For the Enlightened: A question

[stirling]

2 minutes ago, Sir Darius the Clairvoyent said:

To me, it is a paradox.

 

It does seem that way, but it points to a very real realization.  

[stirling]

1 minute ago, Daniel said:

What's stopping you?

 

Daniel, I already DID. Every time you re-quote me (which seems to be a lot) it is right in front of you. Promise.

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

3 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

It does seem that way, but it points to a very real realization.  

Maybe Ill get there in time. Or possibly, I am already there 🤔

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

Daniel, I already DID. Every time you re-quote me (which seems to be a lot) it is right in front of you. Promise.

 

That´s the trouble with summoning the enlightened: they show up.

[stirling]

9 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Let me help you,

 

A gateless-gate:  do it, or not.  It's open.  There's no gate.  The door is off the hinges.

 

I actually HAVE "learned" this one (all of them) already. It isn't the right combination of words that would demonstrate that you also have "got" it... it is an experiential understanding, not an intellectual one. The question is intended to tie the thinking mind in knots.

 

You might be on the road to success.

 

-

 

Just to add: My teacher lost her substantial library in a flood. Thousands of books ruined. She called it her "Fortress of Competence" and will tell you that the false security her library gave her that she was well-read, and more than intellectually incisive enough to put the most intelligent and learned in their place was amongst the most wonderful things she ever lost. What you need to understand all of the secrets of the universe is in fact always right where you are, in the moment and place you inhabit.

[Daniel]

14 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

All good things are paradox.

 

Not true:  choosing indifference is a bad paradox.  It's in contrast to agnosticism ( the good natural version  )

 

( Few consider the distinction , especially if they deny all distinction.  It's an ugly, bad-bad paradox.  )

 

Edited Saturday at 01:12 AM by Daniel

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

 

Not true:  choosing indifference is a bad paradox.  It's in contrast to agnosticism ( the good natural version  )

 

( Few consider the distinction , especially if they deny all distinction.  It's an ugly, bad-bad paradox.  )

 

My take is that the nature of reality itself is paradoxical, good and bad and everything in between.  Whatever it is that transcends transcendence is omnipresent, the silent backdrop of the universe.  

[stirling]

20 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Not true:  choosing indifference is a bad paradox.  It's in contrast to agnosticism ( the good natural version  )

 

( Few consider the distinction , especially if they deny all distinction.  It's an ugly, bad-bad paradox.  )

 

Gosh... choosing indifference seems like a tough life. Who is it you think is doing that?

[Daniel]

21 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

My take is that the nature of reality itself is paradoxical, good and bad and everything in between.  Whatever it is that transcends transcendence is omnipresent, the silent backdrop of the universe.  

 

How do you describe "choosing indifference"?

 

When is it useful?  When is it dangerous?

 

I'll give you a hint:  it's taught in SERE.

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, Maddie said:

 

tran·scend·ence

/tran(t)ˈsendəns/

noun

existence or experience beyond the normal or physical level.

"the possibility of spiritual transcendence in the modern world"

 

tran·scend

/tran(t)ˈsend/

verb

gerund or present participle: transcending

be or go beyond the range or limits of (something abstract, typically a conceptual field or division).

"this was an issue transcending the tech space and reaching other corners of society"

 

one is a verb, the other is a noun, but it's the same word. Therefore it's really meaningless. 

 

That's your answer?  It's meaningless.

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Daniel, I already DID. Every time you re-quote me (which seems to be a lot) it is right in front of you. Promise.

 

I missed it then.  Oh well.

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

I actually HAVE "learned" this one

 

Good for you 

 

2 hours ago, stirling said:

is an experiential understanding,

 

Which is it?  Did you learn it, or did you experience something that you cannot explain?

[stirling]

33 minutes ago, Daniel said:

That's your answer?  It's meaningless.

Is this meaningful to you?

