Jump to content
The Corroboree

Recommended Posts

Krli - ti - Ko. Higher oneness (cosmic love)

 

 

High attracter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the title of the thread too vague.  Hit wikipedia for a 'definition' of "god". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

 

But if you're asking what "God" means to me then sweet fuck all.  I am not religious so therefore a "God" has no relevance for me in that context.  I do consider myself 'spiritual' (which is another can of worms altogether).  If pushed, however, I would say that, logically, "God" is both nothing and everything at the same time...   antimatter/matter perhaps?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8 June 2016 at 7:07 PM, CrayZ said:

I find the title of the thread too vague. 

 

it was intentionally vague

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7 June 2016 at 10:13 AM, Zedo said:

I think before one can define 'God' to a level comprehendable by our narrow awareness - whether it be 'ones self', a higher entity, purely conscience as a whole, the list is infinet - we must first seek to discover what 'we' are - individually and/or collectively. 

But always remember - the last place you will ever find the truth about 'God', is religion. 

 

this was i suppose kind of the purpose of the question, most deistic religions kind of insert a human element into their gods which i suppose is kind of necessary when trying to construct another conscious entity other than our own (after all, human consciousness is the only consciousness we can ever hope to know).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was considering this 'baby' as a child of christ. completely new creational being from the completion of our learning here

 

as far as I'm aware the opportunity and potential on Earth is for us to realise our original intentions as the creator itself, thats who we are

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Humanity as god

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment it's a bit of moldivite inside my pillow

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God is an imaginary friend (with superpowers) for adults.

Even though none of us admit it we all ask him/her to grant wishes before we go to sleep or when something goes wrong.

I had him as one of my imaginary friends but none of the perks eventuated for me, he didn't grant any wishes and never seemed to have my back like other friends do, so I gave him the arse.

Now I'm like George from Seinfeld, I still believe in god but just for the bad things. Divine retribution is a real bitch, & god is one fucken vindictive bastard. But he also has a big heart and is very forgiving, so I'm sure he'll let me off & forgive me after he finishes drilling my arse with with pine cones.

Edited by Sallubrious
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the first hurdle with the question is the word itself. God suggests definition of something that in my mind is indefinable and the attempt is an insult. It also has this sour taste with its relation to religion, which for me is the furthest thing from god. The closest thing I can relate the feeling of god to is the trip you have that you then try to describe to someone, its just never going to translate. Maybe god is a feeling?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The sign and divinity have the same place and time of birth"

Jacques Derrida

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to me god is a notion to contain what is infinite.  and spirituality is merely approaching our infinite nature in whatever way we deem suitable, be it through monasticism, psychedelics or elsewhere derived insight.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a Hebrew mystic point of view, the G-d of the Old Testament is manifest in the presentation of the universe.  With that understanding the text makes much more sense.  

 

"Those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword" sounds at first pass like there is a cosmic score keeper...and that's because there is.  If you check out the WizardofOdds website, he will go to great length to prove to you how the law of averages works.  If you spend enough time driving a car, you will eventually wreck the car.  If you are in enough sword fights, one of them WILL kill you.  

 

"Like kinds beget like kinds" is the foundation of animal husbandry to a rudimentary explanation of evolution.  

Consider the repeated reference to light and it's observable significance to the ancient observer.  Light warms the planet, is required for every plant, and the plant-stored energy goes on to animate every living thing on the surface of the globe.  Every opera, every sonnet, every play, every revolutionary advancement in architecture, art, science, and religion itself was powered by light.  Consciousness itself is demonstrably a potential manifestation of light. 

The reductionist would read that far and say something inane like "So you worship the sun?"
To the mystic the physical world IS the allegory.  G-d manifests to us in the presentation of the universe, and its imitable laws.  That's a fine but important point (to this point of view.) 

Think of it as a finger pointing to the moon.  The reductionist above is like a dog who can't or refuses to see past the pointing finger, pointing toward without itself explaining the ineffable. 

Does that explain what G-d is?  No.  And Joseph Campbell would be quick to point out that nothing can do so.  But there are paths (fingers) pointing in the right direction.  If you were able to say what "G-d is" you have left the journey and adopted dogma. 

 

 

 

Edited by Trevyn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider the repeated reference to light and it's observable significance to the ancient observer.  Light warms the planet, is required for every plant, and the plant-stored energy goes on to animate every living thing on the surface of the globe.  Every opera, every sonnet, every play, every revolutionary advancement in architecture, art, science, and religion itself was powered by light.  Consciousness itself is demonstrably a potential manifestation of light.

