Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Gonzo wrote:
ninth octave wrote:
Isn't pure unconditioned awareness some THING? If there is some THING, you might as well call it "me"...Gonzo
Let's just say there is no borderline between what the inner self is experiencing and what the self is projecting to others outwardly. The thinker is absent in the moment because it detaches from any foreign elements to distract it from remaining close inside the now as it unfolds.. There is NO essence of a me/ self and there is no essence of the other self that projects outwardly to the corresponding object(s) or person(s) that would separate the moment from it's totality. ( two happeners don't exist here). This is response while sustaining unconditioned awareness . It depends upon what condition your condition is in to begin with since everything is subject to impermanence. Is nirvana subject to impermanence too? The two happeners ( aversions or what ever essence divides or splits the moment from its totality) doesn't exist or show any essence in the moments of nondualism. Nothing revolves around the self - not even the the egotic nature.Meaning that our"self"- centeredness is ill-founded anywhere. Buddhism observes that the "self" we're so desperately concerned about IS AN ILLUSION. Our ultimate nature is no- self or selflessness. It means that our INDEPENDENT "selfhood" is illusory. Everyone and everything is interconnected and interdependent. The ignorance of our selflessness is the origin of our attachments and aversions, which are in turn the origin of suffering.
I'm not sure how you can say there are not two happeners here, since you wrote the above and I'm writing this.
re Nirvana...I liked a quip I posted earlier...the implication is, that like awakening, there is no such thing as Nirvana. In effect, all that is, is impermanent, since the essence of being is change.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Tiff wrote:
From the associated Press:
Big Bang investigators want new atom smasher
By EMMA VANDORE
..."It's the future of our discipline."
Instead of crashing protons together, the new international collider will accelerate electrons and positrons, their antimatter equivalent, he said.
In March, the Large Hadron Collider produced its first bang, the most potent force on the tiny atomic level that humans have ever created.
Two beams of protons were sent hurtling in opposite directions toward each other in a 17-mile (27-kilometer) tunnel below the Swiss-French border — the coldest place in the universe at slightly above absolute zero.
CERN, or the European Organization for Nuclear Research, used powerful superconducting magnets to force the two beams to cross; two of the protons collided, producing 7 trillion electron volts.
Heuer said that CERN's experiments so far have "done an incredible job," locating the particles scientists already knew existed. Now their job is to find new ones.
The colliders also may help scientists see dark matter, the strange stuff that makes up more of the universe than normal matter but has not been seen on Earth.
"Your work represents the oldest dream of man since he tried to understand and transform what goes on around him," Sarkozy said. "Why is there something rather than nothing?" Interestingly, Nagarjuna has already answered this. So to understand Nagarjuna, takes some effort (but not as much as maybe perceived), but once understood, one does not fall prey to such seemingly valid questions. The question "Why is there something rather than nothing?"is not valid in any way. Its the wrong line of questioning, only leads in circles. By try telling one of these scientists this. Imagine digging your whole life for a treasure only to come up with dirt. They may satisfy some of their questions, but not the ultimate one spoken of here...their true treasure-question.
The most amazing thing is that getting beyond this question is only a preliminary step, no big deal. A small feat. So they are creating an atom smasher, lol. Its like throwing a boulder to crush a gnat.
This is all A.I. and can never actualize the reality of first cause /creation. Can you place "God" in a petrie dish and try to clone his DNA/ RNA?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Gonzo wrote:Tiff wrote:To prove you are individual essence. Or, if you prefer, then to prove you can have personal notions.
First it cannot happen. Not in your body...which was composed by family DNA, not in mind which was shaped by friends, family, teachers, co-workers, partners. Not in perception which knows only interaction in phenomena (all your memories up till today that gives a sense of identity)...at no point can you be in a void alone, just you, as a personal entity without ever having been connected with everything else. If it can't be done, then it can't be so. In other words, there is no personal you that stands alone. And the criteria of individual essence (personal notions) is it must stand alone. No-thing stands alone. You cannot show me anything that does this.I submit this is specious logic. That is, your conclusion that there is no personal you cannot follow merely from the standpoint that that personal being does not stand alone. Obviously, in order to have identity, there must be "other". In fact, quite the opposite conclusion is logical.There is no personal individuality and by definition individuality must stand apart and be self-aware and truth is our awareness is due to "others". Such as your notions of enlightenment as you say come from Gautama you say, and The Blue Cliff Records, etc. So those are interdependent reflections. Your sense of enlightenment therefore is not personal (came from elsewhere). And BTW is is more intricate than just the two mentioned. When I say elsewhere I am not suggesting separate from you, but elsewhere in that you are extended beyond the borders of "you" in appearance sense.
