The Debate of God.

[AmbiguousGuy]

The enlightened have no need or desire to announce or withhold their enlightenment; that would be like announcing that you are human, or that you breathe oxygen. It would be a bit odd for someone to go around announcing that he breathes oxygen. In the case of enlightenment, its deliberate display is an indication of an egoic issue.

It's so interesting to me, the way you don't deny my position or even fight against it, but rather seem to ignore it (to be oblivious to it?) and to push forward with your own certainty about things. A curious thing to me.

And how is it that you know that?

Observation. I've seen many minds fool themselves, including my own. It's the only way to wisdom, in my view. One must be ignorant and uncertain of one's own truth in order to grow. And growth is important to me, even at my age. So I guess my path is opposite that of Buddhism, at least as you seem to express Buddhism.

I did not need to pass judgment; their behavior gave them away for what they were: karma-driven egoists.

Wow. From my perspective -- the perspective of embracing ambiguity and uncertainty-- you look no different from the Christian fundamentalists I've met. I hope that doesn't offend you. Just my take on things.

It's not your opinion which you're expressing. You're merely reciting The Actual Truth. And doing it entirely without apology.

It takes my breath away.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Is that your concern? To 'have an effect on the world'?

Of course it is. One of my many concerns. It's so hard for me to understand those who don't care enough to at least try to improve life.

Sometimes I can't help thinking of those people as fearful or selfish or well... lifeless.

But I could be wrong. Maybe we're all just made as we're made and I shouldn't judge them. (Or as you might say it, I should not recount the actual fact of their obvious and objectively-so egotism.)

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Concerning changing the world, a Taoist perspective, first change your self....

Be aware the impulses of the will,
Unravel the errors of the mind,
Untie the knots of virtue,
Unblock the free flow of Tao.

Glory and riches, prominence and position, fame and profit, these six are the impulses of the will,

Personal appearance and style, beauty and cleverness, excitement and memory,these six are the errors of the mind,

Hatred and desire, pleasure and anger, sadness and joy, these six are the knots of the virtue,

Rejection and acceptance, receiving and giving, knowledge and ability, these six obstruct the free flow of Tao.

When the four conditions and their six causes no longer disturb your heart,
Then you will be correct, being correct, you are calm,
Being calm, you are clear, being clear, you are empty,
Emptiness, the state of doing nothing in which everything get's done.

 

[The Wizard]

Concerning changing the world, a Taoist perspective, first change your self....

Be aware the impulses of the will,
Unravel the errors of the mind,
Untie the knots of virtue,
Unblock the free flow of Tao.

Glory and riches, prominence and position, fame and profit, these six are the impulses of the will,

Personal appearance and style, beauty and cleverness, excitement and memory,these six are the errors of the mind,

Hatred and desire, pleasure and anger, sadness and joy, these six are the knots of the virtue,

Rejection and acceptance, receiving and giving, knowledge and ability, these six obstruct the free flow of Tao.

When the four conditions and their six causes no longer disturb your heart,
Then you will be correct, being correct, you are calm,
Being calm, you are clear, being clear, you are empty,
Emptiness, the state of doing nothing in which everything get's done.

Very truthful. " Empty, the state of doing nothing in which everything gets done (ie, or solved in the right way)" Yep, one can't solve their problems by remaining as a part of the very problem. Thanks for the post...

 

[godnotgod]

It's so interesting to me, the way you don't deny my position or even fight against it, but rather seem to ignore it (to be oblivious to it?) and to push forward with your own certainty about things. A curious thing to me.

I won't continue to pursue this question until you clarify 'your position', as your original statement is ambiguous.

Observation. I've seen many minds fool themselves, including my own. It's the only way to wisdom, in my view. One must be ignorant and uncertain of one's own truth in order to grow. And growth is important to me, even at my age.

Your original statement was:

Originally Posted by AmbiguousGuy

In my experience, the mind can easily fool us into believing just about anything it wants.

..to which I asked:

And how is it that you know that?

...and you replied:

Observation

...which implies that from a certain vantage point, you can discern the difference between fooling oneself and seeing correctly. So you are somehow verifying that you are seeing correctly. Otherwise you could not make such a statement.

