Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2013 16:21:58 GMT -5
"Sincerity" is so thoroughly defined that there's a whole thread dedicated to it. After reading through, it seems as though one's level of sincerity will be deemed absent if there is : a need to be right, need to control, need to entertain or be entertained, need to socialize, need to be liked, need to acquire knowledge or need to look enlightened, (all of course are in the eye of the beholder). Reefs very strongly expressed his dissatisfaction with this forum and you yourself regularly express your frustration with the nonsense and drama and such. Even in what you say above, I get the sense that you favor the flavor of your own forum....even more reason why I am baffled that you are spending more time here than there. And don't get me wrong. I have no interest in getting you to leave. I'm pretty clear on the fact that in order to have forum discussion, divergence of opinion must be, otherwise we just reiterate what the other has said and pat him on the back and that doesn't go too far in terms of actual discussion. In all fairness, while you do seem to bellyache a bit now and again about 'the nonsense' here, it really was Reefs who seemed to want to give this place a complete overhaul so it would better suit his idea of perfect forum experience. And now it would seem he has his perfect forum vision come into manifestation, and yet, here he remains...?  I'm Enigma. Reefs is a different person. Isn't the new forum kind of a co-creation between the two of you? It sounded from what I've read here that that was the plan. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 26, 2013 16:24:21 GMT -5
 Would you say you are the next most peaceful? I dare say you are the one imagining that sword, E. Long ago, your compadre, Top convinced me more or less, that black print on a white page were harmless. I do get what he's talking about - if you're a man of peace (I know, you never claimed that or something like that), why are having all these imaginings? What imaginings? You mean the imagining that virtually every post Tzu makes is an unprovoked attack, or that Arisha is at least as harsh as anyone on this forum? |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 26, 2013 16:26:39 GMT -5
I dare say you are the one imagining that sword, E. Long ago, your compadre, Top convinced me more or less, that black print on a white page were harmless. I do get what he's talking about - if you're a man of peace (I know, you never claimed that or something like that), why are having all these imaginings? What imaginings? You mean the imagining that virtually every post Tzu makes is an unprovoked attack, or that Arisha is at least as harsh as anyone on this forum? Well, hey. You just said it. It IS your imaginings - those are your words, nobody else's. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 26, 2013 16:49:15 GMT -5
I'm Enigma. Reefs is a different person. Isn't the new forum kind of a co-creation between the two of you? It sounded from what I've read here that that was the plan. It's a creation of everyone on the forum, but regardless, I'm trying to quell the notion that I'm responsible for all of Reef's words. Peeps devote a lot of energy to twisting the words I DO use, I'm not prepared to take responsibility for someone else's too, whether I agree with them or not. If Reefs said it, ask Reefs about it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2013 17:11:47 GMT -5
looks like "Mind States" has taken over this thread
what happened to "Enlightenment"? ... hehe
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 26, 2013 18:46:18 GMT -5
Except it can be a very useful and appropriate thing to do if ego is still present (and maybe even when it isn't). Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. I'd say the moment mind turns love into a weapon to judge and condescend to others, it's time to see through that game. Yes, more playing with the map instead of walking the territory. Staring at the finger instead of looking for the moon. I'm pretty sure most here are clear about that. Well, that's not really what I'm saying. I don't have a problem with the imaginary person trying to make the right choices. It makes sense just fine. What I'm saying is that Love is impersonal, and so whatever the person does, he can only stand in the way of Love. Sure, it's "quite clear" to you that I have ego running rampant, and it's "clear" to H that I have no courage, and it's 'clear; to Tzu that I'm not interested in productive conversation and it's 'clear' to Figs that there are all sorts of guidelines on the new forum and it's clear to Arisha that Tzu is the most peaceful person on the forum, etc, etc. Yes, it really is quite apparent that ego is still playing itself out in the E organism. Which means that you are playing a very dodgy game in ignoring love. When the map is not experienced as separate from the territory, when mind/Becoming is not experienced as separate from Being, there is no need to focus on 'Love'. We may offer it as a pointer away from conditioned beliefs, but conceptual love is fine because there is no issue with appearances. In fact, there comes a time when there is little point in focusing on anything BUT appearances. What you are saying is 'Love' is impersonal by definition (and has no basis in reality), but as Steven Harrison said in the quote I put up the other day....realization is not personal and not impersonal. I can agree that when mind uses love as a weapon it is time to see through that game. |
|
|
|
