Oh! I felt an immediate like for you and consequently touched thumb! After listening to your 'argument' and having much enjoyed the imagery, it is wonderful to hear these idea dicussed in such a lucid way. Thank you!
Thank you so much for saying so. There's a lot hours sunk into these pieces, so it makes all the difference to know I'm sharing the journey with some lovely folks such as yourself! Long way to go yet though 🙏
😄 Glad you enjoy it! though re the sub count… there’s more here today than there was yesterday… so I gotta pleased with that 👍 Happy to have you onboard 🙏
Yes! I reckon Plato was right. The soul or mind is eternally pure, it only accrued obscurations during life. Once swept away, the clear light is seen once more. But that begs the question- why does the soul come into a body?
That is a fantastic question. It’s hard for me to comment on what aspects of your comment I agree with and what I don’t without further discussion, but I have to nonetheless thank you, because you’ve inspired me to use this thought to shape the next ‘Unfolding’s’ video. So maybe keep an eye out for it 👍 keen to know what you think. But as I say, that is a great question… if deep reality is, in fact, more akin to a non-corporeal ocean of spiritual awareness as you suggest, why then would it manifest in the form we experience? Because I don’t think we can really say anything valid about such a “beyond realm” without answering this first. Can I ask, if you believe the soul is “eternally pure”, is the soul specific to the individual self? Or is the “self” only one of the obscurities that get swept away?
@@InfiniteNow_withSeanCrowley Dunno. However, I will say that all this spiritual stuff started to make a little more sense to me when I started conceptualising it in terms of the 'conventional' and 'meta' levels to reality, which are complementary. The fact is, spiritual issues simply don't make sense in a materialistic scientific light, which is why it they aren't part of our modern scientific understanding, which is based on materialism. Reincarnation does not make sense in a materialist scientific light, out-of-body or near-death experiences do not make sense in a materialist scientific light, channeling and telepathy don't make sense in a materialist scientific light, yet there is evidence for all of these. The question then becomes, why does materialist science have such an excellent track record if it is fundamentally wrong? It built the modern world, after all. The answer is that materialist science is not fundamentally wrong - that it is still the best tool for the explaining and predicting the conventional level to reality. But there is also something beyond the conventional, a 'meta' level. Many spiritual traditions speak of the material world in terms of 'illusion', and contemporary simulation theory suggests that it is all like a video game or movie of some sort. I think this is close to the mark. Evolution by natural selection, chemistry, quantum physics, these are all the rules of the game. Mystical phenomena, past life memories, the afterlife - these are all the machinations of whatever is going on behind the game. I have not come to this view through religion, nor was there any particular desire for there to be something 'more' to reality on my part. These are all conclusions I have come to through research, nothing more. I am not part of a religious tradition nor am I entirely comfortable with the revelations of my search for the truth of reality, of which your channel is a part. My first love was and always will be science. Its just so happens that there's something more.
Yes, you're correct. Buddhism does have a lot of Idealistic qualities that see the observer as primary to the observed, but you probably already aware of how subtle Buddhism can be with this stuff. Yogācāra seems to be the specific school that talks to this, though I don't believe Idealism is wholly consistent with all Buddhist teaching. My understanding (which admittedly is still very limited) is that Brahman is in a sense immutable, suggesting a timeless isness that must persist beyond mind. Mind might be prior the world we experience but I don't think this is the same as saying All is Mind. maybe I'm wrong... Love to hear more! 🙏
Oh! I felt an immediate like for you and consequently touched thumb! After listening to your 'argument' and having much enjoyed the imagery, it is wonderful to hear these idea dicussed in such a lucid way. Thank you!
Welcome onboard minnjony!
beautiful presentation. thanks for this. eagerly looking forward to the next one. ❤
Thank you so much for saying so. There's a lot hours sunk into these pieces, so it makes all the difference to know I'm sharing the journey with some lovely folks such as yourself! Long way to go yet though 🙏
Your videos are amazing 👏, I hope you don't mind not having a lot of subscribers.
😄 Glad you enjoy it!
though re the sub count… there’s more here today than there was yesterday… so I gotta pleased with that 👍 Happy to have you onboard 🙏
Yes! I reckon Plato was right. The soul or mind is eternally pure, it only accrued obscurations during life. Once swept away, the clear light is seen once more. But that begs the question- why does the soul come into a body?
That is a fantastic question.
It’s hard for me to comment on what aspects of your comment I agree with and what I don’t without further discussion, but I have to nonetheless thank you, because you’ve inspired me to use this thought to shape the next ‘Unfolding’s’ video. So maybe keep an eye out for it 👍 keen to know what you think.
But as I say, that is a great question… if deep reality is, in fact, more akin to a non-corporeal ocean of spiritual awareness as you suggest, why then would it manifest in the form we experience? Because I don’t think we can really say anything valid about such a “beyond realm” without answering this first.
Can I ask, if you believe the soul is “eternally pure”, is the soul specific to the individual self? Or is the “self” only one of the obscurities that get swept away?
@@InfiniteNow_withSeanCrowley Dunno. However, I will say that all this spiritual stuff started to make a little more sense to me when I started conceptualising it in terms of the 'conventional' and 'meta' levels to reality, which are complementary. The fact is, spiritual issues simply don't make sense in a materialistic scientific light, which is why it they aren't part of our modern scientific understanding, which is based on materialism. Reincarnation does not make sense in a materialist scientific light, out-of-body or near-death experiences do not make sense in a materialist scientific light, channeling and telepathy don't make sense in a materialist scientific light, yet there is evidence for all of these. The question then becomes, why does materialist science have such an excellent track record if it is fundamentally wrong? It built the modern world, after all.
The answer is that materialist science is not fundamentally wrong - that it is still the best tool for the explaining and predicting the conventional level to reality. But there is also something beyond the conventional, a 'meta' level. Many spiritual traditions speak of the material world in terms of 'illusion', and contemporary simulation theory suggests that it is all like a video game or movie of some sort. I think this is close to the mark. Evolution by natural selection, chemistry, quantum physics, these are all the rules of the game. Mystical phenomena, past life memories, the afterlife - these are all the machinations of whatever is going on behind the game.
I have not come to this view through religion, nor was there any particular desire for there to be something 'more' to reality on my part. These are all conclusions I have come to through research, nothing more. I am not part of a religious tradition nor am I entirely comfortable with the revelations of my search for the truth of reality, of which your channel is a part. My first love was and always will be science. Its just so happens that there's something more.
🙂
🦴
According to the Buddhists everything comes from Mind and is Mind.
Yes, you're correct. Buddhism does have a lot of Idealistic qualities that see the observer as primary to the observed, but you probably already aware of how subtle Buddhism can be with this stuff. Yogācāra seems to be the specific school that talks to this, though I don't believe Idealism is wholly consistent with all Buddhist teaching. My understanding (which admittedly is still very limited) is that Brahman is in a sense immutable, suggesting a timeless isness that must persist beyond mind. Mind might be prior the world we experience but I don't think this is the same as saying All is Mind. maybe I'm wrong... Love to hear more! 🙏