Barriers

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

On the "meta-mind of the universe" Being had a conversation with:
Beingof1 wrote:
It was witnessed by others you arrogant young one. Others heard an audible voice that was coming from a wall that spoke of things only the persons could know.
Beingof1 wrote: Seeker:

You keep back smack talking and then - all at the same time - use my arguments and points as if you came up with them all by your little lonesome.

Are you OK?
My reply to Being: Were you on Acid at the time?

My conventional world conclusion: This post by Beingof1 is actually enough to make me quit posting on threads. What purpose or reason could there possibly be with people like this on the board?
Last edited by SeekerOfWisdom on Fri Oct 23, 2015 5:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by ardy »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:On the "meta-mind of the universe" Being had a conversation with:
Beingof1 wrote:
It was witnessed by others you arrogant young one. Others heard an audible voice that was coming from a wall that spoke of things only the persons could know.
Beingof1 wrote: Seeker:

You keep back smack talking and then - all at the same time - use my arguments and points as if you came up with them all by your little lonesome.

Are you OK?
My reply to Being: I'm not sure if this is funny or disgusting. Go have a conversation with the meta-mind which spoke to you through a wall and let me know what he thinks. Were you on Acid at the time?

My conventional-world conclusion: This post by Beingof1 is actually enough to make me quit posting on this forum forever. What hope, purpose or reason could there possibly be with people like this shitting all over any possible discussion of truth?
SOW: IS this post supposed to convince people to post on your thread? Where is your tolerance and understanding. I to would question such a thing but try to keep an open mind you might learn something.

It is very sad to be a young person who thinks they know everything and then hit 40 and realise you really know bugger all!

Life is so much bigger than you assume it to be. No! I do not have a scientific study that supports this contention and NO I do not wish to discuss with you some of the stranger things that have happened in my life.

How many times have you threatened to leave this site? Yet here you still are. You sound like an arrogant acolyte who has just joined a monastery and your not sure if this is the right thing to do. What about the girls, what about the food, what about buying new clothes, what about buying a flat, what about my future, what about, what about....And so it goes until you finally let go of all that crap, sit down and listen to what is going on around you...

It is not complicated but it takes more than you seem to have at the moment. In fact it is so simple you would not entertain it if it jumped up and bit you.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

ardy wrote: How many times have you threatened to leave this site? Yet here you still are
I've literally never done that before.

Everything else you wrote was so general and vague I can't comprehend how you get away with such ambiguous writing constantly.
ardy wrote:what about....And so it goes until you finally let go of all that crap, sit down and listen to what is going on around you...
See what I mean?
ardy wrote: Where is your tolerance and understanding. I to would question such a thing but try to keep an open mind you might learn something.
I also cannot comprehend how you at all are "understanding" of such a delusion as speaking to a wall, but that's just me. What on earth could you learn from that.

Please stop speaking to me, I won't reply to anything else you have to say, and this will be the last thread I engage in.
ardy wrote: NO I do not wish to discuss with you some of the stranger things that have happened in my life.
I really wasn't going to ask about whatever wall-based-conversations you've had.
ardy wrote:It is very sad to be a young person who thinks they know everything and then hit 40 and realise you really know bugger all!
You do realize you're speaking about yourself here right? *slaps forehead*
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by Russell Parr »

You know, I don't recall reading about the enlightened Buddha calling others stupid, mocking them, and threatening to leave when things didn't go his way.

Sounds like you need to spend more time under the Bodhi Tree to meditate on your knowledge until you become more benevolent.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Bobo »

I don't know, but you, him, and others seems to be on the same camp of everything is made by the senses or mind or consciousness, existence is relative kind of view.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Russell wrote:You know, I don't recall reading about the enlightened Buddha calling others stupid, mocking them, and threatening to leave when things didn't go his way.
Besides the fact that Buddhist texts reveal him as someone who; calls people stupid repeatedly, essentially mocks them for their ignorance, and leaves everyone he knows when he finds it not beneficial to wisdom, he also is a historical figure that lived 2400 years ago, and your comments are wholly irrelevant to him or enlightenment.

