that differ from me, but what they represent in the psyche of people might actually be themselves and the rest of the world indirectly.
@wesleyleigh, You have an interesting post for sure. What I am really getting at is that our sense of existence IS absolute. But our belief in an outer world causes us to miss this simple fact. The sense of your existence is absolute, and centuries of wise people have been finding this truth.
In the blur of words we use, I am only pointing back to the absolute that we are. But this all-encomapassing reality can be the hardest pill to swallow, while offering the most potent medicine. I’m not really talking about words, but of the keeper of words. We have learned to think of ourselves as people and so suffer people problems. But we are not people. People is just a sound that makes us feel like we are defined by bodily existence.
For how can a problem exist, if the person does not. From the view of consciousness, all is perfect, self expressing as many, in a dance of cosmic design. The outer wold has absolutely no consequence on who you are, although it takes quite a earnest heart to admit that. What we get in the various levels of mental spirituality are different psychic images of self that remain incomplete. When the ice cube finally surrenders, and melts into the ocean of being, only water remains. This primal water, consciousness, is all encompassing, all loving and creates our individual experiences of life. One with the creation, the sense of separate person hood can dissolve in a greater seeing that all is spontaneous and happening on it’s own. It is freedom.
Agreeing or not agreeing is not of any value to you. Knowing who has the power to agree or disagree makes the difference. And so it goes~~~
‘I SEARCHED FOR GOD AND FOUND ONLY MYSELF. I SEARCHED FOR MYSELF AND FOUND ONLY GOD’. – SUFI PROVERB
@darryl, yes! I AM that and you are too. Discovering this is what it’s all about. It might even sound cheesy to some, but when you know, you just know. It makes life full and you trust it. So thanks for your boldness and your heart, the power of synchronicity draws things together to keep this knowing expanding as far as it can. It is amazing that our words, though momentary and somewhat dead, can communicate the living truth that we are. Thanks!