Wow. From my perspective -- the perspective of embracing ambiguity and uncertainty-- you look no different from the Christian fundamentalists I've met. I hope that doesn't offend you. Just my take on things.

It's not your opinion which you're expressing. You're merely reciting The Actual Truth. And doing it entirely without apology.

It takes my breath away.

...except that I am not foisting a doctrine that you must believe in.

"Beautiful words are not truthful; truthful words are not beautiful"
Tao te Ching

 

[godnotgod]

Of course it is.

Is that certainty I detect?

One of my many concerns. It's so hard for me to understand those who don't care enough to at least try to improve life.

Sometimes I can't help thinking of those people as fearful or selfish or well... lifeless.

But I could be wrong. Maybe we're all just made as we're made and I shouldn't judge them. (Or as you might say it, I should not recount the actual fact of their obvious and objectively-so egotism.)

Maybe they know something you do not.

"When a concept of The Good is formed, a concept of Evil is also automatically and simultaneously formed. In so doing, Good must now oppose Evil, as dictated by The Good. In opposing Evil, one only makes Evil stronger. Therefore, the sage never tries to do Good".

Source: Unknown Chinese Taoist

 

[godnotgod]

Very truthful. " Empty, the state of doing nothing in which everything gets done (ie, or solved in the right way)" Yep, one can't solve their problems by remaining as a part of the very problem. Thanks for the post...

What is most perfect seems to have something missing;
Yet its use is unimpaired.
What is most full seems empty;
Yet its use will never fail.
What is most straight seems crooked;
The greatest skill seems like clumsiness,
The greatest eloquence like stuttering.
Movement overcomes cold;
But staying still overcomes heat.
So he by his limpid calm
Puts right everything under heaven.

Tao te Ching, ch. 45

 

[Thief]

And this debate....about God.... has been lost to the nothingness of nothingness.

So much for sticking to topic.

So God is subject to this nothingness?
He has no thought?...empty minded?....is He?

 

[godnotgod]

And this debate....about God.... has been lost to the nothingness of nothingness.

So much for sticking to topic.

So God is subject to this nothingness?
He has no thought?...empty minded?....is He?

Because of no-thing-ness, God can be every-thing. He is you, but you don't know that. That will be the ecstatic joy of your discovery. Until then, you will think God separate from you, but God is as intimate to you as your next breath.

Stop asking questions for a little while, and enter the Silent World. Stay there for as long as you can, as attentive as you can.

 

[Thief]

Because of no-thing-ness, God can be every-thing. He is you, but you don't know that. That will be the ecstatic joy of your discovery. Until then, you will think God separate from you, but God is as intimate to you as your next breath.

Stop asking questions for a little while, and enter the Silent World. Stay there for as long as you can, as attentive as you can, without making any sounds of your own.

Been there...done that....nothing to see.

And God will be more than intimate AFTER the last breath.

We enter this world naked...we leave the same way.
Heaven will be able to see all you have said or done.
As if it be written on your forehead.
As if you are made of glass.

Here in this life your thoughts and feelings are shielded.
To interact, you must write it down and hand it off....or
make your speech within earshot of others.

In the next life...your thoughts and feelings cannot be withheld.
Dead men do not write or speak.
Dead men do not read or listen.

Living spirit...share eternal life.

 

[godnotgod]

Been there...done that....nothing to see.

And God will be more than intimate AFTER the last breath.

We enter this world naked...we leave the same way.
Heaven will be able to see all you have said or done.
As if it be written on your forehead.
As if you are made of glass.

Here in this life your thoughts and feelings are shielded.
To interact, you must write it down and hand it off....or
make your speech within earshot of others.

In the next life...your thoughts and feelings cannot be withheld.
Dead men do not write or speak.
Dead men do not read or listen.

Living spirit...share eternal life.

Putting off union with the Source from which you emerged until your death is to be dead now. You're still looking for Reward in an 'afterlife', which you admit is merely a belief, when the gifts of the Incarnation have already been given to you to partake of in the Here and Now.

