Inception and Architect Merging

[lex icon]

"Remember now, the grayish whirlwind that you encountered years ago is responsible for this phenomenon. This being is so adaptive within it's intelligence it has almost learnt how to integrate completely with our architect of observation within the living construct and station itself within that position so unnoticeably that it almost speaks the truths of a seer."
                                                                                                 The Art Of Stalking Parallel Perception, Lujan Matus
INCEPTION and Architect Merging
 For those who have not seen the movie yet....A team of sophisticated dream navigators are using dreaming to “steal” secrets from peoples’ minds or conversely to covertly break into peoples’ minds in order to plant a seed that will have dramatic impact in the waking life, the results of which can be manipulated by those in the know who have been able to anticipate the outcome, because of their prior knowledge of the seed they have had surreptitiously planted in who ever they choose. The more influential a person in waking life the more the impact of the seed. This might seem like a far out concept but it is something we face everyday in our own lives but are usually unaware of.
         There is a interesting scene in which the team led by Leonardo Decaprio have isolated their mark within a dream, in a “bar room”. However this person poses a unique challenge in that he is aware dreaming is used by certain nefarious agents as a vehicle to act subversively against a person. So he has taken appropriate counter measures in the form of defensive dream training, training which acts to connect consciously to the unconscious, which becomes more and more aware that it is being infiltrated. Usually such counter measures are enough to alert a person when they are being interfered being with so they can actively participate in the stability of their own integrity and remain uncompromised.
          The team aware of his training adapt to the situation and concoct a scheme that will use the mark’s training to their advantage. Instead of trying to covertly act in ways that avoid alerting the mark to their activity and the fact that he is dreaming they seek to alert the mark to their presence and the fact that he is dreaming and then hide their intentions by posing as the “agents” of his defensive training. Now this is where it gets very interesting and informative.
           Leonardo strikes up a conversation with the mark at the bar which aims at introducing himself as a benefactor with life saving knowledge and presenting the dream situation in a light that is precariously threatening to mark while establishing the need of the knowledge and expertise Leonardo, the dream agent, offers. If unsuccessful in this ploy the mark’s own defensive training will kick in. If successful the need for the defensive training will have been circumvented and the mark will rely on his new ally, the dream agent.  By redirecting and displacing the defensive training with himself the dream agent is able to merge with the mark’s dream architect. The dream agent is then able to stabilize the mark within the construction of his own dream modified by the limits introduced by the dream agent. Of course the limits presented by the dream agent come with “solutions” that only serve the dream agent and are deleterious to the mark.
 “Be aware of their usage of imprints. This precept is usually connected to a ploy or a concept that gives basis to land marking on inner and external landscapes. A person can be imprinted by virtue of being partially aware of the environment, which is a form of immaturity. By being partially aware one’s attention can be molded and, by the mere fact that molding occurs, the imprint begins to become more unconscious. This is how an imprint is established surreptitiously, through familiarity. Be aware of reinforcement, which is usually confirmed by the engineers of land marking so that they may keep their world and our world in familiar comprehension for usage. Also be aware of anchoring. Anchoring is a state of verification that draws the subject into immersion and brings about a solidified state of perception.”
                                                                                                              The Art Of Stalking Parallel Perception By Lujan Matus.
           How Leonardo, the dream agent, breaks into the fundamental integrity of the marks psyche, is through a simple question, “Do you remember how you got here? Where where you before you entered this bar?” Of course the mark doesn’t know, because he is unaware that he is dreaming, which the dream agent did know. Decaprio’s team have the mark’s bodied on a plane in a state of chemically induced sleep. The dream agent proceeds to inform him of how he got there proceeding on the power and credibility of being in a position of being able to ask such a question in the first place! Of course he does not mention the “kidnapping”, just that he is dreaming and that this his defense training being activated. Once the mark’s integrity has been cracked his power to act independently in just syphoned away until he is positioned in a easily manipulated state of total compromise.
           This is risky for the dream agents because they are partially revealed and the mark still has free will. In order to gain his willing participation in their agenda they must destabilize him and deflect his attention from the possibility of just waking up and being done with it. By introducing fearful elements and then explaining those elements in ways that just escalate the stakes the mark is kept off balance and pressured into accepting hasty remedies that are presented as solutions to his mounting anxiety and personal safety. Once the mark is on board with the proffered solution to his dilemma this then acts as an stabilizing anchor within the perceptual limitations outlined and imposed by the dream agent. It now seems to make sense and the mark believes he is acting on his own behalf. Anyone who is part of the dream agent team and who knows the agenda will be able to manipulate the mark accordingly.
