|
Post by topology on Apr 18, 2014 20:22:48 GMT -5
weeelll we've been over this before maxy, cleverness happens. Sorry dude, a "WHAT??" in reply to the earless bunny ... that was actually purported as genuine perpleximentation, is just too too precious, and really, needs no explanation .. like. At. All. As far as explaining humor is concerned in general, covered that here.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Apr 18, 2014 21:45:59 GMT -5
No clue. It's like that Linji zen quote- If you meet the Buddha, kill him.” Conception thing. Whatever the conception/idea/thought of the buddha/Bliss may be is wrong. I see the point, but I don't really agree with it. There comes a point when the buddha/Bliss is met everywhere. :...i returned to the mantra...:- this is my version of reverse engineering the eat it/kill him thing. My meditation teacher said to me early on- I don't care if you see a full blown incarnation of a dancing blue black Krishna when meditating, return to your mantra. So, I return to the mantra when I disagree with some aphorisms I read here. Yeah, mine is to return to the breath. The whole point being the same point ZD makes - conceptualization ain't it. Still...everything communicated has to be done thru conceptualization and there's value in what's being communicated. The concept is dead matter, what it refers to isn't. (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 18, 2014 23:58:34 GMT -5
(** icy truculent silence **) (** muttley snicker **)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 6:01:13 GMT -5
It's like that Linji zen quote- If you meet the Buddha, kill him.” Conception thing. Whatever the conception/idea/thought of the buddha/Bliss may be is wrong. I see the point, but I don't really agree with it. There comes a point when the buddha/Bliss is met everywhere. :...i returned to the mantra...:- this is my version of reverse engineering the eat it/kill him thing. My meditation teacher said to me early on- I don't care if you see a full blown incarnation of a dancing blue black Krishna when meditating, return to your mantra. So, I return to the mantra when I disagree with some aphorisms I read here. Yeah, mine is to return to the breath. The whole point being the same point ZD makes - conceptualization ain't it. Still...everything communicated has to be done thru conceptualization and there's value in what's being communicated. The concept is dead matter, what it refers to isn't. (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped. Yes, it's the concepts about the concepts that.... Don't know if I'm quite at the 'kill the buddha' thingy. Every now and again the thought still arises- how can one invisible thought be any more or less important than another invisible thought? Which still rezzes coz the same source is at work for stars, brains, and thinking. But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought. Primarily through sound, and feel. It began appearing in that manner around mid-winter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 6:38:04 GMT -5
Yeah, mine is to return to the breath. The whole point being the same point ZD makes - conceptualization ain't it. Still...everything communicated has to be done thru conceptualization and there's value in what's being communicated. The concept is dead matter, what it refers to isn't. (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped. Yes, it's the concepts about the concepts that.... Don't know if I'm quite at the 'kill the buddha' thingy. Every now and again the thought still arises- how can one invisible thought be any more or less important than another invisible thought? Which still rezzes coz the same source is at work for stars, brains, and thinking. But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought. Primarily through sound, and feel. It began appearing in that manner around mid-winter. concise and well written. thank you
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 6:39:36 GMT -5
Yes, it's the concepts about the concepts that.... Don't know if I'm quite at the 'kill the buddha' thingy. Every now and again the thought still arises- how can one invisible thought be any more or less important than another invisible thought? Which still rezzes coz the same source is at work for stars, brains, and thinking. But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought. Primarily through sound, and feel. It began appearing in that manner around mid-winter. concise and well written. thank you What?
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Apr 19, 2014 6:52:01 GMT -5
Yeah, mine is to return to the breath. The whole point being the same point ZD makes - conceptualization ain't it. Still...everything communicated has to be done thru conceptualization and there's value in what's being communicated. The concept is dead matter, what it refers to isn't. (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped. Yes, it's the concepts about the concepts that.... Don't know if I'm quite at the 'kill the buddha' thingy. Every now and again the thought still arises- how can one invisible thought be any more or less important than another invisible thought? Which still rezzes coz the same source is at work for stars, brains, and thinking. But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought. Primarily through sound, and feel. It began appearing in that manner around mid-winter. I don't know about concepts about concepts. Haha, that's a screwy statement. What I mean is, some seem to want to chew on concepts, so there are a lot of words around them. I see the Qualia conversations that way, and the Models conversations. Everyone's such a different package of body and mind and we're all kind of groping around in the dark and seem to have to chew on something until it's fully digested. So those conversations have value to the ones having them. For me, I've seen a lot of push in the direction of whatever (this teacher or that meditation practice or Forget Spirituality!...etc.) and it seems more fruitful to just go ahead and let the desire play out instead of trying to direct it or stop it. Chewing on concepts could result in no concepts left! It just occurred to me that 'kill the Buddha' is probably also referring to not holding Buddha up as a deity or thinking that he's any other than ourselves. Not sure what you mean by "But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought." Are you 'chewing' on the nature of thought? Is it the Soup D'Jour?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 7:17:50 GMT -5
