Wise Quotes Collection

[Kunga]

I love Dalis' art. His was also an opium eater....as were many artists/writers. Lewis Carrol smoked opium also....


I found this quote before I read your post :


“Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.”
― William Gibson



lol

[Tenver-]

Right. :)

[Beingof1]

" First and last, what is demanded of genius is love of truth. "

"Ignorant men raise questions that wise men answered a thousand years ago. "

"Just trust yourself, then you will know how to live. "


---Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

[Kunga]

"Ignorant men raise questions that wise men answered a thousand years ago. "

and those wise men were also ignorant before they were wise . :)



The ocean is a body of water
occupying about two-thirds of a
world "made for man" —who has no gills.

—Ambrose Bierce

[Kunga]

“freedom attends reality:
free at the core, any effort is wasted;
timelessly free, no release is needed;
free in itself, no corrective is possible;
directly free, released in seeing;
completely free, pure in nature;
constantly free, familiarization is redundant;
and naturally free, freedom cannot be contrived.

yet 'freedom' is just a verbal convention,
and who is 'realized' and who is not?
how could anyone be 'liberated'?
how could anyone be lost in samsara?
reality is free of all delimitation!

freedom is timeless, so constantly present;
freedom is natural, so unconditional;
freedom is direct, so pure vision obtains;
freedom is unbounded, so no identity possible;
freedom is unitary, so multiplicity is consumed.

conduct changes nothing - our lives are already free!
meditation achieves nothing - our minds are already free!
the view realizes nothing - all dogma is freedom!
fruition demands nothing - we are free as we are!”
― Longchenpa

[Dan Rowden]

Right, so why did he bother writing a word of that?

[Kunga]

Because he knew someone would be inspired by it....a light in the darkness....for all us losers out here that feel so hopeless...

[Dan Rowden]

But such people are already free, so there's no point to it...

[Kunga]

Most people haven't realized this freedom....when you read words that point to truth...then you realize the truth of those words.....there is energy in words....everything is energy....words are energy...words have an effect on our MIND...they can change the energy of the Universe....speaking maliciously or with kindness have effects on us human beings ....Truth has an effect....we are emotional beings with feelings...even caring for a plant will determine it's outcome. This whole world is communicating and having an effect on each other....or would you prefer a silent Genius Forum ? :)

[Kunga]

"free at the core, any effort is wasted;
timelessly free, no release is needed;"


Yes this kinda contradicts itself....but being that everything is free...contradictions are empty too !

[Dennis Mahar]

"free at the core, any effort is wasted;
timelessly free, no release is needed;"

That, being conceptual, is of the nature epistemological.

An epistemological mastery of a subject leaves you knowing.
An ontological mastery of a subject leaves you being.

[Kunga]

Of course the students themselves do not need to study ontology; they only require the access to being and the source of action that is provided by the ontological perspective. And, they don't need to study phenomenology; they only need to be provided with the actionable pathway to the being of being a leader and the actions of effective leadership made available by the phenomenological methodology.


LOL

[Dennis Mahar]

what is the actionable pathway?

being-in-action in the context of freedom of being which is a condition by the way and is generated by causes.

those causes constituted in knowing (epistemological)

what is to be known?

what is prior to languaging?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Experience is prior to language, and as you pointed out, also involves speech.

The actionable pathway is awareness or unbiased observation, residing
it makes blatantly clear the issue of clinging and conceptual attachment, and how these bring about suffering.


I've decided our discussion wasn't relevant to the issue of delusion and it's end. Not in the slightest.
Going to leave behind the whole philosophical debate approach during communication,
and get right to reflecting the difference between egotistical immersion and how fortunate one can be once "freedom of being" is attained. If that's what you lot were talking about- liberation.

[Dennis Mahar]

does being generate points of view or vice versa?

how does that distinction show up in relation to freedom of being?

what's prior to a point of view?

Going to leave behind the whole philosophical debate approach during communication,
and get right to reflecting the difference between egotistical immersion and how fortunate one can be once "freedom of being" is attained

exchanging one act for another?

how does the new possibility benefit?

Give us a look at it.
as a work of art.
is it polished or in the making?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Point of view is part of the experience of being.
Which is prior to any particular point of view.

"benefit" is a possibility, communication involves communicating stuff.
It doesn't require any anticipation to exist.

If you're referring to the possible communication of- not being immersed in various delusions/conceptual attachments.
Then nope not sure how to best polish such points.
Seems there is a subconscious need people have to ignore or distract themselves from their own continuous agitation, hence they are usually unable to know the root of the issue. Pride/arrogance has a hard time meeting itself.
Have you ever implemented any methods which you found to be most direct?

What I mean when I say philosophical discussion isn't directly relevant to actually communicating such points is that it would be an unlikely leap for a person to be conversing about causality/dependent origination or 'original face' and then all of a sudden they're finished with clinging and suffering. More of a possibility if it's actually directly pointed out to them.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Though I haven't attempted much of it at all face to face, even from such small encounters I can see it's more effective communication.

