|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 1, 2013 21:32:35 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Twist the words, edit the post, and create the illusion that lets you believe nobody notices you not addressing the actual issues, the inconsistency if your imagined illusory dream characters being relevant persons.. C'mon, E.. stop editing and twisting what is posted, just to create the illusion you wish were true.. you're becoming a bit deranged if you believe that's what my post says.. You have indeed previously stated that 'there is no person', and for the gazillionth time, I say there are billions of separate, volitional persons.. functioning as an organic whole.. Be well.. Be well.. I do not see suffering as irrelevant, either, i am very interested in helping find solutions for suffering.. If everything is imagined, if it's all a dream, then suffering is irrelevant because in that model, it's not real.. 'dream characters' are not real, i am real, and i suspect you are real, too.. separate volitional persons exist and are 'real', they are also parts of a real whole.. both conditions are directly observable/experienceable with a still, quiet, and clear mind, and.. to deny that is a choice you can make.. My preference is to explore clarity, to understand clarity and various ways that clarity can be achieved.. in this way, i am hopeful that others might find their own clarity, and that they might share their experiences from the perspectives of clarity.. for people to share their experiences of of their understandings, whatever they are, from their perspective of clarity is helpful and contributes to a functional whole, but.. when people state that their perspectives of their understandings are the only valid or true perspectives, and those not in agreement are wrong, then clarity has become distorted by attachment, and.. no longer is the mind open to potentials not yet revealed, it has become closed and attached to the choice of a particular belief.. Yes, it does look like you were trying to manipulate people's perceptions of what i had posted and what my understandings are.. you use misrepresentation and manipulation frequently, which raises questions about your claims of being interested in 'truth at all costs'.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Mar 1, 2013 21:41:18 GMT -5
I've decided that I just ain't gonna argue with you, arisha. You might sick that Mr. G guy on me, or something.   MrG came. That looks a lot like Mr P for some reason.But I kinda get what he's on about, i THINK. Liiiiike,,,,,maaaaybeeee, Mr P is taking a little fun-filled spin through dreamland to see if a few dream characters are ready to wake up. I don’t know Arisha. What is your interpretion of this here context you’ve provided. Curious. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 1, 2013 21:58:22 GMT -5
But who is this Mr P? I don't know who he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Mar 1, 2013 22:49:37 GMT -5
But who is this Mr P? I don't know who he is. So, you're just having a go!  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 1, 2013 23:41:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. It does look a bit like I put those words in your mouth. I didn't mean for it to sound that way. What I mean to say is I don't see suffering as irrelevant, and suffering happens when there is identification with the dream character. I do not see suffering as irrelevant, either, i am very interested in helping find solutions for suffering.. If everything is imagined, if it's all a dream, then suffering is irrelevant because in that model, it's not real.. 'dream characters' are not real, i am real, and i suspect you are real, too.. separate volitional persons exist and are 'real', they are also parts of a real whole.. both conditions are directly observable/experienceable with a still, quiet, and clear mind, and.. to deny that is a choice you can make.. What is irrelevant is the distinction between real and unreal, given that it's all a dream and there isn't some other experience. Dream suffering is still suffering, but you call it irrelevant. This is why I asked you if suffering is irrelevant, though I wasn't clear, and so you pounced on it and misrepresented it as a manipulation. I agree. I don't recall hearing you say those particular words, though your sig strongly implies it. I don't ever purposely manipulate or misrepresent. I know you've repeated it enough times now, as a manipulation/misrepresentation strategy, that you likely take it to be fact, but it is not. The common denominator in your posts is that virtually everything you say is a projection. It's quite interesting, really, but of course it makes productive communication impossible. You're essentially always having a conversation with your own denial, and I merely serve the purpose of a screen to project upon. (Silver is precisely the same in that respect) |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 2, 2013 0:01:34 GMT -5
But who is this Mr P? I don't know who he is. Mr G's alter ego?  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 2, 2013 0:29:46 GMT -5
But who is this Mr P? I don't know who he is. Mr G's alter ego? Mr Person?? |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 2, 2013 0:32:01 GMT -5
Mr G's alter ego? Mr Person?? Just realized, maybe this Mr G person's name is really Mr Germidgipilion? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2013 0:34:21 GMT -5
I think it's really very good that you have a priority to know yourself, it's such a huge task, yes, and you may need nothing else to learn about if you have learnt yourself so well as I think you've managed to. You have the ability to be concentrated very deeply on any subject you start to investigate, - and you could be a good scientist in the field of your choice, - no doubt. Such an ability for concentration is usually due to the star clusters in some Zodiac Sign of the horoscope, and what precisely the person concentrates on and has interests in depends on and is predetermined by the Zodiac Sign where such star cluster is located. I checked it up and found it's true, other astrological methods also work, though not all of them. I am saying about astrology because you, as you said, used numerology to choose the font, so, maybe astrology is also one of your interests as astrology and numerology are connected.