That which is believed to be personally alone cannot be extracted and remain what it thinks itself to be, so "it" is merely an appearance of. A reflection of all phenomena. An I, personal in the vaguest sense, that is mere I because it dependents on everything to appear what it appears to be.
The One Mind is that in which all phenomena and emptiness arises. Not a person's mind verses the rest of the world. The problem is its not perceived the former way, and is most often seen as the latter way. The "out there" and "in here" appear to be separate domains. Which is why I said imagine a void and this void was to prove or disprove if individual "anything" can stand apart and then we could say, "yes it is individual". But we see it can't be done. The fact that you are reliant on other phenomena shows you are truly not an individual as you perceive "yourself " to be. And our reliance is vast and interconnected...
Such as in modern life we are globally reliant. Imagine if we lost electricity and fuel. We would all, well most people would, starve or die from other reasons such as cold or heat or illness that would otherwise be prevented with technologies.
Its easy to forget how interdependent we are. There was a movie, Castaway, with Tom Hanks. He has to journey into this realization. In a way he comes out stronger and more self-reliant, but no one can become completely isolated, and even on that island he is never completely cut-off from exisitence, not even close, what happens is his perceived exisitence undergoes a shift because he looses access to it, and that perceived exisitence was that he was isolated and didn't need anyone. He sees this is not so, ironically, by becoming isolated, but again its never going to be a complete isolation, it can't be.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
ninth octave wrote:Tiff wrote:
The Lion of Pride.
One value of dependent arising is it erases the notion (if repeatedly applied) of an I who has achieved. Because any perceived achievement came from a gathering of components. The right circumstances, the right people and the right emphasis on realizations to comprise any endeavor that resulted in successful outcome. One must beware of the pitfalls of creating a separate "me" apart from everything else that supported such, because there truly is no "individual" anything to promote.
Consequently, the Lion of Pride is one of the 8 dangers (traps).
Each of the eight dangers spoken about in Buddhism has an antidote. In the case of pride it is acknowledging interdependence and kindness from others. Another antidote is to bow, express humility to the teachings. To remember one does not possess a separate capability of anything (the teaching and knowing of are not separate), the teachings were bestowed by favorable convergence.
Instead of 8 variables there might be 11. This is similar teaching of Lujan also and what. "mutual enhancment"or non duality arrives at. Unconditioned awareness.
There are many teachings that speak of variables, lol. I'm just
referring to these specific ones called "the 8 dangers", they are
actually called "the 8 fears" but reworded for English.
Mutual enhancement. It's what occurs naturally, eh? non-duality, long understood in Buddhist teachings.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
lex icon wrote:
He proves there can be no essence (no first cause and no beginning of "being"). Tiff speaking of NJ
When I read NJ I see that the emphasis is more on how illogical the reasoning is that claims such things as first cause or inherent essence of things. That is what is so fascinating because people do not see that they are depending on reasoning to make their claims and that such reasoning is illogical by even their own standards and on and on its goes.
And the reason its illogical is it cannot be. Otherwise it would be logical. So he proves there is no sound logic to it once examined. I see what you state and I have as the same. And the end result is the same, the disproved logic is dropped.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Gonzo,
I remember a while back...many posts ago, you said the perciever and percieved must always be. This is not a direct quote but basically what you were saying.
I propose this, there is no separation of perceiver and perceived. The perceiver IS the perceived and the perceived IS the the one who perceives it, they are one. The "out there" and "in here" are the same. Identity of "a perceiver who perceives 'other things' " only creates the appearance of separation because of the act of reflecting in this manner. Such reflecting is not a permanent stream of consciousness, that is, it can be let go of, for a few seconds or even longer which is of course the goal of practitioners seeking to get beyond the realization of duality.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
And ninth...
