[leskey]

Hi, MJA.

Great example, by the way: either way your right!

Of course, any discussion on Michelangelo's David is pure conjecture. It is likely, though, that Michelangelo had a goal (objective) in mind before he started hacking away at the great slab of marble that was destined to become David...the objective (intent/cause) must precede the subjective (result/effect):

the application (ability, talent, technology, knowledge) of inspiration/imagination = creation/material existence

[Foas]

Originally Posted by melanie I was wondering why you referred to my post as - 'religious jargon' -you said '' is the 'religious jargon' necessary? i hadn't even mentioned religion, you were assuming my post as 'religious jargon' meaning high sounding words, and yet that was not my intention it was your judgement only, and that was my point, it was discrimination OK so generic language .. has no brand name .. it is all encompassing. but to assume religion as 'special language' is ignorance that was my point anyway that's what i was trying to explain all be it very badly, since words will always fall short in describing the indescribable it's not helpful to categorize religion and science it hinders the understanding of 'oneness' the fact that none of 'this' is really happening and 'we' do not exist except as an 'appearance' will still be difficult for the rational logic mind to grasp but it is a very basic and simple truth no jargon necessary. melanie

I like your ideas melanie, they appear to come from a deep understanding. I can see that trying to convey ideas deeper than words must be frustrating with people criticising your wording as "religious jargon". There is no need for defense though, people are only as open-minded as they are. You can only attempt to open someone's gates, it is up to each gatekeeper whether they let you open them. Keep up the good work.

[leskey]

Originally Posted by melanie Hi, The root of all evil is .. there isn't one language is by definition dualistic so first of all to cut to the chase words already slice and separate the whole the whole is no-thing and every-thing arising mutually the whole is already complete without opposite so there can be no evil or good except as conceived [whole] yin yang entanglement IS arising mutually together it is the play of lila acting out here on earth maya it is the brahman the one original face [ VEIL ] appearing as the illusionary duality play lila .. VEIL .. re-arange this word and you will see EVIL also LIVE IT IS CONCEPT and has absolutely no reality except as conceived brahman appears for it's own amusement it appears as the play of lila appearing here on earth maya it is itself appearing for it's own amusement so there is neither evil or good in reality for in reality there is no-'thing' except as an appearance as some-'thing' melanie.

Melanie, because you won't let it go, here are some words from the FIRST of your FOUR posts of March 8: yin yang, lila, maya, brahman.

Of these, probably only "yin yang" and "maya" have wider understanding in the broader English speaking community (at least where I come from) and are, in fact, from a particular culture, cult, school of thought or religion. I don't need to use any "jargon" to make myself understood.

A real example of Oneness is to have the grace to "listen" to what is said or the respect to at least read what has already posted. I do think it is possible to have critical view without wasting energy by reverting to personal denigration (ie your use of the terms,
"discrimination" and "ignorance"). We are to a large extent saying the same thing.

I gather from your many posts since I joined TOE, that you hold certain Hindu beliefs: good for you! Is it possible for you to communicate with another person without reference to these beliefs unless it is invited? Because, to have no regard for another's sensibilities could be deemed as offensive...

[MJA]

Dear Leskey,

I really like your signature quote from Shopenhauer, I see things differently like that, and that is what brings me here.
What about you?
And sticking with the thread subject, do you or anyone else who reads this think that mankind is the only source of evil in the universe?
I think perhaps that we are.

"The task is not so much to see what no one yet has seen, but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everyone sees..." - Shopenhauer

=
MJA

[leskey]

Hi, MJA.

What brings me here? The sense of momentum that all things are about to change and the need to gauge if anybody "has yet thought about that which everyone sees..."

Mmmm, I also think that we are the source of Evil, but you did say, "all evil."

If I could borrow from Melanie's "yin yang" principle: most theories are based on the principles of balance or symmetry.

If as John (everymansmedium) says all information is Data, then the collective (human) consciousness is All Data/The Truth (about everything) for the good of all. However, it stands to reason we should be open to the possiblity of a collective consciousness that opposes this - perhaps,one that is..."inhuman?"

Would you like to disclose your area/s of "expertise" or motivation to participate at TOE?

