Humans.

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
crow
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:01 pm

Humans.

Post by crow »

I don't know of any life-form more useless than humans.
What makes humans so worthless?
Ego.

Nothing else has an ego. Only humans. They use this thing as a proxy for what they are not, but need other humans to think they are.
This is their fragile and unreliable self-esteem mechanism.

Ever since I arrived here, against my better judgement, I've been attacked, insulted, undermined and condescended-to.
Only one guy has been benevolent.

This is fine. He is the only one I had hoped to encounter. I didn't even expect that much.

No. Raccoons are more spiritually advanced than all but the most advanced humans. And far better looking.
Most of my friends are - in fact - raccoons. And birds. And mice. And deer. And frogs. And even trees.
I am most fortunate to not live amid concrete and cars and egomaniacs.

Anyway: it's my bedtime, and even a crow needs to sleep.
In conclusion, I'll leave a reminder: if you don't understand what I talk about, then what I talk about is not for you.
It's solely for that one guy who gets it, likes it, wants it, seeks it, and appreciates it.
Nighty night.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

crow wrote:if you don't understand what I talk about, then what I talk about is not for you.
You're the biggest *Sigh, slaps forehead* case I've ever encountered.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by Russell Parr »

Oh come now Crow, you didn't expect to come here, fire off posts in rapid succession, and expect not to get deeply challenged, did you? Everyone you've spoken with has been here for a long time, and nearly all we do is challenge each other. Perhaps you missed the forum intro? Or, perhaps your time away from humans have made you a bit soft.

I actually think you have something valuable to offer if you care to stick around and probe a little deeper.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Bobo »

On the kingdom of god many are called and few are chosen, only the ten first callers today will also win this amazing toaster.

Don't even think, what's to be understood?
crow
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:01 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by crow »

I decided, a while back, that the vast majority of humans are completely mad. There is wisdom in this...
Blessed are the idiots, for they are relatively harmless.

You characters might want to ask yourselves what use you are. Brilliant geniuses who are unable even to figure out how to be content. Unable to co-exist with anybody else.
What, exactly, does genius have going for it? It appears, to me, to be a hopeless affliction, to which there is no cure, and from which there is no relief.
Because, if and when a cure is presented, it considers itself so intelligent that anything from any source other than itself must, by definition, be worthless.

Genius must be a state of utter hopelessness. Either that, or none of you are - in fact - geniuses at all. Only wannabees without a clue.

Entertaining, though, to witness from afar, for all its terminal tragedy.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Bobo »

Seeker of wisdom said on another thread that you had a beginner's mind, there's the case of people who doesn't have a beginner's mind and if that is a case of madness there's a point in saying nice words or pointing the way to something that may be considered beneficial against their affliction. In case of beginner's mind it seems to me that treating it as if it were an 'advanced' mind more beneficial for its growth, even making no distinctions between such minds, no need to sugar coat what is sugary already.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Pam Seeback »

"Crow" is a god of magical thinking, offering contentment by escaping into the imagination of becoming a form other than that of "useless human being". Which is a problem for crow because he believes that in becoming/imagining a nonhuman form he has stopped the machinery of human thinking. Forgetting of course that it is only human being that imagines.

Crow has confused the ability of the human mind to imagine whatever form it desires to become with the also imagined concept of an omnipresent God.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

movingalways wrote:"Crow" is a god of magical thinking, offering contentment by escaping into the imagination of becoming a form other than that of "useless human being". Which is a problem for crow because he believes that in becoming/imagining a nonhuman form he has stopped the machinery of human thinking. Forgetting of course that it is only human being that imagines.

Crow has confused the ability of the human mind to imagine whatever form it desires to become with the also imagined concept of an omnipresent God.
Pam - I think he offers just one thing and that is the power of no-mind. I am fascinated by this concept as I have never experienced no-mind myself but I have read enough about it to make me wonder if this state is real or imagined?
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by Russell Parr »

Ardy, I think you imagine it to be something other-worldly when it really just describes a state of consciousness unbounded by egotism. It is developed by practicing renunciation of the materialistic outlook on all things. 'Neti, neti' comes to mind. Most people experience this on a very occasional basis, but is an art perfected by the sage.

