et-thoughts

So many want to escape the nightmare rather than transform the dream and enrich it... they will just find the same elsewhere until they learn and transform it all... the notion that marriage, family, children enslave us rather than enrich us keeps many from working out the lessons they need to learn here and now... Its much better to be an incarnated creature with God than being without God... One still has the opportunity to visit so many different places and dimensions out there and around here... why would you wanna remain on planet earth? well because we be here now... and have something to do here and now... so lets get to it...

Stosh, I was alluding to the fact one in principle can act/react instantaneously with the other movement so that an intended slap or blow just caress the face while also directing the excess energy in productive ways... and how in practice doing it well, requires a bit of mastery and some practice... though as I often tell my son... the best solution to the problem is just not having it! I was also indirectly alluding to the fact that a slap of the face is an invitation to a fight and turning the other cheek is an invitation to peace. If one accept the invitation to a fight regardless of wining or loosing the battle one got entangles into fighting rather than something better... And as I sort of implied just now the best response to a slap on the face would be to move so the slap isn't a slap but a caress... a fight isn't a fight but a dance...

I too "always considered myself one of the most easy going gentle natured people I knew" and just could not understand why other did not appreciate it and would seek to take advantage of the genteelness... The best answer I have found comes from a five year old... during those early school years where bitting, hitting shoving buddies is quite common a concerned father of 'Joe' asked 'bill': "why do you fight with my son Joe all the time"? Bill responded "because joe wants to!" Bill would rather play than fight though will play to fight and win the game if thats what the others wanted to play... Soon everyone learned to just play nice games with Bill... I usually resort to jujitsu dance metaphor, the gentle art of directing energy blows while making them caresses... In principle its quite easy, in practice it takes a bit of practice :-) Being aware of what be going on helps us to choose what step to take next... glad what I sent you helped see something anew...

I liked how you where able to put individual quotes in your response... to me it show your savviness and the care you took in your response... The infinite eternal enduring now is the place where past present and future and other possibilities and realities coexists as one ... they can be still, they can be moving, at any speed... slowly, fast, in between. "When you are in it you are in it..."... and you are always in it! everyone is in it! Yes"... to talk about means to descend from it..." though descend from it does not mean one leaves it one just descends from it into a part of it. One enters deeper into it .-) I suppose that what some mean by going within :-) Glad that you say that my " last post shows to me that you understand all that I have to say very well" that means we can dialogue about the matter at hand, rather than each having a monologue on different stuff... :-). Then I am glad I did not think of that... but wait a second now that I read and thought about what you said I realize that I did think of that thanks to what you wrote well I am glad to know that I do think that that is just wrong... I am curious, do you think that my objection comes from understanding terms like I, me, mine only egoically? When I wrote the objection I was thinking that Buddha considering Buddha allegedly said it must had had a huge ego for making that claim takes a huge ego... what concerns me is the belief and path of seeking to make non-existent the ego rather than to work at educating the ego... Seeking the void rather than fulfilling love... cultivating what opposes life rather than what living fully. FWIIW I did not make the judgment call about your writing... I just observe something and point it out its not what I believe what you believe what others believe that concerns me it be what be... what concerns me centers holding on to what be right even if that means letting go of what I think is right and embracing the thinking that is right... To be a bit more precice though is both and more... expanding the boundaries of thought be expanding the boundaries of thought expanding the boundaries of the ego be expanding the boundaries of the ego expanding the boundaries of one may or may not expand the boundaries of the other... its a bit similar to body-mind-spirit stuff... as you sort of mention sometimes the thoughts-feelings-attitudes become a barrier and sometimes become the enablers... When one understands understanding is not a barrier to the spiritual life nor the physical life not the emotional life... in fact it is an doorway to experiences in these and other domains... Thanks for the clarification why you called this thread "The Spiritual Splendour of the Ego"! Why remind and cultivate on the emptiness of phenomena when one can remind and cultivate the fullness of phenomena? This is both a rhetorical question and one I would like you to address directly. To clarify a bit what I mean by 'cultivate' here consider that each word stated holds a value and every time the word is used it adds its value to a counter and then we can look at the counter to observe what be going all... to simplify consider only three values (+ 0 -) negation would be negative. (that just took us to -2) consideration recognition would be positive (that just took us to +1 = -2+3 =+1). There are neutral words and statements that neither add nor subtract value (like this statement). You may notice that sometimes I do the exercise of reflecting back some statements while changing the words used a bit... seeking a bias towards the positive :-) I find that It just happens to be the case that most spiritual seekers in this day and age already know the pros and cons of phenomena and want to cultivate the pros of good stuff even in themselves and in those who still have to learn about spiritual inclinations. Note that there is no danger of emptiness and non-existence when one is full of love, peace understanding in ones existence be it a temporal or an eternal state... people benefit when they hear about 'the existence dialogue' in order to be able to harmonize the possibilities with their common-sense 'existence argument' and therein gain spiritual wisdom... Most would find absurd the notion of focusing on evil and understating the irrational to do good rationally. most would find natural the notion of focusing on good and the rational to do good and be rational... still many focus on understanding the problem and solution rather than embracing the opportunities and cultivating the better ways to be... always... Best wishes and dreams and realities for you and everyone...

