God Speaks . . .

Like a few others on here, I'm pagan and I believe that there is a divine entity that shows itself in many godforms as in gods and goddesses.

It's regular pagan practice to commune with your gods, it's done by feeling connected deep down and holding the conversation with them almost as if you're imagining it in your head, but with practice you can understand and feel the difference.

How does god speak to you?

If I changed this to How do gods speak to you?, then the answer would be - through the shamanic trance journey, the same way as I communicate with any other spirit.

I agree with all that has been said, it is easy to communicate with god, just as it is with any being that is in sprit – the process is no different – and why should it be? The process takes some practise but eventually the ability to discern the chatter from the actual allows one to differentiate. I also think that (for all of us) god leaves us reminders – these are often seen in nature or events around us for many this is the only way that communication can be established.
It is only by talking with god, by listening and questioning that our reason for existence can be clarified – and that must be the very best reason to do it.
love
chris

I also think that (for all of us) god leaves us reminders – these are often seen in nature or events around us for many this is the only way that communication can be established.

Hope you don't mind my asking - does this mean that you believe in one god that is in overall charge of everything (or, at least, everything in nature)?

Hi Crowan,
Of course it is never fully clear because we see what we are able to, but essentially yes - one god, but one that has many faces that people see, some in nature, some in other forms for instance. Even the christian face of god manages to split itself into three parts, and this is a good example of many aspects that are one in reality.
I'm not sure if this answers your question.....

love
chris

Hi Crowan,
Of course it is never fully clear because we see what we are able to, but essentially yes - one god, but one that has many faces that people see, some in nature, some in other forms for instance. Even the christian face of god manages to split itself into three parts, and this is a good example of many aspects that are one in reality.
I'm not sure if this answers your question.....

love
chris

Thank you. It does answer my question. I don't agree but, hey, it would be a boring forum if we all agreed completely.
🙂

Hi Daz

Assuming there is a god. Isn't it based on an image or feeling what people often project??

I did experiment sometime ago by meditating inwardly and praying outwardly, kind of like yin & yang. I think it might got the idea from a Sri Chimnoy book (but don't quote me on that). But I soon got bored of it as it seemed childish.

Now I just feel a kind of interdependant suchness in the universe. You can call it god if you like. If verbal communication (or any other communication) helps you in your inner quest and it works, then why not?

Best wishes

RP

Hi Daz

Assuming there is a god.

Isn't it based on an image or feeling what people often project??

Hi R.P.

I would say that happens for sure R.P. but there are times when one is drawn to or becomes aware of something else other than what they are conscious of in that moment .

Of course on some level we can also self project in a way that something can seemingly become us in any given moment almost like sending ourselves an email or a picture message from another aspect of self in another plane / dimension 😮 😮 .

But what is the self? I see the self as what we are within mind . Some will relate that self to God .

x daz x

Now I just feel a kind of interdependant suchness in the universe. You can call it god if you like. If verbal communication (or any other communication) helps you in your inner quest and it works, then why not?

I have experienced a something. My spirits tell me that the nearest word we have for it is ‘connection’, but we experience it as ‘love’. I tend to think about it as ‘the love of the universe’ (lower-case is deliberate). There are places that my spirits have taken me where I could hear its music. The problem with calling this ‘God’, ‘Goddess’, ‘Great Spirit’ or anything else, is that – being human – we give it a personality. Once we have done that, we have reduced it, made it into a thought-form that can be filled by a spirit. Made it ‘a god’ (of which I have met several) rather than ‘God’. So then we gradually become more aware and realise there’s something beyond the individual gods, but – being human – having realised this, we give it a personality, and the whole cycle starts again.

God Speaks by Meher Baba

[COLOR="Blue"]I came across a book over the holiday period at a family gathering that Is called
God Speaks by Meher Baba.

Imho it's the only book in the mbs/spirituality sphere truly worth reading.

It explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.

That's all.

🙂

I came across a book over the holiday period at a family gathering that Is called
God Speaks by Meher Baba.

Imho it's the only book in the mbs/spirituality sphere truly worth reading.

It explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.

That's all.

🙂

Isn't that somewhat limiting oneself by exlcluding other possibilities of understanding?

All Love and Reiki Hugs

It explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.