I'm sure you've experienced it, but self-doubt prevents you from realizing it.

Crow seems to have a decent grip on this, but more or less completely misses out on the "human" element of enlightenment, the fact that there is definitely a "something" here, a "something" going on. Interestingly enough, it seems he and SoW have that much in common.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

Russell wrote:Ardy, I think you imagine it to be something other-worldly when it really just describes a state of consciousness unbounded by egotism. It is developed by practicing renunciation of the materialistic outlook on all things. 'Neti, neti' comes to mind. Most people experience this on a very occasional basis, but is an art perfected by the sage.

I'm sure you've experienced it, but self-doubt prevents you from realizing it.

Crow seems to have a decent grip on this, but more or less completely misses out on the "human" element of enlightenment, the fact that there is definitely a "something" here, a "something" going on. Interestingly enough, it seems he and SoW have that much in common.
Russell: Thanks for your kind words.

I have no imagination of what No-Mind is like, I have had insights into it and understand it but living it is beyond my experience and anyone here, I suspect.

It is not self doubt that stopped me at the time but lack of courage. It is very scary to think you will die and yet push on. I was also low on cash with retirement beckoning and needed to keep my job which I could not do had I carried on [great excuse].

You could give away all of your worldly goods, live in a small hut on a mountain, have no more to do with women or other men, meditate every day and still not make a state of no-mind. This comes as a form of grace, there is no map to take you there. If there was, many here would be in that state.

Crow does have something and I recognised it from his first post. I will continue a discussion with him and see what comes of it. I recognise something similar in Cahoot and some of the others here, there are echoes of it in you and Pam.

I will continue to post here as I enjoy the discussions but they are taking me nowhere as there is nowhere to go really. I suspect it is time to take some more steps. I meet with a Zen monk most weeks for coffee and we discuss this stuff and generally have a laugh about life and silly things that are happening. I ran a meditation class until last year and I am missing that. I think it is time to put away little things and try to pick up big things again!
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Russell wrote:but more or less completely misses out on the "human" element of enlightenment, the fact that there is definitely a "something" here, a "something" going on. Interestingly enough, it seems he and SoW have that much in common.

Incorrect, almost all of my recent posts have been speaking about the reality of the human condition and conventional world. I'm just not holding on to your various delusions about the nature of that 'something' going on. Anyway, I was going to write more, but again, I can't see any reason to converse in depth with most posters lately. "What's in it for me?" is still what I'm thinking, seems like it would be a waste to apply more time to you. Feel free to provide any good reasons.

Ardy, I just clicked on the "display post" button to see your post, probably a bad decision, but luckily I did since I read the part about you having run a meditation class. That gave me a good laugh. Please don't do that in future, you'll just confuse people! You yourself even admit you have no clue what you're on about, don't you feel like you were sort of leading people on? Especially since whatever words you use to guide them in meditation are probably delusional in one way or another? At least your current recognition of your ignorance on this topic is closer to a humble quality which may one day allow you to learn. I understand you may perceive what I've said as some kind of rudeness or hypocrisy, (though I don't know where you heard it that wisdom is found in those babying the sensitivities of child-like adults) and that's simply because I really don't bother to explain myself to strangers anymore, which of course leaves you with little other option but to doubt, and that's perfectly understandable. I'd love to remedy the situation, really, have a long discussion, and so on, if there were to be of any kind of benefit, but again: What reason is there that I should? I'm open to suggestions.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:
Russell wrote:but more or less completely misses out on the "human" element of enlightenment, the fact that there is definitely a "something" here, a "something" going on. Interestingly enough, it seems he and SoW have that much in common.

Incorrect, almost all of my recent posts have been speaking about the reality of the human condition and conventional world. I'm just not holding on to your various delusions about the nature of that 'something' going on. Anyway, I was going to write more, but again, I can't see any reason to converse in depth with most posters lately. "What's in it for me?" is still what I'm thinking, seems like it would be a waste to apply more time to you. Feel free to provide any good reasons.

