Emptiness and Objects

[Tiff]

Why is it a challenge? What challenges this flame of awareness? The eagle?

[Tiff]

Ah ha, found it...

Of course, Reeves used images of Buddha to get his point of reference on. There is an ecstasy experience. To me I have always looked at Buddha and saw this, so Buddha's realization represents to me such intense elation beyond what most people access on a daily basis.

[Tiff]

Ok, The Qing were not Mongols, they were Manchu (korean tribe) but made alliances with the Mongols at the time, Yuan dynasty were Monglos hundreds years previously. And it was the Mongols who were heavily connected to Tibet so strong alliances between these three during a period of Qing rule.

[ninth octave]

Tiff wrote:
Ah ha, found it...


Of course, Reeves used images of Buddha to get his point of reference on. There is an ecstasy experience. To me I have always looked at Buddha and saw this, so Buddha's realization represents to me such intense elation beyond what most people access on a daily basis.


Yes, this is the same  look I get in the am when I first wake up
    and see myself in the mirror.
PS. Reeves character in Matrix movie is "Thomas " Anderson . This name was chosen intentionally by the Wachoski  bros. The  character Thomas is a spin off from the gnostic Gospel of Thomas.  Gnostic Thomas is said to be the "twin brother" of Jesus. After "the doubting Thomas "was gone, "Thomas" name turned  Neo and  is given the key of knowledge that opens the Matrix/ Mind. Enlightenment happened as did Jesus disciple Thomas. Their are many Buddhism, Gnostic, Christian  themes and a thousand more running through the Matrix Movies -especially the theme of dependent co-origination and the ones who were able to recognize the false nature of reality.

[ninth octave]

lex icon wrote:
Ninth that Desert of the Real link is great. But that does not explain why we keep doing that to begin with.

I saw it this video as the mind being caught in the cycle of illusion and the ignorance of not seeing how it identifies with sensory projection which is delusion. This desire to believe it is real perceives it to be real. This clouds absolute awareness.

[Gonzo]

ninth octave wrote:lex icon wrote:
Ninth that Desert of the Real link is great. But that does not explain why we keep doing that to begin with.

I saw it this video as the mind being caught in the cycle of illusion and the ignorance of not seeing how it identifies with sensory projection which is delusion. This desire to believe it is real perceives it to be real. This clouds absolute awareness.Absolute awareness...would be?  Rejection of the steak, wine and cigar in favor of gray mush?

[Gonzo]

Tiff wrote:Gonzo wrote:Re the heavy readership, I suspect it is more bots rather than "real" folk, although it doesn't appear to be search bots from Google and the like. I'm paranoid enough to think in terms of Big Brother, although I'm not sure what He might be looking for. That He is looking, there is no doubt. It is not without notice btw, which countries we each are from.If this were the case, all the threads I post in would get lots of hits...but this is not the case. Only this thread.
Perhaps we are gaining the attention of the Mahayana Buddhists, then, looking perhaps, for something new.

[nemo.parallelperception]

Tiff wrote:Why is it a challenge? What challenges this flame of awareness? The eagle?Its challenging because it forces the best out of us, and as we strive and shrink (as you put it) "become all as we become nothing". Other possibilities become apparent, at least this has been my experience. Its not that I don't get the points you are making, I just don't agree that it's a final all inclusive step and from a Toltec perspective is not as important as it is being put forth in this thread.
Again, The multiverse creates separate entities from itself, some of those if they choose can can move into another sphere of possibilities, and those possibilities require certain personal achievements/milestones. Then a personal part of ever thing can move out of  the the general energetic current  "tonal of the times" and move into a realm where ones personal power can sustain itself, under the pressure or scrutiny of other seers, because of the letting go of the illusory self as separate.
The term eagle can be used if you like, but as you can see, multiverse works also.

[ninth octave]

Gonzo wrote:
ninth octave wrote:
lex icon wrote:

Ninth that Desert of the Real link is great. But that does not explain why we keep doing that to begin with.

I saw it this video as the mind being caught in the cycle of illusion and the ignorance of not seeing how it identifies with sensory projection which is delusion. This desire to believe it is real perceives it to be real. This clouds absolute awareness.Absolute awareness...would be?  Rejection of the steak, wine and cigar in favor of gray mush?

Absolute awareness ? maybe  it means.. release our mistaken sense of idenity so we can be content with the gray mush too.

