|
 Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
 Explain to me again.
#12584245 - 05/18/10 07:11 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware. 
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
 NastyDHL
breaking the cycles
 
Registered: 04/04/08
Posts: 3,398
Loc: here, now.
Last seen: 1 day, 14 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12584284 - 05/18/10 07:19 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
fear or love
and bewildered animals (including humans) fall into the fear category
|
The Chronic
Registered: 05/08/04
Posts: 11,039
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12584337 - 05/18/10 07:30 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Separate things in nature will naturally consume other separate things to survive, its the only way it can work for a while
The realization of consciousness beyond the separate forms is a unified field of consciousness
That unity is felt as Love, the lack of separation, just like when you hug your dog or your gf you feel love/the lessening of separation
(assuming you do feel love when you hug your dog or gf)
|
The Chronic
Registered: 05/08/04
Posts: 11,039
|
|
As im sure you know by now anyway, no explanation will do
Whats the use explaining how love feels or what it is
Its much better to fall in love & experience that ineffability that swallows your sense of self
|
cc2
Mush
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,687
|
|
I'm with the no explanation theory, though too simple
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
its the only way it can work for a while
Why? And how do you know?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Chronic777 said:
As im sure you know by now anyway, no explanation will do
Whats the use explaining how love feels or what it is
Its much better to fall in love & experience that ineffability that swallows your sense of self
This has nothing to do with my question as far as I can tell. You're off topic.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
The Chronic
Registered: 05/08/04
Posts: 11,039
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander] 1
#12584478 - 05/18/10 08:08 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
its the only way it can work for a while
Why? And how do you know?
Theres the evidence of most species on this planet feeding on each other
Then theres also the evidence of some few beings who have gone beyond that and live off sunlight, water & air
|
circastes
i did it for tha bliss
Registered: 01/14/10
Posts: 3,575
Loc: 
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
|
|
I think the malice and ferocity in nature is just a selection of a game plan. How else could this universal consciousness conjure the values of courage and valor, without malice and ferocity? (for example).
Remember there is only one Self. So who or what suffers, at any time? No one, it is chosen mistakenly.
Everythings ultimate state is love, because that's the nature of the universal consciousness. It's not love so much as perfection or peace, imo. You have to have the pure experience of it directly, unfettered by thought, to understand.
--------------------
Find me in the backyard, sailing my kettle. Playing poker with insects, wearing a cup of tea. A hat of brimstone, yellow-crimson, looking like a giant flea. Forever my friend: so my energy this day I lend, I practice faking it to pretend, and become the actor in the end. My folly hangs on the trees like leaves and drips in the falling breeze, the tock of a minute here shakes me to my knees.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: circastes]
#12584612 - 05/18/10 08:39 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Everyone always talks about fear/love. What about hate?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
  
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Chronic777 said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
its the only way it can work for a while
Why? And how do you know?
Theres the evidence of most species on this planet feeding on each other
Then theres also the evidence of some few beings who have gone beyond that and live off sunlight, water & air
What???????? What does that have to do with knowing things have to be this way only for awhile?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: circastes]
#12584744 - 05/18/10 09:15 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
circastes said:
I think the malice and ferocity in nature is just a selection of a game plan. How else could this universal consciousness conjure the values of courage and valor, without malice and ferocity? (for example).
Remember there is only one Self. So who or what suffers, at any time? No one, it is chosen mistakenly.
Everythings ultimate state is love, because that's the nature of the universal consciousness. It's not love so much as perfection or peace, imo. You have to have the pure experience of it directly, unfettered by thought, to understand.
How else could this universal consciousness conjure the values of courage and valor, without malice and ferocity?
But this is exactly my point and the one no one addresses. Why would a universal consciousness need to conjure these values if it was already it's primary values and it's was already everything?????
Remember there is only one Self. So who or what suffers, at any time? No one, it is chosen mistakenly.
If there is no one who suffers there would have to be no one who chooses suffering. ?????
Everythings ultimate state is love, because that's the nature of the universal consciousness.
Rather, imo, it seems this is the reaction of humans who cannot handle nature and creation the way it actually appears. They must put love at the center or all their anxieties are aroused.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585023 - 05/18/10 10:15 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Love is something the heart desires, right? Something wants to be accepted as it is. Something wants unconditional love. Where can you get that kind of love? Nowhere. You are that love. Within you everything arises and falls. You do not judge. You observe. How simple is that?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12585181 - 05/18/10 10:50 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Something also wants to hate and fear and covet and excite and all that other shit.
What does this have to do with my question?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585289 - 05/18/10 11:12 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
But can you ever find that which hates, fears and covets? Aren't these just energetic movements that awareness observes?
What I was trying to express with "the heart desires love" part is that there is something that seems to want love. This is an absurd desire, although very authentic in a sense. That all-accepting love is already present, watching and not judging.
What more could you ask for?
Edited by Tony (05/18/10 11:19 AM)
|
 c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585344 - 05/18/10 11:22 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Duality cannot be reconciled in convention, but only transcended. Your dog is the raccoon. Emptiness. It can't be intellectualized, only felt.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
  
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12585366 - 05/18/10 11:28 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
But can you ever find that which hates, fears and covets? Aren't these just energetic movements that awareness observes?
What I was trying to express with "the heart desires love" part is that there is something that seems to want love. This is an absurd desire, although very authentic in a sense. That all-accepting love is already present, watching and not judging.
What more could you ask for?
You also never can find that which loves. Again you are not responding to my question as far as I can tell.
Also how is love an absurd desire? It's ingrained in us as infants to seek it out for survival purposes.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Duality cannot be reconciled in convention, but only transcended. Your dog is the raccoon. Emptiness. It can't be intellectualized, only felt.
What does this have to do with answering the question I asked?
If I don't feel something it doesn't exist then. And so this brings me back to my OP.
Now to say it can only be felt would either be true or just avoiding a painful truth by avoiding a reasonable response.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585419 - 05/18/10 11:40 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Your not going to get a reasonable response because the idea I speak of is trans-rational. It can not be understood by the mind - the mind is what clouds the understanding. Mind implies duality - at it's core it the subject-object distinction. When you begin to identify with the awareness behind the "I" thought you may feel the emptiness I speak of.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO 
|
|
By the definition of consciousness you cannot experience universal consciousness unless you have expanded your own.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
Saidin
Sun Dragon
Registered: 12/02/08
Posts: 360
Loc: In between my thoughts
Last seen: 15 days, 19 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12585503 - 05/18/10 11:58 AM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Everyone always talks about fear/love. What about hate?
Hate has its roots in fear.
All emotions can be boiled down to either love or fear as the root causes.
--------------------
What, you ask, was the beginning of it all? And it is this...
Existence that multiplied itself
For sheer delight of being
And plunged into numberless trillions of forms
So that it might
Find
Itself
Innumerably.
-Sri Aubobindo
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
By the definition of consciousness you cannot experience universal consciousness unless you have expanded your own.
What definition are you going by? I don't understand what you mean.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Saidin]
#12585589 - 05/18/10 12:16 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Saidin said:
Hate has its roots in fear.
Would you mind elaborating on this thought? Why is this true?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Chronic777 said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
its the only way it can work for a while
Why? And how do you know?
Theres the evidence of most species on this planet feeding on each other
Then theres also the evidence of some few beings who have gone beyond that and live off sunlight, water & air
And they help countless others without demanding anything in return.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12585607 - 05/18/10 12:19 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
My heart goes out to the truly compassionate. It must be difficult being so perfect all the time.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585610 - 05/18/10 12:20 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware.
Consciousness is not all about love and niceness, it's a mistake if anyone thinks we are never supposed to become mad, depressed, or pissed off.
But 99% of this suffering is the result of consciousness becoming identified with the body and mind. We see enemies when there really aren't any, we become offended when someone challenges or disrespects us, we think of the past and become somber about the friends and loved ones we once had but no longer do...
All of this is a dream tied to an illusory sense of self.
Consciousness is free of all qualities, there is no such thing as a "car", "tree", or "sky". But it seems inevitable that consciousness has to label and identify with things in order for us to survive. If you did not know what a tree was you might think it was some monster with a thousand arms that would attack you when you walked by, so consciousness ends up labeling the tree as harmless. The problem though is that we forget all these labels are merely illusory and have no absolute value whatsoever, they are simply meant to serve as reference points and guides for helping us navigate through life. But, we become ignorant of the illusion and end up spending our lives in a fairy tale.
Edited by appleorange (05/18/10 12:48 PM)
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585650 - 05/18/10 12:26 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
You also never can find that which loves. Again you are not responding to my question as far as I can tell.
Also how is love an absurd desire? It's ingrained in us as infants to seek it out for survival purposes.
There can be desire for unconditional love. In fact I think all people have it. Unconditional love can not, however be found anywhere. Love in the phenomenal world is always conditional. Good parents provide a safe environment for the child to grow in, but even they have to sometimes imply that there are certain conditions to be met, otherwise some kind of corrective action will be taken. The only unconditional love is the space that simply allows everything to happen. And how is everything happening? Are we all trying to kill each other? Is it really that bad?
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
By the definition of consciousness you cannot experience universal consciousness unless you have expanded your own.
What definition are you going by? I don't understand what you mean.
For example under high dose LSD/Mushroom experiences i literally feel as though i have merged with my physical surroundings. I am no longer Cognitive_Shift the person, i don't identify my self in my mind as a single thing with a name and home. I feel as though i am everything. However under normal brain/mind functioning this does not happen, my sense of who i am is Cognitive_Shift a person with a name and house. I do not feel i am everything. In fact i will always be Cognitive_Shift unless i expand my consciousness.
Edited by Cognitive_Shift (05/18/10 12:33 PM)
|
circastes
i did it for tha bliss
Registered: 01/14/10
Posts: 3,575
Loc:
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12585684 - 05/18/10 12:32 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How else could this universal consciousness conjure the values of courage and valor, without malice and ferocity?
But this is exactly my point and the one no one addresses. Why would a universal consciousness need to conjure these values if it was already it's primary values and it's was already everything????? 1
Remember there is only one Self. So who or what suffers, at any time? No one, it is chosen mistakenly.
If there is no one who suffers there would have to be no one who chooses suffering. ????? 2
Everythings ultimate state is love, because that's the nature of the universal consciousness.
Rather, imo, it seems this is the reaction of humans who cannot handle nature and creation the way it actually appears. They must put love at the center or all their anxieties are aroused.3
Good point on 1. There must be another reason, or something entirely different is going on.
As for 2, I was saying since there is only one Self, suffering is an illusion. Say you slowly die because you're beaten to death by a stick, you still win because you are the stick, you are omnipotent, so who really suffered? You cannot say anyone suffered, there was just some suffering and now it no longer exists.
As for 3, my idea of the universal consciousness' love is derived directly from my experience of natural ecstasy. Because I feel this, I say all is love, not for any other reason. It just seems obvious to me.
--------------------
Find me in the backyard, sailing my kettle. Playing poker with insects, wearing a cup of tea. A hat of brimstone, yellow-crimson, looking like a giant flea. Forever my friend: so my energy this day I lend, I practice faking it to pretend, and become the actor in the end. My folly hangs on the trees like leaves and drips in the falling breeze, the tock of a minute here shakes me to my knees.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
By the definition of consciousness you cannot experience universal consciousness unless you have expanded your own.
What definition are you going by? I don't understand what you mean.
For example under high dose LSD/Mushroom experiences i literally feel as though i have merged with my physical surroundings. I am no longer Cognitive_Shift the person, i don't identify my self in my mind as a single thing with a name and home. I feel as though i am everything. However under normal brain/mind functioning this does not happen, my sense of who i am is Cognitive_Shift a person with a name and house. I do not feel i am everything. In fact i will always be Cognitive_Shift unless i expand my consciousness.
I see. Well you are looking at it as your consciousness expanding, I see it as the drugs temporarily kill the ego self which allows you to identify with the infinite awareness which is always there.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
The Chronic
Registered: 05/08/04
Posts: 11,039
|
|
Yes, expansion is just as much phenomena as anything else, the greatest bliss as an experience, still phenomena
The true way is permanent presence, as only that can be called Truth
And theres even an Awareness of that presence
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
|
Chronic, what is awareness?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12586176 - 05/18/10 01:38 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Quote:
Chronic777 said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
its the only way it can work for a while
Why? And how do you know?
Theres the evidence of most species on this planet feeding on each other
Then theres also the evidence of some few beings who have gone beyond that and live off sunlight, water & air
And they help countless others without demanding anything in return.
I'd sure like to know what you're talking about?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: circastes]
#12586211 - 05/18/10 01:43 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
As for 3, my idea of the universal consciousness' love is derived directly from my experience of natural ecstasy. Because I feel this, I say all is love, not for any other reason. It just seems obvious to me.
I've experienced ecstasy, but it would be a huge leap of faith to claim that all is love then. That would be like saying,"I've experienced hate so all is hate then" See what I'm getting at. You are focused on what is pleasurable and comfortable and ignoring what is stressful and uncomfortable. Which makes sense but it's not realistic imo.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
But it seems inevitable that consciousness has to label and identify with things in order for us to survive.
Why? Why does consciousness if it is awake and aware and committed to bliss and love create life forms that are based in the violent struggle for survival and which feed off of each other. Wouldn't it be more likely that that there is no such consciousness at work here?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
The Chronic
Registered: 05/08/04
Posts: 11,039
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Chronic, what is awareness?
its who i am
its not a thing
it is infinity
Im sure you'll see that those answers will not do
You are Awareness, thats indisputable from where im seeing
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12586519 - 05/18/10 02:27 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
The only unconditional love is the space that simply allows everything to happen. And how is everything happening? Are we all trying to kill each other? Is it really that bad?
Based on what you said in your post, imo, it doesn't follow that it's unconditional love that is allowing everything to happen but rather things are just happening because they can. That makes much more logical sense to me. And yes on a very large level we are all struggling for position to survive. In modern culture it's often more symbolic but not the less real. "Dog eat dog" is a common phrase in the business world among others. Every day many things will die to support our existence. We are buffered from this by the facade of culture. It really is survival of the fittest in the long run. And this has been the design of life for as long as we have been here as far as we know. How would an all loving conscious awareness require this type of existence if it didn't have to?????????????????? That's my question and I really haven't heard a good answer yet.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
I was aware but after this forty of malt liquor, not so much anymore.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12586572 - 05/18/10 02:33 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
But it seems inevitable that consciousness has to label and identify with things in order for us to survive.
Why? Why does consciousness if it is awake and aware and committed to bliss and love create life forms that are based in the violent struggle for survival and which feed off of each other. Wouldn't it be more likely that that there is no such consciousness at work here?
For one, we do not know what consciousness is committed to, that's the same as asking "what is the meaning of life?" All that can be said about life is that when consciousness becomes identified with form, suffering ensues. That's about the extent our intellect is able to reach. Anything beyond that point is pure supposition.
If there was no such consciousness at work, you would not be able to read the words on this screen.
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
I don't think psychedelics kill anything including the ego. They do not reduce consciousness. When you say "kill the ego" I think of a process of elimination, which is not what psychedelics do. They do not eliminate anything including the ego, they expand your mind. You become more connected to everything. This mental experience of feeling connected IMO is consciousness expansion.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
rsbattle
Stranger
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 1
Last seen: 2 years, 11 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12586683 - 05/18/10 02:49 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
The only unconditional love is the space that simply allows everything to happen. And how is everything happening? Are we all trying to kill each other? Is it really that bad?
Based on what you said in your post, imo, it doesn't follow that it's unconditional love that is allowing everything to happen but rather things are just happening because they can. That makes much more logical sense to me. And yes on a very large level we are all struggling for position to survive. In modern culture it's often more symbolic but not the less real. "Dog eat dog" is a common phrase in the business world among others. Every day many things will die to support our existence. We are buffered from this by the facade of culture. It really is survival of the fittest in the long run. And this has been the design of life for as long as we have been here as far as we know. How would an all loving conscious awareness require this type of existence if it didn't have to?????????????????? That's my question and I really haven't heard a good answer yet.
We might be struggling for a position to survive, in this world. But this world isn't all there is... Whats good and bad? All they are, is mental constructs created by us humans. Death could be a great thing, it could be the most loving thing someone could do you for... But, the mental constructs we build (With our minds, which create this duality) in this duality, could tell us entirely otherwise.
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12586736 - 05/18/10 02:54 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
The only unconditional love is the space that simply allows everything to happen. And how is everything happening? Are we all trying to kill each other? Is it really that bad?
Based on what you said in your post, imo, it doesn't follow that it's unconditional love that is allowing everything to happen but rather things are just happening because they can. That makes much more logical sense to me. And yes on a very large level we are all struggling for position to survive. In modern culture it's often more symbolic but not the less real. "Dog eat dog" is a common phrase in the business world among others. Every day many things will die to support our existence. We are buffered from this by the facade of culture. It really is survival of the fittest in the long run. And this has been the design of life for as long as we have been here as far as we know. How would an all loving conscious awareness require this type of existence if it didn't have to?????????????????? That's my question and I really haven't heard a good answer yet.
I think what you were getting at here is that the life who got this far didn't do so out of some religious stance or some irrational loony idea about the grand scheme of life, but because we were good enough at staying alive to get this far.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
The connection is our natural state. It is when we identify with the ego mind, the thought pyramid which at its base is the 'I' thought, that disconnection arises.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
But it seems inevitable that consciousness has to label and identify with things in order for us to survive.
Why? Why does consciousness if it is awake and aware and committed to bliss and love create life forms that are based in the violent struggle for survival and which feed off of each other. Wouldn't it be more likely that that there is no such consciousness at work here?
For one, we do not know what consciousness is committed to, that's the same as asking "what is the meaning of life?" All that can be said about life is that when consciousness becomes identified with form, suffering ensues. That's about the extent our intellect is able to reach. Anything beyond that point is pure supposition.
If there was no such consciousness at work, you would not be able to read the words on this screen.
Well I agree somewhat. Yet I hear so many telling me what this "consciousness" has in mind. I think, like you, that's impossible to say and so my OP came into being.
But I'm not so sure I agree that a universal consciousness is necessary for me to experience consciousness. My consciousness could be an emergent property of the function of my physical brain and it's chemistry at work. It could be just another adaptation that is no more important than the ability to walk or run. It's another unknown imo.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
The only unconditional love is the space that simply allows everything to happen. And how is everything happening? Are we all trying to kill each other? Is it really that bad?
Based on what you said in your post, imo, it doesn't follow that it's unconditional love that is allowing everything to happen but rather things are just happening because they can. That makes much more logical sense to me. And yes on a very large level we are all struggling for position to survive. In modern culture it's often more symbolic but not the less real. "Dog eat dog" is a common phrase in the business world among others. Every day many things will die to support our existence. We are buffered from this by the facade of culture. It really is survival of the fittest in the long run. And this has been the design of life for as long as we have been here as far as we know. How would an all loving conscious awareness require this type of existence if it didn't have to?????????????????? That's my question and I really haven't heard a good answer yet.
I think what you were getting at here is that the life who got this far didn't do so out of some religious stance or some irrational loony idea about the grand scheme of life, but because we were good enough at staying alive to get this far.
More or less yes. The material universe is a physical process and that's all we really know about it thus far.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: rsbattle]
#12586915 - 05/18/10 03:14 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Death could be a great thing, it could be the most loving thing someone could do you for...
Could and could is all speculation. That's my point. No one knows these things and yet some claim to know. They have the iron clad defense that you have to experience it because it isn't rational but they use words and logic to explain their position. Something seems fishy about this to me.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
The connection is our natural state. It is when we identify with the ego mind, the thought pyramid which at its base is the 'I' thought, that disconnection arises.
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being. You do it and I do it. If we were to disengage from that identification we wouldn't live long even with the support of a culture. That's why the monk begs for food. If he gives up his identification to his physicalness he starves to death.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12586989 - 05/18/10 03:23 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being.
Exactly. c0sm0, you know your ego is what tells you to get up and eat and do what ever it is you do everyday. If you didn't have an ego or didn't peruse its needs, you wouldn't be alive right now, the ego is necessary for existence. The ego is a natural state too, you just have to keep it in balance just like many other aspects of life.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being.
Exactly. c0sm0, you know your ego is what tells you to get up and eat and do what ever it is you do everyday. If you didn't have an ego or didn't peruse its needs, you wouldn't be alive right now, the ego is necessary for existence. The ego is a natural state too, you just have to keep it in balance just like many other aspects of life.
The question is - Do you control your mind or does it control you? The vast majority of the thought we have on the past and future is useless.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being.
Exactly. c0sm0, you know your ego is what tells you to get up and eat and do what ever it is you do everyday. If you didn't have an ego or didn't peruse its needs, you wouldn't be alive right now, the ego is necessary for existence. The ego is a natural state too, you just have to keep it in balance just like many other aspects of life.
Yes.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Do you control your mind or does it control you?
You control your mind. If you don't think you control your mind, then you have disempowered yourself.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Try and stop thinking for a mere 5 minutes and tell me who is in control. 
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Keyword being try. Do or do not!
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Hieroglitch
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 75
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587058 - 05/18/10 03:34 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
So, I've been confused for the longest time about something, and Cosmo suggested that I post my thoughts here about it, so I will..
From all of the stuff I've read on here, it seems to me that (by my interpretation) if there's only ONE consciousness or whatever, then all living things are puppets. They aren't real, they're on auto-pilot, and the one consciousness is experiencing the world by going into one puppet at a time. Everyone around you is an empty puppet, acting out in the way they inevitably would while you experience life from a specific puppet. Once you die, you realize that you're a single being, you encompass everything, there's no higher realm that your consciousness because you create everything.
So basically it was like this time I was smoking something really weird with one stoner friend and a sober friend.. I basically started tripping in a bad way and I was seeing that they were all empty vessels acting out and I was realizing that I was the only consciousness, which was a very lonely and terrifying, torturing thought. No wonder I split myself into a million fragments and gave myself amnesia if that was to be the case.
Cosmo simply said to post my thoughts.. Hoping someone could enlighten me as to how I've misinterpreted the ideas expressed here. It might be "selfish" to think it's a terrifying thing that you're the only consciousness that exists, but if we're all one universal consciousness, is it selfish for that universal consciousness to realize it's really a single entity? In theory, there's only one observer, no? And even if there're others, then when they die that observing consciousness ceases to be while the others continue to observe until they go out, or in a spiritual scenario, they merge with the universal observer/consciousness. Which is a single observer. ONE. How fun is it to be a formless consciousness talking to yourself for all eternity? Maybe that's why we're all here?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Try and stop thinking for a mere 5 minutes and tell me who is in control.
It's all still you. It's just that part of you mind my not want to think when another part is fully into it and that part is stronger because it gets used more. It's like any habit, it can be hard to change.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587070 - 05/18/10 03:35 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being. You do it and I do it. If we were to disengage from that identification we wouldn't live long even with the support of a culture. That's why the monk begs for food. If he gives up his identification to his physicalness he starves to death.
You're dead on. In the video I posted on the other page, the monk talks about how it is delusional to remain in formless awareness. It would be something akin to Nihilism.
This is why the Buddha talked about the Middle Way. It's acknowleding that all of this is a dream, but knowing that this dream is still our only reality, and it would be downright insane to go around telling people that they do not in fact exist or they are not suffering.
I'll illustrate the middle way in a picture of sorts.
A------------------B------------------C
Point A is where most people live, they believe that the dream is real. Point C is Nirvana/Enlightenment/Formless Awareness and it is seen that nothing exists.
It's impossible to live in point C. You have to live acknowledging that fire burns you, water will not disintegrate you, terrorists blow up buildings. So you live in point B which means that you still live and play in the world of forms, but you are filled with a sense of ease and do not take life so seriously because you realize that none of it is real.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12587069 - 05/18/10 03:35 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Keyword being try. Do or do not!
I don't follow.?
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
I think its more like:
A ----------------------------B--C
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Try and stop thinking for a mere 5 minutes and tell me who is in control.
In society and culture of people no one is in control, only people striving for control. However when it comes to my mind/body i am in control. I am responsible for my actions. The control of your mind is a basic civil liberty, and to not think so is simply disempowering your self.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Keyword being try. Do or do not!
I don't follow.?
If I don't control my mind, who will?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Try and stop thinking for a mere 5 minutes and tell me who is in control.
No one is in control, only people striving for control. However when it comes to my mind/body i am in control. I am responsible for my actions. The control of your mind is a basic civil liberty, and to not think so is simply disempowering your self.
Mind and actions don't exclusively correlate. I;m saying you don't have control of many of your thoughts. Many pop in from unconsciousness. When one becomes aware of the mind, begins to dis-identify with the mind, true power arises. The light of consciousness makes it impossible for the egoic mind to take control of the body through negative emotional responses.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Mind and actions don't exclusively correlate. I;m saying you don't have control of many of your thoughts. Many pop in from unconsciousness. When one becomes aware of the mind, begins to dis-identify with the mind, true power arises. The light of consciousness makes it impossible for the egoic mind to take control of the body through negative emotional responses.
I agree with the top part of your quote, many thoughts are not controllable as a part of the subconscious, but the subconscious is not the entire mind. It is only part of the mind, much more the minds thoughts are controllable and based on the environment. However i disagree with your "egoic mind control" The ego is just as much a part of the mind as the subconscious and other aspects of the mind. The ego is not a pathogen.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being. You do it and I do it. If we were to disengage from that identification we wouldn't live long even with the support of a culture. That's why the monk begs for food. If he gives up his identification to his physicalness he starves to death.
You're dead on. In the video I posted on the other page, the monk talks about how it is delusional to remain in formless awareness. It would be something akin to Nihilism.
This is why the Buddha talked about the Middle Way. It's acknowleding that all of this is a dream, but knowing that this dream is still our only reality, and it would be downright insane to go around telling people that they do not in fact exist or they are not suffering.
I'll illustrate the middle way in a picture of sorts.
A------------------B------------------C
Point A is where most people live, they believe that the dream is real. Point C is Nirvana/Enlightenment/Formless Awareness and it is seen that nothing exists.
It's impossible to live in point C. You have to live acknowledging that fire burns you, water will not disintegrate you, terrorists blow up buildings. So you live in point B which means that you still live and play in the world of forms, but you are filled with a sense of ease and do not take life so seriously because you realize that none of it is real.
Excellent I agree. I have always been a fan of the middle way.
It still does not answer my OP question however.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Mind and actions don't exclusively correlate. I;m saying you don't have control of many of your thoughts. Many pop in from unconsciousness. When one becomes aware of the mind, begins to dis-identify with the mind, true power arises. The light of consciousness makes it impossible for the egoic mind to take control of the body through negative emotional responses.
