pai mei

We are God, the same way as everything around us is. This ideea did not come to me after reading only 1 book or 1 site, or the bible, but after reading many books - about everything, and learning about Zen, I can see the same things everywhere.
Everything is one. We are all God, in different forms, and the fact that we are separated is an illusion
The religion of christianity is taught the wrong way
I do not see myself as a christian, I am more into Zen, but here are some quotes they are similar to Zen teachings :

Here is a 14 page book called "We are god" : http://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/...-Are-God.shtml
From the book :


http://www.ashidakim.com/zenkoans/zenindex.html

asaris

Sure, there are some similarities between Christianity and Buddhism. But there are differences too, and I tend to think the differences are more significant. But note that I don't know a whole lot about Buddhism, so feel free to correct me if I misunderstand it.

1. What is our goal?
In Buddhism, our goal is escape from all desire, to become united with the one/the all, and to, at the end of the day, cease to exist as ourselves. In Christianity, the goal is to become more fully ourselves. The denial of the self Christianity teaches is merely a means to an end. Compare Christian meditation with Zen meditation. In Zen, the goal of meditation is to empty oneself. In Christianity, the goal of meditation is to empty oneself so that you may be filled.

2. How is this goal reached?
In Christianity, salvation is by divine grace. Our own deeds do not earn us salvation. In Buddhism, salvation is by our own efforts.

3. Who do we become?
In Buddhism, we become Buddhas ourselves. In Christianity we become like Christ. But we don't actually become Christs ourselves -- he is the only begotten son of God, we are adopted sons of God.

4. What is the role of desire and the world?
Buddhism teaches that passion is suffering, and the way to perfection is by renouncing desire. Christianity teaches that desire is imperfect, and must be perfected if we are to be perfected. Buddhism teaches that the world is illusion; Christianity teaches that the world is made by God, and is good (albeit, ambiguously so).

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

DaveOrion

I'm with pai mei, I'd rather concentrate on what the two have in common then their differences. Asaris' definitions of both are very general in nature anyway, and many of these could be disputed. The idea that all Christians must 'deny the self' is an out dated concept and most denominations don't concur with this belief. I could go on but I'd rather not get into another religious discussion that goes no where. Whatever you want to believe is your right & privilege, more power to ya.

Some might consider me a non-denominational Christian, but that really doesn't cover it. I also adhere to some Buddhist, and Native American beliefs, such as everything is sacred, the Earth, the sky, every rock and blade of grass. Some body must come up with a name for this besides, Multi- Religious. How about BuddChristNativeism??? Doesn't flow very well, and I'm sure someone would call me a blasphemer!!

Anything that helps bring people together, instead of concentrating on the differences, must be a good thing. Unfortunately there will always be the die hards who insist on their tiny interpretation of faith, and that it must be the correct one. The civil war in Iraq is between two Islamic sects that disagree about who should have been the rightful successor to lead Islam. To bad they cant concentrate on the fact that they're all Muslims.

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

asaris

It depends on the circumstances, Dave. In general, I try to recognize both the similarities and the differences. Otherwise, I'm just getting an inaccurate picture about people's beliefs. Sure there are similarities between Christianity and Islam, but if we ignore the differences, we're just not understanding Christianity and Islam. The same goes if we ignore the similarities. But when I see someone overemphasizing the similarities between, say, Buddhism and Christianity, especially on a message board dedicated to the discussion of ideas, I'm going to tend to emphasize the differences to provide a bit of a corrective.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

pai mei

I did not write here just to discuss, I write because I am searching for myself , and I think other people here are also searching for themselves.

Maybe we are not really God, but we are all the same thing under different forms, separation is an illusion.
Better write no more, just do. Writing or debating such a thing ussualy misses the essence of it.
Stories :
http://www.ashidakim.com/zenkoans/zenindex.html
http://www.rider.edu/~suler/zenstory/zenstory.html

Halifax

The problem I have with these sorts of "theories of everything" which attempt synthesize everything into a harmonious unity is the same as the objection I have towards solipsism: it's inherently non-falsifiable, and therefore an intellectual dead end. Sure it could be true, but only because it is so flexible as to be able to "account" for anything. A solipsist, for example, can simply argue that any counterargument, or logical refutation is but part and parcel of their own thought processes and that it thereby proves their theory. Such a hypothesis can't be refuted exactly because it cannot be proven.