Ardy, I just clicked on the "display post" button to see your post, probably a bad decision, but luckily I did since I read the part about you having run a meditation class. That gave me a good laugh. Please don't do that in future, you'll just confuse people! You yourself even admit you have no clue what you're on about, don't you feel like you were sort of leading people on? Especially since whatever words you use to guide them in meditation are probably delusional in one way or another? At least your current recognition of your ignorance on this topic is closer to a humble quality which may one day allow you to learn. I understand you may perceive what I've said as some kind of rudeness or hypocrisy, (though I don't know where you heard it that wisdom is found in those babying the sensitivities of child-like adults) and that's simply because I really don't bother to explain myself to strangers anymore, which of course leaves you with little other option but to doubt, and that's perfectly understandable. I'd love to remedy the situation, really, have a long discussion, and so on, if there were to be of any kind of benefit, but again: What reason is there that I should? I'm open to suggestions.
God! SOW you are a little twerp aren't you, please turn me off again. Somebody as stupid as you are really should not read my posts anyway. You are stuck in a steel trap of of your own making with complete denial of anything other than what your child like brain can encompass. You need some meditation or medication [more likely] as I guess you could not sit for 2 mins.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Sigh, didn't think so. "Can't sit still for 2 mins" ? Another seer on our hands, do the magical insight ever end around here? Goodbye then, not sure why I even spent a moment talking to a supporter of beingof1 and crow, lol. Not much hope there.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Pam Seeback »

ardy wrote:
movingalways wrote:"Crow" is a god of magical thinking, offering contentment by escaping into the imagination of becoming a form other than that of "useless human being". Which is a problem for crow because he believes that in becoming/imagining a nonhuman form he has stopped the machinery of human thinking. Forgetting of course that it is only human being that imagines.

Crow has confused the ability of the human mind to imagine whatever form it desires to become with the also imagined concept of an omnipresent God.
Pam - I think he offers just one thing and that is the power of no-mind. I am fascinated by this concept as I have never experienced no-mind myself but I have read enough about it to make me wonder if this state is real or imagined?
ardy, to be "fascinated" and to seek power is to have the hungry ego in the driver's seat. For one who knows the true nature of things to be impermanent and without inherent existence, the concepts of "fascination" and "power" are poison.

The problem with the experience of oneness that crow had is that if it is not explored for its wisdom in relation to what is absent in the experience, what is absent in the experience returns. And not only returns, but is erroneously incorporated into the experience. The point of meditation on oneness is to realize that what is missing is suffering, and then, to question the nature of suffering so it can be ended.

Clearly crow suffers as is demonstrated by the original post in this thread. He is not alone, all sentient beings suffer, with the difference being that there are those who have the wisdom to bring it to an end and those who do not. Since crow promises the fleeting experience of comfort reliant on the repetitious experience of attachment to (desire for) a certain form, he is demonstrating that he did not awaken the hidden logical formula of "suffering=desire for form, therefore, the end of suffering=ending desire for form."

Bringing suffering to an end is hard because it means one must be true to the formula for ending suffering. And although it seems easier to use crow's method of magical thinking (the ego is drawn to easy), ultimately, this method proves that all easy does is turn the wheel of suffering. As for meditation, I do not know what you taught in your classes, but in relation to ending the suffering of clinging to form, meditation on the truth of things becomes the way one lives their life. In your conversations with the Zen monk do you two not speak of these things?
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

ardy wrote:Crow does have something and I recognised it from his first post. I will continue a discussion with him and see what comes of it. I recognise something similar in Cahoot and some of the others here, there are echoes of it in you and Pam.
What for you will remain some never ending mysterious "something", I can give you straight. Hear if you've got the ears and the stomach for it. What you saw in Crow and Cahoot and "some of the others" is the main pitfall in spirituality, and way beyond that: the tendency to use various spiritual ideas, feelings and conversations to escape (or just play mind games like with crow). In true narcissistic fashion an imaginary construct is there acting like a mirror used to strengthen ones own and each other's mistakes. Its potential truth value is not even importance here, the motive is: it's still denying the main suffering, the bizarre position we're in.

The issue here is the tendency I noticed that people have started to use the forum - like their philosophy - to perpetuate these false images, as comfort zone, as playing field, as escape hatch from whatever they're running from in their head or life. In that sense the forum ends up having an opposing effect from the original intent. It's also the explanation of why actual discussions rarely happens anymore. People do not log on to have one! But they're coming for something else.