I agree with the top part of your quote, many thoughts are not controllable as a part of the subconscious, but the subconscious is not the entire mind. It is only part of the mind, much more the minds thoughts are controllable and based on the environment. However i disagree with your "egoic mind control" The ego is just as much a part of the mind as the subconscious and other aspects of the mind. The ego is not a pathogen.
I agree. But it can be detrimental when one solely identifies with it.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Mind and actions don't exclusively correlate. I;m saying you don't have control of many of your thoughts. Many pop in from unconsciousness. When one becomes aware of the mind, begins to dis-identify with the mind, true power arises. The light of consciousness makes it impossible for the egoic mind to take control of the body through negative emotional responses.
I agree with the top part of your quote, many thoughts are not controllable as a part of the subconscious, but the subconscious is not the entire mind. It is only part of the mind, much more the minds thoughts are controllable and based on the environment. However i disagree with your "egoic mind control" The ego is just as much a part of the mind as the subconscious and other aspects of the mind. The ego is not a pathogen.
So true. I feel that the ego is an important part of our brains function. It can preform it's function skillfully or unskillfully however. When it convinces us it is the whole picture then it has over stepped itself and becomes a hindrance imo.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Hieroglitch
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 75
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587265 - 05/18/10 04:00 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Not to be a pain in the ass, but everyone familiar with this ego stuff, could they read the post I made? If my idea is really stupid, I guess you don't have to answer, but I'm confused.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587402 - 05/18/10 04:20 PM (2 years, 12 days ago) |
|
|
Here you go Icelander. I believe this will answer the question in your OP. I uploaded a selection from The Power of Now audio book. It is only 15 minutes long.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=fqbkko9mw4
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Hieroglitch said:
So, I've been confused for the longest time about something, and Cosmo suggested that I post my thoughts here about it, so I will..
From all of the stuff I've read on here, it seems to me that (by my interpretation) if there's only ONE consciousness or whatever, then all living things are puppets. They aren't real, they're on auto-pilot, and the one consciousness is experiencing the world by going into one puppet at a time. Everyone around you is an empty puppet, acting out in the way they inevitably would while you experience life from a specific puppet. Once you die, you realize that you're a single being, you encompass everything, there's no higher realm that your consciousness because you create everything.
So basically it was like this time I was smoking something really weird with one stoner friend and a sober friend.. I basically started tripping in a bad way and I was seeing that they were all empty vessels acting out and I was realizing that I was the only consciousness, which was a very lonely and terrifying, torturing thought. No wonder I split myself into a million fragments and gave myself amnesia if that was to be the case.
Cosmo simply said to post my thoughts.. Hoping someone could enlighten me as to how I've misinterpreted the ideas expressed here. It might be "selfish" to think it's a terrifying thing that you're the only consciousness that exists, but if we're all one universal consciousness, is it selfish for that universal consciousness to realize it's really a single entity? In theory, there's only one observer, no? And even if there're others, then when they die that observing consciousness ceases to be while the others continue to observe until they go out, or in a spiritual scenario, they merge with the universal observer/consciousness. Which is a single observer. ONE. How fun is it to be a formless consciousness talking to yourself for all eternity? Maybe that's why we're all here?
Imo there is no why to know if you are right or wrong ultimately. However I'm going to assume you are not the only consciousness because I feel like i'm conscious and I assume that everyone feels that too.
Now when I look at other people acting like puppets I also notice most of my actions are unconscious and puppet like or you might say programmed and on auto pilot. This is basically true imo. It's a condition of being to some extent.
Now being separate is a lonely feeling and we all strive for connectedness. Why? There may be many reasons but one is that it feels very safe to be part of a group and have the support of others. We feel protected and can relax and let down our survival guard.
That's about all I have to say on this subject at this time. It's a good question.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Here you go Icelander. I believe this will answer the question in your OP. I uploaded a selection from The Power of Now audio book. It is only 15 minutes long.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=fqbkko9mw4
I don't see an answer here. The state he refers to is an animal awareness that is not encumbered by thought. That is all. It's a basic animal awareness that allows for the best chances of survival in a threatening environment. Culture, which supports our safety allows for this lapse of attention without immeadiate negative consequences.
In the future I would appreciate not being given long tombs to listen to. You can state it very well yourself and in a concise fashion.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Hieroglitch
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 75
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587686 - 05/18/10 05:08 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:Reply
Imo there is no why to know if you are right or wrong ultimately. However I'm going to assume you are not the only consciousness because I feel like i'm conscious and I assume that everyone feels that too.
Now when I look at other people acting like puppets I also notice most of my actions are unconscious and puppet like or you might say programmed and on auto pilot. This is basically true imo. It's a condition of being to some extent.
Now being separate is a lonely feeling and we all strive for connectedness. Why? There may be many reasons but one is that it feels very safe to be part of a group and have the support of others. We feel protected and can relax and let down our survival guard.
That's about all I have to say on this subject at this time. It's a good question.
I don't feel lonely being seperate. How can you be lonely if you're around others? If you all become a single thinking consciousness, some kind of universal conscious field, you are not a bunch of thoughts thinking from different observational points, you become a single observer. Unless I could be wrong and we can all be part of this "field" and still retain our individual consciousness.
The auto-pilot thing I basically felt myself from my trip, I felt like even my thoughts were on auto-pilot, every single thought that I was having become a linear action, as if on a tape recording and I was somehow realizing that me realizing it was just another auto-pilot action. Even me typing to you guys is an auto-pilot thing in the end. These thoughts make me literally feel very distanced from myself and my surroundings. Only myself as the observer is really all I identify with anymore, I don't know anything.
Thanks for replying, though.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Well that's one of the things that can happen when you trip. 
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587830 - 05/18/10 05:30 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Here you go Icelander. I believe this will answer the question in your OP. I uploaded a selection from The Power of Now audio book. It is only 15 minutes long.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=fqbkko9mw4
I don't see an answer here. The state he refers to is an animal awareness that is not encumbered by thought. That is all. It's a basic animal awareness that allows for the best chances of survival in a threatening environment. Culture, which supports our safety allows for this lapse of attention without immeadiate negative consequences.
In the future I would appreciate not being given long tombs to listen to. You can state it very well yourself and in a concise fashion.
I'm not sure if I would agree that it is an 'animal awareness'. What we are talking about here is a symbiosis between a pure awareness and minimal use of the though-mind for 'practical' purposes. The end of suffering.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Suffering can be ended quite quickly with the suitable application of a shotgun. I'm all for transcending the ego but you can't forcibly eliminate it or it comes back with a vengeance IMO.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12587932 - 05/18/10 05:44 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
I agree, unless you consider awareness a force. The idea is when centering oneself in the present moment, one turns his awareness to the ego, to ones thoughts. This is the essence of meditation. When one is aware of his ego, and not completely identified with it, the ego loses its false power - the illusion of self.
I believe in death anxiety too. The ego will make up many games to preserve its life. 
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Here you go Icelander. I believe this will answer the question in your OP. I uploaded a selection from The Power of Now audio book. It is only 15 minutes long.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=fqbkko9mw4
I don't see an answer here. The state he refers to is an animal awareness that is not encumbered by thought. That is all. It's a basic animal awareness that allows for the best chances of survival in a threatening environment. Culture, which supports our safety allows for this lapse of attention without immeadiate negative consequences.
In the future I would appreciate not being given long tombs to listen to. You can state it very well yourself and in a concise fashion.
I'm not sure if I would agree that it is an 'animal awareness'. What we are talking about here is a symbiosis between a pure awareness and minimal use of the though-mind for 'practical' purposes. The end of suffering.
Other animals do not suffer as far as we know. Why? They don't dwell on their pain. All of the search for enlightenment seems to me an attempt to return to our primal thoughtless nature. And who could blame us? Thinking is problematic.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587939 - 05/18/10 05:46 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
I wish I didn't think so much.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher] 1
#12587956 - 05/18/10 05:48 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Me too.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12587998 - 05/18/10 05:58 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Thinking is problematic.
Your getting it! Especially when our thoughts are in a unchangeable past and future. There is only the Now! Breath and smell the flowers!  Make a conscious effort to stay in that mode of unthinking. Deal with your problems when they are your problems. What problems do you have Now?
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
The present's fine; it's the future I worry about.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12588048 - 05/18/10 06:09 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Dogs love to kill, humans love to kill their own kind. We are MANifestations (or is it, MANinfestations) of God's love of killing (his own kind).
--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12588055 - 05/18/10 06:10 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
But you worry about the future in the present? How do you intend to alter the future in the present?
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Thinking is problematic.
Your getting it! Especially when our thoughts are in a unchangeable past and future. There is only the Now! Breath and smell the flowers! Make a conscious effort to stay in that mode of unthinking. Deal with your problems when they are your problems. What problems do you have Now?
I really think you are kidding yourself that you can live in the now for more than a few seconds or minutes at a time. Still I agree in the now there are less problems to confront. Thinking is problematic and something our ancient ancestors likely didn't have to deal with in the way we do. They reacted as animals to immediate stimulus and then moved on. As I said the search for enlightenment imo is a symbolic desire to return to the primitive unthinking or less thinking state that most animals exist in naturally. That's why nature is revered. But along with that unthinking nature is the unthinking violence of survival. I doubt that we could forgo that aspect if most everyone quit thinking. Culture would collapse and with it the support system that makes survival easy and less violent for most.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Evolving]
#12588309 - 05/18/10 07:04 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Evolving said:
Dogs love to kill, humans love to kill their own kind. We are MANifestations (or is it, MANinfestations) of God's love of killing (his own kind).
this is why I doubt the existence of a benevolent god and really any god at all. I'm afraid that any god that created our current system would not be a nice guy.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12588357 - 05/18/10 07:14 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Love is an evolved survival instinct, I believe all emotions can be traced to a primitive survival instincts. Love can make someone do the nastiest things, quicker than any other stimulus. I can rip apart a child molester in a very heinous way to protect my daughters. It would be the love for my daughters, and that alone, that would make me act this way.
As for niceness.........nothing more than a social pleasantry that really does not exist tangibly in the real world.
But that's just an opinion..........
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
While I agree that love is a survival emotion first and foremost I have to disagree about your example of your daughters. Instead I think it is fear that is your prime motivator here. Fear of the lost of that which you value. It's a purely selfish emotion at work. Your love for your daughters is something outside of this example imo.
Everything here is just an opinion. No matter what some would have us believe.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12588446 - 05/18/10 07:31 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
I understand how it can come off that way, maybe it was a bad example. I am not motivated by fear. I am very aware of the fact that my DNA dictates to me everything I do. The continuity of that DNA is the most basic of survival instincts, as is evolved counterpart in the emotional spectrum, love.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12588457 - 05/18/10 07:32 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Identifying with the ego mind is necessary for survival as a living being. You do it and I do it. If we were to disengage from that identification we wouldn't live long even with the support of a culture. That's why the monk begs for food. If he gives up his identification to his physicalness he starves to death.
You're dead on. In the video I posted on the other page, the monk talks about how it is delusional to remain in formless awareness. It would be something akin to Nihilism.
This is why the Buddha talked about the Middle Way. It's acknowleding that all of this is a dream, but knowing that this dream is still our only reality, and it would be downright insane to go around telling people that they do not in fact exist or they are not suffering.
I'll illustrate the middle way in a picture of sorts.
A------------------B------------------C
Point A is where most people live, they believe that the dream is real. Point C is Nirvana/Enlightenment/Formless Awareness and it is seen that nothing exists.
It's impossible to live in point C. You have to live acknowledging that fire burns you, water will not disintegrate you, terrorists blow up buildings. So you live in point B which means that you still live and play in the world of forms, but you are filled with a sense of ease and do not take life so seriously because you realize that none of it is real.
Excellent I agree. I have always been a fan of the middle way.
It still does not answer my OP question however.
Quote:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware.
I think you're asking how can this consciousness be compassionate when the behavior of other animals is often very cruel or agressive? Is that right?
You're the only person who believes that there are other animals with a consciousness. You see something happening in the "objective world" and believe that it relates to you, but could it be that the objective world is in fact just you?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
I understand how it can come off that way, maybe it was a bad example. I am not motivated by fear. I am very aware of the fact that my DNA dictates to me everything I do. The continuity of that DNA is the most basic of survival instincts, as is evolved counterpart in the emotional spectrum, love.
Don't understand what you are saying.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
You're the only person who believes that there are other animals with a consciousness.
That's ridiculous! Almost everyone I know believes other animals are conscious.
And cruel behavior is not limited by any means to other animals. The human animal is imo by far the most violent and cruel.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12588761 - 05/18/10 08:19 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
You're the only person who believes that there are other animals with a consciousness.
That's ridiculous! Almost everyone I know believes other animals are conscious.
And cruel behavior is not limited by any means to other animals. The human animal is imo by far the most violent and cruel.
And you're the only person who believes that other people think animals are conscious.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
That's also ridiculous. I don't know why I bother to respond to such stuff. It's without merit imo.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12589008 - 05/18/10 08:53 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
That's also ridiculous. I don't know why I bother to respond to such stuff. It's without merit imo.
And you're also the only person who thinks its without merit as well.
Edited by appleorange (05/19/10 11:26 AM)
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc: 
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
|
Animals don't just have consciousness, they are consciousness. However they are not aware of this fact or in other words they are not conscious of their consciousness.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
That's also ridiculous. I don't know why I bother to respond to such stuff. It's without merit imo.
And you're also the only person thinks its without merit as well.
Too bad this subject has freaked you out so. I understand.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Animals don't just have consciousness, they are consciousness. However they are not aware of this fact or in other words they are not conscious of their consciousness.
And you know this how?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591252 - 05/19/10 09:30 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Cats have an amygdala that resembles a teenage humans'.
I've been watching my cat and I haven't seen a single emotion that she cannot convey.
Nor a single emotion that she doesn't respond to much as I would have in my teens.
It's also interesting to me to look at someone like Cyndi Lauper who recently was on The Celebrity Apprentice. Over and over again she could be heard remarking how much the competition felt like high school to her. This made sense to me because of her heightened emotionality -- she was VERY reactive to emotional situations which is very indicative of the enlarged amygdala of adolescence. But along with this, she carried an intense creativity that never lessened. Every task she would come with a new style, new hair, fresh and creative looks. She was constantly rebelling against the dull and mundane nature of the business world, trying to break it open with something spontaneous and fun.
This can be noticed in a cat as well IMO. Our cat has been in a small apartment for over a year now, but she continues to find ways to do something we've never seen before. To use an object in new and interesting ways. To take that abundant emotional drive and turn it into creative energy.
I guess what I'm getting at is, what really differs if we examine the surface? One can talk?
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591372 - 05/19/10 09:59 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
What is universal conciousness?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12591385 - 05/19/10 10:02 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Did you mean this for me? Cause I believe other animals are conscious much like we are.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12591389 - 05/19/10 10:02 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
What is universal conciousness?
Everything being one thing and that thing being conscious of itself.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Saidin
Sun Dragon
Registered: 12/02/08
Posts: 360
Loc: In between my thoughts
Last seen: 15 days, 19 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12591419 - 05/19/10 10:08 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Quote:
Saidin said:
Hate has its roots in fear.
Would you mind elaborating on this thought? Why is this true?
Why do you hate? What is the mechanism, or cause of that hate? Follow it back.
Fear leads to anger which leads to hate which leads to suffering, young Skywalker.
--------------------
What, you ask, was the beginning of it all? And it is this...
Existence that multiplied itself
For sheer delight of being
And plunged into numberless trillions of forms
So that it might
Find
Itself
Innumerably.
-Sri Aubobindo
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591429 - 05/19/10 10:09 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Everything?
Earth? or Universe?
Considering relational size, I can't see the universe, or the creator of the universe giving two shits if earth leaked it's inner goo into it's oceans of life destroying everything that inhabits this small little miserable crumb of an existence.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591433 - 05/19/10 10:10 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
The question is something I think is important to consider. That perhaps the surface doesn't tell the whole story. When comparing the surface system of nature to the same system in an alternative form of nature, it is always going to share the characteristics of the system.
But the post itself was just a generalized comment about the direction the conversation took.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12591448 - 05/19/10 10:12 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Everything?
Earth? or Universe?
Considering relational size, I can't see the universe, or the creator of the universe giving two shits if earth leaked it's inner goo into it's oceans of life destroying everything that inhabits this small little miserable crumb of an existence.
You're way off topic here.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12591460 - 05/19/10 10:13 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
The question is something I think is important to consider. That perhaps the surface doesn't tell the whole story. When comparing the surface system of nature to the same system in an alternative form of nature, it is always going to share the characteristics of the system.
But the post itself was just a generalized comment about the direction the conversation took.
You lost me, what are you trying to say?
HEY EVERYONE IS ANYONE GOING TO GIVE ME A REASONABLE ANSWER FOR MY OP?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591475 - 05/19/10 10:15 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Everything?
Earth? or Universe?
Considering relational size, I can't see the universe, or the creator of the universe giving two shits if earth leaked it's inner goo into it's oceans of life destroying everything that inhabits this small little miserable crumb of an existence.
You're way off topic here.
Your explination was vague. What is everything?
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591476 - 05/19/10 10:15 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Well, I'm going to get off topic too.
But if we assume that we are not the system. That we are what can observe the system.
How can we know if a cat can observe the system or not?
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12591503 - 05/19/10 10:20 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
These are century old questions.
Is the creator outside the creation?
Is the essence of life pursueable?
That thou art.
etc.
If we're in a fishbowl on someone's desk, how would we ever know?
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12591538 - 05/19/10 10:26 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
You can let go of your belief in yourself as the system and you still exist.
This holds a lot of implications.
1) belief isn't creating you
2) belief in yourself as the system is powerful and convincing
3) who are you if not the system (i.e., memory, thought, emotions, physical/chemical reactions)?
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591697 - 05/19/10 10:53 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
What is universal conciousness?
Everything being one thing and that thing being conscious of itself.
Then if one single being is not(as a part of whole - one universal consciousness(UC)) love directed, there is no universal consciousness as such. Or maybe it does not have same idea of love as our minds do. Maybe you think of love as hugging you dog f.e. Maybe UC from its love created us, so we could be able to find that lost love again. Maybe UC from its love gave you free will so you can choose to not be loving, so that you don't enjoy love, if you wish to do so. Maybe it is love directed because it made things happen, and made us be able to experience stuff. Is love something that is only one way oriented by its definition. I think not. Love is about exchange, you give and you take.
Animals don't know of love by them selves. One of many things why we are here. So you can love your dog, and even if he is not capable of understanding that as humans are, he can certainly feel it.
It is not all about love and niceness, it is about choice, IMO. You can support this theory of all and universal love and live in harmony in your life(which is all you have now), or you can choose to see all the suffering and dog eat dog shit, and be sad, and confused and fucked, because things are not the way you want them to be, or you just simply do not understand it.
According to some highly controversial channeled material, and i don't like quoting them ever, we live in a world that is a zone in which one chooses to experience this UC either in love or else. Free will is there, so choose.
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12591879 - 05/19/10 11:33 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
That's also ridiculous. I don't know why I bother to respond to such stuff. It's without merit imo.
And you're also the only person thinks its without merit as well.
Too bad this subject has freaked you out so. I understand.
Too bad this subject has freaked me out so. You understand.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12591996 - 05/19/10 11:53 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Well, I'm going to get off topic too.
But if we assume that we are not the system. That we are what can observe the system.
How can we know if a cat can observe the system or not?
I'm not interested in going off topic. I want an answer to my OP.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592025 - 05/19/10 11:58 AM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592169 - 05/19/10 12:21 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware.
Buddhism claims that animals are ignorant.
That they are not aware that they are aware.
So they are only aware of the physical reactions of their mind/body.
This leads to complete identification with the mind/body.
As a result, any love they manifest is going to be related to this degree of awareness. It is going to be for their mind/body. Both animals in your example are showing this form of love. One is trying to gain nourishment for the body that it loves. Mmmmm, coon meat. The other is trying to avoid harm to the body that it loves. YIKES!
The argument for humans is that we can be aware that we are aware. Self-awareness. That there is the potential to end ignorance of self.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12592236 - 05/19/10 12:32 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
Please prove my question is futile? I asked it to provide evidence for myself as part of an honest investigation, that those who make claims about knowing what the Universe is all about don't really know. That seems to have been accomplished. So how is that futile?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12592251 - 05/19/10 12:34 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware.
Buddhism claims that animals are ignorant.
That they are not aware that they are aware.
So they are only aware of the physical reactions of their mind/body.
This leads to complete identification with the mind/body.
As a result, any love they manifest is going to be related to this degree of awareness. It is going to be for their mind/body. Both animals in your example are showing this form of love. One is trying to gain nourishment for the body that it loves. Mmmmm, coon meat. The other is trying to avoid harm to the body that it loves. YIKES!
The argument for humans is that we can be aware that we are aware. Self-awareness. That there is the potential to end ignorance of self.
Buddhist's make all kinds of unsubstantiated claims. How do you choose which to believe? And what does this have to do with my OP?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592258 - 05/19/10 12:35 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Saidin said:
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Quote:
Saidin said:
Hate has its roots in fear.
Would you mind elaborating on this thought? Why is this true?
Why do you hate? What is the mechanism, or cause of that hate? Follow it back.
Fear leads to anger which leads to hate which leads to suffering, young Skywalker.
Sith lords get all the chicks. Isn't it sometimes pleasurable to cause pain to others? Just look at the Germans and their concept of schadenfreude.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
Edited by deCypher (05/19/10 12:41 PM)
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592288 - 05/19/10 12:40 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Because the degree to which an animal is conscious will determine the degree of love they express. If the animal is identified with the individual body (no awareness of anything but) so the love that manifests will be directed towards the individual body. The animal will do anything that helps its body/mind. This is ultimately love directed towards what it is aware of.
Humans have different limitations. Thus, the love we can express does not need to be bound solely to our bodies/minds. We can express love that extends beyond that.
Or so the story goes...
I find it to be true, but I have no intention of convincing you with words alone.
Chronic brought the "who" wave here. I rode it and found who I am.
You can do the same and see what that means for love. It helps understand why Buddhists make these claims.
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592316 - 05/19/10 12:46 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
Please prove my question is futile? I asked it to provide evidence for myself as part of an honest investigation, that those who make claims about knowing what the Universe is all about don't really know. That seems to have been accomplished. So how is that futile?
Futile - Incapable of producing results; useless; not successful; not worth attempting.
You are asking a question about a baseless subject.
Please prove to me how your investigation produced useful results relating to the theory at hand.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592366 - 05/19/10 12:53 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
"If phenomena were not empty of a fundamental basis or of inherent existence, it would be utterly impossible for the varieties of phenomena to be transformed in dependence on causes. If they existed by way of their own fundamental basis, then no matter what type of entity they were, good bad, and so on, how could they be changed?
If a good fruit tree, for instance, were inherently existent by way of its own entity or its own inner basis, how would it be true that it could become bare and ugly? If the present mode of appearance of these things to our minds were their own inner mode of being, how could we be deceived?
Even in the ordinary world many discrepancies are well known between what appears and what actually is. Therefore, although beginninglessly everything has appeared as if it were inherently existent to the mind that is contaminated with the errors of ignorance, if those objects were indeed inherently existent, their inner basis would be just as they appear. In that case, when the consciousness searching for the inner basis of phenomenon performed analysis, that inner basis would definitely become clearer. Where does the fault lie that when sought, phenomena are not found and seemingly disappear?"
-14th dalai lama
Edited by daytripper23 (05/19/10 01:05 PM)
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592406 - 05/19/10 01:00 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
Please prove my question is futile? I asked it to provide evidence for myself as part of an honest investigation, that those who make claims about knowing what the Universe is all about don't really know. That seems to have been accomplished. So how is that futile?
Your question is futile because you're asking it from the wrong vantage point.
You have divided and fragmented reality and then wonder how it relates to a compassionate consciousness that in fact does not exist.
We did not come into this world speaking words or knowing anything. If I handed you a seashell as a newborn baby, could you ascribe any concept to it? Could you say that it was beautiful? It wasn't until you saw something that appeared ugly in contrast to the seashell that you began making distinctions between the two.
All ideas you have about the world are just that, ideas.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12592531 - 05/19/10 01:24 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Because the degree to which an animal is conscious will determine the degree of love they express. If the animal is identified with the individual body (no awareness of anything but) so the love that manifests will be directed towards the individual body. The animal will do anything that helps its body/mind. This is ultimately love directed towards what it is aware of.
Humans have different limitations. Thus, the love we can express does not need to be bound solely to our bodies/minds. We can express love that extends beyond that.
Or so the story goes...
I find it to be true, but I have no intention of convincing you with words alone.
Chronic brought the "who" wave here. I rode it and found who I am.
You can do the same and see what that means for love. It helps understand why Buddhists make these claims.
I rode it and found who I am.
Really, who am you?
not need to be bound solely to our bodies/minds. We can express love that extends beyond that.
How can you prove this to me? If you say it am I just supposed to believe it like in the mystery forum or are you going to debate the issue? Cause if not then why bring it up? I have searched diligently for over 57 years and found none of your statements about love to be true. Love is an emotion coming from the brain. Universal love is an unknown. If you want to play fair and debate this with evidence then please do.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592535 - 05/19/10 01:25 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Debate? In S&M? Get outta here.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12592547 - 05/19/10 01:27 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
Please prove my question is futile? I asked it to provide evidence for myself as part of an honest investigation, that those who make claims about knowing what the Universe is all about don't really know. That seems to have been accomplished. So how is that futile?
Futile - Incapable of producing results; useless; not successful; not worth attempting.
You are asking a question about a baseless subject.
Please prove to me how your investigation produced useful results relating to the theory at hand.
Already explained that I now know that no one here can explain with evidence the claims they make about universal consciousness and all that being about love. I chalk it all up to death anxiety cause there is evidence of that imo. If someone had provided some reasonable evidence I was all ears.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Quote:
"If phenomena were not empty of a fundamental basis or of inherent existence, it would be utterly impossible for the varieties of phenomena to be transformed in dependence on causes. If they existed by way of their own fundamental basis, then no matter what type of entity they were, good bad, and so on, how could they be changed?
If a good fruit tree, for instance, were inherently existent by way of its own entity or its own inner basis, how would it be true that it could become bare and ugly? If the present mode of appearance of these things to our minds were their own inner mode of being, how could we be deceived?