[melanie]

Originally Posted by leskey Melanie, because you won't let it go, here are some words from the FIRST of your FOUR posts of March 8: yin yang, lila, maya, brahman. Of these, probably only "yin yang" and "maya" have wider understanding in the broader English speaking community (at least where I come from) and are, in fact, from a particular culture, cult, school of thought or religion. I don't need to use any "jargon" to make myself understood. A real example of Oneness is to have the grace to "listen" to what is said or the respect to at least read what has already posted. I do think it is possible to have critical view without wasting energy by reverting to personal denigration (ie your use of the terms, "discrimination" and "ignorance"). We are to a large extent saying the same thing. I gather from your many posts since I joined TOE, that you hold certain Hindu beliefs: good for you! Is it possible for you to communicate with another person without reference to these beliefs unless it is invited? Because, to have no regard for another's sensibilities could be deemed as offensive...

I hold no beliefs .. for religion is but a tool pointing to your real 'identity',
it is the 'pseudo self' that labels and holds false beliefs ...
nothing wrong with that .. Each the other and the One Love in action dreaming differences where there is none .. including this.

I am saddened by your assumption my writing is unwelcome,
and that you assume i have no regard for other's sensibilities,
and that you assume i am offensive with my i-deas,
yet 'apparently' you are the only one here on this forum, who has made such a comment.

The positive thing is you have open my eyes and made me realize that my writing is not appropriate here on this forum,
so in that light i will not be appearing on this forum again.

Even though i am saddened at your assumptions, this is water off a ducks back for me.

You are quite right to pick up on this leskey... for it is only when people are ready to understand the philosophy of non-duality
will this idea become absorbed into the human psyche ... i know that already anyway.

So NOW i am going to let it all go ... as YOU so eloquently put it.

In reality there is nothing to understand or believe in ... as all is ONENESS- WHOLE- COMPLETE- CONCEIVED-PERFECT

lacking nothing, wanting nothing, it is nothing and everything = eternal BEING or CONSCIOUSNESS

It is the rational moral logic mind that cannot accept that. ' pseudo self '


melanie.

[melanie]

= Foas: I can see that trying to convey ideas deeper than words must be frustrating with people criticising your wording as "religious jargon". There is no need for defense though,

Thank you for your kind concern,

Nothing wrong with being defensive, there is always a lesson in every action
it is the same one self playing this game of hide and seek.

The ego cannot be denied for it part and parcel of the whole charade
so a defense reaction spontaneously arose in my character.

I have been posting away for days with some i-deas i thought might be of interest,
they were appearing on this forum for people to take or leave,
my posts were not there to be judged yet apparently
that was the case.

melanie.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by melanie I hold no beliefs .. for religion is but a tool pointing to your real 'identity', it is the 'pseudo self' that labels and holds false beliefs ... nothing wrong with that .. Each the other and the One Love in action dreaming differences where there is none .. including this. I am saddened by your assumption my writing is unwelcome, and that you assume i have no regard for other's sensibilities, and that you assume i am offensive with my i-deas, yet 'apparently' you are the only one here on this forum, who has made such a comment. The positive thing is you have open my eyes and made me realize that my writing is not appropriate here on this forum, so in that light i will not be appearing on this forum again. Even though i am saddened at your assumptions, this is water off a ducks back for me. You are quite right to pick up on this leskey... for it is only when people are ready to understand the philosophy of non-duality will this idea become absorbed into the human psyche ... i know that already anyway. So NOW i am going to let it all go ... as YOU so eloquently put it. In reality there is nothing to understand or believe in ... as all is ONENESS- WHOLE- COMPLETE- CONCEIVED-PERFECT lacking nothing, wanting nothing, it is nothing and everything = eternal BEING or CONSCIOUSNESS It is the rational moral logic mind that cannot accept that. ' pseudo self ' melanie.

Melanie,when you cast the net out into the deep-there are times when we hit snags and
maybe consider hauling in out net and moving on,I implore you not to do so,you are a inspiration here,and I for one enjoy your posts,so stick around girl,thats an order,ok!


warmest regards michael.

[MJA]

Dear Melanie,

I found this quote today and think it appropriate for you.

Your worst enemy cannot harm you as much as your own unguarded thoughts. Develop the mind of equilibrium. You will always be getting praise and blame, but do not let either affect the poise of the mind: follow the calmness, the absence of pride. - Sutta Nipata

=
MJA

[melanie]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Melanie,when you cast the net out into the deep-there are times when we hit snags and maybe consider hauling in out net and moving on,I implore you not to do so,you are a inspiration here,and I for one enjoy your posts,so stick around girl,thats an order,ok! .... YES SIR! ! warmest regards michael.

Thanks Sweet Michael & MJA ... From Self to Self



Love. M