Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

[Rick O'Shez]

If you go back and re-read my comments about this, you will find that I have already answered the question, but it requires that you be attentive.

I checked and I can't see an answer to my question.

So I ask again: What is the practical difference between fleeting moment and eternal moment?

It would be good to get a clear answer with no more evasion and side-stepping.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

and yet your assertions about the so-called "true" nature of reality is, necessarily, filtered through the confirmation bias of your own conceptual mind... unless you are an oracle from "on high".

Some of it is Buddhist teaching, but being able to regurgitate this stuff is no indication of anything very much.

 

[Unification]

Why do you insist on staying chained up? Do you feel more secure that way?

If you don't see things as they are, then you will only see them as they are not. Your choice.

Liberation and freedom from bias/conditions will only come by ones mind being destroyed of what they perceive and starting over with a clear, clean/unconditioned mind.

In solitude, no external environment distractions by other minds, no fear or worry of what others will think...even if they are the only one in the world to discover it.

That is very neurologically painful to rid of everything that we think and perceive that we know. The literal dying out to everything we think we know feels like death. It's why it's the easy way, the secure and comforting way. It's why many cannot reach the other shore. Reaching the other shore requires one to sink the false boat that they're currently in and getting aboard the true boat. The destruction of ones mental ark and the rebuilding/altering of the mental ark.

It takes great courage, faith, and belief that there is another shore and that there is liberation.

 

[YmirGF]

It takes great courage, faith, and belief that there is another shore and that there is liberation.

I drew this in about 1974 so I'm more than familiar with your other shore. (Granted, I am a crappy artist.)

What I find vastly amusing is that several of you folks can't seem to handle the idea that others have different viewpoints. Fascinating stuff...

I always did like this one... it photoshop'd well 39 years after it was drawn in pen on lined paper which took hours of editing to remove.

 

[Unification]

I drew this in about 1974 so I'm more than familiar with your other shore. (Granted, I am a crappy artist.)

What I find vastly amusing is that several of your folks can't seem to handle the idea that others have different viewpoints. Fascinating stuff...

The art is perfectly imperfect the way that it is.

"My folks?" That is exactly the bias that is silly.

I am not a respector of certain persons or words or ideas.

It's fascinating that others can't handle others ideas and viewpoints also.

 

[YmirGF]

The art is perfectly imperfect the way that it is.

Thanks.

"My folks?" That is exactly the bias that is silly.

I meant you folks... and it is now corrected... thanks again.

I am not a respector of certain persons or words or ideas

Of course you aren't...

It's fascinating that others can't handle others ideas and viewpoints also.

I do sense the hypocrisy of the statement however we are not the ones using definitive terms for an unknown reality. Not so much you, but Godnotgod, has a real penchant for using definitive terms for things that, in reality, cannot be defined. That you seem to pat him on the head so often is a tad unseemly.

 

[Unification]

Thanks.

I meant you folks... and it is now corrected... thanks again.

Of course you aren't...


I do sense the hypocrisy of the statement however we are not the ones using definitive terms for an unknown reality. Not so much you, but Godnotgod, has a real penchant for using definitive terms for things that, in reality, cannot be defined. That you seem to pat him on the head so often is a tad unseemly.

My pleasure.

Pretty much everyone here has said some very helpful and beneficial stuff. I love what Spiny said about direct experience of the present, what you said about infinity, and other stuff. Runewolf has said many wonderful things, godnotgod and ben d has said many wonderful things. Some others have popped in to share some wonderful stuff.

I understand what he's saying, it may not be through my own personal choice of words... but I don't mind them. Years ago, I'd be laughing at him and most of what he's saying right now. . and I bet he would be too just as some are now.

Question: hypothetically, if what godnotgod is saying ever struck you and dawned on you and you became aware to what he is saying.... would you admit you were wrong about it, even if it meant destroying your credibility and image? You'd lose a lot, but gain everything. That's why it's beneficial to have self control, tame the tongue, never assume or expect, and to not be biased, and not to be closed off to anything...because when and if one is woken up and becomes radiantly aware of themselves, they feel like the biggest moron and regret all of the stuff they once adamantly said and did. They become naked-exposed to the truth and light.

It's our poor nature that when we disagree with what another says, we will make it a biased mission to dislike everything that person says regardless of what it is. Clearly you can find some stuff godnotgod has said that you understand and can respect even if you don't understand. It truly is very difficult to take the middle.

That's part of the formless... some things need not be defined, conceptualized, or thought of. The mind can be wonderful when pure, whole, and at rest and can also destroy, enslave, and cause suffering.

 

[YmirGF]

My pleasure.

Pretty much everyone here has said some very helpful and beneficial stuff. I love what Spiny said about direct experience of the present, what you said about infinity, and other stuff. Runewolf has said many wonderful things, godnotgod and ben d has said many wonderful things. Some others have popped in to share some wonderful stuff.

I understand what he's saying, it may not be through my own personal choice of words... but I don't mind them. Years ago, I'd be laughing at him and most of what he's saying right now. . and I bet he would be too just as some are now.

