Wise Quotes Collection

[Dennis Mahar]

Consciousness is but one of the five aggregates constituting a person.
Until there is an awareness of subject/object duality, there can be nothing of which to be conscious.
Therefore,
consciousness neither can arise nor is needed until there is an awareness
of a subject interacting with a separate world.

[Cahoot]

It really can be as simple as that, being aware, I'm just not sure exactly of how it works, is it our actions or our thoughts, our feelings or our expectations? I'm not sure how, but I know these things are laying down the general path for future experiences in consciousness and can be figured out.

I have found that when one is locked into a particular state of consciousness, when one has become habituated to viewing the world in a certain way by means of routines, or habits, or finding out what works in one particular instance and so repeating that method for future instances just to keep going along with minimal disruption, then these filters acting upon perception do tend to influence the nature of experience. Or at least the way in which we interpret experiences is influenced.

And in the same vein, how one defines what is logical in life is often dependent upon what one knows of life. Because of this, new information that arrives may be disregarded, or one may not be able to perceive any logical connection between the events of now and what these events may lead to. Even in hindsight we may not see the connection. It's possible to look at what is and still be unable to identify the cause.

Yet when we are in the midst of events that are highly significant in the sense that they are precipitating major changes in what has been, what we have known of cause and effect can be altered to the extent that the world becomes a much more mysterious place.

Once the significant changes have occurred it can be very easy to slip into a mindset in which these changes become rules, or set in stone. In defense of this people often do need some way to continue getting along. After psychic trauma upon what has been, to function one does need a basis of experience for knowing what does work and what does not work in situations similar to what we had known before. The error occurs in assuming that what has worked before is the universal way of things. Sometimes what we assume has worked before in fact did not work at all.

Surely all this could be edited down to something more concise, but I've noticed that past efforts directed towards tightly woven precision are not necessarily conducive to dialogue, and besides, the capacity to have babble instantly transcribed into print is seductive.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

So are you saying it's transient and these ideas are just based on perception and are not lasting? This isn't based on what a worldly person may think is logical in the world, practically, experience/consciousness does have certain 'traits', it exists a certain way and has characteristics that are not transient. For example, transience. I've had experiences that suggest, through being aware of thoughts then the following experiences, then thoughts then the following experiences, that there are certain 'patterns' of consciousness, a way that things go about, certain things leading to certain things. Karma, etc, is what I wanted to hear insight on. The reality of it, not the philosophy of it.

"Be sure to piss downwind" is closer to what I'm talking about, and it is useful always. Another always useful thing based on ever lasting transience: don't cling to what is transient or there will be constant loss.

Now, what leads to what in terms of karma, thought, visualization, emotion, expectation? These are harder to keep aware of, they aren't as simple as what leads to what in terms of actions, which is usually more obvious and predictable. A few simple examples might clear things up; desirous attachment brings about suffering, a negative perception of things brings about suffering, holding focus of a thing in your mind can lead to a visual experience of the thing, etc. These are all examples of predictions based on experience, the idea of karma is essentially one of prediction. Knowing these things requires awareness, most aren't clear or easy to understand. At least now you know exactly what I am talking about, so we'll both know that I'm being ignored if you respond with a philosophical post.

[Dennis Mahar]

A lack of spiritual understanding leads to karma.
a belief in a real self doing real acts.

the wisest course possible seeker is to ignore you.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I'm not sure why you think your speaking about nothing is somehow more justified then my speaking about nothing. A belief in a real self doing real acts?

[Cahoot]

So are you saying it's transient and these ideas are just based on perception and are not lasting? This isn't based on what a worldly person may think is logical in the world, practically, experience/consciousness does have certain 'traits', it exists a certain way and has characteristics that are not transient. For example, transience. I've had experiences that suggest, through being aware of thoughts then the following experiences, then thoughts then the following experiences, that there are certain 'patterns' of consciousness, a way that things go about, certain things leading to certain things. Karma, etc, is what I wanted to hear insight on. The reality of it, not the philosophy of it.

"Be sure to piss downwind" is closer to what I'm talking about, and it is useful always. Another always useful thing based on ever lasting transience: don't cling to what is transient or there will be constant loss.

