|
|
Post by Portto on Mar 27, 2012 8:51:45 GMT -5
Now you have to provide one more crown. Keep them coming! A crown? What do you mean a crown? Can I have a definition please hehe? You're the one who keeps saying that I'm "reign-ifying" stuff. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 8:52:14 GMT -5
There aint no thing to be exposed. And yet here we are talking as if there is. Its madness. But kinda fun. Never trust a pointerer who isnt happy to admit their delusion in pointing. Never trust a pointerer that thinks they've got it all sewn up. We are exposing our cluelessness while trying to expose our "real nature." Reification of 'real nature' there. Thats more delusion. As long as you are okay with your delusion, thats fine with me. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Mar 27, 2012 8:54:35 GMT -5
We are exposing our cluelessness while trying to expose our "real nature." Reification of 'real nature' there. Thats more delusion. As long as you are okay with your delusion, thats fine with me. Three crowns is the maximum I can take in a day. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 9:00:05 GMT -5
A crown? What do you mean a crown? Can I have a definition please hehe? You're the one who keeps saying that I'm "reign-ifying" stuff. ;D ;D You are! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2012 9:01:47 GMT -5
thanks! Hmm, well...I see no contradiction here. By definition a pointer directs ones attention away from itself. The pointer is not the Truth, it (perhaps feebly) points there. Well, depends what the pointer is pointing towards when it's pointing away from itself. If it's merely saying something about mind, then that's fine. But when the pointer is saying something about oneness or 'what is' then there is a contradiction, because oneness can't be known, therefore it can't be pointed to. No pointer known to man can point to something inconceivable. When you say that the pointer is pointing to something inconceivable then actually you have made yourself a model and you're pointing to that model. But the model is so complex that you've confuzzled yourself in the process and believe that it's true. "No pointer known to man can point to something inconceivable." Nonconceptual awareness That which is inconceivable Nothing Emptiness .... "But when the pointer is saying something about oneness or 'what is' then there is a contradiction, because oneness can't be known, therefore it can't be pointed to." This is true: Oneness can't be known. But why can't it be pointed to? I still don't understand. Here's a pointer to Oneness: Nonduality. Not-two, yada yada. I think of pointers as just like traffic signs. When I say that they point away from themselves, I'm picturing a sign pointing away from itself. I'm not thinking of the scarecrow in wizard of the Oz who actually, despite no brain, can sing and dance.  |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 27, 2012 9:03:10 GMT -5
What is the 'real you'? How to use it as a basis for a teaching? Are you sure you know WHAT your 'real you' is? You can't use it. You can't know it. You can only be 'it.' But you've just said 'the real you' can be the basis for the teaching! If I can only 'be it' what the basis of the teaching has to do with it?? Yes, I can only be it. Then again there is no basis for the teaching?! What is the teaching based on? On the absence of ideas about it? on the absence of definitions regarding what its core is? Then what is it used for if it is deliberately fake? To make a fool, an idiot of me? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 9:06:28 GMT -5
Reification of 'real nature' there. Thats more delusion. As long as you are okay with your delusion, thats fine with me. Three crowns is the maximum I can take in a day. Ah, dont go, this is fun. People are told to look at the moon and not the finger, and there may be value in that sometimes, but often it sets up a greater delusion if the reality of the moon is believed. Which it usually is. Then what we have is peeps going through the day directing their attention to something which cant be perceived, or attended to, because it doesnt bloody exist! In the meantime, life is missed out on. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Mar 27, 2012 9:08:43 GMT -5
If straightforward and coherent definitions cannot be made, it means there is no basis for any 'teaching', it is fake and is used to fool out people. The only basis is the 'real you.' I can only 'be it'. This 'real you' cannot be the basis for the teaching, or theory. A teaching without basis cannot teach anything. Pointing and making gestures cannot explain what teaching is about. Those who say they can just make fools of people. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Mar 27, 2012 9:09:50 GMT -5
You can't use it. You can't know it. You can only be 'it.' But you've just said 'the real you' can be the basis for the teaching! If I can only 'be it' what the basis of the teaching has to do with it?? Yes, I can only be it. Then again there is no basis for the teaching?! What is the teaching based on? On the absence of ideas about it? on the absence of definitions regarding what its core is? Then what is it used for if it is deliberately fake? To make a fool, an idiot of me? Arisha: until you find a thing that doesn't change, none of this will make any sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Mar 27, 2012 9:11:35 GMT -5