I continue to explore that which i judge interesting and important to me, but i don't fret that i can never learn everything.
It took me a few decades to joyfully accept that i have a niche i can become very skilled at even though i have a flair to be a jack of all trades.
I realized my field this last decade, which is people. To understand the human species in order to help people resolve any issues they are troubled by.
Most of my understanding comes from self exploration.
~smiles~ Arisha, if you asked you would then know i do use astrology, though i do not follow these teachings precisely
as i have found all teachings have errors in them due to people's inability to see all relevant info.
Astrology and numerology are no exception.
Thus i treat all teachings as rough guides only, i do not accept everything said as being totally correct.
They are imperfect paths to explore, not absolute total truth.
Example: I have found numerology to be extremely accurate, until it becomes more specific.
In that when it expresses intricate details about my personality, it becomes grossly inaccurate.
Other tools i use to help me understand myself and reality are psychology, tarot, i ching, animal, plant and nature signs.
Speaking of astrology type stuff, check out this Mayan one.
Click on the left red box...on the new page click on the 'dreamspell calculator'...
in the pop up window, scroll down and punch in your birth date, hit 'calculate'
and back at the top you will see your Galactic Signature, 5 symbols with the title underneath it...
back on the page look for that title in the list and click on it for your reading. It's hella awesome.- "How can they be good and true?"
'Good' and 'true' are not innate attributes of things. These attributes are attached by humans according to their experiences with/of these things.
Cheese fries are cheese fries, nothing more, nothing less.
When a person eats them and likes them, they don't say, "Hey, these are cheese fries!", no, they say, "Hey, these are some good cheese fries!"
If the don't like them, they don't say, "Hey, these are cheese fries!", no, they say, "Hey, these are some horrible cheese fries!"
'Good, bad, true, false, right, wrong' are adjectives. An addition to a noun.
And this addition is subjective, in that each person judges for themself if something is true or not, regardless if it actually is true or not.
So if a person tells me non duality is the truth about reality, and they are manifesting a better life for themself via their beliefs,
regardless of what i judge the theory as, i am happy for them, they can believe whatever they want.
- "But is it a true teaching?"
If someone has learnt something, then what was said must be a teaching.
Is what was said true or false...that's up to each person to decide for themself.
- "How can lie be true?"
Very simply, just think it. Examine the subject, think and reach a conclusion that XYZ is either true or false.
Convince yourself it is so and hey presto, any falsity can become truth and any truth can become a falsity.
The error is, and i was trapped in my matrix for over half my life, is when a person who judges something as true,
thinks it actually is when it might not be.1) I don't see a teaching has any innate power within itself to create followers out of people.
The power to create a follower resides in the person observing/exploring the teaching and it is they who decide if they shall follow the teaching or not.
2) Simple, the same way you can attach a 'truth' label to "The heart is the center of a person."
3) If you can't see there is, then that is what you see, but can you see everything.4) Artificial:- Made by humans; produced rather than natural. - Brought about or caused by sociopolitical or other human-generated forces or influences: - Not genuine or natural:
According to the dictionary, all concepts are artificial, including, "The heart is the center of a person."
However, after a bit more dictionary exploring...Artificial - not arising from natural growth or characterized by vital processes Inorganic - lacking the properties characteristic of living organisms Concept - 1. A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences. 2. Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion. If humans are living organisms and concepts are a characteristic of this living orgainism, then all concepts are natural.