__________________
Philosopher-in-Training

“The present writer…writes because for him it is a luxury which becomes the more agreeable and more evident, the fewer there are who buy and read what he writes.”
—Søren Kierkegaard

robot_parade

The thoughts you're having sound a lot like the sorts of things poeple think about after reading 'Stranger in a Strange Land' - a very good book, and has some ideas along the same lines as what you're saying.

"Thou art God." is a central phrase/idea in the book.

I kind-of agree with Halifax, though - similar to the idea of the Unitarians, it just strikes me as...wrong - there *has* to be 'truth' somewhere in there.

politicophile

two characters

__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Ourcrazymodern?

It's turtles all the way down!

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

DaveOrion

Thank God for unprovable theories!!

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

Paasbaas

Saying we are all one, everything is God, is the same as saying "we all exist in the same place, albeit a very big place".

Please tell me what you take "God" to mean. Then I'll tell you what I think.

Seer666

All that Groks is God

__________________
Bad spellers of the world untie!!!

I am the one you warned me of

I seem to have misplaced the bullet with your name on it, but I have a whole box addressed to occupant.

Willravel

It'd be nice...but there's no Porsche parked out front, sooo I'm thinking no. I'm just little old Willravel, and that's that.

Somniferous

[Futurama Quote] Sure a theory about God that doesn't require the use of a giant telescope. Get back to work. [/Futurama Quote]

DingDart

Even if everything is the same, everything is not the same, for example hands and feet are the same because they work together and make up the same being, yet they are different. That is my perspective on this whole "We are one" idea, but thats simply my idea on the matter. I think everyone is different therefore everyone has their own beliefs that makes themselves happy, wheter or not they can be discussed is a whole different matter. In essence, what Pai Mei brought up as well as Dave, I totally agree with because i believe in a higher being, yet i don't quite believe in GOD or Alla or Yaweh or anything like that, my premise is that I believe "GOD" is in everything, in fact we are in "GOD" kind of like TAO which influenced Zen teachings.

Ourcrazymodern?

...happy, sabu,
...plays with us.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Nimetic

So that's it then solved? Spastic kids. Explained. The creation of the universe, explained. Mattar/antimatter discrepancy, explained.

May as well go back to the TV then I guess. Nothing more to do here... I can help the world by scratching my own balls.

Seriously, I think I'd achieve just as much enlightenment from a few strong whiskey shots. Or something stronger.

Gahh... The problem with Buddhism/Taosim sometimes seems to be that they'd explain the operation of a car by turning it off and throwing away the key. Stop thinking - and there is no longer a question.

Ourcrazymodern?

Does your brain ever surprise you with something you didn't expect?

TV is also god, as are cars and keys. And the quality of mercy, unstrained.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Laugh-O-Matic

The theory that "We are God" is explained in a nice way in Jack London's "White Fang".

__________________
How you bore me, Florrie,
With those eyes of vacant blue;
You'll be very sorry, Florrie
If I marry you.
Though I'm easy-goin', Florrie,
This I swear is true,
I'll throw you down a quarry, Florrie,
If I marry you. - Saki.

Ourcrazymodern?

The theory "we are god" is nicely explained by the fact we made god up.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Plan9

Toilet paper is my God.

Try to go a day without it.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

josobot

God is the Enduring Rational Reality....You may be part of it, and again...you might not be a part of it. Some call it Being Saved, some call it Buddhahood, some call it Sainthood, some call it being Enlightened or being a Mensch, and so on...

pai mei

- Bible

- Albert Einstein


- Bruce Lee

jessicaabruno

__________________
Jessica, Hippie Feminist, Trying to Go Organic, Learning, Researching (All these will be used now and in Future as well)

pan6467

The nice thing and worst thing about religion is that you can believe however and in whatever you like and not a single person on this planet can prove you wrong.

I don't know what happens to my soul/spirit when I die. I have my opinions as does everyone else, but I won't know until I die.... hopefully in many decades from now.

It is my beliefs that help me to live my life because I want to advance my soul/spirit.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

tecoyah

Oh...but you already started.

If we decided to really look at it everyone is actually on the fence in this, even the devout. Few in this life can say they "KNOW" god, and even fewer actually believe it when they say it. In my opinion, anyone seriously claiming they have the answer would make a good subject for a thesis for a Psyche PhD. Pans got it right...we are all on a quest to figure it all out, I doubt any of us will.

DaveOrion

Someone actually agreed with something I said??? I know I'm in a parallel universe now.....

