[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl

Michael, I think that (just to expand on my previous comment) that what's inner is outer (and vice versa). We project and inject (?) our perceptions on ourselves and our environment. We create our own reality. Through my travels I have hung out with many different groups of people and the accepted reality is always different. I am finding it difficult to believe in objective anything. I don't only think that outer is an illusion, I think inner is as well. I am not sure where reality lies (if anywhere). the only thing that I am sure of is the universal vibration that I have heard coming from trees and have sensed in other places. I definitely think the "I" is an illusion.

You are
so right,"I" is an illusion,and by accepting that fact,we can move on!


kind regards michael.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

From the day we are born,and for most of us,until the day we exit this vale of
tears,we are fooled byare senses,they lead us to believe that there is an inside
and an outside,this is complety false,yes I know all the objections and arguments against this,but nevertheless,there is no outside period!Our senses
tells us thatthere is,our whole network globally tells us the same.In the relative
state,there is indeed the "appearance" of in and out,but thatis all it is an
"appearance"it has no "substance" because it is an illusion?We as a human race,
are all interconnected and locked in firm and "Deep" to this universe ofwhich we
are all part of.The "deeper" we go within we begin to see the connections,and
all of these connections are "INNER Connections" there are NO outer ones at all!


kindest regards michael.

I again agree but not a fish curry may be another glass of lassi. I am vegetarian.

[michellemfry]

One could view the creation act as the total aquisition and merger of all into one to be kept intact forever more. Ensuring that without would be a banished concept. The sense of without could just be a remnant illusion harbored in the matter of which we are made, a fading memory of what once was.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by michellemfry

One could view the creation act as the total aquisition and merger of all into one to be kept intact forever more. Ensuring that without would be a banished concept. The sense of without could just be a remnant illusion harbored in the matter of which we are made, a fading memory of what once was.

That is very poetic,like it.

kind regards michael.

[harmonygirl]

or one could view the creation act as simply the One simultaneously becoming and being transcendentally...

[pagan3142]

What if DNA (a virus) is the driving force behind creation in all creatures ?
Think about it ,it may be the driving force behind all of creation. making the weak die out and the strong stonger. DNA always seems to survive.
Suppose that DNA (RNA etc.) is the real driving force to pro-create in all living matter. what happend to our free will ?

Are we fooling ourselves into thinking we are superior ?
Mayby we are missing the obvious , the one thing that is staring us right in the face. Where better to hide than in plain sight ?
when it is finished with us we die.
THE END.

[mkirkpatrick]

I suppose that using words like within and without,presuppose that there is two aspects of being,one inner and one outer,this too is in the last analysis I
think wrong,it is right in the relative sense,but wrong in the eternal sense,in this relative world that we inhabit,clouded by maya,and fooled by our senses,it seems right and proper to relate in an inner and outer sense,as long
as we know,that this is unreal.we are all in the process of be-coming,that is
what the evolutionary process is about,and when that process has run its full
course,there will be no inner,or outer,there will just be Being!



kind regards michael.

[Guille]

How can humans be so stupid as to think that with a pair of computers and some blood samples, we can in a few years fully understand our identity. What is DNA? NO-thing. It's in fact only a language, the language of our body, of our physical existence... But we all klnow that the objects of language (like words, or numbers) don't physically exist, therefore the DNA fails to explain our physical existence. And yet, even if we did manage to explain our physical existence with science, philosophy and other tools, still we wouldn't have explained most of our existence.

[harmonygirl]

Well, Guille, I don't agree that DNA is nothing. I agree with you that it is the language of our physical existence (I don't agree with you that it, like all other languages, doesn't have physical existence, I think this is contradictory). It certainly has nothing to do with a discussion of inner and outer and the illusory nature of either or both.

[hanzoganz]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl

I accept that you don't. I wouldn't like to live in your world. My point of view is that you are not all. We are all.

I think here is the main aspect of how we see the world nowadays. What you see is what you see. And that´s pretty much everything. So, if we are given the chance to decide what we want to see, we go for it, as soon as we realize we have the ability to do it. Once you see the world, you create it. There is not much out there but what we have created.

I like discussion, as long as they give intellectual pleasure. i lived 4 years in Vancouver and I made a world of myself that now, when I look at it, I´m not sure it was true, if it really existed. harmonygirl, if you have the chance, go have dinner at Savouir, at Thurlow and Haro. It´s just lovely and it would create a great experience. As for Madrid, I visited the city 2 summers ago. It was terrible hot. But i liked the Thyssen-Bornemisa and got drunk in a night club outside Atocha`s train station, where the bombs where put.

I talked about my experience just for you to compare it with the one you may have and see that even if the world is supposed to be the same, it is not, it depends on the one that takes a look at it.

salud