Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2013 22:43:56 GMT -5
What is experienced with clarity and a still open mind is not Real.
Experiences appear and disappear, they are not persistent nor do they have an independent existence.
What is Real is that which does not appear and disappear.
That 'constant' aware space in which all experiences are seen.
Experiences come and go, but you are always here, now as this moment.
Your the only thing less thing that's Real in this room.
That is your belief about your experiences.. nothing you post is apart from your experiences.. Your criteria for 'real' are arbitrary choices, values chosen to support what you believe.. Experience is all you know, is all 'you' are.. mindplay about what you believe is 'real', is still mindplay subject to the same hallucinations and beliefs that conjure other beliefs about "constant aware space".. Can you suspend those attachments, those beliefs, and just see what 'is', just see clearly? Can you stop telling your story, and just be present? One might tell the story of 'sittin' on the dock of the bay', watchin' the ships sail away.. watching as they seem to vanish into the fog, as if they had "appeared and disappeared".. this is clarity, unattached to beliefs 'about' what is 'seen/experienced', simple clear curiosity about what 'is'.. Be well.. No that is not a belief. The seeing of what is actually 'known' in this present moment perception, when you push your chair back from the computer and become aware of what you are perceiving, is before beliefs have a chance to overcome the perception. Your belief in the mental construction of a separate objective world is an indomitable force that uses up all of your attention. You don't have anything left in the gas tank to see what I'm talking about, even though it is staring you in the face. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 8, 2013 22:53:32 GMT -5
Greetings.. That is your belief about your experiences.. nothing you post is apart from your experiences.. Your criteria for 'real' are arbitrary choices, values chosen to support what you believe.. Experience is all you know, is all 'you' are.. mindplay about what you believe is 'real', is still mindplay subject to the same hallucinations and beliefs that conjure other beliefs about "constant aware space".. Can you suspend those attachments, those beliefs, and just see what 'is', just see clearly? Can you stop telling your story, and just be present? One might tell the story of 'sittin' on the dock of the bay', watchin' the ships sail away.. watching as they seem to vanish into the fog, as if they had "appeared and disappeared".. this is clarity, unattached to beliefs 'about' what is 'seen/experienced', simple clear curiosity about what 'is'.. Be well..
The seeing of what is actually 'known' in this present moment perception, when you push your chair back from the computer and become aware of what you are perceiving, is before beliefs have a chance to overcome the perception.
Your belief in the mental construction of a separate objective world is a indomitable force that uses up all of your attention.
You don't have anything left in the gas tank to see what I'm talking about, even though it is staring you in the face.
LOL.. You are presuming far more than you can possibly 'know'.. please don't mistake my attempts to present alternative perspectives for the lopsided attachments to 'non-duality' and oneness as the totality of my understanding.. try asking rather than judging, unless you favor enigma's highly effective process for inspiring love/joy/ease, etc.. Be well.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2013 22:54:09 GMT -5
The saying goes: that which comes and goes isn't real, only that which is always there is real. In short: Enigma is the real deal!
This knowledge will help me to reduce wastage of your's and my time by commenting on your posts
that i take as a serious statement, when they actually weren't.
Yes, Enigma is very stubborn. No matter how many members team together, Enigma won't move an inch. And this is going on since years. So many witch hunts, so many crusades.... but Enigma is still here. If you look into his post history since his first month here, you will see that nothing has changed since then. Only the witch hunters and crusaders come and go. What is that telling us? The saying goes: that which comes and goes isn't real, only that which is always there is real. In short: Enigma is the real deal!
Amen and Hallelujah!
According to my understanding of the phrase, "in their right mind"...it appears you just stated you think enigma is either insane or can't think clearly. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2013 23:01:44 GMT -5
What is experienced with clarity and a still open mind is not Real.
Experiences appear and disappear, they are not persistent nor do they have an independent existence.
What is Real is that which does not appear and disappear.
That 'constant' aware space in which all experiences are seen.
Experiences come and go, but you are always here, now as this moment.
Your the only thing less thing that's Real in this room.