Of course to be able to write this I'm examining my own participation too. And perhaps someone else will moderate here for a while, as I've increasingly noticed how this little forum has become such a big attraction for people who just don't want to do the work and still believe anything from the new age or Zen tradition is actually leading to any truth about themselves (it's not). For last year I kept the forum friendly by removing quite some ugly characters, spammers, mentally ill or sociopathical folks (without trace normally). Perhaps it's better to let the reality of the world back in on the forum? See how crazy some are and how far they'll go to manipulate a couple of unquestioning folks?

By the way, you still think of genius or someone like me as intellectual of head-oriented. You're wrong Ardy. You've no clue! You are the one still stuck in thought and failed logical constructs, glued together with various sentiments. You're just a child that way and mistake superior and fluent reasoning with "stuck" so you don't have to think. And I'm not so sure if this forum is good for you simply because you seem to become more ignorant the longer you write! So what to do? What's in it for you? Cahoot will not come back, Crow neither.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Bobo »

movingalways wrote:"Crow" is a god of magical thinking, offering contentment by escaping into the imagination of not other than that of "useless human being". Which is a problem for crow because he believes that in becoming/imagining a nonhuman form he has stopped the machinery of human thinking. Forgetting of course that it is only human being that imagines.

Crow has confused the ability of the human mind to imagine whatever form it desires to become with the also imagined concept of an omnipresent God.
MA, I disagree with the statement that only human being imagines, it's not that crows are one of the few animals that show human intelligence like someone said somewhere, crows are one of hundreds of animals that are currently studied for their intelligence and there's no exclusive human likeness in intelligence.

I would be more likely to define imagination as something that follows sense/experience. What happens to the human animal is that imagination gets detached from the immediacy of sense/experience and then madness ensues. This imagination gone mad has the upside of being able to counter conditioning, the mind gets constrained and the reconditioning is called 'human intelligence', the conditioned mind is more often than not restrained or put in bad conditions, the human condition then is one of a domesticated animal that has to break from a more or less self-imposed conditioning. Of course many don't know of their own condition.

The child-like imagination is of someone who thinks of the reconditioning the mind as something unlimited maybe not perceiving its own or the condition of those around them or what they perceive or the madness of it. I think the crow was just repackaging things for his own delivery, to take some thing and make it nice to shove it on mailboxes.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

movingalways wrote:
ardy wrote:
movingalways wrote:"Crow" is a god of magical thinking, offering contentment by escaping into the imagination of becoming a form other than that of "useless human being". Which is a problem for crow because he believes that in becoming/imagining a nonhuman form he has stopped the machinery of human thinking. Forgetting of course that it is only human being that imagines.

Crow has confused the ability of the human mind to imagine whatever form it desires to become with the also imagined concept of an omnipresent God.
Pam - I think he offers just one thing and that is the power of no-mind. I am fascinated by this concept as I have never experienced no-mind myself but I have read enough about it to make me wonder if this state is real or imagined?
ardy, to be "fascinated" and to seek power is to have the hungry ego in the driver's seat. For one who knows the true nature of things to be impermanent and without inherent existence, the concepts of "fascination" and "power" are poison.

The problem with the experience of oneness that crow had is that if it is not explored for its wisdom in relation to what is absent in the experience, what is absent in the experience returns. And not only returns, but is erroneously incorporated into the experience. The point of meditation on oneness is to realize that what is missing is suffering, and then, to question the nature of suffering so it can be ended.

Clearly crow suffers as is demonstrated by the original post in this thread. He is not alone, all sentient beings suffer, with the difference being that there are those who have the wisdom to bring it to an end and those who do not. Since crow promises the fleeting experience of comfort reliant on the repetitious experience of attachment to (desire for) a certain form, he is demonstrating that he did not awaken the hidden logical formula of "suffering=desire for form, therefore, the end of suffering=ending desire for form."

