Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Simon on November 30, 2011 at 9:22pm

Composure Saves The World

"We Have Ceased Fighting Anything Or Anyone...." - Bill Wilson

"Death smiles at us all. All a man can do is smile back." - Marcus Aurelius  

Desiring conflict to end (i.e. Wishing Bankers to be fair, or Protestors to disperse, wishing starvation to cease or those who disagree with you to agree with you etc), and hoping this end of conflict will be the path to equanimity, peace, freedom... is like ensuring that my car won't crash by building more roads. It keeps me busy, distracted, frustrated and/or filled with a sense of worth... until I see it is my own car I need to drive, and maintain. 

I will protect myself to my dying breath. I will attack and/or defend to do so. This is natural. This is uniformity. Members are dismembered and/or seek to re-member, seek union.

When I see every thing IS Self, this Self-protection continues. When I see there is no thing that is not Self, I have nothing to attack and/or defend. This is supranatural. This is Unity. Beyond remembrance, each part (of the whole) sees its function, and is unified.

equanimity [ˌiːkwəˈnɪmɪtɪ ˌɛkwə-]
n
calmness of mind or temper; composure
[from Latin aequanimitās, from aequus even, equal + animus mind, spirit)

I see physics; unless I see metaphysics.

OoOoOo

Permalink Reply by Michael Simon on November 30, 2011 at 11:55pm

Physics And/Or Metaphysics
(Or: If You've Tried One Cup Of Tea, Haven't You Tried Them All?)

Are Physics and Metaphysics ultimately the same?
Is God and ME ultimately the same? 

I use a physical symbol (language) to express the metaphysical. 
In other words, I am moved to express the inexpressible. 
How's that working out for ME?

"I've looked at life from both sides now," Joni Mitchell crooned.
Having done so (experienced so), must she now choose the best?
Must she now solidify the two into one? Is this solidifying Unity, or is it Uniformity? The best answers may be simple, but are the Truest answers?
Will life - condensed - be easier to see this way, more manageable, easier to grasp? A mandala is a thing of beauty, but it is not simple.

There is a Divine Paradox: God and ME; Metaphysics and Physics; Irish Breakfast Tea and Tea. 

Is it not, ultimately: God, Metaphysics, and Tea? 
If this is so, why do I prefer one form of tea to another?
How can one person "experience" God, and another, not "believe" in God?

Can "I" answer a question (any question), ultimately?
"I know that I don't know," realized Socrates. 
Mystery is, by its nature, unknown. 
Formlessness is, by its supranature, undefinable. 
The "Ultimate" is, by its nature, limited, and therefore a "matter" of physics. 
Physics, exoterism, is not worse. It sees what it sees. It does not see metaphysics. Its view is that of uniformity.
Metaphysics, esoterism, is not better. It sees what it sees. It sees physics. Its view is that of Unity.

"Are Physics and Metaphysics ultimately the same?" is not a question I can answer for another. To do so suggests I know, or that I know FOR another. It suggest a limited view, as is all knowing. I cannot see, nor can I say, for another. What do I see? I see Both. I see Both Michael And God.

And this begs the question: can another, ultimately, hear another? 
Have I ever said anything, to anyone, in 43 years, and ever truly been heard? 
Or have all my expressions been like eyes: guides with which I see; not expressions to communicate (in Truth) with others, but to communicate with myself, to show ME to ME (to see God Through ME), to lead ME through MY darkness which is the glory of God?
I don't know. 

OoOoOo

ModeratorPermalink Reply by John on December 1, 2011 at 9:56pm

"Are Physics and Metaphysics ultimately the same?"

The expectation is ultimately "yes". It is not a static question. Physics and Mathematics keep closing the windows and doors on many topics which were considered the sole right of Philosophy.

The one single question, so obvious it is almost hard to grasp, is a point that has bothered metaphysicists (including Einstein) is the question of how Physics can define the "Now" as experienced by Mind. It is nowhere to be found. It is a really tough item.

"How can one person "experience" God, and another, not "believe" in God?"

Individual Experience and Belief are innately personal. Atheism is a religion. They Experience No God. Buddhists do not believe in God. In any case - Experience and Belief are never something that can successfully be argued. I had a Christian claim that fossils, radioactive dating etc. were "Planted" as part of Gods Plan. The world is 5000 years old. Period.   There is no way to win that argument. The arguments on Freewill are also so. Fortunately, we now have the Determinists backed into a very tight corner of deterministic thinking. John H. Conway and Simon B. Kochen did a very good job on that one.