Passage ...... Where do you go after you die

Ge

When we are speaking of reality here -- we are talking about Ultimate Reality questions -- not about where my home is or if I am actually talking to you.

We are dealing with the question: What is the reality?

0 Replies

Quote:

Ge

When we are speaking of reality here -- we are talking about Ultimate Reality questions -- not about where my home is or if I am actually talking to you.

We are dealing with the question: What is the reality?

Frank, 'the reality'? You wouldn't be trying to say I don't have a reality except that which you grant me would you? If so I would like to speak to your supervisor or whom ever is in charge of' personal realities immediately!

Do you really know enough about the human psyche to make a judgment of validity for another person's reality and isn't the ultimate reality still dependent on the person experiencing it?

---------------------

CI, in my judgment e are flogging a dead horse and so I have decided to flip a coin to decide whether or not (yes, or no) to bury it.
Call it in the air please

0 Replies

detachment
Hi everyone, Nobody's home again. Frank, I just want to note, without having read the last three pages of this thread, that there is nothing to detach from and, as Twyvel emphasizes, there's really noone to do the detaching. The only way to come to this realization is through some form of meditation, any form that simply notes what is happening each moment without comment. This leads, I believe, not to a desire to detach oneself from passions, understandings, desires, etc. It results in a disposition toward "non-attachment." This is something that has no intention, is not "done" on purpose with a purpose. It is thoroughly "natural," "spontaneous" and effortless.
"Detachment" is a misleading notion, implying that one can choose to ignore or let go of one's passions. Those passions are natural, but it is important to see them for what they are: they are like clouds passing overhead, to be PASSIVELY observed, with non-attachment.
I hope my words are not mystifying or misleading. They are meant to be clear, to show how easy "buddhism" is--at least as I understand it. Pardon my presumption. Now I'm going to read the last three pages of this thread to see if my point has already been made.

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

Quote:

Do you really know enough about the human psyche to make a judgement of validity for another person's reality and isn't the ultimate reality still dependent on the person experiencing it?

[/b]

We manufacture meaning, as Shakespeare said, "Nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so".

As such ultimate reality doesn't have an experiencer, you just "are it"

It's meaningless, pointless and valueless, it just is as it is. It's void of concepts and symbols and therefore void of significance. And therefore void of you (plural (ego/body)

We divide the world by assigning value, distinguishing between "right" and "wrong" (which some have said is the sickness of the mind). Yet everything including our ideas and these here words, in their "isness" signify nothing.

If you could observe the universe without assigning meaning or value, without a purpose or goal what would you observe?

Nondualism; an unfragmented whole................that isn't a whole because there are no parts...............?

Hi, JLNobody,

Yes,
the clouds pass by and there is observing
.............and the void

0 Replies

I didn't change the type size,......oh well....

0 Replies

I understand,you had something to say...you shout it out. :wink:

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

Quote:
Ge

When we are speaking of reality here -- we are talking about Ultimate Reality questions -- not about where my home is or if I am actually talking to you.

We are dealing with the question: What is the reality?

Frank, 'the reality'? You wouldn't be trying to say I don't have a reality except that which you grant me would you? If so I would like to speak to your supervisor or whom ever is in charge of' personal realities immediately!

Do you really know enough about the human psyche to make a judgment of validity for another person's reality and isn't the ultimate reality still dependent on the person experiencing it?

Ge, read my post again. Frankly, I think you should have read it more carefully before going ape.

I did not say what you say I said -- and I think my post was very clear.

If you have anything to say about what I actually said -- rather than your fanciful rendition of what I said -- I'd be happy to hear it and to respond to it.

0 Replies

Well done, JLNobody. Excellent description of detachment.

Quote:

Detachment" is a misleading notion, implying that one can choose to ignore or let go of one's passions. Those passions are natural, but it is important to see them for what they are: they are like clouds passing overhead, to be PASSIVELY observed, with non-attachment.
I hope my words are not mystifying or misleading. They are meant to be clear, to show how easy "buddhism" is--at least as I understand it.

0 Replies

truth
Thanks, Kara. I'm glad I could communicate the point. It's subtle enough to have taken me years to realize. I sought to DE-TACH myself from the ideas, desires and motivations that imposed my constructions on the reality of the moment, thus making my awareness delusional, which is what it still is most of the time. When I saw--in my bones, as it were--that the effort to detach myself from my mental constructions was itself a potent attachment, things began to fall into place. Even meditation became something that required no concentration or effort: just watching whatever is occuring without comment or evaluation produces a sense of bliss which I suspect is very hygenic. It's not a philosophical trick, a way of gaining some kind of understanding, some "enlightenment." Indeed, it is a freedom from the need to understand. Like a tree or a flower, one feels completely valid and complete. I hope everyone at least tries it.