FWIIW, I used to think that being sarcastic was funny until someone told me that sarcasm is a hidden aggression... so I gave up with the aggression and found other ways to be funny :-)

That what you think though evidently there be possibilities that you reject and just can accept rather than embracing the reality that the caterpillar evolves into a butterfly living throughout the process ... now imagine the butterfly transmuting divinely into the next stage...

Oh I am sure the king will put them in a place made just for them to be and if they repent and seek forgiveness will show them divine mercy... I An open their eyes to see the truth of the place and experiences that they be in...

Where there is only life, there will never be death... the death of death makes the concept of death die and become just a past memory ... the concept of life itself can exists and expand ... by itself, with others... at infinitum...There are other ways to erase the concept of Death though I am more interested to cultivate the concepts of life itself... which eventually will be the only stuff around... actually there will be other stuff around filled with life and only life...

The noble, enlightened, morally righteous king with the just power to control the masses would use other merciful means quite different to brutal force of enslavement... allowing each the freedom to choose if to live within the bounds of truth wisdom and love or within the clutches of deception illusion and hate... paradoxically providing each with abundant care sustenance love... and every imaginable possibility. The deceived just would not know it... Though the proposition put forth here involves a much humbler stance where a single voice of truth suffices to direct and silence the slanderous ways once and for all. The peasant with the voice of truth suffices to silence the slanderous rulers... I realize that the challenge can reside in actually recognizing the way of truth... which by the way need not involve the ways of lies... that is the duality of good-bad is not required in the ways of truth... those who know what be the truth need not know any lies...

What are you talking about? do I need to know about that guy?

Let me seek and clarify the point I made... with an example... A wants to smoke in someplace, B does not want to smoke in someplace... only B actually has the right to make changes and demand that his right be respected... because that will help establish the true better ways of being... Another example could be 'slavery'... for those who propose slavery can become slaves of those who propose freedoms... if they so please to have slaves... I do not see the contradiction you saw...

Hey thanks for stating what you did... liked it and am intrigued by the notion of 'waveform writing' and 'particle writing'... Your appreciation that what I write holds true and has multiple and 'deeper' meanings than appear on the surface relates quite well to some of the work I been doing... if you can and want please elaborate a bit more on what you meant by 'waveform writing' I would appreciate it... as is I already appreciate the distinctions you put forth... I would just like to point that the waveform writing I do seeks to be applied to all and each one... its both objective and subjective. It a bit complicated to explain maybe an example will clarify it a bit... The sustainable-desirable-congruent with life ways give each abundantly what they want with The sustainable-desirable-congruent with life ways. Those who desire the unsustainable-incongruent-undesirable find The sustainable-desirable-congruent with life ways unsustainable-incongruent-undesirable ;-) Thanks you given me food for thought will look into 'waveform writing'...

