Some questions about TP

[Robanan]

Hello everyone, this is my first post on this forum, hopefully I'm not repeating a question here.

I'm wondering what you all think about the fact that Thaiooubans feel the need to help out lower category planets. Consider that there are probably many category 1 planets such as ours. Why exactly would it be concerning to the Thaiooubans if Earth was destroyed or the human race wiped out? If we die we'll supposedly just be reincarnated in some other body on some other category 1 planet so really, whats the point of interfering in our natural progression? At the same time that Earth may be wiped clear of all civilization there are other planets like Arki's that have 15 billion highly developed people, and in time even a ravaged planet Earth would recover and become suitable for habitation by interstellar travellers and the cycle continues once again. I just don't think that their interference necessarily makes any sense.

1- I don't think the fact is that the people of Thiaoouba feel the need to help out lower category planets. You follow your own reasoning and in the end you have come to the conclusion that it makes no sense. Let's start from the bottom up and answer this question first, should it make sense? well, even if you would consider that the people of Thiaoouba are a little bit more intelligent than your parents then their helping the people of lower planets has to make sense, just as your parents look after you and assist you in your progress in life.
In the book they stressed the point "God helps those who help themselves" and they axplained they are ready to assist us if we are willing and will be making a move in the direction that is right for us. helping and assisting are different things, the way you stressed the word helping in your question it sounds much like "serving the meal on a plate" read the book again if you really think the people of Thiaoouba are intrested in that.

2- If as you say we were really making natural progression and everything was fine with our progress then really, any help (not only help from the people of Thiaoouba) would have made no sense.

3- The people of Thiaoouba are not concerned about the destruction of earth and the human race wiped out, not even if we start doing that with atomic bombs.

4- If you have a flock of sheep and one of them would go astray wouldn't you leave the whole flock and go to bring back the one sheep who went astray?

Ok, ask yourself this, so what if the planet explodes? Other planets join orbits around suns to replace planets that are destroyed. It's still a big cycle, the universe will never run out of planets. This statement is not intended to make you think I don't care about our planet, it's intended to get my point across about the big picture.

Can't you see it's not just about the planet going bang?

1- helping and assisting are the same things. And I in no way meant to imply "handing the meal on a plate", I'm talking about any assistance whatsoever.

2- Exactly my point. Is it possible that our progression could not be moving along as intended? Would the creator have designed a system that could fail? I doubt it. The only variable I can see would be the length of time it takes to progress, which is of no consequence at all to he who created time. Anyway, this ties in with my above post about the system being designed with the helping hand as part of the "natural" progression.

3- Oh really, then what are their motives?

4- I wouldn't if it meant sacrificing the other sheep to save the one. But I don't see your point with this statement or how it applies.

No, it's not about the planet going bang, it's about a design issue. Which I think I've figured out now anyway. It's easy enough to see when you stop considering cat 9 beings and cat 1 beings, or any beings as being separate from the whole.

1- Ok that was just a clarification, now reconsider what I just said: "I don't think the fact is that the people of Thiaoouba feel the need to help out lower category planets. You follow your own reasoning and in the end you have come to the conclusion that it makes no sense. Let's start from the bottom up and answer this question first, should it make sense? well, even if you would consider that the people of Thiaoouba are a little bit more intelligent than your parents then their helping the people of lower planets has to make sense, just as your parents look after you and assist you in your progress in life." I'm saying that I think what you see as a fact is nothing more than a misunderstanding from your side.

2- haha it's not your point at all, You omitted the purpose for the system in your reasoning, I didn't do that in my sentence. What if the creator has created a limited amount of systems that can choose to fail or not? then I can allow myself to claim that our overall progress on earth is not going even close along what's intended. Not even God can help someone who wants to be helped, Thiaooubians are just intelligent enough to understand that. In a universe where the individuals are left to progress individually, and have the freedom to choose that; there is no point on including any helping hand.

3- Yes, you couldn't imagine could you? I said it in number 2 just now.

4- I drop the argument it fell and has no value.

[Alisima]

The thiaooubans discussed here in this topic, and in any topic on this forum or in ponderings in your head, don't exist. Those thiaooubans are simple interpretations from a book, interpretations full with bias.