          Students of Lujan Matus will recognize here the stalking techniques which are spoken of extensively in his book, The Art Of Stalking Parallel Perception. What might not be so immediately available is the implications of this hidden core presented in this scene from Inception.
          Every day we are faced with the question of how did we get here. Not just the petty dramas of the days conflicts ie; “How did I get myself into this situation?” But on a broader more existential level, “How did I actually come to be here?” Jesus too in his day dealt with this. The gospel of John 8:14 has him saying,
 “14Jesus answered, "Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going.”
          The implication of which is if people did know where Jesus came from they would also know where they themselves were from. As they are ignorant of this they are ignorant of their own origin. Vulnerable to plausible solutions.
How many religious/metaphysical solutions are offered on a daily basis presenting information about our origin and destination, from reincarnation to God to aliens to sorcerers etc. But these are all, without exception, teachings and speculations based on cause and effect. Remember anything that has a beginning has an end and is not immutable. That which is impermanent cannot demonstrate any inherent existence. So what is the solution to cause and effect? Is it even possible to find an immutable first cause in an effect?
Chapter 1: Causality
1.    Nothing whatever arises. Not from itself, not from another, not from both itself and another, and not without a cause.2
2.    There are just four conditions of the existence of anything: efficient cause, supporting condition, precipitating condition, and dominant condition. There is no fifth condition.3
3.    Among the four conditions of the existence of a thing, there is found no substantial essence [svabhava = self-nature] of the thing. If things have no substantial essences, then there can be no real relations between different things.4
4.    There are no causes with conditions; there are no causes without conditions. There are no conditions without causes; there are no conditions with causes.
5.    Things arise from conditions, but if there is no arising, aren't conditions not conditions?
6.    There are no conditions of existing things, nor are there conditions of that which does not exist. How can the non-existent have a condition? If something exists, does it need a condition?5
7.    If there are no existents, nor non-existents, nor existent non-existents, how can there be any causes? If there were a cause, what would it cause?
8.    If there are events (for example, mental states) without supporting conditions, why should we speak of supporting conditions at all?
9.    If things do not begin to exist, then they cannot cease to exist. If things do not begin to exist, how can they have precipitating conditions? If something has ceased to exist, how can it be a condition or cause of anything else?
10.    If things have no substantial essences, then they have no real existence; and, in that case, the statement, "This is the cause or condition of that," is meaningless.
11.    An effect cannot be found in a single cause or condition, nor can an effect be found in all causes and conditions together. How can something not found in causes and conditions arise from them?
12.    If an effect arises from causes or conditions in which it does not pre-exist, then couldn't it arise from no causes or conditions at all?
13.    If an effect is created by its conditions, but the conditions are not self-created, how could the effect ever come to be?1
Therefore, effects cannot arise from causes or conditions, nor can they arise from non-causes or non-conditions. If there are no effects whatsoever, how can there be any causes or conditions (or, for that matter, any non-causes or non-conditions)?Chapter 8: The Agent and the Action
Chapter 8: The Agent and the Action
1.    A real1 agent is not an agent [that is, cannot act]. An unreal (non-existent) agent is not an agent [that is, cannot act]. 2.    That which is [being] does not act. Action in a world of real beings would be action without an agent. An agent in a
world of real beings would be an agent without action.
3.    If a non-existent agent performs a non-existent action, then both action and agent would be uncaused.
4.    No cause, no effect. No cause, no agent. No agent, no activity [no power to act]. No activity, no action.
5.    If there is no action [as implied by both essentialism and nihilism], then nothing arises. If nothing arises, then there is no phenomenal world.
6.    If there is no phenomenal world, then there is no path of liberation, and ordinary existence is without purpose.
7.    It cannot be that an agent that is both real and unreal performs actions that are both real and unreal. (It is impossible for the same thing to be both real and unreal at the same time.)
8.    It cannot be that a real agent performs an unreal action. It cannot be that an unreal agent performs a real action. (From believing these things, all sorts of errors follow.)
9.    It cannot be that a real agent performs an action that is either unreal or both real and unreal . . . .
10.    It cannot be that an unreal agent performs an action that is either real or both real and unreal . . . .
11.        It cannot be that an agent that is both real and unreal performs an action that is either unreal or both real and unreal . . . .
12.    We must say that action depends upon the agent, and the agent depends upon the action. Agent and action cannot exist independently of each other.
1Nagarjuna's assumption is that the real is permanent and thus cannot change (or act).
From this negation of independently existing agents and actions, an understanding of clinging should arise. Through this analysis of action and agent all else should be comprehended.       NARGAJUNA

