View Article  What does Hinduism imply about our relationship to the Causative Force? Part II of II

What does Hinduism imply about our relationship to the Causative Force?

 

Part II of II

...The Causative Force:

 

We, you are a part of the Causative Force.

 

Your wife is a part of the Causative Force.

 

Your child is a part of the Causative Force. Your neighbor is a part of the Causative Force.

 

A black man is a part of the Causative Force.

 

The physically challenged, the poor, the street sweeper, the rich, the sick, the person getting ready to overdose, the person getting ready to jump off the bridge, the beggar, the soldier facing you are all part of the Causative Force.

 

The Causative Force fills our bodies; the Causative Force is the essence of each and every one of us.

 

A different perspective?

 

How can we even doubt it?

 

A new perspective forcing us to look at ourselves, look at others differently, treat each other differently?

 

Absolutely.

 

A new perspective encouraging us to perceive ourselves differently and perceive others we may encounter within our universe differently?

 

Hopefully.

 

End

View Article  What does Hinduism imply about our relationship to the Causative Force? Part I of II

What does Hinduism imply about our relationship to the Causative Force?

 

 

Part I of II

 

Hinduism states that the Causative Force and self are identical.

 

 

If the world is just an appearance existing in a Causative Force, then this would provide the understanding of why the universe was molded out of nothingness.

 

This would explain the eternal state of the soul beyond the temporary status of our physical reality. It would explain why the soul could remain should the universe be dissolved.

 

And if the universe were dissolved, destroyed, where does that leave your soul?

 

It leaves your soul existing within the Causative Force.

 

It leaves your soul as being a part of the Causative Force.

 

We have incorporated much of the basic premises of Hinduism into our religions.

 

Why are we so reluctant to accept this part? It would do nothing to undermine our present basic modern religions and would in fact do quite the opposite.

 

It would unite us all under an understanding of commonality while demanding we accept, respect, and find comfort in the uniqueness of our faiths, our religions.

 

 

To be continued: Part II of II: The Causative Force:...

View Article  'and' versus Either The East Or The West

Consciousness, knowing, knowledge, experiencing, …

 

So what’s the point?

 

The point is to live life.

 

The West: Symbiosis: Science, All is in the physical, all aspects of consciousness emerge from the physical, the physical affects consciousness, each aspect of the physical affects the other in some manner or other, phenomenology …

 

The East: Panentheism: All is in consciousness, all aspects of the physical emerge from consciousness, consciousness affects the physical, each aspect of consciousness affects the other in some manner or other, existentialism …

 

Symbiotic panentheism:

 

It is not just about you, it is not just about you reaching Nirvana, you obtaining Nirvana, you entering Nirvana

 

It is about Nirvana absorbing you and other ‘self/s’.

 

It is about Nirvana absorbing billions, trillions, of ‘self’ existences.

 

It is about collective consciousness avoiding eternal recurrence through the process of ‘creating’ newness through ‘you’ and others like you.

 

Without you Nirvana, collective consciousness, alaya consciousness, amala consciousness, God – the omniscient being … stagnates in an existence of eternal equilibrium, eternal recurrence …

 

Without you Nirvana, collective consciousness, alaya consciousness, amala consciousness, God – the omniscient being … stagnates in a sensory deprivation chamber of its own making where the fluid within which it is immersed is known knowledge, known experiencing, known conclusions to all scenarios except how to generate ‘newness’, generate variety, generate diversity, generate wonder ....

 

Without you, without discrete entities of ‘self’, without you, Omniscience remains impotent in the sense that Omniscience knows everything except how to create what does not exist.

 

The seeming paradox is irrational.

 

Only a merging of East and West provides an understanding as to how it is both East and West are correct but not while standing isolated one from the other but when standing together embracing one another.

 

Only the rejection of the ‘either/or’ scenario embraced by both the East and West provides the solution.

 

Only the ‘and’ scenario presented by symbiotic panentheism provides the system theistic model, the cosmological model, the metaphysical model which unites East and West and thereby completes the picture of reality and thus revealing the solution to the question: So what’s the point.

 

The question you must ask of yourself then becomes: Just what is it you are going to add to Nirvana, bring with you to Heaven, inject into collective consciousness, inject into God …

 

It is your choice no one else’s, given to you through the gift of free will.

View Article  Hindusim

HINDUISM

1500 BC

What new concept has Hinduism firmly established within the East?

1. Monotheism

2. The Identicality of the Causative Force and the Self

3. The Eternal Soul

The effects upon humanity have been enormous.

View Article  Collective Consciousness

Greg: Please give me your ideas on the relative importance of the suffering of:

the rich/powerful vs the poor …

 

djs: Suffering is suffering and is not measured in dollars and cents nor is it measured in terms of relative power.

 

Having said that one cannot deny the rich and powerful are capable of generating more suffering than the poor by using what the poor do not have at their disposal, namely: wealth and power.

Greg: …men vs women

 

djs: Again suffering is suffering. Human gender is simply a product of the physical. Consciousness may be affected by gender but consciousness itself is gender neutral.

Greg: …humans vs animals

 

djs: Although we cannot say for certain, it appears suffering is only suffering if one is capable of knowing or self-knowing, self-conscious, self-awareness, or in essence the existence of ‘self’. ‘Self’-knowing is a product of consciousness.

 

Again, although we cannot say for certain, it appears other levels and basic forms of consciousness could potentially exist.

 

Plants appear to have a different form of consciousness than animals. Biologists have found plants capable of communicating the presence of insect infestation.

 

Animals such as mammals have five senses just as humans do. This introduces the concept: consciousness of one’s five senses.