Three crowns is the maximum I can take in a day. Ah, dont go, this is fun. People are told to look at the moon and not the finger, and there may be value in that sometimes, but often it sets up a greater delusion if the reality of the moon is believed. Which it usually is. Then what we have is peeps going through the day directing their attention to something which cant be perceived, or attended to, because it doesnt bloody exist! In the meantime, life is missed out on. Are you trying to say that everything is a dream? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2012 9:22:24 GMT -5
I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. Pointers are used because there is no other thing which can direct someone's attention at what is being spoken about. The definitions themselves are pointers. ? The whole problem is that attention does get constantly directed at what is being spoken about. Well question has crowned you the king of understanding the usefulness and limitations of pointers so now I know where to go for the answer. "Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves." "“You and I are all as much continuous with the physical universe as a wave is continuous with the ocean.” "Past and future are in the mind only - I am now." "Please understand that there is only one thing to be understood, and that is that you are the formless, timeless unborn." What is the problem again? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 9:33:55 GMT -5
Ah, dont go, this is fun. People are told to look at the moon and not the finger, and there may be value in that sometimes, but often it sets up a greater delusion if the reality of the moon is believed. Which it usually is. Then what we have is peeps going through the day directing their attention to something which cant be perceived, or attended to, because it doesnt bloody exist! In the meantime, life is missed out on. Are you trying to say that everything is a dream? Well.....no, because then I am reifying a dreamer. The idea of a dreamer and a dream, or of formless and form CAN be useful for those that believe in an objective reality in which things are believed to exist separately and distinctly. However, beyond that, those dualities are no use, and actually can be a problem. Its an artificial but helpful duality that pointerers set up, a fairy tale that we tell to get people off the starting blocks, thats all. What happens though is that peeps reify formlessness/the dreamer. And that is what is happening sometimes on the forum. No-one on this forum believes in an objective reality in which things exist separately and distinctly. However, I would say there are some who are attached to the duality of formlessness/form and are reifying formlessness (or whatever term is fashionable). There is no formlessness, no dreamer, no 'it' because if it cant be perceived, or attended to, then it doesnt exist. We may speak of a dreamer/formlessness sometimes, and we may point to one, but its a deluded thing to do. If we are at peace with that delusion, no problem. But I think some peeps point thinking that there really IS something to point to, and of course they deny the delusion in doing so because they dont want to see themselves as deluded. There aint nothing wrong with being deluded, and actually I would say its inevitable. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 9:35:35 GMT -5
The whole problem is that attention does get constantly directed at what is being spoken about. Well question has crowned you the king of understanding the usefulness and limitations of pointers so now I know where to go for the answer. "Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves." "“You and I are all as much continuous with the physical universe as a wave is continuous with the ocean.” "Past and future are in the mind only - I am now." "Please understand that there is only one thing to be understood, and that is that you are the formless, timeless unborn." What is the problem again? Believing in the existence of something that doesnt exist. Trying to perceive or attend to something that doesnt exist. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2012 9:40:18 GMT -5
Well question has crowned you the king of understanding the usefulness and limitations of pointers so now I know where to go for the answer. "Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves." "“You and I are all as much continuous with the physical universe as a wave is continuous with the ocean.” "Past and future are in the mind only - I am now." "Please understand that there is only one thing to be understood, and that is that you are the formless, timeless unborn." What is the problem again? Believing in the existence of something that doesnt exist. Trying to perceive or attend to something that doesnt exist. Okay. I don't have a problem with that. First there is a mountain. Umm, but actually the mountain isn't there. <pointer alert!> Then, after lots of seeking, maybe, there is no mountain. Wow, cool. Finally, mountain. I love flirting with danger. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 27, 2012 9:40:40 GMT -5
But you've just said 'the real you' can be the basis for the teaching! If I can only 'be it' what the basis of the teaching has to do with it?? Yes, I can only be it. Then again there is no basis for the teaching?! What is the teaching based on? On the absence of ideas about it? on the absence of definitions regarding what its core is? Then what is it used for if it is deliberately fake? To make a fool, an idiot of me? Arisha: until you find a thing that doesn't change, none of this will make any sense. Some things that dont change: The existence of existence. The oneness of all things. Change itself. |
|