__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

iamausername

I have come to the conclusion, or rather what makes sense to me, is that everything is "god", or rather, part of the universe.

I think as soon as you use the name "god" people think of a superior being, which immediately separates them from it.

Why do we need a superior being, or rather, why do we need that being to have a concious mind like us?

Even more so, why do we need that being to govern what happens to us when we die, or even while we live?

I believe the universe created us, from the matter, from the energy, from itself.

When we die, we are still part of the universe, but we are no longer concious, as our brain is no longer in use.

I am, personally quite proud to be part of this absolutely beautiful universe, both in this life, and forever after I die.

In this philosophy, science and religion are the same, and nothing to prove.

I think our feelings and emotions are part of our makeup to ensure our survival.

Life, is something that has come about from the universe's constantant changes until it developed an algorithim (for lack of a better word) that keeps itself sustained.

It probably failed many times until it got this algorithim working independantly.
I believe many of the actions we do, we do to ensure our survival, because this is how life needed to exist.

Simply, it exists, because it exists, and we wonder why.
otherwise we wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't wonder why.

I don't accept different religions for different reasons, mainly because they take the power away from the individual.

Buddism, because I believe desire is a wonderful part of life, which we need to survive, simply put, our desire to procreate, to indulge, to believe, to have passion. Why take away what is wonderful?

Christianity for many reasons, mainly because I don't like the separation between god and ourselves.

I prefer the way of thinking that the universe in its completeness is one eg: "uni" "verse" the one thing everywhere.

Bearface

"God" is what makes you, the individual, happy. God is not the fictional almighty creator depicted by the religions of the world, as previously stated on this thread. The search for that something that you can only describe in any language as being true fulfilment. Feeling 100% happy with every single aspect of what you do, what you are and what you stand for etc... No-one will ever find this. You can come close, but you will never truly break that barrier.

This is the key to our survival. So in essence you can say that God is a component of the survival and exponential growth of mankind. Fabricated within our pysche for the purpose of living and surviving. Without which, there is simply no real purpose other than the base instincts found elsewhere in the Animal Kingdom. Without veering off the topic too much, it does lean heavily towards the fact that we, as humans, have the self aware conscience that sets us apart from animals. Do Animals have such discussions? I think not. But some animals are indeed self aware to some degree, so it does beg the question.
There's a quote by Stephen Fry, which I've ironically seen on this board in someones signature which talks about the bear:

One of the nice things about looking at a bear is that you know it spends 100 per cent of every minute of every day being a bear. It doesn't strive to become a better bear. It doesn't go to sleep thinking, "I wasn't really a very good bear today". They are just 100 per cent bear, whereas human beings feel we're not 100 per cent human, that we're always letting ourselves down. We're constantly striving towards something, to some fulfilment--Stephen Fry

The bear certainly doesn't Ponder the notion of a God. Let alone the idea that said bear is part of the collective energy that could be what is known as God. Human advancement has gotten to the stage where we need to protect creatures like the Bear, and many others from ourselves or hazards due to the by-product of our living. We have such power of them, one could argue that its almost God like. We have the power to make extinct animals that have been around for thousands of years more than we have. Its not even a struggle of power either. It's our recognised advantage. If you stop and think as to how advanced we actually are over animals its almost jaw dropping to think that we have come so far in, most cases, less time than these creatures. Yet they are still at primitive, although highly refined stages of evolution. God is nothing to them. We are the most intelligent creatures on this planet, yet we cannot agree amongst ourselves on the rationale behind the concept of God. I think that speaks for itself.
Yeah I think I'm on the fence on this one....

Baraka_Guru

Buddhism actually is a good example of "We are God." It states that inside us all is a buddha. We all have the potential to reach buddhahood, as it is a dormant state suppressed by ignorance and misery that has accumulated through numerous lifetimes (via karma).

Wanton desire, indulgence, and passion all contribute to misery because they allow us to cling to various things in our pursuit of them. Our "need" for physical things, even as our limited time ticks away, obstruct the path to authentic happiness. Buddhism isn't absolute. Even the first buddha was susceptible to passion, but being conscious of it allowed him to maintain enlightenment.

The problem with the things you describe as wonderful is that we constantly pursue those states, and when they end, as they inevitably do, we accumulate more misery and feel the need to continue the pursuit. If you can break this cycle, your life will have more meaning, which is truly wonderful. To be free of these things is true liberation.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cynosure

There is nothing new about this conclusion. Many ancient cultures have come to this very conclusion. Some anthropologists say it's the default conclusion, as far as religions go.

