Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

General chatter that doesn't fit any forums below.
Post Reply
YouCanCallMeAl
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun May 29, 2022 7:36 am
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by YouCanCallMeAl »

I know Rachel does lots of research on bahai etc, and surely that plays a role.

But nonduality also has a lot going for it! It's enigmatic, if you don't get it you're out of the club which encourages people to pretend, it puts collectivism ('we are not separate to anything else in existence') at the heart of things.

I think the elite would be fine with it if the masses were to adopt it.

Take a listen to this podcast, even just the first 5-10 mins, to see what I mean:



I actually even think there is something to it, but not in the way it is framed.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 1857
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 334 times
Been thanked: 601 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by rachel »

I didn't watch much of that, the point of the introduction seemed to be to induce a hypnotic state. I might be entirely wrong, but it stopped me from proceeding. These days I am wary of any media that uses mood music when trying to sell me an idea, whether intentional or not.

What I would say as a general comment to clarify, Carl Teichrib describes three separate things.

Oneness - Creator and Created are One.
Two-ism - Creator and Created are separate and different.
Duality - Two sides of the same One thing opposing one another.

My focus is Two-ism.

Duality has more in common with Oneness. Example, in a tug of war, there is only one rope. So from that point of view of Oneness and Duality only, I imagine I would agree with the Oneness argument.
YouCanCallMeAl
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun May 29, 2022 7:36 am
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by YouCanCallMeAl »

Great distinctions!
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 1857
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 334 times
Been thanked: 601 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by rachel »

I'm aware I probably come over as a Christian freak, but I think more than anything, what irritates me about the hidden players in the system we find ourselves in. They would all appear to believe, or act as if they believe, that Genesis in some way is an accurate interpretation of the beginning of this realm. That's what my research points to. They then sell us the bullshit of evolution and will not be moved on this point, which in small-scale within species isn't a myth, but it means we are lost from the beginning and considered nut-jobs by our peers for asking the most pressing theological question.

Why did God put Adam in the garden with Lucifer?

I have found, when I begin to consider this question, Star Trek, Superman, Doctor Who, Star Wars, Batman, they all start making sense with the story they tell, and they all seem to be an attempt at answering this question. And I think the Papacy, the Crown Corporation, the United Nations, the New World Order, it's a response to the question to why Adam was put in the garden with Lucifer, and what the sons of Adam, us, are meant to achieve as a finished work. In which case, it makes sense why so many people at the very top are totally on board with the lockdowns, the injections, the narrative, etc, etc. They don't have to be blackmailed, they believe it is their duty to complete the task.
YouCanCallMeAl
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun May 29, 2022 7:36 am
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by YouCanCallMeAl »

Why did God put Adam in the garden with Lucifer?
My response to this is - who says he did?

Or, if that is a metaphor, can you break down what this means please?

The problem I have with the religious fakeologist folk, is that they don't seem to apply their fakeology skills - skepticism, research etc - to their religious books and ideas. Religious ideas seem to be accepted as fact.

For me, it seems plain that religious books would be the first step in attempting to control another - if you are able to imprint them with a morality that they accept but is controlled by you, you effectively control people. Before screens and mass education, this would be the best control available. Nowadays however, it slows things up - you can change people in just 2-3 weeks via screens - old fashioned religion is in the way of today's controllers.

I do think there is a metaphysical reality, and that it is possible to coherently discuss some bits around this eg the nonduality folks are saying something to me. I'm not bought into their idea though and I try to break it.... If it is real, it will not fall - truth can only be hidden not destroyed.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 1857
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 334 times
Been thanked: 601 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by rachel »

I'm not sure how to answer the part about the texts because I know, you're not really interested, and that's fine. What I would say, there are two versions of the Bible, one, guess which, seeks to deny the deity of Jesus... Then, getting to actual religion, the Catholic Church has declared the Bible null and void anyway. Tradition is the Church's only measure of importance. If you ever notice, public events, Jesus is never quoted. So if I really wanted to be skeptical of the Bible, I might as well just become Catholic.

The Book itself, which is actually lots of different things bound together in an easy to carry format. I don't think I've be a fakeologist if I hadn't started studying it. What maybe fascinates me the most are the types and shadows.

So going back to Lucifer in the Garden with Adam, forget God. It's the interaction between the Lucifer, the other-world type and Adam, human ingenuity type. Some of them are more direct than others.

Superman falling from the Sky - Lucifer
Doctor Who being sentenced to living on Earth (Jon Pertwee years) - Lucifer
Star Trek, original Spock, TNG, Data - void of human emotion - Lucifer
Batman, a switch Batman Adam, the Joker, Lucifer
Star Wars, Darth Vader, Lucifer, or is it Obi-Wan?

Or do you think I'm seeing something that is not there? Where do you think this idea comes from? Why is it constantly repeated in films? Do you get what I'm pointing at?
YouCanCallMeAl
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun May 29, 2022 7:36 am
Has thanked: 99 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Doesn't nonduality seem a very good candidate for the one world religion?

Post by YouCanCallMeAl »

So if I really wanted to be skeptical of the Bible, I might as well just become Catholic.
Very funny :lol:

I have to say I don't do well with cryptic stuff. Even normal language is painful, and when we start getting into metaphors in film etc, I generally don't get past the idea that these are ideas we are meant to receive for some reason (ie a form of programming) - and then I wonder why and to what end.

However, giving it a shot anyway, when you mention these 2 types of creatures, where one is man and one is another (Lucifer, Dr Who, Spock, Adam (batman), the Joker. Of the other non-man type, there are 2 characters - one seems to be cold and calculating, the other mad, spontaneous. For me this is a distinction that Steiner made with Ahriman and Lucifer:
According to Steiner, in order to to achieve Christ Consciousness we must hold in balance the energies of Lucifer and Ahriman, which are opposing forces that work towards destruction symbolized by Sorat or The Antichrist.
So while Lucifer is flighty and warm, it’s an unstable influence that inspires human fanaticism and false mysticism.
In contrast, Ahriman is cold hard and mechanical. He’s rigid and materialistic. The effect is to reject Spirit in place of the physical, to silence the living principle within in favor of the world of fixed forms.
(from https://www.thestarscience.com/blog/lucifer-amp-ahriman - I haven't read the full article)

Is this the sort of distinction you are driving at?

Alternatively, do you think its possible that there is more than one type of humanity - another species or something like that?
Post Reply