 

Humans have an additional layer of consciousness, which we believe is unique to humans, what the Buddhists call the ‘mano layer’ of consciousness which is ‘consciousness of ‘self’ or what the West would call ‘self awareness’. Although Buddhist consider this form of consciousness to be a problem they speak of it extensively.

 

In addition there may well exist the concept of collective consciousness as espoused by Nichiren, Jung, Shakyamuni, Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu …

 

‘It is from this strong attachment, or clinging, to a reified alaya consciousness that mano consciousness generates the sense of a limited, isolated self referred to in Buddhism as the lesser self.

When the mano consciousness functions in this manner it gives rise to a series of powerful delusions that manifest in the other, more immediate layers of perception and consciousness as attachment to and pride in this proscribed sense of selfhood. The delusion that the reified alaya conscious is one's true self is identified with fundamental ignorance, a turning away from the truth of the interconnectedness of all being. [both, one cannot rationally dismiss ‘self’] It is this sense of one's self as separate and isolated from others that gives rise to discrimination against others, to destructive arrogance and acquisitiveness.’ The Institute of Oriental Philosophy 2002-06

 

Greg: …all animals with central nervious systems (including humans) vs plant and other forms of life

 

djs:  I think the above answers this question.

View Article  What does early Christian philosophy reinforce about the significance of existence, life? Part II of II

What does early Christian philosophy reinforce about  the significance of existence, life?

 

Part II of II

...So it was that omnipresence grew over atheism (a Causative Force not existing) and over pantheism (a Causative Force is the same size as the universe).

 

Western/Middle Eastern religions expanded the Causative Force to a size larger than the universe but not large enough to have the universe located within it.

 

The Causative Force grew but maintained the potential to grow even more.

 

Behavior improved but maintained the potential to improve even more.

 

Significance of life grew but maintained the potential to become even more significant.

 

 

Life gains significance each time we increase the size of the Causative Force.

 

As such, it would seem only logical that we would want to increase our understanding of the size of the Causative Force to the greatest possible size we are capable of generating.

 

Today, we have advanced science to the point of understanding the possibility of our universe having a boundary.

 

The implication is that our universe may have an outside and, therefore, may in fact be located within something.

 

End

View Article  Collective Consciousness

djs: Greg, sorry for the delay in responding to you. Recent events combined with your remarks led me to take some time off to think.

 

Greg: I am glad to see that you are discussing Suffering. You stated:

"your suffering is no more important than that of another"

 

djs: Greg, the concept being discussed Aug. 12, 2006 blog addressed the issue of suffering relative to the whole, relative to collective consciousness. Collective consciousness is the whole ‘within’ which you and I, all discrete entities of consciousness, exist.

 

The idea of existing within collective consciousness is a simple idea, is straight forward and speaks to a different understanding of reality than the West presently embraces. The idea becomes crystal clear within the Western thinking when one asks the question: Where is the physical universe within which we exist?

 

Upon adding the symbiotic panentheistic understanding of ‘nothingness’ and the Western concepts of the primal atom exploding into our present physical universe, symmetry, discrete, non-discrete, the idea of collective consciousness begins to cause the Western concept of reality to overlap the Eastern concept of reality.

 

What does all this have to do with suffering? The net result of suffering, in terms of the West, is understood to apply to individual consciousness.

 

The net result of suffering, in terms of the East is understood to apply to collective consciousness.

 

Unfortunately for society, Eastern and Western societies think in terms of either/or as opposed to ‘and’. If society would step back and reevaluate its thinking, society might realize this is an ‘and’ situation.

 

As such suffering becomes a case of: The net result of suffering applies both to individual consciousness and to collective consciousness.

 

The result using the ‘and’ conjunction verses the ‘either/or’ conjunctions is an understanding that we reduce suffering both to alleviate our personal suffering as well as to reduce the suffering introduced into the collective consciousness separated from us by the physical universe and the same collective consciousness within in which we will be immersed upon leaving the physical universe.

 

Regarding the rest of you comments:

 

Greg: Please give me your ideas on the relative importance of the suffering of:

the rich/powerful vs the poor

men vs women

humans vs animals

all animals with central nervious systems (including humans) vs plant and other forms of life

Greg

 

djs: I will address each of these issues over the next few consecutive days.

 

View Article  What does early Christian philosophy reinforce about the significance of existence, life? Part I of II

What does early Christian philosophy reinforce about  the significance of existence, life?

 

 

Part I of II

 

 

Early Christian philosophy rejected the concept of omnipresence while professing to believe in it.

 

All the while, however, this philosophy adamantly held onto the concept of the significance of life.

 

 

The concept of the individual possessing a quality known as eternal existence was a fundamental premise of early Christian philosophy.

 

This was a complex issue and the scholars of the day were unable to determine a rational reason to explain it.

 

If the scholars were unable to explain the rational for such a model, how could one expect the common individual to do so?

 

Since we had no conception regarding the reason why life ‘existed,’ our only alternative was to rely upon someone to tell us ‘why’ eternal life must be.

 

We, as a species, as individuals, find it hard to give up hoping.

 

As such, we accepted the process of letting others tell us why we existed.

 

We sought out the most logical source of hope.

 

We sought out faith, religion. Thus it was that religion was once again able to provide a model explaining the significance of life.

 

Western/Middle Eastern religions built a model based upon the separation of ‘good’ and ‘evil,’ built upon the separation of ‘heaven’ and ‘hell,’ based upon the separation of the universe and the Causative Force.

 

To be continued: Part II of II: So it was that omnipresence...