GENIUS FORUMS

There's no liberation, no "bliss", if you can't cast that one truth into the fire. If you don't then it becomes a dark tower of self-serving Ego.
For this purpose these discussions exist. Otherwise we're just looking at another cult, another self-help to hide someone's ignorance behind.

equals

There's no liberation, no "bliss", if you can't cast that one truth into the fire. If you don't then it becomes a dark tower of self-serving Ego.
For this purpose these discussions exist. Otherwise we're just looking at another cult, another self-help to hide someone's ignorance behind.

Kunga wrote:If you were Enlightened you'd know all the answers to everything.

More like, you know all that you must know.

“Love says: ‘I am everything’. Wisdom says: ‘I am nothing.’
Between the two my life flows.”
- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Kunga wrote:

movingalways wrote:

Kunga wrote:If you were Enlightened you'd know all the answers to everything.

How do you know this?

Well..what's the point of Enlightenment ?
I would hope that you would know the Ultimate Truth, and if you KNOW THE ULTIMATE TRUTH you would know all there is to know.

The ultimate or final truth the Buddha reasoned is that form is empty and impermanent and that when one clings to form as if it has inherent (permanent/unchanging) existence, they suffer. There is no other truth one needs to know but this one truth. All actions a wise man or woman takes is hinged on this single truth of clinging = ignorance = suffering. If you can think of anything else a man or woman needs to know about the true nature of reality, I'm all ears.

Dennis Mahar wrote:

Why do you insert the mood (condition) of bliss?

You're saying no because bliss is against the rules.
based on circumstantial evidence.

It is you who admonishes projection, and yet, here you are once again projecting your reasoning on me. Rules? Circumstantial evidence? I have no idea what you are talking about. The only one laying down THE rule of ultimate reality here is you with your faulty assertion that bliss = emptiness = detachment. Why is your assertion faulty? Because to be detached is to be formless. Bliss is a form, therefore, to be in bliss is to be attached. When I point this error of spiritual reasoning out to you, you either ignore me, fire back your false premise that emptiness = bliss or you project something of your own reasoned imagination onto my word.

Do we agree that the whole point of becoming enlightened is to cease clinging to form, which one does while remaining clinging to form? As I see it, the most identified forms of clinging that liberate one gradually from clinging are bliss/love/compassion (female flowing/water) and spiritual or philosophical reasoning (male stopping/fire). Therefore, bliss and reasoning, if understood to be a forms of clinging that end clinging, are wise forms of clinging. What needs to be said here is that because reasoning that all things are empty (even subtle feeling forms such as bliss) is the way in which one stops clinging, reasoning trumps bliss in the card game of detachment wisdom. You cling, I cling, we all cling, if it be 'our' will, let us (wisely) uncling together.

absence of something (inherent existence)
doesn't mean absolute nothingness.
bliss.

TheImmanent wrote:

Cahoot wrote:

TheImmanent wrote:

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Not at all, it's a matter of meaningless reproduction. But there's one original, a complex of origins perhaps, and with every copy and reading the understanding changes with its place in space, time and mind.

Space, time and mind is a matter of identity. To be reckoned by.

i.e., just as you cannot step into the same stream twice, the same identity cannot read the same thing twice.

Any identity influenced by space, time and mind is subject to change.

Make-belief.

After due consideration of that thoughtful, deeply considered and reasoned response … ain’t it a shame. ;)

Cahoot wrote:

TheImmanent wrote:

Cahoot wrote:

TheImmanent wrote:
Space, time and mind is a matter of identity. To be reckoned by.

i.e., just as you cannot step into the same stream twice, the same identity cannot read the same thing twice.

Any identity influenced by space, time and mind is subject to change.

Make-belief.

After due consideration of that thoughtful, deeply considered and reasoned response … ain’t it a shame. ;)

An identity is make-belief, i.e., not actually what it is made out to be. You put it as being subject to change. Identity creation is the way of the ego to incorrectly affirm itself. What it sees that it is, what it sees that others are, what it sees that it wishes to be. Roles and dramaturgy. Their true definitions.

Yes. And strangely enough, the chimera of identity, or self-image, is sacrosanct to man, even more powerful than the will to live. It is self-image that overcomes self-preservation, and permits suicide.

movingalways wrote:The ultimate or final truth the Buddha reasoned is that form is empty and impermanent and that when one clings to form as if it has inherent (permanent/unchanging) existence, they suffer. There is no other truth one needs to know but this one truth. All actions a wise man or woman takes is hinged on this single truth of clinging = ignorance = suffering. If you can think of anything else a man or woman needs to know about the true nature of reality, I'm all ears.