[ninth octave]

lex icon wrote:

The God presented by the Buddha above does not fit my logic of how I have come to perceive the God in this world.  In short , God is pure energy, the hidden element in chemisrty, math, and light. Light cannot be really "seen", it simply makes seeing possible. Ninth
I think Buddha is saying of God that IF God is like this or that etc ..... then this ( whatever) does not make sense.
Ninth you say you perceive God, hmmm, perhaps you could share this perception so we too could perceive this? Which is actually something I have been asking you for years now. You have yet to tell me why you believe certain things. When pressed, your beliefs always seem so arbitrary.
Now you have stated quite categorically that "God is pure energy". I am asking how do you know this? You cannot just cop out and say faith. Something led you to believe in a particular way about something particular, in this case God as pure energy. And you have expressed this belief by your statement.
4.) It is not convincing that the Absolute has created us, because that which is absolute cannot be a cause.
What do these words mean? Before we dismiss them lets first understand them.  You do not have to agree or believe just understand.
Why can the absolute not be a cause?
I love the direction of this. Instead of challenging the existence of God directly,  we are challenged instead to understand what Absolute means and how we apply the term. What is implicit in this; is absolute is an quality we (some) attribute to God. Religiously God is also considered the cause of what is created. But the writer has said, " that which is absolute cannot be a cause."
If we can establish what the writer is referring to here, then our ideas of God will need to be modified or discarded. But not just God our whole grasp of causation will be challenged down to the root of existence itself.
So again...
Why can the absolute not be a cause?Firstly, "God" that is written about cannot be interpreted by the minds of men  What we know of God is a try at understanding the unthinkable based on comparisons of what we don't know about God. But this does not mean "God"does not exist. "God"does not fit our logic of space time continuum. God is not linear. The God described in only a hint of the real "God"of this universe, the essence of being and mystery behind and through out the universe(s). So yes it is neither this nor that about "God" and we have only evolved by speculating about what we don't really know . We look for a baseline or beginning point for our human linear way of thinking patterns. When God might be in cyclic circuitry that is outside our domain. Who can make sense of God if we have no real point of reference. So logically we point to zero as our point of reference.

[Tiff]

nemo wrote:Again, The multiverse creates separate entities from itself, some of those if they choose can can move into another sphere of possibilities, and those possibilities require certain personal achievements/milestones.
Dependent arising shows hows its impossible for an entity to create anything if this entity is itself a complete entity. So multiuniverse, in this sense described above, is creator of other entities from itself. How can it create from itself other entities? Does anything in phenomena actually do this? Any examples? In other words, how do you arrive at this conclusion?
Nothing wrong with us all sharing our perspectives, but under such subjectivity that cannot be explained how it is an absolute truth, there will be nothing but these individual viewpoints that cannot be verified.

[Tiff]

Ninth,



On the Matrix...no doubt it does reference Gospel of Thomas. Thanks for that info. I read about the Buddhist  reference here, so that's why perhaps Buddhism could also be a source...



"The Matrix makes numerous references to recent films and literature, and to historical myths and philosophy. These include[citation needed] Advaita, Judaism,[17] Messianism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Christianity, Existentialism, Nihilism, and occult tarot.[18] The film's premise resembles Plato's Allegory of the Cave, Calderon de la Barca's Life is a Dream, Edwin Abbott Abbott's Flatland, René Descartes's evil genius, Georges Gurdjieff's The Sleeping Man[19], Kant's reflections on the Phenomenon versus the Ding an sich, and the brain in a vat thought experiment.[citation needed]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix

[nemo.parallelperception]

Tiff wrote:nemo wrote:Again, The multiverse creates separate entities from itself, some of those if they choose can can move into another sphere of possibilities, and those possibilities require certain personal achievements/milestones.
Dependent arising shows hows its impossible for an entity to create anything if this entity is itself a complete entity. So multiuniverse, in this sense described above, is creator of other entities from itself. How can it create from itself other entities? Does anything in phenomena actually do this? Any examples? In other words, how do you arrive at this conclusion?
Nothing wrong with us all sharing our perspectives, but under such subjectivity that cannot be explained how it is an absolute truth, there will be nothing but these individual viewpoints that cannot be verified.
I see it! I am not saying an entity is or must be complete, you are! The stand that individual viewpoints that can not be verified, and subjectivity that can not be explained has bearing on matters of energy is a machination of the mind. Identifying an absolute truth and understanding it does what for you energetically?

[Tiff]

"I am not saying an entity is or must be complete, you are!"



No I'm not, lol. I've been saying all along that all phenomena is interdependent and there is no essence so...no entity.



Identifying the absolute truth of interdependence enables me to let go of the false concept of "I" as being inherently existent as an independent thing when in truth it is not.

[nemo.parallelperception]

Tiff wrote:Identifying the absolute truth of interdependence enables me to let go of the false concept of "I" as being inherently existent as an independent thing when in truth it is not.Lol, My wife is reading that dwyer guys stuff and she asked me to point at myself, and I pointed all around at the trees, sky and then at my heart, she kinda just wanted me to point at my heart
Tiff I had this truth of yours realized before I went to see Lujan, he had more energy though, if you see what I mean.
My stand  is that  the Multiverse is much more multifaceted than any explanation can encompass, but I am sure Lex is going to try.

[Tiff]

nemo,



What truth of mine?

