Ziran

Guide for the Perplexed, Book 1, Chapter 68. TLDR: God is simultaneously the knowledge the knower and the known.

Sure, and, that imaginary universe has very little in common with the actual universe in which you and I are occupants. This universe has life. This universe has an environment which is evolving. If there's no correlation between the actual universe and the imaginary model intended to make a point, the point fails. Because in an imaginary universe, which is very different from this one, if there was a human life there, but there isn't, that imaginary human would have zero manner for distinguishing between good or bad? Are you sure you want to continue arguing?

Thru 2 layers of abstraction, it can. Infinite >> Other >> Others. 1) The inner dimension is described as "words before they're spoken". 2) If the words are lacking expression, or manifestation, then the infinite would be incomplete. 3) The infinite is always and forever complete. Therefore: IF, big if, God is infinite then it would possess both inner and outer dimensions of each and everything, and more. The inner dimension of anything is the collection of its essential attributes. The outer dimension are the many different iterations manifesting. Both are happening simultaneously. Or. It's choosing to exist. It's equally plausible. Agreed? Maybe it could change its mind, but hasn't. ? Any other objections ?

For the record: the notion that all of reality is in perfect balance of good and evil ( net zero ) is founded on a hidden assumption that good needs evil in order to be defined. But that's a false assumption. Good can also be defined by better. Evil can also be defined by worse. From these 2, 4 are implied, and good does not depend, necessarily, on evil to exist.

Point of Fact: If God is infinite and omni-potent, God can create infinite things or not. If God is ONLY infinite in scope and NOTHING else, yes. Otherwise, it depends. The premise fails because "infinite" includes "omni-potent" which grants choice to do or not regardless of the outcome. ? Other objections ?

1) An assertion lacking reasons is not convincing for me. 2) If you can't explain it, "it just is", then it's doctrine. I've proven it false. The ball is in your court if you would like to show fault in my reasoning. 3) Rhetorical question. No need to answer: Do you expect any reader to appreciate an equivalence between a virus and serial murderer without giving reasons? ? Any other reasons in opposition of discussing God's will ?

There's a couple of ways to look at it: 1) In order to be "good" there needs to be "others" to nurture. On the "inside" there is no "nurturing". or 2) The absolute is not complete if any are missing. If all are inside and concealed, then the absolute is lacking all that are external and revealed. Because of this, there must be expression. If, big if, God is absolutely infinite. Nonsense. This is doctrine which is easily proven false. Tell me, from an absolute perspective how Albert Fish is "good". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Fish Find them in yourself and others.

Undeniable evidence of The Non-Dual reality: whoever smelt it, dealt it.

In a word: "Splendor"? It's "splendid"? Well stated. In general: Good makes better. In particular, it's a case-by-case evaluation of risk vs. reward for all stake-holders within a sphere-of-influence. True, Negating "Any" is none. The negation of "All" is Any.

Yes, and more. If God is literally infinite then it possesses any and all. It's a static set of nearly infinite events. Whether or not these events are manifesting is best described as a timeline. The manner in which the events are arranged, and the corresponding ambiance of each event is variable and permits agency, intention, and nuance.

That's precisely what I described. The nested chain is like a set of bubbles-within-bubbles within God itself. See below. Those beings are "already there" because there are two layers of abstraction between themself and their source of vitality. Maybe think of it this way? Lacking the abstraction the bubbles pop. Another popular analogy: without the shells, plural, separating the "others" from their "source", the others "dissipate" into the source like water drops into a vast endless sea. 100% yes. All of it, the abstraction of the anti-thesis from the source and the corresponding abstraction of others from the anti-thesis, and, the rising-and-striking of individual souls, and their adhesion to the source, and their suckling, and the flowing of vitality. And. The alternative flowing nested chain of energetic principles from others are omni-present and concurrent. All of it is "NOW" for the eternal-infinite-one. Regardless, multiplicity necessarily requires two layers of abstraction if the source intends to be omni-benevolent. My position and reasoning are clear? Even if there's disagreement on the rest Technically. No, that is literally the god you are imagining. The one I'm imagining cannot possibly lack intention, because, the most stable arrangement is God-and-Other. Because there is multiplicity, then, God necessarily has intent. Further, it cannot be a wholly malevolent God. If it were then it would never tolerate sharing itself with an Other. What I'm saying is: in order for multiplicity to exist, if the source is infinite, then, there is necessarily an oppositional force involved. This solves the problem of evil, because, the problem of evil asserts: There can never be an agent, who is rationally deemed "good" if that agent tolerates evil when they have the power and knowledge to prevent it. The "problem" in the Problem of Evil is an accusation of incoherence. "That God is incoherent, contradictory nonsense." Then the topic shifts to unliftable-rocks. ( Which is a different challenge, but also asserts incoherence ). Because, this God, the one I'm actually imagining, cannot be indifferent, and cannot be completely malicious, then, it's not a problem to talk about the Will of this God. It can be spoken about because, this God is necessarily at least somewhat benevolent. That means a human heart-and-mind, a psyche, which is also at least somewhat benevolent, can approach a resonance with this God's will and their own. Please remember? Your original objection? ( correct me? ) is that a human cannot discuss God's will. I'm saying, "Yes we can, and here's why." 1) God's will can be defined. Like I had said, there's ten attributes configured in a nearly endless nested chain. Yes, one within the other, that's the nesting. And eventually, yes, if one traces it all the way to its zenith, God is all alone. That means the nearly infinite nested chain of "God's will manifesting" is happening within God itself. Like the city of Atlantis in an "endless sea of God", there's a bubble, surrounded on all sides by God itself. 2) Many firmly assert, that there cannot be an Omni-Benevolent, Eternal, Omnipotent, and Omniscient agent simply because evil exists. As I've shown, that's not true. If God is absolutely literally infinite, and omni-benevolent, then, there must be evil, contrary to the many who object on grounds of incoherence. Denial isn't convincing. Here's how I can convince myself that God must have intention. If god has no intention then evil necessarily cannot exist. Am I wrong? If evil exists, then God must have an intention, otherwise yes, you're right, the most likely conclusion is one of optimistic nihilism. ? Do you have any other objections to discussing God's will that haven't been addressed by myself or others ?

