click tracking
Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Jeff

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,689 profile views
  1. Blessed to be able to connect here

    Welcome! And congrats to opening your heart.
  2. Sounds very beautiful with the bond/connection that you and Valenone have found. Sounds like a good partnership.
  3. Once again I would have to disagree regarding Jesus. The early catholic and institutionalized Church was more about Roman Empire building then the teachings of Jesus. Jesus even commanded in the gospels to call no man father, and then the first thing Rome did was create a Holy father on earth.
  4. Jesus did not lose his life when he exposed himself. He knew what was unfolding and followed a plan. He ascended, and as part of that provided the basis that allow the infrastructures for all of the connecting/merging that we do (oneness in Christ).
  5. Very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing. In a round about way, I would agree with much of what you have said. Just a few points of contention.
  6. I can’t speak for Valenone, but I am not a representive for any specific god. But, I do know and work with many. For me, it might be better to say that I work for the potential of the “universe” (or all beings).
  7. Very nice. Anytning specific to say with that?
  8. Sounds good. Hugging now...
  9. Valenone and Riju

    I think you both do have a “past” connection. Strengthening now is up to both of you.
  10. Hugging you now... See what you get...
  11. As I responded in the previous post, emptiness is not inside of Brahman (or some being like it). Brahman is an example of the “One” who emerges from the Dao in Taoism. Dao = Emptiness.
  12. While our overall frameworks we describe are very similar, they are different in a few ways. As an example, in my definition of emptiness, it is not possible to recreate it, as everything is a “subset” of emptiness. Your awareness + wisdom would be more like “manifest potential” to me, which is a subset. You sort of see it all as being inside of Brahman. To me it is more like Brahman emerges (or is the potential) of emptiness. Hence my becoming like the universal ground, in your framework would be like I knew how to become a Buddha, but instead decided to be the backstop for sentient beings, so that they could better access the clear light of Buddha’s and higher beings. In terms of wisdoms, it is sort of like I provide the “extra space” for not my wisdoms, but those of other beings that have the potential to manifest.
  13. Assuming you meant this question for me... No, I am not a disciple of some advanced bhoddisatta, but I definitely support and venerate such beings. My path is more like to be the universal “ground” for sentient beings so that they can work with such beings.
  14. The difference that we are describing comes from the point of I am starting from well before what the lotus sutra calls “ignorance causing action”. Or maybe your could say more fully describing the “ignorance” part. In the text, it is presupposing that there is a being in the first place to even be ignorant or do an action. So my order would be something like... bubble up from emptiness... formless and unaware blob of potential... potential starts to take essence... essence begins to become aware... aware essence attaches to stuff = ignorance... then your ignorance causes action...
  15. Look forward to the discussion. Proof is in the hugs (and the actual flows).