Your acceptance of craziness such as beingof1's is completely incomprehensible to me. Have fun chatting with him. It would be logical for him to be banned, I see no reason why he should be posting on the forum, better a forum with two posting members than with such nutters. Anyway, not going to be my problem, just wanted to see if he would be first.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:
Russell wrote:You know, I don't recall reading about the enlightened Buddha calling others stupid, mocking them, and threatening to leave when things didn't go his way.
Besides the fact that Buddhist texts reveal him as someone who; calls people stupid repeatedly, essentially mocks them for their ignorance, and leaves everyone he knows when he finds it not beneficial to wisdom, he also is a historical figure that lived 2400 years ago, and your comments are wholly irrelevant to him or enlightenment.

Your acceptance of craziness such as beingof1's is completely incomprehensible to me. Have fun chatting with him. It would be logical for him to be banned, I see no reason why he should be posting on the forum, better a forum with two posting members than with such nutters. Anyway, not going to be my problem, just wanted to see if he would be first.
Agreed.

But are you just now waking up how utterly incomprehensible, needlessly ambiguous, self-serving, wall-based and mind-numbing replies become when you start to dig a little deeper, prod a little harder? Or did you expect something else, something miraculous to appear here?

It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end? "In every paradise there's a snake in the apple of your eye". And it seems to be a feature of life to be challenged by nonsense, laughed at by mental underterrestials and see truths be twisted into grotesque emo benders or lifeless straight-jackets.

There was a time I wasn't sure where to place you in this spectrum either, John. Just to say...
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
Agreed.

But are you just now waking up how utterly incomprehensible, needlessly ambiguous, self-serving, wall-based and mind-numbing replies become when you start to dig a little deeper, prod a little harder? Or did you expect something else, something miraculous to appear here?

It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end? "In every paradise there's a snake in the apple of your eye". And it seems to be a feature of life to be challenged by nonsense, laughed at by mental underterrestials and see truths be twisted into grotesque emo benders or lifeless straight-jackets.

There was a time I wasn't sure where to place you in this spectrum either, John. Just to say...
I agree there would be no end, but there could be a set boundary. Such as perhaps banning the kind that proclaims the "special-experience", such as I spoke to the meta-mind through a wall, or the "I'm the one" such as the guys who think their mailbox numbers indicate they're Jesus Christ. The distinction is pretty obvious, and there has to be a boundary somewhere. I mean, the worst I ever was only involved an exaggerated focus on the "dream-like" illusory view and an egoistic clinging to it. It's more about the "extremism", as that sort of things ruins any possible credibility or uniqueness to the site. If that sort of extremism is allowed it may as well be a christian forum. I think in the end it would spruce the place up, give it a little more credibility, perhaps also allow members to lower their guard, lessen the predisposition which expects nonsense and thus remains in a state of readiness to ignore. It does not feel like there is much reason to post or apply much effort when you have to listen to conscious-dead zombies, as if there were no point to it, like speaking to a brick wall. Then having that wall proclaim its wisdom. A sort of inevitable intellectual weariness stays with you from the ordinary world of death, and here there is supposed to be only life. In any of the other members, ardy, bobo, russell, myself, moving, there is at least some life and willingness, though clearly drained from repeated exposure, as you also are noticeably drained. If a pint more blood were to be spilled the forum would not exist, and as far as I know, it's the organization, place, or group with the most-correct focus. If even this forum completely died, it would seem as if minions, orange is the new black, and increasingly childlike adults who have no more insight than a twitter post allows, had "won the battle", so to speak.

Conventionally speaking, I imagine it's the same feeling one gets in a post apocalyptic world. The complete absurdity of it. If the world had any fairness you'd be some kind of god, and millions would be worshiping you, is that not more logical than worshiping a preacher of some imaginary god? It would make more sense for thousands to crowd around to see you make a comment and go wild, rather than to do so when they watch a billionaire with the incredible skill of hitting a ball with a stick into a hole. Conventionally, it's simply unjust. If I were a more worldly person it would make me mad. Thank the lord for the wisdom of indifference, or we'd be burning money like Nietzsche. But conventionally, I'd still say, fuck 'em. There's a lot we could do without all the barriers.

In advance to Russel and ardy: I better not read another comment imposing meaning upon what I write. What I've written is temporary, without personality, conventional, and worldly. If you want to pretend to deny worldly emotion and interests, then you can log in to your bank accounts, and send me your money, since you have no need for it and there's no worldliness to be concerned with.

