Earth is Paradise

[Dennis Mahar]

Do your buddies say when you knock on their door:

Hi Quote, where's John?

by the way,
don't pull that holier than thou projecting stuff, you do plenty of it.

doubt and certainty
depend.

the bad news for you is that certainty is empty of self-nature.
the good news for you is it's dependent origination.

to assign any of it 'absolute' existence is to fall into error.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

hahah :D and I'm not doing anything you are the one pulling holier than thou by projecting flaws onto other people or looking for them, even making backwards insults about things you have made up, your comments are always telling and teaching and inquiring but you aren't open to inquiry, that makes you holy. See I don't like this whole competition attitude people here love, there is no need to doubt others or purposefully find reason to disagree, start acting like we are the same, I wouldn't hold anything back from me.

[Dennis Mahar]

OK,
so what have we got.

1 life is illusion.
2 kingdom of heaven.

I'll ring the stonemason in the morning and have it etched on my tombstone.

The Doc's death warrant will state:
Quotacide.

what a way to go!

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Yes kingdom of heaven, look around at the earth and the stars, it is just a name for paradise, and it is of the mind hence "illusion".

Your making up this issue which isn't an issue, contending for no reason, I quote so people can see, the words of sages help people see, it's a fact, plus, you are just talking about nothing.

It's because we have nothing to say to our self.

[Dennis Mahar]

It's because we have nothing to say to our self.

apparently you have.
you're complaining.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Complaining about people and contending constantly is yours and brads job, it should be "at ease" conversation, what happened to, "I love you because I love you" oh loving one? Avoiding inquiry and doing your "vampire" thing is not "at ease".


I love you, although it feels weird saying it because it isn't really love, it is more like I understand I am a projection communing with a projection, no ego's present, of the same source and essence, I'm certain I am talking to myself, actually it's more of a silent recognition void of emotion. Scratch the I love you.

I'm in projection land, it is a "different world" hence why it is "entering".

Identifying with emotion is a trick of the mortal view, an immortal is emotionless, (yet beauty/mystery is happiness) "ineffable silence", hence, lack of anything to say, so you fill in the empty space by talking about nothing, don't worry it's not like anyone can ever say much more than nothing.

There are very few that don't know, is rare, you know this thing.

[Tomas]

Your projecting on to me though, what makes you think I'm not "living the quotes"?

You're falling back into your.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Identifying with emotion is a trick of the mortal view, an immortal is emotionless, (yet beauty/mystery is happiness) "ineffable silence", hence, lack of anything to say, so you fill in the empty space by talking about nothing, don't worry it's not like anyone can ever say much more than nothing.

For the sake of discussion then, when a situation hits you out of the blue, for example you find out a psychopath is living next doors and is planning to wipe you and your girl out. Do you instantly identify with emotion, fear of mortality and pain and do you get into action to protect perhaps not yourself but anyone held dear? This is not about talking. Talking does not address it. And doing nothing is just another option with consequences. Would you act emotionless? We find ourselves in actions so where would you be different if you'd face such burning trouble? (we all live with pathology next doors in a some ways...)

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Yes I would act emotionless, although I don't mean that in the complete sense.

I would do whatever I thought was the right thing, and that option would present itself to me as sure as the problem did. (even if it is being presented in the form of a thought)

[SeekerOfWisdom]

The faith that the right action will arise on it's own is the essence of "do nothing". It doesn't mean don't act, it means don't resist or plan or have desires, or "don't interfere". Yield.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Yes, but is in this instance the reason to act just representing the fear something unpleasant might happen? Aren't you yielding to self preservation? Flight fight reactions? All organisms do that. Yield like an amoeba or walk like an Egyptian? The devil indeed is in the details. I'm not really expecting any detailed answer. The question finds its own way.

[Dennis Mahar]

You're talking about the base nature appearing Diebert in one's own island consciousness irrespective of other.

doesn't your model address that?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Nothing unpleasant ever happens without clinging, the only thing might be physical pain. The action is a result of being prompted, not of fear of consequence.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

The action is a result of being prompted, not of fear of consequence.