Post by whiteshaman on Jan 26, 2013 23:19:07 GMT -5
Greetings.. What i am observing is a small group of people, a 'club' maybe, that is attached to a couple of beliefs.. one belief is a form of neo-advaita.. the other, supported by the first, is that they need conflict and drama to create the illusion that there is something in their beliefs worth fighting for, but.. as of yet, i have observed no clarity, this 'club' remains firmly attached to their beliefs.. This is evidenced by the confrontational way the small group refuses to have actual discussion, and resorts to confrontational tactics to keep people from having their own discussions amongst themselves.. if those genuinely interested in exploring 'isness' simply had the discussions and ignored the bullies that want to keep the focus on themselves through conflict (divide and conquer), there might actually be some progress toward peace and harmony in 'this' forum.. Be well.. Peace and harmony are not possible on this forum. It would require that the participants either be conscious and see what's actually going on, or place themselves under strict rules of conduct. The latter is indeed an option, but I don't know what value there is in such a gathering. I dun know...........it really seems that regardless of a forum being full of conflict or one where everyone agrees with one another, that the purpose people visit them is to give the mind something to 'grasp', hold onto, relate to, find relief from boredom ..............in a life where there is no such thing. I mean we could just go on with our lives aside from forums but that would mean facing the truth that there is nothing to grasp in regards to 'spiritual' things. |
|
|
|
Post by whiteshaman on Jan 26, 2013 23:38:33 GMT -5
Isn't the new forum kind of a co-creation between the two of you? It sounded from what I've read here that that was the plan. It's a creation of everyone on the forum, but regardless, I'm trying to quell the notion that I'm responsible for all of Reef's words. Peeps devote a lot of energy to twisting the words I DO use, I'm not prepared to take responsibility for someone else's too, whether I agree with them or not. If Reefs said it, ask Reefs about it. Some twist the words you use and others seem to try to impress you. There is something about you that brings on these 'egoic' reactions to you. I'm not sure why that is but it is the energy of what is going on whether people want to admit that or not. It's not your fault but you have 'set' yourself up to be either respected or hated. Starting forums, being greatly involved in posting in forums, writing papers, giving instruction, creating your own web site related to this stuff..... Do you know what i am saying? I do but it's hard to relay it. Basically I see that you are reaping the results of your actions by setting yourself up as you have. Some want to knock you down and others want to kiss your ring. Both are the actions of children. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 26, 2013 23:45:12 GMT -5
It's a creation of everyone on the forum, but regardless, I'm trying to quell the notion that I'm responsible for all of Reef's words. Peeps devote a lot of energy to twisting the words I DO use, I'm not prepared to take responsibility for someone else's too, whether I agree with them or not. If Reefs said it, ask Reefs about it. Some twist the words you use and others seem to try to impress you. There is something about you that brings on these 'egoic' reactions to you. I'm not sure why that is but it is the energy of what is going on whether people want to admit that or not. It's not your fault but you have 'set' yourself up to be either respected or hated. Starting forums, being greatly involved in posting in forums, writing papers, giving instruction, creating your own web site related to this stuff..... Do you know what i am saying? I do but it's hard to relay it. Basically I see that you are reaping the results of your actions by setting yourself up as you have.
Some want to knock you down and others want to kiss your ring. Both are the actions of children.Iow, James, you're saying that he's helping to entice these reactions in the vulnerable.......? |
|
|
|
Post by whiteshaman on Jan 26, 2013 23:57:16 GMT -5
Some twist the words you use and others seem to try to impress you. There is something about you that brings on these 'egoic' reactions to you. I'm not sure why that is but it is the energy of what is going on whether people want to admit that or not. It's not your fault but you have 'set' yourself up to be either respected or hated. Starting forums, being greatly involved in posting in forums, writing papers, giving instruction, creating your own web site related to this stuff..... Do you know what i am saying? I do but it's hard to relay it. Basically I see that you are reaping the results of your actions by setting yourself up as you have.
Some want to knock you down and others want to kiss your ring. Both are the actions of children.Iow, James, you're saying that he's helping to entice these reactions in the vulnerable.......? Hi Silver...........In the vulnerable? i don't understand what that means but I simply see that he has set himself up for the reactions he gets and the reactions he gets are made at him.......because he has set himself up. They are not sincere whether they are of conflict or admiration. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 27, 2013 0:03:49 GMT -5
So much gossip and so little time to respond. Here's a pointer from Ramakrishna. I think it sums it up quite well.