Now, what leads to what in terms of karma, thought, visualization, emotion, expectation? These are harder to keep aware of, they aren't as simple as what leads to what in terms of actions, which is usually more obvious and predictable. A few simple examples might clear things up; desirous attachment brings about suffering, a negative perception of things brings about suffering, holding focus of a thing in your mind can lead to a visual experience of the thing, etc. These are all examples of predictions based on experience, the idea of karma is essentially one of prediction. Knowing these things requires awareness, most aren't clear or easy to understand. At least now you know exactly what I am talking about, so we'll both know that I'm being ignored if you respond with a philosophical post.

Well I have to say those with the capacity and the authority have certainly made vast improvements in this Dragon speak software. I had an earlier version and quite frankly it was a pain in the ass. Even though my computer barely meets the hardware requirements, the transcription easily keeps up with my pace of dictation, and produces few errors. I did take care to set up the system properly. This involves training the software by reading the prepared text they provide into a microphone, so that one's voice is matched to what is already known. And the price is quite affordable. Fifty bucks. It's the cheapest thrill that I've had in awhile.

"A few simple examples might clear things up; desirous attachment brings about suffering, a negative perception of things brings about suffering, holding focus of a thing in your mind can lead to a visual experience of the thing, etc. These are all examples of predictions based on experience, the idea of karma is essentially one of prediction."

Based on the logic of a=a, to philosophically say that suffering is brought about by desirous attachment does not equate to the philosophical statement that all desirous attachment brings about suffering. For example, to say that all children are obnoxious is not the same as saying that all obnoxious people are children.

Whether or not all desirous attachment brings about suffering is a matter of enquiry, the conclusion of which leads to theory.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Did I say all?
I was talking about speculation based on experience, so you only pick the example and skip the rest. Thanks for your time. I would repeat what I said to Dennis to you 'I'm not sure why you think your speaking about nothing is somehow more justified then my speaking about nothing.'

[Cahoot]

Did I say all?
I was talking about speculation based on experience, so you only pick the example and skip the rest. Thanks for your time. I would repeat what I said to Dennis to you 'I'm not sure why you think your speaking about nothing is somehow more justified then my speaking about nothing.'

Ah, so you meant to say that only some desirous attachment brings about suffering.

Which desirous attachment brings about suffering, and which does not?

*

Just ordered additional RAM for Dragon on the theory that if minimum is good, maximum must be best.

*

- for a woman, the most alluring scent on a man is the scent of a woman.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

lalalala, can't hear you

[Dan Rowden]

Which desirous attachment brings about suffering, and which does not?

Desire is suffering.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Not to get what one desires is suffering, and to get what one desires is suffering, so that is true enough, but don't be telling these guys, they will only reply to a quarter of your comment, they can probably only see the "is" in it.

What do you think Dan, of the idea of karma, and of the idea that experience of particular expectations/thoughts/visualizations can lay down a path for future experiences? Maybe you will give a practical answer. Otherwise if you three aren't options I'm going to have to find someone younger and more naive to prey on with my talking about nothing incorrectly.

[Dan Rowden]

Not to get what one desires is suffering, and to get what one desires is suffering, so that is true enough, but don't be telling these guys, they will only reply to a quarter of your comment, they can probably only see the "is" in it.

I agree essentially with the first part, though to be more elaborate: desire is suffering because desire means lacking and lacking is suffering. But sublimation of desire only gives temporary relief because the MO of ego is desire. This is part of the body of samsara - the flow from wanting to having (loss/gain); it's a dynamic that cannot cease where ego is operational.

What do you think Dan, of the idea of karma, and of the idea that experience of particular expectations/thoughts/visualizations can lay down a path for future experiences?

Karma is the past causes of all that we are and do, now. Our future karma is all of the causes of what we'll be and do into the future. Those things you mention are significant contributors to this, especially samsaric karma, which every deluded person is caught up in.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I never said it existed ultimately, even if it existed only as a delusion or in one's perception, perception and delusions are causes which lead to certain future experiences also.

I'm asking your insight on how it works, what leads where, in terms of perception, thought, expectation, and even delusion.

