Why the same dream?

[Miguel Angel Carrasco]

On  Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Greg Goode wrote:
        >Miguel Angel Carrasco wrote:
        >         > God just cannot create anything. Because there simply cannot
be God plus something else.

        >Well, THIS is not why the non-creation theory exists.  The Hindu creation
theories are theories of emanation, where the effects emanate from the
cause like an oak comes from an acorn.

I am not interested in creation or non-creation theories. What^Òs the point
of discussing the origin of something that does not really exist? I just
wanted to make it clear that I don^Òt subscribe to creationism, for whatever
reason. And that my second premise in the current debate (see my post Date:
Thu, 4 Dec 1997), namely ...

2.  ^ÓConsciousness [...] needs physical forms for its functioning^Ô (Ramesh
Balsekar^Òs Pointers, page 183) and ^Óthere are millions of psychosomatic
forms but no two exactly alike^Ô (Ramesh Balsekar^Òs Pointers, p.182).

...is not a case of creationism, as you seemed to believe:

        >I don't think there are any forms at all, because ultimately I think the
non-creation theory is the most sound and the most appealing.

It is not a creationist position because objects in Consciousness (as the
world with its zillions of forms is) are neither real beings nor new
beings. So they do not add a bit to the Reality already there (The
Absolute). For me, they are not only not-created, but not-emanated too. It
seems so simple to me. When I am imagining something, there is no more
existence than when I am not imagining anything at all. Because objects in
consciousness do not increase reality.

There is no point in going any further in this search for the meaning of
experience, if you do not accept the existence of many forms as objects of
Consciousness (with all the refining you like: mere appearances,
un-created, un-emanated, un-real, not-independent, not-absolute, etc. etc).
Do you?

If you (or anyone interested in this line of investigation) do, then we
could go on to consider the effect (if any) of such imaginary forms on
Consciousness. Otherwise, I think I´ll take a rest.

Thank you for your patience with my ignorance of sanskrit (and of most
other things).

PSause
By the way, I would be _very_ (repeat, _very_ ) interested if you could
explain to me the meaning of "if this is your EXPERIENCE"  in your question
..

        >If you REALLY believe this, or if this is your EXPERIENCE, then how can
there be any questions??

--Miguel Angel