I look forward to the day you and I call each other friends, in the true sense. I cannot be exactly as I appear to you and vice verse. Our interactions to forums are limiting in knowing all about each other. Regardless, I have appreciated things you've said and I know its the same for you...
my avatar...I saw this yesterday when I was going through my files and had a good laugh. I remembered when you said you woke up in the morning looking like this. I laughed for a good while after I read that that day, and so was the case for yesterday and I decided to make it my new avatar. Maitreya Buddha, the one of the future age (of the Buddhas of the three ages) is the laughing Buddha. In laughter, the truly joyous kind (selfless happiness), we realize enlightement, non-duality.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
lex icon wrote:
He proves there can be no essence (no first cause and no beginning of "being"). Tiff speaking of NJ
When I read NJ I see that the emphasis is more on how illogical the reasoning is that claims such things as first cause or inherent essence of things. That is what is so fascinating because people do not see that they are depending on reasoning to make their claims and that such reasoning is illogical by even their own standards and on and on its goes.
Lex,
Could you demonstrate how you came to logically conclude your spiritual knowledge of God was just illogical reasoning on your part. I have been asking you this for years. What really gave you this grand shift in perception in order to cancel God out of the equation totally. In short how did you empty God from all that you thought you knew about God and yourself.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
http://www.youtube.com/v/V2uHTJNr3CI&hl=fr_FR&fs=1 The Fool wrote:
Oh well...
Golden Fool!! LOL.. Does it really take an acid trip or twoto figure it all out like this?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
ninth octave wrote:
Somethings don't need explaining to get one to understand. Cause and effect is demonstrated to us in the mundane and can be avoided to its extremes with creative visualization.
Apparently you are already assuming you and Lex are the only ones who understand human nature and the true nature of things. lol . I well understand this by experiencing life in a a relatively different way and besides the fact I am older than you.. I don't agree with the with no first cause. So you assume that no one can follow NJ's teachings or Buddhism to a tee because of this not being in their field of awareness.. The Buddha told his disciples on his death bed to work out their own faith. It is stated that there is no first cause because first cause can not be fully understood period. Just because one believes in a first cause doesn't make them any less likely to be" empty "than the one that doesn't believe in first cause. First cause yeah or nay should not be the issue or a hinderence or the obstruction that blocks one to coming to their totality. Who or what can explain God? Certainly not you or I nor Buddha nor Nagarjuna. No man can fully explain gravity yet though we are constantly reminded of its cause and effects everyday of our life.
We all arise to Bodhisattv-aness whilst participating here.Hey I didn't see this post from you yesterday...
"Apparently you are already assuming you and Lex are the only ones who
understand human nature and the true nature of things. lol ."
No way! lol, I just said we are the only ones supporting dependent arising, human nature is relative reality (and very subjective topic), the true nature of things...well, that's what we are discussing be we all, including you, have our sense of having the correct answer, even if that answer is to not decide. I think that's why people enter into debate, they see the value of disgreements and potential insights that can arise from.
"I don't agree with the with no first cause. So you assume that no one
can follow NJ's teachings or Buddhism to a tee because of this not being
in their field of awareness.. "
NJ shows first cause is not possible (since its a logical preposition in the first place, he shows its logically unsound), so yes I don't think you fully support what he says, maybe you only find value in somethings he says, which is what I said in previous post.
As for Buddhism, I'll clarify what I said earlier, its vast and some practitioners don't have to follow NJ and they are still following Buddhism, so the answer to the second part of your question is no, people can pursue Buddhism however they see fit according to the school of Buddhism they prescribe to. There are choices. And within those choices, people can discuss those aspects agreed upon to come to a fuller understanding of the teachings. So to interact with those who support the teachings is beneficial, just as interacting with those who do not can be of benefit. But to just constantly disagree, is not eventually going to amount to much, so its good to have conversations with supporters, and this is by choice and I'm not negating those who practice Buddhism differently than I would approach it.
"The Buddha told his disciples on his death bed to work out their own
faith. It is stated that there is no first cause because first cause can
not be fully understood period. Just because one believes in a first
cause doesn't make them any less likely to be" empty "than the one that
doesn't believe in first cause."
Ninth, ninth, ninth, I'm not saying I think you are less empty!!! lol How can anything be more or less empty than empty?! I'm saying this...In Mahayana Buddhism, particularly Tibetan, dependent arising is a teaching, a very central and basic understanding from which all other various aspects of their teachings support. This topic we are in, this thread 'emptiness and objects' is about that very approach to Buddhism. We are discussing it to bring it to focus and clarity. I said before, Lex and I can go back to just emailing each other about it if no one is interested. There has been some interest but not necessarily anyone was convinced, which is fine with me truly. Also the forum on Zen, lots of things yet to explore of which I would like to explore as well.
