|
|
Post by paul on Jan 19, 2012 13:38:30 GMT 9.5
So is our God a God of Love?
Or perhaps a God of Truth (Intelligence)
Or perhaps a God of Will
Or another sort all together?
Does it matter?
|
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Jan 19, 2012 15:13:39 GMT 9.5
God is all these things and more. When the great Sufi Ramakrishna was asked whether God has form or no form, Ramakrishna answered: God is with form and is also formless...and He is also what is beyond these things as well. Why do you seek to apply limits to God?..."
Part of the essence of Ramakrishna's teachings on the subject of God were that " God-forms" are for those who cannot "grasp"the idea of God without them; the "formlessness" of God is for those who have attained the capacity and the spiritual stability to comprehend fully what that means.(This would be the experience of "crossing the Abyss") but one can much more easily attain to the "formless" God by means of the "forms of God" As Krishna said to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita: "The trancendent is difficult for mortals to attain" implying , of course that one must be "beyond life and death" before one can truly grasp this truth.
It is a fact that there are many spiritual things that it is literally dangerous to learn, because if the mind is not prepared for the revelation, it will simply come unhinged. Again, I invoke the image of Robert Pirsig in "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance".
Has anyone here ever heard of the "dharmakaya light"
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 19, 2012 15:43:00 GMT 9.5
While our God is no doubt more than humans can conceive, does our God have a flavour of the (cosmic) month?
If so, does humanity have some duty to promote that flavour?
|
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Jan 20, 2012 7:01:42 GMT 9.5
While our God is no doubt more than humans can conceive, does our God have a flavour of the (cosmic) month? What does this even mean?  |
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jan 20, 2012 8:01:05 GMT 9.5
Does mankind come hardwired with purpose and use that purpose when imaging their God ??
Does the purpose change over time ??
That is how I read it.
I rather think that as God is All... if we name Him we are probably just projecting our individual purpose upon him.
(I am assuming we are talking GOD here, and not 'Gods' or 'God')
It seems to me that despite the harsh reality of our world, Love seems to be the only thing that can overcome all. 'He ain't heavy, he's my brother".
I wouldn't be too surprised to discover that life on Earth is a game we play to develop soul and spirit. Dungeons and Dragons big time. A reality show. The Trueman Show. Did you know that the camera light which dropped near Truman as he was about to get in his car had the words "Sirius (9 Canis Major)" written on it. Which has been said to be the Star in Freemasonry. The colour blue features prominently in the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 20, 2012 8:13:27 GMT 9.5
Does God develop new attributes? (The term God here is used to indicate a lesser Entity than the one that manifested all of the universes that humans can detect - i.e. the GAOTU)
For example, there is a tradition that the god of this solar system (solar logos) was, before the pralaya, a god of intelligence.
If so, is the task of humanity to contribute to the new qualities being developed by the Being whose body is the solar system?
If our god is a god of love, all human actions taken without love may be directly contrary to the Divine Plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Jan 20, 2012 8:15:07 GMT 9.5
Why are we assuming that it is a "Him?"
According to whom? I say it is the planet Venus.
I see blue all over the place every day. It's a pretty common color. Doesn't mean it's Masonic.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 20, 2012 8:17:12 GMT 9.5
Quite so. The Masonic blue is peculiar.
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jan 20, 2012 8:24:57 GMT 9.5
Why are we assuming that it is a "Him?" It does not seem appropriate but probably closest to the truth. If I wrote She every man and their dog would ride off into the sunset without reading the post. Sad, but true. All in all, Him is a soft option. |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 20, 2012 8:31:15 GMT 9.5
. All in all, Him is a soft option. I was noticing that some months ago. I was looking at The Source of All (that humans can see) aka the GAOTU, and certainly it appeared to be male. And then I noticed another facet (facing away from this Creation) that appeared to be female. It looks to me as if I can see a pair of Creations - manifested separately by the male and female aspects of the Creator. I had seen a lower order version of that with a bust that I have of Kwan Yin. Occasionally I can see Kali peeping around from the back of the bust. And the interesting part is that avatars seem to be secondments from the other Creation. |
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jan 20, 2012 8:42:02 GMT 9.5
Quite so. The Masonic blue is peculiar.  wonder what colour blue the fairy was in the story of Pinocchio - and the wishing star? Pinocchio was written by a Freemason, did you know? |
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 20, 2012 11:45:15 GMT 9.5
Some systems of Masonry use red. I see red around all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 20, 2012 12:39:46 GMT 9.5
Some systems of Masonry use red. Quite so. There is more than one temple in the heavens. |
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 20, 2012 16:11:52 GMT 9.5
Is not all one?
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 20, 2012 17:54:24 GMT 9.5
The human being has organs that are separately organised and the organs have cells that are highly differentiated. Yet the human is one.
And indeed the human race is one.
If man then made in the image of God, then God too has differentiated organs.
What "temples" might there be then in the heavens?
|
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 21, 2012 6:44:22 GMT 9.5
So all the symbols are the same and the uninitiated is the same as the initiated. There are no differences and this conversation is pointless.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 21, 2012 7:04:54 GMT 9.5
So all the symbols are the same and the uninitiated is the same as the initiated. There are no differences and this conversation is pointless. Perhaps the argument needs some refinement. Oneness may be structured rather than amorphous. For example the internet is one but has much differentiated structure. |
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 21, 2012 13:57:44 GMT 9.5
If it is amorphous how could you know that it is one?
|
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jan 21, 2012 14:25:00 GMT 9.5
It could be that one who followed a god of intelligence might, at early stages, perceive God as undifferentiated Force. Others may perceive God as undifferentiated Light.
In practice of course, all intelligences have structure.
|
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 22, 2012 1:40:25 GMT 9.5
Then the structure can be defined and isn't just the fancy of one person's vision.
|
|
wonder what colour blue the fairy was in the story of Pinocchio - and the wishing star? Pinocchio was written by a Freemason, did you know?