Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[godnotgod]

Wow! You like Mr. Watts that much, eh? Great! Soon you will be singing his praises, but first you must clear your mind by barfing into ze bucket, eh? Oooooh! There's a lot of stuff in there!

"Garcon! Another bucket for m'sieur....better bring several!"

 

[Rick O'Shez]

A wave is the ocean itself, not a part of the ocean. Both are made of the same substance: water.

And so? What is your problem with labelling a wave as a "wave"? It's just a label for one aspect of a larger process.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

"Garcon! Another bucket for m'sieur....better bring several!"

Yes, and another 6 crates of brown ale for Mr. Watts.

 

[godnotgod]

And so? What is your problem with labelling a wave as a "wave"? It's just a label for one aspect of a larger process.

I don't have a problem with calling a wave a wave, because I understand it is the ocean itself. However, most people do not see it that way; they see the world composed of separate 'parts', as in a machine; they even see themselves as separate egos acting independently upon the world, bulldozing it around, so to speak.

We did not come into this world; we came out of it, in the same manner as an orange comes out of the orange tree. Meditation should reconnect us with the background of existence, to realize we are not separate from the Universe, as many think.

 

[godnotgod]

Yes, and another 6 crates of brown ale for Mr. Watts.

That's enough for you and Mr. Watts to enjoy the evening into the wee hours together. Now for some roast pheasant and several loaves of crusty bread and lots of butter.....

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Having a dualistic or nondualistic view makes no difference to the universe which is beyond all such views.

Indeed. Part of the confusion here is that people are referring to a psychological experience of non-duality ( whatever ) and automatically assuming that this correlates to some ontological "reality" out there, that they have really seen the universe or something. There is a very large element of wishful thinking involved in such assumptions.

 

[Straw Dog]

Not to change

Indeed. Part of the confusion here is that people are referring to a psychological experience of non-duality ( whatever ) and automatically assuming that this correlates to some ontological "reality" out there, that they have really seen the universe or something. There is a very large element of wishful thinking involved in such assumptions.

Yes, we are always discussing a particular subjective view of reality. All views are shifting relative to a real context. However, there is such a thing as 'reality' or else communication would be impossible. Reality is communication.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I still don't understand why you insist on surrounding meditative states with a load of woo and magical thinking. What purpose does it serve?

You are quoting my post to Runewolf whose purpose it was, was to address his post... Is that a problem or would you prefer me to put my posts by you first to see if you understand them before posting?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You are quoting my post to Runewolf whose purpose it was, was to address his post... Is that a problem or would you prefer me to put my posts by you first to see if you understand them before posting?

I think I asked a valid question, so maybe you could address it? Here it is again:
I still don't understand why you insist on surrounding meditative states with a load of woo and magical thinking. What purpose does it serve?

PS Would it be possible for you to use proper sentences when you post? Your rambling stream-of-consciousness style with all the .... is rather difficult to follow, particularly when you are delivering "mini-sermons".

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Reality is communication.

I think people can spend too far much conceptualising about "reality" ( whatever that is supposed to be ) and not enough time just being in the present and fully appreciating it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I think I asked a valid question, so maybe you could address it? Here it is again:
I still don't understand why you insist on surrounding meditative states with a load of woo and magical thinking. What purpose does it serve?

PS Would it be possible for you to use proper sentences when you post? Your rambling stream-of-consciousness style with all the .... is rather difficult to follow, particularly when you are delivering mini-sermons.

It serves to help explain to those with the prerequisite understanding....my understanding of the subject at hand...

PS For people like yourself, it would not matter how my understanding was conveyed, you would not understand, for atheistic belief is a closed mindset.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

That's enough for you and Mr. Watts to enjoy the evening into the wee hours together.

6 crates of brown ale might keep Mr. Watts going for half an hour, but what am I going to drink?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

It serves to help explain to those with the prerequisite understanding....my understanding of the subject at hand...

Really? Have you asked anyone whether your style makes you clearer? Is there a valid reason for your weird posting style, or is it just a pretentious affectation?

 

[godnotgod]

I think people can spend too far much conceptualising about "reality" ( whatever that is supposed to be ) and not enough time just being in the present and fully appreciating it.

When you are fully in the present, you also are fully in the Universe. Why is it that you think it so impossible to comprehend the nature of the Universe? You are setting up an imaginary wall and making it insurmountable. I think you still see yourself in relation to the Universe in terms of the observer and the observed.

 

[godnotgod]

Really? Have you asked anyone whether your style makes you clearer? Is there a valid reason for your weird posting style, or is it just a pretentious affectation?

I understand clearly everything bend is saying. You seem to have a problem with comprehension with me too, calling it 'muddling', when the muddling is just in your own mind. You have set up automatic rejection biases in your mind. That is not good for a Buddhist.

 

[godnotgod]

6 crates of brown ale might keep Mr. Watts going for half an hour, but what am I going to drink?

We'll send over a nice case of the new brew: 'Hindu New Age Ale' so you might get up to speed, and stop drinking that old stagnant brew from the Hinayana backwater.

 

[godnotgod]

Indeed. Part of the confusion here is that people are referring to a psychological experience of non-duality ( whatever ) and automatically assuming that this correlates to some ontological "reality" out there, that they have really seen the universe or something. There is a very large element of wishful thinking involved in such assumptions.

You're making much too much of this: why is it that you cannot accept seeing things as they are? That is what that the awakened mind is about; that is what the Buddha experienced. Meditation is one pathway to achieving this. It is not some ontological reality 'out there', but in here. You are the Universe, looking at itself through your eyes. You are not the experiencer of the experience. You are the experience itself. Is that too 'new agey' for you? Try...

 

[godnotgod]

Not to change


Yes, we are always discussing a particular subjective view of reality. All views are shifting relative to a real context. However, there is such a thing as 'reality' or else communication would be impossible. Reality is communication.

Does the possibility exist in your mind that there might be a view that is outside the sphere of any subjective view, one untainted by conditioning? One that does not come and go, that does not change, and that, while most people are unaware of its existence as the fish in the sea is unaware of the surrounding sea, this impersonal view is what allows all subjective views?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

1. It is not some ontological reality 'out there', but in here.
2. You are the Universe, looking at itself through your eyes.

Statement 1 is accurate.
Statement 2 is pure speculation and basically meaningless.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Does the possibility exist in your mind that there might be a view that is outside the sphere of any subjective view, one untainted by conditioning?

Our experience isn't just conditoned by our perceptions but by the physical limitations of our senses. We will only ever be able to directly experience a tiny fraction of the universe, so concepts like "Absolute Reality" and "Cosmic Consciousness" are pointless and meaningless.