5) I agree with you that many things of this teaching simply don't add up, but that is just my personal point of view
and i don't claim to know the absolute truth about many things.
If others conclude this teaching is the absolute truth, what is that to me, others can believe whatever they want, just as i can believe whatever i want.
You believe the heart is the center of a person, i currently do not accept this concept as correct, nor does your claim it's true have an adverse effect in my life.
Each person chooses what is true or not. If you do not accept the Oneness concept as true, why are you troubled by it arisha?
6) Can't people have the freedom to claim whatever they want? No one is forcing you to join a cult. No one is forcing their teaching upon other's lives.
Not being able to explain something doesn't make the concept false or true, it simply means someone can't explain it.
Though i generally stay clear of concepts when adherents can't explain it. No point following a person who has no idea of the path they are on.
If they can't describe the path, how can i walk on that which i can't see.
7) I don't read all the posts so i may have missed it, but i have not seen any adherents shouting.
Though i see the opposite you see arisha. I see they spend a lot of time explaining their concept, but to me, their explanations simply don't add up.
The more they explain it, the more irrational it looks to me.
And i theorize it appears irrational due to the concept stating the absence of thought during the process is a vital requirement to seeing the truth of the claims.
Take Realization as an example.
I have heard people here and at SF share their definition of Realization, and their definition does not match the common definition found in the dictionary.
A common practice i have noticed of people who have irrational ideas, is they make up their own definitions of established words to validate their concepts.
So when a particular element of the concept appears irrational, it's because i have referenced each word they have used
against the dictionary definitions thus, their concept appears irrational. But if i use their definitions, their concept appears to make sense.
So, i use the common definitions the majority of other people use that enables successful communication...successful as in we understand each other.
If someone else wishes to create unique definitions of words to explain their concept, then they lost me at hello.
And i always find it funny when me or others hilight the dictionary definitions when conversing with adherents
and they then lament, "word lawyering, word lawyering."
8) If that is what you see, then that is what you see. All i see is a person encased so completely in a belief that they think they are speaking the truth,
and are genuinely trying to help their fellow travellers to reach this promised land they have found.
9) I can understand that, but can you understand why they can label this teaching as right, and they also do this from the bottom of their heart.
If you choose to make it your business to alert peole to false paths, then that is your choice and i wish you well with it.
If i see someone going down a wrong path, i will share my opinion with them because i love them.
If they choose to continue down that path, that is their choice and i will let them, even if it means their destructiion.
Though that is not what i originally said.
I said if a person is on a path that i judge as wrong, but they judge it is right and are happy on that path
and their life is positively enhanced by it, then i choose to not interfer with their journey.
Your analogy of the thief does not match the situation here in ST.
A person making claims about reality is not taking anything away from another.and that the listener is powerless against this theft.
I do not see any intellectually undeveloped children in ST that can easily be decieved by someone. I see adults who can reason for themselves.
If you believe an adult has the power to steal energy from another adult simply by expressing words,
has the power to make another adult beleive in illusions and manipulate their future, then that is your reality...my reality does not look like that.
I see adults with an ability to contemplate that which they observe thus make up their own minds, so if they want to go down a path, that is their choice.
Perhaps it is the exact path they are meant to take at this time. I do not know definately if path X is actually correct or not.
I know it's incorrect for me, but i am not the other person, i do not know what is correct or incorrect for them.
All i can do is share my view if they are interested, and the decision remains theirs if they go down that path or not.
I don't see any value in telling people whats right and wrong, i do see value in telling people to keep their eyes open and use their intellect to figure things out for themselves. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2013 0:46:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 2, 2013 2:17:23 GMT -5
Just realized, maybe this Mr G person's name is really Mr Germidgipilion? HA! God-like co-creation at it's best. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 2, 2013 3:38:03 GMT -5
I think it's really very good that you have a priority to know yourself, it's such a huge task, yes, and you may need nothing else to learn about if you have learnt yourself so well as I think you've managed to. You have the ability to be concentrated very deeply on any subject you start to investigate, - and you could be a good scientist in the field of your choice, - no doubt. Such an ability for concentration is usually due to the star clusters in some Zodiac Sign of the horoscope, and what precisely the person concentrates on and has interests in depends on and is predetermined by the Zodiac Sign where such star cluster is located. I checked it up and found it's true, other astrological methods also work, though not all of them. I am saying about astrology because you, as you said, used numerology to choose the font, so, maybe astrology is also one of your interests as astrology and numerology are connected.
