Kundalini Gateway Email List Archives

line

To: K-list
Recieved: 2001/11/09 18:14
Subject: Re: [K-list] Re: DXM and misc. observations/remarks
From: felix


On 2001/11/09 18:14, felix posted thus to the K-list:


----- Original Message -----
From: "Joshua Sutterfield" <joshuATnospamumr.edu>
<>
> Yet still the concept is pure and true. But it is a "yes" to things,
> without being a "no" to other things. I actually think there is
> conceptually only one thing that can be such. That is somewhat God to
> me. Also, I forget which post but the idea was mentioned of deciding
> your own God and his traits, and the idea that we each have our own.
> It is very much a religious thing to say there is one and only one, or
> that all others are false. Yet the concept (however much we fail to
> reproduce it in our minds, and only own a "local copy") is of One (at
> least the concept of which I speak). It is the highest.. it is an
> inclusion, it is even a paradox, because it rejects none. All are God,
> but all are One. There can be no other because there IS no other.

Hi Josh,

I have enjoyed reading your post very much. I agree with practically all of
it. I am going to have to contemplate and reflect on your notions about
locality.

I have been writing and reflecting on one of the Ten Commandments because it
offers a key to me as to how we are all One. The commandment that I am
taking into consideration is: Thou shalt have no other God before me.

It is the 'me' part that triggers me off. I had to ask myself how many me's
I gnow. Well, just one. Me. That's the only me I actually gnow. So I ask
myself if that me that I gnow is God. Yes. It is. But only in the sense that
there is only One me, and each of us think we're It. The "local" me is
conceptually contrived of what is "not me". I create the elements of the
not-me by making them false gods. I take something out of the whole that is
It by giving it a name. A nay-me. This collection of naymed things are the
maya or illusion often referred to as that which separates us from the
omnisciousness that is IT (which is undivided, pure Concept just as you
described it in your post).

felix


http://www.kundalini-gateway.org


blank
DISCLAIMER!

Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
blank
K.  List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and  Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
line
  • Feel free to submit any questions you might have about what you read here to the Kundalini mailing list moderators, and/or the author (if given). Specify if you would like your message forwarded to the list. Please subscribe to the K-list so you can read the responses.
  • All email addresses on this site have been spam proofed by the addition of ATnospam in place of the at symbol symbol.
  • All posts publicly archived with the permission of the people involved. Reproduction for anything other than personal use is prohibited by international copyright law. ©
  • This precious archive of experiential wisdom is made available thanks to sponsorship from Fire-Serpent.org.
  • URL: http://www.kundalini-gateway.org/klist/k2001b/k200105402.html