If "everything is energy" then what does this mean?

[Runewolf1973]

It's increasingly clear that you have NO IDEA what Zen would ask. A real Zennist would not rabbit on about "Pure Consciousness" / "Universal Consciousness" / "Cosmic Consciousness". A real Zennist would not hold all these new-age pseudo-Hindu beliefs.

Holding onto such labels or concepts is a form of attachment.

 

[Runewolf1973]

For what it's worth, I think your understanding is much closer to the truth.

I guess I don't really see any hard lines between something and nothingness. There is only potential.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Holding onto such labels or concepts is a form of attachment.

Yes, it certainly is. Seeing things as they really are means letting go of all this mental baggage, throwing it all on the fire. So lets make a bonfire and throw on all that rubbish! "Pure/Universal/Ultimate/Consciousness/Reality/Crap".
Let it burn!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I guess I don't really see any hard lines between something and nothingness. There is only potential.

Even "potential" is meaningless, there is really just the present moment, perpetual change and interaction. Movement.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

There is no one left with anything but Absolute No-thing, the fundamental and true Reality, out of which Every-thing comes. There is nothing to grasp, nothing to achieve, nothing to become.

More gobbledygook, you would do much better to take a Zen approach and throw all these pretentious proper nouns on the fire!

Come out of your rabbit hole and look at the moon!
Look, there it is!

Zen practice is great, you should really try it! Practice mindfulness, start living in the present, stop living in your head!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So anyway. After our latest visit to the rabbit hole, how about returning to the topic?

An interesting question came up a while back - is consciousness a form of energy?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Exactly so. All these concepts are meaningless mental baggage, pretentious nonsense to be cleared out. Absolute/universal/cosmic/reality/truth/consciousness/crap.

You do realize Norman that every word in your post is a concept....without concepts there can be no communication....

 

[godnotgod]

It's increasingly clear that you have NO IDEA what Zen would ask. A real Zennist would not rabbit on about "Pure Consciousness" / "Universal Consciousness" / "Cosmic Consciousness". A real Zennist would not hold all these new-age pseudo-Hindu beliefs and preach about them like you do.
The here-and-now simplicity of Zen practice is diametrically opposed to your head full of beliefs, so please stop posing as something you are not.
Even better, start doing some Zen practice and drop all the new-age nonsense.

I'm trying to understand why you remind of the following:

A monk asked master Xuefeng Yicun what were the essential teachings of the Buddha and holy Patriarchs.

Old Feng replied, “The Buddha is a bull-headed jail-keeper and the Patriarchs are horse-faced old maids!”

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Godnotgod calls this "nothing", but you seem to be indicating that it is something. So perhaps it is that which is neither something, nor nothing at the same time? You guys may both disagree, but this halfway between something and nothingness I call interaction. Interaction is neither necessarily some-thing, nor is it necessarily no-thing. It is the inter-action/inter-connectivity that comprises the whole ocean (universe). That's how view it anyways.

No..it is not nothing.....it is the electromagnetic energy of the frequency continuum in universal space... The vacuum of space is not a vacuum.....the name vacuum is a leftover from the days when science believed it to be empty or nothing...

 

[godnotgod]

You do realize Norman that every word in your post is a concept....without concepts there can be no communication....

Right, and the key when using them is to know and understand that they are not that which they symbolize. This is one of the first things anyone on the spiritual path must face and resolve. The ordinary mind does not actually realize this common mistake. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was famous for saying: 'The description is not the described'.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You do realize Norman that every word in your post is a concept....without concepts there can be no communication....

I think you know exactly what I am saying.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

A monk asked master Xuefeng Yicun what were the essential teachings of the Buddha and holy Patriarchs.

The Zen references just look hollow coming from you, and you are not fooling anyone. If you really want to practice Zen you will need to give up all your new-age nonsense. Can you do it?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was famous for saying: [/COLOR] 'The description is not the described'.

Indeed. Why are so obsessed with description then, delighting in the egotistical proliferation of pretentious proper nouns?

 

[godnotgod]

It's increasingly clear that you have NO IDEA what Zen would ask. A real Zennist would not rabbit on about "Pure Consciousness" / "Universal Consciousness" / "Cosmic Consciousness".

A hinayanist from the stagnant waters of Theravada would have little clue about what a Zennist is about since he has yet to learn to look at the Moon. But a real Zennist loves to go all the way down that rabbit hole and fetch, such as this Zennist:

http://www.zengardner.com/universal-consciousness/

 

[godnotgod]

The Zen references just look hollow coming from you....

Oh? Why is that? Is it because you are still personally attached to me in some way? Aw! You still feel smitten, do you? We can remove that nasty thorn from your paw, if you like. C'mon now, have a nice cup of tea.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

A hinayanist from the stagnant waters of Theravada would have little clue about what a Zennist is about since he has yet to learn to look at the Moon. But a real Zennist loves to go all the way down that rabbit hole and fetch, such as this Zennist:[/COLOR]

As it happens I spent a long time in a Zen school, and my current approach has a strong Zen feel, a simple here-and-now practice of mindfulness. So I think I have a good idea of what Zen practice looks like, and your muddled head-full of new-age pseudo-Hindu beliefs is diametrically opposed to it.

You are not a Zennist, so stop posing as one. It's a ridiculous charade.

If you really want to practice Zen you will need to give up all your new-age beliefs and clear your head. Can you do it, or are you simply too attached?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Oh? Why is that? Is it because you are still personally attached to me in some way?

No, I just dislike snake-oil sellers.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Well, not to confuse the issue, but of course 'nothing' and 'something' are relative opposites. But then there is Absolute Nothingness.

If something is not really something and nothing is not really nothing, then I fail to see them as relative opposites. Those "ends" or "opposites" aren't actually real either way.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

As it happens I spent a long time in a Zen school, and my current approach has a strong Zen feel, a simple here-and-now practice of mindfulness. So I think I have a good idea of what Zen practice looks like, and your muddled head-full of new-age pseudo-Hindu beliefs is diametrically opposed to it.

You are not a Zennist, so stop posing as one. It's a ridiculous charade.

Please drop such pretentious concepts as Zen school, Zen approach, Zen practice, and mindfulness practice.....nothing needs to be done....just be... being is all there is to it... There is a raft somewhere tho...

 

[Runewolf1973]

No..it is not nothing.....it is the electromagnetic energy of the frequency continuum in universal space...

That is kind of a mouthfull and sounds a lot like something off of Star Trek, but it also seems like a fancy way of saying "interaction" or "interconnectivity".