I continue to explore that which i judge interesting and important to me, but i don't fret that i can never learn everything.
It took me a few decades to joyfully accept that i have a niche i can become very skilled at even though i have a flair to be a jack of all trades.
I realized my field this last decade, which is people. To understand the human species in order to help people resolve any issues they are troubled by.
Most of my understanding comes from self exploration.
~smiles~ Arisha, if you asked you would then know i do use astrology, though i do not follow these teachings precisely
as i have found all teachings have errors in them due to people's inability to see all relevant info.
Astrology and numerology are no exception.
Thus i treat all teachings as rough guides only, i do not accept everything said as being totally correct.
They are imperfect paths to explore, not absolute total truth.
Example: I have found numerology to be extremely accurate, until it becomes more specific.
In that when it expresses intricate details about my personality, it becomes grossly inaccurate.
Other tools i use to help me understand myself and reality are psychology, tarot, i ching, animal, plant and nature signs.
Speaking of astrology type stuff, check out this Mayan one.
Click on the left red box...on the new page click on the 'dreamspell calculator'...
in the pop up window, scroll down and punch in your birth date, hit 'calculate'
and back at the top you will see your Galactic Signature, 5 symbols with the title underneath it...
back on the page look for that title in the list and click on it for your reading. It's hella awesome.- "How can they be good and true?"
'Good' and 'true' are not innate attributes of things. These attributes are attached by humans according to their experiences with/of these things.
Cheese fries are cheese fries, nothing more, nothing less.
When a person eats them and likes them, they don't say, "Hey, these are cheese fries!", no, they say, "Hey, these are some good cheese fries!"
If the don't like them, they don't say, "Hey, these are cheese fries!", no, they say, "Hey, these are some horrible cheese fries!"
'Good, bad, true, false, right, wrong' are adjectives. An addition to a noun.
And this addition is subjective, in that each person judges for themself if something is true or not, regardless if it actually is true or not.
So if a person tells me non duality is the truth about reality, and they are manifesting a better life for themself via their beliefs,
regardless of what i judge the theory as, i am happy for them, they can believe whatever they want.
- "But is it a true teaching?"
If someone has learnt something, then what was said must be a teaching.
Is what was said true or false...that's up to each person to decide for themself.
- "How can lie be true?"
Very simply, just think it. Examine the subject, think and reach a conclusion that XYZ is either true or false.
Convince yourself it is so and hey presto, any falsity can become truth and any truth can become a falsity.
The error is, and i was trapped in my matrix for over half my life, is when a person who judges something as true,
thinks it actually is when it might not be.1) I don't see a teaching has any innate power within itself to create followers out of people.
The power to create a follower resides in the person observing/exploring the teaching and it is they who decide if they shall follow the teaching or not.
2) Simple, the same way you can attach a 'truth' label to "The heart is the center of a person."
3) If you can't see there is, then that is what you see, but can you see everything.4) Artificial:- Made by humans; produced rather than natural. - Brought about or caused by sociopolitical or other human-generated forces or influences: - Not genuine or natural:
According to the dictionary, all concepts are artificial, including, "The heart is the center of a person."
However, after a bit more dictionary exploring...Artificial - not arising from natural growth or characterized by vital processes Inorganic - lacking the properties characteristic of living organisms Concept - 1. A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences. 2. Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion. If humans are living organisms and concepts are a characteristic of this living orgainism, then all concepts are natural.
5) I agree with you that many things of this teaching simply don't add up, but that is just my personal point of view
and i don't claim to know the absolute truth about many things.
If others conclude this teaching is the absolute truth, what is that to me, others can believe whatever they want, just as i can believe whatever i want.
You believe the heart is the center of a person, i currently do not accept this concept as correct, nor does your claim it's true have an adverse effect in my life.