Because the tenants postulated by certain beliefs here cultivate non-existence rather than full-existence

What does it matter which view of the elephant one has, the one who know the elephant understands why each claims what they claim based on what they view. To answer your question directly... NO! My interest resides in enriching understandings ...

Stosh Indeed I too would say we are in close agreement... though to know the meaning of a word we need to check with the user use, rather than speculate using wouckeepokee ... educated guesses at what the words mean based on an arraignment that may not even contain the actual meaning. Of course the checking with the user assumes stuff like the user will actually tell us what the words mean... which in practice may lead us into the wrong direction... BTW have you ever wonder why you go to a diction -ary to look up meanings rather than sounds? I realize that some words have 'legal' definitions and that some users abuse words to seek and make a point... and we are not even getting into reading between the lines or considering ironic statements that state the opposite of the 'literal meaning'... BTW if someone really thinks that the backward view is correct they will look at you stingily for point to them the error... I know for I have done it quite a bit... Sometimes I think one thing say something else thinking I said what I think and find it puzzling how others just do not get it straight what I think and they even have the nerve to tell me that it was my fault... Dyslexia can be so much fun... One can think one word write another and read the original word one thought... unable to figure out that there is an error ... I realize that it would be difficult for anyone to know if the blank stare response reflected understanding wisdom or the opposite... I sort of wanted to make a joke of it while making a point... for a true master would know one from the other... intellectual humor that I hope others would get...

Well its better to believe one actually exists when one does not exits for to believe one does not exists when one does actually exist... keeps one from doing stuff ... In other words Its better to think one can do it, seek to do it until one does it or eventually finds out one can't than to think one can't do it and never find out one can because one never sought to do it.

Stosh, The absolute meaning of a word presented me with the opportunity to see subjective-objective reality at its core... I hold to believe an objective reality ... things are what they are regardless of what someone claims... Though the meanings of words presented an interesting situation ... here the absolute meaning is indeterminate until someone determines it... I think you thought to know what I meant... I realize that the notion of identical copies existing be somewhat disputable ... I can debate for or against this being the case... the point here isn't so much about debating it one way or the other ... the point centers on observing how difficult changing held beliefs can be... and this example is somewhat trivial... You used the example of the word 'dragon'... The example I generally use involves 'dog' or 'rat' and when a little vulgarity is tolerated may even employ the word 'bitch' ... though any words may be employed to demonstrate that the absolute meaning of a word stems from its use. 'Drangon' could mean anything we want... the meanings of -what the words mean- depend on their singular particular use. We usually project our own experiences and associations regarding them rather than validating if what we think it means corresponds to what it actually means. Sometimes the important meaning to consider centers on what was intended, sometimes the important meaning to consider centers on what was perceived, sometimes the important meaning is elsewhere... Looking at the similarities between our dragons as well as the differences may be entertaining and enriching for 'some of our ideas about dragons are similar and some are not' still it may distract us from getting to the real meaning of the word. What I you others feel may also help or hinder our knowledge and understanding. Evidently we can find evidence to prove either position if we wanted too... still sometimes its impossible to prove the truth but that does not change the veracity of the truth... Say someone is a murderer because they did kill somebody... the fact that they are not legally declared a murderer doesn't change the fact they are a murderer... even the fact that they are legally declared 'innocent' doesn't change the fact they are what they are... I said: I am wondering what you mean by "Then there is the suspension of disbelief that appears attributed to the Sage of Lao"... please elaborate what you mean by it IF you consider it appropriate You response" You seemed to indicate that full and complete suspension of disbelief was not a credible thing to do. That the sheer power of our senses tends to overwhelm our ability to deny the presentation of reality they deliver.. but it seems that Lao-daoists believe that the Sage is capable of it long term. I do not think that one CAN divorce themselves entirely of many of the subjective illusions that we have. ( I feel the Sage of Lao is a literary device developed to carry messages to a reader, not that it is a real possibility for folks to actually think and act like "The Sage". ) I can add more later , I need to get back to work" I would say that the sheer power of our beliefs (disbeliefs) tends to overwhelm distort the reality we experience ... when we change everything changes... though in reality stuff may still be the same stuff... I too will need to moderate my participation here... I enjoy them quite a bit though will have to find the proper balance :-)