Whoever told people wisdom denies the self, egotism, emotion or personhood really screwed up by not making clear the distinction between ultimate wisdom and conventional life and appearance. Thus we have radical abandonment and a little more hypocrisy.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by Russell Parr »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:
Russell wrote:You know, I don't recall reading about the enlightened Buddha calling others stupid, mocking them, and threatening to leave when things didn't go his way.
Besides the fact that Buddhist texts reveal him as someone who; calls people stupid repeatedly, essentially mocks them for their ignorance, and leaves everyone he knows when he finds it not beneficial to wisdom, he also is a historical figure that lived 2400 years ago, and your comments are wholly irrelevant to him or enlightenment.
Touche.
Your acceptance of craziness such as beingof1's is completely incomprehensible to me. Have fun chatting with him. It would be logical for him to be banned, I see no reason why he should be posting on the forum, better a forum with two posting members than with such nutters. Anyway, not going to be my problem, just wanted to see if he would be first.
He doesn't need banning because he usually doesn't stick around long.
Whoever told people wisdom denies the self, egotism, emotion or personhood really screwed up by not making clear the distinction between ultimate wisdom and conventional life and appearance. Thus we have radical abandonment and a little more hypocrisy.
Not sure who this bit was aimed at, but wisdom isn't about denying these things or anything as much as it is about seeing through all things, in order to deal with them in an enlightened manner.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Russell wrote:He doesn't need banning because he usually doesn't stick around long.
I guess that's true, but for example, governments don't need to refuse to openly negotiate with a terrorist, but they won't, since if they did they are are essentially inviting more into the fray.
Russell wrote: Not sure who this bit was aimed at, but wisdom isn't about denying these things or anything as much as it is about seeing through all things, in order to deal with them in an enlightened manner.
Perhaps more to ardy's reply on this thread.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote: It's more about the "extremism", as that sort of things ruins any possible credibility or uniqueness to the site. If that sort of extremism is allowed it may as well be a christian forum. I think in the end it would spruce the place up, give it a little more credibility, perhaps also allow members to lower their guard, lessen the predisposition which expects nonsense and thus remains in a state of readiness to ignore. It does not feel like there is much reason to post or apply much effort when you have to listen to conscious-dead zombies, as if there were no point to it, like speaking to a brick wall. Then having that wall proclaim its wisdom.
You're making a valid point. Not sure exactly what would ever give any discussions forum "credibility" or "uniqueness". I'm open for ideas though, maybe not as much for here as I'm only a janitor basically, keeping things mostly as they were. Lately I've been "encouraging" more members to stay away in cases where hundreds of posts in a row didn't signal any credibility, originality or at least a dose of common sense. Writing on a forum then quickly becomes another way to survive. Also I started to block many spammers, trolls and various obvious attention seekers, who were often allowed to roam way too long here in the past. In the end I don't think that automatically improves "quality" though and I'd prefer some other mechanism for people to reach the threshold for dialog. There's never a short of supply of people who are convinced that they have something to say, being it "special knowledge" to impart or some infantile humor to share. Perhaps it's what Jesus meant when he said "the poor will always be with us". And literally as they tend to be attracted to certain glitter. Feed them any time, some pearly breads perhaps - but one can wonder, does it have to be now or here?
If a pint more blood were to be spilled the forum would not exist, and as far as I know, it's the organization, place, or group with the most-correct focus. If even this forum completely died, it would seem as if minions, orange is the new black, and increasingly childlike adults who have no more insight than a twitter post allows, had "won the battle", so to speak.
You're talking about "little people" who are making the world smaller and smaller. They will always win but only in their own virtual non-existing universe. You're no part of that. There's nothing "won" -- only self-fulfilling prophecies. Perhaps the things is here to make sure one doesn't get sucked into these bubble universes, online of offline, these virtual places where everything is made small and where meaning is being trivialized and spirit chased off. There's never a short supply of the trivial either!
Conventionally speaking, I imagine it's the same feeling one gets in a post apocalyptic world. The complete absurdity of it.
In my view it always has been about waking up realizing the world one imagined to have lived in before is actually, in a very real sense, post-apocalyptic. What we called reality is shown to be the result of a downright set of cataclysms, a chain of disasters! In this case there's a lot of truth in the various fictional depictions.
In advance to Russel and ardy: I better not read another comment imposing meaning upon what I write. What I've written is temporary, without personality, conventional, and worldly. If you want to pretend to deny worldly emotion and interests, then you can log in to your bank accounts, and send me your money, since you have no need for it and there's no worldliness to be concerned with.
There's an interesting link between money and emotion, indeed. Like all the links between the external and internal. But this all takes form on the mass scale of society, a scale where we normally lose oversight and give up contemplation as we cannot exist in our thinking on such a scale. Our existence is of so little relevance when attempting to enter this massive conceptual scale. It's impossible to deny ones environment but it's possible to lose attachment to it -- while at the same time losing all opposition against it. This is the only way to become free in that context.
Whoever told people wisdom denies the self, egotism, emotion or personhood really screwed up by not making clear the distinction between ultimate wisdom and conventional life and appearance. Thus we have radical abandonment and a little more hypocrisy.
Wisdom is also about reflecting on the self, egotism, emotion and person-hood. The problem you describe is the insight that all these things exist by the grace of not reflecting on its own nature. It could be said that this is the very source of their power. So wisdom is not trying to deny any of it -- or avoid any of it. What exactly is life beyond self and person-hood? The problem in answering that lies in the way people generaly only conceive of things in term of self and persoon-hood. And increasingly so.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote: You're making a valid point. Not sure exactly what would ever give any discussions forum "credibility" or "uniqueness". I'm open for ideas though, maybe not as much for here as I'm only a janitor basically, keeping things mostly as they were. Lately I've been "encouraging" more members to stay away in cases where hundreds of posts in a row didn't signal any credibility, originality or at least a dose of common sense. Writing on a forum then quickly becomes another way to survive. Also I started to block many spammers, trolls and various obvious attention seekers, who were often allowed to roam way too long here in the past. In the end I don't think that automatically improves "quality" though and I'd prefer some other mechanism for people to reach the threshold for dialog. There's never a short of supply of people who are convinced that they have something to say, being it "special knowledge" to impart or some infantile humor to share. Perhaps it's what Jesus meant when he said "the poor will always be with us". And literally as they tend to be attracted to certain glitter. Feed them any time, some pearly breads perhaps - but one can wonder, does it have to be now or here?