Even in the ordinary world many discrepancies are well known between what appears and what actually is. Therefore, although beginninglessly everything has appeared as if it were inherently existent to the mind that is contaminated with the errors of ignorance, if those objects were indeed inherently existent, their inner basis would be just as they appear. In that case, when the consciousness searching for the inner basis of phenomenon performed analysis, that inner basis would definitely become clearer. Where does the fault lie that when sought, phenomena are not found and seemingly disappear?"
-14th dalai lama
What?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
a compassionate consciousness that in fact does not exist.
That's just what I think.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592669 - 05/19/10 01:48 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
a compassionate consciousness that in fact does not exist.
That's just what I think.
At least we agree on one thing old man 
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592686 - 05/19/10 01:50 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Your question is futile. You may as well ask if Unicorn horns are made of keratin, and why.
Please prove my question is futile? I asked it to provide evidence for myself as part of an honest investigation, that those who make claims about knowing what the Universe is all about don't really know. That seems to have been accomplished. So how is that futile?
Futile - Incapable of producing results; useless; not successful; not worth attempting.
You are asking a question about a baseless subject.
Please prove to me how your investigation produced useful results relating to the theory at hand.
Already explained that I now know that no one here can explain with evidence the claims they make about universal consciousness and all that being about love. I chalk it all up to death anxiety cause there is evidence of that imo. If someone had provided some reasonable evidence I was all ears.
You didn't know that before you asked?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12592706 - 05/19/10 01:54 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Did I know that no one could explain rationally why the universe is all love?
No, how could I? I just give them all a chance now and again just in case one of them comes up with a bright idea. That's only fair.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592714 - 05/19/10 01:54 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Want evidence? Do psychedelics is the only possible 'answer' I can give you. Having the realization that we are all part of a universal consciousness and that love is the ultimate frequency of this universe is a feeling- a feeling that can't be explained or 'proved' with words. It can only be felt.
Much like the feeling you get when you smell something that brings you back to times of your childhood, good times... or bad.
It also depends on what you perceive 'love' to be. It is a very subjective term, which is why it is hard for many people to see it as a universal frequency.
As far as your dog and the racoon, your dog simply has a natural instinct to attack smaller creatures, im sure wild dogs had predation over such rodents before we domesticated them. A dog viciously wanting to kill/attack a racoon is no different then a mother feeding/protecting her baby with her own life.
Animals killing each other to eat may not be perceived as 'love', but having the earth provide the perfect environment to host life, to me, is love. Having the sun warm my body everyday(to me), is love.... it branches out and out until it can no further- however far that may be.
So I say... just feel. Maybe try perceiving love as more then a simple human emotion... stop trying to look for physical proof.. you probably won't find any(unless you go deep into quantum physics... good luck with that one). If you need help with the 'interconnectedness' feeling, my only suggestions would be psychedelics, and/or heavy meditation.
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592749 - 05/19/10 02:01 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Really, who am you?
no word, no object, no person
no description, no measure, no problem
no thought, no emotion, no pain
no concept, no reaction, no cause
no thing, not even this post
Quote:
Icelander said:
not need to be bound solely to our bodies/minds. We can express love that extends beyond that.
How can you prove this to me? If you say it am I just supposed to believe it like in the mystery forum or are you going to debate the issue? Cause if not then why bring it up? I have searched diligently for over 57 years and found none of your statements about love to be true. Love is an emotion coming from the brain. Universal love is an unknown. If you want to play fair and debate this with evidence then please do.
I'm not sure what you want to hear -- love is a concept, a thing, a word. We each individually fill it with the experiences and descriptions we individually see fitting. There is no experience of love that can fit into a word. No matter what evidence I provide, no matter what description I give, it's not going to be it. I can not give you my experiences, not in words or otherwise. Trying to place it into a container that will only arrive as empty as it began is not going to do the trick.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12592867 - 05/19/10 02:24 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Language is so passé. Good post!
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12592883 - 05/19/10 02:26 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
LOL!
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12592919 - 05/19/10 02:34 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
I understand how it can come off that way, maybe it was a bad example. I am not motivated by fear. I am very aware of the fact that my DNA dictates to me everything I do. The continuity of that DNA is the most basic of survival instincts, as is evolved counterpart in the emotional spectrum, love.
Don't understand what you are saying.
Sorry I was excited when i wrote that and have been busy for awhile. Basically, love is that emotion that evolved from the most primitive survival instinct, the continuity of the DNA. Our DNA is what dictates to us everything we do. With that mentality, everything I do is positively motivated by love, and not anything else. The correlation between love and a uniform mode of behavior that contradicts our nature as biological organisms must be reevaluated. In my opinion.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12593280 - 05/19/10 03:31 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Want evidence? Do psychedelics is the only possible 'answer' I can give you. Having the realization that we are all part of a universal consciousness and that love is the ultimate frequency of this universe is a feeling- a feeling that can't be explained or 'proved' with words. It can only be felt.
Much like the feeling you get when you smell something that brings you back to times of your childhood, good times... or bad.
It also depends on what you perceive 'love' to be. It is a very subjective term, which is why it is hard for many people to see it as a universal frequency.
As far as your dog and the racoon, your dog simply has a natural instinct to attack smaller creatures, im sure wild dogs had predation over such rodents before we domesticated them. A dog viciously wanting to kill/attack a racoon is no different then a mother feeding/protecting her baby with her own life.
Animals killing each other to eat may not be perceived as 'love', but having the earth provide the perfect environment to host life, to me, is love. Having the sun warm my body everyday(to me), is love.... it branches out and out until it can no further- however far that may be.
So I say... just feel. Maybe try perceiving love as more then a simple human emotion... stop trying to look for physical proof.. you probably won't find any(unless you go deep into quantum physics... good luck with that one). If you need help with the 'interconnectedness' feeling, my only suggestions would be psychedelics, and/or heavy meditation.
I've done psychedelics literally hundreds of times over the years and I meditated for years also.
blah blah blah.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
I understand how it can come off that way, maybe it was a bad example. I am not motivated by fear. I am very aware of the fact that my DNA dictates to me everything I do. The continuity of that DNA is the most basic of survival instincts, as is evolved counterpart in the emotional spectrum, love.
Don't understand what you are saying.
Sorry I was excited when i wrote that and have been busy for awhile. Basically, love is that emotion that evolved from the most primitive survival instinct, the continuity of the DNA. Our DNA is what dictates to us everything we do. With that mentality, everything I do is positively motivated by love, and not anything else. The correlation between love and a uniform mode of behavior that contradicts our nature as biological organisms must be reevaluated. In my opinion.
I don't see how you couldn't say the same thing about fear. In fact I would say fear was our most beneficial survival instinct.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12593307 - 05/19/10 03:35 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
no word, no object, no person
no description, no measure, no problem
no thought, no emotion, no pain
no concept, no reaction, no cause
no thing, not even this post
Anyone who studies current scientific theories comes to this conclusion. At least I did. Consciousness is an emergent property of brain function. The I or we that we think we are does not really exist.
I'm not sure what you want to hear -- love is a concept, a thing, a word. We each individually fill it with the experiences and descriptions we individually see fitting. There is no experience of love that can fit into a word. No matter what evidence I provide, no matter what description I give, it's not going to be it. I can not give you my experiences, not in words or otherwise. Trying to place it into a container that will only arrive as empty as it began is not going to do the trick.
Then imo it's not germane to this thread.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
Edited by Icelander (05/19/10 03:37 PM)
|
transital
Registered: 04/13/10
Posts: 195
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12593391 - 05/19/10 03:45 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Let me get it straight. You want someone to explain to you why a universal consciousness would express itself in such ways if it's all about love and niceness. You want it explained because it makes no sense to you. Especially if one claim the consciousness is very very aware.
This is my go at it and although I doubt this will satisfy you, this is how I see it.
I do think it's all erupts from the Joy of Oneness, the Joy of Being, Complete and in utter Unity.
We are all beings evolving from unconsciousness to consciousness, from separation to ultimate unity... we are all in this together.
No one is good or bad, we are relatively something but absolutely nothing. You consider your dog sweet while the raccoon reacts as if he were a ferocious predator, a killer. We all know that the raccoon himself also can become that ferocious predator, it can also play the role of killer.
Everyone of us is after all fair game, some more than others depending on their evolutionary stage.
I don't think this Universal Consciousness is letting anything happen to us that we wouldn't do it to ourselves by doing it to others.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: transital]
#12593495 - 05/19/10 04:06 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Everybody gets to have a theory. And you're right it's not a very satisfactory one.
It doesn't seem reasonable.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
transital
Registered: 04/13/10
Posts: 195
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12593528 - 05/19/10 04:13 PM (2 years, 11 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Everybody gets to have a theory. And you're right it's not a very satisfactory one.
It doesn't seem reasonable.
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12593729 - 05/19/10 04:56 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
I understand how it can come off that way, maybe it was a bad example. I am not motivated by fear. I am very aware of the fact that my DNA dictates to me everything I do. The continuity of that DNA is the most basic of survival instincts, as is evolved counterpart in the emotional spectrum, love.
Don't understand what you are saying.
Sorry I was excited when i wrote that and have been busy for awhile. Basically, love is that emotion that evolved from the most primitive survival instinct, the continuity of the DNA. Our DNA is what dictates to us everything we do. With that mentality, everything I do is positively motivated by love, and not anything else. The correlation between love and a uniform mode of behavior that contradicts our nature as biological organisms must be reevaluated. In my opinion.
I don't see how you couldn't say the same thing about fear. In fact I would say fear was our most beneficial survival instinct.
Nope not true. Fear is not a motivator its the exact opposite. If our primitive tree-dwelling ancestors were afraid, if fear was the their predominant condition they would have never left the trees. It wasn't fear. Must have been love that motivated such bravery as to find a new environment for their young.
|
Saidin
Sun Dragon
Registered: 12/02/08
Posts: 360
Loc: In between my thoughts
Last seen: 15 days, 19 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: transital]
#12593737 - 05/19/10 04:59 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
God didn't create the univese, god became the universe. In becomming, it went from a singular to a plurality. Love is the essense of unity folding back in on itself and becoming aware of its true nature as everything.
How's that for some good mumbo jumbo...
--------------------
What, you ask, was the beginning of it all? And it is this...
Existence that multiplied itself
For sheer delight of being
And plunged into numberless trillions of forms
So that it might
Find
Itself
Innumerably.
-Sri Aubobindo
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Nope not true. Fear is not a motivator its the exact opposite. If our primitive tree-dwelling ancestors were afraid, if fear was the their predominant condition they would have never left the trees. It wasn't fear. Must have been love that motivated such bravery as to find a new environment for their young.
Boy do you need to do some homework. Fear is a selected trait for humans and why it is so prevalent. Those who ran first survived to reproduce. Do some research in psychology and primitive societies and early human history.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594128 - 05/19/10 06:07 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I have a psychology degree. I minored in anthropology and find it hard to believe that fear is a great motivator. Yes sure it made you run from the saber tooth, but what was it that made you hunt it? What made the Spartans leave their kids in the wilderness?
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Oh my, did you watch Dune and feel spiritually empowered?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12594142 - 05/19/10 06:10 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Nah I read it and was inspired.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Just because fear is not the only emotion we have at work in humans does not make it not a prime motivator for survival and a selected trait.
Do you always see everything in such black and white terms.
Truth is that love and fear are both basic emotional states for humans. We obviously don't just run on love or fear. That's my point.
Actually early man rarely hunted sabertooth's as they were not really good to eat being a carnivore and there was much easier prey.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
Edited by Icelander (05/19/10 06:13 PM)
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
I have a psychology degree. I minored in anthropology and find it hard to believe that fear is a great motivator. Yes sure it made you run from the saber tooth, but what was it that made you hunt it? What made the Spartans leave their kids in the wilderness?
Why do people resist dropping the soap? What is the motivating factor behind that?
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594238 - 05/19/10 06:26 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Just because fear is not the only emotion at work in humans we have does not make it a prime motivator for survival and selected trait.
Do you always see everything in such black and white terms.
Truth is that love and fear are both basic emotional states for humans. We obviously don't just run on love or fear. That's my point.
Actually early man rarely hunted sabertooth's as they were not really good to eat being a carnivore and there was much easier prey.
Really all I can say to that is you'll find out when you have your life threatened. When it is clear that death is really close will you see what and where fear will get you. Real fear is usually described as "crippling", you freeze don't act, can't think. You don't move, can't think quick you're dead. I'll give fear as a good indicator, but a horrible motivator. As far as black and white vision, when its my life I have no time to consider higher functions of thought
To Rainbow, you've never been to prison and do not know that the soap dropping analogy is highly inaccurate. Those who exhibit fear in prison have their shit pushed in soap in hand or no fucking soap in hand.
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594262 - 05/19/10 06:30 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
Because why do you think the world is as beautiful as it is. Why are flowers gorgeous, instead of just serving their purpose to the eco-system and being ugly too? So we can love them, love the way they look. Why do you think we are the happiest when in love? Because that's what life is about. The hippies were oh so correct. Why do you think that when you take a natural fungus...FUNGUS...one of the most hated things in the world, and consume it, you are infused with understanding of everything, and for some reason it all points to love. The only one who can answer your question for sure is God, but I feel that I can come pretty close. ONLY because of the knowledge I've gained on Shrooms and LSD. Live, Love, learn my friend. There is a place called Wonderland.  
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594315 - 05/19/10 06:39 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If there is no one who suffers there would have to be no one who chooses suffering. ?????
Exactly. That's why the Hippies didn't succeed in achieving world peace. There has to be a Negative to go with a Positive. Magnetic fields are everything. We are center. We are surged constantly with both Positivity and negativity. It's just a matter of which one to Acknowledge. Glass half empty? Nah...Glass half Full.   
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594327 - 05/19/10 06:41 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I've done psychedelics literally hundreds of times over the years and I meditated for years also.
blah blah blah.
Well then, I am sorry that you have not reached the enlightenment that I have?
I think its pretty clear that you won't find the answer you seek, especially on an online forum.
Your question is just like asking one to teach you Daoism(when you ultimately need to teach yourself).
Believe the concept if you want, or don't. You could also just wait until death... im sure things will be perfectly clear once that happens.
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
|
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Glass half empty? Nah...Glass half Full.
Or... glass is simply twice as big as it needs to be 
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12594346 - 05/19/10 06:44 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Glass half empty? Nah...Glass half Full.
Or... glass is simply twice as big as it needs to be
DAMN STRAIGHT! It's just an EXCESS of these feelings. Nothin wrong with a 4 Liter of Pepsi right? 
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Just because fear is not the only emotion at work in humans we have does not make it a prime motivator for survival and selected trait.
Do you always see everything in such black and white terms.
Truth is that love and fear are both basic emotional states for humans. We obviously don't just run on love or fear. That's my point.
Actually early man rarely hunted sabertooth's as they were not really good to eat being a carnivore and there was much easier prey.
Really all I can say to that is you'll find out when you have your life threatened. When it is clear that death is really close will you see what and where fear will get you. Real fear is usually described as "crippling", you freeze don't act, can't think. You don't move, can't think quick you're dead. I'll give fear as a good indicator, but a horrible motivator. As far as black and white vision, when its my life I have no time to consider higher functions of thought
To Rainbow, you've never been to prison and do not know that the soap dropping analogy is highly inaccurate. Those who exhibit fear in prison have their shit pushed in soap in hand or no fucking soap in hand.
Quote:
LisonAlGaib said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Just because fear is not the only emotion at work in humans we have does not make it a prime motivator for survival and selected trait.
Do you always see everything in such black and white terms.
Truth is that love and fear are both basic emotional states for humans. We obviously don't just run on love or fear. That's my point.
Actually early man rarely hunted sabertooth's as they were not really good to eat being a carnivore and there was much easier prey.
Really all I can say to that is you'll find out when you have your life threatened. When it is clear that death is really close will you see what and where fear will get you. Real fear is usually described as "crippling", you freeze don't act, can't think. You don't move, can't think quick you're dead. I'll give fear as a good indicator, but a horrible motivator. As far as black and white vision, when its my life I have no time to consider higher functions of thought
To Rainbow, you've never been to prison and do not know that the soap dropping analogy is highly inaccurate. Those who exhibit fear in prison have their shit pushed in soap in hand or no fucking soap in hand.
Actually I once had my life threatened. I was terrified and ran my ass off dodging while six shots were fired at me. Fear saved my life. You really don't understand the power of fear to save you. You only look at the ways fear can inhibit you.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12594434 - 05/19/10 07:02 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Well then, I am sorry that you have not reached the enlightenment that I have?
 I love hearing this line.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
Because why do you think the world is as beautiful as it is. Why are flowers gorgeous, instead of just serving their purpose to the eco-system and being ugly too? So we can love them, love the way they look. Why do you think we are the happiest when in love? Because that's what life is about. The hippies were oh so correct. Why do you think that when you take a natural fungus...FUNGUS...one of the most hated things in the world, and consume it, you are infused with understanding of everything, and for some reason it all points to love. The only one who can answer your question for sure is God, but I feel that I can come pretty close. ONLY because of the knowledge I've gained on Shrooms and LSD. Live, Love, learn my friend. There is a place called Wonderland.
It just gets better and better. I love this forum.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594478 - 05/19/10 07:11 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
Because why do you think the world is as beautiful as it is. Why are flowers gorgeous, instead of just serving their purpose to the eco-system and being ugly too? So we can love them, love the way they look. Why do you think we are the happiest when in love? Because that's what life is about. The hippies were oh so correct. Why do you think that when you take a natural fungus...FUNGUS...one of the most hated things in the world, and consume it, you are infused with understanding of everything, and for some reason it all points to love. The only one who can answer your question for sure is God, but I feel that I can come pretty close. ONLY because of the knowledge I've gained on Shrooms and LSD. Live, Love, learn my friend. There is a place called Wonderland.
It just gets better and better. I love this forum.
Yeah...Lets all laugh at other people's beliefs. Way to be closed minded.
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I would never presume to laugh at your beliefs, I respect your beliefs. It's your presentation.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594738 - 05/19/10 08:03 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I never thought of it that way. I guess for some fear gets the gears working. I don't like it though, I find myself in certain social situations were fear is interpreted as weakness, which is never good.
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12594872 - 05/19/10 08:31 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I would never presume to laugh at your beliefs, I respect your beliefs. It's your presentation.
Lol, What's wrong with my presentation? The person who asked this question has gotten nothing but the same answer explained in many different ways. I just gave him another. i can present all day. Doesn't matter how. Different path. Same result. Another one of my beliefs
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
|
Icelander, i don't think any human has an answer for your OP. At least not yet, maybe in a couple thousand years... hell look how much changed in the last 50 years, and the rate of change is only increasing! You can't even imagine what answers we will have about the universe.
--------------------
L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Icelander, i don't think any human has an answer for your OP. At least not yet, maybe in a couple thousand years... hell look how much changed in the last 50 years, and the rate of change is only increasing! You can't even imagine what answers we will have about the universe.
I just hope the world becomes flat again, I really miss those days 
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12595112 - 05/19/10 09:14 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Well then, I am sorry that you have not reached the enlightenment that I have?
I love hearing this line.
Care to 'enlighten' me then? :P
You still seem to be questioning something I found an answer to a long time ago... and im much younger then you. Not saying that i'm better then you in anyway, but you're a 60 year old mocking people in an online forum... something tells me you just made this topic to try and put people down.
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12595186 - 05/19/10 09:26 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
|
Saidin
Sun Dragon
Registered: 12/02/08
Posts: 360
Loc: In between my thoughts
Last seen: 15 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Glass half empty? Nah...Glass half Full.
The glass cannot be half empty. 1/2 of 0 = 0
--------------------
What, you ask, was the beginning of it all? And it is this...
Existence that multiplied itself
For sheer delight of being
And plunged into numberless trillions of forms
So that it might
Find
Itself
Innumerably.
-Sri Aubobindo
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Saidin]
#12595591 - 05/19/10 10:49 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I think it's awesome that a thread requesting explanation gets 9 pages 
|
FollowTheMusic
Stranger
Registered: 11/11/06
Posts: 267
Last seen: 1 year, 27 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12595950 - 05/20/10 12:16 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Let me quote my friend Alan Watts, who is speaking as if to a child:
Quote:
God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside God, he has no one but himself to play with. But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.
I doubt a better explanation is possible. It's the Great Mystery, and it can only be experienced, not answered.
Edited by FollowTheMusic (05/22/10 07:41 PM)
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
|
Quote:
FollowTheMusic said:
Let me quote my friend Alan Watts, who is speaking as if to a child:
Quote:
God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside God, he has no one but himself to play with. But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.
I doubt a better explanation is possible. It's the Great Mystery, and it can only be experienced, not answered.
This.
|
Sleepwalker
Overshoes
Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 3,634
Last seen: 5 hours, 1 minute
|
|
yep it's the great mystery. Not exactly love but it's pretty cool
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12596407 - 05/20/10 05:00 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Well then, I am sorry that you have not reached the enlightenment that I have?
I love hearing this line.
Care to 'enlighten' me then? :P
You still seem to be questioning something I found an answer to a long time ago... and im much younger then you. Not saying that i'm better then you in anyway, but you're a 60 year old mocking people in an online forum... something tells me you just made this topic to try and put people down.
If you found an answer then you should be able to present it here. I'm all ears.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
FollowTheMusic said:
Let me quote my friend Alan Watts, who is speaking as if to a child:
Quote:
God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside God, he has no one but himself to play with. But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.
I doubt a better explanation is possible. It's the Great Mystery, and it can only be experienced, not answered.
Here's the rub. I experienced all the things that most all the trippers here have and have found the silence in meditation but I didn't feel that it said anything about a cosmic consciousness. It was not proof of anything for me beyond the confinds of a physical brain being altered by chemistry. Thats why when you stop tripping you come down. And when you stop meditating you aren't the holy man. Not to say you don't change in ways but that always happens in life and experience mixed with time.
I just think I'm just being very precise and honest about what I actually know. I don't claim like many here to know anything for sure. And I get called arrogant? I was a true believer 30 years ago, but over time and with long experience and study of some science I realized that most likely I was fundamentally a primate animal that was acting out based mostly on death anxiety trying to find a way, not to be mortal.
So when I ask this question I'm looking for someone who can tell me something besides, "well man you just have to experience it". Because I have the "experience" and I don't think people here are right about what it means.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
Last thing I expected to hear. Thanks, I appreciate it. Usually I'm just the bad ol cynic raining on the parade.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
transital
Registered: 04/13/10
Posts: 195
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Saidin]
#12596608 - 05/20/10 06:30 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Saidin said:
God didn't create the univese, god became the universe. In becomming, it went from a singular to a plurality. Love is the essense of unity folding back in on itself and becoming aware of its true nature as everything.
How's that for some good mumbo jumbo...
God the Father, the Source, the Absolute and Indivisible Spirit exists outside manifestation as One.
The manifesting Vibratory Creation is the Cosmic Mother or Holy Ghost (AUM). This Cosmic Vibration is impregnated with God's Son or the Cosmic Consciousness or Christ/Krishna/Buddha Consciousness. And so Mother Nature gives birth to this Consciousness in all of us thus permeating it.
God the Son is the reflection of God the Father's Consciousness in Creation. It's the guiding principle behind God's Will (The Cosmic Mother or Nature) very much like our individual consciousness is the guiding principle of our will. We are after all made in the image of God.
The Creation is possible because of the force of repulsion of The Cosmic Mother which is the counterpart to its force of attraction. With this repulsive force God is able to divide the indivisible into the multiplicity that we experience. I think when people are talking about Love they are referring to this attracting force which leads to unity or the One, the Cosmic Consciousness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: transital]
#12596665 - 05/20/10 06:51 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I think you would have a great career in advertising. You put all those vibes down with a great flow.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
transital
Registered: 04/13/10
Posts: 195
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12596734 - 05/20/10 07:13 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I think you would have a great career in advertising. You put all those vibes down with a great flow.
why thank you sir! 
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: transital]
#12597190 - 05/20/10 09:21 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I doubt a better explanation is possible
Here is a better explanation.
Quote:
Purpose of creation
The sole purpose of creation is for the soul to enjoy the infinite state of the Oversoul consciously. Although the soul eternally exists in and with the Oversoul in an inviolable unity, it cannot be conscious of this unity independently of creation, which is within the limitations of time. It must therefore evolve consciousness before it can realize its true status and nature as being identical with the infinite Oversoul, which is one without a second. The evolution of consciousness requires the duality of subject and object %u2014 the center of consciousness and the environment (that is, the world of forms).
Cause of cosmic Illusion
How does the soul get caught up in Illusion? How did the formless, infinite, and eternal Soul come to experience itself as having form and as being finite and destructible? How did Purusha, or the supreme Spirit, come to think of itself as prakriti, or the world of nature? In other words, what is the cause of the cosmic Illusion in which the individualized soul finds itself? To realize the true status of the Oversoul %u2014 which is one, indivisible, real, and infinite %u2014 the soul needs consciousness. The soul does get consciousness; however this consciousness is not of God but of the universe, not of the Oversoul but of its shadow, not of the One but of many, not of the Infinite but of the finite, not of the Eternal but of the transitory. Thus the soul, instead of realizing the Oversoul, gets involved in cosmic Illusion; and hence, though really infinite, it comes to experience itself as finite. In other words, when the soul develops consciousness, it does not become conscious of its own true nature but of the phenomenal world, which is its own shadow.
The ferocity of nature forces animals together which helps them to develop love. In there strive to overcome nature they develop skill and power which in tern develops there sense of self. A wolf could not be considered to be courageous unless there was something to be courageous against.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I really don't see any evidence for this. Especially the part about animals being forced together for the sake of love.
Hey man. Do you know how many theories I've heard here in just the several years I've been posting here? Must be hundreds. All given as final truth? Did you know that many of them contradict each other or don't mesh up? Do you know that there is never or rarely any physical evidence presented?
How do you know what you are putting down here is the real deal?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597564 - 05/20/10 10:32 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
What do you know of as truth?
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597619 - 05/20/10 10:44 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I really don't see any evidence for this. Especially the part about animals being forced together for the sake of love.
Hey man. Do you know how many theories I've heard here in just the several years I've been posting here? Must be hundreds. All given as final truth? Did you know that many of them contradict each other or don't mesh up? Do you know that there is never or rarely any physical evidence presented?
How do you know what you are putting down here is the real deal?
Why are you so concerned what the "real deal" is? Nobody's going to be able to really explain it to you, that's why it's called mysticism, it seems shrouded in mystery until you decide to find out yourself.