 

Quote

King David writes:  Psalm 19

19:5
בכל־הארץ יצא קום ובקצה תבל מליהם לשמש שם אהל בהם׃
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun,

19:6
והוא כחתן יצא מחפתו ישיש כגבור לרוץ ארח׃
Which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and rejoices like a strong man when he runs a race.

19:7
מקצה השמים מוצאו ותקופתו על־קצותם ואין נסתר מחמתו׃
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit to the ends of it; and there is nothing hidden from his heat.

 

Maybe you could parse it? Or maybe I need to experience it?

[stirling]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Good for you 

 

It has certainly been a good thing, yes, thanks for reminding me. 

 

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Which is it?  Did you learn it, or did you experience something that you cannot explain?

 

The experience illuminated what was being pointed to in ALL koans. 

 

Why so adversarial, Daniel? We are on topic. I feel I'm being friendly? It looked to me like Maddie was being genuine too, as well as the others. Why do you keep coming back to the trough if you don't feel safe or comfortable?

[Daniel]

1 minute ago, stirling said:

The experience illuminated what was being pointed to in ALL koans. 

 

That doesn't answer the question.

 

2 hours ago, stirling said:

I actually HAVE "learned" this one

 

You "learned" it?  Why the quotes?  Did you learn it or not?

 

3 hours ago, stirling said:

it is an experiential understanding,

 

So you can't explain it, right?

 

You don't have words for it?  

 

No one taught you the right words?

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, stirling said:

Daniel, I already DID

 

You said :

 

Nothing to do, no where to go.  That's solitary confinement.  Not a gateless-gate, or anything relating to the topic 

 

It's nothing.  Literally.

 

 

[Daniel]

5 minutes ago, stirling said:

I feel I'm being friendly?

 

I feel you're being obstinate.

[Daniel]

7 minutes ago, stirling said:

Why do you keep coming back to the trough if you don't feel safe or comfortable?

 

Stirling,

 

We aren't supposed to be interacting.  It's in the best interests of the community.  I thought you knew that.  Yesterday, you broke the silence to poke me in the chest about some mysterious 'particular post' that had you doing backflips.

 

How about this?

 

Leave me alone.  I have zero interest in what you have to offer.  Zen is a tiny little curio among all the others in my knowledgebase.  You do realize that your experiential understanding can be taught in about 5 minutes or less to anyone under the right conditions?  Your lineage does not OWN these practices.  They don't belong to you. 

[stirling]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

That doesn't answer the question.

 

You "learned" it?  Why the quotes?  Did you learn it or not?

 

I think it answers it as perfectly as possible. There was a moment where I became able to see the underlying emptiness of all phenomena at any time, and eventually permanently. Seeing the underlying emptiness of phenomena is clearly what all koans point to.

 

It is also what a phrase like:

 

Quote

"The eye through which I see God is the same eye through which God sees me: my eye and Gods eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowing, one love". - Meister Eckhart

 

...also points to.

 

I use quote to indicate words that I consider imperfect for their purpose, and as having no other clear analog. 

 

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

So you can't explain it, right?

 

I try to explain it, imperfectly, all of the time, including this post.

 

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

You don't have words for it?  

 

No one taught you the right words?

 

There aren't any. What is being pointed to by its very nature has no subject object relationships. Language requires and makes assumptions about their being time, space, and a self. One labeled object creates a universe of contextually related other objects. 

 

-

 

Still looks adversarial to me. 

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

That´s the trouble with summoning the enlightened: they show up.

 

And start quacking like ducks...

[Daniel]

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

There aren't any.

 

OK.  Good.  You can't explain it.  You don't have the words.  Thank you.

 

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

There was a moment where I became able to see the underlying emptiness of all phenomena at any time, and eventually permanently.

 

You had an experience.  

 

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

Seeing the underlying emptiness of phenomena is clearly what all koans point to.

 

You decided that the experience is what ALL koans point to.  Clearly.  Got it.

 

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

I use quote to indicate

 

You found a quote somewhere that resonates with you.  OK.