If it's not a supernaturally superior being and an infinitely higher power, then it's not, by definition, "God". (Note, capital "G" – we're not really talking about the gods and demi-gods of Egyptian or Greek mythology, here.)

If a God-being is not conscious and self-aware, then we as human beings really can't relate to it, just as we can't relate to a rock or a tree. Or to a moon or a star.

Because, the human race is fundamentally flawed, and it has neither the power to raise the dead, nor the ability to make us immortal. And no matter how advanced our science might get, it looks like we never will have that power or ability. And despite our thousands of years of progress in technology and society, we are still making the same mistakes and suffering from most if not all of the same shortcomings (biological, psychological, and societal) that our ancient ancestors did.

If, when we die, we forever lose consciousness, not even having any dreamstate, and all our memories and everything that made us what we were, as an individual, is snuffed out irrevocably, then it is without worth to us, as individuals, that we are "still part of the universe".

This universe of ours is indeed awesomely beautiful, but it's also incredibly and almost entirely hazardous and destructive toward human life. I think our existence in this universe, if not purposely created within it, is more of an anomaly and a defiance against the norms of this universe, than our existence is harmonious with the universe or typical of it.

Well, of course, a philosophy that offers no real hope for humanity nor offers anything for an individual to gain, has nothing to prove.

That is definitely the case, whether there is a God and a afterlife, or not.

So, basically, your view of how the universe works and how intelligent life exists, can be summed up (IMHO) with the phrase, "Shit happens".

Plan9

Here's how I look at the whole "We Are God" concept:

I'd suggest that god is our little secret.

I'd suggest that god is in the custard.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Ourcrazymodern?

I'd suggest that the totality being god is most palatable and that Stephen King is part of the darker side though very, very good.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Plan9

It IS good to be the (Stephen) King.

Guy has more followers than most.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Halskwab

The point is that the ultimate Reality can not be understood using mind. It is beyond mind.

If mind would be the highest possible means for us to use we would have to stop at agnosticism.

However, as mytics have described for thousands of years mind is not our ultimate instrument. Not only do they say there is a greater consciousness than mind, this consciousness is accessible to us.

Speculating and reasoning about such a higher consciousness does not take us anywhere, we need to enter it and live in it.

In the East this is normal knowledge, but in the West (as can also be seen in this thread) reason reigns; going even so far as to test spiritual experience using reason to test its validity.

We can not think out reality. The intellect can only show us at best partial and conflicting aspects of the manifestation we see around us. It will never give us the whole.
Mere attraction to some religious of spiritual ideas also will not give us knowledge of the Reality Beyond.

(Dabbling in) reasoning we can all do from our easy chairs, but to reach this greater consciousness requires long hard work.
Many have tried and attained. Lets not ignore them, but listen to what they have to say and not dismiss their experiences a priori because they overreach reason.

asaris

If mind is not our greatest instrument for discovering truth, what is our greatest instrument?

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Plan9

I'd suggest: The body moved by the mind.

To speak poetry, create art, club seals, eat porkrinds.

All this free-floating soul crap is straight silly.

We are goofy ghosts in meat machines.

We are what we do.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

Halskwab

Since there are many mystics there are many different terms for these states of consciousness due to locality and such.

I'll use the terms Sri Aurobindo used, because they are in English. Pretty much all of his works are in English as well so it is easy for you to peruse.

The reasoning mind, as I called it above, he calls Mental Mind. Below it are the Vital Mind and Physical Mind.
Above it, as concerns us, are the Higher Mind, Illumined Mind, Intuitive Mind (has nothing to do with the normal definition of intuition), Overmind and Supermind.

I quote from his work "The Life Divine" as to an explanation of how the Higher Mind cognizes.

This higher consciousness is a Knowledge formulating itself on a basis of self-existent all-awareness and manifesting some part of its integrality, a harmony of its significances put Into thought-form. It can freely express itself in single ideas, but its most characteristic movement is a mass ideation, a system or totality of truth-seeing at a single view; the relations of idea with idea, of truth with truth are not established by logic but pre-exist and emerge already self-seen in the integral whole. There is an initiation into forms of an ever-present but till now inactive knowledge, not a system of conclusions from premisses or data; this thought is a self-revelation of eternal Wisdom, not an acquired knowledge. Large aspects of truth come into view in which the ascending Mind, if it chooses, can dwell with satisfaction and, after its former manner, live in them as in a structure; but if progress is to be made, these structures can constantly expand into a larger structure or several of them combine themselves into a provisional greater whole on the way to a yet unachieved integrality. In the end there is a great totality of truth known and experienced but still a totality capable of infinite enlargement because there is no end to the aspects of knowledge, nastyanto vistarasya me.