 

[Thief]

Putting off union with the Source from which you emerged until your death is to be dead now. You're still looking for Reward in an 'afterlife', which you admit is merely a belief, when the gifts of the Incarnation have already been given to you to partake of in the Here and Now.

Nay again....
But I draw the line differently.
I think I posted so earlier....'let the dead bury the dead'.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I won't continue to pursue this question until you clarify 'your position', as your original statement is ambiguous.

Your original statement was:
..to which I asked:
...and you replied:
...which implies that from a certain vantage point, you can discern the difference between fooling oneself and seeing correctly. So you are somehow verifying that you are seeing correctly. Otherwise you could not make such a statement.

An interesting accounting -- but having nothing to do with the issue we were discussing. To me, you seem to often lose your place in the conversation. Maybe it's because you're engaging so many at once.

But I'll answer anyway, since I think it's a legitimate question. I have seen minds, including my own, come upon evidence which convinces that mind that it has been confused or deceived in its outlook. Those minds have changed themselves to better conform to apparent reality. But, obviously, they could still be wrong.

Does this answer your question?

...except that I am not foisting a doctrine that you must believe in.

So you still won't address it. I have to wonder why.

You are telling me that you don't have to make a personal judgment about the other guy's mind. You can simply see his state of mind. It's the same thing a Sharia judge does every day in some Muslim countries, yes?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Concerning changing the world, a Taoist perspective, first change your self....

Good advice, but in the real world which I inhabit, that would be impossible. I am changing myself every day of my life. If I waited until I was 'changed', it would be too late to try to change the world.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Maybe they know something you do not.

Sure. And maybe that kindergarten kid over there with the mysterious smile also knows something which I don't know. He is welcome to come here and tell me of it or he can just sit there with his Buddha smile and imply that he is wise. Whatever.

 

[waitasec]

'let the dead bury the dead'.

yes, lets....

 

[Thief]

yes, lets....

In context to this thread and the scheme of thought at hand....
your post indicates you are in agreement to my previous effort?
(post 2930)

 

[Curious George]

This is a reasonable attempt to explain the unexplainable, and 'I' do understand what you are trying to convey, but the 'authentic self' is the one and only real self, all other so called selves which identify their self reference in a time and space context are still 'maya' relative to the undifferentiated unity of All that exists.

Iow, their is no 'in part realized enlightenment', there is a state of enlightenment, and there is a maya state of remembering a state of enlightenment. The biggest error any aspirant can make is to ego self identify with a moment or more of egolessness, regardless of the frequency and their duration.

Here is wonderful allegory from Chuang Tzu on this arcane subject,...the character called 'Knowledge' in this story refers to the 'ego self', those who understand will understand...

Here is where the problem lies:

In the philosophy espoused, the concept of self is an illusion. Consequently the concept of enlightenment too is an illusion. Thus for Ambiguous to speak of the enlightenment in the fashion he has is more consistent with the philosophy of Maya and Authentic self than to speak of a separate group of selves- some living in an illusion of Maya and others not. To say that some can realize enlightenment while others persist in a duality differentiates between selves. If the realization of enlightenment destroys the concept of self then so too would it destroy the concept of enlightenment.

 

[Curious George]

If you mistake a rope moving in the wind for a snake, and when it is then realized that there is only the rope, you only remember the illusion of 'snake'; you do not remember 'snake', since snake was never the case to begin with. You are only remembering the traces of the illusion.

The fact that you did recognize the illusion for what it is indicates the presence of enlightenment, even during the moment you firmly believed the rope to be a snake.

What becomes extinguished is the belief that there was actually a snake.

What is left is certitude that there is only the rope.

But the problem with this is that the premise there is no self to have a "you" has already been asserted. If this is the case then the self must be able to simultaneously identify the snake and the rope. For while some exist in a state of Maya and some have realized enlightenment, some will see the world from the perspective of the duality and others from the perspective of the Authentic self. Consequently those perceiving the world from the authentic self must necessarily see multiple perspectives.

 

[idea]

... Consequently those perceiving the world from the authentic self must necessarily see multiple perspectives.

isn't that the point of losing yourself? to be able to see and understand multiple perspectives?