What determines the laws of nature?

[melanie]

Now I understand, and I stand corrected.
Thank you for clarifying, I also agree that the soul is timeless

Yes, and there is only one soul...living as eternity within itself.

Matter is the manifestation of the soul/spirit.

'We' are the ''experiencing'' of the soul/senses.

It experiences in myriad of different ways ''THROUGH'' it's manifestations and ''AS'' it's manifestations.

These two sides of the same coin are arising mutually in concord with each other.

The soul comes as the lower plane/self ..but also exists as the higher plane/self simultaneously as consciousness the witness.

The lower plane/self is where the ''experiencing'' of love/hate/pain/pleasure all emotions happens.

Non-attachment to emotions is known as the higher plane/self ....the witness.

This witness state is who we are, the eternal witness of the one self/soul...having a myriad of experiencing's as duality.
Just as no two finger prints are the same, 'we' are herenow experiencing from our unique angle/perspective/perception within the overall changeless drama.

[melanie]

Ok.....but i'm using the room as an analogy for 'consciousness'.

Consciousness is infinite.....where possibilities are also infinite.

And because consciousness is non-local all appearances in it are illusory...In that they appear real but they are not.

Sometimes, it appears that the concept 'illusory' is taken out of context,
it can be mis-understood or mis-interpreted.
If this is a dream, then why does it feel real.

To switch context then, we can say yes 'appearances' are tangible.
The fire is hot to touch....it will hurt us of course this is true.

'We' and every other sentient creature are the 'instrument' in which these 'experiences' arise and fall.

The sensations sensed are appearing ''through us'' .. ''as us'' .. but they are not .. ''us'' .. and yet they appear to be.

'We' are the ''experiencing'' of these sensations sensed.
But they are not who we are.

The pain we feel as 'sensation' is just that .. it's a sensation.
if we touch hot fire, it hurts, but this sensation is temporal.
It was there temporarily for awhile ..and then it goes.
Where does it go ? where did it come from ....NOWhere ..that's where ..... there is nowhere else...is there?

All these sensations sensed are already known in consciousness .. as this conception .. appearing HERE&NOW One without a Second.

The (i) thought is a movement in consciousness..it is a part and not separate from unitary consciousness.

And just as you too, dream at night, sometimes the dream appears very vidid and real..
the dream can be very pleasurable, and strong feelings & sensations are felt within the dream.
So, Where did that come from if it was just a dream?


'We' are the ''eternal infinite witness''... as well as the ''temporal finite experiencing'' of these sensations/experiences.

WE are appearing as 'finite characters' ' experiencing'
the .. 'changeless, infinite, endless drama'.

There never was a separate (i)(me) (you) that is the illusion.
The dream is real of course.
But the characters in the dream are not separate from the dreamer ..
and that dreamer is (awareness) dreaming all ..One with itself.

This is a good video for anyone who is interested.
It explains in a rather more detailed expert way.. what it is is i'm trying to say.

http://www.closertotruth.com/topic/H...Conscious-/137

[melanie]

"High spirits encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds"-Albert Einstein

That is such a perfect quote to use when we are dealing with semantics.

Good old uncle albert.....he certainly knew a thing or two eh?

When the 'mind' resists ....chaos ensues.

Why because it's going against nature.
Resistance .. flows in the opposite direction of no-resistance.

We have to say yes to every-moment, because that moment arises just as it should, and will never be any different.
When we say yes, the universe echo's that back.

The earth is conscious... .....SHE flows without resistance .....SHE is unconditional love.
That's why we need to look after her, if we don't and we resist natural law, she will let you know.

I haven't even heard the quote before...but it's the best one i've heard for ages.

Of course, i've heard that one where.... alcohol is better known as ''Spirits'' .....lol
Cos, it is when we are high on alcohol that we lose that assumed inhibited separate self..
that was never really there to begin with, and so we all become one.....
IOW we all become our natural self.....bliss

For those of us who don't drink....becoming enlightened will do the same trick ..

Now, back to the main topic of discussion here..

......and apologies for that spontaneous arising tangent..

[melanie]

I say that you are completely scientifically incorrect with your pet theory. If you wish to refute something that I offer, you will need more than your simple gainsaying and 'magical gravitational hypothesis' to refute what I offer.
As you cannot, I will accept your opinion as just that, your opinion. No person is of sufficient 'authority' so as to have his unsupported opinion refute anything.
I disagree with your pet hypothesis from many angles and Perspectives, but respecting your mental effort to come to where you are, I see no need to tear apart everything that you say. You are obviously too emotionally/egoically tied to your 'pet' for a mutually enlightening discussion, anyway. I intuit that you do not desire 'truth' but to validate your pet hypothesis (intellectual vanity). That is not science or philosophy, or honest.
So, I do not engage you about your hypothesis.
I suggest that you refrain from such arbitrary and unsupported dismissals if you want more than a similar dismissal. That which is offered without evidentiary support can be likewise dismissed! And the mere existence of your 'hypothesis' refutes nothing that I say, so, on that note, if you want to play with me, you'd be wise to bring some equipment other than nyaaah nyaaah nyaaah!