Those thiaooubans are 'created' from an ideal in your head. This ideal is somewhat 'pure', since it contains traces of 'behavior', 'philosophy' or 'ideas' found in the book, but is mostly dominated and contaminated with personal assumptions.

In every discussion about thiaooubans we are not discussing the actual 'real' thiaooubans but simple abstractions in our heads suplemented and somewhat dominated by personal dogma. In the end, as can be seem in Robanan's discussion with Seafury, it is more one personal idea against another personal idea than actually discussing thiaooubans, that is: both have nothing in common with the 'real' thiaooubans. It is more discussing about thiaooubans than discussing 'real' thiaooubans.

This is essentially not a bad thing, unless it goes unnoticed. What Robanan and Seafury where/are discussing are individual interpretations of the motives of thiaooubans. Sadly, after the interpretation is over, way before actually communicating, the interpretation is far from the thing it is interpreting. (And often people refer to the same idea but due to semantics or the unability to express oneself, which is a linguistic issue, or other logical traps, 'can't get along', and therefore, result in an endless debate -- but this is another matter.) I am not saying Robanan and Seafury are doing that right now, but am simply stating that such a scenario would be not uncommon.

Again, there is nothing wrong with discussing personal interpretations of a phenomona, in this case: thiaooubans. There is, however, something wrong with seeing these personal interpretations as how reality IS. In other words, when someone in either side of the discussion is forgetting that the discussion is about a personal idea and starts believing that the actual 'real' thiaooubans are discussed, 'problems' occurs. What kind of problems?? That one no longer see a distinction between the idea one has ABOUT thiaooubans and the actual thiaooubans. "One mistakes the map for the territory", "One only sees the finger and not what it is pointing at". "The idea is not the thing it is referring to." (these quotes are not mine but come from Eastern and Western philosophies and sciences.)

I am not implying that the discussion so far has been wrong, or should from now on proceed in a different manner. No. I don't know that. I don't know whether anyone here is "mistaking the map for the territory". I don't know whether anyone here doesn't see the obvious distinction between 'real' thiaooubans and idea's one has about them. I am only trying to say that the discussion, as always, is on slippery ice. Therefore, one should proceed with caution and should know that the thiaooubans discused here, or anywhere else, are only interpretations baised, contaminated and appended with personal dogma.

This leaves a crucial question -- although this is more general than actually concerning this topic and perhapse therefor needs an seperate topic -- can one talk about something without contaminating and appending it with personal dogma?? In other words: is it possible to talk about the thiaooubans as they really are without personal or cultural interpretations?? No, talking is talking in dualism. And with dualism personal or cultural interpretations always contaminate the thing discussed. Again, this is not a bad thing, only if you forget it.

P.S. although this reply sounds more and more like a statement, with actually truth in it, it is not. It is absolutely devoid of truth. It is, however, meant as a slap in the face so that any following replies are seen and perhapse written in a different light. But that is totally up to you.

[Robanan]

This leaves a crucial question -- although this is more general than actually concerning this topic and perhapse therefor needs an seperate topic -- can one talk about something without contaminating and appending it with personal dogma?? In other words: is it possible to talk about the thiaooubans as they really are without personal or cultural interpretations?? No, talking is talking in dualism. And with dualism personal or cultural interpretations always contaminate the thing discussed. Again, this is not a bad thing, only if you forget it.

I think your post needs a separate topic too.

[Seafury]

What if the creator has created a limited amount of systems that can choose to fail or not? then I can allow myself to claim that our overall progress on earth is not going even close along what's intended.

Do you really think that could possibly be the case? Not that either of us could ever know, but what you're saying is, there is a possible scenario where all systems fail. I seriously doubt that. But if that were the case, then I guess we'd need "parents", superior intelligences to help us avoid calamity. A very shoddy design from a divine intelligence wouldn't you say?

I think that's impossible though, can't really believe that a divine intelligence would create a system that could fail, therefore we don't need interference from higher entities.

However like I've said before, if you consider all beings as part of the whole "system" then it makes more sense, because the whole "system" cannot fail. An imaginary system where there is no help could fail, but that is not reality.