|
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jan 27, 2013 0:15:58 GMT -5
So much gossip and so little time to respond. Here's a pointer from Ramakrishna. I think it sums it up quite well. What does this have to do with the price of tea in China, grasshopper? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 0:30:26 GMT -5
Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. I'd say the moment mind turns love into a weapon to judge and condescend to others, it's time to see through that game. Yes, more playing with the map instead of walking the territory. Staring at the finger instead of looking for the moon. I'm pretty sure most here are clear about that. Well, that's not really what I'm saying. I don't have a problem with the imaginary person trying to make the right choices. It makes sense just fine. What I'm saying is that Love is impersonal, and so whatever the person does, he can only stand in the way of Love. Sure, it's "quite clear" to you that I have ego running rampant, and it's "clear" to H that I have no courage, and it's 'clear; to Tzu that I'm not interested in productive conversation and it's 'clear' to Figs that there are all sorts of guidelines on the new forum and it's clear to Arisha that Tzu is the most peaceful person on the forum, etc, etc. Yes, it really is quite apparent that ego is still playing itself out in the E organism. Which means that you are playing a very dodgy game in ignoring love. When the map is not experienced as separate from the territory, when mind/Becoming is not experienced as separate from Being, there is no need to focus on 'Love'. We may offer it as a pointer away from conditioned beliefs, but conceptual love is fine because there is no issue with appearances. In fact, there comes a time when there is little point in focusing on anything BUT appearances. What you are saying is 'Love' is impersonal by definition (and has no basis in reality), but as Steven Harrison said in the quote I put up the other day....realization is not personal and not impersonal. I can agree that when mind uses love as a weapon it is time to see through that game. Yes, and Love is not personal and not impersonal. It's not an ambiguous paradox and it's not that the personal and the impersonal love are the same. It means nothing is more intimate than oneness. To know what that means I expect you would have to know what Love is. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Jan 27, 2013 0:37:18 GMT -5
But there is 'love' - which can join sex, which is a part of mother's love, or a heroic person's love, - and which origin is the idea of love. Love does not originate from the idea of love. All that IS originates from the ideas first. If there are different levels which are subtler and subtler, such as: physical body, astral body, mental body, causal body, spiritual body, - the same subtler gradations do exist about all that IS. We use words to speak about things and thoughts, feelings and events. The more abstract level is the level of concepts, the more abstract and subtler level is the level of ideas. Any word we use can be traced back to its origin - on the level of ideas. The word 'love' is used to say about the feeling on one level, and there is also a more abstract level of concepts where this word has a more abstract meaning, and there is a subtler and a more abstract level of ideas where 'love' has the meaning of 'pure Love'. And there are subtler levels as well. As Time is unfolding the World is developing - in the direction which is shown by the unfolding Time. The energies go through changes. Ideas are the subtler level of Energy than concepts - words - and feelings. All originates from one Source, not simultaneously, but step by step. Not from less subtle to subtler, but starting from the subtlest (which is the infinitesimal ). We cannot observe those gradations as the speed of changes of Energies is too fast. But the energy pattern of the idea about love(the subtler level) and the energy pattern of the feeling of love (the less subtler level) are different velocities of vibration of the same Energy. As Energy is developing in the direction of the unfolding Time the subtlest levels appear before the less subtle levels. After death there is no Time. We see the process of entropy which goes in the opposite direction after death.- When we are alive - and can see it from 'this side'. From 'the other side' the direction of it is different. There is Energy, Anti- Energy, and Meta-Energy. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 1:01:16 GMT -5
It's a creation of everyone on the forum, but regardless, I'm trying to quell the notion that I'm responsible for all of Reef's words. Peeps devote a lot of energy to twisting the words I DO use, I'm not prepared to take responsibility for someone else's too, whether I agree with them or not. If Reefs said it, ask Reefs about it. Some twist the words you use and others seem to try to impress you. There is something about you that brings on these 'egoic' reactions to you. I'm not sure why that is but it is the energy of what is going on whether people want to admit that or not. It's not your fault but you have 'set' yourself up to be either respected or hated. Starting forums, being greatly involved in posting in forums, writing papers, giving instruction, creating your own web site related to this stuff..... Do you know what i am saying? I do but it's hard to relay it. Basically I see that you are reaping the results of your actions by setting yourself up as you have. Some want to knock you down and others want to kiss your ring. Both are the actions of children. I do know what you're saying but I don't see anybody kissing my ring. What I see is clear peeps and not so clear ones, and the clear ones are not interested in knocking down or kissing, just talking about what's really going on behind the curtain. Anybody who talks about what's going on behind the curtain is going to get knocked down. It really has nothing to do with websites and separate forums and post count, since I was getting knocked down long before there was any of that. Short story here I just remembered. Several years ago I stumbled across some old posts by somebody who called himself Anonsage. Both the sage part and the anonymous parts I will testify to as appropriate. I spent some time trying to track him down because his posts were vibrantly clear and very gentle in the delivery. I followed his posts through a few forums and watched him get insulted, degraded, spit on and finally nailed to the cross in one particularly belligerent encounter, after which he never posted again, at least under that name. What I saw was wisdom despised and innocence crucified. A peek behind the curtain reveals that this is, and always has been, the nature of humankind. There is no mystery here. |
|
