The fundamental question

[TheImmanent]

There is the concept of someone who did.

A condition OK?

A condition is a concept.

[Dennis Mahar]

A condition is a concept.

And that?
There has to be a condition in which 'a condition is a concept' operates.

[Pam Seeback]

TheImmanent: You are conscious, the interpreter of form. What is your form, interpreter?

Because I (that which looks and interprets) am always and ever "because of", I cannot know the form(s) of me. I know they are there behind the scenes "doing their thing", I also know this causing of looking shall ever be hidden from my (looking's) sight.

[TheImmanent]

A condition is a concept.

And that?
There has to be a condition in which 'a condition is a concept' operates.

A particular experience, such as the experience of being a person, is constituted by a specific assortment of concepts. The concept of the particular experience is the condition in which the experience, i.e., the specific assortment of concepts, operates. Concepts interact with concepts, since they define each other mutually.

[TheImmanent]

TheImmanent: You are conscious, the interpreter of form. What is your form, interpreter?

Because I (that which looks and interprets) am always and ever "because of", I cannot know the form(s) of me. I know they are there behind the scenes "doing their thing", I also know this causing of looking shall ever be hidden from my (looking's) sight.

Having a form is being a form. Something and its form are not two. If you were a form, there would be nothing else to you but the form.

[Dennis Mahar]

A particular experience, such as the experience of being a person, is constituted by a specific assortment of concepts. The concept of the particular experience is the condition in which the experience, i.e., the specific assortment of concepts, operates. Concepts interact with concepts, since they define each other mutually.

I understand that.

out of that what are you saying?
there's no-one here, only conceptualising.
the caused Sensorium (existential critter) generates concepts and acts them out.

I never asked a question or provided an answer. You never felt a pang of frustration.

that suggests it all is, ultimately, empty and meaningless that it's empty and meaningless.
complete and utter detachment despite worldly clamouring.

detachment is conceptual living in order to get a payoff as is compassionate living.

[TheImmanent]

A particular experience, such as the experience of being a person, is constituted by a specific assortment of concepts. The concept of the particular experience is the condition in which the experience, i.e., the specific assortment of concepts, operates. Concepts interact with concepts, since they define each other mutually.

I understand that.

out of that what are you saying?
there's no-one here, only conceptualising.
the caused Sensorium (existential critter) generates concepts and acts them out.

Pointing out that there is no one here is to point out that the self is not limited, i.e., not assigned. But without an actual self there could be no concept of it.

I never asked a question or provided an answer. You never felt a pang of frustration.

that suggests it all is, ultimately, empty and meaningless that it's empty and meaningless.
complete and utter detachment despite worldly clamouring.

detachment is conceptual living in order to get a payoff as is compassionate living.

No one is detached since no one is limited. No one needs a payoff since no one is limited.

[Dennis Mahar]

The prime duality you're running here is:

freedom and bondage

a matter of perception.

is there a justification for the perception of bondage in that you are recognising what it entails?

this existential experience:
Embodied
encultured
enactive
affective
extended

can't it be viewed as freedom. as celebration.
world as freedom.

putting the house in order
Dwelling in wonderful circumstances.

[TheImmanent]

The prime duality you're running here is:

freedom and bondage

a matter of perception.

is there a justification for the perception of bondage in that you are recognising what it entails?

The infinity of the actual self.

this existential experience:
Embodied
encultured
enactive
affective
extended

can't it be viewed as freedom. as celebration.
world as freedom.

putting the house in order
Dwelling in wonderful circumstances.

When the self is unassigned all that is seen (experienced) is a demonstration (celebration) of the infinite, actual self. The actual self is in infinite self-expression (freedom). Its worth is beyond the greediest dreams of the grasping mind — which has nothing at all for a premise to its desires but a convoluted idea of the actual self. Anything at all that is celebrated is thus a celebration of the actual self, knowingly or unknowingly.

[Dennis Mahar]

The actual self is in infinite self-expression (freedom).

the greediest dreams of the grasping mind

the same guy?
A=A
what you are referring to is human nature.

[TheImmanent]

The actual self is in infinite self-expression (freedom).

the greediest dreams of the grasping mind

the same guy?
A=A
what you are referring to is human nature.

The grasping mind and its dreams are particular concepts. Not someone.

[Dennis Mahar]

Conceive yourself, if possible, suddenly stripped of all the emotion with which your world now inspires you, and try to imagine it as it exists, purely by itself, without your favorable or unfavorable, hopeful or apprehensive comment.

It will be almost impossible for you to realize such a condition of negativity and deadness.

No one portion of the universe would then have any importance beyond another; and the whole collection of its things and series of its events would be without
significance, character, expression, or perspective.

meaningmaker!

[Dennis Mahar]

When any element is seen as being in some way independent, logical paradoxes result.

one cannot conceive of things in isolation, because the identity which makes each a separate and
distinguishable “thing” depends wholly on its relation to other things.

If one asserts that phenomena consist of separate yet interacting elements, then one is left with the problem of how these elements combine, or associate,
to produce the phenomena.
There is no way for atomistic and fully independent things to associate, for a truly independent thing is non-contingent, incapable of being influenced, and thus not subject to association.