Understood. Heck, I've even tried telling him on a few occasions that I used to believe as he does - but grew past such a limited framework. That didn't go so well. Apparently, because he has this perfect view there is no getting past that point and that is also the difficulty in holding such a view. There is no room for any further growth in such an approach.

Question: hypothetically, if what godnotgod is saying ever struck you and dawned on you and you became aware to what he is saying.... would you admit you were wrong about it, even if it meant destroying your credibility and image? You'd lose a lot, but gain everything. That's why it's beneficial to have self control, tame the tongue, never assume or expect, and to not be biased, and not to be closed off to anything...because when and if one is woken up and becomes radiantly aware of themselves, they feel like the biggest moron and regret all of the stuff they once adamantly said and did. They become naked-exposed to the truth and light.

Binder Dundat, burned the T-shirt. To answer the question, If I thought for a moment that Godnotgod made a good point, I would be the first to say so. My ego is strong enough, resilient enough and quite used to working with larger portions of my identity and so swallowing my pride would not be a problem.

What you may not understand is that I came to my present understanding via much the same route, albeit not quite so headstrong, as godnotgod. I never did have such a huge contempt for the world of man and his plight. I never had the same level of contempt for the ego and the challenges that is faces. I came through the impersonal view of reality into the personalist view of reality via Krsna consciousness (many years ago) and it is from there that my current views began to emerge.

When you have looked into the very eyes of divinity and seen what is there to see - it changes you and "you" are never quite the same afterwards. That vision dissolved my need for divinity, if you will and a far, far larger vision of reality began to emerge from it. Though my words are dualistic, the experience is fully non-dual... and well beyond any impressions of duality as it was rooted in an indescribable Oneness that is far more encompassing than anything outlined in this sad sham of a thread. As I have often said in this thread, I am more than willing to admit I might be quite wrong. I don't pretend to have a perfect view, as that is a slippery slope that leads one into delusion.

It's our poor nature that when we disagree with what another says, we will make it a biased mission to dislike everything that person says regardless of what it is. Clearly you can find some stuff godnotgod has said that you understand and can respect even if you don't understand.

I'm all for the multidimensional viewpoint, but I have yet to understand something that I don't understand, LOL. Again, I get the gist of what you mean, and have told him, conceptually I get what he is saying, but he turns around and screams, "No. If you understood, you wouldn't disagree. You see there is always this odd undercurrent in his writing that definitely suggests that he is literally speaking FOR reality. There is never the slightest hint that he could be in error. He is consistent, I'll give him that.

It truly is very difficult to take the middle.

Oddly, I've even tried to meet him half way... Nope, that didn't work either. Everyone who even slightly disagrees is just "Wrong, wrong, wrong ... so wrong." After awhile his gruel gets too thin to bother with. Curiously, godnotgod as never attempted the half way route so, in this context, it makes me the real diplomat.

That's part of the formless... some things need not be defined, conceptualized, or thought of. The mind can be wonderful when pure, whole, and at rest and can also destroy, enslave, and cause suffering.

That is strangely enough part of my cautioning to godnotgod. Sometimes, if a person is delusional enough, a mound of smoking dog doo doo can seem to be a mound of sweetly scented chocolate.

 

[godnotgod]

There isn't a major difference of opinion about perfection of wisdom...

Good! Then you acknowledge Perfect View.

 

[godnotgod]

I much prefer to say that I see things as they might be. I'm not willing to make definitive statements about unknown reality and say that I see things as they are as that is perilously close to being delusional.

Seeing things as they are is sanity. Here, one is firmly planted in the Present Moment. Seeing them as they might be is fantasy; notions about some yet non-existent future. Oh, I know. You think that is noble and lofty, and you want us all to know what a great mind you are.

The Buddha said it: "Don't fancy!"

Your problem is that you think that 'seeing things as they are' is seeing them via the conditioned mind, which means they are mundane, dead, uninteresting. Bottom line is that you fail to see The Ordinary as none other than The Miraculous.

You've got to realize that most of mankind does not see things as they are, but sees them as the conceptual mind tells them they are, or as their desires dictate them to be. To see things as they are involves a radical transformation of consciousness, by which what one thought things to be, are not. Science is now teaching man that lesson via Quantum Mechanics. The mystics have understood this for centuries. IOW, what most men call 'reality' is due to an altered state of consciousness; seeing things as they are is via an unconditioned mind, freed from all encumbrances. This is Higher Consciousness.

 

[godnotgod]

Sometimes, if a person is delusional enough, a mound of smoking dog doo doo can seem to be a mound of sweetly scented chocolate.

'Sometimes' as in 'your case'.

So, how long have you been having this fantasy? Months? Years?

 

[YmirGF]

Seeing things as they are is sanity.

A bit dualistic dontcha think? Besides you generally rant about how this is all beyond logic and reason. I'm not sure how you would square that with being sane by any yardstick.

Here, one is firmly planted in the Present Moment.

At the hub of innumerable possible moments radiating outwards into an infinite number of probable realities.

Seeing them as they might be is fantasy; notions about some yet non-existent future.

No, it's more a psychological safeguard as perception is never perfect. Pretending it is is a very dangerous stance to take.

Oh, I know. You think that is noble and lofty, and you want us all to know what a great mind you are.

