|
Post by acewall on Nov 21, 2013 8:00:06 GMT -5
I still see no removal from my experience in saying I see one side of the coin and I feel the other. That Harding guy is cool. Thanks for that. Have you given any thought to counterfeit? How does one go about making coinage?
|
|
|
Post by acewall on Nov 21, 2013 8:01:33 GMT -5
when the British arrived in Fremantle, Perth, they brought greed along with them from England. Suppose it went to America too? I see greed as a mental-illness.For Greed to flourish in WA, the Crown had to kill-off the Natives who were living here(50,000-80,000years) and shipped heaps across to Rottnest where the Colonies-religious eyes couldn't see what was going-on. (Out of sight out of Mind) The Crown murdered heaps, but many-more of the aborigines died from the diseases the English brought with them. (wont go into that) Greed is cultured by Self-ignorance. “No government likes the clever and the honourable men, because it is impossible to bridle them; they are independent!” Greed seems more to do with Males than Females for some reason...perhaps due to their nuturing nature. Men(cavemen incarnated)still claim more toys than their share within todays Playcentre-sandpits. More Power to Women, they have a big job ahead of them. Same scenario played out in North America, including wiping out the native 'savage' population through war and disease, plus the introduction of slavery. Seems the British didn't think very highly of the non-British. people in Power do nasty things. How embarrassing some ppl are!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 21, 2013 15:00:42 GMT -5
I still see no removal from my experience in saying I see one side of the coin and I feel the other.That Harding guy is cool. Thanks for that. Then literally ... let go of the coin.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 22, 2013 1:21:09 GMT -5
I still see no removal from my experience in saying I see one side of the coin and I feel the other.That Harding guy is cool. Thanks for that. Then literally ... let go of the coin. :) The irony of it is, it's an imaginary scenario and I don't actually have a coin on my hand in the first place...
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 22, 2013 1:22:25 GMT -5
I still see no removal from my experience in saying I see one side of the coin and I feel the other. That Harding guy is cool. Thanks for that. Have you given any thought to counterfeit? How does one go about making coinage?No, I hadn't thought of counterfeit coins and I don't know how coins are made.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Nov 22, 2013 1:23:32 GMT -5
Then literally ... let go of the coin. The irony of it is, it's an imaginary scenario and I don't actually have a coin on my hand in the first place... yeah it is pretty funny
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 22, 2013 9:26:06 GMT -5
Then literally ... let go of the coin. The irony of it is, it's an imaginary scenario and I don't actually have a coin on my hand in the first place... Then the advice applies all the more so!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 22, 2013 11:47:05 GMT -5
Greetings.. Tzu,. either you're not telling the truth, or you have some fundamental issues with how you perceive the world. Tea only has a temperature when you take a sip. When its on the table in front of you, or across the room, or in another country,. you can't perceive the temperature. To say that its hot/cold/whatever, you need to go back to thoughts. There is nothing wrong with that, but its not what you are directly experiencing through your senses. A lemon is bitter when you bite it, dog nuts smells when you sniff it. You yourself have argued a similar point about the painting above the computer in your room. No one (unless they are some kind of remote viewing freak) can tell you what it is. This is no different to perceiving the reverse side of a coin etc etc etc. "the direct experience has no reference to advance to the imagining of there being no side to the coin.. " All I see is you disappearing further and further into mental abstractions and story-land to try and maintain your view of the world. There's a disconnect in our understandings.. no, i'm not telling 'the truth', i'm relating what is actually happening.. you din't understand the fundamental point of the 'painting' question, it's not directly related to the coin illusion.. Al i see is you firmly attached to a belief about 'direct experience', when.. as i've tried to demonstrate, direct experience has no link to the mind's coin/illusion story generating process.. and, it's just not worth the hard-feelings matters like this often end up as, so.. i'm just going to disagree, i understand the message you are conveying, and it has a useful 'point', but it is not 'reality'.. Be well.. It's possible to separate what is perceived with the senses from what is thought/assumed/concluded about that. It's not a recommendation to pretend to not know, or to ignore your past experience. The point is simply to recognize the difference between what you sense, and what you think and feel about what you sense. One reason for making that distinction is that we often come to believe that what we think and feel about what is actually happening, is objectively happening, and this can lead to struggle and suffering.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2013 12:16:33 GMT -5
Greetings.. There's a disconnect in our understandings.. no, i'm not telling 'the truth', i'm relating what is actually happening.. you din't understand the fundamental point of the 'painting' question, it's not directly related to the coin illusion.. Al i see is you firmly attached to a belief about 'direct experience', when.. as i've tried to demonstrate, direct experience has no link to the mind's coin/illusion story generating process.. and, it's just not worth the hard-feelings matters like this often end up as, so.. i'm just going to disagree, i understand the message you are conveying, and it has a useful 'point', but it is not 'reality'.. Be well.. It's possible to separate what is perceived with the senses from what is thought/assumed/concluded about that. It's not a recommendation to pretend to not know, or to ignore your past experience. The point is simply to recognize the difference between what you sense, and what you think and feel about what you sense. One reason for making that distinction is that we often come to believe that what we think and feel about what is actually happening, is objectively happening, and this can lead to struggle and suffering. There is only BEING, only WHOLENESS, so there is NO separation between perception and thoughts about perception.... Your affirming the dualistic ILLUSION of a SEPARATE me, an I, or a self, that RECOGNIZES the difference between senses HAPPENING, and thoughts about senses HAPPENING... There is no YOU in which recognizing or not recognizing the difference can lead to struggle and suffering... There is just WHAT'S HAPPENING...