[SelfHealedMadman]

~



Greetings, Lex.



May I ask you a favor?



Will you, reduce the selection you've shared with us down to a single, coherent concept - one lucid sentence?



The Truth.



That which cannot be simpler.



Thank you.



SHM

[Eilias123]

If lujan wants to say something on this forum, he should come and say it himself.

[Wei Shan Yang]

Yes, saw this movie Monday.



Inception is a fascinating topic and worthy to bring to attention for the very act of it occurring all the time, yet the most important component is never discussed, so good that you draw attention to it here Lex . Even DiCaprio's character is subject to this inception despite the fact he is in on the secret. He is only partially aware is the problem. He only knows what it is and what is does, he does not go beyond this awareness, even to fully question his own predicament of such, and thus is merely doing its bidding as he's seen others do.



So the spinning top is the whirlwind. They obviously read the book, lol.



Something needs to occur to make one willing to want to go beyond the contained idea that inception dictates everything (that this whirlwind rules everything). If not, then there will always be rulers and ruled, in a sense (though its constantly in flux so "the rulers" (perceived as) get ruled and vice verse continuously changing but still within cause and effect). With elections in American this year, you could say this is the season of inception, lol.



The ending of that movie made me laugh, how they tried to do the inception, lol.



To parallel this, as many here probably have not read Lujan's book, the whirlwind is the flyer.



I wanted to talk about this movie, so thanks for bringing this here Lex. I like what you are getting at. Nagarjuna is well placed. An antidote to inception. He asks us to question our origins, and rightfully so because, that's where the inception mechanism operates "from" with its misinformation.

[Wei Shan Yang]

"The team aware of his training adapt to the situation and concoct a scheme that will use the mark’s training to their advantage. Instead of trying to covertly act in ways that avoid alerting the mark to their activity and the fact that he is dreaming they seek to alert the mark to their presence and the fact that he is dreaming and then hide their intentions by posing as the “agents” of his defensive training. Now this is where it gets very interesting and informative."





lol, love this! yes, yes yes!

[Nagual LoneWolf]

Lex..you have your own power and dilute it with references to Lujan as if he is giving you power. I see in you something more greater than he who you idolize. You have more and can be gifted with something that is far beyond such trivial relationship with one who cannot deal with his own flyer. Lex I have read your posts and found them filled with truly meaningful messages. Your references to Lujan only make you seem irrelevant and meaningless here in this forum when I know you surpass he who you deem as your teacher.

[lex icon]

Wolf,
You misinterpret my relationship to Lujan. But this is not the place for that.
When I saw the movie awhile back those verses and a few others from his book came to mind that I thought appropriate to what I wished to convey. Now if I am going to quote from his book I wish to give him credit. Credit where credit is due. (In those two verses I quoted Lujan is reporting what was said to him by another.) If you wish to know about stalking (which is exactly what is occurring in the movie) then as I said Lujan writes extensively about it. If fact he goes much further in explaining the mechanics of it than Castaneda ever could.
Your references to Lujan only make you seem irrelevant and meaningless
here in this forum when I know you surpass he who you deem as your
teacher.  LW
I have no problem with seeming irrelevant as a person but let my words speak for themselves. If your predjudices against Lujan have reached such a point that someone merely quoting from his book needs to be branded as "irrelevant and meaningless" I suggest you take a look at that. Demonizing anyone who shows an association past or present to Lujan, in this manner might discourage the simple minded and aid in your censure of Lujan, but in the end is beneath you Wolf.
I accept teaching where ever I find it.

