GENIUS FORUMS

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:You can't watch it detachedly: it would create a split, a dishonest being thinking he has his own "self" somewhere in the cross-hairs. There's no "collective consciousness" just as there is no "thoughtless state". They're both products of polluted imagination, an inability to see their lack of existence, how it's becoming just an attempt to exist through such contraptions.

It depends what you're talking about when you say "collective consciousness". When we refer to reality we are referring to experiences of the mind-existence, that which we know, there could be no reference to something other than the existence we know. So is "collective consciousness" something like "inter-dependent reality"? Because that would make a lot of sense.

Reality cannot be much more than a temporary construct (a "now" to function in) created by choices and evaluations which are only voluntary to a degree or depending on perspective. There's a ongoing synchronization of perspective between what could be simplified as inside and outside, roaming agents or passing parallel worlds. Reality would then appear as function of this communication. In that sense we can speak of collectivity: the inner world is the outer world. The illusion of individuality is purely functional, to be able to think, pointedly, "freely" and relatively undisturbed. Or just to feast on the drug of self and feeling, to imagine this space and emptiness. But either way it's illusive.

Dennis Mahar wrote:No words or symbols contain the experience of emptiness.
an explosion of love.
an opening.

You have turned emptiness into something and are now preaching that something to the world. You can't help it, I couldn't help it, it seems to be a critical part the process of letting go of emptiness.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:You can't watch it detachedly: it would create a split, a dishonest being thinking he has his own "self" somewhere in the cross-hairs. There's no "collective consciousness" just as there is no "thoughtless state". They're both products of polluted imagination, an inability to see their lack of existence, how it's becoming just an attempt to exist through such contraptions.

It depends what you're talking about when you say "collective consciousness". When we refer to reality we are referring to experiences of the mind-existence, that which we know, there could be no reference to something other than the existence we know. So is "collective consciousness" something like "inter-dependent reality"? Because that would make a lot of sense.

Reality cannot be much more than a temporary construct (a "now" to function in) created by choices and evaluations which are only voluntary to a degree or depending on perspective. There's a ongoing synchronization of perspective between what could be simplified as inside and outside, roaming agents or passing parallel worlds. Reality would then appear as function of this communication. In that sense we can speak of collectivity: the inner world is the outer world. The illusion of individuality is purely functional, to be able to think, pointedly, "freely" and relatively undisturbed. Or just to feast on the drug of self and feeling, to imagine this space and emptiness. But either way it's illusive.

To be free of thinking about the I so the I is free to think.

Thinking about things: conscious of existence, dualism, suffering.

Thinking of things: unconscious of existence, nonduality, no suffering.

Pam,
The direct experience of emptiness is a flash of insight when thought processes shut down and your whole life is realised.

every move you made.

the jigsaw pieces come together

Every move you made

the entire web of interaction exposed and brought to light.

the chain of being laid out before you

an event,
You will experience this at the point of death anyway.

this ceases, that ceases
this arises, that arises

you don't amount to anything.

every move you made in order to

an explosion of love for being.

Dennis,

The direct experience of emptiness is a flash of insight when thought processes shut down

Thought processes shut down during the insight of no-self, yes. But only during the insight.

and your whole life is realised.

every move you made.

the jigsaw pieces come together

Every move you made

the entire web of interaction exposed and brought to light.

the chain of being laid out before you

an event,

If the thought process is shut down during the "experience" of emptiness, how does one realize these things?

You will experience this at the point of death anyway.

this ceases, that ceases
this arises, that arises

you don't amount to anything.

every move you made in order to

an explosion of love for being.

Your love explosion for being is standing between you and living "purely" of your causality.

It's as hard to give up the love orgasm as it is to give up the compassion orgasm, I know all too well of these things of self feeling deeply.

Love is detaching
releasing
freedom

The actual experience
there is that and semantics

An interruption of semantics

a name isn't it.

Dennis Mahar wrote:Love is detaching
releasing
freedom

The actual experience
there is that and semantics

An interruption of semantics

a name isn't it.

Believe it or not, I relate to that unintentional "mess" of dualism you gave me above.

