The source rests in emptiness

OM

“I AM” awakens

The thought investigates the self

The self divides itself:
1
2
4
8
etc.
Creation is happening

While the source rests in it’s own nature
Still doing nothing

This is the source that all that exists comes from.

This is God.

The divided self enquires:
Who am I?
The “I” comes from the source

All the divided selves starts identifying itself as source.

Here we are, now. Awakened. Enlightened.




ThankYou Ramana Maharshi, Papaji, Mooji and Eckhart Tolle.
Please feel free to write your take on creation.
Would love to hear what scriptures say, too.

Sa icchan cakre.

The Supreme Primeval Lord had a desire.

He smiled.

By His mere will,He set Maya into transformation and created millions and millions of brahmandas.

Infinite Jeevatmas emanated from His divine self,as though,sparks from a huge fire.

The Supreme Godhead,being present in one place,simultaneously took up infinite forms as He entered each and every atom of this mayic creation.

..This is the version of the vedas.

The vedic version makes one thing very clear..The Supreme Truth,The primeval cause,the source of everything that be,HAS INTELLIGENCE and thus He is Supremely able to WILL,to DESIRE.

Further,since the Supreme Brahm has superexcellent energies,He brings about the creation,maintenanc and destruction of the universe by His mere will,although remaining in one place.This apparent impossibility that 'the intense task of creating the universe without any toil' is further explained by the vedas.

The vedas counts 8 qualities of the Supreme Brahm.Two of those qualities are: Satyakaama and satyasankalpa.

With Satyasankalpa,The supreme Lord performs all extraordinary tasks without any difficulty.

So, it seems you forgot to mention Maya (the supernatural delusory cosmic energy of God, or the creative Art of God), which is the basis of all gross material creation and all perceived duality and all perceived change..

Actually, there is nothing "supernatural" in Creation.

Read about Zero Point Energy - and you will find the Cosmic Energy which makes up everything in the Universe. From the massive stars to the thinnest grains of sand.

No .... simply:

I AM.

You are what? Who are you referring to?

See first post in thread.

also

Exodus 3:14
God said to Moses, "I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.' "

Of course, enough cosmic energy must exist to explain everything we observe in our material dynamic universe. And the concept of zero-point energy (just like the theory of the existence of dark matter) may explain the large scale gravitational behavior of galaxies, thus accounting for the positive cosmological constant in Einstein’s field equations of general relativity. The amount of missing energy (or mass) that is necessary to keep our universe together is huge. However, the zero-point energy of the vacuum is conveniently infinite.

In terms of a physical model, I personally think that all this energy is present in the momentum (speed times mass) of one infinitesimal quantum point or atom or cosmic singularity or God, which contains total consciousness as well as all energy in the form of infinite speed. The eternal 'chaotic oscillation' of this conscious point, is what we call 'absolute reality'. Our partial individual consciousness or our material reality, may then be a function of a particular higher harmonic frequency, present in this conscious oscillation. Consequently, we may be conscious only every now and then. Hence, we consciously perceive just a small discontinuous fraction of continuous absolute reality. From mathematical chaos theory, we know that such discontinuous phase-projections expose the infinite fractal order or structure or form, present within any formal (non-conscious) singular continuous chaotic system. In a 'conscious chaos' model of reality, all duality and change that we perceive in our world, would then be a discontinuous (quantum) projection of continuous absolute reality.

Now, this would neatly explain the missing energy in our universe. From scientific observations, we can deduce that an (invisible) large scale attracting force (gravity) must exist. But we are only consciously aware of a fraction of the total energy (the total chaotic attractor) of absolute reality which underlies all observable phenomena.

Moreover, such a model would also be compatible with the concept of Maya. In the model, Maya is the higher harmonic frequency or sound (OM), which is present in the conscious cosmic oscillation and of which our individual projection of reality is a function. Thus, Maya is the basis of all gross material creation and all perceived duality and all perceived change and time in this world.

Finally, note that in such a model Maya creates our entire material world, by 'hiding' all but a mere fraction of total absolute reality from our perception or consciousness. That seems to be a perfect explanation of the religious notion of ignorance!

I believe that quantum mechanical experiments can provide the evidence necessary to validate such a scenario. Then the only remaining question would be: Where does conscious chaos (or God) come from? In reality, God’s origin is necessarily meta-physical or unknowable or 'supernatural'. Nevertheless, we might be able to clearly understand (in terms of mathematical chaos theory) the (unpredictable) mechanics of His creative energy or Maya. And consequently, we might be able to understand what we are ourselves..

If you ask me, I think we should just be happy on knowing how the Universe works (with Zero point (or Maya) energy). Indulging deeper into the realm of God in (foolishly) attempt to understand God is not required.

When Theory of Relativity came out back in 1915, Albert Einstein theorized that in order for his Theory to work, an underlining "force" beneath the fabric of the Universe must exist for it to hold everything together. That "force" was Zero Point Energy (which was accepted only recently).

Yet, in the West, this energy have already been spoke of as "Ether" - but of course, like all theories, it was laughed at too.

Only religion truly believed that there was a force which hold everything together as (Maya) Energy was Hinduism which was laughed at too, till recently.

Personally, I would be quite content just to know how the universe approximately works, and to understand who or what we are ourselves in relation to God. No need to understand God and/or His origin.

It’s even questionable whether any sentient being (including Vishnu/Krishna) can understand God as the origin of everything (or Brahman). Logically, no conscious entity can have complete knowledge of its own origin, because any knowledge is a part of the entity itself and therefore it is different from its origin.

