Papoon
Active Member
So why even court the notion of 'cosmic consciousness' ? Which implies the opposite of what you just quoted.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?
- Thread starter Runewolf1973
- Start date
Unification
Well-Known Member
Everyone is a human being. The same nature that resides within me resides within another. I don't think that that nature needs to be monopolized as being called "Buddhism." I certaintly don't believe texts are monopolized or that someone needs the label "Buddhist" to read them and find great wisdom. Those same characteristics are innate within all.
I'm beyond labels. That is what I meant. Meant no offense.
As for the traditions, I think they are lovely and have many great positive things. Anything that would create harm or divide in those traditions is where I'd disagree.
Papoon
Active Member
The 'traditions' are generally passed on orally, directly, to avoid the fabrications so beloved of the homebrew gurus.
godnotgod
Thou art That
What do you mean 'of course'. Where is ego?
Papoon
Active Member
It is your mental process.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Because it is the merging of the two as One. Without it, we have ordinary consciousness only.
Last edited:
godnotgod
Thou art That
Yes, but that is not some 'thing' called 'ego'. In fact, it is not even ego. It is only ego when the mental process identifies with itself as 'I'.
Papoon
Active Member
No, it is only delusion then. It is always ego.
Papoon
Active Member
What two ? That contradicts your earlier zen quote, and is dualism.
godnotgod
Thou art That
When you look for it, is it present?
godnotgod
Thou art That
The 'seeming' two of the Ordinary and the Miraculous. In reality, they are One Reality, just as Nirvana and Samsara appear as two to the ordinary mind, but in fact, are the same.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
All language is founded in dualism...even the teaching about non-dualism is dualism......"In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma [dharma] compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas."
Papoon
Active Member
No. Not the same. Simply either problematically opposed...or not.
And if ordinary mind and 'the miraculous' are the same, why do you bother differentiating them ? What can be gained ? What is the point ? Who or what could possibly benefit ? The 'non existent' ego, or Buddha ?
And if ordinary mind and 'the miraculous' are the same, why do you bother differentiating them ? What can be gained ? What is the point ? Who or what could possibly benefit ? The 'non existent' ego, or Buddha ?
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
godnotgod
Thou art That
Those who are seeking for the Miraculous apart from the Ordinary. They do not see The Ordinary as being The Miraculous due to conditioned mind.
Another way of putting it is:
'That which you are seeking is what is causing you to seek'
*(it's The Ordinary and The Miraculous)
Last edited:
Right where it is denied.
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
That's a good point. When I use the word interaction for example, it is not my intention to express a specific duality of any sort. Anyone who sees interaction solely as a duality is not understanding what I mean correctly. I am expressing interaction as a total action of the universe... Interconnectivity. In actuality, the word interaction indicates that which is not quite singular, yet not quite dual. It is neither, but at the same time it is both. Not one, not two. It is All. The apparent duality acting as a singularity. The apparent singularity acting as a duality. I believe there is no true singularity or "oneness" anymore than there is a true duality or "twoness". Not this, not that. All.
godnotgod
Thou art That
But don't you see that what is being denied is merely an idea?
Now the question becomes: 'who, or what, is it that is denying the ego?
An idea is an existent. It's not ego or denial that needs to exit the image, but the author.
Edit: Where you jump up and deny ego is where you support it in its existence. We can't deny non-existents--they don't exist.
Last edited:
Papoon
Active Member
So why are you saying this to people who are not seeking the miraculous ?