6555Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: A BOOK ABOUT LOVE
- Dec 25, 2012A couple more things about Lila, I offer a couple contemplation seeds
(what I recently found) from the following link.
"[...] It is perhaps best not to think of this in a temporal and
sequential way, but rather in structural terms. Not first there was
unity and then there was differentiation into multiplicity, but rather
that there is self that is also always other and that such a
perspective isn’t possible in any static sense, but only in movement.
I really liked that excerpt and what it contained.
This next excerpt makes things sound a bit confusing, but from that
whole page it was the other section I found most interesting.
"As we learned from Schiller, Gadamer, and Derrida, play is more akin
to the ceaseless structurality of the self-referential paradox that
resides, according to Handelman, in the boundary, the passage place.
For Schiller play is a “third thing” or “drive” that arises when two
drives that are in a relationship in which each enables and controls
the other interact in “concert.” This “third thing,” play, is thus more
accurately the oscillatory interactive reversible interdependent
connection that holds the two together while assuring that neither ever
overwhelms the other or that they dissolve their differences into a
unity. Play is the way of acknowledging this kind of structurality,
this perpetual movement, this magical interrelationship, this
vitalizing connectivity that, as Schiller moved us to see, is Beauty."
It would probably be easier to look at the first excerpt only. And in
that case, would anybody here care to comment?
From: etznab18 <etznab@...>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:33 pm
Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: A BOOK ABOUT LOVE
"Perhaps the One takes on the illusion of being something less in order
to experience life to enhance it."
This reminds me about the concept of Lila. However, there are several
different renditions of what Lila means. The one by Fritjof Capra, from
The Tao of Physics (1975) is the one I am most familiar with.
I think it might be insightful to learn how the concept of Lila first
originated and then evolved.
--- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "iam999freedom"
>creator did not know the effect of a creation?"
> Hi Etznab, You wrote, "What would creation be for a creator if the
>is no distinction between God and Soul. That there are no Souls and no
> In a previous post you wrote, "Here's another thought. Maybe there
Gods. And that everything that exists, all individuals, are inherently
nothing but the same ONE thing which, for some, is something they
sacrifice by living under the illusion of being something less. In this
case it is no less than "God" responsible for all good things and all
evil things as a matter of individual choice."
>enhanced or evolved by playing this game of "hide and go
> In a previous post I wrote to yours above, "If so, how is life
seek"?ie.,individualizing in the physical form while beyond space and
time being One(God).
>order to experience life to enhance it. We make choices to eventually
> Perhaps the One takes on the illusion of being something less in
enhance life through love and compassion. We eventually become
identified with our choices so that we become love and are able to be
it and express it not only in this life but much more fully in the
"higher worlds" where there is no space and time and body limitations.
>mentioned in my e-mail due to trying to keep things brief. Also as the
> I should mention that there are many things in the book not
author states, the worlds he experienced were expanding and were only
a glimpse of the Core.
>compassion, science, sports etc, etc, being infused by love.
> Sorry for the long post. Also, by love I also mean beauty, joy,
> I AM
> --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
> > About the quote from the book, the word that came to me was
> > in the sense of cause and effect. I am not saying that Inecessarily
> > believe in all the different religious dogma definitions ofkarma.
> > Rather, I am looking at the word literally and believe thatit suggests
> > "action" ("kara") and action of a personal nature.action by the
> > It just seems rudimentary there be a way to learn about
> > effect it has. What would creation be for a creator if thecreator did
> > not know the effect of a creation? And, perhaps, knowing theeffect is
> > the way that creators learn? A classical example is that babylearns
> > about fire by being burned. In that sense karma, or theaction of
> > touching fire, is instructive.something
> > I often have heard the saying that people are responsible for
> > everything that happens to them, good and bad, as if they had
> > to do with it. However, given free will, one person couldcreate
> > something bad (nuclear experiments, tests and bombs) thataffects
> > millions of people, but I do not necessarily believe that thepeople
> > affected are "responsible" as if they created such things.That they
> > created nuclear fallout. Believe it or not, I remember evenHarold
> > Klemp writing something to this effect years ago which, in somany
> > words, sounded like a debunking of predestination and theidea that
> > people are "responsible" (it is their karma) for everythingthat
> > happens to them. Instead, I got the impression Harold wassaying there
> > were examples where other people create things that canaffect us, and
> > that they are things we are not each personally "responsible"for.
> >individuals to
> > What I guess I am saying is that free will allows for
> > make "bad" choices, or choices that affect other people in a"bad" way.
> > History is filled with examples.will" and
> > ***
> > Now, on the other hand, when Harold Klemp wrote about "free
> > genes in the December 2012 Wisdom Note I had to say tomyself: "It
> > looks to me like Harold has lost it!"when I
> > Btw, I read that Wisdom Note just before bed. In the morning
> > turned on the TV there was a news blurb about conjoined twinsthat had
> > been successfully separated. Then they went on to describethe twins
> > and how they were NOT the same and that (in so many words)one had a
> > different character than the other.wonderful
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: iam999freedom <iam999freedom@>
> > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
> > <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sun, Dec 23, 2012 8:50 pm
> > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] A BOOK ABOUT LOVE
> > Â
> > I thought I'd share for those who may be interested about a
> > book I've just finished reading. You may have heard about thebook
> > already as it was written recently in 2012 and received somemedia
> > attention. The name of the book is "Proof of Heaven: ANeurosurgeon's
> > Journey into the Afterlife" by Eben Alexander, MD.that
> > What makes his NDE (near death experience) so interesting is
> > before it he was an atheist and also because the validity ofhis NDE
> > cannot be explained by conventional scientific/medicalthought. He was
> > attacked by e-coli menningitis and lay in a coma for sevendays
> > completely brain dead in the areas of the brain whereby a NDEand
> > consciousness are considered possible. That he completelyrecovered is
> > also considered to be a medical miracle. In the condition hewas in
> > there is a 90% death rate and even upon survival living in avegetative
> > state is expected.placed a
> > It's interesting how sometimes life works in synchronicity. I
> > hold on this book at the library about 3 months ago and justreceived
> > the book this past Friday. In the wake of the Newtownshootings I was
> > so shocked and saddened that the core of my experiences andbeliefs
> > were being crushed.now have a
> > Even though I am still deeply pained about what happened I
> > refreshed look at Ourselves and God (Whole, Love), evil, freewill etc.
> > I also feel rejeuvinated about the meaning of my life onearth.
> > The following is an excerpt from the book that I found richly
> > within me:could
> > "there is not one universe but many - in fact more than I
> > conceive - but that love lay at the center of them all. Evilwas
> > present in all the other universes as well, but only in thetiniest
> > trace amounts. Evil was necessary because without it freewill was
> > impossible, and without free will there could be no growth -no forward
> > movement, no chance for us to become what God longed for usto be.
> > Horrible and as-powerful as evil somtimes seemed to be in aworld like
> > ours, in the larger picture love was overwhelmingly dominant,and it
> > would ultimatlely be triumphant."scientific
> > The book has many vivid descriptions of the other worlds,
> > debate and spiritual discussion, and is written in both asimple and
> > explicit fascinating way that evoked love and compassion.can be
> > Perhaps as importantly it emphasises that such worlds/states
> > experienced with persistence meditative/comptemplative effort.
> > I Am
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>