Why causality is an illusion

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:06 pm

Jamesh,

Some would think that “everything is connected” is a primary truth. Nope, it is secondary as it does not explain the why, it is merely an observation, and there is something else that underlies it, that causes it to be true.
My truth re Time is a deeper primary truth, that explains why subsequent truths arise. Multiple secondary truths can relate back to this primary truth. It is not quite the unattainable absolute truth, as in the reason that Time expands is X.


I'm going to bring Sherlock into this.

Firstly, I want to acknowledge what I see as 'psychological well-being' in you as a conversationalist. It stands out and thankyou for it. It teaches me. Grateful.

Your Time theory, albeit 'exciting'.

Is of the category,
the means by which the crime is committed.
It leaves unanswered,
the motive and the killer.

We remain as the condition:
the unanswered question is open.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Jamesh » Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:09 am

Denis,
Is of the category,
the means by which the crime is committed.
It leaves unanswered,
the motive and the killer.

Sorry I don’t think I properly understand this.

Were I to take it literally. Then I would have to say that motive and killer, are human, or more broadly, life traits. There is no underlying purpose or motive for nature. It does not create and destroy by some form of choice.

Time can’t have any other properties - it's fundamental, ie it has a single property, expansion of itself at a rate relative to its infinite past, without requiring external causes. Its external cause is only ever its past, lesser self. It only ever becomes more of itself, but its very nature is one that automatically creates a duality - Now, +Now.

Layers of differentiation occur due to warping, caused by the fundamental "inequality" of Now and +Now. Space itself is the first level of warping (thus the huge relative distance between things like within atoms or between galaxies). The warping exponentially increases as time passes, as time grows, which cause space to overlap and contract into energy and, then later on, mass.

Taking your comment as meaning that my own conceptual proliferation, being a desire brought about by the self, is the motive and the killer, then I don't know what to say.

I'm talking about, for instance, when walking.
Being the walking.
Being the crunching gravel giving way underfoot.
Being the delight of the birdsong heard in the distance.
Being the experience of aghast at unwittingly stepping on and squashing a snail.
Being the experience of humility in the conditions.
Direct access that's not a head full of conceptual proliferation.

I don't live my life like this. I don't ever attempt to set it up so that I have situations where I would be calm like that. There is no chance, I'm an entertainment junky (which means most of the time I don't over conceptualise, at least in terms of becoming overly earnest). Part of the reason for that is because I live alone, and prefer my own company, and hate exercise, and discomfort.

I had a fluctuating emotional crisis that lasted about 18 years, it made me constantly irritated and stole my joy in life, though I was never a positive based person. It was a physical affect that I could not ascertain the cause of. It became a neurosis, wherein the mental part was far more distressing than the physical side*. The suffering did lead me to philosophy though, but I haven't had enough time on the other side of what it has taught me, for me to become serene. I'm far too frightened of returning there, to take any significant life changing moves, to make peace with my mind, although the positive outcome could very well be quite favourable.

* I view mental illnesses, where there is no direct physical cause (accident, drugs, genetic etc), as being an emotional problem that goes into a toxic loop. The more attention the mind gives to it the worse it gets, the more the loop is intensified. It consumes one's consciousness making it difficult to make rational reactions, causing further emotional problems. One emotional problem leads into another. It can damage the ego program causing breakdowns and random things like delusions of grandeur.

We remain as the condition:
the unanswered question is open.

But it can be dismissed by logic. One can define what it must "sort of be like" and thus takes away all the layers of mistaken possibilities, like God, or even something more realistic like "that the totality is uncaused". It ties all the secondary level truths, which are of vital importance, into one logical reason for them to be truthful in the first place.

I think you might see this theory that is part of me now, as now being really just a delusional confidence building exercise, a delusion of grandeur. So be it. While I do get confidence from it, surety breeds confidence, it is just that it also because it just seems to fit into everything else, so I'm not seeing any reasons to dismiss it.

Well apart from this "still mind" business, which as I've mentioned does not fit into my present circumstances. Being outside of that though, or having not achieved that if you like, I could also call what you have a delusion of grandeur. It seems to me that those who attain the deepest understanding of reality, are more often than not, the most naturally sensitive people. If you are sensitive, you are likely to suffer more. This will cause some attributes to arise, like: negativity; scepticism; self-absorption; determination; a desire for solitude; reflection; desire to understand causes, empathy for the suffering of the unfortunate, etc.

