The Absolute Present

[Marblehead]

sure, but the energy is in the present

Actually, Vmarco is correct in his proposition, from the human recognition point of view, but you are also correct, from the manifest reality point of view, IMO.

[MooNiNite]

boom

Edited August 5, 2013 by MooNiNite

[Marblehead]

i think Vmarco also possesses the truth...i think he is just trying to teach the way. kinda like a set of beliefs that lead to enlightenment.

No arguement there. our main difference is that he looks at it from a Buddhist perspective and I look at it from an Atheistic Taoist perspective.

 

Yes, he is trying to share his understandings. I find no fault with that.

[MooNiNite]

oom

Edited August 5, 2013 by MooNiNite

[Vmarco]

sure, but the energy is in the present

 

NO! Energy is NEVER, EVER in the Present. Remember, there is no Present in time. Energy, as all motion, only exists in time.

[Vmarco]

i think Vmarco also possesses the truth...i think he is just trying to teach the way. kinda like a set of beliefs that lead to enlightenment.

 

The only beliefs I point to in my posts are for dissolution. Beliefs step between people and their liberation. My I have an anvil tied to my neck, and be thrown into an abyss if I ever attempt to "teach" a belief.

 

Anyone who gives you a belief system is your enemy

[Vmarco]

i think Vmarco also possesses the truth...i think he is just trying to teach the way. kinda like a set of beliefs that lead to enlightenment.

 

No belief system leads to the uncovering of enlightenment.

[C T]

...he looks at it from a Buddhist perspective ..

 

God loves him for trying, but i would not go as far to say that he comes purely from that angle. Sometimes, his takes sorta reminds me of a someone who brings his own air-pistol to the amusement park just so he'd get a better shot at the moving duckies..

 

Very unconventional, often tainted with extremities, and almost always provocative and judgmental.

 

Some may find it agreeable. In most parts, i dont.

 

just saying..

[Stosh]

dis·so·lu·tion play_w2("D0290300") (ds-lshn)

n.

1. Decomposition into fragments or parts; disintegration.

2. Indulgence in sensual pleasures; debauchery.

3. Termination or extinction by disintegration or dispersion: The dissolution of the empire was remarkably swift.

4. Extinction of life; death.

5. Annulment or termination of a formal or legal bond, tie, or contract.

6. Formal dismissal of an assembly or legislature.

7. Reduction to a liquid form; liquefaction.

 

 

Ahh now I see!

But I dont want that for myself, Im very much in favor of its reverse.

[MooNiNite]

boom

Edited August 5, 2013 by MooNiNite

[GrandmasterP]

The only beliefs I point to in my posts are for dissolution. Beliefs step between people and their liberation. My I have an anvil tied to my neck, and be thrown into an abyss if I ever attempt to "teach" a belief.

 

Anyone who gives you a belief system is your enemy

.....

The magic is in his pauses.

[Stosh]

so, you believe nothing exists because everything is in motion.

"only the unchanging can observe change."

so your soul, and others souls, is the only thing that exists?

i'd probably agree. however i dont like to use words like yes or no or separate.

 

some people believe that this energy that everything is made out of is consciousness, or somehow connected to the soul.

 

sorry if im butchering what your trying to say Vmarco, im not enlightened yet.

 

You arent butchering , it is already butchered. INTENTIONALLY

[Birch]

And crazy border collie eyes...

[Marblehead]

just saying..

No way will I get involved in that. Hehehe.

[Marblehead]

I'm not enlightened either, however,

 

some people believe that this energy that everything is made out of is consciousness, or somehow connected to the soul.

I won't be included with those folks.

[Jeff]

NO! Energy is NEVER, EVER in the Present. Remember, there is no Present in time. Energy, as all motion, only exists in time.

 

 

Even in the pure moment, energy exists as potential.

 

 

(edit - deleted question. reread first post in thread)

Edited December 11, 2012 by Jeff

[deci belle]

It is only confusion that I do not necessarily avoid. I do not need to preserve my little bit of clarity~ as I gave it up to see you.

 

If you knew what not to do with your intellectual arrows— God knows you would only rush to display them all the more. Yet since you do not offer anything in response other than to project your own knowledge of confusion, and do nothing to actually display your ability to apply your quiver of intellectual footnotes to the reality which has no part of your insistence on denying the real inconceivability of this and that. You want to appear as if there is something to understand— and that you do.

 

Confucious said that appearing to know when you do not is a sickness. Erudition without a basis in reality is balderdash and poppycock.

 

I already knew you do not have a partnership in what is beyond the created. Reality has no sum of its parts— You are only a phantom among phantoms quoting antiquity. Absolute presence is not beyond your sum of its parts; not to mention that there is no such sum.

 

The most important fact is that there are many viewers. If you believe I have an issue with you, it is only due to your knowledge of confusion as your identity of projections. You are providing the situation, mr V. The situation itself is providing the context.

 

So would you like to re-direct attention? That would be so convenient.

 

Your inability to apply potential to meet creation is indicative of your denial of the real— and the day-jobs of enlightening beings who have no fear of confusion flourishing as flowers fall.

 

I only speak of the real. So necessarily the sameness of Samsara and Nirvana eludes you, and therefore you must project confusion to express an inability to see through both in order to see reality as is— and perpetuate your high-minded concepts void of reality.

 

You say it cannot be done because you yourself cannot do it.

 

mr V sez:

NO! Energy is NEVER, EVER in the Present. Remember, there is no Present in time. Energy, as all motion, only exists in time.

 

HAW!! (borrowed that from Judo Trend)

 

 

ed note: add "not" in second sentence; "not to mention that" in the 4th paragraph

Edited December 11, 2012 by deci belle

[deci belle]

Been there, done that, dear~ just sayin'

swirling in the void (that's where is swirls).

 

But then you didn't know that because you haven't seen that, hmmmmm mr V?

 

Maybe you ought to re-direct out attention after all.

 

 

 

 

ed note: spell "ought" better

Edited December 11, 2012 by deci belle

[et-thoughts]

The seeking of commonalities between beliefs is a diversion from truth,...would it not be better to seek and find all the falseness between beliefs?

 

 

Yea seeking commonalities between truth and falseness is certainly a diversion from truth... just know what be true!

[et-thoughts]

No arguement there. our main difference is that he looks at it from a Buddhist perspective and I look at it from an Atheistic Taoist perspective.

 

Yes, he is trying to share his understandings. I find no fault with that.

 

One who finds no fault with the faulty shares in that understanding...

[et-thoughts]

No belief system leads to the uncovering of enlightenment.

Be careful with the belief system of 'no belief system'... its like choosing not to choose... rather than just choosing the better choice one has...

[C T]

Yea seeking commonalities between truth and falseness is certainly a diversion from truth... just know what be true!

 

yawn...

 

what be next?

[et-thoughts]

I only speak of the real.

 

If that is true THEN why did you write the other stuff?

[et-thoughts]

yawn...

 

what be next?

 

seems like you going to sleep...

[Marblehead]

I said: Yes, he is trying to share his understandings. I find no fault with that.

 

One who finds no fault with the faulty shares in that understanding...

So are you suggesting that Vmarco is in fault by wanting to share his understanding? I really cannot figure out why you responded the way you did.