I know you've been around the block and experienced a great deal, but it would be egotistical to think that just because you haven't experienced some of these spiritual phenomena that they don't exist.
By the way, I don't know about this board, but in reading quite a bit of spiritual literature, the goal of realizing the true self is a common theme that underlies thousands of years of spiritual traditions that were completely independent of each other.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12597650 - 05/20/10 10:49 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
What do you know of as truth?
That's a good question. Nothing really, and I've stated so many times.
The only big objection I have to mysticism or whatever you want to call it is the claim that one can "know truth" through subjective experience and subjective interpretation of that experience.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12597673 - 05/20/10 10:54 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Why are you so concerned what the "real deal" is? Nobody's going to be able to really explain it to you, that's why it's called mysticism, it seems shrouded in mystery until you decide to find out yourself.
See my above reply to Fraggin
I know you've been around the block and experienced a great deal, but it would be egotistical to think that just because you haven't experienced some of these spiritual phenomena that they don't exist.
I have never said this and have often stated anything could exist however unlikely.
By the way, I don't know about this board, but in reading quite a bit of spiritual literature, the goal of realizing the true self is a common theme that underlies thousands of years of spiritual traditions that were completely independent of each other.
I realize this but at the point of describing what that true self is things get very widely subjective and as I stated above that's dandy until someone say's they know for sure what is true, give details, and even claim enlightenment whatever that means.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
Hmmm so is Icelander dishing out a koan here? Many have acknowledged that it is a futile question.
So Maybe it is... I can't really judge that. I don't have experience with a system of learning that doesn't engage with formal philosophy, and I find that ambiguities such as this that put me in doubt or skepticism.
Apples...The form of this thread may easily fall in line with a framework you are familiar with, however, I would ask if that is both necessary and sufficient? From what I can see is that the question has a very certain form. I think on a basic level it is clear to anyone that Icelander has set up a soap box for either pedantic or enlightened explanations.
Is the explanation legitimate? Or first should we wonder if the question is legitimate?
This situation is something I've wanted to probe you a bit on, given your experience as a Zen monk. From an external perspective, it seems to me that Zen is very disciplinary in nature. I do not suppose I can really interrogate the system, but I would just say I do not trust myself to take refuge in Sangha (Community), or more specifically, the elders who are dishing out either the nonsense, or whattchacallit (KATZ!)
How do you tell when its genuine?
I vest much more in the Dharma (teachings) - ideally, exoteric philosophy (although I also enjoy esoteric philosophy too.)
Since I have had a basic understanding of Buddhism, I have noticed a great tension between the 3 refuges (Sangha, Dharma, Buddha - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuge_(Buddhism)). In my particular experience, I have found it difficult to acknowledge that to learn, one must be taught in a personal relationship, which implies power relations.
This is why I am curious of Zen, which seems to be so firmly situated in Sangha, and further does not seem to have any formal philosophy to speak of.
Noticing that a pedantic structure ultimately effects the ground of discourse, it has seemed to me that these communal relations impose on the explicit philosophy that I am inclined to. I certainly do not see a sense of favoring or even augmenting uneven grounds (soap boxes - a step up.)
This is why I find your comment interesting, because Zen seems to make this sort of face...
I recognize that the game can't be avoided, and in the same sense, I understand why the three refuges are represented equally. BUT it is my own disposition to question where and how personal relations (power) meets discourse. I can see it is weighted differently depending on the tradition.
In short, I think Icelander is looking for a conceptual answer. I think the question he has contrived is futile, and it suffers a disconnect to what may ideally be explained, (which again, is what he frankly asked for)
As I see it, what may seem to be koan could be a conceptual trap. How do you tell the difference? It would require great faith in a person for me to see through a koan. That is what I cannot seem to trust in community. What I notice, is that strictly in terms of Sangha, you would never be able to tell the difference between a koan and a trap - otherwise, what fulcrum in analytic is there to speak of?
About Icelander's "question", somehow I find it worthwhile, I wouldn't post otherwise. But on the other hand I wouldn't give credit for just laying these grounds - as this is much too ambiguous.
I think that Icelander has set up, and is holding conceptual ground. His tactic is actually to be the lower ground, and he has gotten good at defending this position. Humble? He is no more humble than my ass, as I assume a higher ground. We are all doing the same thing here. And you may also note that we all got here by being high....
This world or community immanent. I am up on a mountain with my books, apples has spent time in a zen community, and Icelander... I'm not sure where hes at other than some relative lowland. But none of these positions represent necessary and sufficient conditions for individualized existence. The ultimate "character" of discussion is that we are interacting.
This is where an illusion of separateness can be seen in a positive sense. Consider the format of this argument - I am not describing wholeness, I am saying someone cannot exist by an inherent disposition. This is much bigger than the shroomery. It is like what the Dalai Lama was explaining in the previous quote as dependent origination; emptiness.
Dependent origination, at least, is not an esoteric truth. Conventionally, it may be seen that we are all communicating with definite potency towards expression, even though some may assume more passive or aggressive positions. Even in questioning, in an "inferior" position, with the head tilted upward, intonation voicing an upward climb - a basically dependent position is maintained. This is intuited by everyone on some level.
As for the question, maybe a few remarkable persons have been able to hold one foot in absurdity and the other in logic. But there definitely isn't going to be a straight answer of "unification" - at best, you might get an absurd "naturalism".
Beware the Jabberwok, my son - Logician/Madcap Lewis Carrol
Quote:
Jabberwocky
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Edited by daytripper23 (05/20/10 11:18 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
In short, I think Icelander is looking for a conceptual answer. I think the question is futile, and it suffers a disconnect to what may ideally be explained, (which again, is what he frankly asked for)
Several times I have stated the purpose of my OP in this very thread. Read the few posts above yours.
My desire is to find common ground for exploration with those who claim to be seeking truth. Now I think we have to come from the place of realization that "truth" is going to have to be relative and a good guess is really what is needed. And an admission that one is guessing based on the fact that everything is filtered, as far as I can tell, through a pretty efficient filter and one that is so complex as to be beyond complete understanding.
Frankly I'm sick of people knowing what is true because that's the end of the exploration except to confirm the already known "facts".
I'd be a whole lot more open to this forum if it were more open ended and really a place to explore all the explanations for what appears or what we think appears.
Mostly here at the shroomery I play advocate. (hence my favorite little guy) I take positions that I don't necessarily believe myself and am never ever sure of. I do it to see if anyone is going to play. And some do to their credit and from them I have learned quite a bit here. And for that I'm grateful. And I'm sure many of you go unacknowledged by me which is kind of a shame. 
Am I expecting success and a good answer to my questions?
Too much to ask, yes most likely, but then the fun is being the burr in the blanket.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597799 - 05/20/10 11:23 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Am I expecting success and a good answer to my questions?
Too much to ask, yes most likely, but then the fun is being the burr in the blanket.
This pretty much sums up your existence on the shroomery.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597811 - 05/20/10 11:26 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
So what I am saying is that "devils advocate" perfectly reflects the interdependency of our situation, in a way that you can internalize.
And further, it proves that this "evil" or "hateful" guy is just a way of looking at things - it may be to our regard, an appearance.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597919 - 05/20/10 11:47 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
The only big objection I have to mysticism or whatever you want to call it is the claim that one can "know truth" through subjective experience and subjective interpretation of that experience.
Most mystics that I personally find sensible enough (to the extent that anyone can seem sensible) don't think of truth as an experience. It's beyond all experience. Yet even Ramana Maharshi said that it can be directly experienced by removing all self-limiting tendencies. So paradoxical..
My advice is that don't try to pre-conceive it with your intellect, because that's a trap. I also fall into it time and time again, so I try to remind myself that whatever notion comes up is just another form and not truth itself. Will I ever know truth, will I be able to say that now I know? Maybe, maybe not. Others claim to have done it, so why shouldn't you and me?
In any case, what's the point of trying to intellectualize it if we know that it's a wild goose chase? Something compels us to try and understand, but we have become too arrogant and attached to reason to go beyond dialogue. It's supposed to be very simple, yet it seems like madness from the conventional perspective:
With these said, your advocacy is most welcome. The integral approach is always the best.
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12597955 - 05/20/10 11:54 AM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
Fraggin said:
What do you know of as truth?
That's a good question. Nothing really, and I've stated so many times.
The only big objection I have to mysticism or whatever you want to call it is the claim that one can "know truth" through subjective experience and subjective interpretation of that experience.
How else do you know anything? Boolean logic? It's all subject to interpretation, that includes experiences of oneness as well as laws of physics. I don't know what reassurance of validity would satisfy you...some of these experiences are so deeply moving that they leave no doubt. After tripping on shrooms and acid, I now know that reality is much more malleable than I would have suspected. After meditating for a while, I now know that when the mind is quiet, we experience greater peace and contentment. From quiet observation, I've seen how all phenomena and forms inevitably rise and pass away. These are the only "truths" I claim to know, and they've changed my life in a totally fundamental way.
edit: plus, look at that picture of the guy in my sig. Tell me he isn't fuckin one with the universe in that picture
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
Edited by oojijimoo (05/20/10 11:56 AM)
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
Hmmm so is Icelander dishing out a koan here? Many have acknowledged that it is a futile question.
So Maybe it is... I can't really judge that. I don't have experience with a system of learning that doesn't engage with formal philosophy, and I find that ambiguities such as this that put me in doubt or skepticism.
Apples...The form of this thread may easily fall in line with a framework you are familiar with, however, I would ask if that is both necessary and sufficient? From what I can see is that the question has a very certain form. I think on a basic level it is clear to anyone that Icelander has set up a soap box for either pedantic or enlightened explanations.
Is the explanation legitimate? Or first should we wonder if the question is legitimate?
This situation is something I've wanted to probe you a bit on, given your experience as a Zen monk. From an external perspective, it seems to me that Zen is very disciplinary in nature. I do not suppose I can really interrogate the system, but I would just say I do not trust myself to take refuge in Sangha (Community), or more specifically, the elders who are dishing out either the nonsense, or whattchacallit (KATZ!)
How do you tell when its genuine?
I vest much more in the Dharma (teachings) - ideally, exoteric philosophy (although I also enjoy esoteric philosophy too.)
Since I have had a basic understanding of Buddhism, I have noticed a great tension between the 3 refuges (Sangha, Dharma, Buddha - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuge_(Buddhism)). In my particular experience, I have found it difficult to acknowledge that to learn, one must be taught in a personal relationship, which implies power relations.
This is why I am curious of Zen, which seems to be so firmly situated in Sangha, and further does not seem to have any formal philosophy to speak of.
Noticing that a pedantic structure ultimately effects the ground of discourse, it has seemed to me that these communal relations impose on the explicit philosophy that I am inclined to. I certainly do not see a sense of favoring or even augmenting uneven grounds (soap boxes - a step up.)
This is why I find your comment interesting, because Zen seems to make this sort of face...
I recognize that the game can't be avoided, and in the same sense, I understand why the three refuges are represented equally. BUT it is my own disposition to question where and how personal relations (power) meets discourse. I can see it is weighted differently depending on the tradition.
In short, I think Icelander is looking for a conceptual answer. I think the question he has contrived is futile, and it suffers a disconnect to what may ideally be explained, (which again, is what he frankly asked for)
As I see it, what may seem to be koan could be a conceptual trap. How do you tell the difference? It would require great faith in a person for me to see through a koan. That is what I cannot seem to trust in community. What I notice, is that strictly in terms of Sangha, you would never be able to tell the difference between a koan and a trap - otherwise, what fulcrum in analytic is there to speak of?
About Icelander's "question", somehow I find it worthwhile, I wouldn't post otherwise. But on the other hand I wouldn't give credit for just laying these grounds - as this is much too ambiguous.
I think that Icelander has set up, and is holding conceptual ground. His tactic is actually to be the lower ground, and he has gotten good at defending this position. Humble? He is no more humble than my ass, as I assume a higher ground. We are all doing the same thing here. And you may also note that we all got here by being high....
This world or community immanent. I am up on a mountain with my books, apples has spent time in a zen community, and Icelander... I'm not sure where hes at other than some relative lowland. But none of these positions represent necessary and sufficient conditions for individualized existence. The ultimate "character" of discussion is that we are interacting.
This is where an illusion of separateness can be seen in a positive sense. Consider the format of this argument - I am not describing wholeness, I am saying someone cannot exist by an inherent disposition. This is much bigger than the shroomery. It is like what the Dalai Lama was explaining in the previous quote as dependent origination; emptiness.
Dependent origination, at least, is not an esoteric truth. Conventionally, it may be seen that we are all communicating with definite potency towards expression, even though some may assume more passive or aggressive positions. Even in questioning, in an "inferior" position, with the head tilted upward, intonation voicing an upward climb - a basically dependent position is maintained. This is intuited by everyone on some level.
As for the question, maybe a few remarkable persons have been able to hold one foot in absurdity and the other in logic. But there definitely isn't going to be a straight answer of "unification" - at best, you might get an absurd "naturalism".
Beware the Jabberwok, my son - Logician/Madcap Lewis Carrol
Quote:
Jabberwocky
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Icelander does want an answer, but he wants an answer that complies with his perception of reality.
Enlightenment both exists and does not exist.
The enlightenment we are discussing in this thread does not exist. That's a spiritual trap that many of us fall into, we've turned enlightenment into a concept, no different from the words "job promotion" or "sex." How can you reach a concept? Let alone, how can you show that your concepts exist in an "objective" world? This is why Bodhidharma would ask people to show him their minds, it's impossible, it cannot be done.
Once Hui-Neng came across two monks looking at a flag blowing in the wind and they were discussing whether it was blowing east or west, Hui-Neng replied "neither, it is your mind that is moving, not the flag."
You mentioned something about community and trust. I think these two things are very important. One of us here may be posting something that is very insightful and would benefit our understanding, but since this is the shroomery, we don't take our posts all that seriously. We all assume that we are just book-learned people, quoting others, and living off the knowledge of something that maybe Alan Watts said. When you look into a man's eyes and listen to what he is saying with complete faith, there's a receptiveness that you can never capature from the words on a page. There's a conviction in your heart that what he is saying is truth.
As a kid, would you believe in Santa Clause from reading about him in a book or by your own father sitting you on his lap and telling you about him?
P.S.
KATZ!!!
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
You people need to read some Wittgenstein. Using words to try to get at spiritual truth is just futile masturbation.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12598159 - 05/20/10 12:26 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
If you found an answer then you should be able to present it here. I'm all ears.
I see that you have failed to understand the point of my posts .
Please tell me a way that I can somehow upload my own personal, subjective experiences(via psychedelics, meditation, lucid/vivid dreams), as well as the feelings I had during those experiences onto this forum. 
Since you fail to realize that it can only be experienced(and hardly explained), then my only answer to you now is to wait until 2012... if nothing happens to you then, then just wait until you die
I promise... if you wait until death... you surely will find the answers you so desperately seek... and you definitely wont be able to come back on this forum and say that you found nothing.
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12598631 - 05/20/10 01:48 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fraggin said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Am I expecting success and a good answer to my questions?
Too much to ask, yes most likely, but then the fun is being the burr in the blanket.
This pretty much sums up your existence on the shroomery.
Purty much
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
So what I am saying is that "devils advocate" perfectly reflects the interdependency of our situation, in a way that you can internalize.
And further, it proves that this "evil" or "hateful" guy is just a way of looking at things - it may be to our regard, an appearance.
Evil and hateful? That may be your way of looking at it but it certainly isn't mine. The devil represents for me the honest look in the mirror, the "truth" straight up, your only real friend whether you know it or not.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
Hmmm so is Icelander dishing out a koan here? Many have acknowledged that it is a futile question.
So Maybe it is... I can't really judge that. I don't have experience with a system of learning that doesn't engage with formal philosophy, and I find that ambiguities such as this that put me in doubt or skepticism.
Apples...The form of this thread may easily fall in line with a framework you are familiar with, however, I would ask if that is both necessary and sufficient? From what I can see is that the question has a very certain form. I think on a basic level it is clear to anyone that Icelander has set up a soap box for either pedantic or enlightened explanations.
Is the explanation legitimate? Or first should we wonder if the question is legitimate?
This situation is something I've wanted to probe you a bit on, given your experience as a Zen monk. From an external perspective, it seems to me that Zen is very disciplinary in nature. I do not suppose I can really interrogate the system, but I would just say I do not trust myself to take refuge in Sangha (Community), or more specifically, the elders who are dishing out either the nonsense, or whattchacallit (KATZ!)
How do you tell when its genuine?
I vest much more in the Dharma (teachings) - ideally, exoteric philosophy (although I also enjoy esoteric philosophy too.)
Since I have had a basic understanding of Buddhism, I have noticed a great tension between the 3 refuges (Sangha, Dharma, Buddha - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuge_(Buddhism)). In my particular experience, I have found it difficult to acknowledge that to learn, one must be taught in a personal relationship, which implies power relations.
This is why I am curious of Zen, which seems to be so firmly situated in Sangha, and further does not seem to have any formal philosophy to speak of.
Noticing that a pedantic structure ultimately effects the ground of discourse, it has seemed to me that these communal relations impose on the explicit philosophy that I am inclined to. I certainly do not see a sense of favoring or even augmenting uneven grounds (soap boxes - a step up.)
This is why I find your comment interesting, because Zen seems to make this sort of face...
I recognize that the game can't be avoided, and in the same sense, I understand why the three refuges are represented equally. BUT it is my own disposition to question where and how personal relations (power) meets discourse. I can see it is weighted differently depending on the tradition.
In short, I think Icelander is looking for a conceptual answer. I think the question he has contrived is futile, and it suffers a disconnect to what may ideally be explained, (which again, is what he frankly asked for)
As I see it, what may seem to be koan could be a conceptual trap. How do you tell the difference? It would require great faith in a person for me to see through a koan. That is what I cannot seem to trust in community. What I notice, is that strictly in terms of Sangha, you would never be able to tell the difference between a koan and a trap - otherwise, what fulcrum in analytic is there to speak of?
About Icelander's "question", somehow I find it worthwhile, I wouldn't post otherwise. But on the other hand I wouldn't give credit for just laying these grounds - as this is much too ambiguous.
I think that Icelander has set up, and is holding conceptual ground. His tactic is actually to be the lower ground, and he has gotten good at defending this position. Humble? He is no more humble than my ass, as I assume a higher ground. We are all doing the same thing here. And you may also note that we all got here by being high....
This world or community immanent. I am up on a mountain with my books, apples has spent time in a zen community, and Icelander... I'm not sure where hes at other than some relative lowland. But none of these positions represent necessary and sufficient conditions for individualized existence. The ultimate "character" of discussion is that we are interacting.
This is where an illusion of separateness can be seen in a positive sense. Consider the format of this argument - I am not describing wholeness, I am saying someone cannot exist by an inherent disposition. This is much bigger than the shroomery. It is like what the Dalai Lama was explaining in the previous quote as dependent origination; emptiness.
Dependent origination, at least, is not an esoteric truth. Conventionally, it may be seen that we are all communicating with definite potency towards expression, even though some may assume more passive or aggressive positions. Even in questioning, in an "inferior" position, with the head tilted upward, intonation voicing an upward climb - a basically dependent position is maintained. This is intuited by everyone on some level.
As for the question, maybe a few remarkable persons have been able to hold one foot in absurdity and the other in logic. But there definitely isn't going to be a straight answer of "unification" - at best, you might get an absurd "naturalism".
Beware the Jabberwok, my son - Logician/Madcap Lewis Carrol
Quote:
Jabberwocky
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Icelander does want an answer, but he wants an answer that complies with his perception of reality.
Enlightenment both exists and does not exist.
The enlightenment we are discussing in this thread does not exist. That's a spiritual trap that many of us fall into, we've turned enlightenment into a concept, no different from the words "job promotion" or "sex." How can you reach a concept? Let alone, how can you show that your concepts exist in an "objective" world? This is why Bodhidharma would ask people to show him their minds, it's impossible, it cannot be done.
Once Hui-Neng came across two monks looking at a flag blowing in the wind and they were discussing whether it was blowing east or west, Hui-Neng replied "neither, it is your mind that is moving, not the flag."
You mentioned something about community and trust. I think these two things are very important. One of us here may be posting something that is very insightful and would benefit our understanding, but since this is the shroomery, we don't take our posts all that seriously. We all assume that we are just book-learned people, quoting others, and living off the knowledge of something that maybe Alan Watts said. When you look into a man's eyes and listen to what he is saying with complete faith, there's a receptiveness that you can never capature from the words on a page. There's a conviction in your heart that what he is saying is truth.
As a kid, would you believe in Santa Clause from reading about him in a book or by your own father sitting you on his lap and telling you about him?
P.S.
KATZ!!!
Icelander does want an answer, but he wants an answer that complies with his perception of reality.
Unfortunately this is often true.
I have found some of my greatest truths in the written word more than from looking into most of the eyes I have seen.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12598685 - 05/20/10 01:58 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
The only big objection I have to mysticism or whatever you want to call it is the claim that one can "know truth" through subjective experience and subjective interpretation of that experience.
Most mystics that I personally find sensible enough (to the extent that anyone can seem sensible) don't think of truth as an experience. It's beyond all experience. Yet even Ramana Maharshi said that it can be directly experienced by removing all self-limiting tendencies. So paradoxical..
My advice is that don't try to pre-conceive it with your intellect, because that's a trap. I also fall into it time and time again, so I try to remind myself that whatever notion comes up is just another form and not truth itself. Will I ever know truth, will I be able to say that now I know? Maybe, maybe not. Others claim to have done it, so why shouldn't you and me?
In any case, what's the point of trying to intellectualize it if we know that it's a wild goose chase? Something compels us to try and understand, but we have become too arrogant and attached to reason to go beyond dialogue. It's supposed to be very simple, yet it seems like madness from the conventional perspective:
With these said, your advocacy is most welcome. The integral approach is always the best.
ACTUALLY... I think the truth is found on the intellectual level, and is transmitted to the level of emotions if we are fortunate and determined. Psychology holds the answer to happiness imo, personal psychology and if people would and could be happy, the need to be enlightened and know ultimate truth would be come mostly unimportant. We would be too busy living. IMO.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12598709 - 05/20/10 02:03 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Since you fail to realize that it can only be experienced(and hardly explained), then my only answer to you now is to wait until 2012... if nothing happens to you then, then just wait until you die
I promise... if you wait until death... you surely will find the answers you so desperately seek... and you definitely wont be able to come back on this forum and say that you found nothing.
Why do I not believe you even have a clue for me. Let me share. You set an arbitrary and popularized date called 2012 for my enlightenment and you presume to promise me that I will find answers when I die. Now I believe with all my heart that you don't know any of that is true with any surety and that is why I don't care about your posts. IMO they are ignorant in there presumption of knowledge.
In fact it is exactly post like yours that inspired my OP.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12598856 - 05/20/10 02:24 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ACTUALLY... I think the truth is found on the intellectual level, and is transmitted to the level of emotions if we are fortunate and determined. Psychology holds the answer to happiness imo, personal psychology and if people would and could be happy, the need to be enlightened and know ultimate truth would be come mostly unimportant. We would be too busy living. IMO.
Let's say you're the only person who has ever eaten an orange. You come on the shroomery and exclaim "Goddamn! Guys you are never going to believe what I just tasted! It was an orange and it was fucking delicious!"
All of us here begin asking, "Icelander, please tell us, what does an orange taste like?"
You would say "It tastes like an orange. I mean I can describe what it tastes like, but you'll never know what an orange tastes like until you eat one."
You could then describe as best you could what an orange tastes like and all of us here would think we have achieved understanding of The Orange Fruit. Hell, Chronic would probably write a fucking book about the orange fruit and invite us to satsangs where we talk about oranges.
An intellectual understanding about oranges still remains an idea at best, at the end of the day only Icelander actually knows what an orange tastes like.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12598893 - 05/20/10 02:30 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
You people need to read some Wittgenstein. Using words to try to get at spiritual truth is just futile masturbation.
Hmm luckily I have his philosophic investigations open in front of me. P
I do not think Wittgenstein directly appealed to mysticism.
I just began his philosophical investigations actually, and from what I can see he is very precise, and dare I say, logical. I am going to need some companion books to get through this. The reason I've begun reading his philosophical investigations, is for his mention in the philosophic language of the Madhyamika tradition:
From Huntington's Emptiness of Emptiness:
Quote:
By gaining insight into the psychological and social mechanisms that support our thoughts and perceptions, we might be able to surrender the obsession to search for an a priori justification of... a rationalistic definition of truth. And if this insight were to go deep enough into the wellsprings of our emotional volitional being, we might eventually find that everyday life would be transformed into something quite different from what it is at present. Wittgenstein seems to have recognized such a possibility, which is one reason for the aura of mysticism commonly felt to surround his writing:
"The real discovery is the one that makes me capable of stopping doing philosophy when I want to. - The one that gies philosophy peace, so that it is no longer tormented by questions which bring itself into question."
- Wittgenstein 1953
The ultimate justification for the Madhyamika's soteriological philsoophy does not lie in any claim to monopoly on objective, value-free truth, but in a very pragmatic sense of purpose: the desire to bring an end to clinging antipathy and delusion. It is not only professional philosophers who are so tightly bound by the innate reifying tendency of conceptual thought. As Candrakirti writes in the entry into the middle way
"Even though things are not in reality produced...they do serve as objects that are perceived in the context of everyday experience... Therefore the master declared that all things are from the beginning at peace, devoid of production and, by virtue of their intrinsic nature, completely unentangled in suffering."
The role of philosophy is here very clearly defined in soteriological terms. The investigation of everyday experience is taken to be conducive to one particular aim, and this aim could never be fully realized in any strictly formal rationalist or idealist account of truth.
Another mention:
Quote:
It is not simply that questions of epistemic truth and ontic reality are entirely irrelavent to this process; they are, in fact symptomatic of the archetypal samsaric form of life that is permeated with fear and suffering. The inability to escape one's obsession with the observational language in which these questions are embedded - not only to "stop philosophizing," as wittgentein puts it, but simultaneously to see and see through the natural interpretations that give meaning and structure to this and any picture of the world - is to be held tightly, with "a knot made by space" to the wheel of becoming (bhavacakra) continually turning round and round under the force of clinging, antipathy and delusion.
Wittgenstein didn't go so far to explicitly describe a soteriology (suggesting enlightenment or disentanglement) as the Madhyamika do.
He represented an philosophical investigation. Toward what?
I can't say much about the investigations yet, but I can see what you are trying to suggest as an answer. "We need to read Wittgenstein, because you are enlightened by it?" You must admit that this is how your argument makes face. All the enlightenment without the path.