Nikolai1, I am sort of rotflol... and its in a light humorous way so I hope you will take this the right way... your said "this is the delusion of ego hood"... yea it be the delusion of ego hood that holds that all things arise and then pass at very high speed. When they are passed they become non-existent. The illusion of past present future keeps many from realizing the singular infinite eternal enduring now... It takes a huge ego to claim "There is nothing at all in existence except for what is before (me) right now" and ignores everything that does exist independent of that particular being... but hey if you want to go that a way thats your choice... maybe someday you will become aware of being and there other beings and other stuff... Curious how you claim that "Thought' is not 'about' anything in so-called reality, but is a present here and now reality in itself". For me thought can be about so-called reality and can be a bit more... Thought be thought bound only by thought, when the thought so chooses it... Who asks who witnesses all this 'thought' and 'reality'? The witness is The witness ... regardless of being aware of itself and what the witness does. IF Awareness is the path of Tao then the realisation that we are not, and never were, some kind of individual ego interacting with an external territory is the ultimate illusion to keep us from interacting with the external territory and amongst others. Oh some are free to open up beyond the ego egoless through love... and be a singular whole within the whole ... What hold us back are a bunch of stuff we better let go of while we embrace what actually sustains us... We do share the notion of best wishes for each other... though I do see some beliefs promote embracing the notion of becoming non-existent... and even if that where to happen I know that me being and these words will endure forevermore...

Consider that if the answer(s) or interpretation was the same and thus "quite self evident" ... then it follows that the claim in my case I agree with the lines as originally quoted would be rather meaningless... given that the answer(s) or interpretation put forth be the same, each "quite self evident" ... It follows that the answer(s) or interpretation be quite different... One only actually has the right to make changes or put forth alternate lines of interpretation when that will help establish the truth... though some choose to change that to mean help establish their truth... for the record my interest lies with establishing the truth of the matter... whomever needs to correct themselves let them correct themselves... whomever be right be right regardless of others recognizing it or not...

Indeed what I stated does not really match up with the upanishad and the commentaries of some Self-realized beings ... the questions posed are rhetorical in that the answer is quite evident. Look some think to know stuff with full certainty when they should be wondering about it a bit more... or at least as you state specifically note that it is their interpretation of stuff... Everyone takes liberties to fit the meaning that they choose to what is said and few recognize it openly.

Stosh, Isn't it curious how one word can predispose us to hold a certain stand on stuff rather than allow us to take a closer look to see the truth of the matter...In a way its like seeking the persona label that already explains and judges what will follow rather than taking an unbiased look. The sage said it, the peasant said it, that does not change the veracity of It--- what was said, what be true, the correspondence between the two that determines the actual veracity of it... I met many a man who judge the book by its cover, rather than its content... heck some judge the book by what they manage to see, rather than what it actually holds... the wise can see wisdom even in the simplest of peasants. "...get a handle on what direction you are coming from..." ...get a handle on what direction you are going towards... only makes sense when one be moving from place to place... and that distracts us from focusing on the present place we be at... besides where one is coming from, does not specify what one was doing there... just as where one ends up, does not specify the correctness (or incorrectness) of ones actions... One can end up in a bad place for the right reasons, say to do right there... While indeed it takes two hands to clap, to fight or dance it only takes one... heck we could be dancing with someone who be fighting and each will distinguish the experience from what they chosen to do ... I, like you, come from the direction I been, and go towards the direction I am going, always being where I be. The sound of one hand clapping be the sound of one hand clapping ... If I respond with stumped blank stare: it may be because I know the answer, because I ignore it ... the true master will know to differentiate and distinguish the soundless stare... Stories told have profound ramifications and insights, yes sometimes we take them lightly and even enjoy learning by playing them out... understanding that it is just a story does not make our reactions to be the less sincere... Oh the reaction to a bedtime-story can be as sincere as the reactions to life-stories. Indeed people can take life with all sort of attitudes depending on the particulars some attitudes are more appropriate... I am wondering what you mean by "Then there is the suspension of disbelief that appears is attributed to the Sage of Lao"... please elaborate what you mean by it IF you consider it appropriate What I intended was that its possible for the twisted perception of the twisted sense to result in a true direct view... Can you describe an example.. it is a bit vague. Sure, I can say something using the wrong words you can hear wrongly what I said and you end up getting what I intended to say... and neither you nor I realize that there was anything wrong tacking place... you twisted what I twisted just so the results produce a direct view of that I indented to say. From our dialogues i hold that you believe its actually impossible for two beings to share identical understandings, that is identical copies of knowledge are impossible in separate minds... Now suspend that belief and see that its actually possible for identical copies of knowledge to exists in separate minds. I can choose to embrace either belief: 1- identical copies of knowledge exist in separate minds, 2- identical copies of knowledge are impossible in separate minds It was extremely difficult to accept the first belief as valid and give up the second belief... I have not declared any particular affiliation because to me the importance here and now centers on the beliefs on the table I would like to dialogue about the opinions divergence/convergence/transcendence by putting forth the individual notions and the standard to use, and jointly learning stuff... I am not sure how we can be sure if what we understand of what somebody else wrote corresponds with what they understand without asking them and they responding. First we need to validate if what we think they think corresponds to what they think then we can evaluate it... most of the time individuals think that what they think others think correspond to what the others think.... boy are they surprised when they actually take a look :-) to the reality that be...

