|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 16, 2013 20:07:19 GMT -5
[/font][/quote] I 'know' that there is a consistency to what i 'see', to what i 'experience'.. and, i acknowledge those consistencies in accordance with the resonance revealed by not comparing them to beliefs or trying to fit them into preconceived scenarios.. I 'see' what others post, i see the inconsistencies in what they post.. if someone posts that they are interested in open honest direct discussions, but proceeds to avoid every opportunity by creating the illusion of fault in the person that would welcome such a discussion, i am reporting what i 'see'.. if someone says that they are interested in peace, but provokes others, i report the inconsistency i 'see'.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. if you say you are interested in peace, but act contrary to that claim, it's not something i 'know', it's something i observe.. i'm not telling others "what they need to do or stop doing", i'm pointing out the observable inconsistency.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. and, if i observe a different happening, i am not attached to the prior.. if you 'come empty' to the discussion, i will meet you there.. Be well.. [/quote] Another excuse.. you come to this accusation and excuse full of beliefs about "Maya; illusion", to build a rationalization for why you can't 'come empty', yourself.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 16, 2013 20:08:09 GMT -5
Greetings.. Never said that the lack of response to Phil's question troubled me, and I assure you it didn't and doesn't. The people on the other side of the monitor and keyboard don't have anything to do with belief ... it might seem that way sometimes, but that's just an appearance. I did keep my end of that bargain back here. Well.. considering the time difference between Phil's request, and your bringing up now, you were attached to it for some reason, troubling or not.. I discern between 'motive', and this: " If you really want me to construct and tell a story of why I'm in this I will".. but, if you're satisfied that you have 'told that story', so be it.. Be well.. You don't know about attachment any more than you knew about 'troubled'. All you know is that he noted the event and referred to it in the discussion. You also note many things and refer to them in discussion, and yet I doubt you see them as your own attachment or 'trouble'. It's these sorts of stories that a still mind can see through.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 16, 2013 20:09:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. Well.. considering the time difference between Phil's request, and your bringing up now, you were attached to it for some reason, troubling or not.. I discern between 'motive', and this: " If you really want me to construct and tell a story of why I'm in this I will".. but, if you're satisfied that you have 'told that story', so be it.. Be well.. memory doesn't attachment imply Since you bring that up, you clearly must be troubled by it and attached to it.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Apr 16, 2013 20:10:50 GMT -5
Greetings.. What that tells me is that you know nothing because you are still looking, which is fine, but every post seems to be filled with stuff you know about others and what they need to do or stop doing. How do you know this? I 'know' that there is a consistency to what i 'see', to what i 'experience'.. and, i acknowledge those consistencies in accordance with the resonance revealed by not comparing them to beliefs or trying to fit them into preconceived scenarios.. I 'see' what others post, i see the inconsistencies in what they post.. if someone posts that they are interested in open honest direct discussions, but proceeds to avoid every opportunity by creating the illusion of fault in the person that would welcome such a discussion, i am reporting what i 'see'.. if someone says that they are interested in peace, but provokes others, i report the inconsistency i 'see'.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. if you say you are interested in peace, but act contrary to that claim, it's not something i 'know', it's something i observe.. i'm not telling others "what they need to do or stop doing", i'm pointing out the observable inconsistency.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. and, if i observe a different happening, i am not attached to the prior.. if you 'come empty' to the discussion, i will meet you there.. Be well.. The -what is happening- is filtered and labelled by the mind, no? Your experience was categorized. Pattern recognition, no?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 16, 2013 20:12:11 GMT -5
memory doesn't attachment imply Since you bring that up, you clearly must be troubled by it and attached to it. it must be an anticlarattachpectation!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 16, 2013 20:14:04 GMT -5
Greetings.. The question was just in response to your repeated addressing of 'my beliefs'. I can't say that I hold any beliefs, in the ultimate sense. Sure, I believe the sun will likely rise tomorrow, but in the largest context, no belief is true, and that's not a belief. I sometimes make statements of absence, in the way that oneness is an absence of separation, or Peace is an absence of the need for certain conditions, but I don't claim these as beliefs. Hi Phil: Well.. you make repeated statements like: "it's all a dream", or "it's all imagined", or 'there are no choosers, or doers, or perveivers', or "there is only oneness".. do you believe the statements you make? Be well.. They are the statements of absence to which I referred. I don't know anything about a physical reality, but you apparently do, so I say you are dreaming and imagining. I don't see a chooser, a doer or a perceiver, but you apparently do, so I say it's not so. I'm not the one who believes in stuff, you are.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 16, 2013 20:17:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. memory doesn't attachment imply I'll disagree, and you know why.. Be well.. If you remember stuff they you're attached?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 16, 2013 20:17:41 GMT -5
