|
Post by Reefs on Jul 4, 2013 10:21:59 GMT -5
So you are just speculating? Its all speculation (including 'its all speculation') Right. Meaningless conversation.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 4, 2013 10:23:10 GMT -5
Its all speculation (including 'its all speculation') Right. Meaningless conversation. Unless its not. Its speculation that its speculation. That means is speculative nature is unknown i.e. it might be meaningless or it might not be.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 4, 2013 11:18:24 GMT -5
Right. Meaningless conversation. Unless its not. Its speculation that its speculation. That means is speculative nature is unknown i.e. it might be meaningless or it might not be. Andrew, if you didn't actually believe and were serious about everything you've said, I would hail you as the greatest spirituality Troll of all time. :-)
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 4, 2013 11:22:27 GMT -5
Unless its not. Its speculation that its speculation. That means is speculative nature is unknown i.e. it might be meaningless or it might not be. Andrew, if you didn't actually believe and were serious about everything you've said, I would hail you as the greatest spirituality Troll of all time. :-) Im sincere, and I would say that I am doing my best to point to what might be called 'Truth' (capital 'T'). I understand that it may not always seem that way though!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 11:38:13 GMT -5
Andrew, if you didn't actually believe and were serious about everything you've said, I would hail you as the greatest spirituality Troll of all time. :-) Im sincere, and I would say that I am doing my best to point to what might be called 'Truth' (capital 'T'). I understand that it may not always seem that way though! I think that your pointer is malfunctioning...
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 4, 2013 12:05:34 GMT -5
Im sincere, and I would say that I am doing my best to point to what might be called 'Truth' (capital 'T'). I understand that it may not always seem that way though! I think that your pointer is malfunctioning... Such is the nature of pointing
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 12:23:18 GMT -5
I think that your pointer is malfunctioning... Such is the nature of pointing Yes, in the sky there is no distinction between east and west. Likewise there is no distinction between what is true and what is false. Pointing creates the distinction out of one's mind, and then he believes that which is pointed to is true.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 4, 2013 12:26:43 GMT -5
Such is the nature of pointing Yes, in the sky there is no distinction between east and west. Likewise there is no distinction between what is true and what is false. Pointing creates the distinction out of one's mind, and then he believes that which is pointed to is true. yep, that's it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 12:33:44 GMT -5
Yes, in the sky there is no distinction between east and west. Likewise there is no distinction between what is true and what is false. Pointing creates the distinction out of one's mind, and then he believes that which is pointed to is true. yep, that's it. Yep, everything in the world is caused by the coincidence of causes and conditions, so there can't be any fundamental distinctions among things... The apparent distinctions exist because of my absurd and discriminating thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 14:08:18 GMT -5
Andrew, do you think I'm actually referring to spot of grease? You mean.....you're not suggesting to get a butterfly net, catch every idea, transfer the net containing the ideas to the stove and find that single stubborn greasy spot that just won't wash away, and then....quickly, before any ideas escape, transfer all those ideas into that greasy spot? Hehehe. You really DO think I'm a bit crazy. Sometimes I really do, yes. Ideas are seen to be imagination. That's all it means. You hear something weird that I can't discern, Silver want's a full definition of the term, and Tzu thinks it's part of my plot to confuse and take over the world. Yes, there's lots of insanity here.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 14:24:03 GMT -5
I think I agree with that, which makes me wonder what in blazes you've been talking about. Realizations reveal illusions for what they are. They aren't ideas and don't lead to new ideas or add any information, and so i call them empty. My issue here is with the word 'illusion', because although its true that the primary realizations do involve 'seeing through illusions', the ultimate realization collapses the boundary between illusion and not-illusion. Does it collapse into a greasy spot or would say it's more of a charred area? Realizations themselves are not ideas, and so the boundary you see as having collapsed is just an imaginary boundary that you added. You then call the acknowledgment of this imaginary idea a transcendent realization that trumps all other realizations, which puts where you wanted to be in the first place; at a positionless position of ambiguous paradoxical certaintyless certainty. Realizations do not come and go. You conclude this because your mind has usurped the sovereignty of your seeing, and so you no longer see. What you saw (assuming you saw anything) has not gone anywhere. You are the one who went somewhere with your ideas. On this forum, I'm almost always responding directly from that seeing. The talking about it is a challenge. The seeing is effortless. It has not gone anywhere. Where would it go?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 14:51:41 GMT -5
I think I agree with that, which makes me wonder what in blazes you've been talking about. Realizations reveal illusions for what they are. They aren't ideas and don't lead to new ideas or add any information, and so i call them empty. *hands Enigma his Andrew decoder ring* It's a substitution cypher. I don't think he understands your use of realization as a verb and thinks you are using it as a noun. "A run through the forrest" is an event. Events are hybrid creatures. They are talked about as if they are nouns, but they are based on verbs and represent change in state. Of realization were a true noun, not an event, it would be a conclusion. Was it Farmer that said recently that he used to experience the silent gap between thoughts until silence became pervasive and thoughts appeared on the backdrop of silence. That shift between foreground and background is essentially for getting perspective on the whole shebang. Andrew anchors his whole understanding on the idea that it is all a play of ideas. We have no opportunity to hear if there is any silence happening in and around those ideas. Until the ideas are swallowed by the silence, it's going to continue to be fleas chasing their own tails. Yeah, it's clear he thinks realizations are ideas, so it doesn't really matter what I call them. He's going to assume I'm playing with ideas, which is really what everyone assumes who has never 'experienced' a realization. Tzu, for example, calls everyone's realizations beliefs, and calls his own ideas self evident clarity. It's that point of supposed self evident clarity that he and Andrew can rejoin as compadres and agree that illusory experience is, in fact, 'what is'.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 4, 2013 14:52:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. Andrew, do you think I'm actually referring to spot of grease? Speak plainly, openly, clearly, and you won't have to ask those unnecessary questions.. if you don't mean "spot of grease", why do you use the phrase? you say you're interested in clarity, but you speak in riddles and innuendos and mockery and provocations, do you see the inconsistency and contradiction? or, as your MO suggests, will you advance more of the same to cover your inconsistencies.. Be well.. Are you serious? Wow, the super literal club is larger than I previously thought.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 4, 2013 15:05:05 GMT -5
Yep, everything in the world is caused by the coincidence of causes and conditions, so there can't be any fundamental distinctions among things... The apparent distinctions exist because of my absurd and discriminating thoughts. Yes. As I see it, life IS diverse and thoughts both reflect and contribute to that diversity, but the core of the 'problem' is as you implied above, that its the taking of a thought to be true
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 15:07:33 GMT -5
Greetings.. The fact that I have to ask such questions reveals the rampant insanity here, as does your response. The fact that you ask such questions is that you are detached from reality, as you said, you believe "it's all imagined".. that's the actuality.. Be well.. Yes, it's all imagined. We don't have to get all philosophical or mystical to see this, as virtually all of your posts are jam packed with expressions of your imagination. There is, however, a relative truth about it. (i.e., you're a man and not a woman) In a larger context, this is also seen as imagination and it turns out you are neither and the whole issue is misconceived.
|
|