That is your belief about your experiences.. nothing you post is apart from your experiences.. Your criteria for 'real' are arbitrary choices, values chosen to support what you believe.. Experience is all you know, is all 'you' are.. mindplay about what you believe is 'real', is still mindplay subject to the same hallucinations and beliefs that conjure other beliefs about "constant aware space".. Can you suspend those attachments, those beliefs, and just see what 'is', just see clearly? Can you stop telling your story, and just be present? One might tell the story of 'sittin' on the dock of the bay', watchin' the ships sail away.. watching as they seem to vanish into the fog, as if they had "appeared and disappeared".. this is clarity, unattached to beliefs 'about' what is 'seen/experienced', simple clear curiosity about what 'is'.. Be well.. To see 'what is', to see clearly, to realize, is not an experience. Realization is timeless for starters, meaning it isn't a story unfolding for the mind or a concept being formed. There isn't, directly, any information contained in realization, and it is not a realization of 'something', but more like the revealing of the boundaries of what was believed. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 8, 2013 23:18:43 GMT -5
You are prolific in posts and words, but they are empty, and not enough for seeing with clarity. Such a definition of realization which you made for the sake of making somthin shows where you come from: from the place of delusion where only you is important and the rest of the people do not exist. Your definition is again wasting of time to read it : "there is no information contained in realization", but "more like the revealing of boundaries" - which IS information.
|
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 8, 2013 23:31:48 GMT -5
Greetings.. That is your belief about your experiences.. nothing you post is apart from your experiences.. Your criteria for 'real' are arbitrary choices, values chosen to support what you believe.. Experience is all you know, is all 'you' are.. mindplay about what you believe is 'real', is still mindplay subject to the same hallucinations and beliefs that conjure other beliefs about "constant aware space".. Can you suspend those attachments, those beliefs, and just see what 'is', just see clearly? Can you stop telling your story, and just be present? One might tell the story of 'sittin' on the dock of the bay', watchin' the ships sail away.. watching as they seem to vanish into the fog, as if they had "appeared and disappeared".. this is clarity, unattached to beliefs 'about' what is 'seen/experienced', simple clear curiosity about what 'is'.. Be well.. I really wish you were open to a direct honest and respectful discussion that followed this perspective to its natural conclusion, but.. i have learned that you value your ideologies more than exploring the possibilities of expanding awareness.. You arrive at discussions with the intentions of advancing your agenda, assuming that you already understand more than others, which shuts-down open communications.. and, even among those that agree with your beliefs, they are tolerated only in supporting roles.. without others to disagree wit, you soon turn on former supporters.. You have touched on an interesting issue, it's unfortunate that you aren't equipped to actually explore the implications.. yes, yes, i know, we will fire volley after volley, until you find the will to have those open, honest, and respectful discussions.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2013 23:37:27 GMT -5
Greetings.. To see 'what is', to see clearly, to realize, is not an experience. Realization is timeless for starters, meaning it isn't a story unfolding for the mind or a concept being formed. There isn't, directly, any information contained in realization, and it is not a realization of 'something', but more like the revealing of the boundaries of what was believed. I really wish you were open to a direct honest and respectful discussion that followed this perspective to its natural conclusion, but.. i have learned that you value your ideologies more than exploring the possibilities of expanding awareness.. You arrive at discussions with the intentions of advancing your agenda, assuming that you already understand more than others, which shuts-down open communications.. and, even among those that agree with your beliefs, they are tolerated only in supporting roles.. without others to disagree wit, you soon turn on former supporters.. You have touched on an interesting issue, it's unfortunate that you aren't equipped to actually explore the implications.. yes, yes, i know, we will fire volley after volley, until you find the will to have those open, honest, and respectful discussions.. Be well.. I'm not the one who just shut down any possibility of having such a discussion. I'm not the one who arrived at the discussion with an agenda. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 8, 2013 23:41:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. I really wish you were open to a direct honest and respectful discussion that followed this perspective to its natural conclusion, but.. i have learned that you value your ideologies more than exploring the possibilities of expanding awareness.. You arrive at discussions with the intentions of advancing your agenda, assuming that you already understand more than others, which shuts-down open communications.. and, even among those that agree with your beliefs, they are tolerated only in supporting roles.. without others to disagree wit, you soon turn on former supporters.. You have touched on an interesting issue, it's unfortunate that you aren't equipped to actually explore the implications.. yes, yes, i know, we will fire volley after volley, until you find the will to have those open, honest, and respectful discussions.. Be well.. I'm not the one who just shut down any possibility of having such a discussion. I'm not the one who arrived at the discussion with an agenda. See what i mean, it's 'never' you, and.. when it is you.. you decide you're 'done' with whatever label suits your escape.. Be well.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 0:33:01 GMT -5
Enigma's style and message hasn't changed one bit since he signed up here. I had a look into his first couple of posts here. So why is it sometimes a problem and sometimes not? That's food for thought. It can't be really about Enigma. 