[Cahoot]

Suffering has been propagated through love, but not through unconditional love. Self cherishing is not the root of unconditional love.

The nuances that distinguish love from unconditional love are grasping (attachment), and the absence of grasping.

Suffering has also been propagated through desirous attachment.

Seeker you may find the wisdom you seek by investigating karma in terms of purification. For example, suffering is a purification.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

And is that an accident?

Call me crazy, but I know, (if I knew how to do that emphasis thing on a word I would do it on 'know')
I know that thought is a factor helping to determine future sensations (experience) even without any action. Bringing about things only with thought. I could give the known example of visualization turning into a real experience, but I mean more than that.

Do I know even slightly how this shit works? No clue, I used to have a hard time believing in such connections, doubt is a deceptive thing, but through awareness many impossible things are seen to be true, this is undeniable, maybe it means nothing ultimately, but it exists at least as more than a delusion, it exists in experience, and it only makes even an inkling of sense because we know it is all of the mind.

The point is, it is almost impossible for me to correctly determine how these work, or even if they exist at all, as a single person.

[Dan Rowden]

When you type a message there's a menu above your edit box. Click on the "i" menu button. Those are the italics tags. Anything in between those tags will be in italics - blah blah blah.

[Cahoot]

Do I know even slightly how this shit works? No clue, I used to have a hard time believing in such connections, doubt is a deceptive thing, but through awareness many impossible things are seen to be true, this is undeniable, maybe it means nothing ultimately, but it exists at least as more than a delusion, it exists in experience, and it only makes even an inkling of sense because we know it is all of the mind.

Well, in practical terms the mind that translates thoughts into action is quite literal. It interprets your thoughts literally, no matter how stupid or impractical the thought. So if you say to yourself, I am a fool, on an abstract level you may in fact know that you are not a fool. Yet this simple literal mind, over which you have far less control than you think, will endeavor to translate the thought that you are a fool into experience.

The process is really that simple.

New Agers thus stress the significance of "positive affirmations." You need not believe, on that abstract level, that these affirmations are true. However, simply because you think them your simple literal mind will endeavor to turn these thoughts into experience.

Thus the pronoun "I", and the forms of the verb "to be", should be used with care. Not only do you become what you eat, Grasshopper, you become what you think you are. It is also why the impressionable minds of children should be approached with care.

If you think that by flapping your arms you can fly through the air like a bird, then you become a delusional being who thinks he can fly through the air like a bird. If you think that you can fly through the air like a man, and hold that thought, you are likely to find yourself flying through the air like a man at some point in time, for the literal mind will have taken the steps to shape conditions.

- “If we worked on the assumption that what is accepted as true really is true, then there would be little hope for advance.”
- Orville Wright

[SeekerOfWisdom]

That is all true and good, believed by most, but what about the same thing occurring without having taken "the steps to shape conditions" ?

To show what I mean;

Taking steps to shape conditions: Someone thinks they want to see the circus, they drive over to the circus.

Not taking steps but still true to most due to the obvious connection: Someone thinks they are sick and this literally effects their health.

Not taking steps, not true to most, no obvious connection: Someone thinks something, and without taking any action or steps, that thing appears in some way.

Would you say this is a delusion or real?
You would have to know that the world is of the mind to consider it as possible, and be unbiasedly aware to see it as real.

[Cahoot]

That is all true and good, believed by most, but what about the same thing occurring without having taken "the steps to shape conditions" ?

To show what I mean;

Taking steps to shape conditions: Someone thinks they want to see the circus, they drive over to the circus.

Not taking steps but still true to most due to the obvious connection: Someone thinks they are sick and this literally effects their health.

Not taking steps, not true to most, no obvious connection: Someone thinks something, and without taking any action or steps, that thing appears in some way.

Would you say this is a delusion or real?
You would have to know that the world is of the mind to consider it as possible, and be unbiasedly aware to see it as real.

