Is God A Thing?
-
Even if one hasn't done much meditation, sometimes pointers can shatter someone's illusions on the spot. Knowing is also important... not to have the wrong views. But to deepen this realisation one has to seriously practise.Originally posted by Isis:Hi Eternal Now, I feel unless that one has done meditation on it, will one be really understanding the process so if there one hasn't done meditation, it is rather hard for there one to understand and sometime can mislead there someone. -
Hi, i but i feel u add abit of personal flavour in it... i myself don't get it...Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Even if one hasn't done much meditation, sometimes pointers can shatter someone's illusions on the spot. Knowing is also important... not to have the wrong views. But to deepen this realisation one has to seriously practise. -
However i get this. No personal flavour being put in here.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:To add on:
The recognition is recognizing, no 'recognizer'.
We are moulded to think in terms of subject and object division;
we partition, divide what that cannot be divided and behave and react as if reality is really made up of such division. Mindfulness enables us to return to this pre-symbolic mode and 'see' reality as it is. This is the whole purpose.
-
Hi !
I am back !
How's the discussion ? Looks like we have more Forumers looking at learning from trying to write out to people?
Learning comes from allowing inputs , and accepting and thinking of the spiritual path of others .
Before this , we still need to have outputs from other spiritual beings . This world is a mess of spiritual paths . Your own path to accept is your own .
No input, no output.
Nobody outputs to Us nobody can get an Input .... This is a forum and it communicates this way.TEXT Based
Coz i cannot touch you , look into your eyes , see you , or feel your presence in a forum. I assume you have a soul behind your postings . Lets have some common sense 1st ok ?
[/b] -
Sorry what is personal flavourOriginally posted by Isis:Hi, i but i feel u add abit of personal flavour in it... i myself don't get it...
-
maybe i shld explain... I do not get this recognition is not some sort of conceptual recognition and yes it is pure learning..Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Who is recognising that self is ever changing... awareness itself is recognising it. Recognition itself recognises it, but this recognition is not some sort of conceptual recognition, it is pure knowing before symbols and labels. Light itself shines on darkness and dissipates it. Awareness is not 'I', but the inverse function of 'I' - clarity=1/Self, as Thusness has put it.
and Light itself shines on darkness and dissipates it?? ( i think you put personal flavour here ) it is really so....?? very chim...
unless i experience it, will then i understand it...
Lastly i don't get the awareness is not 'I' but the inverse function of 'I'
A big HUh here... too chim
Beginners in buddhism might not understand what you are trying to say....
However can be good pointers for those meditate and have advance knowledge in buddhism. -
Meaning awareness is instantaneous, it transmutes dualism to non dualism. Meaning there is no dualism of subject and object division.Originally posted by Isis:maybe i shld explain... I do not get this recognition is not some sort of conceptual recognition and yes it is pure learning..
and Light itself shines on darkness and dissipates it?? ( i think you put personal flavour here ) it is really so....?? very chim...
unless i experience it, will then i understand it...
Lastly i don't get the awareness is not 'I' but the inverse function of 'I'
A big HUh here... too chim
Beginners in buddhism might not understand what you are trying to say....
However can be good pointers for those meditate and have advance knowledge in buddhism.
Not conceptual recognition... means its not just a form of conceptual knowledge "I know that there is no self" but is a form of direct experience. You directly experience the impermanence, the no-selfness.
Lastly, awareness is not 'I' is so that casino king wont think that there is a 'I' called awareness that is perceiving things. -
yes An external now, it is based on your experience and perception. Other people have different perception in it. You have to explain more clearly.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Meaning awareness is instantaneous, it transmutes dualism to non dualism. Meaning there is no dualism of subject and object division.
Not conceptual recognition... like "I know that there is no self" but is a form of direct experience. You directly experience the impermanence, the no-selfness.
Lastly, awareness is not 'I' is so that casino king wont think that there is a 'I' called awareness that is perceiving things.
Dualism and emptiness is such a profound topic. Even if you put them up here. you have to explain so that people with different level of understanding can understand.
You have to understand the people who came into the forum might have ZERO or slightly lower knowledge in dharma. -
Sorry I updated, made a typo.
Not conceptual recognition... means its not just a form of conceptual knowledge "I know that there is no self" but is a form of direct experience. You directly experience the impermanence, the no-selfness. -
Ya thanks for pointing out.. if u feel theres anything that needs clarification do tell us or just help me reply them heheOriginally posted by Isis:You have to understand the people who came into the forum might have ZERO or slightly lower knowledge in dharma. -
A short example on non-dualism. When you see, just see. You dont see, become the seeing. The seeing itself needs no self to see.
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:
I AM looking doesnt mean there is an 'I' that is looking, but to totally become the looking itself. Totally absorbed with no self remaining.
27th May'06
[b]Looking for Me
I am looking for me.
I look and look.
Who am I?
I can't find.
I can't define.
I can't see.
Who am I?
I AM looking.
There is no looker and nothing looked.
There is only the looking.
The looker and the looked are one.[/b]
-
Ok Isis commented I spoke like greek
so if dun understand pls comment to me thanks -
Is awareness an entity? Is Recognition an entity? No entity is aware? Nobody is aware? Nobody recognises? Are you blur of what?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:quote:and I asked: Who is doing the percieving then? The one who has no perception of "self?"