But if you appealed to the text rather than its implied goal (an implication that is no different than what many are suggesting here) you would be just as tangled, because in respect to the text you could only be in the process of unentangling yourself. (in other words, you are implying a path at least, if only that we "read Wittgenstein")
In philosophical investigations, I can immediately see that his work is immersed in philosophy and language. That is what it is!
In respect to wittgenstein you represent a duality of knower and known at face value, therefore mystifying it at face value. It is not necessarily our misunderstanding of some reality, but just as well the fact that we are not you.
I do not believe these two ideas are intimate as you describe, even though you are making very practical use their possible conformity.
What Wittgenstein himself reached in his last work, he apparently titled exoterically a Philosophical Investigation. His representation, if only based on the title, is not mystical at all - but precisely the opposite - something that is within the mundane faculty of anyone.
I am open to the possibility that there is something mystical being suggested. But I think rather than just positively emphasizing the shunned attempt to speak "it" - as if it were some "thing" - mystified may it be - I believe it is only possible to point to the actual process or engagement of his ideas.
In the west, the text is often held as an important static truth, as a canonical authority. From what I have read he was tentative to publish this final work - for the disjunct between how it would be used, and authoritatively ascribed, and how this can become convenient for certain authorities.
You are apparently taking advantage of this, to make a very tight circle, which you only include yourself in so far. I suppose you are allowing us to penetrate, but it would help if you pointed towards the ideas rather than the canon.
I do not think Wittgenstein suggested an authority of mysticism - that is, more precisely I do not think he ever suggested closing a hermeneutic circle to relative discourse. Your position here seems open, but how open is it if you haven't presented any idea but a closed book. The closed book is the implied goal -disentanglement. But I think when you close the book you also see the title, which was aptly named by Wittgenstein "philosophical investigations." And I the book is made to be opened.
I think the only way to engage any work is not to "claim it", but to intimate the philosophy itself, which is seemingly recognized as a process of disentanglement. You are correct that his work is written; static in a certain sense, but there is no sense in representing this. Any book represents a process, or an investigation, and it is only sensible to represent that process.
So if I were to represent any philosophy soteriologically, like a buddhist hermenuetic, I would point towards something like the four noble truths, rather than just one of them (you seem to represent only something like #3, the ostensible, static disentanglement)
1. Life means suffering.
2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
4. The path to the cessation of suffering.
You might remember this?
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/12411382#12411382
If we explicitly recognize disentanglement as possible sight we can arrive at a sound soteriology rather than a vague mysticism. There is nothing outwardly accomplished in mysticism, because it is contrary to what is seen (as mist). What is practically being represented in mysticism is usually the possibility of understanding something through an esoteric process, and this seems to be useful maybe, but not obligatory. Nothing really distinguishes this esoteric process, other than pretension. I see mysticism as simply the flipside of realism, neither is really coherent in my opinion.
A practical results can be understood by an exoteric path, and circumstantially knowing where to look.
These practical engagements can be carefully represented at the level of relative discourse. If a person doesn't get them, then they just don't get them - there is no sense in saying you don't get them, making "airs" substantial and misty, suggesting this weather is natural and real. Again, don't get me wrong, I am not advocating realism either though...
Basically:
If your suggestion is that Wittgenstein represented enlightenment, I believe we should be able to talk about it, precisely insofar as the view was represented.
So what is necessary for a world that recognizes a static conception as well is process is as Apples describes - enlightenment, or unentanglement does and does not exist. That is the "mysticism", but what I have been impressing here is to avoid the paradox is simply to avoid dualism. Is it possible to just avoid it, or just do it as you describe? No, we have conventional language too.
I think you could avoid the mysticism if you didn't take the attitude that we need to read wittgenstein because it suggests certain understanding. You would simply dispel our illusion in the manner that he would.
I do not think Wittgenstein suggested an immediate surrender of philosophy, mysticism, even if it might have been the static goal of the work. The static goal has little bearing on the present weather.
--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
True, experience must be had. Yet isn't that a given? And everyone can eat an orange right. But not everyone can experience enlightenment. So what's going on?
Basically as humans we have common ground for physical mental experience. Now it's not going to be the same for everyone but their will be similarities. That's something we can work on together. But enlightenment? I can't even really begin to guess what these folk here are talking about. I don't even believe what they are saying because it's not part of my human experience. It sounds like magic to me. And I don't believe in magic.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
1. Life means suffering.
This never made sense to me. From a psychological standpoint it's lopsided. Life means a lot of things and one of them is pain. Suffering is attachment and so part of what can happen in life but it is not life per se.
So life has pleasure/joy and pain/suffering etc. Now through proper application of personal psychology one might create a fairly decent balance or even tip things a little in favor of a preference. Then, again, life becomes worth living imo. A challenge without too much suffering or pain and neither totally pleasurable. No more need for enlightenment because life now takes precedence over predicament.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12598996 - 05/20/10 02:47 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
I've been told by an Eastern sould that Westerners love to personify elightenment. Furthermore, it's often discussed as a finale to a spiritual quest. Both perspectives are not in alignment with hindu philosophy, from which they were born.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Wittgenstein didn't go so far to explicitly describe a soteriology (suggesting enlightenment or disentanglement) as the Madhyamika do.
He represented an philosophical investigation. Toward what?
Towards the death of philosophy. It's a Catch-22 but I do what I can since words simply create the illusion that we can transcend our own skull.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599034 - 05/20/10 02:51 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Life=suffering could more accurately be translated as "life is uncomfortable." Inherent in life is the being ripped out of the womb, growing up and getting all conditioned, and then watching your body die as you grow older, eventually resulting in the death of the brain. Buddhism says that if we remove our desires, this suffering will end.
It makes sense at the immediate level...if I remove the desire to have a fancy car, I will no longer suffer when I see others driving a fancy car. It gets cosmic when you start talking about removing ALL desires...extricating yourself from the web of ego.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Icelander has a lot more humility than most us here do.
I don't see eye to eye on everything he says, but at least he doesn't preach from a soap box.
Hmmm so is Icelander dishing out a koan here? Many have acknowledged that it is a futile question.
So Maybe it is... I can't really judge that. I don't have experience with a system of learning that doesn't engage with formal philosophy, and I find that ambiguities such as this that put me in doubt or skepticism.
Apples...The form of this thread may easily fall in line with a framework you are familiar with, however, I would ask if that is both necessary and sufficient? From what I can see is that the question has a very certain form. I think on a basic level it is clear to anyone that Icelander has set up a soap box for either pedantic or enlightened explanations.
Is the explanation legitimate? Or first should we wonder if the question is legitimate?
This situation is something I've wanted to probe you a bit on, given your experience as a Zen monk. From an external perspective, it seems to me that Zen is very disciplinary in nature. I do not suppose I can really interrogate the system, but I would just say I do not trust myself to take refuge in Sangha (Community), or more specifically, the elders who are dishing out either the nonsense, or whattchacallit (KATZ!)
How do you tell when its genuine?
I vest much more in the Dharma (teachings) - ideally, exoteric philosophy (although I also enjoy esoteric philosophy too.)
Since I have had a basic understanding of Buddhism, I have noticed a great tension between the 3 refuges (Sangha, Dharma, Buddha - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuge_(Buddhism)). In my particular experience, I have found it difficult to acknowledge that to learn, one must be taught in a personal relationship, which implies power relations.
This is why I am curious of Zen, which seems to be so firmly situated in Sangha, and further does not seem to have any formal philosophy to speak of.
Noticing that a pedantic structure ultimately effects the ground of discourse, it has seemed to me that these communal relations impose on the explicit philosophy that I am inclined to. I certainly do not see a sense of favoring or even augmenting uneven grounds (soap boxes - a step up.)
This is why I find your comment interesting, because Zen seems to make this sort of face...
I recognize that the game can't be avoided, and in the same sense, I understand why the three refuges are represented equally. BUT it is my own disposition to question where and how personal relations (power) meets discourse. I can see it is weighted differently depending on the tradition.
In short, I think Icelander is looking for a conceptual answer. I think the question he has contrived is futile, and it suffers a disconnect to what may ideally be explained, (which again, is what he frankly asked for)
As I see it, what may seem to be koan could be a conceptual trap. How do you tell the difference? It would require great faith in a person for me to see through a koan. That is what I cannot seem to trust in community. What I notice, is that strictly in terms of Sangha, you would never be able to tell the difference between a koan and a trap - otherwise, what fulcrum in analytic is there to speak of?
About Icelander's "question", somehow I find it worthwhile, I wouldn't post otherwise. But on the other hand I wouldn't give credit for just laying these grounds - as this is much too ambiguous.
I think that Icelander has set up, and is holding conceptual ground. His tactic is actually to be the lower ground, and he has gotten good at defending this position. Humble? He is no more humble than my ass, as I assume a higher ground. We are all doing the same thing here. And you may also note that we all got here by being high....
This world or community immanent. I am up on a mountain with my books, apples has spent time in a zen community, and Icelander... I'm not sure where hes at other than some relative lowland. But none of these positions represent necessary and sufficient conditions for individualized existence. The ultimate "character" of discussion is that we are interacting.
This is where an illusion of separateness can be seen in a positive sense. Consider the format of this argument - I am not describing wholeness, I am saying someone cannot exist by an inherent disposition. This is much bigger than the shroomery. It is like what the Dalai Lama was explaining in the previous quote as dependent origination; emptiness.
Dependent origination, at least, is not an esoteric truth. Conventionally, it may be seen that we are all communicating with definite potency towards expression, even though some may assume more passive or aggressive positions. Even in questioning, in an "inferior" position, with the head tilted upward, intonation voicing an upward climb - a basically dependent position is maintained. This is intuited by everyone on some level.
As for the question, maybe a few remarkable persons have been able to hold one foot in absurdity and the other in logic. But there definitely isn't going to be a straight answer of "unification" - at best, you might get an absurd "naturalism".
Beware the Jabberwok, my son - Logician/Madcap Lewis Carrol
Quote:
Jabberwocky
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.
And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Icelander does want an answer, but he wants an answer that complies with his perception of reality.
Enlightenment both exists and does not exist.
The enlightenment we are discussing in this thread does not exist. That's a spiritual trap that many of us fall into, we've turned enlightenment into a concept, no different from the words "job promotion" or "sex." How can you reach a concept? Let alone, how can you show that your concepts exist in an "objective" world? This is why Bodhidharma would ask people to show him their minds, it's impossible, it cannot be done.
Once Hui-Neng came across two monks looking at a flag blowing in the wind and they were discussing whether it was blowing east or west, Hui-Neng replied "neither, it is your mind that is moving, not the flag."
You mentioned something about community and trust. I think these two things are very important. One of us here may be posting something that is very insightful and would benefit our understanding, but since this is the shroomery, we don't take our posts all that seriously. We all assume that we are just book-learned people, quoting others, and living off the knowledge of something that maybe Alan Watts said. When you look into a man's eyes and listen to what he is saying with complete faith, there's a receptiveness that you can never capature from the words on a page. There's a conviction in your heart that what he is saying is truth.
As a kid, would you believe in Santa Clause from reading about him in a book or by your own father sitting you on his lap and telling you about him?
P.S.
KATZ!!!
YARGG
I'm not sure what I'd do if someone katzed me.
The guy I was taught by was Madhyamika, and Zen seemed to lay at precisely the other end of the spectrum. Actually in my usual oppositional stance, I tended to take the position that enlightenment could not be represented. But I have been pretty well convinced of the usefulness of the sutras by the end of the semester though...
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599074 - 05/20/10 02:58 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
Life=suffering could more accurately be translated as "life is uncomfortable." Inherent in life is the being ripped out of the womb, growing up and getting all conditioned, and then watching your body die as you grow older, eventually resulting in the death of the brain. Buddhism says that if we remove our desires, this suffering will end.
It makes sense at the immediate level...if I remove the desire to have a fancy car, I will no longer suffer when I see others driving a fancy car. It gets cosmic when you start talking about removing ALL desires...extricating yourself from the web of ego.
Eliminate your fear of death and you'll kill the ego, I swear.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599082 - 05/20/10 03:00 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Why not instead teach the children to come to terms with the life/death process. Death anxiety causes parents to deny the truth to themselves and their offspring. We pretend nothing will go south. "He passed on" no he fucking died, go ahead, touch the corpse, find out for yourself.
Learn the truth about the process of living in dying like the monk in the graveyard. Then less attachment to the physical being and more interest in maximizing the time available. You must know we could do it better psychologically. That would make a huge difference in what we now call the world of woe. When in a flow state life feels fucking wonderful. And then you die.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12599085 - 05/20/10 03:01 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Quote:
guruu said:
Life=suffering could more accurately be translated as "life is uncomfortable." Inherent in life is the being ripped out of the womb, growing up and getting all conditioned, and then watching your body die as you grow older, eventually resulting in the death of the brain. Buddhism says that if we remove our desires, this suffering will end.
It makes sense at the immediate level...if I remove the desire to have a fancy car, I will no longer suffer when I see others driving a fancy car. It gets cosmic when you start talking about removing ALL desires...extricating yourself from the web of ego.
Eliminate your fear of death and you'll kill the ego, I swear.
Ah so you are an example of egolessness. How interesting in that you seem just like everyone else here.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599097 - 05/20/10 03:03 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599108 - 05/20/10 03:06 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
True, experience must be had. Yet isn't that a given? And everyone can eat an orange right. But not everyone can experience enlightenment. So what's going on?
Basically as humans we have common ground for physical mental experience. Now it's not going to be the same for everyone but their will be similarities. That's something we can work on together. But enlightenment? I can't even really begin to guess what these folk here are talking about. I don't even believe what they are saying because it's not part of my human experience. It sounds like magic to me. And I don't believe in magic.
A deeper seeing is that there are no other people who share a common ground with you. The other people are you.
If you look closely, the only thing that makes you think other people exist independently of you is the idea that they do. That's all.
This is why we have racism, nationalism, countries, sexism, and all other divisional acts fueled by insecurity and fear. As long as a sense of self exists, fear and insecurity has to exist alongside with it.
If you were to meet another person as none other than yourself, how could hate or animosity possibly be projected on to them?
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599122 - 05/20/10 03:07 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Just because you remove your desires doesn't mean you won't die. "You" just aren't the one dying any more. But Buddhism and spirituality in general aren't in conflict with the realities of death.
I can't speak for anybody else but I know for a fact that with me, I didn't even realize I had death anxiety until I started taking reincarnation seriously. Before, when I assumed death was the end of it all, I didn't really worry about it cause I thought of my life as my own eternity. Now, I realize that even if death is only of the body and not of your whole existence, that's still horribly scary and I don't feel ready to die at all. Part of the reason I meditate is with the hope that I can accept my own death when it happens. Also, as you said, to maximize and fully enjoy the time I have alive.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599132 - 05/20/10 03:09 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
Before, when I assumed death was the end of it all
I'm still stuck here. I do agree we should enjoy our lives, though.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
True, experience must be had. Yet isn't that a given? And everyone can eat an orange right. But not everyone can experience enlightenment. So what's going on?
Basically as humans we have common ground for physical mental experience. Now it's not going to be the same for everyone but their will be similarities. That's something we can work on together. But enlightenment? I can't even really begin to guess what these folk here are talking about. I don't even believe what they are saying because it's not part of my human experience. It sounds like magic to me. And I don't believe in magic.
A deeper seeing is that there are no other people who share a common ground with you. The other people are you.
If you look closely, the only thing that makes you think other people exist independently of you is the idea that they do. That's all.
This is why we have racism, nationalism, countries, sexism, and all other divisional acts fueled by insecurity and fear. As long as a sense of self exists, fear and insecurity has to exist alongside with it.
If you were to meet another person as none other than yourself, how could hate or animosity possibly be projected on to them?
Just don't agree. I can bump into another person or a tree dog or cat to know they exist independently of me and from that I surmise they are having a separate experience. I can intellectualize our commonality by learning about atomic particles. I can also choose to get along with others when I realize it's in my best interest.
But life is designed for separateness. Everyone wants to get out of life the way it is. Well not everyone.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599166 - 05/20/10 03:17 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Now, I realize that even if death is only of the body and not of your whole existence,
Oh boy, here I go again, I'm the Zappasgod of the Philosophy forum.
How do you know the death of your body is not the end of your existence/ Please explain.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599177 - 05/20/10 03:19 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
Life=suffering could more accurately be translated as "life is uncomfortable." Inherent in life is the being ripped out of the womb, growing up and getting all conditioned, and then watching your body die as you grow older, eventually resulting in the death of the brain. Buddhism says that if we remove our desires, this suffering will end.
It makes sense at the immediate level...if I remove the desire to have a fancy car, I will no longer suffer when I see others driving a fancy car. It gets cosmic when you start talking about removing ALL desires...extricating yourself from the web of ego.
"WORST ITCH EVER!" At first I laughed at how silly I was being. It became so much worse though, soon I was giving birth through my tear ducts. Not a good feeling at all. If anyone remains unconvinced at how bothersome an itch can be, trip out and see where it will take you if you let it...No scratching!
Ok I need to temporarily detatch myself from this apparatus.
Why is this thread is so... (itchy)?
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Why do you cry daytripper23?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599195 - 05/20/10 03:21 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Most enlightenment is self-enlightenment. What enlightenment have you exactly received in life?
You are skeptical of love. You are skeptical of death. You question a lot of things that I no longer do- what exactly have you discovered? Have you discovered that everything should be questioned until physical, scientific evidence can be presented? Science is only one form of an answer. Like I said, if youre looking for bold, concrete physical evidence on this subject, then go spend the remainder of your years studying advanced quantum physics...
But if you insist on questioning other peoples feelings and experiences, then either go find some of your own, or continue to wander and question this for the rest of your life. I know(in my mind) that you'll find out sooner or later.
Believe it or dont, your choice :P
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599197 - 05/20/10 03:22 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Well I don't know for sure, that's why I said if. Honestly I'm just pretty confident it's not because a) my experiences with meditation have lead me to take very seriously the writings of spiritual masters who tell us reincarnation is true and b) I intuitively believe that what we are is more than this personality and that some "energy" or essence will survive death. Also, the idea of every being undergoing countless incarnations until it becomes aware of itself is very aesthetically pleasing to me and gives a satisfying metaphysical answer to many of life's unanswered questions.
I just can't imagine the universe ending with my death. Everything might go...but I think there will always be 'now'
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599208 - 05/20/10 03:24 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Now, I realize that even if death is only of the body and not of your whole existence,
Oh boy, here I go again, I'm the Zappasgod of the Philosophy forum.
How do you know the death of your body is not the end of your existence/ Please explain.
Because if we are all one consciousness, and merely the illusions of ourselves, then death is simply waking from the dream.
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12599219 - 05/20/10 03:25 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
For an itch I guess?
How sad!
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599222 - 05/20/10 03:26 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I really don't see any evidence for this. Especially the part about animals being forced together for the sake of love.
Seems obvious enough to me. Unless animals work together and come together with their own kind then they will die. Take human dogs for example, your dog needs to look to you for food, water, etc so it relies on you and comes to love you.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599230 - 05/20/10 03:27 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
a) my experiences with meditation have lead me to take very seriously the writings of spiritual masters who tell us reincarnation is true
Mistake #1 since you haven't been reincarnated. I don't mean to insult your ego here but really, you won't live after your death by definition.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12599233 - 05/20/10 03:27 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Most enlightenment is self-enlightenment. What enlightenment have you exactly received in life?
You are skeptical of love. You are skeptical of death. You question a lot of things that I no longer do- what exactly have you discovered? Have you discovered that everything should be questioned until physical, scientific evidence can be presented? Science is only one form of an answer. Like I said, if youre looking for bold, concrete physical evidence on this subject, then go spend the remainder of your years studying advanced quantum physics...
But if you insist on questioning other peoples feelings and experiences, then either go find some of your own, or continue to wander and question this for the rest of your life. I know(in my mind) that you'll find out sooner or later.
Believe it or dont, your choice :P
Wow are you full of misinformation and yourself.
You are skeptical of love. You are skeptical of death.
Never said either.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12599246 - 05/20/10 03:28 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Now, I realize that even if death is only of the body and not of your whole existence,
Oh boy, here I go again, I'm the Zappasgod of the Philosophy forum.
How do you know the death of your body is not the end of your existence/ Please explain.
Because if we are all one consciousness, and merely the illusions of ourselves, then death is simply waking from the dream.
Big fucking "if" buddy and no evidence.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12599248 - 05/20/10 03:29 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Oh shit you're right
No seriously though, I feel as though I'm reincarnated every morning when I wake up. Just with the same body and the same memories and personality
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
I really don't see any evidence for this. Especially the part about animals being forced together for the sake of love.
Seems obvious enough to me. Unless animals work together and come together with their own kind then they will die. Take human dogs for example, your dog needs to look to you for food, water, etc so it relies on you and comes to love you.
Dogs also fight and work together AGAINST other animals. Think harder. And that working together is about survival not love.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599262 - 05/20/10 03:32 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
appleorange said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
True, experience must be had. Yet isn't that a given? And everyone can eat an orange right. But not everyone can experience enlightenment. So what's going on?
Basically as humans we have common ground for physical mental experience. Now it's not going to be the same for everyone but their will be similarities. That's something we can work on together. But enlightenment? I can't even really begin to guess what these folk here are talking about. I don't even believe what they are saying because it's not part of my human experience. It sounds like magic to me. And I don't believe in magic.
A deeper seeing is that there are no other people who share a common ground with you. The other people are you.
If you look closely, the only thing that makes you think other people exist independently of you is the idea that they do. That's all.
This is why we have racism, nationalism, countries, sexism, and all other divisional acts fueled by insecurity and fear. As long as a sense of self exists, fear and insecurity has to exist alongside with it.
If you were to meet another person as none other than yourself, how could hate or animosity possibly be projected on to them?
Just don't agree. I can bump into another person or a tree dog or cat to know they exist independently of me and from that I surmise they are having a separate experience. I can intellectualize our commonality by learning about atomic particles. I can also choose to get along with others when I realize it's in my best interest.
But life is designed for separateness. Everyone wants to get out of life the way it is. Well not everyone.
In Hinduism, this is called Maya or the veil of illusion, that which prevents us from seeing everything as one seamless totality.
The distinctions and divisions exist only in our mind. I'm looking at my clock now and it says it's 6:25pm, how can I exist in 6:25pm? Our clocks mark the passage of time, when it turns 6:26pm, can I say that I exist in 6:26pm or is it more accurate to say that I cannot exist in any period of time, but simply witness its passing?
Perhaps, there is no such thing as time?
Oh well, you need to conquer your death anxiety and I need to help Chronic write a book about oranges.
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599284 - 05/20/10 03:35 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Big fucking "if" buddy and no evidence.
These questions are inherently internal, private affairs. There is never going to be any evidence that we can produce in the external world that will be 100% able to withstand scientific scrutiny, at least not at this point in technological development. This is not because these things aren't true, it's simply the nature of finding truth.
What is the evidence that you exist? Can you prove your existence to me? You might just be some organic robot that doesn't actually have any awareness. But I believe you exist because, since I know that I exist, I assume that these other humans I see walking around probably have the same sort of consciousness as I do. That's why people speak in a universal sense when talking spiritually...they've learned things in their own minds that they believe to be true for every mind. Like, for instance, that desire causes suffering.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599287 - 05/20/10 03:35 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Dogs also fight and work together AGAINST other animals.
They also leave behind weak members of the pack.
EDIT: I also believe desire can cause suffering, but mystics are generally altogether too cheerful for my liking.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599296 - 05/20/10 03:37 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
You are skeptical of love being the ultimate frequency of the universe, and you are skeptical of death being a new waking. So yeah... youll find out when you die, right? Let me know what the real answer is, since you obviously think im wrong in every way.
My feelings, thoughts, beliefs, and experiences are true to me, and that's all that matters in the end. I tried to help ya, but youre either being stubborn and/or too full of yourself .
But its okay, for we're all one. If I was given every life experience that you were given, in the exact same circumstances that you were given, guess what? i'd be you
Enjoy your subjective reality, i'm enjoying mine
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
It's obvious that distinctions exist only in your mind but outside of your mind plenty of other shit is happening in physical space. I know it feels nice to say all that though. Makes one feel all Hindu an shit.
Oh and death anxiety cannot be conquered
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12599315 - 05/20/10 03:39 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
You are skeptical of love being the ultimate frequency of the universe, and you are skeptical of death being a new waking. So yeah... youll find out when you die, right? Let me know what the real answer is, since you obviously think im wrong in every way.
My feelings, thoughts, beliefs, and experiences are true to me, and that's all that matters in the end. I tried to help ya, but youre either being stubborn and/or too full of yourself .
But its okay, for we're all one. If I was given every life experience that you were given, in the exact same circumstances that you were given, guess what? i'd be you
Enjoy your subjective reality, i'm enjoying mine
Thanks for adding to my skepticism with your diatribe.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599318 - 05/20/10 03:40 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Dogs also fight and work together AGAINST other animals. Think harder. And that working together is about survival not love.
I KNOW. War divides but in order to divide you have to unite the groups you are dividing. Natuer forces them to work together to SURVIVE just like you said and then in turn works to develop real LOVE. Think harder yourself.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599319 - 05/20/10 03:40 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Oh and death anxiety cannot be conquered
that made my day. Thanks!
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
Dogs also fight and work together AGAINST other animals. Think harder. And that working together is about survival not love.
I KNOW. War divides but in order to divide you have to unite the groups you are dividing. Natuer forces them to work together to SURVIVE just like you said and then in turn works to develop real LOVE. Think harder yourself.
That really doesn't follow.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12599328 - 05/20/10 03:42 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Oh and death anxiety cannot be conquered
that made my day. Thanks!
I'm so glad.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599335 - 05/20/10 03:42 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
What is this exterior physical space? Can this be described as an objective reality? Einstein proved that it cannot, that it is dependent on the movement of an observer. To talk about space without an observer makes no sense.
So...is it more likely that space exists without us, or is it more likely that space and time are an emergent property of consciousness? I feel like the latter provides a more consistent framework for the universe, and many physicists would probably agree with me.
How is it that during meditation, with closed eyes, I'm entirely perceptive of the space around me, more so than when my eyes are opened?
I know it sounds like I'm just pretending to be all mystical on the internet, but I think you've just got to many assumptions about the way reality is supposed to be.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599359 - 05/20/10 03:46 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
So...is it more likely that space exists without us, or is it more likely that space and time are an emergent property of consciousness? I feel like the latter provides a more consistent framework for the universe, and many physicists would probably agree with me.