You're talking about "little people" who are making the world smaller and smaller. They will always win but only in their own virtual non-existing universe. You're no part of that. There's nothing "won" -- only self-fulfilling prophecies. Perhaps the things is here to make sure one doesn't get sucked into these bubble universes, online of offline, these virtual places where everything is made small and where meaning is being trivialized and spirit chased off. There's never a short supply of the trivial either!
I think, once one has recognized all this, it comes down to only three possible options: Engage in a world completely, engage in a world while partially disengaged from it, or attempt to disengage from the world as much as possible. There's no right or wrong here of course, but as far as I see it, worldly meaning and purpose hasn't lost any realness, only lessened in importance. I could have used a number of words other than importance, but my general meaning is that without the all consuming clinging, egotism, and narrow-mindedness which creates ones fantasy world and duties therein, there is also much less significance to ones achievements. I'd guess each of us here are engaged in the world while partially disengaged, so to speak. The middle of the three. A sort of interaction with the world which still retains an awareness of these truths, but holds on to some form of purpose or another. On that note I'd say, why not achieve? As long as one isn't getting sucked into and immersed by a world (which I don't think is entirely possible anymore when one has had these insights already) then I think that using ones ability makes more sense than just being with no purpose. Especially since conventional wisdom reveals to one that capability which has no doubt, fear, or limit.

In the world there are various barriers between people which are almost never removed. Financial barriers, egoistic barriers, barriers based in distrust, and so on. It's apparently obvious that if people (for example those who are so concerned with their financial situation) were to be free from these barriers then they would thrive more than ever. Similar to the benefits of an epicurean society, yet what if we apply this thinking here. The possibilities are endless with an organization of a few people without barriers. A mind who has recognized all this and is alone has little purpose, little reason to spur itself on, little motivation to achieve much aside from to be and continue and contemplate. It's only when we apply other people as some kind of purpose or motivation that ones full worldly potential is ever applied.