*sigh*

Your problem is that you think that 'seeing things as they are' is seeing them via the conditioned mind, which means they are mundane, dead, uninteresting.

No, actually, I don't. I simply don't buy into your notions of pristine awareness and faultless perception.

Bottom line is that you fail to see The Ordinary as none other than The Miraculous.

I have no use for concepts like "miraculous". Sue me.

 

[godnotgod]

Some of it is Buddhist teaching, but being able to regurgitate this stuff is no indication of anything very much.

You, who claim to be present in the Present Moment, which is what the practice of Buddhism is all about, don't even know the difference between really being in the Present and a fleeting moment.

 

[godnotgod]

A bit dualistic dontcha think? Besides you generally rant about how this is all beyond logic and reason. I'm not sure how you would square that with being sane by any yardstick.

The insane are commonly very logical and reasonable.

How can you not recognize that sanity is to see things as they are? Anything else is delusional.

At the hub of innumerable possible moments radiating outwards into an infinite number of probable realities.

...at the base of which is only this moment; this reality.

No, it's more a psychological safeguard as perception is never perfect. Pretending it is is a very dangerous stance to take.

You're not paying attention: Perfect View is not about perceptual reality! It is transcendent of perception.

*sigh*

S**t Detectors ON, 24/7, no apologies, *sigh*

No, actually, I don't. I simply don't buy into your notions of pristine awareness and faultless perception.

Of course not! You tenaciously cling to muddled awareness and faulty perception as if they are the only true reality! Oh, I know. Plato's Cave is Oh, so comfy. There is no such thing as The Sun. Only these dancing cave wall shadows represent reality. All other views are garbage.

edit: You've got to realize that most of mankind does not see things as they are, but sees them as the conceptual mind tells them they are, or as their desires dictate them to be. To see things as they are involves a radical transformation of consciousness, by which what one thought things to be, are not. Science is now teaching man that lesson via Quantum Mechanics. The mystics have understood this for centuries. IOW, what most men call 'reality' is due to an altered state of consciousness; seeing things as they are is via an unconditioned mind, freed from all encumbrances. This is Higher Consciousness.

I have no use for concepts like "miraculous". Sue me.

It's right under your nose. Some see it; some don't. You don't because you still think it's a concept, rather than reality. Pity.

"The mundane makes up most of our lives. The big moments are few and far between. How much of our lives are we going to miss if we only pay attention to the big stuff?

Why is each moment miraculous if we pay attention? Because in each moment the entire universe is present. Each moment in time is connected to every other moment. From the beginning of time to the future, which hasn't happened yet.

It's only because we've learned to dismiss the ordinary rather than experience it fully that we take it to be ordinary."

https://www.ordinarymind.com/talks/81-the-hidden-lamp-the-miraculous-and-the-ordinary

 

[godnotgod]

Thanks.
Godnotgod, has a real penchant for using definitive terms for things that, in reality, cannot be defined. That you seem to pat him on the head so often is a tad unseemly.

That which cannot be defined can be pointed to, but you don't look to what is pointed to, but rather attack the pointing finger.

He is not praising me; he is appreciating the content of my post, and that is not about me; it is about something universal we both see and appreciate. You cannot do so because you are still clinging to 'this' and 'that' and personal views. So you attack the messenger and ignore the message.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I am not a respector of certain persons or words or ideas.

Though like the rest of us you don't like being disagreed with and having your assumptions challenged.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You, who claim to be present in the Present Moment, which is what the practice of Buddhism is all about, don't even know the difference between really being in the Present and a fleeting moment.

I notice you still haven't explained the practical difference between fleeting moment and eternal moment, whatever they are supposed to be. Instead you attempt to divert attention.

So come on then, tell me what the practical difference is. I don't think you can, it's just another clever-sounding idea you picked up from Alan Watts or somebody.

As far as I can see one is either fully in the present or one has a head full of concepts about the present. You seem to be stuck in the latter category, full of ideas, jargon and theorising.

 

[YmirGF]

That which cannot be defined can be pointed to, but you don't look to what is pointed to, but rather attack the pointing finger.

He is not praising me; he is appreciating the content of my post, and that is not about me; it is about something universal we both see and appreciate. You cannot do so because you are still clinging to 'this' and 'that' and personal views. So you attack the messenger and ignore the message.

Tell yourself whatever you have to, Big Fella.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You cannot do so because you are still clinging to 'this' and 'that' and personal views.

Again, this is the pot calling the kettle black. You become over-sensitive and defensive when anyone challenges your preachy pronouncements, clearly you are very attached to your personal beliefs and interpretations.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Good! Then you acknowledge Perfect View.

As the first verse of the Heart Sutra explains:
"The Bodhisattva of Compassion, When he meditated deeply, Saw the emptiness of all five skandhas And sundered the bonds that caused him suffering."

So it's a realisation of sunyata - emptiness or conditionality. Therefore according to Buddhist teachings it's about developing insight, not your new-age rhetoric of stoned mystics and higher states of consciousness. Again with the misrepresentation.

Do you now accept that sunyata is incompatible with your new-age Hindu "cosmic consciousness"?