|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 15, 2014 23:12:16 GMT -5
Just maybe you should take a dose of your own advice(s). The moment I log off here, it's gone Silver. The only reason I said you should 'let it go' is because you mentioned being disturbed. If that's not the case, then I'm glad and if it is, then I hope you are able to let it go. Take care.  Noone believes you. Your self-justifying reply to this before was that this isn't your business, but the fact is that you're ignoring it because it conflicts with your own distorted and almost entirely fictional self-image. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Sept 16, 2014 0:07:20 GMT -5
First off, I'd like to make it clear that there are pa-lenty of things that Enigma, Reefs and Laughter talk of that goes waay over my head to this day, but what in the beginning I saw as insult and playing around at the expense of my feelings, wasn't that at all - well, maybe a little - but we have to have fun sometime.....anyway, I had to swallow my pride so that I could learn what I most definitely sensed was something very important. Of course I was hurt because it couldn't be clearer that you said any number of things - all in that one post - designed specifically for that purpose - because that's how you operate. It's clear that you can't separate the wheat from the chaff when anybody is talking to you, and you seem to think that you should just go through life without anyone making a thoughtful observation about you/your behavior that isn't complimentary. What makes you so special, huh? So, for you to say that: "You say you no longer have interest in getting embroiled in the arguments here, but its' pretty clear that interest is still active. You steered clear for a bit, but now it seems, you've resume..." you're at least being contrite about being at the center of these arguments that peeps get embroiled in. Do you not see how defensive that is, even though it was especially designed to paint me at a certain angle to benefit you? The action starts at 1:15 and a few seconds later, notice how he's putting on a heavy duty gas mask and already is dressed in clothes to protect him from the toxic fumes of the paint. fwiw, I saw the original Tron, and I really liked it. Has anybody seen the sequel(s)? Do you want some advice on how to deal with this stain on the face of humanity? Wull yeah, but you didn't have to word it quite like that. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 16, 2014 0:58:49 GMT -5
I know, but there have been enough assassinations this week and I'm trying to save 'natural state' from oblivion. It's a good term that points to the condition of freedom that is less clearly referred to as enlightenment. The really sophisticated seekers have learned to dismiss that as well, which is unfortunate. There's much to be said for allowing all movements to move along, but if there is a suffering state, it's because one has already made negative judgment on the conditions present. You've also already distinguished between states you want to perpetuate and those you don't. I'm just doing the same with the natural state. I hear your concerns, and I will give them consideration, but in regards to the bolded I mean to distinguish the difference between "naturally occurring painful happenings", i.e. getting a broken knee cap, emergency open heart surgery, the loss of a very close loved one, being nailed and hung from a cross for no good reason, etc, and "unnecessary mental suffering" created by identification with thoughts about the painful happening. Sure, but we were talking about mind states. I'm talking about psychological suffering, which is also a huge part of physical pain. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 16, 2014 1:04:41 GMT -5
Notice the similarity to Andrew's love concept. You don't seem to think very clearly. The psychology forum is here. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 16, 2014 1:09:40 GMT -5
I know, but there have been enough assassinations this week and I'm trying to save 'natural state' from oblivion. It's a good term that points to the condition of freedom that is less clearly referred to as enlightenment. The really sophisticated seekers have learned to dismiss that as well, which is unfortunate. There's much to be said for allowing all movements to move along, but if there is a suffering state, it's because one has already made negative judgment on the conditions present. You've also already distinguished between states you want to perpetuate and those you don't. I'm just doing the same with the natural state. Suffering is the result of attachment, clinging....or the opposite side of the same coin, avoidance. Seeking an invented or imagined natural state, while trying to avoid an imagined un-natural state, helps to cause suffering, not alleviate it. Also, what does any seeker need to do in order to 'find'? Answer: Stop Seeking When you set up the proposition of imagined natural versus un-natural states, you delude yourself into seeking other than whats right in front of you, closer than your own skin... You also support the illusion of both feared and desired permanence. Humans imagine the illusion of permanence, then crave permanent pleasure and fear permanent pain or dis-pleasure....then they set up a whole life around seeking permanent pleasure, while avoiding imagined permanent dis-pleasure....its a lifetime of activity based on a self created illusion. 'Seek the [imagined] natural state, and avoid the [imagined] un-natural state'....now thats a fool's errand ;-) Well, maybe not a fool, but certainly an idiot's errand. We're not talking about seeking permanence or pleasure or avoiding pain. We're talking about the absence of seeking. That would be the natural state. As you imply, the absence of attachment, clinging, avoidance. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 16, 2014 1:15:25 GMT -5
Nonsense. States of suffering are not natural states, and if one is not interested in the absence of those unnatural states, what IS one interested in? (I suspect the answer is woo woo states, which is a fool's errand.) Notice the similarity to Andrew's love concept. You mean, like, all negative states are actually loooove states? Yeah, the assassination urge may be contagious. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 16, 2014 1:27:37 GMT -5
