06-25-2010, 12:01 AM
At a certain point we can feel objects and be
clear of the separation of the emanations and the self. Nemo
what I mean by a certain point, is when the internal dialogue recedes in
dominance Nemo.
We have no trouble feeling objects. It is precisely this feel of objects as distinct that fosters the implication of a "feeler" the one "doing" the feeling and concluding a separation of feeler, felt and feeling. It is not as if the internal dialogue needs to recede in order to experience this. I would think it is quite the opposite. Still not sure what you mean by "certain point" as a point when internal dialogue recedes in order to see a separation and its relevance here.
The entire body of a seer senses the Eagle. There is something in all of us that
can make us witness with our entire body. Seers explain the act of seeingthe Eagle in very simple
terms:
because man is composed of the Eagle’s emanations, man need only revert back to his
components. The problem arises with man’s awareness; it is his awareness
that becomes entangled and
confused. At the crucial moment when it should be a simple case of the emanations acknowledging
themselves, man’s awareness is compelled to interpret. The result is a vision of the Eagle and
the Eagle’s emanations. But there is no Eagle and no Eagle’s emanations.What
is out there is something that no living creature can grasp.” DJ
So many points need clarifying.
The entire body of a seer senses the Eagle. Does it?
man need only revert back to his
components. What are these components? Oh yes they are Eagles emanations...neither of which according to DJ exist. If these components referred to by DJ are the aggregates referenced by Buddhism then we can can be more precise about what we are talking about.
What
is out there is something that no living creature can grasp.” DJ
First, referring to an out there implies in here. DJ has come up against the farthest limits of this imagined "internal". This is the moment when both perspectives should collapse. Instead he establishes an unfathomable mystery that no living creature can grasp. What is a "living creature"? Is this the same as a sentient being referenced by Buddhism. Buddhism sees sentient beings as trapped within cyclic existence. For DJ he is surrounded by a magical and mysterious universe (existence). So really we get no help from DJ here. He only seems to obscure and muddy the waters further and accepts as paramount.
What we have been trying to introduce in this thread is what lies beyond these notions of existence, notions both crude and refined. In order to do this we must see how our notions of existence are formed. Once we are aware of this, existence can no longer obscure awareness.
clear of the separation of the emanations and the self. Nemo
what I mean by a certain point, is when the internal dialogue recedes in
dominance Nemo.
We have no trouble feeling objects. It is precisely this feel of objects as distinct that fosters the implication of a "feeler" the one "doing" the feeling and concluding a separation of feeler, felt and feeling. It is not as if the internal dialogue needs to recede in order to experience this. I would think it is quite the opposite. Still not sure what you mean by "certain point" as a point when internal dialogue recedes in order to see a separation and its relevance here.
The entire body of a seer senses the Eagle. There is something in all of us that
can make us witness with our entire body. Seers explain the act of seeingthe Eagle in very simple
terms:
because man is composed of the Eagle’s emanations, man need only revert back to his
components. The problem arises with man’s awareness; it is his awareness
that becomes entangled and
confused. At the crucial moment when it should be a simple case of the emanations acknowledging
themselves, man’s awareness is compelled to interpret. The result is a vision of the Eagle and
the Eagle’s emanations. But there is no Eagle and no Eagle’s emanations.What
is out there is something that no living creature can grasp.” DJ
So many points need clarifying.
The entire body of a seer senses the Eagle. Does it?
man need only revert back to his
components. What are these components? Oh yes they are Eagles emanations...neither of which according to DJ exist. If these components referred to by DJ are the aggregates referenced by Buddhism then we can can be more precise about what we are talking about.
What
is out there is something that no living creature can grasp.” DJ
First, referring to an out there implies in here. DJ has come up against the farthest limits of this imagined "internal". This is the moment when both perspectives should collapse. Instead he establishes an unfathomable mystery that no living creature can grasp. What is a "living creature"? Is this the same as a sentient being referenced by Buddhism. Buddhism sees sentient beings as trapped within cyclic existence. For DJ he is surrounded by a magical and mysterious universe (existence). So really we get no help from DJ here. He only seems to obscure and muddy the waters further and accepts as paramount.
What we have been trying to introduce in this thread is what lies beyond these notions of existence, notions both crude and refined. In order to do this we must see how our notions of existence are formed. Once we are aware of this, existence can no longer obscure awareness.