This may also relate to 'Gödel's first incompleteness theorem', which basically states: There can never exist a complete system of formal logic that allows all true logical statements to be derived from itself. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems)

na tv evaham jatu nasam
na tvam neme janadhipah
na caiva na bhavisyamah
sarve vayam atah param
Bhagavad Gita 2.12

Yes this is good. To know the relationships between God the universe and ourselves is the platform of real knowledge.

Concerning origins, it's not a question of understanding as much as it is one of acceptance. God is His own origin and never was there a time when He did not exist.

There is no need for the intellect to wrap it's tiny little arms around this truth before the self can be be brought into knowledge of this reality because the intelligence is not the self.

Here the mistake is made of concluding that God must be without sense perception. So you are conceiving of God as deaf dumb blind and the totality of UN-awareness, the supreme unconscious. This is a definition of death.
But I ask you how you can be sure of this. Not how can you prove it to me but how can you prove it to yourself.

You can not.

The other choice is that God means the Supremely aware one. The Omniscient Being not the senseless being. The one whose sense perception knows no limitation. The Supremely alive one.

These are the choices and need to be considered deeply. Is spiritual enlightenment one of entering into life or death?




Well, this presupposes that there is a difference between the conscious entity and the origin of his own self. In one sense this is true of ourselves but it is not true of God.

Agreed.

As I suggested earlier, I think God (impersonal Brahman) is total consciousness as well as total energy, all present in a singular cosmic oscillation. Our individual (material) consciousness is a discontinuous fraction of this total consciousness, and a function of its creative energy or Maya. In such a model we are simultaneously one with God and different from God, and God is the origin or basis of our (partial) consciousness.

According to this, our consciousness is incomplete, and since our knowledge is obviously part of our consciousness, our knowledge is incomplete. Therefore, we can never fully know God, or the origin of our consciousness.

If Krishna/Vishnu, or the supreme personality of Godhead, has total consciousness (including our own consciousness), then Krishna has complete knowledge of Brahman, and there is in fact no difference between Krishna and Brahman or God.

Perhaps my (implicit) question was, whether consciousness or knowledge and (mindful) understanding are equivalent. In other words, can total consciousness (or God) fully understand itself? I suspect, however, that 'understanding' is just a characteristic of our material brain and subtle mind. Beyond that, only absolute knowledge might exist..

Not exactly.

Well yes this is the impersonalist idea. But we should not confuse this with Lord Caitanya's teaching on oneness and difference.


The jiva's consciousness is complete when it is fully Krishna conscious, that is, fully conscious of Krishna. Krishna never directly experiences incomplete consciousness. Understanding the distinction between ourselves and Krishna is essential.

Here is how Krishna's completeness is described in relation to the universe.


Brahman is a feature of Krishna, Krishna is not a feature of Brahman. Do you see what I mean? The Brahman is Krishna's emanation, His aura. A person emanates an aura, an aura does not emanate a person. There is a critical difference primate.


Perhaps my (implicit) question was, whether consciousness or knowledge and (mindful) understanding are equivalent. In other words, can total consciousness (or God) fully understand itself? I suspect, however, that 'understanding' is just a characteristic of our material brain and subtle mind. Beyond that, only absolute knowledge might exist..[/quote]

God can and does understand Himself. The Lord never experiences an identity crisis like the ones we are having now. Therefore we are not the Supreme God.

Does "it " understand itself? First point an impersonal it cannot understand anything. None of this will make sense to you as long as you hold to an impersonal conception of God as the highest.

"Beyond that, only absolute knowledge might exist."

Knowledge without a knower? Both absolute knowledge and the knower of that knowledge exist. In the absolute world they are not separate or ever found one without the other.

Well, I said: "there is in fact no difference between Krishna and Brahman or God". Krishna is the person (or knower) and Brahman is the mechanical system (or mechanism, if you like). In reality, I don’t think one is 'the basis' of the other. To be the basis of something, the basis must come first. This implies sequential order, which implies time, which implies Maya. And God isn’t subject to Maya or time; God is Maya..

We often think that we don't know the (true nature of the Universe and God) and attend to follow Holy figures in figuring this out.

What if we DO KNOW everything? What if we have merely forgotten who we are?

Like an Armesia (wrong spelling here) victim. Someone who have lost his memory and trying to figure out who we are in relationship to the World around us?

I got this idea from watching X-Men Origin, by the way.

Amnesia ........

There was once a Prince who developed amnesia.

He wandered about not knowing who he was. Eventually he sat in the gutter in tears.

A kind lady came by and gave him some food. Then a man came by and gave him some wine.

But later a priest came by and recognizing the boy, said "My dear son, I know your father. He has a great Kingdom, which is yours. Let me take you there".

We can see who best took care of the lost boy's welfare.

Sequential thinking is of time. You are correct. But it is you who are attempting to impose that conception onto the absolute.

Krishna is called the Cause of all causes. Krishna caused the Brahman effulgence.This has to be accepted even though both Krishna the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His effulgent the Brahman.

You call this sequential thinking but it is not. It appears contradictory to our minds because we are conditioned by sequential thinking as in past and future. Krishna perfectly houses all such apparent contradictions.

The material (therefore not perfect but in this case nearly) example is the sun and the sunshine. Even though they both exist simultaneously still no one would argue the fact that the sun is the cause of the sunshine.

Yet you do not see what actually saved the boy.

What truly saved that boy could be his father's merits (punya) and his own. Not the kingdom or the Priest.

If that prince was an evil man, or his father was a cruel king, do you believe that anyone could be bothered about the boy who was crying in the gutter? N0 ... because they will remember his and his father's cruelty and shy away from him.

And like most people who does not remember who they are, the prince will sit in the gutter and wonder why no one is helping him. Because of his amnesia he will not remember the evil things he did (in another lifetime) which have shone away his could-be-rescuers.

Merits and Sins determines what sort of World you are living in. Sometimes, your merits will save you when you are least expected.