 

to an extent, but consciousness still exists without light. sitting in the dark consciousness still exists, we cover our eyes to block out light consciousness still exists.

you could argue that even doing that the consciousness that was manifest when light was going to the brain is still extant even after light is blocked

but light itself isn't necessary for life on earth, and if god is a manifestation of life itself then god doesn't need light to exist. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the energy that powered that consciousness (no matter where you take it) demonstrably came from the sun.
I am not saying animated life is a series of solar collectors.  The ancients were saying (and science has vindicated) that every function of life (on the surface of the planet) is powered by light, either directly or through transference. 

 Without the carbohydrates powering the brain, the darkness would be completely dark. 

The interesting bit for me, is that while science has verified the wide variety of manifestations of light's potential, to the mystic that is the allegory, pointing to something higher.  
 

 

 

Edited by Trevyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volcanic vents can power life.  There is chemical energy to be utilised outside photosynthesis.

 

Still, the majority of life is like you say.

Edited by ThunderIdeal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made sure to qualify "on the surface of the planet" which is what the ancients would have had to observe when exploring allegory. :) 

But looking at that old model with fresh science is certainly interesting.  "Consciousness is a potential manifestation of energy".  What can we explore there?  And what is it about light that makes it a more prolific source?  Or do we simply owe the teachers and guardians which act as the go between (plants and photosynthesis).  

Edited by Trevyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate where you try to go however I feel it would be an exploration in ignorance.  It seems to me that the idea of consciousness being a product of light is a flawed perception due to the nature of duality.  Life dependent on light may not beget consciousness any more than a drop of water begets something that is wet.  The only reason to know a difference is because we know what is dry.  Thus how can we know that consciousness is not also a product of the absence of light when we have only experienced life?

Lets go beyond that and consider that light cannot exist without a darkness to be within, and thus its absence becomes essential to its manifestation in the first place.  Which to me, is succint of why conceptualisation will never get us to God.

So to reiterate:  the darkness is just as much a source of life as the light in terms of a plant relying on photosynthesis. Or to put it another way: Would the conditions arise for the existence of life if darkness or better "void" were absent?  It is the dance of form and formlessness though which phenomena manifest and they are completely interdependent and indistinguishable if considered thus, giving rise to the knowledge of such as enlightenment, or oneness with god being that understanding.  

So the exploration we face is to go beyond our sensory limitations, our bodies, our life while being conscious in order to experience nonduality and not just theorise it, just in the way you can describe how the ocean feels to someone but it will never suffice taking a plunge.

 

I do not see how God can be limited to anything less than this.

 

Edited by Mapacho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"God", a word with a pretty broad sense, so broad in fact it can be suggested it created more confusion than if it never existed, ultimately is the contribution of monotheism to the religious spirituality question of mankind. 

 

The notion of a single all powerful god advertised by muslism, christianism and jewism is perhaps one of the first if not THE first system of mass oppression. A vengeful fucking god. 

 

Despite being a radical atheist, I dont believe all religions are the same. I despise monotheism and I have tons of reasons for it. The monotheistic type of God , these kinds of religions try to hard to drive us a away from nature, and make us feel like we need such a stupid idea as the notion of God like presented by monotheistic religions. Its easier for them to do if you are alienated from nature and natural history. They make us need some thing bigger and powerful, but if fact we reside in a bigger system, we are part of it, we live in this bigger and more powerful notion . Which is , of course the earth. 

 

Monotheistic type gods are the paradigm under which masses of sheep are produced.

 

On the other hand I dont have much problems with the notions of 

god=everything

god=nature

god=me

god is in the brain

god is electricity 

god is our hard to describe tendency for mysticism and mystical spirituality

and so on 

 

So, fuck you god! (quoting the most atheist film ever made, the ozzie Bad boy buddy) 

Edited by sagiXsagi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey what the heck is duality you are all mentioning above? 

 

(edited to add) 

 

modern religion is slowly losing its impact on people.  

 

so in modern societies and maybe even earlier 

 

each god is a personal god. god has nothing to do with the universe, nature or the earth. 

 

its just a notion that was invented to cash in the god-module , the tendency of the human animal to stand in awe,  to wonder in front the mystery of life and death. 

 

 

 

Edited by sagiXsagi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about another thing now.. 

 

I believe in characters.. 

 

lets imagine an ecstacy, an d excstatic experience, epiphany or apocalypse.. 