Drop love, and ?

Do you mistake emptiness for absolute truth?
it's an explication of phenomenal existence.
a philosophy of nonduality, not a religion.


A description of the activities of:
Gross mind
subtle mind
very subtle mind

Will you wear this costume for me as Nietzsche pointed out.

Such a slippery little devil you are.

Drop love and ?

Can you answer this question or not?

It's rhetorical.
loaded with malice.

the negator is still present.

dependent arising.

Not rhetorical and not malicious.

Everything would be just as they are.

If you drop love, there would be no negator present. Love would be dropped.

if words like bliss and love get close to the intellect
Wow
strong reaction
loathing
tirades of abuse ensue.

how detached is the intellect?

take a look at the machinery without prejudice.

if you reckon causality is a filthy rag or a lustrous garment so be it.

Not a reaction, not loathing, not a tirade, just a dropping of belief in self.

Causality is neither a filthy rag or a lustrous garment. It is what it is.

Nature isn't self-defining.
You provide the meaning.
what are the consequences of a no-self philosophy?

Dennis Mahar wrote:Nature isn't self-defining.
You provide the meaning.
what are the consequences of a no-self philosophy?

Being unattached to one's thoughts. Thinking without a self at the wheel. Meaning is attachment, self is at the wheel.

The moodedness?
The actual pervading mood.
not the denial of moods
Not a theory about 'correct' mood.

the actual mood.

Meaning like all the rest does operate beyond ourselves, ultimately as causality, including creating appearances of a self which takes itself as meaning-giver: perhaps its largest error so far in self-history! That's why a reversal is in order: nature is necessarily self-defining and meanings keep providing "us". Watch out, reflection upon this can cause meaningfulness in this or that context!

Attachment as momentum: the centripetal force created by each and every spin of the senses. Only some centrifugal masculinity can overcome this gravity. Really, anything else just has only one direction to go no matter how one feels it should be. Grounding suddenly gets another meaning.

That"s absolute truth is it?

Dennis Mahar wrote:The moodedness?
The actual pervading mood.
not the denial of moods
Not a theory about 'correct' mood.

the actual mood.

Because infinite consciousness is all things being caused now, there is no mood present when It has knowledge of "Its" infinite causing (enlightenment, wisdom). Only when It 'forgets' Its infinite nature and the shadow of self arises does it cause the arousal of mood or feeling as if leaving Itself or moving toward Itself.

When infinite consciousness has knowledge of Its nature, It is awake.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Meaning like all the rest does operate beyond ourselves, ultimately as causality, including creating appearances of a self which takes itself as meaning-giver: perhaps its largest error so far in self-history! That's why a reversal is in order: nature is necessarily self-defining and meanings keep providing "us". Watch out, reflection upon this can cause meaningfulness in this or that context!

Attachment as momentum: the centripetal force created by each and every spin of the senses. Only some centrifugal masculinity can overcome this gravity. Really, anything else just has only one direction to go no matter how one feels it should be. Grounding suddenly gets another meaning.

All caused things come and go, impermanence, including the self that is the meaning maker. Reflection on this is meaningful in that it is causes knowledge of one's infinite causing nature. Which means it is knowledge, not meaning that is the centrifugal force of liberation. One must know and be able to say why they know they are of infinite causes before liberation from cause-attachment is attained. Knowledge is the life of wisdom.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Attachment as momentum: the centripetal force created by each and every spin of the senses.

So what is the evolutionary purpose ? Survival ?

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Only some centrifugal masculinity can overcome this gravity. Really, anything else just has only one direction to go no matter how one feels it should be. Grounding suddenly gets another meaning.

Why do you have to call it masculinity ? Is nature masculine ?

movingalways wrote: Knowledge is the life of wisdom.

Wisdom has no life. Compassion has life. :)

That's why Wisdom has to get a life :)


Example:

A library full of books, needs a human being, with a love of learning, to appreciate & read them.


There is no Wisdom without Compassion.

Was Hitler wise because he thought he had the correct knowledge to justify his murdering of millions of innocent people ?