This is possible because the divine (i.e. the One, God, &c), which is Knowledge, is in direct contact with these higher levels of consciousness.

This connection does not directly stop at "regular" mind, it is however very seldom, short and much more obscured that such connections occur in that state.

I wish to reiterate that this is not the experience of one person. Whether you read the great mystics like Plotinus or the smaller ones like Gopi Krishna they describe the same state(s). There are also non-mystics who have had the experiences for very short durations (Dostoyevsky comes to mind).

The keyword in your question is "discover". There need not be any discovering for we are Truth. Unfortunately it is not present all the way down to the physical consciousness; we need to reach up for it.
The Yoga practised by Sri Aurobindo tried to bring Truth all the way down, but if you are interested in that I'm sure you will find and read about it.

Since you quote Nietsche you most likely are familiar with Schopenhauer who was in turn inspired by the Vedanta. You could peruse that path as well.

The Sanskrit at the end of the quote is from the Bhagavad Gita and can be translated as "My self-extension is endless". "My" being Krishna.


If you admit the little that is written above (if only hypothetically) it would mean that our everyday actions are not guided by the divine, because our everyday consciousness is not in contact with it.

Is it not undeniable that the people that are in touch with it are exemplary and are absolutely fitted to learn from?

Why not go to some center where you can meditate for one or two weeks? What do you have to lose, maybe you'll find it interesting; if only to dismiss it.

"Tilted Forum Project; The Evolution of Humanity, Sexuality and Philosophy."

Plan9

I believe that greatness is in how you change the world through your actions, not how you change yourself (faith).

So much of religion is make-believe. We make-believe it matters.

I like to make things to believe in...

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

roachboy

here's a quote from edmond jabès "the book of questions" that i have been thinking about alot lately. it isnt a new idea--neither in general nor to me--but i really like it:

all letters give form to absence
hence, god is the child of his name.

forms, levels, hierarchies of them: all are the products of a type of doing routed through the characteristics of words mapped onto what is said to lay beyond them. a very very basic confusion. same confusion that enables you to imagine yourself as a type of object (an "i")--same confusion that enables you to imagine that action is a discrete mode that this i-thing enters into--and the reverse (that absent this mode, the "i" is at rest, static, itself).
if you dont model the "i" as an object, then there's no need to posit an essence. if there's no need to posit an essence, there's no need to talk about a soul. the word soul refers to nothing. people are afraid of nothing, so they fill it in. there are obviously modes of being that are you cannot jam into categories. strictly speaking, then, all of these are nothing. but nothing is not homogenous. it simply denotes all types of activity that escape representation. most everything we are escapes representation.

but i am typing this, so there must be something.
yes.
no.
maybe.
sometimes.


what matters is that you find these ideas to be pretty.
because that is all that is at stake.

we are words <---this is the baseline.<---this is wrong. more exactly:
we are syntax. we are a mode of ordering phenomena based on modes of linguistic ordering.<---but linguistic ordering are not self-contained. what meaing is ascribed to verb tenses is not a function of verbs alone.

but just as the process of signification (the process of bringing phenomena into relation with each other) cannot be accounted for on the basis of the results of that process (signifier-->signified or more naively signifier--->referent) so the processes that we are cannot be accounted for in terms of the logic that we use to order the results of those processes.

so all the posts above are true.
none of the posts above are true.

what is consistent above is the conflation of conclusions motivated by aesthetic preferences with other types of claims.

none of this is about the nature of anything beyond what mode of conceptualizing the world yourself and the relations that can obtain between them is most pleasing to you aesthetically.
belief follows pleasure.
belief is the enactment--the spreading out in time, the repetition--of aesthetic dispositions.
without the pleasure, there'd be no repetition.
without repetition, there'd be no belief.

but to repeat something is not to say the same thing over and over: repetition is generative of phenomena that run way beyond what you're repeating.

we are processes: lots of them running on different scales simultaneously. any process is repetition.
any process goes beyond repetition.
repetition is a limiting idea.
repetition is a necessary idea.
limitation is necessary.
but which limitation?
which do you find pretty?
that is what you find necessary.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite