click tracking
Jump to content
Jeff

Divine Beings Exist...

Recommended Posts

Divine beings like Jesus, Krishna and Buddha exist.  As one's clarity increases it is possible to directly share presence and receive transmissions from such beings. To communicate with such beings, one must begin to step beyond the limited perspective of local body-mind and notice the subtle and luminous aspects of pure manifestation (light).

 

Or as described by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu...

 

To receive this type of transmission, it is therefore necessary to have the capacity to perceive the subtle dimension of light... To have contact with this pure dimension one needs to develop one's innate clarity to the highest degree, and to purify the obstacles of karma and of ignorance.
 
- Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff-

These beings are in fact 'egregores'.

Powerful ones mind you.

And depending on which one we are discussing...some egregores predated homo sapiens; and these egregores give the impression of being divine --- they are not.

What people call 'higher selves' are in fact egregores....

What people call 'souls' are in fact (generally) just poorly formed tulpas.

FYI i won't be arguing or defending these words....I really don't care what comforting beliefs someone wishes to entertain.

In fact I think that my words could possibly be verified in a scientific lab.....

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kev,

 

Once again, I disagree that we are talking about the same "beings"or even level of beings. Additionally, a soul is definitely not a "poorly formed tulpa" or thought construct. A soul is just another name for the inherent "light body".

 

But, I am very interested to hear how you think that your position could be "verified in a scientific lab"?

 

Best wishes,

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  As one's clarity increases it is possible to directly share presence and receive transmissions from such beings. To communicate with such beings, one must begin to step beyond the limited perspective of local body-mind and notice the subtle and luminous aspects of pure manifestation (light).

 

Agree, and true, from my own direct experience of which I have shared with you privately. 

Beyond the pure white light is something that IS OMNIPRESENT, ENDURING, INDESTRUCTIBLE.  _/\_

 

 

Or as described by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu...

 

To receive this type of transmission, it is therefore necessary to have the capacity to perceive the subtle dimension of light... To have contact with this pure dimension one needs to develop one's innate clarity to the highest degree, and to purify the obstacles of karma and of ignorance.
 
- Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Divine beings like Jesus, Krishna and Buddha exist.  As one's clarity increases it is possible to directly share presence and receive transmissions from such beings. To communicate with such beings, one must begin to step beyond the limited perspective of local body-mind and notice the subtle and luminous aspects of pure manifestation (light).

 

Or as described by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu...

 

To receive this type of transmission, it is therefore necessary to have the capacity to perceive the subtle dimension of light... To have contact with this pure dimension one needs to develop one's innate clarity to the highest degree, and to purify the obstacles of karma and of ignorance.
 
- Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State 

 

 

Exist in what sense?

 

As separate, individual beings?

 

As symbolic representations experienced via higher consciousness?

 

What does "share presence" mean, specifically?

 

Also, is Chogyal Namkhai Norbu referring to encountering and/or receiving transmission from beings such as Jesus or Krishna, specifically?

 

A bit more detail would be helpful in clarifying what you are saying, here. 

 

Thanks very much,

 

Doug

Edited by Doug
minor typo correction and editing for clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Exist in what sense?

 

As separate, individual beings?

 

As symbolic representations experienced via higher consciousness?

 

What does "share presence" mean, specifically?

 

Also, is Chogyal Namkhai Norbu referring to encountering and/or receiving transmission from beings such as Jesus or Krishna, specifically?

 

A bit more detail would be helpful in clarifying what you are saying, here. 

 

Thanks very much,

 

Doug

 

 

Hi Doug,

 

 

Here is the direct context of the Norbu quote...

 

The Tantras are teachings based on the knowledge and application of energy. Their origin is not to be found in the oral teachings of a master, as is the case with the Sutras taught by the Buddha, but stems from the manifestation in pure vision of a realized being. A pure manifestation arises through the energy ofthe elements in their subtle and luminous aspect, while our karmic vision is based on their gross or material aspect. To receive this type of transmission, it is therefore necessary to have the capacity to perceive the subtle dimension of light.
 
-Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State
 
When one perceives the "subtle dimension of light", they are beginning to notice the "emptiness of ultimate reality" as discussed in other threads. Once can directly perceive and differentiate various aspects of light (or realized beings). These realized beings are as separate as you and I are.
 
Regarding your "sharing presence" question... Such sharing is more commonly described as a light or mind transmission.  You can find a description of such sharing in the below thread.
 
 
Best,
Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for 'if you meet the Buddha in the road, kill him.'

Now I know that's not from the sutras or tantras or what not....but that's a good thing of course. ...

It slightly amuses me actually...that most spiritual devotees (of more eastern philosophical roots anyway)

rapidly learn that they themselves don't actually exist in any permanent or meaningful way...but that the 'self' is more illusion than substance....

Yet these same devotees then commit the gross logical error of fighting for the existence of 'so-called divine beings' which are in actual fact...just larger scale delusions of 'self' created over hundreds or thousands of years by the same exact mechanism that the devotees are now supposedly free from (they aren't).

