The "omni's" are almost creepy when we think God is a separate Being, all powerful, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.
But when you are awake in a dream, aren't you omnipresent? Since it is YOUR mind (subconscious + conscious) that is shaping the dream, that mind (not you as a character in the dream) is all powerful, not meaning it can DO anything, meaning, it IS doing EVERYTHING): and omniscient, NOT meaning you 'know a huge number or awesome number of things, but since, it is your subconscious + conscious mind that is underlying everything, everything that is known in the dream is known by that mind.
This is why the ancient Indian scriptures refer "That which being known, all else is known." Meaning, there is only one knowing, not one limited "god" knows everything about everything else. There IS none else.
Also, the idea of a transcendent infinite Consciousness "Separate" from is a common misconception of the word "transcendent."
I saw a great video of Swami Sarvapriyananda eplxaining this. From feedback, it seems that this is challenging for folks, but once you get it, you'll - as they say here down south - "slap yourself upside the head"
Imagine you have an ink pen, and you write the word "transcendent."
Where is the ink in the word transcendent? The entire written word is MADE of ink. But as long as your attention is only on the written word, the ink "transcends" what you see. But if you shift your attention, the ink is all there is. This doesn't deny the "reality" of the word "transcendent," but you realize, the word can't exist without the ink, but the ink remains even if the word disappears.
Similarly, the screen transcends the movie. The movie can't exist without the screen, but when the movie stops, the screen is still there
This is a problematic analogy, since the screen is separate from the movie. But it may give you a hint. Another way to put it is the movie is made of light. The light transcends the movie (as long as you attend to the movie, you don't notice the light) but remove the light, and there's no movie, yet the light remains.
Similarly with the light of omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent Consciousness.
I think, therefore I am...I leave the topic of consciousness to the scientists to figure out. I submit that the condition that we call "animate" or "alive" has a clear, key characteristic of consciousness; whereas, inanimate "things" do not have that key characteristic. YET, objects do pick up memories and "vibes" from living beings and from events. Anybody who has ever practiced psychometry or experienced a vision or haunting in a place will agree to that.
Right now, notice, in between thoughts, you still exist, you are.
Are you unconscious when in the moment between thoughts.
Now, if you can see this, you'll notice
(1) you are conscious, you exist, no thought
(2) thought arises momentarily, as a conscious being (or better, AS conscious being) the thought may or may not be attended to, then it disappears. You remain conscious, you continue to exist.
if you get this, you're about 99% beyond 99% of the scientists who ponder this when it was perfectly clear in the Katha Upanishad, around 900 BC!
So, great conversation, and two things;
The "omni's" are almost creepy when we think God is a separate Being, all powerful, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.
But when you are awake in a dream, aren't you omnipresent? Since it is YOUR mind (subconscious + conscious) that is shaping the dream, that mind (not you as a character in the dream) is all powerful, not meaning it can DO anything, meaning, it IS doing EVERYTHING): and omniscient, NOT meaning you 'know a huge number or awesome number of things, but since, it is your subconscious + conscious mind that is underlying everything, everything that is known in the dream is known by that mind.
This is why the ancient Indian scriptures refer "That which being known, all else is known." Meaning, there is only one knowing, not one limited "god" knows everything about everything else. There IS none else.
Also, the idea of a transcendent infinite Consciousness "Separate" from is a common misconception of the word "transcendent."
I saw a great video of Swami Sarvapriyananda eplxaining this. From feedback, it seems that this is challenging for folks, but once you get it, you'll - as they say here down south - "slap yourself upside the head"
Imagine you have an ink pen, and you write the word "transcendent."
Where is the ink in the word transcendent? The entire written word is MADE of ink. But as long as your attention is only on the written word, the ink "transcends" what you see. But if you shift your attention, the ink is all there is. This doesn't deny the "reality" of the word "transcendent," but you realize, the word can't exist without the ink, but the ink remains even if the word disappears.
Similarly, the screen transcends the movie. The movie can't exist without the screen, but when the movie stops, the screen is still there
This is a problematic analogy, since the screen is separate from the movie. But it may give you a hint. Another way to put it is the movie is made of light. The light transcends the movie (as long as you attend to the movie, you don't notice the light) but remove the light, and there's no movie, yet the light remains.
Similarly with the light of omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent Consciousness.
I think, therefore I am...I leave the topic of consciousness to the scientists to figure out. I submit that the condition that we call "animate" or "alive" has a clear, key characteristic of consciousness; whereas, inanimate "things" do not have that key characteristic. YET, objects do pick up memories and "vibes" from living beings and from events. Anybody who has ever practiced psychometry or experienced a vision or haunting in a place will agree to that.
If you're not thinking, do you cease to exist?
Right now, notice, in between thoughts, you still exist, you are.
Are you unconscious when in the moment between thoughts.
Now, if you can see this, you'll notice
(1) you are conscious, you exist, no thought
(2) thought arises momentarily, as a conscious being (or better, AS conscious being) the thought may or may not be attended to, then it disappears. You remain conscious, you continue to exist.
if you get this, you're about 99% beyond 99% of the scientists who ponder this when it was perfectly clear in the Katha Upanishad, around 900 BC!