Each person chooses what is true or not. If you do not accept the Oneness concept as true, why are you troubled by it arisha?
6) Can't people have the freedom to claim whatever they want? No one is forcing you to join a cult. No one is forcing their teaching upon other's lives.
Not being able to explain something doesn't make the concept false or true, it simply means someone can't explain it.
Though i generally stay clear of concepts when adherents can't explain it. No point following a person who has no idea of the path they are on.
If they can't describe the path, how can i walk on that which i can't see.
7) I don't read all the posts so i may have missed it, but i have not seen any adherents shouting.
Though i see the opposite you see arisha. I see they spend a lot of time explaining their concept, but to me, their explanations simply don't add up.
The more they explain it, the more irrational it looks to me.
And i theorize it appears irrational due to the concept stating the absence of thought during the process is a vital requirement to seeing the truth of the claims.
Take Realization as an example.
I have heard people here and at SF share their definition of Realization, and their definition does not match the common definition found in the dictionary.
A common practice i have noticed of people who have irrational ideas, is they make up their own definitions of established words to validate their concepts.
So when a particular element of the concept appears irrational, it's because i have referenced each word they have used
against the dictionary definitions thus, their concept appears irrational. But if i use their definitions, their concept appears to make sense.
So, i use the common definitions the majority of other people use that enables successful communication...successful as in we understand each other.
If someone else wishes to create unique definitions of words to explain their concept, then they lost me at hello.
And i always find it funny when me or others hilight the dictionary definitions when conversing with adherents
and they then lament, "word lawyering, word lawyering."
8) If that is what you see, then that is what you see. All i see is a person encased so completely in a belief that they think they are speaking the truth,
and are genuinely trying to help their fellow travellers to reach this promised land they have found.
9) I can understand that, but can you understand why they can label this teaching as right, and they also do this from the bottom of their heart.
If you choose to make it your business to alert peole to false paths, then that is your choice and i wish you well with it.
If i see someone going down a wrong path, i will share my opinion with them because i love them.
If they choose to continue down that path, that is their choice and i will let them, even if it means their destructiion.
Though that is not what i originally said.
I said if a person is on a path that i judge as wrong, but they judge it is right and are happy on that path
and their life is positively enhanced by it, then i choose to not interfer with their journey.
Your analogy of the thief does not match the situation here in ST.
A person making claims about reality is not taking anything away from another.and that the listener is powerless against this theft.
I do not see any intellectually undeveloped children in ST that can easily be decieved by someone. I see adults who can reason for themselves.
If you believe an adult has the power to steal energy from another adult simply by expressing words,
has the power to make another adult beleive in illusions and manipulate their future, then that is your reality...my reality does not look like that.
I see adults with an ability to contemplate that which they observe thus make up their own minds, so if they want to go down a path, that is their choice.
Perhaps it is the exact path they are meant to take at this time. I do not know definately if path X is actually correct or not.
I know it's incorrect for me, but i am not the other person, i do not know what is correct or incorrect for them.
All i can do is share my view if they are interested, and the decision remains theirs if they go down that path or not.
