Can spirituality exist without God?

Sandra Richardson53 said:"I am" is God itself.
The hunt for truth is God.

When you're searching, you finally realize you aren't just some meat suit or a bundle of thoughts... and that the love you feel for your own soul is the exact same thing as the love for the soul in everyone else.

It's all one.

Your consciousness and mine—it looks like we're two different people, right? Wrong. We're one. We're both chasing that unity, and that's what love is.

Nisargadatta Maharaj...

🙂

What a total joke!

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Look, if Consciousness lacks color, taste, or smell—meaning you can't really describe it using basic sensory input—then why bother adding that it "isn't bland"? Why even include that little qualifier? Is he just trying to fill the silence?
And what does he even mean by "basic sensory input" anyway?

Well, if we're adding qualifiers, let's be honest—it's because we're talking to OURSELVES!
You can't bake a single, solitary, absolute TRUTH about CONSCIOUSNESS.

In fact, you can't even prove whether it EXISTS or NOT.

placidharbor7 said:Well, if we're adding qualifiers, let's be honest—it's because we're talking to OURSELVES!
You can't bake a single, solitary, absolute TRUTH about CONSCIOUSNESS.

In fact, you can't even prove whether it EXISTS or NOT.

Can you apply that same logic to God?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Can you apply that same logic to God?

We "perceive" "God" in the exact same way we perceive "ourselves" or our own "ego."
To us, "God" is about as tangible as "last year's snowfall."
The concept of "God" simply sits at the table of our own thoughts, where His angels are nothing more than the cherubs of our own imaginations.

CONSCIOUSNESS—assuming it even exists—is supreme, standing even above such a constructed "God."
If "God" were actually out there, He would know about CONSCIOUSNESS just as much as His creation, humanity, does; in other words, He would know absolutely nothing.

It’s all just "Bemu" and things like that "higher power."

Alright, so what’s the actual point of this thread, given the title?

placidharbor7 said:What a total joke!

Man, he’s spot on...

If you actually want to read it, Oliver Haddou has a link in his signature to some e-books. You can find a PDF of "I Am That" by Nisargadatta Maharaja there. It’s an American translation—honestly, the quality is pretty rough, but it gets the point across enough to read...

placidharbor7 said:We "perceive" "God" in the exact same way we perceive "ourselves" or our own "ego."
To us, "God" is about as tangible as "last year's snowfall."
The concept of "God" simply sits at the table of our own thoughts, where His angels are nothing more than the cherubs of our own imaginations.

CONSCIOUSNESS—assuming it even exists—is supreme, standing even above such a constructed "God."
If "God" were actually out there, He would know about CONSCIOUSNESS just as much as His creation, humanity, does; in other words, He would know absolutely nothing.

It’s all just "Bemu" and things like that "higher power."

Pretty well put...

But still.....

who or what exactly is this "Kozmologos" you're always bringing up?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Alright, so what’s the actual point of this thread, given the title?

If you were to ask Ram Dass that, he’d probably tell you that both the topic itself and whoever started it are just products of free will within the scope of a technically observable "future."

placidharbor7 would likely fire back at you with a counter-question: "Then what is the purpose of Surrender?"

Sandra Richardson53 said:Pretty well put...

But still.....

who or what exactly is this "Kozmologos" you're always bringing up?

Why not just give your Kozmologos a nickname based on your own style? Then maybe you won't have to keep asking placidharbor7 about his latest little invention!

placidharbor7 said:If you were to ask Ram Dass that, he’d probably tell you that both the topic itself and whoever started it are just products of free will within the scope of a technically observable "future."

placidharbor7 would likely fire back at you with a counter-question: "Then what is the purpose of Surrender?"

To find its purpose, obviously.

But can you actually reach the "known" by traveling through the unknown?

placidharbor7 said:Why not just give your Kozmologos a nickname based on your own style? Then maybe you won't have to keep asking placidharbor7 about his latest little invention!

If he comes for me, I'm coming for him.

