Enbrightenment

A psychobabble duel.

Kewl.

 

The Guru does not see separation. There are no other identities, Only One. There is Only One Being/Identity. All relationships are like whirlpools in water. You cannot remove the whirlpool from water, and vice versa. Teaching certainly means to reveal, or make known, and the Revelation Is Communion. As I said, there is no one to convert. There is no conversion, Only the Everlasting God. A person progresses spiritually through the constant reiteration of God As the Only. Spiritual practice progresses as every conscious relationship is born through God Only.

The separative mind feels this way.

This is the bearer of your 'honest' and 'penetrating' motive? This is an artistic way of writing, like it or not.

:sunny:

 

Are you saying this about your own writing?

 

Yes, the use of bold, italicized, underlined, capitalized and any combination of those tools, are all used in my writings. It keeps a lively movement through the text, and helps to move people out of a comfort zone when reading. Every word in my writings/books is given great care. There are layers upon layers of meaning and depth in my writings, and I use these tools creatively to help that communication.

:sunny:

 

I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm sure you're a nice guy and while I found some of what you wrote interesting, it's starting to just sound like you want to be read.

I've found this quality in numerous writers and artists, it isn't very becoming. After all, pride is simply a construct of the ego. Do you not advocate against the cultivation of ego?

I'm not doubting that you care for people, but if you want to share your information so as to enlighten people, why not just post it and walk away? After all, the message you're sharing is free.

 

Who is The Guru?

Are you saying that you did not write two books?

Absolutely. Do you have something to address concerning the content of my statements?

 

Silence is where the teaching is truly commune-icated, yet, I speak, and babblon forever about God and Truth. That is fine with me, if people do not understand, so be it. I was born to run my mouth on and on about God. Years of study enable me to have a vast ability to converse in many ways, across many paths. I will never tire of this motive to speak out loud concerning God. Addressing every question, or attempting to clarify every mis-understanding is really impossible. Thus, the reason for engaging many people from many backgrounds, it enables me to create multiple versions of explanatory dialectic concerning Enbrightenment.

 

In this moment it's very possible to answer these two. Certainly they're not beyond the scope of possibility.

I do enjoy the message.

 

What is not the Guru? The mind of separation looks for these distinctions.

Your other comments/questions will be left alone, no need to respond - I am fine with your interpretation, or anyone else's interpretation of my answers/response in previous comments concerning those particular questions.

:]

 

"I am" and calling oneself a Guru creates separation. Human language creates separation. Why not call everyone the same thing?

If we're all students, or just people, learning and experiencing at the same rate, helping others when and if they ask or seek, then we are not creating separation.

By distinguishing oneself as a "guru" that person is creating separation, if at least in the same way a finger is not a thumb.

Do teachers not try and provide answers? Does ego stop one from answering questions?

 

If people do not understand you, then your years of study giving you vast ability to converse, have gone to naught.

Addressing specific questions is not impossible. Having a conversation on equal terms is not impossible.

If there is no separation in truth, one version of explanatory dialectic is as good as any other.
Jeepers, creepers, where did you get those peepers!

 

I advocate the reiteration of God Only.

I do not just walk away because this is Babblon, the un-ending blabber mouth of God, perfectly Awake and Shining As the Heart. Walking away is something that seems to not happen. What really happens, is that some people will become frustrated with me, it is better to simply move on in the conversation. Usually those frustrations are liberated over time, and from peaceful dialog.

 

Saying that "The Guru does not see these separations", is to create a distinction between The Guru and those who are not, The Guru. So I ask, Who is The Guru that you are making the distinction for.

We are glad you are comfortable.

 

Ego needs answers, that is why there are questions.

No necessary separation is present in the idea. Ego needs separation to exist.

Here is something I use often to communicate this idea of separation, and what nature actually demonstrates.

Reach out and touch something with the hand. That whole movement, exchange of energy, and dynamic do not demonstrate separation, rather, that Is a Demonstration of Unity, and Oneness. One thing cannot know another, unless those 'things' share a common substance.

Man and woman are not one person, but if they were separate by nature, there would never be any communication. No substance to join the perspectives, no unity, then separation logically follows to be the metaphysical state of said 'things'. You can reach out and hug your family because you Are One, not separate. Thus, nothing creates separation Really. Perspective consciousness is to be yoked to the Divine Transcendental Reality of God Consciousness, the body/mind falsely perceives separation because that is what the culture and people of this place tell each other. The teaching (Enbrightenment) shows us to be One.

Consider one more example: between 0 and 1 there are an infinite number of fragments. Not one fragment exist in and of itself. There is 1 reality, and 0 other realities. The fragment is not greater or equal 1, nor is the fragment less than or equal 0.

 

You have advocated that;

"Years of study enable me to have a vast ability to converse in many ways, across many paths.",

and

"Addressing every question, or attempting to clarify every mis-understanding is really impossible."

Your quoted statement is false on the face of it.

 

This is a quote from a friend of mine,

"I have noticed there is either only narcissus or Only Reality. There is no two. The ego makes the apparent other. But the other is only a reflection of the ego. Narcissus thinks the reflection is an other, but it is only him. Thus, however I see an other, I am only looking at myself. Real God only sees Real God. Narcissus only sees narcissus. What I see, is only me - only reflection, only projection.

Thus, no need for me to claim being a victim to my own image in the mirror (pond)!"

 

God, being everything/divine consciousness (whatever you want to call it), would not leave room for anything else to exist. Something can't exist outside of everything.

 

So we are as a bird who sees it's reflection in a mirror and thinks it sees another bird, or, we dream a dream, seeing ourselves figures in the dream, but forget we are the dreamer.

You are preaching to the choir on this note.

 

Seems odd that if you're not looking for followers - even in the sense of having people agree with you, that you post this in the 'Gurus' section.

 

There is something to realize. You learn from your parents certain things. Is it wrong to call them mommy and daddy? You learn from teachers at school, is it wrong to call them professor? This goes for spiritual practice, the term Guru has value and indicates a commune-ication.