[lex icon]

Self Healed Madman,
If you believe that you "came from" somewhere before you discovered yourself "here" then that is a position that is ripe for exploitation.
How's that? We can discuss how such a position can be exploited if that would be helpful.

[SelfHealedMadman]

lex icon wrote:
Self Healed Madman,
If you believe that you "came from" somewhere before you discovered yourself "here" then that is a position that is ripe for exploitation.
How's that? We can discuss how such a position can be exploited if that would be helpful.

Thank you, Lex.
Yes, we can discuss how such a position can be exploited.
May I ask you to begin?  I'd first like to know how/why you are using that particular word:  exploitation.  It can be used many ways.

[lex icon]

I am using it in the negative sense of the word.
2 exploiting the workers: take advantage of, abuse, impose on, treat unfairly, misuse, ill-treat; informal walk (all) over, take for a ride, rip off.
We are fond of saying that this waking life is but a dream, that it is not really any different from a sleeping dream. So lets just go with that notion for a minute.
If asked the question “where do you come from or how did you get here?”, like the mark in the bar room, the question itself is so loaded and full of assumptions that if we try to answer it without taking into account the assumptions the question is based on then our answer is open to manipulation by the one asking it, especially if the one asking the question claims special knowledge in regards to your ignorance.
So lets examine some of the assumptions.
It assumes there is an ‘local’ of origin.
It assumes that you originated from there.
Which assumes you existed before being physically born here.
It assumes a “you” however you interpret that you.
It assumes this “you” is an independent entity.
Now religion never having got beyond cause and effect assumes the local to be a “heaven” of some sort. A place where a divine being abides. This entity is considered the creator, we the creation. We issue from this creator. This creator is the cause of our being. This notion holds out the possibility of returning to heaven from whence we came.
Sorcerers like Castaneda prefer the Eagle as the source of emanations of awareness. Such awareness being merely borrowed from the Eagle and upon death the awareness will be reclaimed by the Eagle unless a warrior has been fortunate enough to have lived an impeccable life in which case the warrior gets to keep the awareness. Some sorcerers prefer formless eternity to the Eagle.
Reincarnation is believed to occur when the soul or spirit (the “you”) after death of the body is reborn as another being also known as transmigration.
There are many other notions swirling around trying to account for why we are here.
For our friend in the bar the question,  “where were you before you were in this bar?” only has an impact because it never occurred to him to question this and try as he may he is unable to sufficiently answer the question because he does not know. Because he does not know for sure he is susceptible to the influence of a plausible explanation whether true or false just as long as it makes sense and pacifies the existential anxiety.
Now if like we are fond of saying this waking life is but a dream why should there be any existential anxiety about this? We don’t know where we are from precisely because this is a dream and my notion of myself only began when the dream began and will evaporate when the dream ends. This notion of myself as perceived in this dream is just part of the dream. It has no existence other than as an image of the dream. But we are attached to the perception of ourselves in the dream and do not realize that it is just part of the dream and we become energetically, intellectually and emotionally invested in the perception as if it were independently real. Of course such attachment wishes to prolong the perception of this “dream” self beyond physical death so we start creatively inventing plausible scenarios that would facilitate such a desire.
It is our conscious ideas and unconscious beliefs about cause and effect that are at the bottom of all this. Without getting beyond cause and effect there is no possibility of waking up! That is why someone like Nagarjuna is so impactful when it comes to this. He is able through use of the intellect to bring the intellect to its own limit! He is able to expose all the contradictory teachings of cause and effect. He is able to take the intellect by the hand and walk it to the very edge of its domain and say, “See. This is as far as you can go!” He is able to do this because he has seen beyond the teachings of cause and effect.