But prompted for what? You learn about a psychopath out there with a plan. Do you investigate? Do you hesitate? Without plan you're a sitting duck, possibly. Fear is a nervous state, preparedness as part of human nature. Hormones are released when a situation is recognized, the body is put into a state of preparedness. And why not? Your empty stomach puts you in state "hungry" to make you move as well.

Do you think it's unpleasant to be fearful? Many people get a kick out of it to some degree. A whole industry around it. Perhaps we cannot call fear an emotion proper? There's a difference between being fearful and identifying with it, the latter being a magnifier as well. Paralyzing can occur but we shouldn't kid ourselves with fantasy states, that's all.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

You're talking about the base nature appearing Diebert in one's own island consciousness irrespective of other. Doesn't your model address that?

There are indeed all kinds of ways appearing. It's interesting to see what people think would change in that regard. Or what would have changed.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

"prompted for what?"

I do whatever I do, trying to control is futile it only leads to suffering. You are always prompted and it is always clear, either way, you did what you were going to do.

The universe manifests everything, do you pick out the parts you find bad and whine over them, are they bad?

They are only experiences of eternal being, like a fleeting dream. Creating suffering, is for the delusional who hold on and cling.

Creating suffering through trying to avoid suffering, genius.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

If you maintain purity of thought despite outside circumstances and the allure of what is only illusion, you have not only lit up your own side but you are also acting as a light for others by showing them the only way, "Don't worry, be here"

[Diebert van Rhijn]

But when confronted with certain illusions the "fear" of your body still causes your pants to get wet. Or your muscles to prepare to fight or flight. Your anxious mind plotting and pushing for some action. Or doesn't it? Everyone is doing whatever they do. They don't need to "light up their side" or "purity of thought" to do whatever they do. So what do you bring to the table? What is the light if you're not doing anything different quality wise?

[Pye]

Seeker,

There are very many things upon which we disagree: you do not believe in a self; I think that's all any one of us has (to be true to that private loop of sensations we cannot exceed); you believe consciousness rises prior and independent of the phenomenal world; I think consciousness rises with and of it - is phenomena itself; you do not believe in a phenomenal/physical/external world: I do - this self-same consciousness tells me so; you believe in consciousness-itself beyond its individual appearances; I believe in manifestation (existence) alone. We agree on one thing: we cannot exceed ourselves in knowing/experiencing world - yet even this can be overcome in a view that does not annihilate world; that thinks us rather in constant and dynamic exchange with it at all times - making it in ourselves as it makes us, too.

Brad,

I'll see you that sunshine thing and raise you my own naivete, apt, because even with you explaining it, I don't quite get this experiment with the forum; don't occupy easily yours or anyone else's me-to-forum projects, as though having a joke on, or seriously convincing oneself that whatever posture, plan or ruse is being perpetrated will net some useful or productive results. It seems to me that people who tend to do that, can't sustain it, or else they start suffering these fitful relationships to the "forum" itself, coming and going dramatically, having to make explicatorily winded excuses, or hit the reset button, or reincarnate, friend and de-friend, and any and all the other personal suffering exhibited here over seeing individual people as "forum."

Once long ago, three people did write here whose absolute convictions were mutually reinforced against all comers and presented a proper windmill at which to tilt. But even there, it boiled down to three individuals thinking enlightenment, differences were discernible. Diebert's right, this forum is always falling apart, it ought to be seen that way so that the individuals who write here can be heard that way, too; so it can be seen for the living pieces that make it what it is. Otherwise, one "them"s and "they"s in perpetual ignorance/suffering.

Dennis,

What takes my breath away is watching thinking break out. That's where that happens. Philosophers, in my experience, who have provided the best most gusting openings for this are Nietzsche . . . Tao . . . Kierkegaard . . . Beauvoir . . . Heidegger . . . Dostoevsky . . . even Plato . . . even when they fight against Descartes . . . and many many more essay-thinkers, as long as they can make thinking happen, then my breath gets taken away . . . .