Bringing suffering to an end is hard because it means one must be true to the formula for ending suffering. And although it seems easier to use crow's method of magical thinking (the ego is drawn to easy), ultimately, this method proves that all easy does is turn the wheel of suffering. As for meditation, I do not know what you taught in your classes, but in relation to ending the suffering of clinging to form, meditation on the truth of things becomes the way one lives their life. In your conversations with the Zen monk do you two not speak of these things?
Hi Pam - Without a 'fascination' I prefer the words 'interest' or 'desire', we might be questioning nothing like a government official with his rule book in front of him. I am not of the suffering type and I do not believe that Crow, Cahoot, Russell or many here are either [from my limited time]. It is not my experience and certainly not the Zen monk I meet with who is very jovial, yet we talk about people who are suffering around us, as this type of searching attracts people who have suffered or are still suffering. My Friend has 3 women who were molested as children in the group he teaches.

Meditation is not about ending the 'suffering of clinging to form' if you suffer from this then it too will fall away at the right moment. To meditate thinking it will do anything at all is not advantageous. It is better to approach it like a child, if not, just sit and meditate. Over time you get to a point where you enter Samadhi and then, during your ordinary life, observe what changes happen to you. Meditation is so simple yet it is one of the hardest things I have ever done and to meditate twice a day for 45mins is very hard.

I do not see Crow as having some magical formula, nor do I see any obvious suffering in him, he stated in his post that he has limited time for humans - not original, nor about suffering. He is the end result of meditation and I agree with that approach. I also disagree with Diebert that he 'yanked my chain' at my time of life I don't have a chain to yank, mind you SoW is doing a good job of looking for one.

There are certain things that occur on the path and one is a recognition of those who have been where you have been. Crow has gone further than I dared to go, I recognised that and am acting on that recognition. Could turn out to be a charlatan or an enlightened being. It's of interest both ways but it would be stupid to ignore it. Whatever happens, I am still me and happy with me.

Pam, I wish to be presumptuous as my time here may be short. - Learning to like yourself is so easy and so beneficial. There is no suffering at a fundamental level, I suggest you go to the fundamental level.

I have enjoyed my time here, and I will still post here from time to time. I wish you all WELL .... Yes even Seeker of Arguments.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

Bobo wrote:
I would be more likely to define imagination as something that follows sense/experience. What happens to the human animal is that imagination gets detached from the immediacy of sense/experience and then madness ensues. This imagination gone mad has the upside of being able to counter conditioning, the mind gets constrained and the reconditioning is called 'human intelligence', the conditioned mind is more often than not restrained or put in bad conditions, the human condition then is one of a domesticated animal that has to break from a more or less self-imposed conditioning. Of course many don't know of their own condition.

The child-like imagination is of someone who thinks of the reconditioning the mind as something unlimited maybe not perceiving its own or the condition of those around them or what they perceive or the madness of it. I think the crow was just repackaging things for his own delivery, to take some thing and make it nice to shove it on mailboxes.
Excellent Post Bobo [my bold of what I enjoyed most] - I wish some here could hear it....
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
ardy wrote:Crow does have something and I recognised it from his first post. I will continue a discussion with him and see what comes of it. I recognise something similar in Cahoot and some of the others here, there are echoes of it in you and Pam.
What for you will remain some never ending mysterious "something", I can give you straight. Hear if you've got the ears and the stomach for it. What you saw in Crow and Cahoot and "some of the others" is the main pitfall in spirituality, and way beyond that: the tendency to use various spiritual ideas, feelings and conversations to escape (or just play mind games like with crow). In true narcissistic fashion an imaginary construct is there acting like a mirror used to strengthen ones own and each other's mistakes. Its potential truth value is not even importance here, the motive is: it's still denying the main suffering, the bizarre position we're in.

The issue here is the tendency I noticed that people have started to use the forum - like their philosophy - to perpetuate these false images, as comfort zone, as playing field, as escape hatch from whatever they're running from in their head or life. In that sense the forum ends up having an opposing effect from the original intent. It's also the explanation of why actual discussions rarely happens anymore. People do not log on to have one! But they're coming for something else.