[Robanan]

What if the creator has created a limited amount of systems that can choose to fail or not? then I can allow myself to claim that our overall progress on earth is not going even close along what's intended.

Do you really think that could possibly be the case? Not that either of us could ever know, but what you're saying is, there is a possible scenario where all systems fail. I seriously doubt that. But if that were the case, then I guess we'd need "parents", superior intelligences to help us avoid calamity. A very shoddy design from a divine intelligence wouldn't you say?

I think that's impossible though, can't really believe that a divine intelligence would create a system that could fail, therefore we don't need interference from higher entities.

However like I've said before, if you consider all beings as part of the whole "system" then it makes more sense, because the whole "system" cannot fail. An imaginary system where there is no help could fail, but that is not reality.

Well if to make a few more clarifications on some words there I could come up with a better statement, but yes that pretty much sums up what I meant to say.

The possible scenario where all systems fail, is the total failure of the system as a whole. It's just natural for any system to fail anytime and if it does it means that the either the design or the implementation of the system needs debugging and/or improvements. As we are assuming that the universe is created by design, It's just natural for such a scenario to be there simply because it was there from the beginning when other primordial designs of the universe must have simply had failed. Considering the proportions of our universe and the whole domain of the experiences that can be experienced with it's help, how could we measure the chances of failure or success of this universe? we can't and that's the whole point, assuming that it's a total failure it's stupid and wrong, as assuming that it's totally infallible is stupid and wrong either.

If you say that the system is designed by a divine intelligence then that divine intelligence must have had an intellect don't you think? I mean there is no point for the intellect to develop if there is no chance that it could fail otherwise.

Did I just consider the systems I was talking before all to be as parts of a whole universal "system"?

I think that's impossible though, can't really believe that a divine intelligence would create a system that could fail, therefore we don't need interference from higher entities.

Don't mess things up, just because naturally there is a possible scenario where all systems can fail it doesn't mean that in reality it is designed to fail. It's just the way intellect works.

[Seafury]

Don't mess things up, just because naturally there is a possible scenario where all systems can fail it doesn't mean that in reality it is designed to fail. It's just the way intellect works.

Wow, you're a ***. It's not designed to fail, but it's not designed to succeed either. It's designed to play out as it will and guess what, that means it can fail...or it can succeed. The point being, your world-view means that a perfect intelligence, (divine as you would call it) would create something fallible.

It's just the way intellect works, *** you're dumb, that doesn't even mean anything.

Anyway, I don't believe in TP, I just thought I'd explore some arguments regarding your belief system and I've found two things.

Shakorr or whatever his name is, is the type of person who joins whatever cult or belief system happens to infringe on his world because he's definately a follower. He doesn't necessarily understand an argument but he'll reply with something generic like, "What this really means is, you need to live your life in tune with Universal Conciousness, only then will you realize that full human potential is inside all of us and life is just a journey of discovery where sense of self is a mere illusion." Generic statements that sound like they mean something and don't.

Robanon on the other hand makes a genuine attempt at sounding like his belief system is well thought-out. In actuality he as well doesn't actually think about what he's replying to. My quote above is a clear indication that this forum is for people needing a crutch, not unlike most mainstream religions.

Anyway, whoever is the mod can delete this post now, it's probably better for the psyche of the individuals I just mentioned if they don't read this. It will most definately prompt a few posts like, "haha, this guy really has lost himself", or something equally *** like, "If you're arguments were more well thought-out you would see that the divine has a real plan for all of us, and Thiaooubans are here to help us reach our real potential....because we're incapable of knowing real potential in our present imperfect state living on the "Planet of Sorrows".

Delete this whole thread now, and if possible, please delete my registration to this forum.

May the spirit of Michel what's-his-face be with you. >P.[/quote]

[Alisima]

The possible scenario where all systems fail, is the total failure of the system as a whole. It's just natural for any system to fail anytime and if it does it means that the either the design or the implementation of the system needs debugging and/or improvements. As we are assuming that the universe is created by design, It's just natural for such a scenario to be there simply because it was there from the beginning when other primordial designs of the universe must have simply had failed. Considering the proportions of our universe and the whole domain of the experiences that can be experienced with it's help, how could we measure the chances of failure or success of this universe? we can't and that's the whole point, assuming that it's a total failure it's stupid and wrong, as assuming that it's totally infallible is stupid and wrong either.