[Tiff]

"While Reeves relishes being a part of the Wachowski Brothers vision, it
remains a vision that the trilogy's directors themselves won't share
with the press. Keanu is reluctant to further define their vision in
their place, "because they don't want it defined. I don't think that's
something they're interested in giving to anyone who watches the film."
Reeves talked a bit about the philosophy of the Matrix. "What is reality, what is truth, what is fate, dealing with man and technology. What is AI? What is the real? And if real is just sensory perceptions why can't the matrix be as real and the whole aspect of finding authentic life." interview excerpts



"The parable of the movie only goes so far. It is an excellent device for
considering liberation and a perceived parallel existence but it is
just that another EXISTENCE! Once in that other existence one still has
to deal with existence. Existence itself has still not been penetrated." ~Lex
"WAKE-UP!" opening theme song.
[Reeves] begins to warm to his theme. "Those questions you have are also
strongly Neo's questions such as: Do you believe in fate? Why
not? I'm
not in control of my own life. That whole thing of asking those
questions
I think is Neo's journey and it was fun to ask them. I have a
feeling
about what Neo wants and the brothers had a feeling, so in the
second
one in an odd way I think they kind of invert what happened. In
the first
one, Thomas Anderson became Neo; his digital self became his
real self
and his fear of flying became him flying and there's a certain
aspect
in Reloaded where the hero gets inverted and we're back to Neo
as Thomas
Anderson. We see his fears, his personal kind of hopes
and his
vulnerabilities."
...a perceived parallel existence but it is
just that another EXISTENCE! Once in that other existence one still has
to deal with existence. Existence itself has still not been penetrated."
The value of dependent arising lies in seeing fallacy in this idea of self as independent and suffering and breaking apart those misconceptions. A part of this, a problem of not address exisitence directly, is one can turn to pseudo-truths as if they were absolute truth when they are not...if only to bring comfort to the sense of vulnerability conceived in ignorance, the "I" as having essence to protect.

[Tiff]

[Tiff]

[Tiff]

Gonzo wrote:Tiff wrote:Gonzo wrote:Re the heavy readership, I suspect it is more bots rather than "real" folk, although it doesn't appear to be search bots from Google and the like. I'm paranoid enough to think in terms of Big Brother, although I'm not sure what He might be looking for. That He is looking, there is no doubt. It is not without notice btw, which countries we each are from.If this were the case, all the threads I post in would get lots of hits...but this is not the case. Only this thread.
Perhaps we are gaining the attention of the Mahayana Buddhists, then, looking perhaps, for something new.
Not sure what you mean specifically by new, but if the perception here is that dependent arising is new to Mahayana Buddhism, then know that's not the case at all. Neither Lex nor I have expressed here anything new nor are we claiming to. Its very well documented and taught for centuries now. And in Mahayana particularly its well-known. And I'm sure they discuss this extensively among their schools. No need to come here, lol.

[Tiff]

nemo wrote:Tiff wrote:Identifying the absolute truth of interdependence enables me to let go of the false concept of "I" as being inherently existent as an independent thing when in truth it is not.Lol, My wife is reading that dwyer guys stuff and she asked me to point at myself, and I pointed all around at the trees, sky and then at my heart, she kinda just wanted me to point at my heart
Tiff I had this truth of yours realized before I went to see Lujan, he had more energy though, if you see what I mean.
My stand  is that  the Multiverse is much more multifaceted than any explanation can encompass, but I am sure Lex is going to try.


Maybe its not that Lujan had more energy than you, to me its not even about what some supposedly have and others don't. I would just take that entire focus and redirect it to examination of exisitence.  Its nicer that way anyway

[ninth octave]

...to include even more content, and you'll see that the frame, if we widen the frame further, we'll see that the architecture of the human psyche explains
 most of that tension. So the more we include in the frame of reference, the more ambiguous is the meaning of the word 'cause'.
If we drive the inquiry in the other direction ( towards 'effect'), we'll find the same thing- the effects and causes both disperse in scope until eventually they touch everything in the universe.
At what point does this diffusion of focus render the words meaningless? Where is the "right"place to put our frame to discuss cause and effect?
  It should be obvious that there is no correct answer to that question. It depends on what you're trying to study.
Ultimately, without frame of reference cause and effect melt back into the whole and quietly disappear. Reality is just doing what it's doing."

[ninth octave]

Here is well-rounded , non objective, all inclusive , all encompassing approach into the Movie Matrix. www.unomaha.edu/jrf/gnostic.htm
 I think it would be nice to ask the Wachowski Bros.for another one.

[lex icon]

“The central theme of a Toltec is based on the energetic achievement of individual entities keeping their flame of awareness. This is the challenge.” Nemo
Nemo, what are individual entities?
If we cannot find an individual entity what would that mean for such Toltec themes?

[lex icon]

The multiverse creates separate entities from itself Nemo.
Nemo could you qualify this and how you know those to be so?