When 'spirituality' is approached incorrectly....the poor tortured ego will indeed play dead for a while....to convince the spiritual seekers that they have 'made progress' or in fact are 'enlightened'.

But what happens. ..is that eventually the ego resurfaces in the form of 'higher selves' or divine beings.

This is really pathetic. I won't mince words.

Now these 'beings' certainly feel real to devotees trapped in this stage of delusion...in fact these delusions can produce powerful effects....transmit 'light'...transfer visions and thoughts..even make a solid 'thump' be felt when one devotee 'connects' to another....

But this stage of 'accomplishment' is a dead end as are all the systems which don't understand mind, ego, 'spirit', being and all associated concepts...but just compound the thousands of years of incorrect realization and incorrect and harmful spiritual practice.

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for 'if you meet the Buddha in the road, kill him.'

Now I know that's not from the sutras or tantras or what not....but that's a good thing of course. ...

It slightly amuses me actually...that most spiritual devotees (of more eastern philosophical roots anyway)

rapidly learn that they themselves don't actually exist in any permanent or meaningful way...but that the 'self' is more illusion than substance....

Yet these same devotees then commit the gross logical error of fighting for the existence of 'so-called divine beings' which are in actual fact...just larger scale delusions of 'self' created over hundreds or thousands of years by the same exact mechanism that the devotees are now supposedly free from (they aren't).

When 'spirituality' is approached incorrectly....the poor tortured ego will indeed play dead for a while....to convince the spiritual seekers that they have 'made progress' or in fact are 'enlightened'.

But what happens. ..is that eventually the ego resurfaces in the form of 'higher selves' or divine beings.

This is really pathetic. I won't mince words.

Now these 'beings' certainly feel real to devotees trapped in this stage of delusion...in fact these delusions can produce powerful effects....transmit 'light'...transfer visions and thoughts..even make a solid 'thump' be felt when one devotee 'connects' to another....

But this stage of 'accomplishment' is a dead end as are all the systems which don't understand mind, ego, 'spirit', being and all associated concepts...but just compound the thousands of years of incorrect realization and incorrect and harmful spiritual practice.

Kev

 

Hi Kev,

 

Do "you" exist? Do I exist as a separate being from you? Do you cease at "death"? Is all of reality just an "illusion" for you?

 

For you is it all just one "human" life and it is game over? 

 

I am trying to understand your overall perspective on the "nature of reality" or what "is"...

 

Best regards,

Jeff

 

p.s. You do also realize that the "meet and kill buddha" is a Zen koan from around 1500 years after budda (regarding astral level stuff)? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff-

Yes I looked up the etymology of the saying 'kill the Buddha..." before I posted. What's funny about Zen koans is they often do point to something real. ..even though they are designed to 'stop the mind'.

Jeff- You are so convinced that your world view is correct that it doesn't matter what I say or don't say....pure and total selection bias. As you know..I have 'played in your world' for years....for my own reasons....you can't say that I haven't walked 100 miles in your moccasins.

At some point nearly everyone forgets their initial basic training....because they never mastered it..then you get all this crazy being talk again...just like before they started their path....but now since they can play with energy they now think that their mistaken ideas about being are now valid. ...but they are not....it's just a basic training failure.

Yes....infrastructure exists....yes there is awareness as a fundamental part of everything...yes there can be death avoiding games....

But it's markedly different than you can find described in a sutra tantra or other book. When it comes to 'spirituality' nothing true has ever been written down. ..just us rust flawed approximations. ..only a few of the original minds ever got a glimpse of what is true....and by necessity that true glimpse could not be conveyed to another....then over the years got further corrupted.

Show me someone who harps on the 'basics' rather than harping on beings and about definitions for purported states of mind....and you will be showing me someone who might actually 'get it'.

Imho.

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff- You are so convinced that your world view is correct that it doesn't matter what I say or don't say....pure and total selection bias. As you know..I have 'played in your world' for years....for my own reasons....you can't say that I haven't walked 100 miles in your moccasins.

Kev,

I have repeatedly attempted to discuss your disagreeing comments in multiple threads and so far you have not responded.

I do not read books from "old dead guys". I simply dive deep "inside" and report what I have found. And whenever possible, I have included friends to "verify" my findings. As an example, things like "light transmissions" exist. Many of the forum members have shared and can report such experiences. Maybe you would like to join us some time...

Best wishes,

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff-

There is really not much to discuss.

Contrary to known history you want to dress up your ego in the form of 'divine beings'. Now I have nothing against forms of this practice....as for example this is the same thing that shamans do. Only when they are done tapping the egregore they stop paying it any mind; only a damn ed fool worships a human - created idol.

When the ego is abused, due to not understanding what it is and what it's role is in spirituality, you will wind up with a very confused, deluded and harmful form of spirituality.