I think it's more likely that space exists with us. I've never argued that on the molecular level it's all the same stuff. But one must ask, what is being perceived and WHY?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599371 - 05/20/10 03:47 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Oh and death anxiety cannot be conquered
Except by the grim reaper and the words of naive, young fools.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599377 - 05/20/10 03:48 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
This is pretty cool. One of my only threads in this forum and look how many posts. No one but me agreeing with me and were still basically on topic. 
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12599382 - 05/20/10 03:49 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Even Death fears death -- watch the Hogfather for an explanation
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599395 - 05/20/10 03:50 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
So...is it more likely that space exists without us, or is it more likely that space and time are an emergent property of consciousness? I feel like the latter provides a more consistent framework for the universe, and many physicists would probably agree with me.
I think it's more likely that space exists with us. I've never argued that on the molecular level it's all the same stuff. But one must ask, what is being perceived and WHY?
Yes, you should ask this question. What the fuck is going on here? What do you think is the answer?
I think this is all a play, all the world's a stage, for the one being who is existing in infinite forms. That strikes a chord with me. No other explanation has been as intellectually satisfying to me, but I'm open to anything.
My model of the universe isn't exactly comforting, although it does allow for peace 
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12599442 - 05/20/10 03:55 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Well I agree it is satisfying and also a little horrifying. Infinity I mean. Playing out this game for eternity. How boring.
Guess that's why sex had to be invented.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599499 - 05/20/10 04:04 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
And enlightenment.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12599514 - 05/20/10 04:06 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Actually I think I'm getting much more enlightenment than sex these days.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599528 - 05/20/10 04:08 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
They say that's how it goes.
Good luck with the celibacy stage.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599673 - 05/20/10 04:33 PM (2 years, 10 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
That really doesn't follow.
How does it not follow? Nature forces individuals to unite in order to survive. They develop a relationship in which they depend upon one another, they unite and form one body which is stronger then any of the individuals which make it up. This in turn causes them to start seeing the others within the group to be an extension of themselves, therefore promoting love.
In war the people of the individual nations are forced to work together towards a common goal. They give-up petty differences and unite for what is truly important, the survival of their nation. They unite over what they have in common and this causes people who would otherwise have no common ground to develop relationships which can lead to true love.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
|
Quote:
Actually I think I'm getting much more enlightenment than sex these days.
I've been trying to posit a convincing reason for why women in a relationship eventually lose interest in frequent sex. It makes me want to retaliate with monkey-esque violence.
Hormones, evolutionary psychology, ovulation, menstruation, and menopause, blah, blah, blah.
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12599861 - 05/20/10 05:11 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Thats why when you stop tripping you come down. And when you stop meditating you aren't the holy man. Not to say you don't change in ways but that always happens in life and experience mixed with time.
You are what you believe you are
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
That really doesn't follow.
How does it not follow? Nature forces individuals to unite in order to survive. They develop a relationship in which they depend upon one another, they unite and form one body which is stronger then any of the individuals which make it up. This in turn causes them to start seeing the others within the group to be an extension of themselves, therefore promoting love.
In war the people of the individual nations are forced to work together towards a common goal. They give-up petty differences and unite for what is truly important, the survival of their nation. They unite over what they have in common and this causes people who would otherwise have no common ground to develop relationships which can lead to true love.
How does it not follow? Nature forces individuals to unite in order to survive. They develop a relationship in which they depend upon one another, they unite and form one body which is stronger then any of the individuals which make it up. This in turn causes them to start seeing the others within the group to be an extension of themselves, therefore promoting love.
And you've studied wild canines or other carnivores? You really got to be kidding.
And humans uniting. Yeah we can obviously see the love that has resulted from thousands of years of countries banding together for war.
All I can say is WoW!
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12599992 - 05/20/10 05:32 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arden said:
Quote:
Actually I think I'm getting much more enlightenment than sex these days.
I've been trying to posit a convincing reason for why women in a relationship eventually lose interest in frequent sex. It makes me want to retaliate with monkey-esque violence.
Hormones, evolutionary psychology, ovulation, menstruation, and menopause, blah, blah, blah.
The facts are that women have other goals for a relationship than guys do. Once they realize you're not such hot shit they start thinking about other things. Like, how can I dump this guy.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Quote:
Thats why when you stop tripping you come down. And when you stop meditating you aren't the holy man. Not to say you don't change in ways but that always happens in life and experience mixed with time.
You are what you believe you are
You certainly have the most interesting ratings to back that opinion up.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600051 - 05/20/10 05:42 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You certainly have the most interesting ratings to back that opinion up.
That just goes to show how "enlightened" you are. Ratings!! Ratings Everyone!! That's what makes us who we are! Ignorance...
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
|
Not to mention HE has opted out of the rating system himself...hmmm
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: The.Hatter] 1
#12600095 - 05/20/10 05:48 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
The rating system is for wankers and everyone should give me a 0.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher] 1
#12600161 - 05/20/10 06:00 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The rating system is for wankers and everyone should give me a 0.
Opt out, tough guy. Easy to say when you have 329 ratings. 
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
The.Hatter said:
Quote:
You certainly have the most interesting ratings to back that opinion up.
That just goes to show how "enlightened" you are. Ratings!! Ratings Everyone!! That's what makes us who we are! Ignorance...
I'm the one saying enlightenment isn't even a remote possibility.
Did I push your little buttons.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600218 - 05/20/10 06:08 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I'd opt out but the backlash would kill my ego.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized
Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,672
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 2 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600226 - 05/20/10 06:09 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Jesus loves you.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12600230 - 05/20/10 06:10 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Well finally this thread is officially off topic.
No one could help me out with my OP.   
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized
Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,672
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 2 days, 7 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600255 - 05/20/10 06:16 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Jesus loves you.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: andrewss]
#12600305 - 05/20/10 06:24 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600404 - 05/20/10 06:38 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
And you've studied wild canines or other carnivores? You really got to be kidding.
Yeah actually I have. What is your point anyway? I have to personally "study" wild carnivores in order to know that they live and work together?
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12600583 - 05/20/10 07:07 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
How do you know the death of your body is not the end of your existence/ Please explain.
I've talked to my dead Grandfather. It is my subjective proof.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
|
hah sweet
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
The.Hatter
Mycologist/Shroomer
Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 206
Loc: Where Aren't I? U.K.
Last seen: 1 month, 7 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: andrewss]
#12600605 - 05/20/10 07:11 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Lmao, Yes Icelander...Spiritual Enlightenment isn't even a remote possibilty...but ratings matter...child
--------------------
There is a place. Like no place on Earth. A land full of Wonder, Mystery, and Danger
Some say to Survive it, You need to be as Mad as a ♔Hatter...
Which Luckily I Am! ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ♬♫♪♩♬♫♪♩
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12601064 - 05/20/10 08:31 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
1. Life means suffering.
This never made sense to me. From a psychological standpoint it's lopsided. Life means a lot of things and one of them is pain. Suffering is attachment and so part of what can happen in life but it is not life per se.
So life has pleasure/joy and pain/suffering etc. Now through proper application of personal psychology one might create a fairly decent balance or even tip things a little in favor of a preference. Then, again, life becomes worth living imo. A challenge without too much suffering or pain and neither totally pleasurable. No more need for enlightenment because life now takes precedence over predicament.
I am going to use this a segue into the more "usual" concern.
Suffering can be represented in many ways, on many levels. But fundamentally, it is due to impermanence.
Suffering is fundamental because everything you know, will one day cease. You will suffer the deaths of many things you love. Everything you know, even if it doesn't happen in your lifetime, will end. You just said that death anxiety can't be beaten. In a certain sense, that anxiety, at the very least is suffering.
I am starting to like the "body knowledge" that suffering is an itch in the body, which I want to talk more about, but right now we are considering the far end of the spectrum - the "mortal" wounding.
You say death anxiety is inescapable but how could you possibly know that? This is no more reasonable than any objectification of death. We circumspect (circlular) the inevitability of death, we never objectify it though. Circumspect
Consider this concept to be a theme for my post.
Buddhists advocate accepting the presence of suffering. This is close to what you are saying in the inescapability of death/death anxiety, but it is also different.
Quote:
1. Life means suffering.
2. The origin of suffering is attatchment,
3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
4. "The path" to the cessation of suffering.
The presence of suffering is something we cannot doubt we are in control of, as cognizant processes. This is given due to the possibility of realizing emptiness, as well as the impossibility of any existence other than emptiness. This is represented in concept by the rigor of the buddhist argument, and it supposedly may be understood on an experiential level.
So for instance:
Correct me if I'm wrong here , You would negate the possibility of "detatchment", to arrive at a base state of ego? That is to say, by negating the possibility of detachment, you posit a self? Or how else can you make an argument for death anxiety other than by positing a concept of an temporal self? I think the Buddhists' argument for emptiness actually pulls the carpet out from under "you" here.
It is recognized by all parties that there would be integrity to a perspective that conforms with this circumspect notion of death. WHY, and further, HOW should we recognize it in respect to some entity though? An living entity does not conform with death at all.
It is this entity that is negated by Buddhist discourse. The Buddhists have many arguments that undermine the existence of self. That is, they recognize the illusion of self, and its tendencies. This is what accounts for suffering. But they do not recognize a real self.
On the other hand, how do you suppose you have properly represented death, from the perspective of some entity?- I am not aware of any of your descriptions that haven't objectified death as some "thing" beyond - being "what dreams may come?", as Hamlet described. Wake/sleep/wake/sleep, the existential argument is circular in this manner, otherwise, by objectification, a person is implying that non-existence can be known, and further posited within a system, as a certain "consequence".
-----------------------------------------------------
SO it is recognized that death cannot actually be represented in this morbid fashion.
For example, look at Hamlet's famous soliloquy. He was not hoping for "what dreams may come". Or if he was, he was not "only" hoping for dreams. He was recognizing the fact that try as he may, he could not imagine death, as anything other than a weird thing. The existential question - To be or not to be (to be is to exist) is fundamentally a futile question - it just so happens to make cowards of us all, by engaging this futile question.
Buddhism is not an existential philosophy, and that is the limit that reincarnation locates. It is specifically the arising of phenomena, referring to phenomena which can assume the illusion of self.
Notice the circular theme to reincarnation, not for the sake of any point, but clarity to this composition. The buddhists apparently posit the circle in a different manner. Let me describe the grounds of this:
By many interpretations, it is not positing life after death. It is simply disregarding the futile existential questions - yes in a sense that means assuming a certain ambivilance to the ordinary conception of death. But it is to only refine the concept. Without existential prerogative, all reincarnation means in a positive sense is the continuation of suffering - That is, the intimation of death/death anxiety.
Perhaps it would be easiest to understand this continuation of suffering in terms of only one life But you see, much more fundamental than a conception of reincarnation, is the emptiness of self. Therefore, they do not posit "one life" - that is, a self - the self that is necessary to ground this morbid conception of death.
This is why they speak of reincarnation in a poetic sense. It is poetic in terms of self (life) and death. If there is selfing going on in "your life", its one life after another, each one ceasing to exist, followed by the next. (Vasubandhu represents this particular position - will post a follow up of this verse) That is closer to a representation of reincarnation but we still have to rely on "your life" - quotes not withstanding. Reincarnation is assumed underneath this concept of a single enduring entity which it undermines. It is the positive death you imminently suffer - upon whatever level.
But more basically it must conform to emptiness, which is the original theory. If it is impossible to think of reincarnation, just consider emptiness. That's what I tend to do; of course, I am young. Reincarnation isn't crucial to the Buddhist metaphysics though, it just happens to be a consequence by many opinions, such as my present description here. It is not by any means necessary to understand emptiness, or the truth of suffering.
Since this is a favorite topic around here though, I will continue the attempt to describe the "difference" in precisely these terms:
Buddhists, (specifically Madhyamika in my case) hope to cease suffering. This is - as it has been pointed out - at the very minimal interpretation, death/death anxiety. In saying that they hope to end suffering, they hope to escape wheel (circle) of reincarnation. There is no other solution, because life (reincarnation) is suffering.
So you see, there is no idealized notion of nirvana. It is simply cessation. And it is simply that in such a manner that is actually possible to represent, unlike a morbid conception of death.
Maybe all you have to do for enlightenment, is live a life. That is not assuming determination in the Buddhist sense, but it still fits in the Buddhist scheme of things.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic points to consider:
A. Notice that your conception of death as "cessation" is precisely identical to what Nirvana is characterized as, only in recognition of the truth of suffering
B. Notice the circular theme to reincarnation, relates in a certain way to circumspection.
Questions to test this theory:
Can you represent death in any sense that does not conform with nirvana? At the very least, these are both ideals that are impossible to conceptually represent. I suppose that I should be enlightened to describe this, and you should be dead...
But what makes more sense, the path to enlightenment, or death?
This is because you run into the very same problems you raise by objectifying death - in addition to the additional problems that I am describing. As I see it, emptiness is at least tenable in theory, even if it isn't the realization itself. The morbid conception of death on the other hand is neither a tenable theory, nor an experience.
If you are empty, there is no "you" to die. The Buddhists are could be said to have described death in a way that it is possible to actually understand, as emptiness. It is "Your" emptiness - the present fact that you do not exist. Consider this in comparison to the impossible intimation of death and death anxiety. (That is, as you say, it is impossible to escape death anxiety, just as it is impossible to escape death)
If "you" do exist in any sense, you exist momentarily arising each moment, and are dying one moment from the next. (again see Vasubandhu) There are many interpretations of the self, but none "hold up" longer than than a moment. In short, I say that "emptiness" makes much more sense than death, given that the impermanence of your existence undermines the temporal existence of 80 or so years of self that you must in burden posit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is not the end of the story though.
It is crucial to remember the "teethe and claws" of madhyamika perspective. That is what my teacher says. I am sure you would enjoy helping me out with this, just about now.
He says that if emptiness doesn't scare you, then you are not really considering it. Of course, I am describing it as it conforms with death. I am at least partially aware that I do not understand emptiness, even though I am speaking of it. But I would say that is due to my ignorance, rather than any truly "insufferable" burden. (Suffering indicates that there is a cessation to suffering - see Nagarjuna/four noble truths in the following post)
It is admitted that a conceptual perspective of emptiness does not represent teeth and claws very well. But I for one am an advocate of a sensible description of what is going on, if it is possible. For argument's sake, I challenge you to consider nirvana as anything other than cessation. Consider for a moment that nirvana is a positive conception of "death" - in that it is actually possible to represent. That is just the other side of morbidity.
Why couldn't emptiness suffice to represent your objectified notion of death? It is sufficient, as well as necessary if you consider the contradictions you are up against in objectifying death.
I challenge you to characterize the "impossible" notion of death in a way that doesn't precisely conform with the cessation of suffering that is "impossible" as nirvana.
What is death/death anxiety - is this really reasonable, or is it an idealized perspective?
Think about it!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether or not this is a airtight argument, I would hold that this is not esoteric knowledge I am representing. It is simply the deconstruction of the self.
"I" am not sure what I believe, but I will attest that emptiness is pretty amazing to consider at both practical and conceptual levels. I would say, if nothing else it allows you to go a whole lot deeper in whatever you are doing. I was surprised by what you can learn by simply relating concepts to one another in a secular environement. This is how I was taught buddhism. The question here is who is secular (defined from within) when death is beyond, yet demands representation of some kind. Enough about my "personal" thoughts though:
Buddhism is rooted in presumptions (conceptual diffusion) insomuch that it is rooted in suffering. Indeed it is a convenient perspective in that sense - it may seem it is convenient not to consider about the conventional understanding of death too. But why is reality anything but convenient? What, precisely does convention mean? (Convenient/convention)
It is "convenient" that buddhism may simply deconstruct to arrive at these notions, but it is not conventional. It just so happens that these tendencies are practically innate unlike the self.
I hope you try to get an idea of the "whole" or rather the dependent nature of this argument. Again, dependent arising is indicative of emptiness, and I wouldn't hope to represent anything other than "The emptiness of emptiness"
So much for short and sweet.
Edited by daytripper23 (05/20/10 09:40 PM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
And you've studied wild canines or other carnivores? You really got to be kidding.
Yeah actually I have. What is your point anyway? I have to personally "study" wild carnivores in order to know that they live and work together?
No but you would realize very quickly that they don't love each other. 
Your position is ludicrous imo.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
|
Ok I want to follow this up with a genuine Madhayamika verse, so its not just me re-presenting these ideas. This particular verse is famous for establishing the Madhyamika tradition. It is notoriously difficult and abstruse, as pointed as Nagarjuna's language may be. Nagarjuna is known for being difficult in general though.
Ostensibly, it describes why the "emptiness of emptiness" is not nihilism - for this is what the Buddhist opponent charges Nagarjuna.
Like my post, it is sort of an examination of the 4 noble truths, in a similar chain of reasoning. ( if the beginning seems a bit repetitive, or irrelavent, just consider it as that interconnectiveness. It gets more interesting)
Its a good follow up, because there is no reincarnation to speak of - yet it seems to reflect this disposition as an argument between two buddhists.
Follow this link, its an old post.
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/12411382#12411382
I am not looking at this till tommorow, so please take your time responding to my previous post (icelander )
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
I would feel exausted if I waded through all your post but I did get this far.
You say death anxiety is inescapable but how could you possibly know that? This is no more reasonable than any objectification of death. We circumspect (circlular) the inevitability of death, we never objectify it though. Circumspect
Consider this concept to be a theme for my post.
Buddhists advocate accepting the presence of suffering. This is close to what you are saying in the inescapability of death/death anxiety, but it is also different.
I believe death anxiety is inescapable do you my studies, observations and experiences. Now it could be escapable but I've seen no evidence.
Suffering and and death anxiety are directly connected. In fact you could say suffering comes from the reality of death, for all neurotic behaviors stem from this core of non acceptance imo.
The buddhist religion deals with death anxiety, imo, at least in one way with the myth of reincarnation. This means on some level one does not die. Even a billion hellish incarnations is better than non being and liberation is a golden carrot waiting at the end.
Basic Buddhist psychology about how to end suffering is good as gold but that's where it ends. As a religion it's like all the others in this respect, a shield for death anxiety.
Of course I only have a rudimentary knowledge of buddhist religion.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12601175 - 05/20/10 08:48 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Ice,
You talk about death anxiety a lot and I'm not sure what you're referring to. Are you saying that people are afraid of their bodies dying or their sense of self?
|
Cognitive_Shift
@shroomery.org
Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 22,230
Loc: OhighO
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12601210 - 05/20/10 08:53 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I believe death anxiety is inescapable do you my studies, observations and experiences. Now it could be escapable but I've seen no evidence.
More people commit suicide than kill eachother. You have never seen soldiers going to war who know they are most likely going to die? Does this not defy the definition of death anxiety. Through out history many men have died fighting for what they believe in. Today we have radical islamic's suicide bombing. IMO death anxiety to the severe degree it is today is a by product of technology cradling humans through out their life.
Edited by Cognitive_Shift (05/20/10 09:03 PM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Personality structure, sometimes called ego. The body follows.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
I believe death anxiety is inescapable do you my studies, observations and experiences. Now it could be escapable but I've seen no evidence.
More people commit suicide than kill eachother. You have never seen soldiers going to war who know they are most likely going to die? Does this not defy the definition of death anxiety. Through out history many men have died fighting for what they believe in. Today we have radical islamic's suicide bombing. IMO death anxiety to the severe degree it is today is a by product of technology cradling humans through out their life.
I've been thorough this dozens of times here so I'm going to refer you to Ernest Beckers work "Denial of Death".
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12601421 - 05/20/10 09:41 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
No but you would realize very quickly that they don't love each other.
Your position is ludicrous imo.
& IMO you really don't know much about animals. It's obvious to me that animals love one another, especially; apes, dolphins, elephants, orcas, etc.
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/739FA9AD-89C5-47C6-8D66-66D7251257C9/
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12601566 - 05/20/10 10:06 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
First, I broke the last post up into sections. I realize its alot to read in one sitting, then again, I would rather have anyone protract their consideration of what I am saying. Hopefully that is attempted, rather than just to skip over it:
I would call it A Refutation of Conventional Death Anxiety, in terms of the Four Noble Truths.
Also, I wanted to share another source in sutra - Vasubandhu.
Vasubandhu is relatively early buddhist (Abhidharma) philosopher in comparison to Nagarjuna: As I described in sidenotes to my own post, read the second passage for what I was referring to strictly as Vasubandhu's "various momentary entities"... This first one is similar to the concern and relevant as well. Specifically the first passage refutes theory of "persons", and the second refutes theory of "souls".
Anyhow, here they are:
Both taken from Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakos
Quote:
"Critique of the Pudgalavadins’ Theory of Persons":
Translation
Vasubandhu’s Statement of His Own View:
There is no liberation [from suffering] other than this [liberation, the path
to which has been explained], since [the Tırthikas, who also teach a path to
liberation from suffering, fail to recognize that] the mistaken view of a self
[causes all suffering. Those who follow their teachings will not be liberated
from suffering,] for they do not understand that the conception of a self
refers only to a continuum of aggregates; they believe that a self is a separate
substance; but the mental afflictions[, which cause suffering,] arise from selfgrasping
[which cannot be eliminated by those who believe that a self is a
separate substance].
It is known that the expression, “self,” refers to a continuum of aggregates
and not to anything else because [direct perception and correct inference establish
that the phenomena in dependence upon which a person is conceived are
the aggregates, and] there is no direct perception or correct inference [that
establishes the existence of anything else among these phenomena].
[If anything else exists among these phenomena, its existence would be
established by direct perception or correct inference,] for of all phenomena
[that exist] there is direct perception [that establishes their existence], as
there is of the six objects and the mental organ unless [direct] perception
of them is impeded, or there is correct inference [that establishes their existence],
as there is of the five [sense] organs.
Second Passage:
Quote:
Vasubandhu's Critique of the Soul:
Translation
[Non-Buddhist Opponent:] Every action depends on an agent. As, for
instance, when we say that Devadatta walks, in this case the action of walking
depends on the walker, Devadatta. In the same way, consciousness is an
action. Therefore, whoever is conscious must exist.
[Vasubandhu:] Who is this “Devadatta?” Is he a soul? But that’s just what
you have to prove. Now, is he what is called a “person” in everyday usage?
That’s not any single thing; that name refers to various caused entities. Devadatta
is conscious in just the same way as Devadatta walks. And how is it
that Devadatta walks? Devadatta is no more than momentary caused entities
that form an unbroken continuum. Fools who presuppose that the cause
of the appearance of the continuum in a different place is a single being, a
body, say that “Devadatta walks.” They call the arising of the continuum in
another location “walking.” On our view, the “walking” of Devadatta is like
the propagation of sound or the spread of a fire. In the same way, thinking
that the cause of consciousness is a unitary being, fools say that “Devadatta
is conscious.” Hearing them say this, the Noble Ones say the same thing, in
order to conform to received usage...
...A sutra does say that “Consciousness is conscious of an object.” What does
the consciousness do to its object? It doesn’t do anything. But just as it is
said that “the effect conforms to the cause,” it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. That’s what it means to say that
“consciousness is conscious of an object”; it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. Now, in what way is it similar?
In appearance. It’s because of this similarity in appearance that the consciousness
represents its object, rather than the sense-faculty that is also one
of its causes. Or, since there is a continuum of moments of consciousness,
each one caused by the last, there is no error in saying “Consciousness is
conscious of an object,” since the word “agent” can be used to refer to a
cause. It’s like saying “A bell rings.” Moreover, just as a lamp moves, in that
way, consciousness knows its object. And how does a lamp move? The term
“lamp” is applied metaphorically to a series of flames. When these flames
appear in different places, we say “It moves to such-and-such a place.” In
the same way, the term “consciousness” is applied to a series of thoughts.
When they arise with different objects, we say “Consciousness is conscious
of such-and-such an object.” Just as physical form is produced and remains
in existence, but has no creator that is different in substance from itself, it’s
the same way with consciousness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by daytripper23 (05/20/10 10:15 PM)
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Quote:
c0sm0nautt said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
How do you know the death of your body is not the end of your existence/ Please explain.
I've talked to my dead Grandfather. It is my subjective proof.
Ghosts are the imprint of a person's consciousness while they were still living. Any person who dabbles in necromancy will tell you that the dead aren't conscious.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
No but you would realize very quickly that they don't love each other.
Your position is ludicrous imo.
& IMO you really don't know much about animals. It's obvious to me that animals love one another, especially; apes, dolphins, elephants, orcas, etc.
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/739FA9AD-89C5-47C6-8D66-66D7251257C9/
While animals do share nurturing qualities that even I might call love your ridiculous examples of what causes that love to happen were are what I'm talking about. Your position is incredible on this.
I never denied love exists, I stated it is not the meaning or purpose of the Universe and Everything as so many, such as you claim and without any kind of reasonable evidence. The notion that animals band together for war or to hunt being evidence of how the Universe is bringing us together to love is maybe the most unbelievable position I have come across in all my years of posting here.
Really.
Edited by Icelander (05/21/10 04:57 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
First, I broke the last post up into sections. I realize its alot to read in one sitting, then again, I would rather have anyone protract their consideration of what I am saying. Hopefully that is attempted, rather than just to skip over it:
I would call it A Refutation of Conventional Death Anxiety, in terms of the Four Noble Truths.
Also, I wanted to share another source in sutra - Vasubandhu.
Vasubandhu is relatively early buddhist (Abhidharma) philosopher in comparison to Nagarjuna: As I described in sidenotes to my own post, read the second passage for what I was referring to strictly as Vasubandhu's "various momentary entities"... This first one is similar to the concern and relevant as well. Specifically the first passage refutes theory of "persons", and the second refutes theory of "souls".
Anyhow, here they are:
Both taken from Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakos
Quote:
"Critique of the Pudgalavadins’ Theory of Persons":
Translation
Vasubandhu’s Statement of His Own View:
There is no liberation [from suffering] other than this [liberation, the path
to which has been explained], since [the Tırthikas, who also teach a path to
liberation from suffering, fail to recognize that] the mistaken view of a self
[causes all suffering. Those who follow their teachings will not be liberated
from suffering,] for they do not understand that the conception of a self
refers only to a continuum of aggregates; they believe that a self is a separate
substance; but the mental afflictions[, which cause suffering,] arise from selfgrasping
[which cannot be eliminated by those who believe that a self is a
separate substance].