Yes, your disagreement has been noted.
You may note that, as far as I am concerned, your 'hypothesis' is totally trivial and without merit, and is a prime example of 'intellish!t'; sounds 'intelligent' (scientific sounding words and all) but is full of sh!t! Google it.

And thank you for your support of;
'The First Law of Soul Dynamics'; "For every perspective, there is an equal and opposite Perspective!" - Book of Fudd (1:2)

Blimey nameless! .. talk about crabby, but they say that....

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj ...The Indian Sage who smoked himself to death...
Apparently he used to throw people out of his ''Gatherings'' if they didn't listen with their ears and see with their eyes.
Anyone asking too many questions were quickly shown the exit.

Awakening to the dream, does apparently make one quite crabby, me included.
I think i must have upset just about everyone i can think of on this forum.
But my hearts in the right place, that's all that matters, at the end of the day/road/life/path/goal/.......
Where ever it is we are going now! .....bla bla bla ...

Sometimes a good firm poke with a stick -un-sticks the blockage.....so nothing wrong with that.

I also agree, with the '' High Sounding Words''
I mean, what's that all about......huh? .. it's like what..can we have that in layman's language please.....

[nameless]

"High spirits encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds"-Albert Einstein

By your quote, I must imagine that you fancy yourself a "high spirit". Good luck with that.
Heres another one for your ego;

" Again and again some people in the crowd wake up,
They have no ground in the crowd,
And they emerge according to much broader laws.
They carry strange customs with them
And demand room for bold gestures.
The future speaks ruthlessly through them."
Rainer Maria Rilke

(Your ego can imagine yourself as the one 'awakened'...)

"Each progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand mediocre minds appointed to guard the past."
-Maurice Maeterlinck

(And I, or anyone, who disagrees with, or even questions your 'enlightenment' is automatically one of these "mediocre minds"! See how that works? Now you try...)

That should get your young ego all warm and fuzzy feeling...
Good luck with that.

Your meaningful and well thought out (as best as you are capable, no doubt) response has been noted.
Thank you for your time.
Shall we discontinue this conversation? You don't want to waste too much time on 'mediocre minds' such as this one, and I need to concentrate on my video games and action figures...
Peace

[nameless]

Blimey nameless! .. talk about crabby, but they say that....

He set the tone and I responded in kind.
Isn't that how the game works?

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj ...The Indian Sage who smoked himself to death...
Apparently he used to throw people out of his ''Gatherings'' if they didn't listen with their ears and see with their eyes.
Anyone asking too many questions were quickly shown the exit.

Only stupid, rude and/or egoically disingenuous questions.

The great Acarya Maitreya says in his
Saptadasa-bhumi-sastra-yogacarya:

"Before accepting a challenge for a
debate, one should consider whether his opponent is
a person worthy of carrying on debate through the
process of proposition (siddhanta), reason (hetu),
example (udaharana), etc. He should, before
proceeding there, consider whether the debate will
exercise any good influence on his opponent, the
umpire, and the audience. But first of all, he
should consider whether a debate - even won - would
not bring him more harm than benefit."

[melanie]

He set the tone and I responded in kind.
Isn't that how the game works?

Yes nameless, i agree.

I greet people in the same spirit with which they greet me.

That's nature.

Expansion or Contraction.

[nameless]

Yes, nameless i agree.

I greet people in the same spirit with which they greet me.

That's nature.

Expansion or Contraction.

And I have enjoyed our respectful and thoughtful conversations. Thank you.

And, my, how we have strayed from the topic (which I have already answered and am now bored with the 'non-question')...

[melanie]

He set the tone and I responded in kind.
Isn't that how the game works?


Only stupid, rude and/or egoically disingenuous questions.

The great Acarya Maitreya says in his
Saptadasa-bhumi-sastra-yogacarya:

"Before accepting a challenge for a
debate, one should consider whether his opponent is
a person worthy of carrying on debate through the
process of proposition (siddhanta), reason (hetu),
example (udaharana), etc. He should, before
proceeding there, consider whether the debate will
exercise any good influence on his opponent, the
umpire, and the audience. But first of all, he
should consider whether a debate - even won - would
not bring him more harm than benefit."

Yep,


''When one has one's hand full of truth it is not always wise to open it. ''

'' Emptiness meets emptiness. ''

[melanie]

And I have enjoyed our respectful and thoughtful conversations. Thank you.

And, my, how we have strayed from the topic (which I have already answered and am now bored with the 'non-question')...

Thank-you too but not two ...

Now, what was we talking about ?

oh yeah, that was it ''The Story'' .........................hmm!

What was the story again??????