D - I have always wondered why, the sense: God created, emanated the universe, all that is physical and not physical, so that all this (let's say, very figuratively) would expand, evolve and then return to Him or however in Him, and become aware of Him. Why all this?
This, in reality - and you will understand over time - I would say that is the main question that has the answer then more foolish and simpler that there can be; the fact is that keep looking at something from relativity, something that is not relative and subjective; therefore it is a perspective with quite irreconcilable presuppositions between them.
The same concept as evolution that our prof. L. tonight affirmed with certainty to be a thing that concerns time, a sure thing, that evolution is there, it concerns time, and on and on and on, in reality it is absolutely not true because the concept of evolution itself is an illusion!
Evolution does not exist, in the end; it exists only when viewed from here, from relativity, from your point of view.
And the same goes for what concerns the Absolute, the famous discourse ofemanation and reabsorption: these are terms used to make you understand certain mechanics, but always from the point of view of the subjective, of the relative.
Indeed in God all IS, it is not “everything is, something will be, something will no longer be”!
Everything IS, everything is already there. It does not emanate and absorb nothing. Both emanation and absorption are already part of His Being.
Q - But why is there anyway the physical, let's say the material? What need is there? Maybe it's a stupid question, I don't know ...
Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp.
(Read only, cannot comment) To subscribe
It is there because it is part of the Absolute, it is a part of the Absolute, it exists in the Absolute and therefore it exists. It is you who see it limited by your perceptions, by your habit of being in the relative, and you experience this as a consequence, a succession of points, experiences, evolution (as you want to call it), but it is only from your point of view.
D - But why, sorry, did the Absolute set up this little theater?
But nothing came up, that's the point you can't understand! Try to think of the term "eternal present": what does Eternal Present mean?
It is not that God wants to pass the time, he is bored, he is doing all this, I don't know, so as not to spend centuries or millennia like this, always doing the same things: “Let's do something different: let's create the physical plane! ". No, the physical plane is a part of God!
D - It is very difficult.
I know it is difficult. Then we'll get there calmly. You know that we have deliberately left aside the discourse of God, because you were having too many difficulties; how difficult you are also for the rest, I seem to understand. Scifo
Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting,
or subscribe to feeds.
Although this topic has been debated for several years, it is more understood than understood.
I would say that for us embodied, we of the Way, until the experimentation of Unity becomes a recurring sensation, what Scifo affirmed is accepted by faith.
I wonder if the human can ever understand God from his condition of relativity.
If it is true that everything is acquired through experience, it is perhaps only this that can answer ...
If so, it's not part of my luggage yet
The physical plane is part of god
When I ask myself the question of why God conceived all this, I don't find an answer.
I struggle to understand concepts such as Eternal present, undifferentiated matter, non-time.
Indication that the experience of the Real is not acquired.
I proceed by small understandings, in the confidence that everything I live will lead me to open myself to the Love and to the understandings that are still so difficult for me.
The straight line cannot understand the plane: however, it makes a limited experience of it, through the projection of the reality represented on the plane.
May it be so also for us for the reality of the Eternal Present
I share Catia's thought, that these arguments are more understood than understood.
The image of the newborn arises e
the inability, impossibility of seeing what is around him, because the senses, the bodies are not yet well structured.
Feeling suggests that there is more and I think this is enough today ...
The part cannot contain the whole.