If you say that the system is designed by a divine intelligence then that divine intelligence must have had an intellect don't you think? I mean there is no point for the intellect to develop if there is no chance that it could fail otherwise.

The problem with this line of thought is that you imagine that while the 'divine intelligence' created this universe, concepts of failure and success already existed. But that is impossible because, before the universe was created, failure and success simply didn't exist. Failure and success are perhapse part of the created universe, but not of the primordial 'soup' that was the universe's predecessor. You are creating a theory of the creation of the universe with words/concepts that are from this universe. It is like explaining the pre-technology age with technological terms. Like explaining horse and wagon with models of steam-engines. If you like to imagine/see what was before the universe, you must first step out of that universe. You simply can't try to describe the universe with concepts that are part of that same universe.

Anyways, whether the thiaooubans help us or not tells us more about thiaooubans than about us. If they want to help us, it is their 'problem'. We can't know what goes on in their ninth category while we are still remaining on the first. Just like caveman can't tell us something about ethics or aesthetics because that is ahead of their time. Same is with us, we can't determine why they do or don't help us because we are not them.

[shezmear]

Seafury,

When you squeeze a lemon… you get lemon juice,
When you squeeze an apple…. you get apple juice,
When people squeeze you…. what comes out of you???

[Robanan]

The possible scenario where all systems fail, is the total failure of the system as a whole. It's just natural for any system to fail anytime and if it does it means that the either the design or the implementation of the system needs debugging and/or improvements. As we are assuming that the universe is created by design, It's just natural for such a scenario to be there simply because it was there from the beginning when other primordial designs of the universe must have simply had failed. Considering the proportions of our universe and the whole domain of the experiences that can be experienced with it's help, how could we measure the chances of failure or success of this universe? we can't and that's the whole point, assuming that it's a total failure it's stupid and wrong, as assuming that it's totally infallible is stupid and wrong either.

If you say that the system is designed by a divine intelligence then that divine intelligence must have had an intellect don't you think? I mean there is no point for the intellect to develop if there is no chance that it could fail otherwise.

The problem with this line of thought is that you imagine that while the 'divine intelligence' created this universe, concepts of failure and success already existed. But that is impossible because, before the universe was created, failure and success simply didn't exist. Failure and success are perhapse part of the created universe, but not of the primordial 'soup' that was the universe's predecessor. You are creating a theory of the creation of the universe with words/concepts that are from this universe. It is like explaining the pre-technology age with technological terms. Like explaining horse and wagon with models of steam-engines. If you like to imagine/see what was before the universe, you must first step out of that universe. You simply can't try to describe the universe with concepts that are part of that same universe.

Anyways, whether the thiaooubans help us or not tells us more about thiaooubans than about us. If they want to help us, it is their 'problem'. We can't know what goes on in their ninth category while we are still remaining on the first. Just like caveman can't tell us something about ethics or aesthetics because that is ahead of their time. Same is with us, we can't determine why they do or don't help us because we are not them.

Alisima I'm just saying that the process of try and error is an imminent part of the progress of any design process, it doesn't make difference if you are designing a car, a house or a universe. Cycles of failure and success are met on every step, my point is that as long as we have intellect working behind the project, success and failure both naturally happen, and it just intrinsincally depends on the progress of the development of the intellect which is working on it.

Wow, you're a ***. It's not designed to fail, but it's not designed to succeed either. It's designed to play out as it will and guess what, that means it can fail...or it can succeed. The point being, your world-view means that a perfect intelligence, (divine as you would call it) would create something fallible.