To communicate it through writing and for many is what one would be hard pressed to find a 'polished' version of.
There are some much 'better' at it than others of course.
But almost every version I have come across either didn't seem to 'get through' strongly enough, it wasn't made clear or it involved a lot of the same conceptual attachment, or perhaps it just involved philosophical discussion and missed the ball completely.

[Dennis Mahar]

You indicated you have a method or script, so what is it?

To experience being as being, as the empty space it is that 'world' shows up in.
Agree?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I really mean it when I say I wouldn't put anything down unless it was a 'worthwhile' description.
What I've got is a long collection of various related writings/reflections, most of which acts as nothing more than hints/reminders.
I haven't found any method which resonates/reflects truth well enough that it would reach a closed listener.
To me there is no point in communication if there's no communication.

Although you're unable to agree on anything, yes I agree, it's almost like "to experience experience as is"
as opposed to "to live the experience and imagine what it is".

You're negative method means:
There's no beginning or end.
Not created or spontaneous.
No choice or free will.
No "me".
Not predetermined or planned.
Not ugly or beautiful.
You're negative method is a rejection of meaningless conceptual attachment which is transient, agreed?

[Dennis Mahar]

whatever exists is empty of self (via negativa)
whatever exists is dependently arisen (via positiva)

straightforward.

belief in inherent existence is extremely popular despite being a case of erroneous thinking.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

"whatever exists is empty of self (via negativa)
whatever exists is dependently arisen (via positiva)"

Exactly, this is the basis of what I was pointing out.

Negative doesn't involve conceptual attachment, it can simply be a denial.

Positiva does, the assertion you were making was an assertion, how does it differ from any other?

Although I know you see it as only a repeat of the negativa in different words, it really isn't, it is fundamentally different.
Can you see what I mean?

Also on top of that, there is the other assertion about the senses perceiving/reflecting.

[Dan Rowden]

Where does anything begin and end? Where and when does a thing be a thing? Who and/or what decides?

[Dennis Mahar]

Negative doesn't involve conceptual attachment, it can simply be a denial.

Positiva does, the assertion you were making was an assertion, how does it differ from any other?

emptiness/dependent origination is the theory of no-theory.
it's a description of phenomena.
it holds that phenomena isn't self-caused and is dependently arisen and then gets rid of itself by declaring empty is empty because without phenomena the description of phenomena is void.

It only applies to phenomena.

phenomena and description of phenomena.
a condition without phenomena entails a description of it as unlikely to arise.
there being phenomena calls forth a requirement for description.

emptiness/dependent arising is that description which can't be refuted.


Getoriks says it is a belief that entails an infinite regress of justifiers which implies knowledge is impossible.
Looking at Getoriks argumentation what we see is:
a belief is a condition and an infinite regress of justifiers is a condition that necessarily shows up along side a belief.
These elements depend on each other because if belief ceases then infinite regress of justifiers ceases.
if belief arises then infinite regress of justifiers arises.

Getoriks unwittingly proves dependent arising in his argumentation and confirms knowledge is possible without entailing infinite regress.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Where does anything begin and end? Where and when does a thing be a thing? Who and/or what decides?

Just said there's no beginnings or ends, all those ideas are momentary designations which are meaningless.
They exist only in imagination, same as 'empty'/'full'.

emptiness/dependent origination is the theory of no-theory.
it's a description of phenomena.
it holds that phenomena isn't self-caused and is dependently arisen and then gets rid of itself by declaring empty is empty because without phenomena the description of phenomena is void.

In this and with what you were saying about Getoriks you are referring to various formations,
this idea exists dependently, this 'house' exists dependently,
this conversation exists dependently, 'person' exists dependently
meaning only in relation to other formations,

this has only been applied to various fragments of experience,
thoughts, ideas, sights, sounds,

how does it apply to the arising of experience itself?
For our existence to be dependent upon something other than what we know existence to be,
there would have to actually be the 'other', but clearly, it's nowhere to be seen.

[Dennis Mahar]

an insight 'emptiness' provides goes along the lines of,
ordinarily a subject is reified as self-existent and a predicate assigned as self-existent attributes out of which an object is created deemed to exist independently.
that shows up as a way to go about it.
and the question is whether that way to go about it stacks up.

keeping in mind at all times,
that 'universe' is indivisible and split up by consciousness into dualities,
then consciousness is grokked as an activity,
a process.
a verbing, a doing.
a concept isn't reified as a thing in itself, rather it is an act of conceptualising a possibility and attaching to that in order to have ground.
the insight shakes down to 'consciousness picking and choosing from a menu of possibilities for attachment'.

ie, a christian is actually christianing
a capitalist is actually capitalising
a sage is actually saging.

does that stack up?