So, as a suggestion, being rid of barriers and putting heads together to achieve something sounds a little more reasonable than having a discussion regarding details over and over. I don't think there is any limit, as long as those barriers can be overcome. Most of us have no doubt had the insights which 'destroy' the world so to speak, as well as the insights of spirit, and have at least overcome fear and world-immersion. As far as I see it the intelligent are always in a position of conventional power, and so far there's no motivation to use it.
Diebert van Rhijn wrote: It's impossible to deny ones environment but it's possible to lose attachment to it -- while at the same time losing all opposition against it. This is the only way to become free in that context.
And what if you're already free? So far, "do nothing" has been our answer. I've elucidated upon truth and recognized delusion for long enough now, "do nothing" is no more wise than doing or achieving, which seems the logical choice to me.
Diebert van Rhijn wrote: Wisdom is also about reflecting on the self, egotism, emotion and person-hood. The problem you describe is the insight that all these things exist by the grace of not reflecting on its own nature. It could be said that this is the very source of their power. So wisdom is not trying to deny any of it -- or avoid any of it. What exactly is life beyond self and person-hood? The problem in answering that lies in the way people generaly only conceive of things in term of self and persoon-hood. And increasingly so.
Absolute and worldly, ultimate and conventional, selfhood or emptiness, the difference only resides in ones focus. Conventionally, we're making a choice on what to focus on every day. Even to sit still and take no action, one is making a choice each day.
Last edited by SeekerOfWisdom on Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote: It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end?
We all know where it would end Diebert, with just you here!...
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Beingof1 »

ardy wrote:
Diebert van Rhijn wrote: It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end?
We all know where it would end Diebert, with just you here!...
What Ardy said.

Let me see here, lets point out what we can all agree on - test it with logic - and see if non-ordinary claims such as these in question are "logical".

1) The Totality is infinite.
2) The totality is in an infinite state of flux through cause and effect.
3) Infinite means by its very definition that all things that are possible are true/reality.

And yet most of the dip shits here still think that a possible experience is not possible. Most of you do not understand what you yourself claim and believe I am the one that does not get it - now that is irony. Cognitive dissonance run amok.

Diebert any time you want a lesson in humility, challenge me to a debate. You will not do it because you would walk away knowing you got your kiester kicked.

Seekerofwisdom; you should also ban the Bible, Buddhist teachings, all writings of Lao Tzu, Socrates and literally stamp out all writings of every sage that has ever lived cause they all claimed, without exception,that 'they get it' or are 'the One'. But by all means, continue with your nonsensical cognitive dissonance.

No one - not one of you will challenge the substance and logic of my syllogism - you all just talk 'personality disorder' and babble about how I make claims and on and on all the while knowing you cannot address the logic of what I have presented. So - like all good brainwashed goose-step - BAN HIM QUICK. I thought seeking the truth meant that but apparently not here. this does not pass the smell test for so called 'truth seekers'.

Anyone - and I do mean anyone, want to cowboy up and challenge my premise, underpinning and conclusion or are you just interested in getting rid of someone who may know more than you?
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

ardy wrote:
Diebert van Rhijn wrote: It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end?
We all know where it would end Diebert, with just you here!...
And perhaps not even that lot! It's also possible to see our selves as "that" what's left after we managed to ban all that isn't from our field of view. Like a garden is defined just as much by what's not allowed to grow as what's actually being planted. Think about it.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Beingof1 wrote:[Diebert any time you want a lesson in humility, challenge me to a debate. You will not do it because you would walk away knowing you got your kiester kicked.
Well we've been there before a few times. And both of us believe the other is not even capable of recognizing the difference between defeat and victory. So which point you try to prove here? Your thought processes are based on a completely different set of assumptions and drivers than mine.

Anyway, if you think this is good place to defend your particular brand of miraculism, then you're being masochistic. What is the purpose of your recurring attempt if everyone here is really dip shit, misunderstanding you, misinterpreting you and so on? Why even bother wasting precious time? Opposing and challenging can be good but sometimes I think people are making some kind of lifestyle out of it. That their whole existence depends on that impossible to defend position and its never-ending all-consuming defending of the precarious. It generates feeling and specialness and there you have it: the foundation of a belief. It's possible you're running through those motions since childhood, being a specially selected little boy preacher, if I remember correctly. It's hard to shake off those strong currents. There's no one to blame.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Beingof1 wrote:ut what we can all agree on - test it with logic - and see if non-ordinary claims such as these in question are "logical".