Other than genetically, then from then on, your own life experiences will determine how you deal with those attributes. If the quest for truth begins early, when one is more naïve and say you cope well with controlling or beneficially steering the reactions your attributes cause, then you may be more inclined to the more mystical style of enlightenment, or you might get stuck in a uni. That is where part of your past self still is in your memories, most of which will never appear in your consciousness.

Others may have tougher time and be more hardened in some mental fashion. You have overly your earnest people, the "Needys", the need to be enlightened type, and you have the "Carefrees", and the not fully recovered from a "Breakdown-ers", the noticeably delusional - the "Self-Advertisers", the inwardly troubled "Jokers", and the Materialists like me who see the most real answers in the examination of things.

Lastly we have the Gurus, the ones appear to have the required wisdom-vibe.

We are all some of each, but with different mixes, different overall patterns. It is sometimes difficult to see where the delusions of grandeur are hidden.

It is easier to be the writer of words than to be the reality behind them. All our other roles in life are acts of habit, and so to can this be, it can be just a skill. The tests at this forum though, are more difficult than anywhere else I've seen, all the actors fall down if sufficiently questioned.

Over the years, there are some people I've not been able to dismiss as not being enlightened, but I haven't been paying that much attention in the last few years. I probably wont back here long unless I can find something novel to talk about or get too bored at work :) Tired of the old scripts. This has been fun though. I've discovered a bit more about my theory and had a nice bout of free range philosophical reasoning, discovering some things from my own mind. Who knows, maybe I've even learnt something about your way of thinking but don’t realise it yet (bearing in mind that I agree with pretty much everything you've said, either completely or from one angle, and the important sticking point, the still-mind, has to have more causes than just conversational ones).
User avatar
Jamesh
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Bob Michael » Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:45 pm

User avatar
Bob Michael
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:08 am
Location: Reading, Pennsylvania

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:04 am

Jamesh,

Taking your comment as meaning that my own conceptual proliferation, being a desire brought about by the self, is the motive and the killer, then I don't know what to say.


I wanted to distinguish,
conceptual proliferation (entertainment junkie, mind full of stuff)
actual, creative thinking (time theory)

all part of the woof and warp of the causal nature of mind.
each informs the other.

time theory as creative act (cognition).
taking what was formless and having the experience of it form in your mind.
reality 'frozen' by cognition.
Hasn't it given you surety, stillness, serenity?
It looks like it has.

How did the cognition come about?
The moment of cognition?

When the mind full of stuff is broken thru' a sensual extravaganza opens up.
another of the manifold ways of experiencing.
Last edited by Dennis Mahar on Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby m4tt_666 » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:36 am

you use the term 'formless' as if you have defined what it actually is. the formless, therefore, is nothing more than another way of saying form.
User avatar
m4tt_666
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:00 am

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:57 am

you use the term 'formless' as if you have defined what it actually is. the formless, therefore, is nothing more than another way of saying form.


languaging is naming and it doesn't have to be taken so literally.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby m4tt_666 » Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:17 pm

to a certain extent but i would say we're under a false presumption that written and spoken language is, for the most part universal when in reality everyone matches up these 'universal' words with type specific images in his/her own mind, no matter how subtle the difference. we can only accurately convey our perspective to the extent that we define our terms.
User avatar
m4tt_666
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:00 am

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Sat Aug 27, 2011 3:41 pm

Emptiness itself is said to be the mode of subsistence of (all) phenomena, because of the reason of dependent arising. Objects and persons arise through causes and conditions, and as such are said not to exist from their own side in some separate way. Also, objects are imputed (by an imputational or designating consciousness) in dependence on their collection of parts. This means that they are not only dependent on what they 'are', but also upon the consciousness viewing these objects. Dependent arising is a positive phenomenon. It is something occurring in your mind right now; the dots of ink on this sheet are being transformed into words and then into mental images in dependence on the shape of the dots. There aren't really any words on the paper you are holding, because words are in your mind. In that way, the words on the page are empty of inherent existence, although that is certainly not the only way they are empty. They are also empty, because there is no one gist or meaning or way of grokking this paper. A word could have a slightly or vastly different meaning to every person who reads it, especially in dependence on the words surrounding it. If every person understands a word differently, then every sentence is understood differently, and there can be no claim about the meaning of the collection of words. If everyone reading it gets a different meaning, how can it be inherently existent, meaning something from its own side? With these reasonings, one can see that emptiness is somehow the flip side of dependent arising. Emptiness proposes nothing in the place of inherent existence, and in this way it is non-affirming. It is also a negative, or a negation. It is simply the negative, or negating of, the idea that something is existent from its own side or inherently existent. Emptiness is existent in the sense that it can be realized, but it does not exist as a thing. I can realize the emptiness of something, and even all things, but not label anything emptiness without falling back into designational conception, or the normal (innate) mode of perceiving.
One certainly does not usually think to himself, "this object is inherently existent and exists from its own side", but one does assent to this appearance without realizing he is doing so. One goes along with the way things appear without giving it any active thought at all, usually. Having a strong feeling that some things really exist, that they have their own existence without needing us to be involved in any way, is the gateway to believing in things as inherently existent. Strengthening that feeling to the level of actually actively seeing oneself and objects as inherently existent is difficult, and suffers from many internal inconsistencies when given sufficient thought. If we can at least cut through this exaggerated level of thought that reinforces this erroneous idea of the "self" of persons and objects, then we may be able to attack the subtler forms of this delusion as well.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:08 pm