Ok, you cling to your aversion of bliss.
Think about it though, if there was no more suffering in the world or anywhere, wouldn't it be blissful ?
No more suffering. Zilch.
No more suffering...hard to imagine ?


Wouldn't it be blissful ???

And it would be permanent....not worldly impermanent bliss..but permanent bliss, NIRVANA !!!!


From the Dharmmapada :

202. There is no fire like passion; there is no blemish like hatred; there is no suffering like physical existence (the five aggregates or skandhas) and there is no bliss equal to the calm (of nirvana).

203. Greed is the worst of afflictions; mental and emotional tendencies are the greatest of sorrows. Having perceived this fact truly, one realizes nirvana, the highest bliss.

204. Health is the greatest of gifts, contentment the greatest of riches; trust is the finest of relationships and nirvana the highest bliss.

205. Having tasted the sweetness of solitude and of inner tranquillity, he becomes free of woe and sin, enjoying the sweetness of the bliss of the Dhamma.

http://www.buddhivihara.org/dhammapada3.htm

Cahoot wrote:Yes. And strangely enough, the chimera of identity, or self-image, is sacrosanct to man, even more powerful than the will to live. It is self-image that overcomes self-preservation, and permits suicide.

Self-image and self-preservation is the same. Suicide is to act on self-image, i.e., it is to preserve it to the last, rather than letting it go.

Self-image and self-preservation is the same. Suicide is to act on self-image, i.e., it is to preserve it to the last, rather than letting it go.

Applying the double D brand to indefinite, ambiguous pronouns:
Self-image may, or may not, be consistent with the preservation of one’s own life. Suicide is to act on a self-image that is consistent with ending one’s own life, thus suicide is to preserve that self-image to the last, rather than letting that self-image go. To move from the realm of thought into the world of action and perform irrevocable, destructive acts such as suicide, based on an arbitrary self-image that has been installed into consciousness, is to be enslaved by ego. Morality kicks in when suicide is self-sacrifice for a cause, or to preserve other lives. Sometimes history judges the self-sacrifice as stupid, e.g., Gallipoli.

Cahoot wrote:

Self-image and self-preservation is the same. Suicide is to act on self-image, i.e., it is to preserve it to the last, rather than letting it go.

Applying the double D brand to indefinite, ambiguous pronouns:
Self-image may, or may not, be consistent with the preservation of one’s own life. Suicide is to act on a self-image that is consistent with ending one’s own life, thus suicide is to preserve that self-image to the last, rather than letting that self-image go. To move from the realm of thought into the world of action and perform irrevocable, destructive acts such as suicide, based on an arbitrary self-image that has been installed into consciousness, is to be enslaved by ego. Morality kicks in when suicide is self-sacrifice for a cause, or to preserve other lives. Sometimes history judges the self-sacrifice as stupid, e.g., Gallipoli.

One's own life is self-image.

Kunga wrote:

movingalways wrote:The ultimate or final truth the Buddha reasoned is that form is empty and impermanent and that when one clings to form as if it has inherent (permanent/unchanging) existence, they suffer. There is no other truth one needs to know but this one truth. All actions a wise man or woman takes is hinged on this single truth of clinging = ignorance = suffering. If you can think of anything else a man or woman needs to know about the true nature of reality, I'm all ears.

Ok, you cling to your aversion of bliss.
Think about it though, if there was no more suffering in the world or anywhere, wouldn't it be blissful ?
No more suffering. Zilch.
No more suffering...hard to imagine ?


Wouldn't it be blissful ???

And it would be permanent....not worldly impermanent bliss..but permanent bliss, NIRVANA !!!!


From the Dharmmapada :

202. There is no fire like passion; there is no blemish like hatred; there is no suffering like physical existence (the five aggregates or skandhas) and there is no bliss equal to the calm (of nirvana).

203. Greed is the worst of afflictions; mental and emotional tendencies are the greatest of sorrows. Having perceived this fact truly, one realizes nirvana, the highest bliss.

204. Health is the greatest of gifts, contentment the greatest of riches; trust is the finest of relationships and nirvana the highest bliss.

205. Having tasted the sweetness of solitude and of inner tranquillity, he becomes free of woe and sin, enjoying the sweetness of the bliss of the Dhamma.

http://www.buddhivihara.org/dhammapada3.htm

.
It is not to an aversion to bliss that I'm clinging, I am reasoning with Dennis and with you the error of equating bliss with emptiness, with ultimate reality. Read #205 again, the sweetness of bliss is because of the Dhamma, not because it is the experience of emptiness. What is the Dhamma? Reasoning the folly of attachment to inherent existence. Bliss and reasoning, the Dhamma. Once again, not emptiness.