Greetings.. [/font][/quote] I 'know' that there is a consistency to what i 'see', to what i 'experience'.. and, i acknowledge those consistencies in accordance with the resonance revealed by not comparing them to beliefs or trying to fit them into preconceived scenarios.. I 'see' what others post, i see the inconsistencies in what they post.. if someone posts that they are interested in open honest direct discussions, but proceeds to avoid every opportunity by creating the illusion of fault in the person that would welcome such a discussion, i am reporting what i 'see'.. if someone says that they are interested in peace, but provokes others, i report the inconsistency i 'see'.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. if you say you are interested in peace, but act contrary to that claim, it's not something i 'know', it's something i observe.. i'm not telling others "what they need to do or stop doing", i'm pointing out the observable inconsistency.. I don't 'know' these things, i observe their happening.. and, if i observe a different happening, i am not attached to the prior.. if you 'come empty' to the discussion, i will meet you there.. Be well.. [/quote] The -what is happening- is filtered and labelled by the mind, no? Your experience was categorized. Pattern recognition, no?[/quote] No. Those qualities emerge in recall and contemplation from memory.. Be well.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 16, 2013 20:20:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. I'll disagree, and you know why.. Be well.. If you remember stuff they you're attached? ok ... in all fairness I'm gonna leave the material for this laugh on the ground and express the opinion that Tzu' probably didn't mean to make such a blanket statement and that it was more personalized and narrow of focus.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 16, 2013 20:22:35 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Hi Phil: Well.. you make repeated statements like: "it's all a dream", or "it's all imagined", or 'there are no choosers, or doers, or perveivers', or "there is only oneness".. do you believe the statements you make? Be well.. They are the statements of absence to which I referred. I don't know anything about a physical reality, but you apparently do, so I say you are dreaming and imagining. I don't see a chooser, a doer or a perceiver, but you apparently do, so I say it's not so. I'm not the one who believes in stuff, you are. I do not believe you.. your stories of you and Marie are steeped in physical reality.. I report what i observe.. you, create illusions and believe them.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 16, 2013 20:27:16 GMT -5
Greetings.. If you remember stuff they you're attached? ok ... in all fairness I'm gonna leave the material for this laugh on the ground and express the opinion that Tzu' probably didn't mean to make such a blanket statement and that it was more personalized and narrow of focus. It rhymed: Memories do not attachment imply I'll disagree, and you know why In this case, the disagreement is specific to the discussion.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 16, 2013 20:30:18 GMT -5
Greetings.. ok ... in all fairness I'm gonna leave the material for this laugh on the ground and express the opinion that Tzu' probably didn't mean to make such a blanket statement and that it was more personalized and narrow of focus. It rhymed: Memories do not attachment imply I'll disagree, and you know why In this case, the disagreement is specific to the discussion.. Be well.. ha! didn't notice that Bob, pretty cool. btw ... if you really aren't interested in beliefs you have a prime opportunity to walk the walk right now ... are those buttons that Phil sees just there to hold up your shirt or what?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 16, 2013 20:43:14 GMT -5
Greetings.. It rhymed: Memories do not attachment imply I'll disagree, and you know why In this case, the disagreement is specific to the discussion.. Be well.. ha! didn't notice that Bob, pretty cool. btw ... if you really aren't interested in beliefs you have a prime opportunity to walk the walk right now ... are those buttons that Phil sees just there to hold up your shirt or what? LOL.. no.. they are very shiny buttons, they reflect what is projected upon them, but.. one has to be willing to 'see'.. Speaking of walked walks.. any chance for a 'story'? Be well..
|
|
|
Post by topology on Apr 16, 2013 20:45:12 GMT -5
Greetings.. The -what is happening- is filtered and labelled by the mind, no? Your experience was categorized. Pattern recognition, no? No. Those qualities emerge in recall and contemplation from memory.. Be well.. Be well.. This is where the rubber meets the road. Memory isn't just involved in thoughts and recall, memory is directly involved in rendering your current experience as it presents itself. Previous experience has shaped neuronal pathways. For a direct phenomenal example, the more you have experience with something, the more detail is rendered in your experience about it. The closer you look, the more detailed your next experience is with the same object. It's not just recall, past experience shapes future experience. What something is, as it appears right now, includes your past experience with it. Pattern recognition is a sub-conscious or prior-to consciousness process. www.scholarpedia.org/article/Attention_and_consciousnessen.wikipedia.org/wiki/AttentionThere are two kinds of attention: 1) Bottom up 2) Top down When the mind become still, Top down processing lessens its control on attention, but bottom up processing takes up more attention. The bottom-up processing has been influenced by past top-down processing. www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~cgc2646/LRN/TOPDOWN.htmDo you get the point I'm making? WHAT you SEE happening is mitigated by past experience. It is the triggering of the model that has been refined and shaped through past experience. A babe seeing for the first time has no concept of what they are seeing. They will crawl off the end of the bed until the mental model for depth perception and the sense of "there is an EDGE there" activates through development. Now you go out into the glades and use your surveying equipment without a first thought, let alone a second thought, but that can only happen due to the effects of memory mitigating how you perceive. WHAT is seen is still heavy on the conditioning. Top-down attention can embed itself in bottom-up processing.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 16, 2013 20:48:24 GMT -5
Since you bring that up, you clearly must be troubled by it and attached to it. it must be an anticlarattachpectation! I'm not sure we're allowed to talk about pectation here. www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pectation
|
|