Stosh, How you took it stems from the stuff you be caring around... personally I am more interested in the issues than what the affiliations people have with the issues. I seek to be rather blunt and clear about the matter at hand and have little concern about who be right and who be wrong what matters to me is understanding what be the valid point and if I was wrong correct it. Though some folks just do not want to get into that... they prefer to walk away thinking what they think... sometimes even telling me that their close-mindedness is because of my close-mindedness... As I said "I think that there is also a bit of avoiding certain interplay's because of stuff..." you said "There is an awful lot of that STUFF"! Yea for the time being it certainly seems that way... the consolation is that every step taken towards the goal gets us one step closer to it... and right now its the next step that counts... From what you said it seem to me that you want to learn how to dialogue intensely while keeping peace and opening doors to further the dialogue. I am chuckling with what I am about to state next... You seem to put forth the notion that 'suspension of disbelief' is possible, and yet when I claim that its impossible you respond... "...we will have to agree to disagree on that, suspension of disbelief is a common phenomena..." if it such a common phenomena why didn't you just suspend your belief regarding this phenomena ? Here is a hint ... "They pretend the situation is real knowing it is not". I am chuckling because I know how difficult it is to suspend the belief... and how what you did supports what I said... thug you may choose do disagree :-) I said "Yes the senses are faulty still it is possible to twist the twisted just so that it ends up being straight... besides sometimes the twisted view is actually much better" ... What I intended was that its possible for the twisted perception of the twisted sense to result in a true direct view... Like you I brought up certain issues because of contradictions which may be inherent with the beliefs... I have not declared any particular affiliation because to me the importance here and now centers on the beliefs on the table. I am prepared to dialogue about the beliefs and explain them... mine and others... seek to understand what they do... seems like a good exercise... who knows what one may learn... have a good night/day

When death be the eater of death then death be no more ... thats why it seeks to consume life... Why would anyone seek freedom from birth and eternity? Indeed "one cannot overcome death unless one resorts to the Supreme Being"... who gives us life in abundance: joyous happy fulfilling existence (without death nor diseases nor suffering). The supreme being can give us many graces including peace, love, wisdom, understanding, transmigration, transfiguration and more. Live this moment full of love, happily ever after... there can be freedom in life, the great Reality is realized by realizing the great reality instant by instant. Why cultivate death by wondering who is the death of death? Which is Death! When one can cultivate life by wondering who is the life of life ? and living every instant with abundance of life. The Supreme Being, the Eternal, the Absolute, He is the giver of life, and only He has the absolute key.

I can affirm to you that I exists... I exists now know that I exists... there I have just affirmed to you that I exist... of course whether my affirmation is true or false depends on wether I exist... but thats beside the issue here :-)