I don't see any value in telling people whats right and wrong, i do see value in telling people to keep their eyes open and use their intellect to figure things out for themselves.Oh, I am so happy that you are interested in astrology and numerology, M-G, thank you very much for the link, it is rely awesome. I have so many coincidences in my life, and I feel to be connected with numbers vibrations immensely, the numbers confirm all the time that I am a part of some global totality, - I can feel it with my heart and soul. I again found so many synchronicities in the Mayan Calender! Number 13 is very important in my life, and number 14 as well. I've recently written about numbers 25 and 26 on my site, - and voila - they write on the Mayan Astrology site about the Blue Resonant Storm Year we are in which started in July 26, 2012, and finishes in July 25, 2013! According to the Calender I am Manik' (#13) and Sip (#0). I found the reading for Manik', but I didn't find the reading for Sip. If you know how to find it, could you, please, tell me? As for judging, "good" and "true", - I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you. Yes, those attributes are attached by humans. Yes, lie can be not a lie, but something true. Yes, everybody chooses what is false or not. BUT: If those attributes are attached by humans, - we cannot avoid applying them as we ARE HUMANS. Even if we imagine that we are not, we will NEVER be other than HUMANS, only HUMANS and not some extra-terrestrial beings who have already overcome their HUMAN nature. Doesn't matter if those Oneness vulgarizers say about themselves that they are gods, or that they are beyond human nature, or whatever they say on the subject, - they will never stop being just HUMANS. But, of course, in their imagination they can call themselves with any words they like, - gods, or yellow-green dots, or anything else. They are HUMANS, as you and me. And we HAVE TO apply attributes, such as 'true' or false, or 'good' and 'evil' - judging - from the point of view of the common sense human morality, and in every separate case the laws of that morality can be rather easily applied to label the case correspondingly. Those who pretend they are above and beyond applying such attributes , - have to be above and beyond their human nature. But none of them is. Because neither you, nor me, nor them are able to. There is NO human on the Earth who can be above their human nature. Only in their mind, - they can think about themselves all they like, - but it will never change their human nature. So, applying attributes according to the norms of the common sense morality is just a natural thing to do. There is nothing wrong about it. So, the teachings can be true if they follow such norms ( the details of them can be different, of course), - and if they violate them (Satanism, or such theory as Hitler's), - they violate the norms of the humanistic morality, and cannot be true FOR HUMANS. If they are true for gods or green dots, - this has nothing to do with the HUMAN approach. HUMANS are and always will be just humans. Let those egomaniacs imagine whatever they want about themselves - gods, sages - nobody takes them seriously if they try to apply such theories as something true and valuable. Of course, gods or some extra-super beings can see humans from their perspective, - but WHAT they think about them we cannot know. So, why to pretend we can know? I've already tried to explain why I am troubled that people are wasting their time on such delusional theories as Oneness. I think you underestimate the damage from the influence from those who try to promote delusional false ideas. Ideas can be like a drug for the mind. Delusional ideas can deteriorate the soul and the heart of a person. If such ideas start influencing a person so much that they become addicted to them, and if those ideas promote egomania of the sort "I am god", - there is nothing good about them, and they are potentially ( and actually) harmful for others. If such ideas develop, they can be of the same sort as Hitler's : "Germany is above all", and here we have: "I am above good and bad". Such a person has a distorted soul and heart, they stop to understand what is good and what is bad FOR HUMANS, as we can see it perfectly well in the discussion of E & R with Silver. They cannot stop after being told that their help doesn't help, and keep on. No, we cannot let them do that and let them be happy while hurting other people on their path. Their claim that THEY are hurt in this case - is the same as the complaint of a person who has hurt somebody and was sentenced, that they are HURT now. Don't hurt others not to be hurt. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 2, 2013 13:34:07 GMT -5
If those attributes are attached by humans, - we cannot avoid applying them as we ARE HUMANS. Even if we imagine that we are not, we will NEVER be other than HUMANS, only HUMANS and not some extra-terrestrial beings who have already overcome their HUMAN nature. Doesn't matter if those Oneness vulgarizers say about themselves that they are gods, or that they are beyond human nature, or whatever they say on the subject, - they will never stop being just HUMANS. But, of course, in their imagination they can call themselves with any words they like, - gods, or yellow-green dots, or anything else.
They are HUMANS, as you and me. And we HAVE TO apply attributes, such as 'true' or false, or 'good' and 'evil' - judging - from the point of view of the common sense human morality, and in every separate case the laws of that morality can be rather easily applied to label the case correspondingly.
Those who pretend they are above and beyond applying such attributes , - have to be above and beyond their human nature. But none of them is. Because neither you, nor me, nor them are able to.
There is NO human on the Earth who can be above their human nature.