You can't have a rational discussion with someone in the throes of this syndrome. I know, as I too suffered from this syndrome for years.

I know that it is extremely difficult to break free from this control collar which religion and spirituality evolved (or were designed in some cases) to place upon devotees of such systems.

Early Buddhism was free of the control collar....some forms of tantra and other so-called "left hand paths" are free of the control collar.

But for the most part, the more one is intetested in spirituality and religion the more trapped one becomes. It's like a Chinese finger trap.

It's understandable that the people who actually know something rarely if ever say something straight up. For example it's pointless to discuss salty crackers with someone obsessed with the idea that they are dehydrated in the desert.

Nearly all humans are obsessed with death and their number one goal, whether they realize it or not is to deny death or cheat death or 'transcend death'.

This makes them incapable of learning much, until this warping of their mind is healed....and the only way to do this is to understand the role and purpose of the ego and how to work with it properly.....

I won't speak for Yogani...but i noticed some time ago, that if one actually finishes AYP and actually learns how to think...that one's ego assumes the proper role.

This is just one example....but i must give credit where credit is due...

In the entire world, the number of people not trapped by the spiritual chinese finger trap is probably less than one thousand or some such number.

I know these posts seem harsh....and disillusioning.

I don't enjoy them.

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kev,

 

Once again, you seem to have made many assumptions about what you think that "I believe", rather than actually reading my posts and described approach.  Additionally, rather than respond with any specific details in actual discourse, you make sweeping judgements that others are incapable of understanding if they don't agree with your undefined "mysterious" position.

 

Your above strong support AYP does explain a few things regarding your attitudes regarding Buddhism and mystical Christ based paths... Are you an AYP practitioner? Have you personally found the practices effective? 

 

Since you seem to think that AYP leads one to the right place... Maybe you could at least describe what you think that right place is or means? Or, how AYP practices work and are effective in getting you there?

 

Best wishes on your path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff-

 

we have been close for more than 5 years. That is the basis of my knowledge of you,

not words on a forum.

 

It's obvious to both of us, that this conversation is not productive, as we've both been
entrenched in our basic positions for more than 5 years.

 

So I for one, am happy to let things rest right where they are.. just where they were
5 years ago ;-)

 

Kev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this is not off topic but didn't Paramahansa Yogananda in Autobiography of a Yogi confirm that the individual "I" still exist even after enlightenment? Did not the Buddha say the same thing?

 

It seems to me while it may ultimately be an illusion, the evolution of the spirit continues. Yet to focus on the "I" is a trap and why the Buddha and others don't focus on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jonesboy,

 

I believe that you are correct. In particular, even a buddha has a remaining "impurity" and hence has some degree of perceived "separation".

 

Best,

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Information is.

What labels we place upon it reveals the structure of our thinking.

When we state "it comes from this" or when we say "this is how it came to be" we are attempting to prove metaphors.

Metaphors are used when language fails and thus are not full definitions.

A photon is a quanta of information.

That which is in front of you is also information.

Like anything else a photon does not care what you call it.

Ego is information.

I am information.

What does this mean? What I choose it to mean.

This represents the structure of my thinking.

Divine beings, thought forms, egregores, fey, ego, self, God, Brahman, the void, none of these labels are in any manner accurate yet they help describe a metaphor for what is there.

We all see these things differently as our brains have differing structure (or else we would all be of the same mind and have nothing to discuss, Boring!).

Thus our experience of these things may have similar metaphorical structure yet not be the full truth.

How can anyone claim to have the truth when they do not have the full set information regarding any complex system (do not even attempt to say you do, you will just sound silly) in which many of the variables can only be expressed as metaphors?

Ignoring the pleas of ego leads to understanding the unity of what is, without center, in the Now and only seen through a haze of interpretation which fits no language.

Yet ego is also a part of this system, part of the information of everything.

I personally have a belief that the system we are in is an infinite system (the clue is numbers, rational, irrational, imaginary...) in which all possibilities have a form of information which is accessed through experience and observation. What I am uncertain of is whether or not we can understand such information without approaching the uncertainty inherent in metaphor. In an infinite set of all infinite sets all things real, unreal, past, present, future, imaginary, possible, impossible, rational and irrational must both exist and not exist all at once. This is the unity of information. Is this a metaphor? You betcha! Is this an assumption? Oh yes it is! But then so is everything else.

Why am I writing this?

To illustrate how wrapped up we can become when traversing the slippery slope of definition and metaphor.

Do divine beings exist? Does it matter? How would you define "divine"? How would you define "being"? How about any of the other labels used all across this discussion?

I will state right now that in my experience there are many uncertainties and I know that I do not have all the information to determine a real truth concerning this.

Information is.

What we think of it, what we do with it, how we feel about it depends on how our minds are structured.

That does not change that what is simply is despite our limitations and dependency upon metaphor to describe certain thoughts and experiences.

Yet those thoughts are also information.

It is what it is.

What do you want it to be?

What is your Will?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...