practically, we can apply this,
for instance,
to 'marraige'.

'marraige' is found to arise dependently,
mainly by cultural imputation,
amongst a host of other 'things' including people.

'marraige' lacks any intrinsic meaning whatsoever,
except meaning pumped into it by a deluded, cunning meaning maker,
it is merely attachment.
there is no grounds to it.
It is a Story.

Stories are,
'empty and meaningless'
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:47 am

Dennis: We remain as the condition:
the unanswered question is open.


By way of the fire of question and the cooling of answer, metaphysical reasoning, the above statement is realized to be false:

If I were the condition, I could not become aware of the condition.

Which means, that because I have the wisdom that I am That which is aware of the condition, I also have the wisdom to remove the condition.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Sun Aug 28, 2011 9:32 am

to live as the question is open,
is to live as open to possibilities,
for that's what it is: possibilities.
freedom.

to cling to an answer and work it as a winning formula,
to build a rhetorical fortress around it,
to storify it,
to fall into that cunning,
to experience that degree of inauthenticity,
to imprison oneself in that way,

it unravels.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby m4tt_666 » Sun Aug 28, 2011 12:01 pm

by being in a determined state of consciousness at any given moment we are actively shutting everything else that is, not a part of this 'consciousness' out.
User avatar
m4tt_666
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 7:00 am

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:43 pm

Dennis Mahar wrote:to live as the question is open,
is to live as open to possibilities,
for that's what it is: possibilities.
freedom.

to cling to an answer and work it as a winning formula,
to build a rhetorical fortress around it,
to storify it,
to fall into that cunning,
to experience that degree of inauthenticity,
to imprison oneself in that way,

it unravels.


Dennis,

If the answer to one's question does not move one without hesitation, without a shadow of doubt, without a second thought extending from the first thought, then one is not totally free of the question, are they? It is only the absolute unconditioned answer that is the way of true freedom, of liberation, and such a question answered of subjective-objective union is in no way related to the cunning of the intellect that desires to storify an answer. The question is asked of Wisdom of what to do or say, the answer is given, what is to be done is done, what is to be said, is said. No story. No "thinking about." No pondering, wondering, opining, projecting, no reasoning, only "Thy Will is done." This is why most individuals who are true to their conscience of faithfulness to Thy Will be done are often described as being highly independent or self-sufficient, often quiet in demeanor and silent of nature.

You said above that we remain as the condition, as the question. I said that this is not so, and that it is our task, as the one who is aware of the condition, to remove the condition/question from our consciousness. What I describe above is how this task is completed. Every time we move in obedience to Wisdom's unconditioned, absolute answer of "do this" or "say that" - no further questioning allowed, no storyfying allowed - part of our darkness of our original condition of belief in two minds, one Unconditioned and one conditioned, is dissolved. This is to go beyond open mindedness, into being opened. Being opened to what? Being opened to live of one's infinite image or pattern of absoluteness of the moment.

Does this being opened of the end of the condition eliminate human conversation of exchange of ideas on the mental-material plane? Yes. This is why few truly pursue the truth of spiritual absoluteness, of conscious union with Wisdom of the Infinite. The price of liberation from belief in dualism, from being enslaved of conditionality/causality, is too costly for most.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:14 am

You're probably referring to a mode of being for human being known as 'detached immersion'.
If so, that's what I mean by being open.
Hearing a 'voice' seems funny, why do you say that?
I prefer 'knowing'.
All the necessary reasoning/getting of wisdom has been done and is in the background and yet profoundly informs the responses to the events rising now.
It's a condition where the desire for worldly things, other people, conceptual fortresses has disappeared.
Attachment is unnecessary and the suffering that goes with that is understood and avoided.
If that's what you are affirming then it's remarkable of you to be able to achieve that given all the care you have to integrate as a responsibility in the raising of 2 kids and the hubby. Well done.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Mon Aug 29, 2011 2:31 am

You're probably referring to a mode of being for human being known as 'detached immersion'.