So, you are empty regardless of what you believe, and I am not questioning your emptiness, to do so is to not understand what emptiness is. So there is an important consideration...understanding emptiness. Has nothing to do with "being empty or not" there is no state of emptiness to be or not be in. But to understand it, realize it directly. And in this topic this refers to "to realize phenomena is empty". No essence. No essence means no central hub of anything, no god. How you can say you realize emptiness of essence and god at the same time, I have never seen you give a good answer on this.
First cause yeah or nay should not be the issue or a hinderence or the
obstruction that blocks one to coming to their totality. Who or what
can explain God? Certainly not you or I nor Buddha nor Nagarjuna. No man
can fully explain gravity yet though we are constantly reminded of its
cause and effects everyday of our life.
We all arise to Bodhisattv-aness whilst participating here.
God (perceived as apart from you) is a hindrance to arriving at non-duality as taught in Buddhism. If non-duality is understood, why support the concept of God? If you know you are the supreme, the ultimate realization of yourself, why support the idea of "God"? Or better yet, what hindrance could I possibly have by not believing in God?
I say goodbye to romance, yeah
Goodbye to friends, I tell you
Goodbye to all the past
I guess that we'll meet
We'll meet in the end
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
the Maitreyavyākaraṇa (The Prophecy of Maitreya)
"will lose their doubts, and the torrents of their cravings will be cut off: free from all misery they will manage to cross the ocean of becoming; and, as a result of Maitreya's teachings, they will lead a holy life. No longer will they regard anything as their own, they will have no possession, no gold or silver, no home, no relatives! But they will lead the holy life of chastity under Maitreya's guidance. They will have torn the net of the passions, they will manage to enter into trances, and theirs will be an abundance of joy and happiness, for they will lead a holy life under Maitreya's guidance." (Trans. in Conze 1959:241)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Was realizing this yesterday and wanted to share.
First, the reason Toltec and Buddhism can be linked is because they both embody truth. So, if something is a truth, in whatever manner its conveyed, it remains true. So there can be cross referencing and one does not detract from the other, but merely shows what's true in both cases.
The Wheel of Dharma...the three revolutions of
First revolution- relative reality
Second revolution -emptiness
Third revolution - Buddha nature
Toltec teachings
Tonal - first revolution
Nagual- second revolution
Totality of one's self - third revolution
People who like Toltec wisdom better than Buddhism, certainly understandable and this cross reference does not undermine either teaching, just shows how the truth is understood around the globe...in Asia and in the Americas, differently but not different truths. So they can actually bring more clarity when explored together. Perhaps this is why this sub-forum was created...one reason for it.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Getting swallowed by infinity...what does that mean? I equate it with Buddha nature. One has to relinquish "sense of self and others", the world here and their individuality in it. Giving up dual perception to enter into full realization of non-duality.
The Buddha (anyone obtaining Buddhahood) still has a body (emanation body) after he dies, and comes here to teach. So maybe Buddhism and Toltec understanding are not that different.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
I've mentioned Lex in posts many times of recent...so just to be clear, he and I are not coordinating anything behind the scenes. Our interest is not that structured that we discuss direction of thread or anything of that nature. I don't know what his specific realizations are nor he mine until we read them here. We do have one thing in common for sure and I don't need to even ask him to know its true, and that is we value the teachings of dependent arising, emptiness and that lineage of Buddhism.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Ninth said: "Golden �Fool�!!� LOL.. Does it really take an acid trip or two�to figure it all out like this?"
Definitely not! Psychedelic journey is child's play in comparison to when actual dissolution of one's beliefs happens under the guidance (and tricks) of a true master.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Fool...
Dissolution of all beliefs...even dissolution of beliefs in true masters?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Yes, even beliefs in true masters. Good point Tiff, as always. And i say it again : ever-fresh women's wisdom What i meant by a true master is one whose intent is only to help you to be free or i should say to help you realize that what you truly are is ever-free.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Who or what can explain God? Certainly not you or I nor Buddha nor Nagarjuna. No man can fully explain gravity yet though we are constantly reminded of its cause and effects everyday of
our life. Ninth
Yet the writer of Ephesians seems to point to the possibility of a deeper understanding of God than you exhibit with you words here, Ninth. The writer seems to suggest that the knowledge of that God is not as removed and separate or different as you would have us believe.
What you speak of regarding gravity does not apply since there are those who can levitate. What is the experience of gravity while levitating?