If things are distinguishable, then their identity can be defined in isolation.
Yet the concept of difference requires dependence.
Different things are dependent upon different things

To say that things are different is to say that they are separate.
without a second different thing, one different thing can not exist as a different thing.

Since any attempt to differentiate elements or phenomena reduces to absurdity, there can be no such thing as association of these elements.
Neither the associating nor the associated nor even the agent of association is evident.

The etymology of both “distinguish” and “distinction” is the Latin distinguere,“to separate.”
As reality is ultimately whole, by whatever definition, separations have only phenomenal validity.
The consequence of this is that there can be no way to declare a phenomenon to be composed of separate but combined elements.
One of the aspects of the Buddha’s teachings about which the Buddha was most adamant is also one that proved to be the most unpalatable
both to subsequent Buddhists and to non-Buddhists alike. This is the assertion that there is no real soul to be found in the universe. The Buddha
was very explicit regarding the doctrine of soullessness.

“Whether Buddhas arise, O priests, or whether Buddhas do not
arise, it remains a fact and the fixed and necessary constitution of
being, that all its elements are lacking in an ego (atman).

This fact a Buddha discovers and masters… and announces,
teaches, publishes, proclaims, discloses, minutely explains and makes
clear, that all the elements of being are lacking in an ego.”

[Pam Seeback]

Dennis: Conceive yourself, if possible, suddenly stripped of all the emotion with which your world now inspires you, and try to imagine it as it exists, purely by itself, without your favorable or unfavorable, hopeful or apprehensive comment.

It will be almost impossible for you to realize such a condition of negativity and deadness.

The world cannot exist purely by itself which is why you are, by necessity of having to distinguish, forced to use the word "imagine" in your above scenario of unconsciousness.

Dennis, do you believe that there is an actual "ultimate" world stripped of distinction and/or emotion that is actually/literally separate from the world of distinction and/or emotion?

[TheImmanent]

When any element is seen as being in some way independent, logical paradoxes result.

No separation has been proposed.

The view of things as separate is not separate. The fact that there are concepts of things, i.e., conceptual separation, does not mean that there is actual separation.

[Pam Seeback]

When any element is seen as being in some way independent, logical paradoxes result.

No separation has been proposed.

The view of things as separate is not separate. The fact that there are concepts of things, i.e., conceptual separation, does not mean that there is actual separation.

Contrast.

[Dennis Mahar]

Dependent or independent?

If its dependent its empty of its own power.

setting a whole up from parts is the project ok?

a mode of thinking innate to human being ok?

lego blocks

[Pam Seeback]

Dependent or independent?

If its dependent its empty of its own power.

Contrast exists and must be interpreted, no choice in the matter.

[Dennis Mahar]

Therefore its dependent.
thankyou.
that means we can empty it of significance.

what you mean is the act of comparing
apples and oranges
So what?
Not on the agenda here.

will you quit setting up shit like 'contrasts' as inherently existing nouns and recognise verbing.
Act.
performance of

[TheImmanent]

Dependent or independent?

If its dependent its empty of its own power.

setting a whole up from parts is the project ok?

a mode of thinking innate to human being ok?

lego blocks

Since there is no actual separation, there is no dependence.

Conceptual separation and conceptual dependence is the same thing. To distinguish is to conceive something dependent conceptually.

If you point to something and say "that element is actually dependent", you have separated being in your mind, which is to say that you have misconceived. But even so, your misconception is not separate.

That said, dependent arising is a fruitful demonstration to those who conceive things as separate.

[Dennis Mahar]

a thing is declared to exist dependent on:

causes/conditions
parts
thought

[TheImmanent]

a thing is declared to exist dependent on:

causes/conditions
parts
thought

Conceptually, like the declaration. A conceptual nature is dependent only conceptually, since it is only conceptual.

[Dennis Mahar]

What exists is functionally dependent.
If it hasn't got a name it doesn't exist.

This conceptualising mind generates environment, bodies, activities, sorrows, pleasures.

We're both trying to get round back of this conceptualising mind and disclose how it marches for the sake of.

[Pam Seeback]

Therefore its dependent.
thankyou.
that means we can empty it of significance.

what you mean is the act of comparing
apples and oranges
So what?
Not on the agenda here.

will you quit setting up shit like 'contrasts' as inherently existing nouns and recognise verbing.
Act.
performance of

I never used the plural term "contrasts" always the singular term "contrast." Contrast, singular, is not an existing noun, that's just nonsense, it is the word that speaks of the inherent nature of consciousness. Contrast is why and how consciousness moves, it is why and how your "verbing" happens. No contrast, no movement. Without contrast reality would be a seamless void of whiteness, silence, death, unconsciousness.

You are reading my words on this page and reacting to them because of one thing: contrast. It is the acknowledgment of contrast as a universal experience that opens one up to compassion for all sentient beings. Contrast is the prime condition of consciousness.

[Pam Seeback]

What exists is functionally dependent.
If it hasn't got a name it doesn't exist.

This conceptualising mind generates environment, bodies, activities, sorrows, pleasures.

We're both trying to get round back of this conceptualising mind and disclose how it marches for the sake of.

I am not trying to get round the how the mind marches, I know why and how it marches. Contrast.