|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 18:40:09 GMT -5
The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. Why not? People are born turned for this or that. Some people have an interest in philosophizing, and it doesn't depend on their feeling at peace with the world or not. What is really absurd is the irrelevant philosophizing which is about nothing. So it's okay to be interested in philosophy just not philosophy about nothing? Even if nothing is the source of everything? That's what I would call absurd... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 19:48:51 GMT -5
It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? I haven't experienced a lot of things. Are you saying that experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening? You asked I'm saying change the internal conditions and you change your experience. That's the whole point. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 30, 2012 20:10:09 GMT -5
It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? I haven't experienced a lot of things. Are you saying that experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening? I would say (if I may interject, here) that one can't really "be at peace with whatever is happening" until they first realize that there's no one really experiencing anything. (Edit: oh, sh*t, I'm starting to sound like E.  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Mar 30, 2012 20:12:32 GMT -5
The way I see it, is that the dream is unique for each individual.(uses the term loosely) So it seems to me, the the dream must be a projection of my inner condition. And if I feel at peace with the projection, which is the world I see, there doesn't seem to be any interest in philosophizing. But I can only speculate that there may exist in someone the dream of separation and suffering. If so, than perhaps there may or may not be the interest in seeking a resolution to the suffering. But I can't say what someones dream is like, so I really don't know, and neither does anybody else. Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? What if one has no interpretation, but just ... witnesses the dream as it is? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 20:29:27 GMT -5
I haven't experienced a lot of things. Are you saying that experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening? I would say (if I may interject, here) that one can't really "be at peace with whatever is happening" until they first realize that there's no one really experiencing anything. (Edit: oh, sh*t, I'm starting to sound like E. ) Must be why Mr G is after you too. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 20:34:23 GMT -5
It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? What if one has no interpretation, but just ... witnesses the dream as it is? Then I would say one is attending the axchual. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 21:07:10 GMT -5
I haven't experienced a lot of things. Are you saying that experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening? You asked I'm saying change the internal conditions and you change your experience. That's the whole point. Actually I was asking Arisha. I know where you stand on the issue E. Although you dodged the question of whether experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening. On that point I'm not sure of your position. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 21:11:14 GMT -5
It's the interpretation of the dream that changes along with the internal conditions. Have you never experienced that? What if one has no interpretation, but just ... witnesses the dream as it is? Well than I would have to call you Mr Buddha... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 22:04:35 GMT -5
Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D I think the soul is always in peace. The soul doesn't change, it remains the same always. What internal condition are you speaking about? Emotional condition? It can be changed if one tries to feel their soul, then tries to enlarge this feeling. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 22:39:00 GMT -5
You asked I'm saying change the internal conditions and you change your experience. That's the whole point. Actually I was asking Arisha. I know where you stand on the issue E. Although you dodged the question of whether experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening. On that point I'm not sure of your position. Being at peace with whatever is happening requires the experience of being at peace with what's happening. How can you be at peace and not experience being at peace? How would you even know? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 30, 2012 22:44:27 GMT -5
Perhaps within the dream, the seeking of philosophy and the teaching of it are attempts at changing the dream into one of Peace instead of suffering. Which to me seems impossible. So can the internal condition change to reflect a new projection of the world? A world in which one sees Peace and not suffering? It seems like a valid question to ask. Of course, it's a topic of much discussion and plenty of philosophizing... ;D I think the soul is always in peace. The soul doesn't change, it remains the same always. What internal condition are you speaking about? Emotional condition? It can be changed if one tries to feel their soul, then tries to enlarge this feeling. There isn't actually a soul that's always at peace. There's just mind identification and the absence of mind identification. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Mar 30, 2012 23:15:07 GMT -5
Actually I was asking Arisha. I know where you stand on the issue E. Although you dodged the question of whether experiencing or not experiencing something is a prerequisite for being at peace with whatever is happening. On that point I'm not sure of your position. Being at peace with whatever is happening requires the experience of being at peace with what's happening. How can you be at peace and not experience being at peace? How would you even know? To me anyway, being at peace with what's happening involves a kinda of conceptual remembering, because obviously no one is totally at peace with whatever is happening all the time. I just thought that you meant there was a series of experiences a person went through, finally arriving at the experience of being peaceful, as possible, with whatever was happening. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 30, 2012 23:51:50 GMT -5
I think the soul is always in peace. The soul doesn't change, it remains the same always. What internal condition are you speaking about? Emotional condition? It can be changed if one tries to feel their soul, then tries to enlarge this feeling. There isn't actually a soul that's always at peace. There's just mind identification and the absence of mind identification. Doesn't matter how to call it. I just use a term, soul, to be able to speak on the subject. It is more convinient to use this short word than a whole definition of what is meant in case we speak about the inner condition. Mind identification is implanted from the outside of the brain. So, it can be called a soul, as it is equivalent to what is meant by the soul. The soul is also implanted by God when He creates life, living beings, making them alive, giving them this 'mind' identification. All these speculations about spiritual things are always highly metaphorical, and cannot be other than that. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Mar 30, 2012 23:56:42 GMT -5
Being at peace with whatever is happening requires the experience of being at peace with what's happening. How can you be at peace and not experience being at peace? How would you even know? To me anyway, being at peace with what's happening involves a kinda of conceptual remembering, because obviously no one is totally at peace with whatever is happening all the time. Conceptual remembering of what? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 31, 2012 0:06:05 GMT -5
Being at peace with whatever is happening requires the experience of being at peace with what's happening. How can you be at peace and not experience being at peace? How would you even know? To me anyway, being at peace with what's happening involves a kinda of conceptual remembering, because obviously no one is totally at peace with whatever is happening all the time. What sort of remembering are you referring to? Gnaw, not really. |
|
)