No, I am speaking of going beyond one's awareness of being human, which means going beyond human interpretations of attitude. "Immersion" requires an explanation (is this not an example of the cunning of the mind that desires to storyfy?) What I am speaking of is being awake to the moment and being an open channel for the free flowing movement of spirit's will.

If so, that's what I mean by being open.


How can there be complete openness if one has to attach a label to the openness?

Hearing a 'voice' seems funny, why do you say that?
I prefer 'knowing'.


In this realm of sense, of attachment to the breath, of the appearance of the human mind, there is always an inner voice guiding one to either hold onto their breath consciousness [the mentality of body survival] or to release their breath consciousness [the mentality of body detachment]. If there is no awareness of a voice - "do or say this thing", then there can be no movement of spirit's will. This is what I mean by my signature, that one must use [go through] the mind to go beyond the mind. Thought that is geared toward body and ego survival is sense oriented - image, sound, taste, smell and touch are the gods of flesh thought, thoughts such as "how to build a better computer", or "how to make a tastier meat pie." Thought that is geared toward body/ego detachment does not arouse image, sound, taste, smell and touch, thoughts such as virtue, compassion, purification, discipline, obedience, patience, etc.

'Knowing', to me is the activity of intuition or wisdom of thoughts not yet revealed. It is to have absolute faith in the invisible world of spirit forms that both uphold and activate I am realization.

All the necessary reasoning/getting of wisdom has been done and is in the background and yet profoundly informs the responses to the events rising now.
It's a condition where the desire for worldly things, other people, conceptual fortresses has disappeared.
Attachment is unnecessary and the suffering that goes with that is understood and avoided.


What you describe above is very close to what I am saying about wisdom and reasoning, but I would not use the concept of "events" to define what one experiences when is given a wisdom for the purposes of removing a perceived [illusory] condition. Rather than an event arising, which is really a story arising, what happens for the individual who is in union with "God" or the "Infinite" or the "Absolute" is a prick on the conscience to pay attention to what must be done to remove the condition, or as Jesus put it "the mote in the eye."

The answer to what must be done is already present before the prick is experienced [ergo the presence of the prick]; all one has to do is be still and listen.

As for desire, the only desire that is present when one is being guided by their unconditioned consciousness is to be liberated completely from their conditioned consciousness.

If that's what you are affirming then it's remarkable of you to be able to achieve that given all the care you have to integrate as a responsibility in the raising of 2 kids and the hubby. Well done.


The law of human thought patterns is "like is attracted to like", which means the man I married also was not and is not, attached to human ideals and human ways of thinking. Therefore, this is how both our children were raised, in an atmosphere of always questioning one's prejudice or attachment to any one human idea or concept. Both my children are now in their 30's, and sometimes I find myself under their scrutiny of truth, calling me on a moment when I fall into the error of my human patterning of conditioning. Especially my son, my eldest, who is not married and lives a simple, self-directed life.

What I have discovered, since "having children", is that our true children are our thoughts.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:06 am

I'm not entirely happy with your languaging as you are not entirely happy with mine.
Being mindful that language isn't mine and isn't yours,
that the source of language,
as all things,
is true nature,
gives the opportunity,
to glimpse true nature in a conversation.

detached immersion is not a story.
we have to draw a distinction.
a story covers up 'what's so'.
a distinction discloses 'what's so'.

detached immersion is a hard won mode of being arising out of logical reasoning as the basis for drawing accurate distinctions.

One is always/already immersed.
being with your family is immersion, at the market shopping is immersion.

there's a distinction for immersion that has a being,
'on the court'.
'in the stands'.

for instance, as a child, you were 'on the court', suffered injustice, experienced disgust,
which put you 'in the stands'.
'In the stands' had you embarked on a path of seeking/discovery, a path of reasoning, of gaining insight that culminated in a grok of true nature.

For the most part, people are on the court, attached to a story about getting stuff for themselves, oblivious to consequences. there has been no path of reasoning undertaken.

So there you are,
'on the court', immersed detachedly.

not a story,
a way of being.
a mode of being for human being.
a distinction.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:39 pm

I'm not entirely happy with your languaging as you are not entirely happy with mine.


This is because we are standing on different 'points' of awareness. Our willingness to continue standing is a testament to spirit's desire for comprehension of its 'stand/point.'