 

to me who I am atheist, cynic and egoist, its just that.. and if there is something more to it, its just a chemical, alcohol to psychedelic, doesnt matter.  psychedelia means the inner you expressing itself

 

for another bloke, an ecstacy would be like connecting with the universe earth, a sense of oneness, like he is in-separatable from the whole. 

 

at the end of the day, the difference in perceiving a similar experience lies to the person, to the individuality. 

 

and that is the power of life, individuals... thats why ego is important and theories on how we should eliminate ego to find god is crap..  

because if you think you are one with the universe, than that's what your ego needs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah I used to be mutant, wow lots of food for thought. 

 

the ways you analyze it is intriguing. I dont know if we're kind of on the the same page.. none of the two are fanatics , thats for sure. 

 

I can accept both that god is real and that it is fictional and invented - well it sure helps to know which god of all we are talking about... you mention science, but I am not really getting what you are saying there. I will give you that though, maybe to play along: science is a god - religion that can beat most other gods.. I mean it can render them explainable, strip them off their mystery, which is large part of their appeal...

 

Even if I am in big favour of anti-clericalism, it annoys me greatly that scientifism seems to be the rising most powerful god of our days, mostly advocated by hardliner neurotic super atheists who usually hate religion / alternative medicine and whatnot for personal reasons. (lost a relative to cancer who went for an alternative treatment, were bullied by reliigious figures when young, come from oppressive religious families, or became atheists late in their lifes, f.e. )  

 

you are right when you say , in regards with individuality . that the individual self , even the conscious egoist still needs a society or cultural system and ethics to realise himself, and to relate or else we have a sociopath or a shaman/priest. A sociopath being a mistake (?) and priest shaman the spiritually predisposed. The simple reason for this is that the social animal is hardwired into us, we are not meant for lonely existences, but for interaction.. 

 

Another great point you make is how nowadays cultures and everything is mixing. We are mixing it so as to compare it, so as to perceive it.. Still, I find asian films strange, sometimes I feel asian-illiterate. Thats why I cant accept cultures have the same structure. A look at modern asian films proves me right, I would say. We could say american culture and wars and everything has partly shaped worlds cultures. Fuck this is a HUGE subject about everthing! 

 

Here I am inclined to open a parenthesis. I have thought about psychosis, schizophrenia and bipolar disorders and how the human animal evolution seems to approve it, like homosexuality, like something useful . f.e. You would think that if those were bugs or not helping the species they would have vanished. So its funny that humans seem to have perceived homosexuality or mental illness like something un-natural, but not nature itself. 

 

So I have thought about what is the "use" of psychosis in humans.. What use would "hearing voices" have? I dont have an answer here... But it seems to me pretty certain that is a part of humans legacy.. Wacky, paranoid thinking?  Hearing voices, connecting with the 'other' ? I cannot help it but think its also related with religion and perhaps the begining of religion too. 

Or maybe psychosis exists so that sensibility and reason can exist.

 

Does the other exist? You seem to think so, I say, OK, lets say it exists, what is it? 

 

I can perceive it like a state of mind, a drunken, excstatic or simply very fulfiling state of mind, propably similar to some meditative state, but at the same time I can see how different people might perceive it as something very different and bigger than how I see it, like an outside and conscious being, god, a parallel dimention or voices and whispers from the other side, f.e. 

 

 because I am a cynic, I have come to realise how much of a vanity it is to try and explain god for everyone and from everyone's point of view, but I still have the tendency to try and do it as objectively I can. Tell my point of view .  

 

So from where I am standing, I can't see all gods having the same structure, all cultures having the same structure.  For example patriarchy and matriarchy are different structurally because females have different traits from males. Asian cultures just seem weird to me... Cant see the parallel. Religious cultures seem weird to me too, as I dont come from a religious family.. 

 

And I am not as sure as you seem to be that the first half is a god, or that  there is an observable god in half of the picture... I agree and like how you go on about the second half though :) 

 

In that sense, trying to link god, religion and culture, and end my rant

 

there's not enough mention in this thread of dying and death as opposed to living and life. This is the first conjuction, this is were all these notions first meet, this is where religion and god are first proposed by the first priests/shamans: at the first ritualised funerals which are not limited to Homo sapiens and at least up to 120.000 tears ago. 

 

The realisation of death , the moments of realising one will eventually die, the moment of consciousness were you understand what death is, is historically the moment when religion and culture emerge. 

 

Funerals were the frist religious practice on earth because fear of death is the basis of religion. 

 

reminds me of an enigmatic phrase I liked as a youngser:

 

MOMENT OF TERROR IS THE BEGINING OF LIFE

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Micromegas
removed
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×