Peter Ralston On LOVE - Newsletter Response

[Mellowmarsh]

6 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Not only did Phil ban you but they wiped out all your content.  

I know, it’s radical whitewashing.. maybe that’s how Phil wants to manage his own forum, it’s not my place to object to the way he chooses to manage his own business, it’s none of mine, so.
 

Each their own as they say.

Edited 1 hour ago by Mellowmarsh

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Nope.

Isagi?

[Joseph Maynor]

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

Isagi?

You're trolling now bro.  Come on. 

[Someone here]

@Mellowmarsh I left Phil’s place cause he teaches escapism to depressed teenagers .

[Someone here]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You're trolling now bro.  Come on. 

I’m not . You don’t want to clarify why Leo unbanned you then ok fine with me . No problem.i was just curious.

Edited 1 hour ago by Someone here

[Joseph Maynor]

Just now, Someone here said:

I’m not . You don’t want to clarify why Leo unbanned you then ok fine with me . No problem.i was just curious.

I don't feel the need to disclose that.  That's none of your business.

[Inliytened1]

Guys im just catching up here but can we stay on topic.  The topic seems to be Love, ironically.  Lets show some here.  Lets not derail the thread. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Inliytened1

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Guys im just catching up here but can we stay on topic.  The topic seems to be Love, ironically.  Lets show some here.  Lets not derail the thread. 
 

Love is a facet of the absolute. Just like infinity.

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Love is a facet of the absolute. Just like infinity.

That doesn't answer the question.  How does it differ from the term Love in the sense we use it as humans.  Is it the same just in an existential sense? I would have to agree with @Joseph Maynor feeling and emotion cannot be left out because it is a facet of Love.  So if you want to refer to it as an existential emotion just like no self is Self, than OK.  

[Someone here]

2 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

How does it differ from the term Love in the sense we use it as humans.

It doesn’t differ that much . Otherwise we would have called it hate . God is in love with everything. 

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, Someone here said:

It doesn’t differ that much . Otherwise we would have called it hate . God is in love with everything. 

I agree.  

[Someone here]

You love ice cream but you don’t love pain . That’s finite love which is biased . A human love is limited because a human is a finite form. A finite form has finite love because all it cares about is the survival of itself . If you love unconditionally that means you have to love hunger. But if you love hunger you will die as a human . 
god has no desire to survive or fear of death because it’s infinite and immortal..so it’s love is infinite and unconditional.

[Inliytened1]

13 minutes ago, Someone here said:

You love ice cream but you don’t love pain . That’s finite love which is biased . A human love is limited because a human is a finite form. A finite form has finite love because all it cares about is the survival of itself . If you love unconditionally that means you have to love hunger. But if you love hunger you will die as a human . 
god has no desire to survive or fear of death because it’s infinite and immortal..so it’s love is infinite and unconditional.

Why all this mysteriousness or confusion around Love then existentially. Its the fact that there is no difference between anything is incomplete.  It really means that God loves all parts of itself because it is all parts of reality and in its Infinite Wisdom (a hidden absolute mind you) it accepts and loves all parts of itself unconditionally.  Now..what Ralston seems to miss then is that feeling and emotion are part of Infinite Consciousness.  This also clarifies Infinite Goodness because anything bad to a human is Good to God.  Nothing complicated about this honestly.   

Edited 30 minutes ago by Inliytened1

[Mellowmarsh]

49 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Mellowmarsh I left Phil’s place cause he teaches escapism to depressed teenagers .

Wow, doesn’t surprise me.

[Someone here]

5 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Why all this mysteriousness or confusion around Love then existentially. Its the fact that there is no difference between anything is incomplete.  It really means that God loves all parts of itself because it is all parts of reality and in its Infinite Wisdom (a hidden absolute mind you) it accepts and loves all parts of itself unconditionally.  Now..what Ralston seems to miss then is that feeling and emotion are part of Infinite Consciousness.  This also clarifies Infinite Goodness because anything bad to a human is Good to God.  Nothing complicated about this honestly.   

Yes it’s not rocket science.  Why care why Ralston doesn’t understand it ? If you understood it then that’s enough .

[Mellowmarsh]

22 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But if you love hunger you will die as a human . 

Maybe you love hunger because the hunger signals you to eat, otherwise the body would die. 

[Inliytened1]

10 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Yes it’s not rocket science.  Why care why Ralston doesn’t understand it ? If you understood it then that’s enough .

Well according to Leo its an ontological matter.......and we are wrong...its not a feeling or emotion its something else? I am not disputing it is baked into the nature of reality here either.  Or that it is the very fabric of Nothinfness or Consciousness m...but when one says it is intentical to Truth its really a facet hence the separate words.  The problem with spirituality is no one wants to bother to clarify anything.  But when said that way Ralston's position becomes clearer. He does not feel that these qualities are a facet of the Absolute.  

Edited 16 minutes ago by Inliytened1

[Someone here]

@Inliytened1 Again because god’s infinite love means literal death to the ego .

[Mellowmarsh]

4 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

He does not feel that these qualities are a facet of the Absolute.  

Maybe Ralston is right about that.

Love to have a chance of any impact, meaning or significance would mean it would have to be absolute. 
Even facets of the absolute are absolute. Like the holographic idea.

 

[Inliytened1]

6 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

Maybe Ralston is right about that.

Love to have a chance of any impact, meaning or significance would mean it would have to be absolute. 
Even facets of the absolute are absolute. Like the holographic idea.

 

Its too hard to ignore. You're just drowned in it with awakening.  Whether there is a conceptual realization or not (which there wasn't for me). 

Edited 2 minutes ago by Inliytened1