[Dennis Mahar]

Diebert,

There are indeed all kinds of ways appearing. It's interesting to see what people think would change in that regard. Or what would have changed.

The base nature is always/already pummelling 'the island' with burning issues like hungry, angry, lonely, tired,
A series of weather changes streaming thru' endlessly.

Luckily,
Philosophy, concerning itself with this 'subjective experience',
provides an access,
where 'diminished aliveness' as a response is an unnecessary option.

grimly waiting for the storm to pass,
and
hiding out
and
blaming

don't 'get' it.

[Dan Rowden]

If you maintain purity of thought despite outside circumstances and the allure of what is only illusion, you have not only lit up your own side but you are also acting as a light for others by showing them the only way, "Don't worry, be here"

The problem with this is things are not illusory. To go through life with this philosophy is to fall into a pseudo-Buddhist-New Age delusion. As a metaphysic the idea of the illusory nature of all "things/reality/whatever" is logically unsustainable and philosophically abortive. If you consider the "meta-logic" of this idea you'll see that it ends in contradiction and cannot therefore be ultimately true.

Things are ultimately neither real nor illusory and to think in either fashion simply traps one in a false duality.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Objects, and the world, are thought to exist independent of the mind, that is the illusion. They exist as much as anything ever existed, but it is rather like a dream or vision, a manifestation of the mind, it is only attachment and delusions of thought that change the clarity of this.

Diebert, no they don't need purity of thought to do anything. If they don't have it they create extra suffering for themselves and others.

You can't see the difference between suffering daily of your own accord and suffering very rarely only when there is physical pain? (As I know you guys like to be thorough)

I can see the difference.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert, no they don't need purity of thought to do anything. If they don't have it they create extra suffering for themselves and others. You can't see the difference between suffering daily of your own accord and suffering very rarely only when there is physical pain?

Suffering goes beyond a collection of unpleasantnesses and anxieties. And even with those you would have a hard time conceiving of them, with all the degrees and dualistic opposites involved. As usual you're only applying your insights to a very limited outlook on things, perhaps creating a more comfortable and relaxed way of living? Which is fine but illusionary as such little setup just won't usually last that long.

It's time to wake up and realize this is not just about removing or creating some "extra suffering". You need ultimately to address life, death and all that presses itself into your form. Without brushing it all aside as too unreal to handle.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

That is where you are wrong, stop thinking. The way is to not think of past or future but live serenely in the moment, that doesn't include any worries or issues, just living.

By keeping a pure mind you are effectively bringing happiness into your life.

You need to take it literally, the only way is to recognize your thoughts are actually altering what appear to be external circumstances.

"The more man meditates upon good thoughts the better will be his world and the world at large." or

"Seek first his kingdom of righteousness and all these things will be given to you" or

"All that we are is the result of what we have thought. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him."


These quotes are all literal, whether you think it impossible or not.

The only way to understand is to see your experiences are manifestations of your own mind, your thoughts are literally altering your circumstances for better or for worse, the decision is yours.

That does not mean you aren't going to die or don't have to go through life, just that you shouldn't fret, it is just part of an eternal experience, it is magically wondrously amazing, paradise.

No one ever thinks it a reality, but it is real, give everything up and everything is given to you.

[Dennis Mahar]

Pye,

What takes my breath away is watching thinking break out. That's where that happens. Philosophers, in my experience, who have provided the best most gusting openings for this are Nietzsche . . . Tao . . . Kierkegaard . . . Beauvoir . . . Heidegger . . . Dostoevsky . . . even Plato . . . even when they fight against Descartes . . . and many many more essay-thinkers, as long as they can make thinking happen, then my breath gets taken away . . . .

As a breathtaking possibility it's more reliable than rooting and all that jazz.
a lot cheaper too.

and yet,
taking on a Philosopher,
is of the nature 'Courtship'.
one needs to clear the decks and listen in the nature of 'ardent suitor'.