Of course to be able to write this I'm examining my own participation too. And perhaps someone else will moderate here for a while, as I've increasingly noticed how this little forum has become such a big attraction for people who just don't want to do the work and still believe anything from the new age or Zen tradition is actually leading to any truth about themselves (it's not). For last year I kept the forum friendly by removing quite some ugly characters, spammers, mentally ill or sociopathical folks (without trace normally). Perhaps it's better to let the reality of the world back in on the forum? See how crazy some are and how far they'll go to manipulate a couple of unquestioning folks?

By the way, you still think of genius or someone like me as intellectual of head-oriented. You're wrong Ardy. You've no clue! You are the one still stuck in thought and failed logical constructs, glued together with various sentiments. You're just a child that way and mistake superior and fluent reasoning with "stuck" so you don't have to think. And I'm not so sure if this forum is good for you simply because you seem to become more ignorant the longer you write! So what to do? What's in it for you? Cahoot will not come back, Crow neither.
Diebert: What the hell is happening to you? One guy shows up and your world is thrown into disarray. Your site [yes I think it is, in so many ways] is what it always has been. Your illusion is that you are carrying a new way to enlightenment or understanding oneself [both the same] as defined by David, Dan and Kevin. Yet none of them post here. They seem to have abandoned this mine and moved on.

Yet on your shoulders it has lived on and provides a fine vehicle for those who want to dig and discuss and test their understanding against others here. This is good enough.

I understand why you would curl your lip at people like me, it has always been thus. Intellectual v Intuitive and has a great parallel in Materialism v Idealism. I think this site is better for having you as a sounding board for those you attract. If I had not met a few people similar to me here, I would not have stayed as I recognised almost immediately that the site was not aimed in the same way I am aiming at things.

You are right in one thing you said in this post. "You're just a child that way and mistake superior and fluent reasoning with "stuck" very true - pity your not more of a child yourself. You seem so old to me...
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

ardy wrote:One guy shows up and your world is thrown into disarray. Your site [yes I think it is, in so many ways] is what it always has been. Your illusion is that you are carrying a new way to enlightenment or understanding oneself [both the same] as defined by David, Dan and Kevin. Yet none of them post here. They seem to have abandoned this mine and moved on.
That's all in your head, Ardy! But thanks for the perspective on how you interpret your observations.
I understand why you would curl your lip at people like me, it has always been thus. Intellectual v Intuitive and has a great parallel in Materialism v Idealism.
Yes but you're not realizing yet that the intuitive and the idealism is not with you but with most of the ones you are arguing with here. From my perspective it's all intellectualism and materialism with you, wrapped up cleverly as sentiment and largely unexamined feelings. That's why I've to laugh as well since you have conceived a complete different picture! But you need to have it as any alternative would smash your mirror. Now before you'd think that could happen to me: I do this all the time, it's the foundation of my thought: to take perspectives, smash any preconceived notion, reverse the earth and sky, then flip them side-ways. It's what I've been doing for decades so I've been pretty good at overturning myself and everything with it. And I know you cannot yet go there because I know where you are, I lived there.

Ardy, being a child in the spiritual sense means only that your mind becomes and remains capable of learning by unlearning what you think you know about me, the forum, existence and the world. And I know you're refusing that since the child analogy is for you another excuse to remain dangerously naive about your own state. That's the advantage of having a perspective like I have. That I can say that without blinking and demonstrate it with every line I write.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Bobo »

ardy wrote:
Bobo wrote: The child-like imagination is of someone who thinks of the reconditioning the mind as something unlimited maybe not perceiving its own or the condition of those around them or what they perceive or the madness of it. I think the crow was just repackaging things for his own delivery, to take some thing and make it nice to shove it on mailboxes.
Excellent Post Bobo [my bold of what I enjoyed most] - I wish some here could hear it....
I was more ambivalent on it because taking imagination as the thing that immediately follows sense/experience, well child-like imagination means more tuned with the senses and more out of it, it's a matter of intensity so it may be the way to/fro delusions.