I don't even believe to the existence of a perfect intelligence, Intelligence if is perfect is not intelligence anymore. Intelligence won't deprieve itself a chance to develop if it's intelligent. The idea to imagine a perfect intelligence, divine intelligence, Omnipotent intelligence and so on are self contradicting and are just pushed by the flock of ignorant infants who have failed to use their own intellect for themselves firstplace and keep on borrowing from others here and there and then throw it up on the rest, since they are too ignorant to even evaluate what they have borrowed from others by themselves. All the products of intelligence are to some degree more or less fallible, like our posts for example. The fact that you don't simply see that leaves me guess when was the last time you examined and studied your own intellect.

[Vesko]

Seafury,

Calling other people names won't help your arguments. When you see a what you consider to be a problem in others, point it to them kindly, no need to call names -- it shows immaturity immediately. In my life, I don't remember any case where, when I've called someone names, it has helped me or others in any way. This forum is full of people who are willing to listen and understand, and also correct their failings -- take advantage of that!

You said that you can't believe that a divine intelligence would create a system that could fail in the long term. What I get from reading your posts is that you do *not* admit the possibility for an eventual failure (after long-term operation) to be a feature, and not a defect like you think it always is. I propose you to consider that by making at least some failure possible, new possibilities can be created to improve the overall design. For some designs, one may need as much reliability as possible, for others, losing some reliability may be very desirable if that wins you features. I'm working with computer programs, and I know that one can make a certain program extremely reliable, but then it would be unacceptably slow, due to all the monitoring and checking overhead necessary to prevent a failing component from affecting other, working components in the short or long term. Sometimes it's the way to go, sometimes it's not. It depends on what you want, what your resources are and what is practically possible, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you or others are unintelligent to allow the possibility for some long-term failure in a particular design; on the contrary, it can mean that you are actually more intelligent to design your creation in that way. I will be happy to elaborate if you have doubts about this.

When you admit the possibility for a failure as a desirable feature chosen by the Creator on purpose, you can now consider the universe as an optimisation problem, with room for improvement, e.g. through higher human intellect intervention.

So you say that Earth being destroyed and the people on it dead would not be a big deal, because there are probably many other category 1 planets. First, we of course do not know how many there are. It seems to me that there are not that many, because in the book it is written that the original human inhabitants on Earth come from the constellation Centauri. I wonder, if the planets are so many, why did they have to go so far (to Earth) to find a suitable habitable planet?

Second, even if the destruction of our particular planet makes little or practically no difference to the universe and the Creator, the aliens from the book give indication that the negative tendencies on our planet leading eventually to its destruction or at least the total wiping out of its inhabitants, are not unique to it, but hold for all 1-st category planets. If that is true, we are talking about a global problem with tremendous proportions. If the Thiaooubans don't do their share of work to help our planet, and others like the Thiaooubans think and do likewise, a worst-case scenario would develop -- the natural speed of planetary formation would be outpaced by the number of exploded planets. Reincarnation would stall because there would be not enough planets, resulting in slower total universal spiritual development of souls. That would be bad for the Creator (for the Creator's own spiritual development), since the influx of positive sensations from us humans would lessen in amount or quality.

If the worst-case scenario seems unlikely, I consider that mass human deaths alone (billions of such for our planet in case of an explosion) could still affect perceptibly negatively the Creator's sensations, because there will be a lot of suffering, virtually no positive thoughts. All the suffering will be filtered out at one or more higher self levels, and nothing will remain for the Creator.

Supposedly going down the suffering and negativity scale, if our everyday thoughts could be improved through the help of much higher developed people, there is room for optimisation in them, too.

You have guessed correctly, as far as the book goes, that higher developed people benefit from their helping us, because they too have more to learn. The reference in the book to them being *adults* and us being *children* clearly means, in my opinion, that they, like parents on Earth, learn from their children while helping them grow; a mutual learning experience.

I very much hope that my response is timely and you have not yet abandoned the forum, that you will read this post and it will make you think more about your arguments. I very much welcome further discussion on the topic.

[anonymousbeing]

Success? Failure? Why not look from the perspective of strength and weakness. Any system has its own weakness. By subjecting the system with various conditions, we will eventually discover the weakness. We can then improve upon it.
One good example of the 'weakness' of the Forum system is to allow people to use ***** or %%%%% or $$$$$ as an username.