1) The Totality is infinite.
2) The totality is in an infinite state of flux through cause and effect.
3) Infinite means by its very definition that all things that are possible are true/reality.

And yet most of the dip shits here still think that a possible experience is not possible.
God damn it being, I did not say you didn't experience talking to a wall and thought it was the "meta mind", you probably did experience it! Just like millions have experienced all sorts of weird things, on acid or off! That doesn't change the fact that you're deluded for thinking it really was a meta-mind of the universe, rather than just more empty and impermanent appearance. Dip shit.
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:lifestyle
Let me know what your thoughts on my previous reply to you were Diebert.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
ardy wrote:
Diebert van Rhijn wrote: It's tempting to ban ignorance and emotional blinders from a forum. Where would it end?
We all know where it would end Diebert, with just you here!...
And perhaps not even that lot! It's also possible to see our selves as "that" what's left after we managed to ban all that isn't from our field of view. Like a garden is defined just as much by what's not allowed to grow as what's actually being planted. Think about it.
I did Diebert, I assume you mean that you end up trampling on a lot of new plants without knowing what they will turn into so that your garden ends up how you want it -Is this place your garden? Even SOW with his aggressive approach can (and will) turn into an interesting human being given time. Assuming that new posters can understand what is being spoken about and have something to say that has relevance then why kill plants in the garden?
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Ardy, what are you talking about? Which "new plants"? Or "agressive"? Growing into "interesting human being"? You need a new perspective on this.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Bobo »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote: I mean, the worst I ever was only involved an exaggerated focus on the "dream-like" illusory view and an egoistic clinging to it. It's more about the "extremism", as that sort of things ruins any possible credibility or uniqueness to the site.
When I analyze it I don't find the view that "'life is a dream" much different than from "all things are finite", both statements start striving to completeness (life/all things) to say something about it (dream/finite) that end up implying the opposite of it - a reality or infinite. Maybe there's an issue that is not about the extremism of the views, it's more of how you put them to use.

This leads to what you were talking about engaging in the world, the different views of having no knowledge that life is a dream, having knowledge that life is a dream, and living a reality out there. The question of "how to live" may be regarded to this totalizing knowledge or not, how to live applies to anyone and may be answered as such, how to live with some knowledge in mind may require other answers (an example as if it were from buddhism - not causing harm to sentient beings vs engaging in monastic practices), note that the third possibility - life is a dream implies reality- implies a reality outside of what is defined by life which may be why the questions of how to live would be of coincern, as 'reality' has nothing to do or provide no answers about it.




Beingof1 wrote:ut what we can all agree on - test it with logic - and see if non-ordinary claims such as these in question are "logical".

1) The Totality is infinite.
2) The totality is in an infinite state of flux through cause and effect.
3) Infinite means by its very definition that all things that are possible are true/reality.

And yet most of the dip shits here still think that a possible experience is not possible.
I have one objection in mind:

Infinite bottles on the wall, infinite bottles on the wall, kick one down, pass it around, infinite bottles of beer on the wall. Infinite bottles on the wall, infinite bottles on the wall...

Seriously though, that the universe is infinite then means that all possible things are never true, there's always something left to be realized.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Barriers

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Ardy, what are you talking about? Which "new plants"? Or "agressive"? Growing into "interesting human being"? You need a new perspective on this.
A new analogy maybe, but what you seem to need is a bit of imagination. No good being smart if you cannot imagine anything beyond your own intellectual limitations.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

ardy wrote:
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Ardy, what are you talking about? Which "new plants"? Or "agressive"? Growing into "interesting human being"? You need a new perspective on this.
A new analogy maybe, but what you seem to need is a bit of imagination. No good being smart if you cannot imagine anything beyond your own intellectual limitations.
It's not about being smart, Ardy. Who are the new plants which you seem to be worried about? How many on that list have ever been restricted to your knowing and would you even know why? You mention SOW who after 2086 posts in three years still might "grow" into something you'd find "interesting"? And surely if he's "aggressive" then you'd be an arrogant knob full of pretense. But you both still reason and somewhat keep to the point in the posts, which is the only requirement really. In fact Seeker is interesting even if I disagree at times. If anyone should be worried to be an uninteresting plant on this forum, it might be you!
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Pam Seeback »