In any logical argument, the premises have to be agreed with before the conclusion can be agreed with. If I don’t accept your (or the book’s) view of ‘God’, then I’m not likely to accept the explanations, am I?

[COLOR="Blue"]I came across a book over the holiday period at a family gathering that Is called
God Speaks by Meher Baba.

Imho it's the only book in the mbs/spirituality sphere truly worth reading.

It explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.

That's all.

🙂

Are you saying this book offers a convincing explanation?

Are you saying this book offers a convincing explanation?

Hi Mouse ,

This is a small taster of material that is of God Speaks by Meher Baba .

According to God Speaks, in the evolution of consciousness, before the Soul has any consciousness of anything or itself, there is an infinite, impressionless unconscious tranquil state. Meher Baba calls this state the Eternal Beyond-Beyond State of God (or Paratpar Paramatma), which has no experience of Self, nor of any of its Infinite latent attributes. Latent in this Infinite state is the undifferentiated and unmanifested Everything. Meher Baba says that the state of the man's consciousness during sound sleep is literally the same original divine sound sleep state of God. Synopsizing this concept in God Speaks biographer [url]Charles Purdom[/url] writes, "In the beginningless beginning, in the beyond the beyond, God Is in absolute sound sleep."

Meher Baba writes that in Everything is also included the Nothing. Latent in <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="Paramatma">Paramatma is the First Urge, which is expressed by the question "Who Am I?". This First Urge at one finite but unlimited point becomes manifest as the "Om Point" or the "Creation Point." Through this point the Nothing gradually appears as the shadow of the Everything and this appearance starts expanding ad infinitum. Simultaneously with the manifestation of the First Urge, the infinite Soul, in a tremendous shock, experiences its very first gross impression as it identifies itself with the projected Nothingness. In this experience, the first illusory separation (sense of separate identity) takes place in the undifferentiated. The Soul, still not conscious of its true Self, becomes identified with its projected shadow through this very first impression, thus initiating the illusion of duality. Although this first event of consciousness might be considered to correlate with what is called the "[url]Big Bang[/url]," for Meher Baba the beginning of creation is in fact a beginning in consciousness.<a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[8]">[8]

Are you saying this book offers a convincing explanation?

NICE_1, the important word here is 'convincing'.

In any logical argument, the premises have to be agreed with before the conclusion can be agreed with. If I don’t accept your (or the book’s) view of ‘God’, then I’m not likely to accept the explanations, am I?

Using the term 'logical' in a discussion like this is in itself illogical. We all have personal experiences that define our beliefs. My beliefs are based on christianity but I have come to embrace a rather wider view of the universe than that. But for all of us it is a matter faith - and faith defies logic at times.

NICE_1, the important word here is 'convincing'.

To one Meher Baba's realizations may seem convincing to another it may seem complete gibberish but what is doesn't have to sit well with anyone I would say .

x dazzle x

Using the term 'logical' in a discussion like this is in itself illogical. We all have personal experiences that define our beliefs. My beliefs are based on christianity but I have come to embrace a rather wider view of the universe than that. But for all of us it is a matter faith - and faith defies logic at times.

Hi Tash,

I agree _ there is much that doesn't make sense and is illogical or can seem unconvincing and for whatever that will be that lies beyond the reach of one's intellectual mind doesn't lose any of it's substance / sustenance because of that .

x daz x

Hi Mouse ,

This is a small taster of material that is of God Speaks by Meher Baba .

According to God Speaks, in the evolution of consciousness, before the Soul has any consciousness of anything or itself, there is an infinite, impressionless unconscious tranquil state. Meher Baba calls this state the Eternal Beyond-Beyond State of God (or Paratpar Paramatma), which has no experience of Self, nor of any of its Infinite latent attributes. Latent in this Infinite state is the undifferentiated and unmanifested Everything. Meher Baba says that the state of the man's consciousness during sound sleep is literally the same original divine sound sleep state of God. Synopsizing this concept in God Speaks biographer [url]Charles Purdom[/url] writes, "In the beginningless beginning, in the beyond the beyond, God Is in absolute sound sleep."