On the materialism vs idealism thing I would focus more on what can be seen vs what can't be seen, that resolves to a question of appearances subject/object or not even that instead.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Pam Seeback »

Hi Pam - Without a 'fascination' I prefer the words 'interest' or 'desire', we might be questioning nothing like a government official with his rule book in front of him. I am not of the suffering type and I do not believe that Crow, Cahoot, Russell or many here are either [from my limited time]. It is not my experience and certainly not the Zen monk I meet with who is very jovial, yet we talk about people who are suffering around us, as this type of searching attracts people who have suffered or are still suffering. My Friend has 3 women who were molested as children in the group he teaches.

ardy, who hasn't been molested in some way or another? I'm not talking about this kind of suffering, I have long since dropped my memories of such things. I am speaking of the suffering that lies at the heart of psychological desire to find the truth of things. This desire may not burn within you or your Zen monk, fair enough, however, in my time here on Genius I would say that for most I have encountered, this burning to know is present.
Meditation is not about ending the 'suffering of clinging to form' if you suffer from this then it too will fall away at the right moment. To meditate thinking it will do anything at all is not advantageous. It is better to approach it like a child, if not, just sit and meditate. Over time you get to a point where you enter Samadhi and then, during your ordinary life, observe what changes happen to you. Meditation is so simple yet it is one of the hardest things I have ever done and to meditate twice a day for 45mins is very hard.
When one must know the truth of things and won't settle until they do, they become a solitary being by necessity, and when one is a solitary being, meditation is the natural outcome. I have meditated as you suggest (many years ago), I have been where crow is, but of course, of what value is this revelation of my past to you? You will have to check these things out for yourself. As for clinging to form, whether you realize it nor not, it goes to the very heart of why you are seeking to find a state of "no-mind."
I do not see Crow as having some magical formula, nor do I see any obvious suffering in him, he stated in his post that he has limited time for humans - not original, nor about suffering. He is the end result of meditation and I agree with that approach. I also disagree with Diebert that he 'yanked my chain' at my time of life I don't have a chain to yank, mind you SoW is doing a good job of looking for one.
Crow is not the end result of meditation, but again, you will need to discover this for yourself. Crow believes that "oneness" is the truth of things. It is not. It is the sky that opens the mind, it is the beginning point of insight meditation, but only if the fire to have insight is present.
There are certain things that occur on the path and one is a recognition of those who have been where you have been. Crow has gone further than I dared to go, I recognised that and am acting on that recognition. Could turn out to be a charlatan or an enlightened being. It's of interest both ways but it would be stupid to ignore it. Whatever happens, I am still me and happy with me.
You must do what you must do, as does everyone.
Pam, I wish to be presumptuous as my time here may be short. - Learning to like yourself is so easy and so beneficial. There is no suffering at a fundamental level, I suggest you go to the fundamental level.
You speak of samadhi and the jnana's often, I wonder if you are aware that jnanic or yogic meditation does not offer liberation from the delusion of a fundamental level of self whereas bodhi and prajna (cognitive wisdom of the true nature of things) does. Perhaps you do not desire liberation from "liking" and its shadow face "not liking", but surely by now you have realized that some of the longstanding members of this board are wholly dedicated to this practice. Which is probably why you have experienced so much "head-banging" with regards to the two definitions of enlightenment. I know from crow's short appearance here that at the present, he does not seek cognitive (final) liberation, instead he is caught in the seductions of the "self-bliss-absorption-expansion realms", which I am reasoning is why Diebert has sent him (and others of like mind) packing.
I have enjoyed my time here, and I will still post here from time to time. I wish you all WELL .... Yes even Seeker of Arguments.
I wish you liberation. :-)
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

movingalways wrote:I am speaking of the suffering that lies at the heart of psychological desire to find the truth of things. This desire may not burn within you or your Zen monk, fair enough, however, in my time here on Genius I would say that for most I have encountered, this burning to know is present. {...) Crow believes that "oneness" is the truth of things. It is not. It is the sky that opens the mind, it is the beginning point of insight meditation, but only if the fire to have insight is present.
A desire also for unity while the truth remains the full unconnectable vastness of emptiness. Which is then often turned into "one" thing again, as our whole being is geared to that: to weave and connect tapestries of beauty and delusion. Seen this way a deeper truth might come along: we suffer because we're trying to be despite not-being, to know despite not-knowing. And yet appearances and knowledge manifest as part of the same fabric or stream, the same causality which we can imagine to be ripples of. Then people often turn this around and seek comfort in not-knowing despite knowledge and not-being despite manifestation everywhere. The vibhava-tanha or "craving not to be". We do this because it's craving either way which fuels self-manifestation. Perpetuation it always wishes, the desire is also its fuel.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Humans.