It is known that the expression, “self,” refers to a continuum of aggregates
and not to anything else because [direct perception and correct inference establish
that the phenomena in dependence upon which a person is conceived are
the aggregates, and] there is no direct perception or correct inference [that
establishes the existence of anything else among these phenomena].
[If anything else exists among these phenomena, its existence would be
established by direct perception or correct inference,] for of all phenomena
[that exist] there is direct perception [that establishes their existence], as
there is of the six objects and the mental organ unless [direct] perception
of them is impeded, or there is correct inference [that establishes their existence],
as there is of the five [sense] organs.
Second Passage:
Quote:
Vasubandhu's Critique of the Soul:
Translation
[Non-Buddhist Opponent:] Every action depends on an agent. As, for
instance, when we say that Devadatta walks, in this case the action of walking
depends on the walker, Devadatta. In the same way, consciousness is an
action. Therefore, whoever is conscious must exist.
[Vasubandhu:] Who is this “Devadatta?” Is he a soul? But that’s just what
you have to prove. Now, is he what is called a “person” in everyday usage?
That’s not any single thing; that name refers to various caused entities. Devadatta
is conscious in just the same way as Devadatta walks. And how is it
that Devadatta walks? Devadatta is no more than momentary caused entities
that form an unbroken continuum. Fools who presuppose that the cause
of the appearance of the continuum in a different place is a single being, a
body, say that “Devadatta walks.” They call the arising of the continuum in
another location “walking.” On our view, the “walking” of Devadatta is like
the propagation of sound or the spread of a fire. In the same way, thinking
that the cause of consciousness is a unitary being, fools say that “Devadatta
is conscious.” Hearing them say this, the Noble Ones say the same thing, in
order to conform to received usage...
...A sutra does say that “Consciousness is conscious of an object.” What does
the consciousness do to its object? It doesn’t do anything. But just as it is
said that “the effect conforms to the cause,” it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. That’s what it means to say that
“consciousness is conscious of an object”; it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. Now, in what way is it similar?
In appearance. It’s because of this similarity in appearance that the consciousness
represents its object, rather than the sense-faculty that is also one
of its causes. Or, since there is a continuum of moments of consciousness,
each one caused by the last, there is no error in saying “Consciousness is
conscious of an object,” since the word “agent” can be used to refer to a
cause. It’s like saying “A bell rings.” Moreover, just as a lamp moves, in that
way, consciousness knows its object. And how does a lamp move? The term
“lamp” is applied metaphorically to a series of flames. When these flames
appear in different places, we say “It moves to such-and-such a place.” In
the same way, the term “consciousness” is applied to a series of thoughts.
When they arise with different objects, we say “Consciousness is conscious
of such-and-such an object.” Just as physical form is produced and remains
in existence, but has no creator that is different in substance from itself, it’s
the same way with consciousness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I skimmed it. This is buddhism as religion imo. Want me to read the bible too?
So? Why should I believe that?
Instead, why not just talk to me like you just met me and didn't know how intelligent I was and you wanted to explain a concept to me. Are you unable to do this? How do you get by out in the world? Lets talk.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602709 - 05/21/10 06:20 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I stoped reading this after page 6. So Icelander, still no satisfying answers?
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602711 - 05/21/10 06:21 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I'm still waiting for a worthy explanation of why we're here.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12602719 - 05/21/10 06:24 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Here on this forum, or here on this planet?
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602724 - 05/21/10 06:25 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Both, but I was aiming more at an existential query.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12602735 - 05/21/10 06:29 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Well, Morpheus once said. Nobody can tell you that... You have to see it for yourself.
LOOK, THERE IT IS!!!
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602740 - 05/21/10 06:31 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I see my computer monitor and a bunch of empty beer bottles.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12602745 - 05/21/10 06:35 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
You are drunk. 
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602746 - 05/21/10 06:36 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Jesus turned water into wine, but I'm actually hung over.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602750 - 05/21/10 06:38 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The notion that animals band together for war
I used the war example as an analogy of how conflict can bring people together & the struggle for animals to survive in nature does the same thing. Just pointing out that its not purely negative, I didn't mean for it to be interpreted as purely positive.
Quote:
The notion that animals band together for war or to hunt being evidence of how the Universe is bringing us together to love
If the natural laws are indeed setup by a higher intelligence then I don't necessarily think they are setup directly "to bring us together to love", they are but indirectly. Nature is primarily setup to develop consciousness which is a prerequisite for love. Unless there is consciousness there isn't anyone or anything capable of loving, so natures primary purpose is to develop consciousness. The struggle to survive which nature imparts upon organisms forces them to develop a sense of self-preservation & they gather new experiences which develop their consciousness'.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602799 - 05/21/10 07:01 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ivander said:
I stoped reading this after page 6. So Icelander, still no satisfying answers?
Not yet.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
consciousness which is a prerequisite for love.
Consciousness is also a prerequisite for hate. Your argument ends here.
You're so invested in preserving your pov that you ignore obvious evidence which contradicts your reasoning.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Grapefruit
Obliviated
Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 4,276
Last seen: 1 day, 5 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602812 - 05/21/10 07:06 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I wonder how many more pages you can take. Make page 25 and you get the official Grapefruit stamp of enlightenment.
--------------------
"So man's insanity is heaven's sense; and wandering from all mortal reason, man comes at last to that celestial thought, which, to reason, is absurd and frantic; and weal or woe, feels then uncompromised, indifferent as his God." - Herman Melville
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Emotional investment in POVs makes spiritual gurus smile.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Grapefruit
Obliviated
Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 4,276
Last seen: 1 day, 5 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12602826 - 05/21/10 07:10 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
"So man's insanity is heaven's sense; and wandering from all mortal reason, man comes at last to that celestial thought, which, to reason, is absurd and frantic; and weal or woe, feels then uncompromised, indifferent as his God." - Herman Melville
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602838 - 05/21/10 07:15 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Consciousness is also a prerequisite for hate. Your argument ends here.
You fucking kidding me? I have a feeling everything is just too complicated for you isn't it?
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602849 - 05/21/10 07:18 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
ivander said:
I stoped reading this after page 6. So Icelander, still no satisfying answers?
Not yet.
Maybe you are asking wrong people. And if you get that answer, do u think it will really satisfy ur hunger?
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
Consciousness is also a prerequisite for hate. Your argument ends here.
You fucking kidding me? I have a feeling everything is just too complicated for you isn't it?
This is not an argument this is a diversion.
Let's look at it this way. Let's call Love - "Order" and Hate - "Entropy".
both are necessary in our Universe and one is not more important or stronger than the other.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: ivander]
#12602859 - 05/21/10 07:22 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ivander said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
ivander said:
I stoped reading this after page 6. So Icelander, still no satisfying answers?
Not yet.
Maybe you are asking wrong people. And if you get that answer, do u think it will really satisfy ur hunger?
Well remember I'm here for fun ultimately and I love to debate.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
ivander
LEAR. SPEC. SILO.
Registered: 11/01/08
Posts: 1,223
Last seen: 6 hours, 50 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602869 - 05/21/10 07:27 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Most reasonable thing I read today.
Have fun..
--------------------
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Nietzsche
I've never faked a sarcasm in my life. True story.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602922 - 05/21/10 07:47 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Let's look at it this way. Let's call Love - "Order" and Hate - "Entropy".
both are necessary in our Universe and one is not more important or stronger than the other.
Definitions suck 
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12602929 - 05/21/10 07:48 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Clearly you've never heard Empedocles talk about how Love and Strife formed the Universe.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12602930 - 05/21/10 07:49 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I'm trying to make a very simple obvious point to someone who is determined not to see it.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12602976 - 05/21/10 07:59 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
The only point you are making is that you are identified with form. Nice. 
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12602981 - 05/21/10 08:00 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
It's so hard not to be identified with form when you're still trapped in this mortal flesh.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603003 - 05/21/10 08:08 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
First, I broke the last post up into sections. I realize its alot to read in one sitting, then again, I would rather have anyone protract their consideration of what I am saying. Hopefully that is attempted, rather than just to skip over it:
I would call it A Refutation of Conventional Death Anxiety, in terms of the Four Noble Truths.
Also, I wanted to share another source in sutra - Vasubandhu.
Vasubandhu is relatively early buddhist (Abhidharma) philosopher in comparison to Nagarjuna: As I described in sidenotes to my own post, read the second passage for what I was referring to strictly as Vasubandhu's "various momentary entities"... This first one is similar to the concern and relevant as well. Specifically the first passage refutes theory of "persons", and the second refutes theory of "souls".
Anyhow, here they are:
Both taken from Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakos
Quote:
"Critique of the Pudgalavadins’ Theory of Persons":
Translation
Vasubandhu’s Statement of His Own View:
There is no liberation [from suffering] other than this [liberation, the path
to which has been explained], since [the Tırthikas, who also teach a path to
liberation from suffering, fail to recognize that] the mistaken view of a self
[causes all suffering. Those who follow their teachings will not be liberated
from suffering,] for they do not understand that the conception of a self
refers only to a continuum of aggregates; they believe that a self is a separate
substance; but the mental afflictions[, which cause suffering,] arise from selfgrasping
[which cannot be eliminated by those who believe that a self is a
separate substance].
It is known that the expression, “self,” refers to a continuum of aggregates
and not to anything else because [direct perception and correct inference establish
that the phenomena in dependence upon which a person is conceived are
the aggregates, and] there is no direct perception or correct inference [that
establishes the existence of anything else among these phenomena].
[If anything else exists among these phenomena, its existence would be
established by direct perception or correct inference,] for of all phenomena
[that exist] there is direct perception [that establishes their existence], as
there is of the six objects and the mental organ unless [direct] perception
of them is impeded, or there is correct inference [that establishes their existence],
as there is of the five [sense] organs.
Second Passage:
Quote:
Vasubandhu's Critique of the Soul:
Translation
[Non-Buddhist Opponent:] Every action depends on an agent. As, for
instance, when we say that Devadatta walks, in this case the action of walking
depends on the walker, Devadatta. In the same way, consciousness is an
action. Therefore, whoever is conscious must exist.
[Vasubandhu:] Who is this “Devadatta?” Is he a soul? But that’s just what
you have to prove. Now, is he what is called a “person” in everyday usage?
That’s not any single thing; that name refers to various caused entities. Devadatta
is conscious in just the same way as Devadatta walks. And how is it
that Devadatta walks? Devadatta is no more than momentary caused entities
that form an unbroken continuum. Fools who presuppose that the cause
of the appearance of the continuum in a different place is a single being, a
body, say that “Devadatta walks.” They call the arising of the continuum in
another location “walking.” On our view, the “walking” of Devadatta is like
the propagation of sound or the spread of a fire. In the same way, thinking
that the cause of consciousness is a unitary being, fools say that “Devadatta
is conscious.” Hearing them say this, the Noble Ones say the same thing, in
order to conform to received usage...
...A sutra does say that “Consciousness is conscious of an object.” What does
the consciousness do to its object? It doesn’t do anything. But just as it is
said that “the effect conforms to the cause,” it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. That’s what it means to say that
“consciousness is conscious of an object”; it comes into existence, similar
to its object, without doing anything to it. Now, in what way is it similar?
In appearance. It’s because of this similarity in appearance that the consciousness
represents its object, rather than the sense-faculty that is also one
of its causes. Or, since there is a continuum of moments of consciousness,
each one caused by the last, there is no error in saying “Consciousness is
conscious of an object,” since the word “agent” can be used to refer to a
cause. It’s like saying “A bell rings.” Moreover, just as a lamp moves, in that
way, consciousness knows its object. And how does a lamp move? The term
“lamp” is applied metaphorically to a series of flames. When these flames
appear in different places, we say “It moves to such-and-such a place.” In
the same way, the term “consciousness” is applied to a series of thoughts.
When they arise with different objects, we say “Consciousness is conscious
of such-and-such an object.” Just as physical form is produced and remains
in existence, but has no creator that is different in substance from itself, it’s
the same way with consciousness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I skimmed it. This is buddhism as religion imo. Want me to read the bible too?
So? Why should I believe that?
Instead, why not just talk to me like you just met me and didn't know how intelligent I was and you wanted to explain a concept to me. Are you unable to do this? How do you get by out in the world? Lets talk.
Who is being unclear?
I'm not sure if you are referring to my post, or the following two you quoted.
I could be sure if you formed any kind of actual argument. Otherwise I have no idea what your extraneous labels apply to.
Secularity is not appealing to an institution/object, it is the use of language that is clear to what it refers to. It is a matter of form, which you must at least assume on your own to some degree.
Here is where the thread putters off. It will putter off because you refuse to engage the actual arguments. Instead you make extraneous commentary about the other posters, and form extraneous labels for what they say. You claim that this is friendly and down to earth, but it isn't. Its unfriendly to point fingers and call names. To speak freely and genuinely is to use words by their own reference, frankly, to let words speak for themselves. It is unfriendly to use words as stamps or labels for your own personal commerce.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
If words spoke for themselves we wouldn't need humans.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603023 - 05/21/10 08:12 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It's so hard not to be identified with form when you're still trapped in this mortal flesh.
I don't know if it's hard. It feels good to go abroad and just leave everything behind. Or wipe out your entire hard drive and restart with an empty computer. Or go to sleep. Nothing is more pleasant than no desire no attachments. I guess the apparent difficulty arises from fitting this attitude into our lives in a pragmatic way.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603027 - 05/21/10 08:13 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Let me know when you've reached Nirvana.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603084 - 05/21/10 08:30 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Why? You'd just flame me with the usual 
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603087 - 05/21/10 08:30 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
It's hard work being a Bodhisattva.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603113 - 05/21/10 08:35 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I didn't mean it like that. I meant literally what would be the point?
It's not a big deal anyway. There's always death to look forward to.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603136 - 05/21/10 08:40 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
The only point you are making is that you are identified with form. Nice.
And the only point you are making is you don't have any argument other than that. Since you are form your self and have no evidence you have shared otherwise.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603140 - 05/21/10 08:41 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Yes we are both stuck. Now what?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603141 - 05/21/10 08:42 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
Quote:
It's so hard not to be identified with form when you're still trapped in this mortal flesh.
I don't know if it's hard. It feels good to go abroad and just leave everything behind. Or wipe out your entire hard drive and restart with an empty computer. Or go to sleep. Nothing is more pleasant than no desire no attachments. I guess the apparent difficulty arises from fitting this attitude into our lives in a pragmatic way.
What you are saying in no evidence of having no form. Going abroad?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
What I'm saying is I never know what you are saying in your, imo , obtuse way.
And since it has gone on so long I'm done trying. Have a great life.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603164 - 05/21/10 08:48 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I'm trying to make a very simple obvious point to someone who is determined not to see it.
Lets ask another way. If love/compassion and hate/selfishness etc. both happen and both have survival value. What makes one more important or the meaning behind everything? I don't know how many times I've asked this over the years.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603189 - 05/21/10 08:54 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Stop asking.
I haven't found any evidence that I am formless. I'm not even looking for any evidence. I'm just trying to figure it out, like the rest, with the intellect and the odd sit-and-observe session, sometimes accompanied by a sense of "divine" presence. All my life I'd had problems establishing a firm identity in relation to other people and the world in general. Failed. Now I've found these people who are saying that I don't need to have such an identity. Something auspicious for a change. But like I said there's always death to look forward to as the ultimate peace of mind. Not saying this in a cynical way. Life is good also.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603193 - 05/21/10 08:57 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I'm not even looking for any evidence. I'm just trying to figure it out,
This sentence seems contradictory to me.
I don't care what path you decide to take in life but if you post it here I just might ask a question or two.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603203 - 05/21/10 09:01 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I don't know about you but this made me laugh.
Questions are ok. Emotions are just an appearance. A mirage. I'm unhurt by all the humiliation I subject myself to in here. Afterall it's almost completely anonymous. Just imagine someone getting hurt through his internet identity, as if identification with the physical body isn't enough.
Edited by Tony (05/21/10 09:02 AM)
|
LisonAlGaib
Registered: 05/15/10
Posts: 1,654
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603213 - 05/21/10 09:06 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
I'm still waiting for a worthy explanation of why we're here.
Because our DNA says so.........
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603216 - 05/21/10 09:06 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Explain to me again...
How this post is 13 pages.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603231 - 05/21/10 09:10 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Lets ask another way. If love/compassion and hate/selfishness etc. both happen and both have survival value. What makes one more important or the meaning behind everything? I don't know how many times I've asked this over the years.
What makes you think proponents believe it is the meaning behind everything? IME it is just what exists beneath everything else. The meaning you give to that is just as open as the meaning you give to anything that exists.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12603239 - 05/21/10 09:12 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Then my OP was not addressed to you. Get out!
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603249 - 05/21/10 09:14 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If words spoke for themselves we wouldn't need humans.
Right, I my human voice is necessary to make the "intonation" to speak. Or rather, in this instance I have to type the words on the keyboard. That would be the assumption of form that I am speaking of. The "use of words" I am referring to must obviously follow this assumption. But after assuming form, there is the flow language, through which one can be more or less genuine, or more or less petty. There are many examples of this, I am sure you at least intuitively understand what I mean.
This is easily understood listening to music, which is a kind of language, you might say. In listening to music, one realizes that some fact attests to whether the music is more or less contrived, and this is after the fact that form was assumed (that is, given that there are relative differences between different forms). It is enjoyed in a positive sense, not a deprecation of its form.
Music is not the integrity of silence, however there is relative degrees to how genuine how music may be. (I think it might be that music speaks of silence, through its intervals of tone and rhythm.)
Philosophically speaking, I have presented traditional proofs that concepts of self, such as the person or soul do not exist (see Vasubandhu, Nagarjuna)
These arguments explain why the flow of form may be more or less contrived - for the reason that there is a self behind it. Once the possibility of emptiness is understood, it is also understood why the self seen behind the yoga forms makes people uncomfortable. You see the contrived form, and it seems silly. When you feel the self composing form, you come up with a contrived form that says me me me, and is not outwardly expressive. When you improvise to show off, you do not play well, and avoid intimation.
Here, I am attempting to communicate through composition; that is, I am paying very close attention to the structure of the argument, and precise rigor of form. Of course it is not meant to be absolute, but I am more careful than if I were improvising.
All of this is just elaborating on what you have pointed out: you have hinted to the problematic connection between a person and its connection to speech (Or form in the more general sense). This self seems to deprecate form, it seems to make it as though there is no way to speak more or less freely.
But we have all intuited the fact that we may speak more or less freely (again it is not an absolute). I have given a possible explanation for this.
This self, and the relative realization of its emptiness, attests to why there is relative degrees of the quality of music, of the possibility of learning, or of something being more or less genuinely communicated. We each recognize these differences; it is why we listen or read to these "tainted" or inherently "corrupt" forms.
This is what distinguishes emptiness from nihilism. Emptiness is being able to speak, rather than just having the words trail off into shame and nihilistic deprecation. ("I am 'inauthentic' - due to the connection between my person and the form I assume. I need to shut up.")
We presently speak, We are speaking. We work from there, within the stream. Again, it is not an absolute, the rigor and beauty of form is an ideal found within the process.
There is no absolute of truth, but one can perhaps represent the path to emptiness through language, and thereafter not speak. This might be considered the ideal represented by Wittgenstein. But it is important to avoid the reification of this ideal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_(fallacy)
Obviously, you wouldn't be able to speak if you are presently not speaking. So you wouldn't be able to assume this position by not speaking. Making squeamish appearances, opting out of the game, breaking the rules of reference is completely different. That is presenting certain forms, and disappearing when you need to take responsibility for them. Or it is coming into the argument with extraneous commentary, without backing it up with referential language. This is indicative of nihilism and/or unjustified, protracted faith. They are the same thing, once you get down to it.
The ideal of emptiness is much different than deprecation of language and form that resentfully attempts to silence oneself or others.
For instance, as I previously described, it is possible, and further it is only possible within wittgensteins linguistic framework, to untangle that which is presently entangled. Wittgenstein does not positively represent anything static, such as a mystical or nihilistic absolute. That aspect does not speak, and to "do so" one does not attempt to make it speak.
In front of such idols as this, one only appeals to to the deprecation of form. However, if his representation is understood to be a path to enlightenment from within the mire of language, enlightenment may be considered a "possibility" at least.
So for this practical instance, as long as you have "showed up", you play by the rules of the language game, and stand by your words. You can't be the referree (enlightened) because you are playing the game, in your use of words.
But as it so happens you wield rules in a referential way, that is much like making certain rules. People are "creative" in a conventional sense (not in a buddhist sense, however). Therefore it is recognized as crucial that a person needs to understand the difference between playing, and assuming they are referee, and making extraneous calls. That is precisely what is secular (within) the game, as opposed to what is extraneous.
So once you show up, there is no use in claiming enlightenment, you can only presently disentangle in a process or in a flow. This is because (as you have said) assuming language is entanglement. And you have assumed it. So enlightenment could be a possibility that someone like Wittgenstein represents, but a person must work his way the rules of his game. There is no such thing as static enlightenment, the label of enlightenment. There is such a thing as not speaking, but it is presently not speaking.
This is what he seems to describe in a very broad sense of language, (so perhaps which includes all the games of language) - At best, he describes the referential use of language, that speaks of silence.
It is only possible to discuss philosophers (even insomuch that it is problematic) by the assumption of form.
Edited by daytripper23 (05/21/10 09:34 AM)
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603255 - 05/21/10 09:16 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Love and hate, compassion and selfishness, and any polarity of emotion are equally important and instrumental. There aren't preferential slices of reality that are better than others. Believing this is erroneous, for instance, when claiming the world is a perfect place and then disowning the value of violence and negativity. Justifying this as a part of the "plan" is a difficult move for dogmatic and religious people in my opinion.
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603261 - 05/21/10 09:18 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Let's review the question again...
Quote:
Icelander said:
How this universal consciousness, if it exists, is ultimately love directed?
When walking this morning my big old dog treed a young raccoon. It looked so scared up in that little tree with Kilo trying desperately to get at it. Then I remembered that Kilo is one of the sweetest dogs I've owned and that raccoon would have no trouble tearing into a nest full of young helpless newborn birds. This isn't even taking a hard look at how primates, including and especially humans, behave much of the time.
Now explain to me again how a consciousness that expresses itself in these ways is all about love and niceness? Cause it really doesn't make sense to me. Especially if one is going to claim that this consciousness is very very aware.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12603313 - 05/21/10 09:29 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Spiral dynamics
Boomeritis by Ken Wilber
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603330 - 05/21/10 09:34 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12603344 - 05/21/10 09:38 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arden said:
Love and hate, compassion and selfishness, and any polarity of emotion are equally important and instrumental. There aren't preferential slices of reality that are better than others. Believing this is erroneous, for instance, when claiming the world is a perfect place and then disowning the value of violence and negativity. Justifying this as a part of the "plan" is a difficult move for dogmatic and religious people in my opinion.
Bingo! This is what I'm saying and in my OP I was asking how one defends the idea that this is all about love and the Universe is at core about love and everything that is happening is all heading towards love.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603382 - 05/21/10 09:47 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Why could the same not be said about any emotion?
The universe, at core is about attraction.
or
Lust,
Greed, the universe want's all matter to itself compressed into a tiny ball of singularity.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603388 - 05/21/10 09:48 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I'm not even looking for any evidence. I'm just trying to figure it out,
This sentence seems contradictory to me.
If you found a cockroach in your apartment, would you say you've found evidence of a cockroach?
Same thing when you discover the Self. You don't find evidence of it, a scent or a foot print. You find the Self itself, directly.
Edited by Tony (05/21/10 09:49 AM)
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603394 - 05/21/10 09:49 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I hear an important concept being addressed. But naturally in a dualistic view any answer is going to contain only half the picture.
You cannot fight hate to get the love that exists all around it.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12603399 - 05/21/10 09:50 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Well yes. That's my point. All emotions have survival value and are important. We choose love and hate because they are so well recognized and love is the one being claimed by some to be the be all and end all of the Universe. And there is absolutely no reasonable evidence of that. But still it's a widely held Urban Myth.
The next question of course is why do people feel such a strong need to believe this myth.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12603405 - 05/21/10 09:52 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
I hear an important concept being addressed. But naturally in a dualistic view any answer is going to contain only half the picture.
You cannot fight hate to get the love that exists all around it.
What makes you think love exists all around hate? (here we go again)
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603423 - 05/21/10 09:55 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
All emotions have survival value and are important.
Seems like you attach a great deal of importance to survival. But the survival of what?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603448 - 05/21/10 10:01 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I attach the same value to it that you do. It's basic and primary to your continued existence whether you acknowledge that fact or not. You act in ways that insure your survival or you would die.
So it's the survival of the animal that is you. The primate family you belong to. Anything beyond that is speculative. But right now you live and have a body as far as we know.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603467 - 05/21/10 10:06 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
An example taken from the Rage thread:
If you're feeling rage and want to be rid of it, you can resist it, suppress it, fight it... do all those things that rage is often used for. Or you can cease all attempts to DO anything. Stop resisting, cease the suppression, end the fighting. Let the rage be. In this moment, where you've stopped seeing yourself as the rage but rather the rage as something happening, you can also begin to see the love around the rage. There is a welcoming acceptance of the feeling.
How can this be, rage and love at the same time?
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603492 - 05/21/10 10:14 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Ultimately nothing that exists in the phenomenal world will survive. Survival can not be a "goal" from an transcendent perspective.
However something is aware of the turmoil in and the impermanence of this world, something that doesn't rely on memory or reasoning to recognize itself.
Or so they say.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603510 - 05/21/10 10:19 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
Ultimately nothing that exists in the phenomenal world will survive. Survival can not be a "goal" from an transcendent perspective.
However something is aware of the turmoil in and the impermanence of this world, something that doesn't rely on memory or reasoning to recognize itself.
Or so they say.
Or so "they" say.
from an transcendent perspective.
what if this perspective is an illusion meant to protect us from the fear of our mortality? There seems to be psychological evidence for this position.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12603522 - 05/21/10 10:22 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
An example taken from the Rage thread:
If you're feeling rage and want to be rid of it, you can resist it, suppress it, fight it... do all those things that rage is often used for. Or you can cease all attempts to DO anything. Stop resisting, cease the suppression, end the fighting. Let the rage be. In this moment, where you've stopped seeing yourself as the rage but rather the rage as something happening, you can also begin to see the love around the rage. There is a welcoming acceptance of the feeling.
How can this be, rage and love at the same time?
That's pretty speculative. I know some who if they let their rage go an didn't try to suppress it they would do great damage before the energy played itself out.