0 Replies

JL, I have gone through somewhat the same process myself. It is difficult to explain to people how one can become detached. As you point out, it is better described as lack of attachment. And it is easier to explain than to do. The Buddhists were the first real psychologists, and their ideas on the human mind are valid today.

0 Replies

namu ami dabutsu, namu ami dabutsu...... am I there yet? namu ami dabutsu.....

0 Replies

For some reason, I am reminded of a quote that I read in the Financial Times Weekend, five years ago, and kept.

"...The sequence of creation of the universe from nothingness, culminating after six days in humans, is not so far adrift from Big Bang theory, as I understand it, except that as scientists we are allowed to answer questions about what happened before the Big Bang by saying we don't know, rather than that God did it..." Steven Rose ("atheist biologist") reviewing his intro to the Canongate edition of Genesis. FT Weekend 20 Sept 1998.

0 Replies

Earth to c.i., earth to c.i.......

0 Replies

truth
Kara, I agree, and I'm glad you've experienced this process. Not to be cute, but in a way it's easier to do than to explain, IF one realizes that meditation must be completely effortless. It is SO difficult to explain what ABSOLUTE effortlessness is. It is so natural to think that this effortlessness ("giving up", "letting go", etc.) must be "achieved" by some kind of through-the-back-door (disguised) effortfulness. This is especially the case because meditation is often described as a form of discipline characterized by one-pointed concentration. This may accomplish something--never has for me--but it is not the approach of teachers like Krishnamurti or the Soto Zen school.

0 Replies

Frank, yes I get a little inscensed when someone tells me that what I consider to be reality is no more than a guess. Then I am told there is 'ultimate' realtyand 'the' reality, both of which are not valid because, if I accept your theory that unless one has proof that is to be judged as valid by you, I assume, then any guess, we are not allowed faith, gotta have proof that our reality is not halucination ..... is invalid..

If you know what is not reality as evidenced by your claim that any suggested knowledge of reality is a guess, then you must know what reality is.
So tell me please, what is reality?

And while I have you here you forgot to answer a prior question:

Frank, if I may enter the fray .... to paraphrase ...... you believe that Twyvel's belief is belief and that your belief that his belief is belief is fact?
Am I correct?

It helps the discourse if questions are not ignored.

0 Replies

Quote:

Then I am told ther is \'ultimate\' realtyand \'the\' reality, both of which are not valid because, if I accept your theory that unless one has proof that is to be judged as valid by you, I assume, then any guess, we are not allowed faith, gotta have proof that our reality is not halucination.

Gelisgesti, I think what Frank is saying is that everything is a guess unless one has proof. Not proof judged by him. Proof as proven somewhere sometime by someone in a way that is satisfactory to all. Otherwise, what is proof?

I have read, for example, the Catholic Church's proofs for the existence of God. If you start at their Square One, you will accept these proofs, or you can, by logic, do so. If you do not begin with their major premise, you will not end up where they end up. And you will not be convinced.

If your "proof" is not someone else's "proof," you have proved nothing.

0 Replies

"Proof" in this world is very fickle. c.i.

0 Replies

I'd much rather ride on my motorsikle
and I don't want to die
cause I know I'll meet Frank
up in the sky i Wink

0 Replies

Kara wrote:

Quote:

Gelisgesti, I think what Frank is saying is that everything is a guess unless one has proof. Not proof judged by him. Proof as proven somewhere sometime by someone in a way that is satisfactory to all. Otherwise, what is proof?

I doubt proof would ever be "satisfactory to all"

There are self evident proofs which are non-shareable, such as inner experiences, qualia etc., i.e. I cannot prove I see the colour red.

In fact you cannot prove anything to anyone.

But generally speaking I really find it bizarre to ask SOMEONE else to prove god exists to you. It's like asking someone to eat an apple and tell you what it tastes like, as if they could somehow transfer the sensation onto you.

I think we can share information and insights, but the proof is in the eating.

0 Replies

I am really hammered, did I like post here or is it some sort of cosmic thing. Inquiring minds, y'know.......

0 Replies

Passage ...... Where do you go after you die

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know