This here...I can envision Mr. Spock raising an eyebrow and saying, "Reefs, your logic is unsound."
This here...I could do the whole Mr. Spock thing again, but i won't. Seriously? You reason that if something never changes, it can't be the source, or part of the problem.
Word to your logic, reefs.
if my nose accuses others of harmful behavior without offering evidence to support it's accusations,
if my nose tells other's their mind is messed up or they can't see clearly, without providing evidence to back up it's claims,
if my nose describes and refers to others in derogative terms, ie, disrespectful and rude, then yeah, my nose is part of the problem.
But of course, no one's nose is capable of doing any of that, so please use an analogy that fits the issue being discussed.
You reason that if something has not changed, it can't be a part of the problem.
Ok, Hypomathematical:
Every person who has ever set foot in this forum who states that they exist as a separate individual
has been told by enigma that they are wrong, deluded/lost in illusion, and they don't know what they are talking about.
And if he's in high spirits, he may mock them to their face or in conversation with another.
And he tells them in his usual style of insensitivity, disrepectfullness, arrogance( I'm right and you are wrong and that's all there is to it), and close mindedness ( will not discuss the issue and maintains his view is the correct one.)
Now, out of all the people who interacted with enigma, a percentage were offended and a percentage were not.
That some had a problem with enigma's attitude and some not.
You claim because enigma has never changed his attitude, that their's nothing wrong with it within the parameters of social interaction.
And it's the ones who were offended and confront enigma about his attitude that are the ones with a problem.
But that is not the only answer because it could be that the ones who did not express they were offended,
saw enigma's unsociable attitude and simply chose to not say anything, because of different reasons. Sociable - Pleasant, friendly, and affable. Pleasant:- Pleasing in manner, behavior, or appearance. - Fair and comfortable: Affable:- Easy and pleasant to speak to; approachable. - Gentle and gracious: an affable smile. - Showing warmth and friendliness; kindly; mild; benign - Easy to converse with; approachable; amicable Gracious:- Characterized by kindness and warm courtesy. - Characterized by tact and propriety. - Of a merciful or compassionate nature. My reasoning is if enigma stopped being insensitive, disrepectful, arrogant and closed minded,
i am quite sure the number of people responding with offense would greatly reduce.
But it's all academic because enigma has no intention of changing because he is convinced he is not doing anything socially unacceptable,
and he will simply state that others are blackmailing him into changing.
Oh, one more thing.
It can also be reasoned that if a problem persists, even if it's intermittent, like the one discussed here, enigma's and other's interactions.
Then the consistant thing can be the problem.
If enigma's attitude is the problem, then the problem will only manifest when another has an issue with it.
Hence why i state your logic is unsound. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 0:37:30 GMT -5
Yeah, one eventually includes the self in that love,
Love is huge and awesome, but a self is bigger and even more awesome to include love in one's being. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 0:41:11 GMT -5
Being in love means never having to say you're sorry.
Trite but rather profound and also apropo.
For the record, I interjected into E's talk with the Goat in the "Seeker" thread before I read Reef's reply to him here. 
edit: i can time wasting! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 1:47:12 GMT -5
Yeah, one eventually includes the self in that love, and then the doormat role is set aside. One might even catch a glimpse of the fire of genuine Love and the old ideas of what love is will start to crumble.
I am only interested in the "twisting" one.
If all humans interpret reality, and my current understanding is that all of us do,
then it's possible enigma is not twisting my words, but is simply doing what comes naturally, interpreting them, and his response is based on his interpretation.
And that his interpretation is vastly different from yours and mine.
In other words, it is possible that enigma is neither intentionally or unintentionally twisting my words to suit his position.
Or to add some more to it. If an interpretation can be so different from another's, it can appear like a twisting.
"How could you possibly get that out of what i just said?" type situation.
Simple, by having a different 'processing of information' system. And this system is developed from one's life experiences.