Until then, my Beloved....🙂, life’s just easier when you feel like there’s someone up in the heavens watching your back.

Just kidding.

Actually, not even kidding. I talk to Him all the time.

Brahman becomes Ishvara (the Almighty) within creation.

Sandra Richardson53 said:If he comes for me, I'm coming for him.

Until then, my Beloved....🙂, life’s just easier when you feel like there’s someone up in the heavens watching your back.

Just kidding.

Actually, not even kidding. I talk to Him all the time.

Brahman becomes Ishvara (the Almighty) within creation.

Are you serious right now, girl? Seriously?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:To find its purpose, obviously.

But can you actually reach the "known" by traveling through the unknown?

The "known" is dead, and the "unknown" will eventually die too; the only thing that stays truly alive is the Unknowable—assuming it even exists!

placidharbor7 said:The "known" is dead, and the "unknown" will eventually die too; the only thing that stays truly alive is the Unknowable—assuming it even exists!

So, here's the kicker: is "change" something you actually earn, or is it just handed to you?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:So, here's the kicker: is "change" something you actually earn, or is it just handed to you?

I mean, really, what kind of "will" does a person actually have to merit anything at all?🙂

placidharbor7 said:If we follow that logic, then you’ll also have to admit that consciousness is completely immeasurable, right? It evades any kind of objective check or observation.

Which makes this whole claim from Master Raman an absolute absurdity, so let me just apologize to everyone right off the bat!

Think about it: when you and Parsifal claim to be "conscious," you aren't actually *aware* of that awareness. Instead, you're both just projecting your own memories onto a concept of "self" and "identity." It's like a coroner measuring a corpse (the past) while loudly shouting about how full of life they are! Oh, the irony! Honestly, trying to define the "self" is about as productive as snoring through a lecture—it's just a much more polite way of being foolish.

placidharbor7 explained this ages ago: it is fundamentally impossible to achieve what you, Parsifal, and all those other misguided believers call being "here and now." Because if you are truly "here and now"—you aren't "YOU"; and if you are "YOU"—then you aren't "here and now." Makes sense, doesn't it?

That "here and now" which you two, and so many others, so desperately label as "consciousness" is nothing more than a clumsy attempt to grab God by the beard.

"Consciousness" and the observer can never actually meet. All these claims regarding "consciousness"—especially in your specific case—are nothing more than pure spiritual amateurism.

Precisely. It is quite inconceivable to suggest that time exists in a place where it does not. The ego, thought, time, and the past simply cannot exist within the eternity built into the here and now.

placidharbor7 said:I mean, really, what kind of "will" does a person actually have to merit anything at all?🙂

If a person doesn't even have their own free will—meaning there’s nothing they can actually *do* to earn anything—then why on earth do we spend so much damn time "denying" what’s already been handed to us?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:If a person doesn't even have their own free will—meaning there’s nothing they can actually *do* to earn anything—then why on earth do we spend so much damn time "denying" what’s already been handed to us?

Isn't it perfectly logical, though? It all stems from that same lack of true freedom!

placidharbor7 said:Isn't it perfectly logical, though? It all stems from that same lack of true freedom!

Look, whether it's logical or not—I don't know, man—but I definitely don't get it.
If I don't actually have free will, then I can't choose anything because everything's already been decided for me... but then how come I keep choosing to "reject" exactly what I'm supposedly stuck with?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Look, whether it's logical or not—I don't know, man—but I definitely don't get it.
If I don't actually have free will, then I can't choose anything because everything's already been decided for me... but then how come I keep choosing to "reject" exactly what I'm supposedly stuck with?

And that right there is exactly how "lack of free will" shows up! It’s this constant tug-of-war that tricks our tiny bit of focus on our inner workings. Poor little humans actually think they’re having these deep "internal debates" with themselves, don't they? But really, they're just acting in the name of some "higher purpose" or those big values you see listed in everyone else's textbooks.

The "I," or the self, is all woven together from that one single strand of "(un)will." Stop trying to split it apart and you'll finally see the whole picture!