Hi Beingof1, you said:
1) The Totality is infinite.
2) The totality is in an infinite state of flux through cause and effect.
3) Infinite means by its very definition that all things that are possible are true/reality.
Are you are asserting that one can truthfully predict the causality? If so, then sound reasoning of the nature of causality is not being used. Why? Because things are caused now, in this moment, of this moment. This is the meaning of "to exist." Which means only what exists now is true or real. Which also means no mind can know future existence (a contradiction in terms) it can only reason what probably/might exist and probabilities are beliefs/theories, not truths. If indeed you are asserting that the causality can truthfully be predicted, give me an example of a thing you know is going to be caused and so reasoning is not compromised, an inclusion of the exact (absolute) causal chain map of its truth/reality is required.

If you are not asserting that it is possible to truthfully predict the causality then a further explanation of what you mean by relating what is possible to what is true is needed.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Barriers

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Seeker, finally came around to address your post.
SeekerofWisdom wrote: A sort of interaction with the world which still retains an awareness of these truths, but holds on to some form of purpose or another. On that note I'd say, why not achieve? As long as one isn't getting sucked into and immersed by a world (which I don't think is entirely possible anymore when one has had these insights already) then I think that using ones ability makes more sense than just being with no purpose.
You make it sound like the "world" would still be an actual place or state to flip on and off. To enter and leave. But this split is not actually there. It's more like a cognitive effect of observation, of detachment perhaps. The best word I know is disintegration but it's a falling apart of a false image. Even the split of self, created by thought and sense accumulation, is shown to be merely shadow play.
In the world there are various barriers between people which are almost never removed. Financial barriers, egoistic barriers, barriers based in distrust, and so on. It's apparently obvious that if people (for example those who are so concerned with their financial situation) were to be free from these barriers then they would thrive more than ever.
Cause and effect: many barriers are indeed part and parcel of the machinery. The whole process wouldn't be there without them. Dissolving barriers is then another name for death. But by that time a new process usually arrives, defining new barriers to work by.
A mind who has recognized all this and is alone has little purpose, little reason to spur itself on, little motivation to achieve much aside from to be and continue and contemplate. It's only when we apply other people as some kind of purpose or motivation that ones full worldly potential is ever applied.
In my view "purpose" is something that arises out of circumstance, a certain distribution of energies and position. It's something that pulls and drives you, when standing in the middle of a stream. Life then would become purposeless, "lifeless", when trying to abandon it. But a truth seeker will recognize this as the presence of a hidden purpose, to escape, to abandon, to desire the lack of desire. The will to the end. It's possible to theorize that such will is tied up with all other will to start anything: the dialectic view of life, things as a complex dynamic of opposing forces and directions. Desiring something coupled with the wish to annihilate it: the very collision as effect and movement. It's just a way to look at things and does help to understand causality better, even as abstract, partial model.
As far as I see it the intelligent are always in a position of conventional power, and so far there's no motivation to use it.
I think such motivation will arise out of that position inside a stream of power dynamics and possibilities. Conventional power is under the surface just a conglomerate of motives, desires, agenda and such. One doesn't end up in there by not being already part of it. It's network based! Perhaps that's the paradox of power?
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:And what if you're already free? So far, "do nothing" has been our answer. I've elucidated upon truth and recognized delusion for long enough now, "do nothing" is no more wise than doing or achieving, which seems the logical choice to me.
Do nothing in the sense that it's being realized only god is doing, like in the same way only causality truly exists. It's not a matter of translating that to a specific non-action at the level of the individual, of the self. Then again, it's true enough that people are too caught up inside their own actions, their own "doing" to even consider, to reflect upon anything. In that context it's good to call for "do nothing" as that's probably better than just keep being caught up into the ignorance of others, these imagery worlds collectively fabricated and maintained for whatever purpose. And I mean "good" in the context of valuing insight into the nature of things. Perhaps for its own sake?
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Absolute and worldly, ultimate and conventional, selfhood or emptiness, the difference only resides in ones focus. Conventionally, we're making a choice on what to focus on every day. Even to sit still and take no action, one is making a choice each day.
It's more like a wild fire burning. Once it really starts, no way to put it out. To become conscious, observant and reflective is just like that. Not a still passive block of ice (although in some sense it's like the top of the Matterhorn) but also an active consuming process, which is already out of your hands.
Locked