|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 26, 2013 20:33:04 GMT -5
What nature demands is 'truth'.. to see a problem that 'is', and you identify the problem succinctly, but to see it as it 'is' and to suggest conceptual thinking, 'oneness', as a solution is not 'truth'.. I suggest that there are abundant resources for the security and welfare of all people, that what is lacking is the will and inspiration to distribute those resources fairly to all people.. i suggest a spiritual and cultural revolution, where unity is revealed as the functional solution, where no father ever has to "steal an apple" to feed his kids.. Be well.. Oh, I soitainly don't suggest conceptual thinking about oneness. I 'suggest' the realization of oneness. Why, you state that "everything is one".. there is, by your own belief, no one to realize anything.. but, you address other people, people that have separate and different realizations than you have, and you suggest that their realizations are illusions and not true.. so, i am interested in why your deeds do not reflect what you say you believe.. You haven't addressed the elements of our discussion that reveal inconsistencies in your stated beliefs, you are returning to the recital of mantras, so.. if you are interested in discussing oneness, and presenting a case worthy of consideration, could you describe how your statement, "everything is one", functionally accounts for what is directly experienced as separation? This is an opportunity for you to demonstrate how your belief in 'oneness' is worthy of serious consideration.. i'm interested in an open, honest, and respectful discussion, and.. if you are successful at demonstrating the validity of your beliefs, i will "soitainly" revise my understandings.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 26, 2013 21:04:37 GMT -5
Don't be silly. Oneness, 'by definition', means everything is one. Do yous guys purposely try to make oneness inaccessible? You haven't understood the idea, silly. Oneness, 'by definition', refers to a condition of being one, and nothing else. That's what I said, silly.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 26, 2013 21:19:11 GMT -5
You haven't understood the idea, silly. Oneness, 'by definition', refers to a condition of being one, and nothing else. That's what I said, silly. uh-oh! ... if you two start agreeing I'm tossing away my snipers rifle and headin' fer the hills! And QUICK! (non-dual-double-time!)
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 26, 2013 22:02:50 GMT -5
Okay, here's the deal.
A few of you know me as a rather cut-to-the-point poster who frequented the board roughly three years ago.
Couldn't help my curiosity so I returned to the board to blah blah blah blah blah...
WALL OF TEXT
Oh, you're the satori guy! Any new announcements to make?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 26, 2013 22:11:11 GMT -5
Okay, here's the deal. A few of you know me as a rather cut-to-the-point poster who frequented the board roughly three years ago. Couldn't help my curiosity so I returned to the board to see exactly who's maintaining the status quo on the endless, distracting, bullnuts conversation. Naturally I still see a sample of the same names I saw then, with seemingly no indication that you've tired of all the talk. I said it then and I'm saying it again. You're all wasting your time and you seem to rather enjoy your slumber. How else can one explain the circular talk, the same rehashed topics, the novice questions that anyone that's taken even a single step in their journey would have the answer to? There are several folks on this board who seem to be on that all-important precipice -- they've been there for YEARS -- but they clearly have no interest in going beyond it. You want to talk "oneness", "nonduality", "enlightenment" and all that nonsense, but let's be honest -- how many of you want to experience it? If this messageboard is any indication, the answer to the question is "not very many." So, on topic, what is oneness? You may ask a million times and receive the answer as many times, but what use is it to you if you don't see it for yourself? Here's what I experienced many years ago. Mind you, I explained this at least once on this board, many years ago. The experience is the clearest realization that you are as virtual as a Super Mario life. The physical presence taken to be you feels no more "you" than your car, your house or your yacht.
For all intents and purposes, you feel disembodied -- ghost like, and as a result, indestructible. There's a subtle, singular experience of simple awareness and it is thundering in its silence because it's -- you're so powerfully present. There is a simple shifting in perspective, but the resulting feeling is exponentially different in presentation. I won't mince words here, the experience gives you a very strong and clear impression that you are dead on the spot.
There is a powerful recognition that "you" are the canvas upon which all else is painted; that there is no subsequent structure behind or before you because you are it -- the a priori presence that all else is dependent upon.
It's a simple experience, devoid of any awe. You're not granted super powers, your perspective simply shifts.
That's the bottom line.
While in this state, if you perform the simple experiment of uttering your own name, you will realize that there will be no answer -- neither conscious nor unconscious -- because your name points nowhere. The utterance will simply disappear into you, the void, with no trace of response.