TheImmanent wrote:

Cahoot wrote:

Self-image and self-preservation is the same. Suicide is to act on self-image, i.e., it is to preserve it to the last, rather than letting it go.

Applying the double D brand to indefinite, ambiguous pronouns:
Self-image may, or may not, be consistent with the preservation of one’s own life. Suicide is to act on a self-image that is consistent with ending one’s own life, thus suicide is to preserve that self-image to the last, rather than letting that self-image go. To move from the realm of thought into the world of action and perform irrevocable, destructive acts such as suicide, based on an arbitrary self-image that has been installed into consciousness, is to be enslaved by ego. Morality kicks in when suicide is self-sacrifice for a cause, or to preserve other lives. Sometimes history judges the self-sacrifice as stupid, e.g., Gallipoli.

One's own life is self-image.

Not exactly. Here’s why.
The act of suicide requires a self-concept.
A self-concept requires life.
Life does not require a self-concept.

Btw: unreasoned pronouncements don’t count for much.

movingalways wrote:It is not to an aversion to bliss that I'm clinging, I am reasoning with Dennis and with you the error of equating bliss with emptiness, with ultimate reality.

Ultimate Reality is Bliss & Emptiness.

Nirvana.

http://www.homeoint.org/morrell/buddhism/bliss.htm

http://www.nirvanasutra.net/selectedextracts1j.htm



"If bliss is to scratch an itch, what greater bliss, no itch at all? So too, the worldly, desirous, find some bliss, But greatest is the bliss with no desire" - Nagarjuna -

Cahoot wrote:

TheImmanent wrote:

Cahoot wrote:

Self-image and self-preservation is the same. Suicide is to act on self-image, i.e., it is to preserve it to the last, rather than letting it go.

Applying the double D brand to indefinite, ambiguous pronouns:
Self-image may, or may not, be consistent with the preservation of one’s own life. Suicide is to act on a self-image that is consistent with ending one’s own life, thus suicide is to preserve that self-image to the last, rather than letting that self-image go. To move from the realm of thought into the world of action and perform irrevocable, destructive acts such as suicide, based on an arbitrary self-image that has been installed into consciousness, is to be enslaved by ego. Morality kicks in when suicide is self-sacrifice for a cause, or to preserve other lives. Sometimes history judges the self-sacrifice as stupid, e.g., Gallipoli.

One's own life is self-image.

Not exactly. Here’s why.
The act of suicide requires a self-concept.
A self-concept requires life.
Life does not require a self-concept.

"One's own life".

Kunga wrote:Ultimate Reality is Bliss & Emptiness.Nirvana.

http://www.homeoint.org/morrell/buddhism/bliss.htm

Emptiness is not any specific experience, how could it be? A "sustained vision of the world"? Sounds like an ideology mixed with a cultist self-soothing mantra or self-hypnosis. It's a homeopathic version of Buddhism (note: Peter Morrel writes mostly about homeopathy so his thinking of Buddhism is not surprisingly of the same diluted quality: placebo philosophy).

The second link oozes on about "colorful and cool delights". Based on the idea that enlightenment has a specific "form" invisible to "worldly eyes". Like a halo perhaps? An actual life free of suffering (the coming and going of things, feelings, reactions) is actually suggested. And since then is quoted: "because liberation [moksha] is not created [akrta], it will not perish", this would mean a whole new category of "uncreated" and "unborn" forms is being introduced! The "liberated" category of uncaused bliss states? Mr. Page is a confused man, way too invested in this precious teaching and interpretations. He should burn some of his books and see how that feels in terms of liberation. It's that kind of suffering he actually avoids with all this work.

Anyway, Kunga, it's more important you develop and express your own thoughts on emptiness, causality or how you experience "bliss" in your life. There's nothing else. No source can do that for you. Stop depending on other men for every breath you take! Or otherwise just don't try so hard. Nothing to prove, if anything you're just avoiding the inner work by arguing by proxy.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:it's more important you develop and express your own thoughts on emptiness, causality or how you experience "bliss" in your life. There's nothing else. No source can do that for you. Stop depending on other men for every breath you take! Or otherwise just don't try so hard. Nothing to prove, if anything you're just avoiding the inner work by arguing by proxy.

I thought in a debate, one is supposed to back up claims with evidence. Those links I provided was an attempt to do that. While I see validity and truth in others, you see false and frivilous.

