Written by Mathew Naismith
I've been receiving some
interesting responses to my last two posts on my blog, the finite and infinite
perspectives are certainly giving us different perceptions. On one side, we
have the consciousness of science stating that infinite consciousness is a consciousness
in delusion. On the other side we have consciousness of spirituality stating
that finite consciousness is a consciousness in an illusion......Science minded
and spiritually aware people are stating that each other is in a delusional or an
illusional state of consciousness!!
In actuality, both illusions
and the delusions exist but not to the extent of the obvious bias being
expressed by either side, both the infinite and the finite has it's place, to
me this is obvious.
The following is an interesting reply to my last post.....
Reply
Hi Mathew I read the
blog but still find myself confused at your understanding of truer self and the
deception of science and the spiritual nature of the truer self as you put it.
I'm not sure what it is you are trying to get across. Do you have a special
different understanding of everything compared to the two mentioned above? If
so can you explain it so that clarity can be given to that theory. I'm not
trying to criticise just would love to see where your thoughts are taking you
as it feels a bit off the mark if I'm honest.
My Reply
Finding other people's perceptions questionable, is
all about trying to be aware beyond your
own perceptions, this can also include being aware beyond human perceptions at
times. Trying to perceive beyond your
own perceptions isn't, to me, being critical Damon, it's quite cool.
Truer Self: Look at your
truer self being everything that is infinite, it's a state of being that has no
boundaries of the finite, in other words a starting and ending point, it's
basically a state of eternalness. In most religions this was portrayed through
the knowing of a God and/or Goddesses or anything portraying an eternal aspect.
We have always had a connection with our eternal self through spirituality in one sense or another.
It's obvious to me there is something to the infinite self, why would so many
people express such an interest in the
infinite if it didn't have some kind of truth about it? We have obviously felt a connection to the
infinite self, our truer or inner self/being.
Science: If I at all
portrayed science being of deception, I'm sorry for that, this was not my
intentions. Science is of the finite awareness, an awareness based on finite
perspectives where's spirituality is based on infinite perspectives. Within any
ideology or concept, it's not the ideology or concept that becomes deceptive,
it's the people behind such conscious perceptions.
Spirituality = infinite + eternal states of
consciousness + infinite awareness
Science = finite + transitory states of consciousness
+ finite awareness
It's interesting how general science preconceives that consciousness also dies when the human self dies!!
Don't be mistaken that these two quite different
perspectives don't come together, they often do when a consciousness using such
perceptions has no biases/boundaries to contend with. Some of the newer
sciences of today use both finite and infinite perspectives as they did before
modern day science. I think using both perspectives certainly seems to give us
wisdom. This wisdom comes about by perceiving that there are no true
boundaries, therefore, there are no preconceptions.
To me, it is obvious why we are lacking wisdom today,
we have set up boundaries and biases between infinite and finite conscious
perceptions and being. A truly wise person never preconceives what is and
isn't, they always stay open to any possibility beyond their own perceptions.
Damon, you yourself have expressed this through
querying a perception different to your own......It's not easy staying open to
perceptions we have no idea of , only in the wise will we observe this.
Note: The discussion between
Damon and myself is still in progress, I will update this post in accordance
with our discussion.
Reply
Actually that helped thank you I agree with your explanation
Reply
No comments:
Post a Comment