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 22, 2013 17:28:15 GMT -5
The irony of it is, it's an imaginary scenario and I don't actually have a coin on my hand in the first place... Then the advice applies all the more so! I didn't ask for advice.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 22, 2013 18:42:45 GMT -5
It's possible to separate what is perceived with the senses from what is thought/assumed/concluded about that. It's not a recommendation to pretend to not know, or to ignore your past experience. The point is simply to recognize the difference between what you sense, and what you think and feel about what you sense. One reason for making that distinction is that we often come to believe that what we think and feel about what is actually happening, is objectively happening, and this can lead to struggle and suffering. There is only BEING, only WHOLENESS, so there is NO separation between perception and thoughts about perception.... Your affirming the dualistic ILLUSION of a SEPARATE me, an I, or a self, that RECOGNIZES the difference between senses HAPPENING, and thoughts about senses HAPPENING... There is no YOU in which recognizing or not recognizing the difference can lead to struggle and suffering... There is just WHAT'S HAPPENING... It's not separation, it's distinction, like the distinctions you're making in your post as well.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 22, 2013 18:47:59 GMT -5
Then the advice applies all the more so! I didn't ask for advice. I know ... I mean, would you have taken it from some dude on an internet forum with the login name laughter anyway?
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 22, 2013 20:44:27 GMT -5
I know ... I mean, would you have taken it from some dude on an internet forum with the login name laughter anyway? Mmmmm... that's a point. E says my posts are something other that exemplary and Jo said something similar, but I think I speak about things in depth, and even though little truisms like 'suffering is attachment' are really really easy to understand, and they really do sound like widom, and there is some degree of truth to it, I speak of different kinds of attachment separation anxiety, nature nurture... and condisering the detail, my posts are like totes brief... G-string even. When it came to emotions and feelings etc... I merely explained that there are natural responses (I called reflexes) and there are personal reactions... I elaborated on the nature of these to portray the difference, I also mentioned how the reflex passes quickly but people generate reaction after reaction and keep on doing it. I think what people miss is, it's not me who rabbits on for ages. I express my thoughts in one post (in response to like 10 pages of little posts on the subject (though I tend to ignore the bunny posts because motion on the page make reading more difficult). So as a little one liner "My one post is far shorter that the pages upon pages of little tiny ones" (and I think they have better quality content, but I'm biased of course, so there is no validity to this statement... hence, not worth saying really, therefore not worth deleting) hehehe
|
|
|
Post by silence on Nov 22, 2013 20:47:22 GMT -5
There is only BEING, only WHOLENESS, so there is NO separation between perception and thoughts about perception.... Your affirming the dualistic ILLUSION of a SEPARATE me, an I, or a self, that RECOGNIZES the difference between senses HAPPENING, and thoughts about senses HAPPENING... There is no YOU in which recognizing or not recognizing the difference can lead to struggle and suffering... There is just WHAT'S HAPPENING... It's not separation, it's distinction, like the distinctions you're making in your post as well. He's in full mantra mode. Best to just ignore.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 22, 2013 20:50:17 GMT -5
I know ... I mean, would you have taken it from some dude on an internet forum with the login name laughter anyway? Mmmmm... that's a point. E says my posts are something other that exemplary and Jo said something similar, but I think I speak about things in depth, and even though little truisms like 'suffering is attachment' are really really easy to understand, and they really do sound like widom, and there is some degree of truth to it, I speak of different kinds of attachment separation anxiety, nature nurture... and condisering the detail, my posts are like totes brief... G-string even. When it came to emotions and feelings etc... I merely explained that there are natural responses (I called reflexes) and there are personal reactions... I elaborated on the nature of these to portray the difference, I also mentioned how the reflex passes quickly but people generate reaction after reaction and keep on doing it. I think what people miss is, it's not me who rabbits on for ages. I express my thoughts in one post (in response to like 10 pages of little posts on the subject (though I tend to ignore the bunny posts because motion on the page make reading more difficult). So as a little one liner "My one post is far shorter that the pages upon pages of little tiny ones" (and I think they have better quality content, but I'm biased of course, so there is no validity to this statement... hence, not worth saying really, therefore not worth deleting) hehehe I've enjoyed pretty much everything you've written, even the stuff where you sideswipe me and the girl gang. Do you think that everyone who used the bunny intended the exact same meaning and intended the same meaning each time they used it?
|
|