In the beginning, that wich Is is all there was, and there was nothing else. Yet All That Is could not know itself - because All That Is is all there was, and there was nothing else. And so, All That Is… was not. For in the absence of something else, All That Is, is not.
This is the great Is/Not Is to which mystics have referred from the beginning of time.
Now All That Is knew it was all there was - but this was not enough, for it could only know its utter magnificence conceptually, not experientially. Yet the experience of itself is that for which it longed, for it wanted to know what it felt like to be so magnificent. Still, this was impossible, because the very term “magnificent” is a relative term. All That Is could not know what it felt like to be magnificent unless that which is not showed up. In the absence of that which is not, that which IS, is not.
[taken from “Conversations with God” by Neale Donald Walsh (book one)]
(Keine Stimmen soweit)
Loading ...
06.01.2008 / 08:33h /
Hm, ja. Dem kann ich, rein philosophisch, vielleicht zustimmen. Was nicht heißt, dass ich zustimmte, vielmehr erwäge ich die Ansicht, unter bestimmten noch zu definierenden Umständen, dass dies konzeptionell eine Auslegung sein könnte.
Hm. Ja.
06.01.2008 / 13:29h /
feigling :-p