[Nagual LoneWolf]

Lex. I feel I had to address you and your post based on its content. I also wanted to tell you I respect you as a person and a warrior. You have embraced this sub-forum and I have throughly enjoyed your comments and have learned from you much about Zen. Lujan has created a barrier here and over the years there has been much conflict. Whether right or wrong, posting his words here brings more conflict and I am sure he feels the same and wants none of his words posted in these forums. Everytime his name is mentioned I get these pleading emails from him demanding I removed all references of him and his name and frankly I get tired of it. Other than that I want you to know your quite welcomed here and your a valued member of community.

[lex icon]

LW,
If Lujan is pleading with you about his words being posted here, I have no objection if you wish to remove his words from my original post. Do what you must to oversee your forum.

[Wei Shan Yang]

The movie itself has an interesting hidden core, which Lex pointed out. I see Lex as endeavoring to draw attention to this hidden core, and thus must first lay the groundwork. While I know the book references might not be comfortably placed here, it would be less effective to talk about the movie in other references as no better correlation exists, but even without these references I agree it could be discussed, just won't be as straightforward is all.
What interests me most is the second part of Lex's post about Nagarjuna and origins. The concept of origins is what drives the movie Inception, and this correlates to stalking techniques. While some may wish to learn stalking, I know no one here wishes to be stalked in return. What I found interesting is DiCaprio did not seem to fully come to terms with this...that he was stalked. He knew himself as a stalker, the one doing the inception, but clearly we as the audience saw he was just as immersed in the inception.



To take "the dream" (of life) seriously would result in a sense of threat. Even if that person knows beforehand its just a dream, something has to occur in perception to make them solidify the dream in a way that perceives its more than a dream. Once this happens, the inception can do its work. DiCaprio knows this. He knows what inception is, he knows how its done, he does it successfully, yet he himself is plagued with a sense of needing a future, hence he is prey to it as well. The end of the movie shows the, *spoiler alert* top spinning as the camera focuses on it. Saying to us the audience, "your world you are perceiving now is not real" and a typical response perhaps is to become alarmed and question our reality and question where the real reality is, thus needing a place to be in in the future. My friend who was with me didn't do this but she seemed disturbed that the movie ended with uncertainty. She asked me, "so did he make it back to reality or was he still trapped in dreaming?" It disturbed her to not be able to stabilize this. Because the character represented her in a sense.



Rather than all being dreams within dreams and always will be such, what becomes stabilized is the idea there is a realm beyond that must be gotten to because it is real, essential in some way and that way takes infinite forms depending on the perceiver. Also is the idea that not getting access to it would be death of some kind. So fear is the main component. So how is the fear established? Well, its outlined in stalking techniques presented here. Seeing it and knowing it is not enough though. As we see with DiCaprio's character who is adept at inception but cannot escape its perimeters himself. He keeps chasing a future.

[SelfHealedMadman]

lex icon wrote:

