In eastern philosophy the Absolute is known as Parabrahman and to occult philosophy is known as the Void or Ever-Darkness. According to I. K. Taimni both the Vedas and the Upanishads contain indirect hints to an Ultimate Reality an unknowable principle. Taimni describes the Parabrahman as unknowable by the human mind and unthinkable but the highest object of realization and the most profound object of philosophical enquiry.[43] Taimni wrote that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_(philosophy) The above excerpt from Wikipedia claims that there is an unknowable Absolute Reality or Void that is the source and cause of all things. You may also be familiar with the term Ein Sof to refer to it. What I found in the Wiki entry is the word "ineffable" to describe it because it is in essence, beyond words. I believe that the recent discovery of the Higgs field gives evidence of something that exists which few have experienced let alone are able to describe because it is invisible and non-relative. However, be that as it may, as we have failed to describe it thus far, it is real and therefore it is subject to some kind of a description. Since reality itself is subject to description.
I started this thread to discuss the experience and personal accounts of The Absolute and to trace back in History the descriptions of people who have also experienced it to see if the accounts tally up as evidence of its reality. In other words, to provide evidence for its existence.
“The little space within the heart is as great as the vast universe. The heavens and the earth are there, and the sun and the moon and the stars. Fire and lightening and winds are there, and all that now is and all that is not.” ― Swami Prabhavananda, The Upanishads: Breath from the Eternal Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That Wiki article about the Absolute in Hinduism is useless and pointless. In Hinduism the Absolute is unknown and unknowable, as it has NO attributes. It just cannot be defined except in the negative, even that too partially. List an attribute like cruel, kind, hot, cold any color, gender etc. It IS NOT THAT. It is neither males, nor female nor both nor neither. So He is a misnomer in this case. This Parbrahamm that is sung about daily by Hindus. Spinoza comes close.
Nice picture. Very poetic. Seed for a song. And all of this is, because you say it is? Does a thing become more believable because of its poetry? We all want to believe in the pretty. This is how cats get away with destroying every life form on earth smaller than they are.
Yep..pretty much. Which is why there is no deep poetic prose based on cats destroying smaller lifeforms. Unless you're a nihilist who wants to believe in the banal and mundane. How's that working out for you?
And you're ok with that. No question mark required. Pretty is superior. Got it. I already knew what you were, no need to reinforce. I'd imagine it's working out much the same for me as it is for you. I'm still alive, you're still alive. The only odd thing is that you equate nihilism with the banal and mundane. How terribly limiting that must be for you.
Apparently, a "Cosmopolitan" editor. They work under the same kind of principle. If its pretty, its defensible. And marketable. Your willingness to understand a different point of view is only skin deep. I know that. No need to reiterate. Perhaps I should write a poem about it.
No..I don't edit magazines. Care to take a another stab? Why should I be obligated to understand you? Are you projecting absolute morals onto your vast meaningless universe now? Tsk tsk..
It wasn't a stab, it was a moral comparison. And I don't believe you should be obligated to understand me. My "vast meaningless universe" has a tendency to look after itself.
Moral comparisons in an amoral universe? How does that work? How "zen"! Turns out we're on the same page after all.
So, all people can be divided into three categories: the intermediate group of "materialists", demoniac people, and people who seek spiritual Perfection, i.e. Union with God. For the latter group, the main component of spiritual self-realization should consist in development of the spiritual heart — the energy of the anahata chakra (see [7,9]). An optimal achievement for them is Mergence (as consciousness, or buddhi) with the Higher Purusha or even Entering the Abode of the Creator and Mergence with Him there. One must learn to live in these states during one’s life in the physical body. Those who succeeded in this acquire the ability to control matter, as it was demonstrated by Jesus Christ, Babaji and Others [11,14]; today it is demonstrated by David Copperfield and Sathya Sai Baba. http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/Swami_Center/en/text/New_Upanishad.pdf People are divided into three groups: Intermediate (materialists), evil (demonaic) and finally spiritual (seekers and practitioners, as well as those who achieve union with God).
Again, I have to ask, what is the purpose with this post? You have merely quoted and then summarised the quote. Is it answering a question raised? If so, which? Is it countering someone else's position? If so, which? It seems you are just making any excuse to preach, in one guise or another.
My "we're the chosen minority" alarm went off on that. That's the delusional mindset of religion: WE'RE God's special children and everyone else is lost. That's a load of crap. It may make you feel good to believe that, but for all the wrong reasons. Everyone has their own unique path.