[Alisima]

You said that you can't believe that a divine intelligence would create a system that could fail in the long term. What I get from reading your posts is that you do *not* admit the possibility for an eventual failure (after long-term operation) to be a feature, and not a defect like you think it always is.

The universe will not fail, nor will it succeed. The universe simply is. Failure, like I have already said, together with succes is part of a dualism created by man. The creator is non-dual and has no nonsensical notions as such.

When you admit the possibility for a failure as a desirable feature chosen by the Creator on purpose, you can now consider the universe as an optimisation problem, with room for improvement, e.g. through higher human intellect intervention.

The creator isn't rooted in dualism. He knows nothing of failure or succes. He can't have purposely intertwined failure and succes with the universe, because failure and succes only exist in dualism. The question, or even the notion, that the creator has something to do with failure and succes is nonsensical. Just like your CPU doesn't know what a pixel, a line, or a 3D rotational matrix is, the creator doesn't have a clue of failure and succes. Not because the creator is somehow uncapable of understanding failure and succes, but because failure and succes are superimposed illusionary concepts. Just like the creator doens't know what up and down is. Neither does he understand left and right. Not because he is dumb, but because left and right are dumb. They are superimposed illusionary concepts. We have divided our environment relative to the observer in left and right, to the creator there is no division in his sight. Similarly there is no failure nor succes.

Nor can there be failure or succes since those are only possible when certain goals are set (how else can you define failure or succes without bringing in goals??) The creator simply hasn't any, no goals that is. And he shouldn't. Succes/failure/goals are only possible in time, the creator is Eternal. The creator knows no time, knows no future, therefore no goals, therefore no failure nor succes. Although this might come as a shock to people. But then again, everything that upsets you is worth investegation, if only to overcome being upset.

I wonder, if the planets are so many, why did they have to go so far (to Earth) to find a suitable habitable planet?

So that we don't come running back??

[Vesko]

Alisima, you state that the Creator is non-dual. I read your explanations why particular dualities are not adopted by the Creator. But you haven't really explained why the Creator is free from any duality, according to you. The closest to an explanation that I see in your posts is that it is because the Creator thinks dualities are dumb. Why? Without a good explanation of this, I find it hard to take you seriously.

I think that the particular duality success / failure, making goals possible, can happen as long as there is change possible. You don't have any argument that change is not possible for the Creator and its environment? It should be, because, for example, by the act of Creation, something has become different. If it hasn't become different, Creation hasn't happened. But it has (The Big Bang).

[anonymousbeing]

Everyone hs built-in success mechanism. Your 'sucess mechanism' must have a goal or target. The target of Great Intellect is to maximize the number of souls returning to the ocean of consciousness.
The G.I must have made numberous mistakes (there are not failure or at best it is just a temporary failure) in terms of its evolution. It is the only way of achieving a goal by negative feedback, or by going forward, making mistakes and immediately correcting the course.

GI MUST have a goal if not goals.
According to TP (pg76):

‘As you have heard, in the beginning there was the Spirit alone and he created,by his immense force, all that exists materially. He created the planets, the suns,plants, animals, with one goal in mind: to satisfy his spiritual need. This is quite logical since he is purely spirit.

Thiaooubans seem to be goals-oriented beings.

‘This is to place as head of state a leader whose unique goal is the wellbeing of the people -

‘You should always bear in mind this main point: An Astral body, in all cases, must conform to Universal Law, and, by following nature as closely as possible, it can achieve the ultimate goal by the fastest path.’

‘Certain Tantrists on Earth have attained this point, but it isn’t common amongthem, for still their religions, with ridiculous rituals and prohibitions, create a real obstacle to attaining this goal

[survivor]

A perfect system/structure does not have accidents. (hence the saying, nothings perfect)


pg 5 (TP)
You were right in explaining it as a kind of
purgatory but, of course, this is quite accidental. In fact, this is one of several
accidents of nature. An albino is an accident, and a four-leafed clover can also be
considered as an accident. Your appendix is just as much an accident. Your
doctors still wonder what use it could possibly have in your body. The answer -
no use whatsoever. Now usually, in nature, everything has a precise reason for
existing - that’s why I list the appendix among the natural ‘accidents’.