Only in their mind, - they can think about themselves all they like, - but it will never change their human nature. Arisha, Your point about our nature is well taken -- the word "absolute" is only a word and winds up being projected, in one way or another, onto the relative. If I were to make the claim that "I am God" then I've literally stated an attachment to an idea and the only thing that I've "pointed to" is my own ignorance. On the other hand, this concept of divinity does confront us with a paradox, because if I point out to you that God is within, that God looks out from your eyes, that you don't have to look outside to find God, I've stated an alternative to the notion that God is something external to you and apart from you, that God is an authority, some controlling presence, that other people are somehow closer to God than you are, and because of this, you should submit to their will and by doing that, to God's will. That alternative is simply a remedy to a cultural imbalance. Because it references the paradox quite closely it does seem to be easily misinterpreted. If we're talking about God, then we're talking about something that noone is any closer to than anyone else, regardless of appearances. It does seem a characteristic of human nature to hijack the notion of God in order to gain material advantage and the illusion of control over other people. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 2, 2013 13:36:10 GMT -5
Greetings.. I do not see suffering as irrelevant, either, i am very interested in helping find solutions for suffering.. If everything is imagined, if it's all a dream, then suffering is irrelevant because in that model, it's not real.. 'dream characters' are not real, i am real, and i suspect you are real, too.. separate volitional persons exist and are 'real', they are also parts of a real whole.. both conditions are directly observable/experienceable with a still, quiet, and clear mind, and.. to deny that is a choice you can make.. What is irrelevant is the distinction between real and unreal, given that it's all a dream and there isn't some other experience. Dream suffering is still suffering, but you call it irrelevant. This is why I asked you if suffering is irrelevant, though I wasn't clear, and so you pounced on it and misrepresented it as a manipulation. No, you edited my post and misrepresented my understandings to manipulate the perspectives of others that migh read the exchange.. I agree. I don't recall hearing you say those particular words, though your sig strongly implies it. I don't ever purposely manipulate or misrepresent. I know you've repeated it enough times now, as a manipulation/misrepresentation strategy, that you likely take it to be fact, but it is not. It is such a common tactic in your interactions with others that if you don't believe it's intentional, then you have successfully conditioned yourself to believe it is acceptable to treat what you think are 'dream characters' and imaginary characters with utter disrespect.. you have created an illusion (imaginary dream characters) that you believe absolves you of being responsible for the conflict, mockery, ridicule, and misrepresentations you feel justified to impose on them, but they are real just like you are.. you really should do some self-inquiry, it's becoming clear that you are not at all what you believe about yourselfThe common denominator in your posts is that virtually everything you say is a projection. It's quite interesting, really, but of course it makes productive communication impossible. You're essentially always having a conversation with your own denial, and I merely serve the purpose of a screen to project upon. (Silver is precisely the same in that respect) As usual, you conclude with your escape clause, your excuses for not dropping the misrepresentations, manipulations, intimidations, and all the other tactics you use to avoid direct, open, honest, and respectful discussions.. if you're actually interested in 'truth at all costs', stop evading.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Mar 2, 2013 16:56:32 GMT -5
Oh please please please learn how to use the quote function.nope. the dream characters do whatever they're supposed to. don't ask me to prove it! haha
2: Yes, i keep forgetting this is a nonduality forum where nondualists perceive reality is a dream and all the people are dream characters.
3: If dream characters do whatever they are supposed to do then why tell them to do this...4: And from another angle, i notice here......no mention of any "dream characters".
See, i assumed you were addressing the other people in the forum but now you bring in "dream characters",
so i really have no idea who you were addressing when you advised others to do the things you mentioned up there.
So someNOTHING, if you like, please specify, from the members of this forum,
who are the "dream characters", who are the people and who are the "Ladies, gentleman, idiots, and blasphemers!".
This would be a great help to me that i may be able to understand what you are actually saying.If you are troubled when others stand up for their beliefs/ideas/concepts/etc, then you do...i don't. [/quote] 1: If you are not troubled by the things you see others doing, then why have you "ranted" about it, are you happy, concerned, what?
Why have you brought this information to the attention of others?
2: Of course it depends on your definition of 'perfect', but if the things you notice others are doing is "perfect",
then why express yourself in a manner that looks like you are not satisfied with this type of behavior you see others are doing?
3: If no one can do these others things you allude to, then to whom are you addressing with your advice?OK, cool. And g'luck in whatever it is that you intend to do,,,,just as long as it is not waking up.[/quote] It is not clear to me if you regard using or having luck is helpful or not in one's life, so i cant' tell if you wish me success or failure in not waking up.
If you like, please clarify.