Meditation student: "... and that's because the unibrow is non-dual." Meditation-teacher: "You're fired."

Yes. It's necessary for an absolutely infinite being to "create" finite-beings, plural, somethings from nothing. There's 2 layers of abstraction. That's what necessitates 'defiance' aka 'crossing into another's territory without consent'. Most neglect the necessity of those two hops. Here's what it looks like broken out: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Premise: Suppose there is a God, a being, with benevolent motives, intentions, etc, that is also simultaneously infinite. What would this God do? Find another, to nourish, to nurture, to cultivate. Premise cont'd: If so, then, what would a God with omni-benevolent motives do? Find others, plural, to nurture so that they can nurture themself AND others. Point of Fact: An absolutely infinite being is necessarily alone, because any and all are subsumed and nullified on their approach with one and only one exception: Not-God, "Chaos-and-Void". This union of chaos-and-void are the anti-thesis of "absolutely infinite omni-benevolence". Conclusion: If there is an absolutely infinite omni-benevolent being, then, it necessarily must create an "other" which is the anti-thesis of itself, then, use this as a layer of abstraction, between itself, and the "others". This abstraction permits this theoretical being an opportunity to share itself, its infinite qualities, without nullifying and subsuming ( re-assimilating) the "others", back into their origin. Infinite -source << Other >> others In this arrangement, the "others" are not proximal to their source. They need to traverse "upstream" so-to-speak crossing through nearly infinite hostility-and-indifference. Rising and striking, simultaneously, individual souls are sinking their metaphorical fangs into the metaphorical face of God, and, God is metaphorically turning the other cheek. This forbearance is necessary. If God were ever to eliminate evil, in all of its forms, then there can never be any "others", plural, to be nurtured by God and to nurture each other. All that is possible, lacking the "oppositional force" , the "rising-and-striking", the root of evil, would be a singular infinite being nurturing one other which is the anti-thesis of itself. In this config, no borders need to be crossed for vitality to be received from the source. No evil is needed. Just containment of the other. But once "others", plural, are considered necessary, and they are for omni-benevolence, then there must be a purely evil force, trespassing and taking with no remorse.

It's a limitation on finite beings. Yes and more Some are, some aren't. https://web.physics.ucsb.edu/~complex/research/amorphous.html

The first great lie is first. Which happens to be 2.

I am

God possesses God's will. God's will does not possess God. God's will is lacking one and only one thing, God itself, the source. Therefore God's will is nearly infinite. One or two steps removed depending on how they're counted. Rape, by definition, is a crime. It exists as a pejorative. ? Are you referring to the "Problem of Evil" to discourage talking about God's will ? Yes, it's nearly infinite which is finite. This God concept does not permit any others. Infinity + 1 = Infinity Infinity + 2 = Infinity Infinity + 3 = Infinity Infinity + will = Infinity Infinity + infinity = Infinity

Friend, maybe you replied in haste? Allah is routinely described with superlatives. The most merciful, for example.

... the imperfect is being nullified within the perfect. It's on-going. Not static.

God is the one and only infinite source of vitality. Infinite means: "without any beginnings and without any endings". There is no creator of infinity. Infinity possesses "creator"; not vice-versa. Creating "things" does not necessitate being a "thing". Like your own will which permeates your entire body, God's will permeates the entire "body" of the universe and more. God's will is defined as a nearly infinite nested chain of gradually "descending" ten motives called "Seder Hishtashalus". "Descending" is in quotes because there is no above-and-below beyond the material. Clarity Understanding Knowing Giving Taking Sharing ( mercy ) Submission Victory Teamwork Dominion This God is literally infinite. Infinity is not subject to causality. IF, big if, this God is revealing itself to humanity in various times and in various ways, then, it's reasonable to conclude, this God wants humanity to know these ways and emulate them. Deuteronomy 10:12 ועתה ישראל מה יהוה אלהיך שאל מעמך כי אם־ליראה את־יהוה אלהיך ללכת בכל־דרכיו ולאהבה אתו ולעבד את־יהוה אלהיך בכל־לבבך ובכל־נפשך׃ And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you, but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul,

Respectfully, this is a fool's errand. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2754306/ "A more external locus of control is related to fewer periods of recovery, to both depressed mood and psychosis, and to various aspects of personality."

My vote? Everyone is suited for spiritual work, because, everyone is a union of material and spiritual. And. Spiritual work happens naturally as individuals develop. That's why old folks tend to be smart and laid back. Even reading a good book is spiritual work, when the reader becomes immersed in the author's work. How does the schizophrenia present? For the others, You may be in a better position than most, because you're necessarily going to need to stay grounded. Most folks don't focus well on both their physical needs and their spiritual aspirations. With these conditions you are forced to become excellent at self-care. You already know this, but: sleep, exercise, and nutrition are super important for you. Heard. I have not seen anyone completely walk away without coming back to it. "You can't put toothpaste back into the tube."

Psalm 139 agrees. גם־חשך לא־יחשיך ממך ולילה כיום יאיר כחשיכה כאורה׃ Even the darkness is not dark for you; but the night shines like the day; darkness is as light with you.