Ephesians 1:17-21 (Amplified Bible)
17[For I always pray to] the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, that He may grant you a spirit of wisdom and revelation [of insight into mysteries and secrets] in the [deep and intimate] knowledge of Him,
18By having the eyes of your heart flooded with light, so that you can know and understand the hope to which He has called you, and how rich is His glorious inheritance in the saints (His set-apart ones),
19And [so that you can know and understand] what is the immeasurable and unlimited and surpassing greatness of His power in and for us who believe, as demonstrated in the working of His mighty strength,
20Which He exerted in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His [own] right hand in the heavenly [places],
21Far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named [above every title that can be conferred], not only in this age and in this world, but also in the age and the world which are to come.
Ephesians 3:16-19 (Amplified Bible)
16May He grant you out of the rich treasury of His glory to be strengthened and reinforced with mighty power in the inner man by the [Holy] Spirit [Himself indwelling your innermost being and personality].
17May Christ through your faith [actually] dwell (settle down, abide, make His permanent home) in your hearts! May you be rooted deep in love and founded securely on love,
18That you may have the power and be strong to apprehend and grasp with all the saints [God's devoted people, the experience of that love] what is the breadth and length and height and depth [of it];
19[That you may really come] to know [practically, [a]through experience for yourselves] the love of Christ, which far surpasses mere knowledge [without experience]; that you may be filled [through all your being] [c]unto all the fullness of God [may have the richest measure of the divine Presence, and [d]become a body wholly filled and flooded with God Himself]!
Then there is this.....if you wish to go even further.
"My father is the intrinsic awareness, Samantabhadra (Sanskrit; Tib. ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་པོ). My mother is the ultimate sphere of reality, Samantabhadri (Sanskrit; Tib. ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་མོ). I belong to the caste of non-duality of the sphere of awareness. My name is the Glorious Lotus Born. I am from the unborn sphere of all phenomena. I consume concepts of duality as my diet. I act in the way of the Buddhas of the three times." Padmasambhava
[img]file:///Users/karldisley/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot.png[/img][img]file:///Users/karldisley/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot-1.png[/img]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
The Fool wrote:
Ninth said: "Golden �Fool�!!� LOL.. Does it really take an acid trip or two�to figure it all out like this?"
Definitely not! Psychedelic journey is child's play in comparison to when actual dissolution of one's beliefs happens under the guidance (and tricks) of a true master.I mean the mind on" power plants" or " flower power "was the catalyst for an altered state of consciousness. The mind enters an alter state of reality when one enters into the psychedelic journey. The hallucinations are purely subjective inside the mind of the hallucinator but to the outsider looking in the tripper looks rediculous.The fascinating thing is the one that decides to trip with the other also appears to "share" the same trip or same mind field of awareness together. Now if there is three or more all sharing the same trip inside the mind than you can say this must be a universely accepted truth.
My point is you still tricked and distorted the mind's eye with psychedelics and once there inside the trip you will never "see" things as they really look in reality. Reality than becomes like movie reel reality.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
lex icon wrote:
Who or what can explain God? Certainly not you or I nor Buddha nor Nagarjuna. No man can fully explain gravity yet though we are constantly reminded of its cause and effects everyday of
our life. Ninth
Yet the writer of Ephesians seems to point to the possibility of a deeper understanding of God than you exhibit with you words here, Ninth. The writer seems to suggest that the knowledge of that God is not as removed and separate or different as you would have us believe.
What you speak of regarding gravity does not apply since there are those who can levitate. What is the experience of gravity while levitating?
Ephesians 1:17-21 (Amplified Bible)
17[For I always pray to] the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, that He may grant you a spirit of wisdom and revelation [of insight into mysteries and secrets] in the [deep and intimate] knowledge of Him,
18By having the eyes of your heart flooded with light, so that you can know and understand the hope to which He has called you, and how rich is His glorious inheritance in the saints (His set-apart ones),
19And [so that you can know and understand] what is the immeasurable and unlimited and surpassing greatness of His power in and for us who believe, as demonstrated in the working of His mighty strength,
20Which He exerted in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His [own] right hand in the heavenly [places],
21Far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named [above every title that can be conferred], not only in this age and in this world, but also in the age and the world which are to come.
Ephesians 3:16-19 (Amplified Bible)
16May He grant you out of the rich treasury of His glory to be strengthened and reinforced with mighty power in the inner man by the [Holy] Spirit [Himself indwelling your innermost being and personality].