Notice the similarity to Andrew's love concept. You mean, like, all negative states are actually loooove states? Yeah, the assassination urge may be contagious. I've heard it's the shortcut to enlightenment. edit: The assassination of words has always been a tool for happy-face-stickering, i.e. denial. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 1:42:00 GMT -5
Yeah, it's just more awareness of why we do stuff. The frequency of the intention always informs us whether completion is probable or not. Sometimes plans are imagined so that, the time before their non-completion is felt in a much more vibrant and immediate way. It's not about the plan, or it's completion. The apparent delaying will set-up a psychological dynamic of perceived control. The idea that control is an illusion was one that I was exposed to soooo long ago it was pretty much part of conditioning ..  .. the reality of it is soooo much more .. open. Taking cue's from brain ticks is a deceptive nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by steven on Sept 16, 2014 1:58:25 GMT -5
You don't seem to think very clearly. The psychology forum is here. Haha...did you just wip out the 'I know what you are but what am I' card? |
|
|
|
Post by steven on Sept 16, 2014 2:10:45 GMT -5
Suffering is the result of attachment, clinging....or the opposite side of the same coin, avoidance. Seeking an invented or imagined natural state, while trying to avoid an imagined un-natural state, helps to cause suffering, not alleviate it. Also, what does any seeker need to do in order to 'find'? Answer: Stop Seeking When you set up the proposition of imagined natural versus un-natural states, you delude yourself into seeking other than whats right in front of you, closer than your own skin... You also support the illusion of both feared and desired permanence. Humans imagine the illusion of permanence, then crave permanent pleasure and fear permanent pain or dis-pleasure....then they set up a whole life around seeking permanent pleasure, while avoiding imagined permanent dis-pleasure....its a lifetime of activity based on a self created illusion. 'Seek the [imagined] natural state, and avoid the [imagined] un-natural state'....now thats a fool's errand ;-) Well, maybe not a fool, but certainly an idiot's errand. We're not talking about seeking permanence or pleasure or avoiding pain. We're talking about the absence of seeking. That would be the natural state. As you imply, the absence of attachment, clinging, avoidance. Ahh sorry...I thought you and Reefs were talking about natural versus un-natural states, and asking if Meditation was 'THE' natural state...as if there is a natural state and an un-natural state. But wait, that natural state that you mentioned just now, wouldn't that imply an un-natural state? If thats the natural state, then what is the un-natural state? And more importantly, which nature is it outside of, apart from....and how did it get there? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 16, 2014 2:26:24 GMT -5
We're not talking about seeking permanence or pleasure or avoiding pain. We're talking about the absence of seeking. That would be the natural state. As you imply, the absence of attachment, clinging, avoidance. Ahh sorry...I thought you and Reefs were talking about natural versus un-natural states, and asking if Meditation was 'THE' natural state...as if there is a natural state and an un-natural state. But wait, that natural state that you mentioned just now, wouldn't that imply an un-natural state? If thats the natural state, then what is the un-natural state? And more importantly, which nature is it outside of, apart from....and how did it get there? You don't seem to think very clearly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 2:28:46 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 3:09:13 GMT -5
What I see is that that post where I told you that "if you were not enjoying the conversation you could always go elsewhere," angered you, "What you see"? And yet, when anyone else shows your your own bile, in your own words, what comes spewing out of you like a fountain of vomit is some of the most prolific, intricate and self-deluded rationalization ever written in the history of mankind.  Am I right in thinking that you don't have pantomime in the States? |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Sept 16, 2014 8:33:58 GMT -5
I hear your concerns, and I will give them consideration, but in regards to the bolded I mean to distinguish the difference between "naturally occurring painful happenings", i.e. getting a broken knee cap, emergency open heart surgery, the loss of a very close loved one, being nailed and hung from a cross for no good reason, etc, and "unnecessary mental suffering" created by identification with thoughts about the painful happening. Sure, but we were talking about mind states. I'm talking about psychological suffering, which is also a huge part of physical pain. All suffering is psychological. It begins and ends with mind identification, no? The solution seems to be acceptance of the situation as that alleviates psychological suffering, if not the pain itself, which is usually made far more bearable by its very acceptance. Niz: "Pain is physical, suffering is mental. Beyond the mind there is no suffering. Pain is merely a signal that the body is in danger and requires attention. Similarly, suffering warns us that the structure of the memories and habits, which we call the person (vyakti), is threatened by loss or change. Pain is essential for the survival of the body, but none compels you to suffer. Suffering is due entirely to clinging or resisting; it is a sign of our unwillingness to move on, to flow with life. A saint is friendly with the inevitable and therefore does not suffer." |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Sept 16, 2014 9:16:36 GMT -5
Regardless, It still seems odd to me for folks to enter into conversations they are not a part of, to tell those conversing that the conversation is annoying, stupid or pointless and that they should therefore, stop conversing. Oh, the brushstrokes. This is your imagination running wild, and when you do this, when you write something that ascribes words to someone else that they didn't write, it is a form of libel.In all seriousness, if all words are ultimately acausal how can any accusation or blame of libel be assigned to a specific anyone? |
|
.. the reality of it is soooo much more .. open.