I have expressed my own thoughts here on emptiness and bliss.
My thoughts and thinking skills are rapidly diminishing.
Maybe I should drink, like all writers do...lol

I prefer the silence, or the thoughts of others, that my mind agrees with,
as I have recognised their thoughts, as registering as truth.

I experience bliss and emptiness daily, i always say to others (outside of cyber-space) "I am in Nirvana".
But I am referring to the time when i am alone, in my own space...

Kunga wrote:I thought in a debate, one is supposed to back up claims with evidence.

Yes, back it up with logic, reasoning or examples of your own experiences. It's possible to illustrate or underline it with a reference or quote but I think that really should be just, well, illustration. There's no claim to discuss if only illustrations are posted.

My thoughts and thinking skills are rapidly diminishing.

That's normal, there's a strong force at work trying to turn us all in mashed potatoes. This is called ignorance, sometimes ego. It's more powerful than you think and it uses our emotions to blur everything. This is because it can maintain itself better without any examination.

Maybe I should drink, like all writers do...lol

For some alcohol or other drugs can create focus and sharpness. Or just blurs out the dominating emotion which was blocking creativity. Most people just get worse, darker and sicker.

I prefer the silence, or the thoughts of others, that my mind agrees with, as I have recognized their thoughts, as registering as truth.

But you chose this forum to discuss, not to spread silence and thoughts of others. Probably you're wasting your valuable time here, perhaps procrastinating or escaping something?

I experience bliss and emptiness daily, i always say to others (outside of cyber-space) "I am in Nirvana". But I am referring to the time when i am alone, in my own space...

For you it feels like nirvana but it's just happiness that comes naturally to all people at ease. Not that different from the cow in the field, after milking and with enough grass to chew. "The hell, that's the other", wrote Sartre. But those others are often just the ignorant parts of ourselves we keep denying, a life, a world not accepted. It's hard at times, to face it, I know.

Philosophy...the love of wisdom.
I love the wisdom of others.
Sometimes I feel a twitch of falling in love with you...

_/\_

Kunga wrote:Philosophy...the love of wisdom. I love the wisdom of others. Sometimes I feel a twitch of falling in love with you...

You still have some way to go before you can start existing without the support of all those men or their produce, their love, wisdom or just attention. Women cannot exist at all without it. Men actually do, only barely though. When a man talks to a woman, he talks with her father, her lovers, her boss or her politicians. Or sometimes with her spite. Rarely her hatred.

Quote:
Kunga: My thoughts and thinking skills are rapidly diminishing.

Diebert: That's normal, there's a strong force at work trying to turn us all in mashed potatoes. This is called ignorance, sometimes ego. It's more powerful than you think and it uses our emotions to blur everything. This is because it can maintain itself better without any examination.

This is a normal part of awakening, the happiness that comes when one realizes that the world is not the solid thing one once believed it to be, a realization that causes the expanding bliss or joy to literally lift the weight of the world (sins, guilt, worries, preoccupations, etc.) off one's shoulder. What I found was that once this dissolution of attachments to one's past or history as a personality or self occurs, consciousness can no longer abide being in a thoughtless state (thought is a prerequisite for its survival) and the second stage of enlightenment kicks in, which is to be a fully awake, thinking, feeling spirit or soul. Before awakening, spirit feeds on thought (memories and projections), after awakening to bliss, feeding begins to diminish, once the feeding ends, however, the primary feeling state of bliss ends and the spirit becomes as a reflective pond, allowing thoughts to come to be reasoned by one's conscience when action is needed (future oriented using cause and effect) or to reflect on memories using love or compassion when action is not needed. This is my experience, just sharing.

Dennis Mahar wrote:absence of something (inherent existence)
doesn't mean absolute nothingness.
bliss.

Where's Dennis go?

More importantly: where are you these days? Dennis was r̶e̶t̶i̶r̶e̶d̶ banned. If you want to know more you can PM me but it's not really a discussion piece, I think.

Cahoot wrote:
“Love says: ‘I am everything’. Wisdom says: ‘I am nothing.’
Between the two my life flows.”
- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

"I am Everything
or I am Nothing."
-Ashtavakra Gita

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:More importantly: where are you these days? Dennis was r̶e̶t̶i̶r̶e̶d̶ banned. If you want to know more you can PM me but it's not really a discussion piece, I think.

Dennis was banned? Why? That's unexpected, I assumed he'd be posting here until the apocalypse. I know I was supposed to PM this part, so you can reply with a PM if you like.