Perhaps if one grew up in a manipulative family, or were always controled by others and never allowed to speak up for oneself or defend oneself
and one were negatively affected by it, it's quite easy to view my love behavior as a doormat.
Example of interpretation, not twisitng: And i'm sure i shared this story with you before.
I am tone blind, certain colors under certain lighting, and i will see a different color than what is actually there.
The incident is me and my dawta were walking in a car park and she said, "Look at that dark green car", i said, "Oh you mean that black car?"
My dawta interprets reality and sees a dark green car. I interpret reality and i see it's black. There is no "twisting" to suit anyone's position.
It's simply each person has a unique way of viewing the world.
If enigma and reefs see my behavior in my story about my mum as me being a doormat,
then that is the conclusions they have developed along their own journey from their life experiences.
I take it that they are simply expressing how they see it.
If this is part of their understanding of love, then that is their understanding.
It does not bother me if they read my story and conclude i am a doormat.
It's their interpretation of reality and not mine.
I can't change the way they see things, nor do i want to or have to. If that's what they see, then that's what they see, and i assume they consider their conclusions are true.
Not a problem. I will continue to love me mum regardless of what enigma or reefs or anyone else thinks of my interpretation of love.
The proof is in the experience. As i see me mum respond positively to my love, i will continue to love this way.
If she responds negatively, then i will re-examine my conclusions and change what needs changing.
I do not need to know the aleged absolute truth about love, i simply need to love according to my understanding
and change whatever needs changing if my love does not benefit all involved.
Enigma and reefs are entitled to their opinions just like everyone else.
And even if they were twisting to suit their position of the need to be right, it still wouldn't bother me because my position is abundant with love.
It's like the incident with my brother while i was living with him and his family while i rehabed after getting out of the psych ward.
I was drivng him somewheres, and he's a bit of a race nut, so he's ranting at me that i am not holding the steering wheel correctly.
I smile and ask him, "Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?"
"No", hes says, and i said, "Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
"NO NO NO...oh you idiot, that's not what i mean. The correct way to hold a steering wheel is..."
and he goes off on this long and technical rant about how you gotta have your hands here, and the seat must be adjusted as such and such,
and your elbows must be at this height and angle... blah blah blah and blah.
So he finishes his long and passionate rant and i smile and say,
"Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?
No? Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
And now his arms start flailing up in the air, "OOOH, NO, YOU ARE NOT HOLDING IT RIGHT, WHY CAN"T YOU GET THAT IN YOUR THICK HEAD"
And i'm laughing by now and i say, "Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?
No? Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
Poor old brother could not accept anything beyond his own conclusions. It's his way or it's wrong.
The other funny part about that experience is, i just got out of the nuthouse and he's the one behaving like a mad hatter.
And i'm currently having a jolly good laugh as i've been writing all this down...ahh, reminising the good timesYep, finally responded to reefs a page back.EDIT: slight clarify n spelled |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 9, 2013 2:03:11 GMT -5
That's quite the brazen assumption about M-G - I think it's a common mistake when you've got your nose in the air. To twist someone's words in such an extreme way such as this, it's a prime example of what Arisha's been talking about. I knew it would come along sooner or later...
I am only interested in the "twisting" one.
If all humans interpret reality, and my current understanding is that all of us do,
then it's possible enigma is not twisting my words, but is simply doing what comes naturally, interpreting them, and his response is based on his interpretation.
And that his interpretation is vastly different from yours and mine.
In other words, it is possible that enigma is neither intentionally or unintentionally twisting my words to suit his position.
Or to add some more to it. If an interpretation can be so different from another's, it can appear like a twisting.
"How could you possibly get that out of what i just said?" type situation.
Simple, by having a different processing of information system. And this system is developed from one''s life exeperiences.
Perhaps if you grew up in a manipulative family, or were always controled by others and never allowed to speak up for yourself or defend yourself
and you were negatively affected by it, it's quite easy to view my love behavior as a doormat.
Example of interpretation, not twisitng: And i'm sure i shared this story with you before.
I am tone blind, certain colors under certain lighting, and i will see a different color than what is actually there.
The incident is me and my dawta were walking in a car park and she said, "Look at that dark green car", i said, "Oh you mean that black car?"
My dawta interprets reality and sees a dark green car. I interpret reality and i see it's black. There is no "twisting" to suit anyone's position.