Post by ardy »

movingalways wrote:
You speak of samadhi and the jnana's often, I wonder if you are aware that jnanic or yogic meditation does not offer liberation from the delusion of a fundamental level of self whereas bodhi and prajna (cognitive wisdom of the true nature of things) does. Perhaps you do not desire liberation from "liking" and its shadow face "not liking", but surely by now you have realized that some of the longstanding members of this board are wholly dedicated to this practice. Which is probably why you have experienced so much "head-banging" with regards to the two definitions of enlightenment. I know from crow's short appearance here that at the present, he does not seek cognitive (final) liberation, instead he is caught in the seductions of the "self-bliss-absorption-expansion realms", which I am reasoning is why Diebert has sent him (and others of like mind) packing.
Pam: From Desire for something comes searching, from searching comes meditation, from meditation comes samadhi, from samadhi comes 2 things: recognition that who you think you are is NOT correct and Prajna. From recognition of what you are NOT you change automatically, from Prajna comes an ever deepening instantaneous, intuitive understanding and desire to help others.

The problem of discrimination becomes obviously real at this point, but the pairs do not disappear and there is no effort that will make them. From further deepening comes silence in your head but you still can't work from no-mind. All of these gifts [trials?] fall automatically to all who steep themselves in meditation. I have EXPERIENCED ALL OF THESE GIFTS. I think my understanding is sound to this point.

Then when ripe Bodhi which equals enlightenment [did you know?] falls as grace on a few.

From the Oxford dictionary: Bodhi in Buddhism is the understanding possessed by a Buddha regarding the true nature of things. It is traditionally translated into English with the word enlightenment, although its literal meaning is closer to "awakening." The verbal root "budh" means to awaken.

One last comment from your post to highlight an issue:

I talk about prajna as I have and continue to experience it but don't think I have ever mentioned jnana's.

You said, "I wonder if you are aware that jnanic or yogic meditation does not offer liberation from the delusion of a fundamental level of self whereas bodhi and prajna (cognitive wisdom of the true nature of things) does."

Not according to the Bhagavad Gita:

In the Bhagavad Gita (13.3) Krishna says that jñāna consists of properly understanding kshetra (the field of activity, that is, the body) and kshetrajna (the knower of the body, that is, the soul or Atman). Later in the Gita (13.35) Krishna emphasizes that a transcendentalist must understand the difference between these two:

"Those who see with eyes of knowledge the difference between the body and the knower of the body, and can also understand the process of liberation from bondage in material nature, attain to the supreme goal."

This is just to point out that your understanding is not as crystalline as you might think, but mine is not as deep as I would wish it to be either. As stated above, I do understand meditation and the opening of the way. To fall in the way and flow with it, is something I don't understand but continue to look for.


Diebert and Seeker have almost no understanding of the way, to my mind they never will have unless they change [unlikely]. They are too attached to intellectual dissection and argument. The way is far simpler and harder than those two stone heads realise.
visheshdewan050193
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 7:03 pm

Re: Humans.

Post by visheshdewan050193 »

The ego is a consequence of a significantly developed conciousness (or masculinity/genius, as Weininger put it).

Ironically, you technically require a strong ego in order to transcend it.

Also reading posts by Ardy and Diebert:

I wouldn't want to talk about jnana/samadhi since I haven't really cultivated one-pointed absorption ever, but ardy, you'd do well to get off your high horse by toning down the anti-intellectual attitude.

I can quote a half dozen quotes of the Buddha (as recorded in the Pali canon/ Chinese texts) that agree with statements Quinn/Solway have made/established via pure reasoning. The similarity is so striking, it's natural to infer that the Buddha in all probability employed similar lines of reasoning when he said some of the things he said.

You seem to put yourself as an experienced practitioner who knows what he is doing, and to young upstarts such as myself you really don't come across as that in attitude, at least in comparison to people like QS (who I've actually managed to talk to quite a bit) and Diebert (who I've just briefly talked to/read of). Off the bat I'd agree with Diebert's assessment of people like crow.
Locked