So now, satisfied? What more do you any of you want? Well, I guess that's it then. Yeah, I'd say he should email this to Shawn and then we can delete our accounts and Shawn can shut down the forum.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 22:28:48 GMT -5
Excuse me, can anybody explain me what "all over the F'in place" means? What is F'in? F'in = effing = the F word with 'ing' on the end, as apparently some people are offended by certain words so ST has a word filter to shut them out, so "F'in" and "effing" have to be used to be able to express oneself freely.yeah. F'in as in Fukkin'....as in expression of 'whatever' in some crass uncouth way.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 22:39:56 GMT -5
I never questioned if your post was a rant or not, nor even made any mention of these things.OK.If that was your intention, then i never saw it because this here......looks to me as you telling people how they should role on their journey. nope. the dream characters do whatever they're supposed to. don't ask me to prove it! hahaIf you are troubled when others stand up for their beliefs/ideas/concepts/etc, then you do...i don't.Nope, not troubled. All's perfect. Just pointing out other things that can be done (though not "by anyone").I have no intention of believing the theory that the separate self doesn't exist because currently that theory makes no sense compared to the theory that i do exist as a separate self. So there is no point wishing me good luck in keeping or destroying any beliefs because i don't have a foundational belief either way. I do understand your passion of the path you are currently on, but i don't see the point in your speculations about others and the paths they are on, other that you claiming your way is the correct way and theirs is not.OK, cool. And g'luck in whatever it is that you intend to do,,,,just as long as it is not waking up.
EDIT: aaron spelling
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 26, 2013 22:44:44 GMT -5
MrG came. Which one is beingist? The next guy? I'd sacrifice the bamboo shirt. I'm not in this one. I have a cubicle.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 26, 2013 22:46:48 GMT -5
In your system waking up is not possible. One never wakes up really. It's a system for dreamers who just talk about waking up while dreaming. Nothing happens with them. I have a system? Maybe she means, like, a digestive system?
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 22:52:45 GMT -5
Well, why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel, Hetero? hehe Reading your words, I can tell you've really learned a lot from your beloved teacher and all that in-concert movement and uncanny reverence for life he must have implanted so methodically into your thinking processes. Indeed, you've mastered it so well, I can't even begin to see what he was on about. But if you insist that you're way on down that road, headed off to the promised land, I do bid you farewell, the best of luck in NOT finding what you think you're looking for, and hope you get what you could never imagine (That's code between idiots and blasphemers, btw. Means sum'm good.) That's about all I can do. If you didn't understand the rant was pretty obviously tongue-in-cheek, a bit autobiographical, and pointing to that surge of freakazoid intent that was (in my experience) necessary to get'er done, well, I guess you just didn't. Guess the local firewater was just lowering my affective filter a wee-bit much. But in the meantime, ya'd better getch'er butt back on the squatmat back at Plum Blossom, I guess. Tell us how it turns out for ya. I get the code, so I must be one a them idiots or blasphemers. WooHoo! ;D Idiot! Blasphemer! WaaaHooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 22:57:34 GMT -5
I'm just wondering, is it memory/conditioning or is it truish that very few people here are actually interested in getting to the bottom of WTF is going on? It seems that more and more are just interested in maintaining some whinging whiny self-fulfilling hope or desire that one can awake and still be here. Ladies, gentleman, idiots, and blasphemers! Stand up on thy chariot and drive this thing over the cliff already! Where's the free fall? Where's the bewilderment? Where's the actual prying and forced letting go that's only talked about here as some exaggerated b.s. about how woowoo and advanced one is, how one should be, how folks should act when they are in the bowels of despair and utter loss of any hope for discussing reality? Hints of it here, at best; let down thy guard, step up to the mighty precipice, JUMP already! Quit all this inching along, calculating every millimeter for every sake of correctness and waste! J F'in C! Back when I existed, I dreamt of sailing on the sea of fire. No harbor, no oar...abandon was the only refuge, and where that led was just deeper and deeper into that abyss known as shallow.....empty to the core!!! OK, I'm done. Hugs. Priceless! Nice chariot, sN. Another tipple of the local and keep'em coming like that. Salud! Hey Vacant, long time! Whole new meaning to drinking and driving! hehe Do what I can, whenever I can. Sometimes, that includes what I can't be bothered with (if I'm allowed to say that around here, hehe).