And please please please learn how to use the quote function.[/quote] Hi M-G, This dream character has not had the time to respond to your post, nor does it now (enough with the 3rd person talk, but it is just a fanciful way of talking about something you're not "really"). Anyway, I am heavily involved in upstarting a new teacher training program (it's one of the things oneness does!) and I simply do not have the time. BUT!! I have taken the time to collect a wall of T.S Elliot quotes that might point to some of the exact ____ to which these terrible dream characters on this board are trying to direct attention. From T.S.'s words I sense he was a non-dualist soldier child, rambling on and on in such poetic flights. Perhaps, some of these words might ring true...... When I say "g'luck", I mean that the search for most is inevitably just for "more whatever" (doesn't matter what it is, it just has to be perceived as needed). Eventually, having searched through the rolodex of worldly things, it appears there's the spiritual search to make it all come together. As before, this search is insatiable in time, in search of dualistic happiness. Always the search. The desire to be right, to be on top, to be famous, to be the torch, etc....all is part of that search. But, sometimes, that search can come to an end, and that final failure of this most beautiful impassioned search, out beyond despair and far beyond any notion of right & wrong, comes to that most strange emptiness that wells up from within and FILLS. HERE. ---------------------------------------------------------------- And now, for that wall of words I promised you. “Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go.” ― T.S. Eliot “To do the useful thing, to say the courageous thing, to contemplate the beautiful thing: that is enough for one man's life.” ― T.S. Eliot, The Use of Poetry and the Use of Criticism “This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper.” ― T.S. Eliot “We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time.” ― T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets “I said to my soul, be still and wait without hope, for hope would be hope for the wrong thing; wait without love, for love would be love of the wrong thing; there is yet faith, but the faith and the love are all in the waiting. Wait without thought, for you are not ready for thought: So the darkness shall be the light, and the stillness the dancing.” ― T.S. Eliot “We die to each other daily. What we know of other people is only our memory of the moments during which we knew them. And they have changed since then. To pretend that they and we are the same is a useful and convenient social convention which must sometimes be broken. We must also remember that at every meeting we are meeting a stranger.” ― T.S. Eliot, The Cocktail Party “We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats' feet over broken glass In our dry cellar Shape without form, shade without colour, Paralysed force, gesture without motion; - The Hollow Men” ― T.S. Eliot, Poems: 1909-1925 “Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.” ― T.S. Eliot “What is hell? Hell is oneself. Hell is alone, the other figures in it Merely projections. There is nothing to escape from And nothing to escape to. One is always alone.” ― T.S. Eliot “What we call the beginning is often the end. And to make an end is to make a beginning. The end is where we start from.” ― T.S. Eliot “Anxiety is the handmaiden of creativity” ― T.S. Eliot “The endless cycle of idea and action, Endless invention, endless experiment, Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness; Knowledge of speech, but not of silence; Knowledge of words, and ignorance of the Word. All our knowledge brings us nearer to our ignorance, All our ignorance brings us nearer to death, But nearness to death no nearer to God. Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information? The cycles of Heaven in twenty centuries Bring us farther from God and nearer to the Dust.” ― T.S. Eliot “It will do you no harm to find yourself ridiculous. Resign yourself to be the fool you are... ...We must always take risks. That is our destiny...” ― T.S. Eliot, The Cocktail Party “Where does one go from a world of insanity? Somewhere on the other side of despair.” ― T.S. Eliot “Success is relative. It is what we make of the mess we have made of things.” ― T.S. Eliot “Teach us to care and not to care” ― T.S. Eliot “Time present and time past Are both perhaps present in time future, And time future contained in time past. If all time is eternally present All time is unredeemable.” ― T.S. Eliot “To arrive where you are, to get from where you are not, You must go by a way wherein there is no ecstasy. In order to arrive at what you do not know You must go by a way which is the way of ignorance. In order to possess what you do not possess You must go by the way of dispossession. In order to arrive at what you are not You must go through the way in which you are not. And what you do not know is the only thing you know And what you own is what you do not own And where you are is where you are not.” ― T.S. Eliot -------------------------------------------------------------------- Jump, I dare say! ;D |
|
Greetings..