And I was asking, who is doing the perceiving of WHAT? lol...[/quote] You said perception of "self" and then you ask, perception of "WHAT?"
Are you trying to be funny or what? Becuase it is either that or you are compleletly blur.
[quote]Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
[b] quote:Who is the one recoginising that self is ever changing? That there is no inherent "self?" That self is inherently empty? Who?
Who is recognising that self is ever changing... awareness itself is recognising it. Recognition itself recognises it, but this recognition is not some sort of conceptual recognition, it is pure knowing before symbols and labels. Light itself shines on darkness and dissipates it. Awareness is not 'I', but the inverse function of 'I' - clarity=1/Self, as Thusness has put it.. -
Are you trying to be funny or what? Becuase it is either that or you are compleletly blur.
Nope I am clear. Perceiving what?Is awareness an entity? Is Recognition an entity? No entity is aware? Nobody is aware? Nobody recognises? Are you blur of what?
Awareness is not an entity, recognition is not an entity. Awareness is whole, and only an analytical mind can have subject-object division, and seperating things into entities.
You are in a blur. -
That is exactly what I was trying to say. That we exists. The words "I am not in existence" cannot stand.Originally posted by Isis:Firstly, Buddha didn't MEAN there " u didnt exist ".
see: post 22 June 2006 · 07:03 PM page 2 of this thread.
I do not know Buddhism but I can see the errors the people here are making about Buddhism. I am simply pointing out their internal incoherance to themselves.Originally posted by Isis:My honest Opinion and no hard feelings.
I feel that you are assuming that you are know buddhism. When i compare what you wrote here with other venerable's teachings, i can see the differences in insufficient understanding and realization.
How long did you spend on understanding Buddhism everyday? Who and where did you learn it from?
Cast aside comparision, i investigate what you wrote and not based on discriminating. However, i still don't get your logic. Sometime i feel that you anyhow deduce. Maybe im dumb ok.. but please explain properly too.
I am sure that when you feel that they are wrong and you are right, u will frankly tell them that they are wrong. BUT what make you think they are wrong?? what make you think so? Based on YOUR OWN percpetion or on buddha's teachings??
You have to make sure that you know what you are talking about cos i don't get your concept in EMPTINESS. infact i think it is rather inaccurate, if i based on Buddha's teachings and venerable's writings.
where did you deduce there emptiness from and how? -
That is exactly what I was trying to say. That we exists. The words "I am not in existence" cannot stand.
No, Isis was not saying that we exist.
What he meant was Buddha taught that we are empty.
Empty does not mean non existence.
Empty means empty of existence, non existence, both existence and nonexistence and neither existence nor nonexistence. -
If "Empty does not mean non existence." Then it does not mean non-existence. Then existence remains.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:No, Isis was not saying that we exist.
What he meant was Buddha taught that we are empty.
Empty does not mean non existence.
Empty means empty of existence, non existence, both existence and nonexistence and neither existence nor nonexistence.
AEN either exists of does not. You cannot say AEN exists and does not exists. So get it in your head clearly; does AEN exist? -
Pls read before you post.Originally posted by casino_king:If "Empty does not mean non existence." Then it does not mean non-existence. Then existence remains.
AEN either exists of does not. You cannot say AEN exists and does not exists. So get it in your head clearly; does AEN exist?
Empty means empty of existence, non existence, both existence and nonexistence and neither existence nor nonexistence. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Please don't try to wiggle your way out. Make a conclusive statement. Are you in existence?
Pls read before you post.
[b]Empty means empty of existence, non existence, both existence and nonexistence and neither existence nor nonexistence.[/b] -
Do not even speak of an 'I'. There is no self to be found. But neither does it mean that self is inherently non existence. It is beyond all extremes.Originally posted by casino_king:Please don't try to wiggle your way out. Make a conclusive statement. Are you in existence? -
http://www.dzogchenlineage.org/kcrbcaintro.html
Khenpo Kunpal comments: “Since the absolute, the natural state of things, is beyond all extremes—of ‘existence’, of ‘non-existence’, of ‘both existence and non-existence’, and of ‘neither existence nor non-existence’—it is not within the reach of the intellect. Consequently, the intellect and verbal expressions conceptualizing (positions) such as ‘existence’ and ‘nonexistence’ must be described as being the relative and therefore not as being the absolute” -
Since you are so blur, let me just give you some hints.... what is the nature of your existence?
-
Awareness which is empty in natureOriginally posted by casino_king:Since you are so blur, let me just give you some hints.... what is the nature of your existence? -
Awareness is impossible without existence, so what are you saying? You exist, you are aware. I exist I am aware. So what are you saying? Are you still talking about exsistence or have moved on?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Awareness which is empty in nature -
Awareness comes before perception of name and form. (it is pre-symbol and pre-labelling). Name and form is a latter commentary by the mind.Originally posted by casino_king:Awareness is impossible without existence, so what are you saying? You exist, you are aware. I exist I am aware. So what are you saying? Are you still talking about exsistence or have moved on?
'You exist', 'I exist', both are mental assertions by the mind.
All is merely conditioned arising, and is empty of the 4 extremes.