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 23:05:58 GMT -5
You do realize that "Rants" are the result of mentating and judging 'what is'? Where there is ranting, there is a personal perspective. Where there is personal perspective, there is "a person" regardless of what label you choose to give it (or not). Clearly there is still some 'one' remaining though. You had an experience where there has been a shift in what you previously believed yourself to be, but is the shift really anything more than a shift in belief 'about' yourself..about who and what you are? There's clearly still a distinct individualized perspective occurring where 'you' are concerned, as is evidenced by your unique viewpoint that is chock full of judgments about others who are 'mentating' too much. And yet, in spite of what appears to you to be 'a mind kept wandering in tightly bound circles,' Andrew has no complaints about his experience. In fact, quite the opposite. AT what point does your perception of 'a problem' in how another approaches spirituality, actually become 'a problem'? Aren't 'problems' always in the eye of the beholder, and therefore, Doesn't it take a 'person' to see a problem? What really is this 'death of the believed separate self' other than a seeing through/release of attachment to a set and well defined identity and storyline? As an example of one who seems to believe he is no longer a person, what's different in your experience now from before this supposed death? Clearly, there's still a perspective that has you looking from a vantage point that judges and sees 'wrongness,'.....so that has not fallen away. Clearly you uphold 'your' approach (or non approach) to all of this as being superior, which also involves a 'personal' judgment. Who/what is it that stands in his own unique experience to judge the experiences of others as being lesser, if not 'a person'? Don't you actually mean "unclearly, from my personal point of view"? Either way, my arms stretch out widely as the sky, and I yawn. You ARE...as in already HERE, but you believe the dream. Keep letting us know how it feels though.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 23:09:19 GMT -5
I'm curious what you would expect to happen to the individualized perspective. Surely you don't expect the body to keel over or the mind to fall silent such that it never expresses a perspective? Beyond that, do you expect it to never perceive a problem? If there's a flat tire, I guess he would just keep on driving and not notice? Or is it that he just wouldn't talk about it? Beyond that, I do speculate that you expect that no negative feeling would ever be expressed, but I really want to resolve the issue of whether the individuated perspective should somehow go away first. Elsewhere, Tzu seems to have the idea that I should see M-G as Enigma if I want to keep the nonduality police off my tail. I don't really know how to respond to that particular brand of insanity.You cannot demonstrate the actuality of the ideology, non-duality, you try to sell to others as valid.. you tell others that your beliefs are true, but you cannot demonstrate your own faith in those beliefs.. you talk in riddles, supposing that to be guru-esque, and hoping it will convince the others you say 'don't exist', to believe what you cannot demonstrate as valid.. You have stated that 'you are me', and we are all one, but.. you demonstrate no valid evidence of that, only conceptual imagery and imaginary beliefs.. Be well.. Clearly, you just keep missing IT. All language is imagery. What are the words pointing to. Or, as is the case with your words, what are they holding on to? Don't think twice...
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Feb 26, 2013 23:12:11 GMT -5
I'm curious what you would expect to happen to the individualized perspective. So long as there is experience, the individualized perspective 'aint' going anywhere. And that's the thing. For many of us, in definition, there is no distinction between individualized perspective and 'person.' In saying that 'the person' disappears, imo, one is simply revealing their limited definition of 'person.' As I see it, with clarity, what goes, is attachment to a set identity and story-line, but of course, the individualized, unique perspective remains, and I see no reason to refrain from calling that 'a person.' Perspectives will indeed continue to be expressed when attachment to identity and story-line has fallen away, however, as acceptance/allowance deepens, 'judgments' that deem circumstances as being 'problematic' also fall away. No longer is a flat tire seen to be a problem in the sense that it is seen as something that should not have happened. It's simply a circumstance of our now moment, and we don't spend time cursing it or wishing it away or judging it to be bad, but rather, we pull over and take the necessary steps to putting on a new tire so we can carry on in the direction we were moving. YOu have a habit E of invoking metaphors that vastly shift the context of conversation. Really, what we're talking about here is not judging a flat tire to be 'wrong' or in need of fixing, but instead, judging spiritual approaches of others. Judgments about the spiritual approaches of others, imo, invoke much more of the personal than judgments about things like flat tires. (And btw, I don't personally see any problem with invoking the personal ....it is however of importance whether or not we are able to see it for what it is). Anytime we are judging 'this' we are to some extent engaging with an identity and story line. There is 'a person' there who is comparing the qualities of 'this' TO that which he/she upholds and values. No big deal though. Surely you understand that he is trying to get you to see that some form of separation "IS" behind your inability to experience AS another...? From baby steps to amoebic steps. Good thing eternity doesn't exist either. Jump already.
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Feb 26, 2013 23:18:09 GMT -5
You haven't understood the idea, silly. Oneness, 'by definition', refers to a condition of being one, and nothing else. That's what I said, silly. You haven't understood again. This definition of Oneness is not compatible with another one. When you are mixing up modalities you create two Onenesses even if you don't mean to. And everybody can see how delusioned you are.
|
|