I have done many times what is suggested and for me it left me calm and relaxed but not exactly loving. I just realized that the rage was doing me more harm than good. This is basic psychology. And when rage is appropriate love would get in the way of survival.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603556 - 05/21/10 10:30 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
When there is no energy being given to the rage, it does nothing but exist. The energy is provided by the belief that something needs to be done with the rage. This belief stems from identification with the rage as you. I am mad and so I need to do something or this rage will become all I am.
It can cause no harm or damage to anything without the energy you provide.
As soon as you cease doing, the love can and will envelop the rage.
Of course, there are attempts to cease that are centered around suppression.
And this is still doing and will keep energy being fed to rage.
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603565 - 05/21/10 10:33 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
what if this perspective is an illusion meant to protect us from the fear of our mortality? There seems to be psychological evidence for this position.
Could be.
"As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him."
Or maybe there's something more to it.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603575 - 05/21/10 10:35 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
That's all I'm sayin.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12603606 - 05/21/10 10:41 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
again
I have done many times what is suggested and for me it left me calm and relaxed but not exactly loving. I just realized that the rage was doing me more harm than good. This is basic psychology. And when rage is appropriate love would get in the way of survival.
When one is in a relaxed state one feels good, body and mind. When one is agitated one is on guard ready for flight or fight. In the blackness of space things seem calm and collected. The sun burns with violent nuclear energy. Both are and possibly always have been happening and always will.
So you could say that anger etc is all around love waiting until the stimulus for action releases it.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12603695 - 05/21/10 11:08 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
daytripper23 said:
Quote:
If words spoke for themselves we wouldn't need humans.
Right, I my human voice is necessary to make the "intonation" to speak. Or rather, in this instance I have to type the words on the keyboard. That would be the assumption of form that I am speaking of. The "use of words" I am referring to must obviously follow this assumption. But after assuming form, there is the flow language, through which one can be more or less genuine, or more or less petty. There are many examples of this, I am sure you at least intuitively understand what I mean.
This is easily understood listening to music, which is a kind of language, you might say. In listening to music, one realizes that some fact attests to whether the music is more or less contrived, and this is after the fact that form was assumed (that is, given that there are relative differences between different forms). It is enjoyed in a positive sense, not a deprecation of its form.
Music is not the integrity of silence, however there is relative degrees to how genuine how music may be. (I think it might be that music speaks of silence, through its intervals of tone and rhythm.)
Philosophically speaking, I have presented traditional proofs that concepts of self, such as the person or soul do not exist (see Vasubandhu, Nagarjuna)
These arguments explain why the flow of form may be more or less contrived - for the reason that there is a self behind it. Once the possibility of emptiness is understood, it is also understood why the self seen behind the yoga forms makes people uncomfortable. You see the contrived form, and it seems silly. When you feel the self composing form, you come up with a contrived form that says me me me, and is not outwardly expressive. When you improvise to show off, you do not play well, and avoid intimation.
Here, I am attempting to communicate through composition; that is, I am paying very close attention to the structure of the argument, and precise rigor of form. Of course it is not meant to be absolute, but I am more careful than if I were improvising.
All of this is just elaborating on what you have pointed out: you have hinted to the problematic connection between a person and its connection to speech (Or form in the more general sense). This self seems to deprecate form, it seems to make it as though there is no way to speak more or less freely.
But we have all intuited the fact that we may speak more or less freely (again it is not an absolute). I have given a possible explanation for this.
This self, and the relative realization of its emptiness, attests to why there is relative degrees of the quality of music, of the possibility of learning, or of something being more or less genuinely communicated. We each recognize these differences; it is why we listen or read to these "tainted" or inherently "corrupt" forms.
This is what distinguishes emptiness from nihilism. Emptiness is being able to speak, rather than just having the words trail off into shame and nihilistic deprecation. ("I am 'inauthentic' - due to the connection between my person and the form I assume. I need to shut up.")
We presently speak, We are speaking. We work from there, within the stream. Again, it is not an absolute, the rigor and beauty of form is an ideal found within the process.
There is no absolute of truth, but one can perhaps represent the path to emptiness through language, and thereafter not speak. This might be considered the ideal represented by Wittgenstein. But it is important to avoid the reification of this ideal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_(fallacy)
Obviously, you wouldn't be able to speak if you are presently not speaking. So you wouldn't be able to assume this position by not speaking. Making squeamish appearances, opting out of the game, breaking the rules of reference is completely different. That is presenting certain forms, and disappearing when you need to take responsibility for them. Or it is coming into the argument with extraneous commentary, without backing it up with referential language. This is indicative of nihilism and/or unjustified, protracted faith. They are the same thing, once you get down to it.
The ideal of emptiness is much different than deprecation of language and form that resentfully attempts to silence oneself or others.
For instance, as I previously described, it is possible, and further it is only possible within wittgensteins linguistic framework, to untangle that which is presently entangled. Wittgenstein does not positively represent anything static, such as a mystical or nihilistic absolute. That aspect does not speak, and to "do so" one does not attempt to make it speak.
In front of such idols as this, one only appeals to to the deprecation of form. However, if his representation is understood to be a path to enlightenment from within the mire of language, enlightenment may be considered a "possibility" at least.
So for this practical instance, as long as you have "showed up", you play by the rules of the language game, and stand by your words. You can't be the referree (enlightened) because you are playing the game, in your use of words.
But as it so happens you wield rules in a referential way, that is much like making certain rules. People are "creative" in a conventional sense (not in a buddhist sense, however). Therefore it is recognized as crucial that a person needs to understand the difference between playing, and assuming they are referee, and making extraneous calls. That is precisely what is secular (within) the game, as opposed to what is extraneous.
So once you show up, there is no use in claiming enlightenment, you can only presently disentangle in a process or in a flow. This is because (as you have said) assuming language is entanglement. And you have assumed it. So enlightenment could be a possibility that someone like Wittgenstein represents, but a person must work his way the rules of his game. There is no such thing as static enlightenment, the label of enlightenment. There is such a thing as not speaking, but it is presently not speaking.
This is what he seems to describe in a very broad sense of language, (so perhaps which includes all the games of language) - At best, he describes the referential use of language, that speaks of silence.
It is only possible to discuss philosophers (even insomuch that it is problematic) by the assumption of form.
Great post, I have nothing to add.
Quote:
Tony said:
Same thing when you discover the Self. You don't find evidence of it, a scent or a foot print. You find the Self itself, directly.
I found myself, but I lost it in a drinking binge.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603736 - 05/21/10 11:14 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Cypher said:
Both, but I was aiming more at an existential query.
I'd like to think we are the Universe becoming aware of itself in one of an infinite number of ways.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Well that's fun to believe but it always brings up this question for me. How could the universe that is infinite and infinitely creative and seemingly infinitely powerful not be aware of itself and need to create something that takes unimaginable creative powers to bring into existence to know who and what it is.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
c0sm0nautt
Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 9,432
Loc: NY
Last seen: 20 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12603786 - 05/21/10 11:22 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I think it was originally aware, but plays games to experience.
--------------------
astralsun.blogspot.com
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant, and has forgotten the gift. - Albert Einstein
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Why do you think that?
Do you hold it as a firm belief or a guess to try to explain something beyond reason?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
If life is a game, how do I win?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: deCypher]
#12603858 - 05/21/10 11:32 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If life is a game, how do I win?
Buy the ticket and take the ride.
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12603872 - 05/21/10 11:36 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
he who makes a beast of himself....
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
|
Quote:
I think it was originally aware, but plays games to experience.
Aware of what tho? If there is nothing but yourself can you even be aware of yourself? Maybe you just are and you don't even know it. Then the whole processes of coming to know yourself you go through the entire game of experience + consciousness. It's all explained in the thread I made - "IMO the best explanation of why the infinite divides into finite consciousness."
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12603966 - 05/21/10 11:55 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arden said:
Quote:
If life is a game, how do I win?
Buy the ticket and take the ride.
That's not very helpful! 
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
|
Humans did not come into knowledge by stumbling across earth's instruction manual left behind by it's manufacturer.
Everything we know we've essentially made up.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12603985 - 05/21/10 11:58 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Love and hate, compassion and selfishness, and any polarity of emotion are equally important and instrumental. There aren't preferential slices of reality that are better than others.
Uhh love feels good hate feels bad. Seems like love is more important to me.
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12603988 - 05/21/10 11:58 AM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arden said:
Quote:
If life is a game, how do I win?
Buy the ticket and take the ride.
You don't have to buy the ticket. You're forced to play.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604407 - 05/21/10 01:12 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
You don't have to buy the ticket. You're forced to play.
It feels that way at times, then you begin to see patterns in the system that can be manipulated.
|
foliocb
Self-destruction...
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 974
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604415 - 05/21/10 01:13 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
icelander...
are you afraid of dyin?
--------------------
Everything posted by me on this forum is purely fictional and should not be taken seriously.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12604458 - 05/21/10 01:22 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
11:15, restate my assumptions: 1. Mathematics is the language of nature. 2. Everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers. 3. If you graph these numbers, patterns emerge. Therefore: There are patterns everywhere in nature.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Arden]
#12604529 - 05/21/10 01:32 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arden said:
Quote:
You don't have to buy the ticket. You're forced to play.
It feels that way at times, then you begin to see patterns in the system that can be manipulated.
That's how you play the game.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: foliocb]
#12604535 - 05/21/10 01:33 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
foliocb said:
icelander...
are you afraid of dyin?
I'm really afraid of having to live with morons.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604720 - 05/21/10 02:03 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
In the blackness of space things seem calm and collected. The sun burns with violent nuclear energy. Both are and possibly always have been happening and always will.
I like the analogy
No matter what the sun is doing, there is always empty space around it.
I'm surprised you don't find the space to be loving and nurturing if it calms you and makes you feel good. I'm not sure what you define love as because I can't fathom something more loving than the calming and joyous space that exists around everything.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12604798 - 05/21/10 02:18 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Icelander's definition of love.
The unconditional acceptance of anything and everything.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604812 - 05/21/10 02:20 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Long after the sun has died, the space that surrounded it will remain.
|
bodhicitta
Registered: 05/13/10
Posts: 77
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604821 - 05/21/10 02:22 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
since you stated that anything and everything happen because it can, you've already answered your own initial question with such definition of love. the tao judgeth none.
--------------------
if everything is nowhere, where is what?
|
soldatheero
lastirishman
Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,588
Loc:
Last seen: 17 hours, 18 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12604843 - 05/21/10 02:25 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Humans did not come into knowledge by stumbling across earth's instruction manual left behind by it's manufacturer.
Oh what seriously?? I thought RL had a instruction manual and guide like world of warcraft!
Quote:
Everything we know we've essentially made up.
No. Knowledge is discovered not created or "made up".
--------------------
..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12604859 - 05/21/10 02:28 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Long after the sun has died, the space that surrounded it will remain.
Yet suns are continually reborn from the dust of dying suns.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
Edited by Icelander (05/21/10 02:29 PM)
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12604890 - 05/21/10 02:33 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Indeed. Possibly in a new area and possibly with new features.
Thus the groundwork of reincarnation was born...
All the same there is calm and nurturing space around all of it.
Perhaps we've never truly left the womb.
Who knows what more could be.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12605014 - 05/21/10 02:56 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Well I certainly don't. The world and everything is a mystery to me and those who claim to know what it's all about are an even bigger mystery.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12605045 - 05/21/10 03:01 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
I love a good mystery!
If it continually keeps twisting and turning, all the better.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12605051 - 05/21/10 03:02 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
It can get old over time. You may see.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Arden
לנשום
Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 7,648
Loc: Α & Ω
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12605056 - 05/21/10 03:03 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The world and everything is a mystery to me and those who claim to know what it's all about are an even bigger mystery.
This is why I like R. A. Wilson's Maybe-Logic.
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12605077 - 05/21/10 03:07 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Existence is truly bizarre. I know all CC really wanted was to be free.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Kickle]
#12605091 - 05/21/10 03:09 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
It's a fucking trip for sure and in spite of some death anxiety I'm very curious if anything comes after.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Kickle
A Growing Hope
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 11,340
Last seen: 28 minutes, 9 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12605101 - 05/21/10 03:11 PM (2 years, 9 days ago) |
|
|
Me too -- since I was really little
|
halo
Tripper
Registered: 11/01/07
Posts: 763
Last seen: 2 hours, 26 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12606544 - 05/21/10 08:09 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Icelander's definition of love.
The unconditional acceptance of anything and everything.
The universe exists.
Consciousness and life exist although scientifically we do not know to what extent. We know humans have consciousness as do animals to a lesser extent. But we don't know if plants or rocks do. And we don't know if stars or galaxies do.
However, the universe exists. At it's basis it is energy. The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed.
Although people will die, stars will explode, Death Star's will shoot lasers that destroy whole planets, the energy that composed those things never goes away. It's always here and now. That energy is always there.
The universe does not and cannot destroy that energy. Is not it's existence proof that it accepts anything and everything unconditionally?
--------------------
All drugs should be legal
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: halo]
#12606783 - 05/21/10 08:54 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
All drugs should be legal.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
halo
Tripper
Registered: 11/01/07
Posts: 763
Last seen: 2 hours, 26 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12608089 - 05/22/10 01:58 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Hey man I made my sig when I signed up which was 3 years ago. I was 16 and I'm too lazy to change it.
Plus I still pretty much agree with it.
Don't derail your own thread I'm genuinely curious to see what you have to say about what I said.
--------------------
All drugs should be legal
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: halo]
#12608507 - 05/22/10 06:55 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Well I thought your post was a lot of mish mash but not essentially incorrect on the surface although you are anthropomorphizing the universe. If it's not conscious then it's not actively doing anything.
If things are happening just because they can the universe is not loving or hating. It is ising.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12608981 - 05/22/10 09:34 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
It is being, would be how I'd put it.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12608995 - 05/22/10 09:38 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah it's just being it. We don't even really know who we are imo. How can we know what the Universe is. Just because we are part of it doesn't make us necessarily aware of the whole.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609017 - 05/22/10 09:43 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
We are being, just like the universe.
Think about it like this: We as human organisms are the result of billions of years of evolution that started when the first organic molecules started to self replicate. The forces that brought those molecules together were the natural forces of the universe, and the forces that allowed them to continue replication were of the universe as well. Life began, and took on innumerable forms, but at no time did it ever stop following the natural flow of the universe. So, even though we are highly sophisticated conscious beings, we have inside the most fundamental forces of the universe acting on us and through us. If we go far enough back into ourselves we are literally going into the universe, reconnecting with the source.
I don't know if I explained this properly but to me this is an obvious truth.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609159 - 05/22/10 10:16 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Just watched a documentary about Timothy Treadwell, the "Grizzly Man". He was a guy who felt rejected by humanity/rejected humanity and fell in love with "nature" instead. He spent years living close to bears, videotaping them and surviving in their habitat, until one of them killed him and his girl friend and ate both of them. Happily ever after, eh?
Looking for unconditional love or some kind of honest perfection in the phenomenal world is something people indeed do out of desperation. But I don't see what this has to do with how the word love is used in spirituality. Loving emptiness is something entirely different from loving wild animals that can and will rip you to shreads.
(Although loving emptiness will also rip "you" to shreads, eh Chronic? )
Edited by Tony (05/22/10 10:18 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12609178 - 05/22/10 10:20 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
guruu said:
We are being, just like the universe.
Think about it like this: We as human organisms are the result of billions of years of evolution that started when the first organic molecules started to self replicate. The forces that brought those molecules together were the natural forces of the universe, and the forces that allowed them to continue replication were of the universe as well. Life began, and took on innumerable forms, but at no time did it ever stop following the natural flow of the universe. So, even though we are highly sophisticated conscious beings, we have inside the most fundamental forces of the universe acting on us and through us. If we go far enough back into ourselves we are literally going into the universe, reconnecting with the source.
I don't know if I explained this properly but to me this is an obvious truth.
Well I think I've always basically agreed with what you say except maybe that we actually can know ourselves well enough to know the universe. But this really has little to do with my OP.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12609183 - 05/22/10 10:22 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tony said:
Just watched a documentary about Timothy Treadwell, the "Grizzly Man". He was a guy who felt rejected by humanity/rejected humanity and fell in love with "nature" instead. He spent years living close to bears, videotaping them and surviving in their habitat, until one of them killed him and his girl friend and ate both of them. Happily ever after, eh?
Looking for unconditional love or some kind of honest perfection in the phenomenal world is something people indeed do out of desperation. But I don't see what this has to do with how the word love is used in spirituality. Loving emptiness is something entirely different from loving wild animals that can and will rip you to shreads.
(Although loving emptiness will also rip "you" to shreads, eh Chronic? )
I have no objection to using the word love. Love exists imo. It just may not be the meaning of everything as many here claim to know for sure.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609206 - 05/22/10 10:31 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Well, probably not in the way you understand that sentence. If you love emptiness, and you are emptiness, and emptiness is both the observer and the observed, then it's just one cycle of love isn't it? The One accepts everything as it arises.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12609255 - 05/22/10 10:44 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Big fuckin "if"
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609417 - 05/22/10 11:25 AM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Well what would be the point of the search if it were obvious from the start.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12609628 - 05/22/10 12:05 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
I've often wondered why, if the universe was really conscious and fully enlightened itself, then what is the purpose/need for any of it's manifestations to search?
It's easy to say well the universe was bored or wanted to play hide and seek with itself but who really knows if that is true? How would they know?
I wonder how many things we believe just to make our other beliefs work?
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
oojijimoo
OouuruguruuoO
Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 11,772
Loc: ATL GA
Last seen: 13 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609645 - 05/22/10 12:08 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
I've often wondered why, if the universe was really conscious and fully enlightened itself, then what is the purpose/need for any of it's manifestations to search?
Because many aspects of the infinite can only be expressed through a being that does not know it's true nature? I don't know for sure but I think it's all just part of this creative process that is going on infinitely.
--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/ufhwhomp like music?
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12609674 - 05/22/10 12:14 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
That's an interesting thought. If everything is possible and everything that is possible will happen I could see how that would be true. Just an unlucky break to be in this part of the game right now.
I can entertain any idea (i have my own) as long as it comes with the acknowledgment that we aren't sure. Cause if some one is sure then I need to know why I'm not.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12609701 - 05/22/10 12:19 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
"We" is ultimately the presumption.
If a person indicates "we should not anthropromorphize the universe" - the integrity of this position cannot be grounded in itself. This is because the distinction itself is the anthropromorphizing of the universe. Given that the basest philosophical position is the existence of the universe without metaphysical distinctions, - "we" in the egotistical sense is the philosophic presumption, as the anthropromorphism of the universe:
What this means, is it does not ultimately make sense to anthropromorphize the universe as "we" . Nor then does the distinction between "universe and we", actually exist in the first place.
But I am presently holding the position that we should not anthropromorphize the universe, with the integrity of philosophical convention. Convention may be useful, in the precise sense that it is true that we should not anthropromorphize the universe. That is because this is not a tenable philosophical position.
The philosophic integrity of this present convention is based on whether this statement is serving a specific use: That is, it must precisely point out the fallacy of someone who has anthropromorphized the universe.
Can it be proven that someone else is anthropromorphizing the universe?
In my case, as I hold this position, I need to look no further than Icelander's post to find this position explicated, and thus the face of the problem. Therefore my position is conventionally legitimate. Does it trace further back? If it does not trace back further than that though; that is, if icelander cannot prove that someone previous to him has anthropromorphized the universe, then it is he that is guilty of fallacy, and he is the one projecting the anthropromorphism of the universe.
I am not saying whether that is ultimately the case or not.
What I am explicating (to reiterate) is that: To anthropromorphize the universe in the most basic sense, is to assume from the basest philosophical position of "existence", or "the universe", and superimpose "we" upon. This particular argument itself is rooted in the convention of "we".
This distinction is necessary for the position Icelander explicitly takes, so conventionally, I am raising the question if "he is the one" making this distinction in the first place, by projection. This is first, my own projection, but it is light shed on a position that has been explicitly maintained external to me (it is presently a problem). From there - Icelander's perspective - does light shed upon another such position, or is precisely an image that is being projected?
It seems that on a more macroscopic level of this thread one may inquire of the same formula. What is the original question, other than futile? Who should it apply to? Since we are even considering "what each of us is generally doing" in an even more macroscopic sense, (as our general activities at the shroomery), I would raise the question of whether this formula could be seen at the level of posting histories - that is, as karma. This is pretty close to explicating entities I realize, but it hopefully impresses a point.
In this Karmic sense, "we" cannot end our analysis at the level of entities; otherwise we are hopelessly mired in karma. This is a question of convention, and if we keep panning out, of course there is just the universe, as it simply exists. But at the level of convention that we may assume with more or less integrity - that is "philosophy", or "debate" - I would ask "anyone" implicated to think for themselves how these fallacious views are being projected in the first place.
That there is suffering such as the present conceptual diffusion, indicates there is a root cause to its suffering. Once this is understood, it is then seen that there is a possibility for extinguishing suffering.
Quote:
(four noble truths)
1. Life means suffering.
2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
4. The path to the cessation of suffering.
PS: I hope that this just helps to sort out some of the philosophical problems presented here.
I will admit this is a power play, and it is a role I will assume circumstantially, and very tentatively. For those who love the of rigor of debate, of philosophy, I want to remind these folks what is really going on. It is easy to become lost in the conflict of debate, rendering it meaningless. Perhaps philosophy is ultimately an expression of power in a certain sense. But that doesn't necessarily vanquish its being a "love of wisdom".
Edited by daytripper23 (05/22/10 01:23 PM)
|
appleorange
Rainbow Technician
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 4,868
Loc: Reykjavík
|
|
|
Tony
Stranger
Registered: 09/25/09
Posts: 859
Last seen: 3 hours, 25 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: oojijimoo]
#12609750 - 05/22/10 12:28 PM (2 years, 8 days ago) |
|
|
So far I haven't been able to accept the notion that the universe is a contemplative entity in its unmanifest state of being. It didn't intelligently design how things would play out after the beginning of time. IMO, contemplation is an evolved characteristic, albeit somehow miraculously it had no choice but to evolve into expression.
It does seem arrogant and ignorant to give the contemplation (or the manifestation through which the contemplation is expressed, i.e. the brain) the credits of being the source of the contemplation. All the contemplation in the universe arises from a common source, yet this happens in a disconnected fashion so that there is something like cognitive dissonance on a universal level. This is what I meant when I said in the other thread that God has a divided personality.
Edited by Tony (05/22/10 12:28 PM)
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Tony]
#12619376 - 05/24/10 09:44 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
The gasses from our own galaxy get in the way of us viewing the majority of the universe.
Our own exsistence is an obstacle.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12619388 - 05/24/10 09:47 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
I've been workin on my gas problem.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12619410 - 05/24/10 09:50 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
Embrace it. Sit and Be. Smell the Fruits of your labor. You're a fart smeller, I know you can figure it out.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12619524 - 05/24/10 10:19 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
My dog seems to enjoy it.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12619538 - 05/24/10 10:22 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
He must love you unconditionally.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12619575 - 05/24/10 10:30 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
As a dog trainer I can say that dogs do not love unconditionally no matter what some may say.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12619607 - 05/24/10 10:37 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
I would presume it would be near impossible to train an animal that has unconditional love.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12619688 - 05/24/10 10:53 AM (2 years, 6 days ago) |
|
|
True. No animal goes willingly to an abusive leader. They may obey out of fear but love and respect is earned through actions.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
halo
Tripper
Registered: 11/01/07
Posts: 763
Last seen: 2 hours, 26 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12629949 - 05/26/10 12:27 AM (2 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Icelander I think you actually believe most of what other people here try and convince you of but you just have a different way of thinking about it.
I completely agree that the universe is just being. It is total "isness" (depending on what the meaning of the word "is" is lol).
I guess the way I see things a lot is that the world, one's reality, is a reflection of how one perceives that reality.
If I think the universe is a wonderful place filled with love, it is.
If I think it's a desolate unforgiving place that cares for nothing, then it is.
And I think grappling with the paradox that the universe can be both loving and hating at the same time is something people struggle with.
Other words for love and hate in this context would be creating and destroying respectively.
Creation is not inherently good. And destruction is not inherently bad.
It all just depends on how you choose to look at it.
--------------------
All drugs should be legal
|
Fraggin
Multi-Faceted
Registered: 01/05/05
Posts: 8,707
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: halo]
#12631199 - 05/26/10 09:15 AM (2 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
halo said:
Icelander I think.... believe ..................of thinking....... .
I guess .......................
If I think ...............................
If I think ............................
And I think ......................................
You seemed preoccupied with thinking and guessing...
Quote:
Other words for love and hate in this context would be creating and destroying respectively.
I disagree. Destruction is not the polar opposite of creation and nor is hate the opposite of love.
Quote:
Creation is not inherently good. And destruction is not inherently bad.
It all just depends on how you choose to look at it.
Creation and destruction are emotionless.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 67,567
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: halo]
#12631291 - 05/26/10 09:41 AM (2 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
halo said:
Icelander I think you actually believe most of what other people here try and convince you of but you just have a different way of thinking about it.
I completely agree that the universe is just being. It is total "isness" (depending on what the meaning of the word "is" is lol).
I guess the way I see things a lot is that the world, one's reality, is a reflection of how one perceives that reality.
If I think the universe is a wonderful place filled with love, it is.
If I think it's a desolate unforgiving place that cares for nothing, then it is.
And I think grappling with the paradox that the universe can be both loving and hating at the same time is something people struggle with.
Other words for love and hate in this context would be creating and destroying respectively.
Creation is not inherently good. And destruction is not inherently bad.
It all just depends on how you choose to look at it.
Well I haven't completely decided how to look at it. Still gathering information.
--------------------
“What is the ideal for mental health, then? A lived, compelling illusion that does not lie about life, death, and reality; one honest enough to follow its own commandments: I mean, not to kill, not to take the lives of others to justify itself.”
― Ernest Becker
"Beneath the civilized veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno."
|
teknix
ÐøøÐ
Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 4,726
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Icelander]
#12631407 - 05/26/10 10:12 AM (2 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
I think it has more to do with acceptance than with love. Just IMO.
I feel pretty numb inside, most of the time.
Yet I am not blinded from the light.
Love leads to other undesireable emotions
Inevitably, atleast for me.
|
halo
Tripper
Registered: 11/01/07
Posts: 763
Last seen: 2 hours, 26 minutes
|
Re: Explain to me again. [Re: Fraggin]
#12631532 - 05/26/10 10:36 AM (2 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah dude it's really all I can do
--------------------
All drugs should be legal
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
