Theos-Talk Archives (September 2009 Message tt00075)

No, I don't accept a personal god - if you do, Semock, then perhaps theosophy is not your path.

Cass


>
>From: semockr <semockr@hotmail.com>
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Monday, 14 September, 2009 1:46:26 AM
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Zero Point - Leon
>
>  
>This is the most theosophical post I've seen in here for a long time and it gets down to cases in science and religion to get at the truth. I dont know about Cass but I for one still believe in a personal God, not an external one however.
>
>--- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@ ...> wrote:
>>
>> Cass,
>> 
>> I don't think you are too far off the mark...
>> 
>> But, at the primal beginning of each cycle of manifestation, the 
>> cosmos is in a state of rest -- which consists of its laya point of 
>> pure consciousness (of absolute space) spinning in an angular 
>> momentum of force rays that correspond to the total potential mass- 
>> energy of each level of the past and future seven fold fractal 
>> involved manifest fields of cosmic consciousness.
>> 
>> It's this laya point that Einstein called the "singularity" prior to 
>> the birth of the spacetime continuum... And that the "new science" of 
>> today sees as being in the center of every black-hole (now called a 
>> "black-white whole" by Nassim Haramein) as well as in every zero- 
>> point in total holographic spacetime. (Incidentally, Haramein's 
>> theory is the closest science has come to verifying the ABC model as 
>> well as HPB's metaphysics) .
>> 
>> THerefore, we might think of this cosmic singularity, or primal 
>> dimensionless atom of "abstract motion", as the "God particle" that 
>> is the "seven robed mother" of the Book of Dzyan -- whose still zero- 
>> point center of pure consciousness is the "father"... And, as HPB 
>> pointed out, is the primal state of "absolute space" that contains 
>> the rootless root of both spirit or consciousness, and matter or mass- 
>> energy. So, where's the need for an external personal God creator 
>> when the cosmos is its own creator, sustainer, destroyer or Brahma, 
>> Vishnu, Shiva (Kether, Binah, Chochma)?
>> 
>> Thus, the inherent consciousness at the primal beginning of our 
>> present cosmic cycle of manifestation, is the triggering intent of 
>> will that wakes up and initiates the emanation and radiation of the 
>> manifest cosmos and all its fractal involved energy fields -- which 
>> are governed solely by the laws of cycles inherent in original spin 
>> momentum, after the release of the reactive nature of karma -- like a 
>> compressed coil spring explosively expanding when the latch holding 
>> is down is slid open. That's why science calls it the "big 
>> bang" (and, now, considers each galaxy as starting with an analogous 
>> little big bang.)
>> 
>> Since the only eternal unchanging reality is that zero-point of pure 
>> consciousness -- that's why the ever changing manifest cosmos
>> and all the evolving forms in it, are considered as temporary 
>> illusions or Maya.
>> 
>> For a closer view of this concept check out my new blog, "How It All 
>> Began" at:
>> http://dzyanmaster. wordpress. com/
>> and compare it with the theories of Haramein at his web site and in 
>> his video lectures at:
>> http://www.thereson anceproject. org/
>> http://www.youtube. com/watch? 
>> v=pPgII_4ciFU& feature=PlayList &p=88EDD1895A2F5 587&index= 0&playnext= 1
>> or http://tinyurl. com/haramein
>> 
>> Leon
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 7, 2009, at 9/7/098:12 PM, Cass Silva wrote:
>> 
>> > Leon,
>> > This is in response to a poster who struggles with the idea of a 
>> > godcreated universe. Am I on the right track?
>> > Cass
>> >
>> > Can I propose that this primeval particle was a combination of 
>> > matter and energy? As matter is unable to be destroyed only 
>> > changed, could this zero mass reach a point that its constitution 
>> > in static equilibrium could no longer be contained and that change 
>> > was the inevitable result of an inherent force acting upon itself?
>> >
>> > This then suggests that matter and energy are in a constant state 
>> > of flux (albeit over billions and billions of years) from static to 
>> > energetic and that expansion and contraction are a result or an 
>> > effect of changing interacting forces.
>> >
>> > This then takes god out of the zero point and replaces god with 
>> > 'force'. A force that is subject to its own laws?
>> >
>> > Cass
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _ 
>> > ____________
>> > Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail.
>> > Learn more: http://au.overview. mail.yahoo. com/
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>
>
>


      __________________________________________________________________________________
Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail.
Learn more: http://au.overview.mail.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]