Descended… or returned to the Source? Sometimes the best way forward is to turn back.
You’re goofy,
I’ll take a stab.
“The soul is neither born, and nor does it die; it is eternal and cannot be destroyed.”
Wrong quote?
The soul is a vessel that contains the experience of a life lived.
Here is a true and irrefutable quote.
By endowing man with a soul, God receives all the information about man. Paradise is in God, isn’t it? That is why any soul goes to Paradise.
As for your quote - you can laugh. If there is a soul, without let’s say a person, then why does a person need it?
That quote is from the Baghavad Gita.
You’re all mixed up. God doesn’t receive information. Omniscience doesn’t take time.
oy vey subject change
The quote found in the shit is also shit. Why do you read stupid shit invented by cretins? Try to think at least a little. If God lives, He must change. That is, God is not perfect at one moment in time compared to another moment in his life. Well, how can God change? Only by obtaining information, including from people.
Gardens grow from shit.
God is the gardener.
Have you ever heard about humus? And shit is just shit - nothing grows on it. Well, except for your statements.
1 Like
You’re a doofus.
But it can suffer.
Due to our lack of direct understanding of how things truly exist, we create and continually reinforce the idea of an independent, solid self — the ‘I’ or ‘me’. This imagined entity then becomes the central lens through which we view our entire existence. Our thoughts, emotions and identities revolve around this imagined entity as if it were permanent and separate.
From this sense of self arises an ongoing cycle of craving and resistance. We pursue pleasant sensory experiences and chase after modes of ‘being’ or ‘becoming’: wealth, recognition, power, love, respect, permanence and even immortality. At the same time, we turn away from anything that threatens our fragile self-image, avoiding discomfort or pain at all costs. These habits of grasping and aversion govern much of human life. However, as they are based on a misconception of self and reality, they inevitably lead us back to frustration, conflict and suffering.
Through this delusion, our natural sensitivity — our capacity to feel, empathise and be touched by the world — is mistaken for weakness. Rather than protecting and honouring it, we cover it over with masks of strength: indifference, hardness and competitiveness. In attempting to escape our vulnerability, we disconnect from what makes us truly sentient. In turn, we become willing to injure or dismiss others who are just as vulnerable and sensitive as we are. Thus, estrangement from our own depths leads directly to estrangement from one another.
Therefore, we are both the problem and the solution. By falling for the illusion of separateness, we lose sight of the deeper unity that underlies existence. Estranged from that unity, we alienate one another and condemn the very sensitivity that could heal us. In our quest for approval and validation, we adorn ourselves with outwardly appealing qualities such as beauty, charm, status and display, while overlooking the enduring qualities of compassion, integrity and understanding. In chasing what is fleeting, we blind ourselves to what is sustainable.
The cycle of suffering does not arise from life itself, but from our misperception. By recognising the illusory nature of the independent ‘self’, honouring our sensitivity rather than suppressing it, and realigning our desires towards what nourishes rather than diminishes, we can begin to touch the unity we once overlooked. In doing so, the very roots of suffering can be transformed into the seeds of freedom.
What is it that does the imagining, except that very entity?
Is this just another way of saying “no man is an island”?
The split between subject (the imagine-er) and object (what is imagined) is a product of thought and language, not of direct experience. In reality, there is no dividing line. What is imagined, and the act of imagining, are not two; they are modulations or movements within the single field of awareness. There is only the happening of imagining, not an entity standing back and making it happen
Some teachers use metaphors like “the screen and the movie”: Awareness is the screen on which all appearances—including the feeling of a self—play like a movie. The movie appears on the screen, but the screen itself is not changed or divided by the movie.
This famous phrase by John Donne emphasises our interdependence as human beings. It means that nobody exists in complete isolation; our lives, well-being and identities are shaped by our relationships with others and our sense of community. According to this view, the self is recognised as an individual, yet is also seen as being fundamentally connected to others and the world.
Non-dualism goes further than this by suggesting that the sense of having a separate, independent self is an illusion. Rather than being individuals who are simply connected to others, non-dualism teaches that there is, in truth, only one undivided reality — consciousness or awareness — appearing as many. The boundaries between selves are seen as mental constructs, not ultimate facts.
What does the imagining is a subject who is an entity (object). Not sure what the big deal is.
There are no teachers. Merely imagined teaching.
lol jk
What does the imagining is a temporary apparition that fails to see it is nothing more than an eddy in the vast river of existence. And yet, that recognition can be wholesome and contributes to an ever-growing awareness.
Nothing becomes/grows that was not already before. And the temporary is within the eternal, so if it does not diverge, perhaps it will remain?
Here is the proof - a manifestation of the essence of a person overflowing with shit.
1 Like
Those who are reduced by faith to the state of an animal have no divisions at all. Faith excludes the use of reason.