 

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

I try to explain it, imperfectly

 

No one taught you.  No discourse.  No text.  No teacher.  No words to explain it.  Right.

 

15 minutes ago, stirling said:

There aren't any.

 

You don't have words for it.  You had an experience.  Now you talk about it.  But you can't explain it. 

 

---

 

3 hours ago, stirling said:

I actually HAVE "learned" this one

 

But you can't teach it.  Whatever you learned, you can't explain it.  

 

Stirling, can you give me one good reason to take any of this seriously?

 

Edited Saturday at 04:37 AM by Daniel

[Daniel]

47 minutes ago, stirling said:

Is this meaningful to you?

 

Of course

 

47 minutes ago, stirling said:

Maybe you could parse it?

 

 I can.  But your behavior discourages me.

 

47 minutes ago, stirling said:

Or maybe I need to experience it?

 

The question is:  "What is ... ?"

 

The question is not:  "How do I ... ?"

 

[stirling]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

We aren't supposed to be interacting.  It's in the best interests of the community.  I thought you knew that.  Yesterday, you broke the silence to poke me in the chest about some mysterious 'particular post' that had you doing backflips.

 

I'm a concierge here. I keep an eye on what goes on here when I have the time. In this case, I wanted to be sure the intention of your comment wasn't to insult someone, including me.

 

On this thread I was tagged by a poster to respond, and did. You messaged me, after that, if I recall correctly. I messaged you back, curious to see if things had shifted for you. People change, yes? If you don't feel they have, I'm fine keeping out of your hair. If you want me to stop responding to you, stop asking me questions.

 

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Leave me alone.  I have zero interest in what you have to offer.  Zen is a tiny little curio among all the others in my knowledgebase.  You do realize that your experiential understanding can be taught in about 5 minutes or less to anyone under the right conditions?  Your lineage does not OWN these practices.  They don't belong to you. 

 

You are aware that you keep asking?

 

What I am talking about is POST Buddhism, post practices. It is a-religious. It definitely can't be completely understood in 5 minutes, or you'd have arhats wandering the streets being kind to one another. Sounds great actually.

 

I'm sorry if I have made you feel threatened or vulnerable. Clearly something in what I have to say hits some deep wound of yours, that makes you feel you need to insult me. 

[Daniel]

1 minute ago, stirling said:

I'm a concierge here. I keep an eye on what goes on here when I have the time. In this case, I wanted to be sure the intention of your comment wasn't to insult someone, including me.

 

I told you:  "not yours".  I do not read anything you write.   I scroll past them.  I told you my posts had nothing to do with you.  You had kittens.  You kept going, and going, and going.

 

There was nothing insulting.  You were over-reacting.  

[stirling]

8 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

OK.  Good.  You can't explain it.  You don't have the words.  Thank you.

 

 

You had an experience.  

 

 

You decided that the experience is what ALL koans point to.  Clearly.  Got it.

 

 

You found a quote somewhere that resonates with you.  OK.

 

 

No one taught you.  No discourse.  No text.  No teacher.  No words to explain it.  Right.

 

 

You don't have words for it.  You had an experience.  Now you talk about it.  But you can't explain it. 

 

---

 

 

But you can't teach it.  Whatever you learned, you can't explain it.  

 

Stirling, can you give me one good reason to take any of this seriously?

 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

You had an experience.  

 

It's permanent. 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

You decided that the experience is what ALL koans point to.  Clearly.  Got it.

 

What I can see in this moment is what all koans point to. 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

No one taught you.  No discourse.  No text.  No teacher. 

 

These are your words. I mentioned one of my teachers previously. 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

You don't have words for it.  You had an experience.  Now you talk about it.  But you can't explain it. 

 

To truly understand it in 5 minutes you'd need to have the experiential understanding yourself. Pointing can get you pointed in the right direction. 

 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

But you can't teach it.  Whatever you learned, you can't explain it. 

 

See above. 

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Stirling, can you give me one good reason to take any of this seriously?

 

I think you have made your position clear.