For our friend in the bar the question,  “where were you before you were in this bar?” only has an impact because it never occurred to him to question this and try as he may he is unable to sufficiently answer the question because he does not know. Because he does not know for sure he is susceptible to the influence of a plausible explanation whether true or false just as long as it makes sense and pacifies the existential anxiety.
Now if like we are fond of saying this waking life is but a dream why should there be any existential anxiety about this? We don’t know where we are from precisely because this is a dream and my notion of myself only began when the dream began and will evaporate when the dream ends. This notion of myself as perceived in this dream is just part of the dream. It has no existence other than as an image of the dream. But we are attached to the perception of ourselves in the dream and do not realize that it is just part of the dream and we become energetically, intellectually and emotionally invested in the perception as if it were independently real. Of course such attachment wishes to prolong the perception of this “dream” self beyond physical death so we start creatively inventing plausible scenarios that would facilitate such a desire.
It is our conscious ideas and unconscious beliefs about cause and effect that are at the bottom of all this. Without getting beyond cause and effect there is no possibility of waking up! That is why someone like Nagarjuna is so impactful when it comes to this. He is able through use of the intellect to bring the intellect to its own limit! He is able to expose all the contradictory teachings of cause and effect. He is able to take the intellect by the hand and walk it to the very edge of its domain and say, “See. This is as far as you can go!” He is able to do this because he has seen beyond the teachings of cause and effect.
Lex,
Let me first say thank you for taking the time to post all of this.  I find it very valuable. 
What you've posted seems to tie into three other sources I'm working with.  The first in Dreaming, and it's very similiar to what you mention here:
"This notion of myself as perceived in this dream is just part of the dream. It has no existence other than as an image of the dream. But we are attached to the perception of ourselves in the dream and do not realize that it is just part of the dream and we become energetically, intellectually and emotionally invested in the perception as if it were independently real. Of course such attachment wishes to prolong the perception of this “dream” self beyond physical death so we start creatively inventing plausible scenarios that would facilitate such a desire."
The second resouce is Curtis Sensei.  Your words are very similar to his.  To this, I give you kudos, as he is well versed in this!  (As you seem to be as well!)
Third is the author, Jed McKenna.  Your last line is very similar to when he says, "Done."  "Done is done."  Which you mention below:
"He is able to expose all the contradictory teachings of cause and effect. He is able to take the intellect by the hand and walk it to the very edge of its domain and say, “See. This is as far as you can go!” He is able to do this because he has seen beyond the teachings of cause and effect." 
As to the 'Lujan words being posted here' issue, I just don't understand it.  That bruhaha occured prior to my joining this discussion group, and I don't know anything about Lujan or his teachings, or the differences of opinion which seem to have peoples knickers in a bunch.  What you posted here seems quite relevant, regards of the author. 
May I ask a question of anyone who agrees or disagree's with Lujans words:  If you have anything that adds to Lujans work, or, contradicts Lujans work or writings, please post it.  If not, to me it's just complaining, thus, what's the issue?
SHM
P.S. - Lex, please continue on if you'd like to add anything further in regards to the exploitation, or, anything else.  At this current time you've given me plenty to work with and I have nothing to add.  Feel free to ask me questions as well, but I'll have to admit, you're much more adept at this than I am, and I may not be able to provide you with a sufficient reply   
P.S.S. - I will be going to see the movie, Inception, either today or tomorrow.  I've been meaning to see it since it arrived, but for one reason or another it's not gotten accomplished 
Thank you once again!

[SelfHealedMadman]

~



Wei, thank you for your thoughtful replies as well. Excellent information and perception of what Lex wrote.



This is the kind of discussion and thoughtful replies I would really like to see more of.



One line replies, idiotic pictures, quotes and re-hashing of Zen or Castaneda's work just doesn't cut it.



I'm certainly not above any of this, I'm as guilty and idiotic as the next.



May I ask, of myself and everyone else, to put a bit more desire or passion or just content/context into a post?



I want to go beyond, and beyond, and beyond. The challenge never ends. And I want to use You to give me a powerful boost into infinity and I'm putting myself in the position of allowing you to use me for the same reason. I'm not offended.



Let's do this!



SHM

[Wei Shan Yang]

Hey SHM, pleasure to read such posts from you as well : )



About that movie... when I saw it I was noticing how its implied to the audience that there is even a waking realm in the first place...its just something taken for granted. That a waking is intrinsically different than the dreaming layers. Then a tension in the movie builds around this need to find/get back to the "real" realm.



I recommend reading Nargarjuna's Middle Way (partially posted here). Its not the most enticing work at first sight, but if each line is given consideration, if logic is allowed to follow his assertions, it causes an experiential shift. This whole idea that we cannot transform via words is not true. This whole business that intellectualiztion is a barrier is not true. I know this first hand. Nagarjuna may seem a kin to college text philosophy for example, but its really not, its something quite different.



Yes, I like talking with Lex for many reasons...among them...he knows his material, can articulate it to point out what is relevant from it, and always the focus will be on the teachings. I think I have thanked him about 3 times for this thread. Because, he brought to my attention something I'm interested in exploring, and, I think, is truly relevant to all of our perceptual experiences, and by this I refer to Di Caprio's character who is an encapsulation/representation of the viewer, us, and the dilemma we all face. He (Di Caprio) knows the inception, knows how to do it, does do it, but it does not free him of his concerns which, are in fact, more of this very inception. So the hidden core remains hidden for him.