Meher Baba writes that in Everything is also included the Nothing. Latent in <a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="Paramatma">Paramatma is the First Urge, which is expressed by the question "Who Am I?". This First Urge at one finite but unlimited point becomes manifest as the "Om Point" or the "Creation Point." Through this point the Nothing gradually appears as the shadow of the Everything and this appearance starts expanding ad infinitum. Simultaneously with the manifestation of the First Urge, the infinite Soul, in a tremendous shock, experiences its very first gross impression as it identifies itself with the projected Nothingness. In this experience, the first illusory separation (sense of separate identity) takes place in the undifferentiated. The Soul, still not conscious of its true Self, becomes identified with its projected shadow through this very first impression, thus initiating the illusion of duality. Although this first event of consciousness might be considered to correlate with what is called the "[url]Big Bang[/url]," for Meher Baba the beginning of creation is in fact a beginning in consciousness.<a class="go2wpf-bbcode" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[8]">[8]

Thanks Nice, that gives some context to the discussion but what I was questioning was the assertion that Meher Baba's book "..explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.." That's a big claim isn't it?! Isn't it the case that this book is perceived by some to offer a convincing explanation of same?

To one Meher Baba's realizations may seem convincing to another it may seem complete gibberish but what is doesn't have to sit well with anyone I would say .

x dazzle x

Yes, but what does "what is" have to do with Meher Baba's realisations?

and faith defies logic at times.

Logic is a method of arguing from stated premises to a conclusion. If my premises include (as they do) 'Everything has a spirit' or 'reincarnation exists' then my conclusions will be different to the conclusions of people who don't accept those premises.
When people say, ‘It’s not logical’, nine times out of ten the subject has nothing to do with logic. They usually mean either, ‘This goes against what I am comfortable believing,’ or ‘It’s not economically viable.’

Thanks Nice, that gives some context to the discussion but what I was questioning was the assertion that Meher Baba's book "..explains how the universe came into being, how it functions, and God.." That's a big claim isn't it?! Isn't it the case that this book is perceived by some to offer a convincing explanation of same?

Your welcome mouse .

It is a big claim to some but to the one that realizes it is no big deal . It's just self realizing what self is . The way that one then tries to describe what is realized can seem convincing or unconvincing to others depending on if another can or cannot relate to what is realized .

x daz x

Yes, but what does "what is" have to do with Meher Baba's realisations?

What is _ is realized .

x dazzle x

To one Meher Baba's realizations may seem convincing to another it may seem complete gibberish but what is doesn't have to sit well with anyone I would say .

Hmn, I see you're using the "what is" phrase, daz. What's changed with you since the "[url]To be Free[/url]" discussion?

Hmn, I see you're using the "what is" phrase, daz. What's changed with you since the "[url]To be Free[/url]" discussion?

Sorry W.S. was just heading out to the garden to catch some rays . .

Whats changed you say? throw me a bone and explain to me a bit more of what you mean .

A lot was said on that thread .

x dazzle x

Your welcome mouse .

It is a big claim to some but to the one that realizes it is no big deal . It's just self realizing what self is . The way that one then tries to describe what is realized can seem convincing or unconvincing to others depending on if another can or cannot relate to what is realized .

x daz x

Perhaps you can take the idea of 'explanation' out of the equation then, the book is an expression of MB's realisation and that 'is'all 🙂

Perhaps you can take the idea of 'explanation' out of the equation then, the book is an expression of MB's realisation and that 'is'all 🙂

I would say mouse that the expression is what lies behind the words . The explanation or description lies within the words .

x daz x

Sorry W.S. was just heading out to the garden to catch some rays . .

Whats changed you say? throw me a bone and explain to me a bit more of what you mean .

A lot was said on that thread .

x dazzle x

Well, over on the To be Free thread, Paul was using the What Is phrase... you were saying there's [url]judgement involved in all perception[/url]. Remember:

3 men each having a different take on to what is God .

1. God is love
2. God is Man
3. God just is .

So, I wondered what has changed, with you, since then and caused you to adopt the "what is" phrase. When your 'motto' seems to be "God Is Love"

I would say mouse that the expression is what lies behind the words . The explanation or description lies within the words .

x daz x

I see that you can express a state of realisation without words but I think that what lies within the words can only be a partial explanation or description of it, or a pointing towards it.