Yes, it's the concepts about the concepts that.... Don't know if I'm quite at the 'kill the buddha' thingy. Every now and again the thought still arises- how can one invisible thought be any more or less important than another invisible thought? Which still rezzes coz the same source is at work for stars, brains, and thinking. But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought. Primarily through sound, and feel. It began appearing in that manner around mid-winter. I don't know about concepts about concepts. Haha, that's a screwy statement. What I mean is, some seem to want to chew on concepts, so there are a lot of words around them. I see the Qualia conversations that way, and the Models conversations. Everyone's such a different package of body and mind and we're all kind of groping around in the dark and seem to have to chew on something until it's fully digested. So those conversations have value to the ones having them. For me, I've seen a lot of push in the direction of whatever (this teacher or that meditation practice or Forget Spirituality!...etc.) and it seems more fruitful to just go ahead and let the desire play out instead of trying to direct it or stop it. Chewing on concepts could result in no concepts left! It just occurred to me that 'kill the Buddha' is probably also referring to not holding Buddha up as a deity or thinking that he's any other than ourselves. Not sure what you mean by "But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought." Are you 'chewing' on the nature of thought? Is it the Soup D'Jour? You mentioned sometimes it's concepts about concepts in the post of yours I responded to... I was agreeing. I'm not so much a chewer of concepts. If something bubbles up when I'm quiet, I'll look at it. Yes! Let the desire play out. It's the only way we can get to the next desire. Agreed on the 'Kill the Buddha" thingy. Hmmm.. chewing on the nature of thought. Nope. It's more like a listening.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 19, 2014 10:35:17 GMT -5
I don't know about concepts about concepts. Haha, that's a screwy statement. What I mean is, some seem to want to chew on concepts, so there are a lot of words around them. I see the Qualia conversations that way, and the Models conversations. Everyone's such a different package of body and mind and we're all kind of groping around in the dark and seem to have to chew on something until it's fully digested. So those conversations have value to the ones having them. For me, I've seen a lot of push in the direction of whatever (this teacher or that meditation practice or Forget Spirituality!...etc.) and it seems more fruitful to just go ahead and let the desire play out instead of trying to direct it or stop it. Chewing on concepts could result in no concepts left! It just occurred to me that 'kill the Buddha' is probably also referring to not holding Buddha up as a deity or thinking that he's any other than ourselves. Not sure what you mean by "But these days I find myself slipping into the subtler aspects/origins of thought." Are you 'chewing' on the nature of thought? Is it the Soup D'Jour? You mentioned sometimes it's concepts about concepts in the post of yours I responded to...
I was agreeing. I'm not so much a chewer of concepts. If something bubbles up when I'm quiet, I'll look at it. Yes! Let the desire play out. It's the only way we can get to the next desire. Agreed on the 'Kill the Buddha" thingy. Hmmm.. chewing on the nature of thought. Nope. It's more like a listening. I'm pretty sure she was saying her own statement was screwy: "I don't know about concepts about concepts."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 10:44:53 GMT -5
You mentioned sometimes it's concepts about concepts in the post of yours I responded to...
I was agreeing. I'm not so much a chewer of concepts. If something bubbles up when I'm quiet, I'll look at it. Yes! Let the desire play out. It's the only way we can get to the next desire. Agreed on the 'Kill the Buddha" thingy. Hmmm.. chewing on the nature of thought. Nope. It's more like a listening. I'm pretty sure she was saying her own statement was screwy: "I don't know about concepts about concepts." (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 20, 2014 3:26:32 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure she was saying her own statement was screwy: "I don't know about concepts about concepts." (Or I should say, might not be. Sometimes it's concepts about concepts - heh heh.) Seems what you're saying is you really do agree with 'kill the Buddha'. That point you mentioned, where it's everywhere, that's the time to let the concept drop. Or probably more precisely, it's already dropped. I'm pretty sure she was referring to her own statement, which I have quoted below. (Her statement that she thinks is screwy) "I don't know about concepts about concepts."<--Quote by Quinn
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 6:37:56 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure she was referring to her own statement, which I have quoted below. (Her statement that she thinks is screwy) "I don't know about concepts about concepts."<--Quote by Quinn Yes, I see you still have the same bone from yesterday morning.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 20, 2014 15:11:10 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure she was referring to her own statement, which I have quoted below. (Her statement that she thinks is screwy) "I don't know about concepts about concepts."<--Quote by Quinn Yes, I see you still have the same bone from yesterday morning. Well, it was a response last night to your post made yesterday morning. Did the statute of limitations run out on that post during the day yesterday?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2014 15:19:13 GMT -5
Yes, I see you still have the same bone from yesterday morning. Well, it was a response last night to your post made yesterday morning. Did the statute of limitations run out on that post during the day yesterday? Bone's a bone. You own it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 20, 2014 17:29:24 GMT -5
Well, it was a response last night to your post made yesterday morning. Did the statute of limitations run out on that post during the day yesterday? Bone's a bone. You own it. But you brought it up. I was just trying to clarify your misunderstanding for you. You're welcome.
|
|