[Wei Shan Yang]

I also like that both you and Lex have highlighted the dreamer as but a part of the dream. The dream is not the result of one dreaming. Rather the dreamer and dream occur together. This is getting to dependent origination, hence why origins--understanding the impact of, and examining the subconscious assumptions about them are central to unraveling the core. As long as its perceived there was a beginning (an origin), then around this will revolve the perceptual notions of the one who supposedly began. The dreamer began, so its thought. The dreamer then can endure, so its thought. The dream will end and hence so will the dreamer, so its thought.

[Gonzo]

Wei Shan Yang wrote:The dreamer began, so its thought. The dreamer then can endure, so its thought. The dream will end and hence so will the dreamer, so its thought.
And there you have it...So.  It IS thought.

[Wei Shan Yang]

What is? Please elaborate.

[The Moth Man]

So SHM, my posts doesn't cut your capricious wantings?? OK!! 


I'm taking note of this. But by all means, nobody ask me what I think of these threads. It wouldn't be a surprise though.


Carry on.

[SelfHealedMadman]

Wei Shan Yang wrote:

About that movie... when I saw it I was noticing how its implied to the audience that there is even a waking realm in the first place...its just something taken for granted. That a waking is intrinsically different than the dreaming layers. Then a tension in the movie builds around this need to find/get back to the "real" realm.
Saw Inception last night.  Very interesting.
Yes Wei, your comments above are accurate.  I also noticed this in the movie, The Matrix, as well.  My first thought was, after he was 'awakened,' "how do you know you're not in yet another matrix?"    
I've not much to add at this point.  A bit rattled due to the fact that when the team went to get the new chemist, that basement scene with all the dreamers was very familiar.  Several years ago I Dreamed that exact setup as in the movie.  A bit unnerving.

[Gonzo]

Wei Shan Yang wrote:What is? Please elaborate.
What you said...it's all thought.

[Wei Shan Yang]

Gonzo,

I never said its all thought, you did. Thoughts are inaccurate and for this reason should be examined. In reference to this thread, specifically the three I mentioned.



Thoughts about an individual existence of the dreamer who dreams his dream and who has a beginning middle and end of his existence. These thoughts are widely accepted, and due to this often go unquestioned. Even as the question arises, it seems implausible to many people to even consider questioning such "obvious realities" which in fact are merely appearances.



An inception has taken place, the inception of the idea you are an individual with a beginning (birth). You can't remember this moment, this birth, but since no one else questions its authenticity, you won't either.

[Gonzo]

Gonzo wrote:Wei Shan Yang wrote:The dreamer began, so its thought. The dreamer then can endure, so its thought. The dream will end and hence so will the dreamer, so its thought.
And there you have it...So.  It IS thought.
I believe those are your words...I am being a bit facetious.

[Wei Shan Yang]

haha, Gonzo, try the hear what I'm saying. I'm not saying its all thought, I'm saying there is more to see than thought is telling. So its thought is, to phrase it another way... "is that certain?" aka lets question these assumptions rather then assume they are true.
Is there such a thing as birth? We have seen birth occur around us, but that could be because it was the inception planted, like in dreams. Our own birth we do not recall, cannot remember. Maybe we could hypnotize ourselves and have a birth recall, but how firm would such a recall be? The birth event will never be as certain as say the day we graduated high school or the day we learned to ride a bike. These events we consciously recall, but birth is not a conscious recollection. Yet we believe it so certainly due to everyone believes it and its seen all around. The only missing piece is our own experience of it at the time it supposedly happened. What is birth like (experientially)? What is begining like? A true beginning? We don't knwo. So why believe it's a certainty it even happened?!
Again, you believe all is thought, not me. I want to get past that assertion. You are not being facetious as I see it, you are just not seeing the distinction. Thought is one of the 5 aggregates in Buddhism, from which arises a view of ignorance and it is ignorance that must be overcome to experience enlightenment. Its not all thought, cannot be, thought is one component and is interconnected. I have said this to you before and so remind you about it here.
Heard a quote yesterday "What is thought? No matter. What is matter?" Nevermind." But take one away from this interconnected relationship and both are unqualified. So neither one originated the other, they are interdependent.