17May Christ through your faith [actually] dwell (settle down, abide, make His permanent home) in your hearts! May you be rooted deep in love and founded securely on love,
18That you may have the power and be strong to apprehend and grasp with all the saints [God's devoted people, the experience of that love] what is the breadth and length and height and depth [of it];
19[That you may really come] to know [practically, [a]through experience for yourselves] the love of Christ, which far surpasses mere knowledge [without experience]; that you may be filled [through all your being] [c]unto all the fullness of God [may have the richest measure of the divine Presence, and [d]become a body wholly filled and flooded with God Himself]!
Then there is this.....if you wish to go even further.
"My father is the intrinsic awareness, Samantabhadra (Sanskrit; Tib. ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་པོ). My mother is the ultimate sphere of reality, Samantabhadri (Sanskrit; Tib. ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་མོ). I belong to the caste of non-duality of the sphere of awareness. My name is the Glorious Lotus Born. I am from the unborn sphere of all phenomena. I consume concepts of duality as my diet. I act in the way of the Buddhas of the three times." Padmasambhava
[img]file:///Users/karldisley/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot.png[/img][img]file:///Users/karldisley/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/moz-screenshot-1.png[/img]I don't experience God as you and never could because I can not be you on earth.
I have experienced nonduality and all that was written by Padmasambhava only in dreaming to know of it.I have experienced this zone once with another person before to know it is real. Only in dreaming , I ultimately know I am unborn and am still looking for a man that has never been born ..If I consume concepts of duality as my diet , I certainly wouldn't be heavy and would be light as a feather or poetry in motion and levitate in the face of gravity. Only in dreams have I done this enough to know what my original face is. For now I am only reminded when I get around to smoking some pot.
How do you levitate now Lex? Do you experience non-duality? The funny thing is whenever I do see you, you appear to be in a state of non-duality. Does it really take two to tango?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
ninth octave wrote:
lex icon wrote:
He proves there can be no essence (no first cause and no beginning of "being"). Tiff speaking of NJ
When I read NJ I see that the emphasis is more on how illogical the reasoning is that claims such things as first cause or inherent essence of things. That is what is so fascinating because people do not see that they are depending on reasoning to make their claims and that such reasoning is illogical by even their own standards and on and on its goes.
Lex,
Could you demonstrate how you came to logically conclude your spiritual knowledge of God was just illogical reasoning on your part. I have been asking you this for years. What really gave you this grand shift in perception in order to cancel God out of the equation totally. In short how did you empty God from all that you thought you knew about God and yourself.Lex,
was the other post before this your way of avoiding answering the direct questions here?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Lex,
Could you demonstrate how you came to logically conclude your
spiritual knowledge of God was just illogical reasoning on your part. I
have been asking you this for years. What really gave you this grand
shift in perception in order to cancel God out of the equation totally.
In short how did you empty God from all that you thought you knew about
God and yourself. Ninth.
I have been telling you for years that if you just examine why it is that you conclude there is a God and follow this to the end, your reasoning also will come to the same place.
Now experientially the tradition of Christian Mysticism I came by was apophatic when this is followed to the end the emptying process does not stop with oneself, but goes on to include objective phenomenal reality and EVEN god and even emptiness.
Emptiness is not some conceptual philosophy which you can choose to agree or disagree with.
What is perceived
is the non- existence of self-nature in things, and an awareness of
this non-existence is referred to as the perception of emptiness.
If you still perceive objects as if they were inherent individual entities then you do not perceive emptiness. Unless you seriously engage the reason why you impute essence and inherent being to things and get to the bottom of it you will never perceive emptiness.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
I don't experience God as you and never could because I can not be you on earth. Ninth
And neither can you be you!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
The Fool wrote:Yes, even beliefs in true masters. Good point Tiff, as always. And i say it again : ever-fresh women's wisdom What i meant by a true master is one whose intent is only to help you to be free or i should say to help you realize that what you truly are is ever-free.I agree, and happy to see you responding this way because I said at the time I posted that it sounds like I'm confronting Fool, lol. I really wasn't...not that much, I just figured if you were really walking the walk you woudl not find my question offensive.
I too have a great respect for the teachers who follow the teachings, as you say, the true masters. We can recognize them by their adherence to the teachings. And because they adhere to the teachings, they help us to be free, of even them, via such teachings. So the focus is always on the teachings, not the teachers. We may call them true masters out of respect, but they are not expecting it or even suggesting or wanting it because its about freedom.
|