That's the mystery of the world. Every action to which one is attached is a step that shapes events and creates karma, but in ways you may not comprehend. And to simply say with abstract mind that you are not attached does not make it so. What you think you know of cause and effect is not the whole show. In fact, the physical transformations of non-attachment are significant enough to place cause in the realm of the organic rather than as a mental process of thought. To be even more vague to the comprehension of linear mind, forces that influence life are brought into alignment in ways that are seemingly unrelated to a limited comprehension that is bound by concepts of time, and limitations of memory related to what one thought was going on in similar situations. Whether or not you know this is happening it still happens. Which is all just a rephrasing of what has been said up in the initial so-called philosophical post. Another way of looking at karma is that life is a circle with an infinite circumference. You pick a point on that circumference which represents an event in time and with limited linear comprehension of cause and effect look for adjacent points as causes, however the cause need not be adjacent. All causes are linked. Limited comprehension simply looks for an immediate cause, perhaps a link that happens to conform to the limitations of comprehension, and any other point on the circumference or under the surface of the circumference that does not conform to the limitation of comprehension is dismissed as unlinked, irrelevant, coincidence, etc. Thus the nostrums of God moves in mysterious ways, everything works out for the best, and so on. While embroiled in roiling events and egocentric attempts to control based on memories of what one thought was going on during some similar situation in the past, (but may not have been going on at all thus making the basis of attempted control a delusion), events may seem chaotic.

Thus, the powerful significance of intent, intention, or intension [sic]. Though one may lack the capacity to ascertain the totality of causality in the present, one does have the capacity to maintain intention via sincere and honest (to oneself) attention as the guiding force of how things come to be. The quality of the intention is not necessarily what society deems positive, or acceptable. A raging alcoholic filled with bitterness and negativity is maintaining a sincere and honest intention, which does shape events.

Actually, we did go to the circus recently. I remember muscular play on the naked backs of those female acrobats as they climbed fifty foot (according to the ringmaster) ropes hand over hand, slowly and elegantly, and then swinging with power and grace on the flying trapeze. Magnificent. And in some karmic way that most likely is dismissed as coincidence or irrelevant to mundane mind, there is a causal link to your example. My next to last visit to the circus was at least twenty-five years ago. However, get too far along into that sort of thing by trying to label it according to some form of linear reasoning and one can begin to sound like a nutter.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

This would only be to say that experience is influenced and dependent upon the processes, thoughts and actions of all and everything, and of course it is true that there is never a singular deciding factor that leads to an event, but I am not proposing that a choice is made and that alone leads to the visualized situation. Instead whichever thought or intention one has is not chosen but is also a result of the many factors, as is the outcome.

The unity of events, such as the undivided relationship between bee and nectar, or the babe sucking on teets, is really what I mean when I say that I am not proposing that a thought alone causes an event. These things aren't even separated. "All causes are linked."

That doesn't mean that practical (experience-based) patterns are not real.

For example, personal visualization leading to the experience, is real. The visualization wasn't a chosen action, the topic of visualization is also dependent, as is the 'desired' result. Yet practically, the connection is clear and useable, I could do it right now, whether or not "I made it happen" or "everything lead to it occurring", I still made it happen, as we can together better understand how things happen, or more accurately, how to make them happen. There is no reason this kind of discussion doesn't turn out as useful as a simple life saving "drink this cure" or "think this cure!".

The difference between ultimate reality and what we experience doesn't exist. The difference is in how we try to correctly describe ultimate reality, often imagining that it goes beyond what we experience.

You think her flying is magnificent, I think that the fact that she and we don't act is magnificent, I didn't think to write any of this, yet here it is, sadly that also leaves no way to distinguish whether it is babble or not.

[Cahoot]

I must say, the maximum RAM that this machine can handle does improve the performance of all operations when the Dragon is awake. We are synching together more efficiently. Dragon even operates my word processor as directed. I may name it Hal.

Those acrobats. The ideal of uncorrupted form, like newborn babies.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

This guy

[Cahoot]

It's not easy until it's effortless.

... or the babe sucking on teets ...

teet?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

homo

[Cahoot]

Uh oh. Ego going into defense mode.
Ego is the corrupter of body and mind, don't you know.
Purification mitigates corruption.
Thus again, investigate in terms of karma and purification of what has been corrupted.

But it all sounds good in theory.


"You come to see what you want to see. You come to see, but you never come to know."
- Kinky Friedman