It's simply each person has a unique way of viewing the world.
If enigma and reefs see my behavior in my story about my mum as me being a doormat,
then that is the conclusions they have developed along their own journey from their life experiences.
I take it that they are simply expressing how they see it.
If this is part of their understanding of love, then that is their understanding.
It does not bother me if they read my story and conclude i am a doormat.
It's their interpretation of reality and not mine.
I can't change the way they see things, nor do i want to or have to. If that's what they see, then that's what they see, and i assume they consider their conclusions as being true.
Not a problem. I will continue to love me mum regardless of what enigma or reefs or anyone else thinks of my interpretation of love.
The proof is in the experience. As i see me mum respond positively to my love, i will continue to love this way.
If she responds negatively, then i will re-examine my conclusions and change what needs changing.
I do not need to know the aleged absolute truth about love, i simply need to love according to my understanding
and change whatever needs changing if my love does not benefit all involved.
Enigma and reefs are entitled to their opinions just like everyone else.
And even if they were twisting to suit their position of the need to be right, still doesn't bother me, because my position is abundant with love.
It's like the incident with my brother while i was living with him and his family while i rehabed after getting out of the psych ward.
I was drivng him somewheres, and he's a bit of a race nut, so he's ranting at me that i am not holding the steering wheel correctly.
I smile and ask him, "Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?"
"No", hes says, and i said, "Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
"NO NO NO...oh you idiot, that's not what i mean. The correct way to hold a steering wheel is..."
and he goes off on this long and technical rant about how you gotta have your hands here, and the seat must be adjusted as such and such,
and your elbows must be at this height... blah blah blah and blah.
So he finishes his long and passionate rant and i smile and say,
"Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?
No? Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
And now his arms start flailing up in the air, "OOOH, NO, YOU ARE NOT HOLDING IT RIGHT, WHY CAN"T YOU GET THAT IN YOUR THICK HEAD"
And i'm laughing by now and i say, "Have we driven off the road, have we hit a tree or other cars?
No? Well, i must be holding the steering wheel correctly then."
Poor old brother could not accept anything beyond his own conclusions. It's his way or it's wrong.
The other funny part about that experience is, i just got out of the nuthouse and he's the one behaving like a mad hatter.
And i'm currently having a jolly good laugh as i've been write all this down...ahh, reminising the good timesYep, finally responded to reefs a page back.Thanks. That helps me to understand a bit how folks see twisting in what I say. Yes, Love is seen radically differently now, though I understand the expression of love that you're talking about. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 2:13:14 GMT -5
You just did it - again! Wow, I'm gonna be sick of that word - in fact already am. I"m not even gonna ask what in blazes you mean.
No, it's my intuition that he would examine that notion if he had any previous wonderings about it.
I don't know exactly where he talks about what he believes love is, but I tend to think from what I've read of his, that self love comes first and foremost. He may draw the line there, though.
Well, that's the problemo. Self love doesn't look for ways to take abuse and not react. This is abusive to the self and not loving.
When i love myself and others, then other's abusive language is not felt as abuse by me.
And because of this fact in my life, i am not abusing myself.
There is no abuse felt by me.
It's ok to me if you see a problem. I experience none in these situations.
What you see and what i experience are two separate and different things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2013 2:23:50 GMT -5
Of course on the other hand, I can imagine-up the idea that not all imagination is created equal stated by the following cliche:
if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and smells like a duck, then it's a duck.
it seems to me that trf's allegation that enigma's report was egoic is based in the following idea:
In the absence of ego, there are no post reports.
On the face of this it seems reasonable, rational and sane, although dig a bit deeper and it implicates a ghostly host.
For one thing, it can lead to the speculation on scenarios of the "egoless-report", and then we have to start slicing and dicing things up, for instance, to differentiate a random-click on the link in error that has no associated complaint.
That differentiation of a "null-report" leads to an interesting point: perhaps we can examine the details of the complaint for evidence of ego?
Well of course the answer to this is "yes, we can" ... but how do we do this without imagination?
In the end:
"In the absence of ego, there are no post reports" is ultimately a call to prove a negative: the absence of ego.
It is my stated explicit imagined state of affairs that the whole shooting match makes for some deep and satisfying comedy .... and oh yeah ...
if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and smells like a duck .... then it is clearly an imaginary duck! EDIT: fontsize |
|