Being mindful that language isn't mine and isn't yours,
that the source of language,
as all things,
is true nature,


It is true that language isn't mine and isn't yours, this is enlightened thinking; before I can comment on your identification of "true nature" as being the source, I require your vision of "true nature."

gives the opportunity,
to glimpse true nature in a conversation.


Here, I will give you my vision of the source of language, which is that which allows nature to appear, but is itself, transcendent to the appearance of nature. "That" is the invisible laws, principles and patterns of the Infinite which gives rise to the natural law, visible to all believe themselves immersed, but invisible to those who know themselves to be transcendent to the natural law.

detached immersion is not a story.
we have to draw a distinction.
a story covers up 'what's so'.
a distinction discloses 'what's so'.

detached immersion is a hard won mode of being arising out of logical reasoning as the basis for drawing accurate distinctions.


Which is precisely why I am not immersed in the human condition of duality, of logic. I do not refute the wisdom of logic to wisely manage the human condition, but being a logical human being is not to be in conscious union with the infinite, which was, is and always will be, transcendent to all conditions, human or otherwise. This is the challenge I bring to this forum, to logically point out that consciousness 'precedes' human consciousness, which means that to suggest that the wisdom of the infinite is about being a logical human being is, to put it simply and bluntly, not so. It is a stepping stone toward conscious union, it is not conscious union.

One is always/already immersed.
being with your family is immersion, at the market shopping is immersion.


No, one is already transcendent to immersion. My family is a temporal appearance, my market shopping is a temporal appearance - how can I be immersed in that which has no permanency of form?

there's a distinction for immersion that has a being,
'on the court'.
'in the stands'.

for instance, as a child, you were 'on the court', suffered injustice, experienced disgust,
which put you 'in the stands'.

As a child, I was always aware, albeit unconsciously [I did not have the word for my awareness] that I was not these things that you describe. I did not experience disgust nor did I suffer injustice. This is what I was trying to tell you about my experience with my uncle, which you storified with your own subjective beliefs/story, tying in your belief in injustice and disgust. What happened that day by way of a man who believed himself immersed in the human condition to a child who intuited that neither she nor he were immersed in the human condition was that the child was awakened to seek the knowledge or Word of what she intuited, but did not yet know.

'In the stands' had you embarked on a path of seeking/discovery, a path of reasoning, of gaining insight that culminated in a grok of true nature.


I was never 'in the stands.' Reasoning, for me, was always about reasoning why there is such a thing as "a human condition."

For the most part, people are on the court, attached to a story about getting stuff for themselves, oblivious to consequences. there has been no path of reasoning undertaken.

So there you are,
'on the court', immersed detachedly.

not a story,
a way of being.
a mode of being for human being.
a distinction.


This is where you are, not where I am. What you have done in this post is the same thing you did when you tried to project your understanding of the Pam-uncle story onto my comprehension of the Pam-uncle story. And with your attempt to project your understanding of the Pam-jufa story onto my comprehension of the Pam-jufa story. Which culminated in several individuals jumping on board to agree with your projection. This is the problem with "immersed detachment", the belief that one can use "logical reasoning as the basis for drawing accurate distinctions." There is never an accurate distinction made by way of logic. One can say that a tree is a tree, using A=A; one can also say that the tree is not a tree, using A=A, but one cannot say, as if it is the truth, "John became this way because of this thing" using A=A. The moment one steps away from naming only, which wisdom tells us is an empty naming, meaning it is not the truth, but rather, "a pointing to," they fall into pure subjectivity, and to call pure subjectivity an "accurate distinction" is deluded thinking.

All logic does, all that the search for cause does, is provide a sense of temporary order. Of calming the mind so that one is not overwhelmed with the hundreds of thoughts that assault the soul when "something happens." Which is a beneficial thing, as a mind that seeks order rather than chaos is a mind that can be taught the things of spirit, the way of transcendence.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:08 am

I was referring to a mode of being for human being.
A distinction for human being.
A way of being for human being.
immersed detachment.
If you like, a being-towards buddhahood.
A necessary stage on the way.

You are discounting the condition.
I'm recognising it.

True nature is hard to catch.

If it's impossible to deny existence.
If it's impossible to claim phenomena is self-established.
Then it is clear existence and phenomena lack inherency.
That it is empty.
Now, we have to see that 'empty' also depends for existence.
For 'empty' depends on there being phenomena to be 'empty'.

If you've got that straight,
you are looking straight down the gun barrell at 'true nature'.

no-thing
not finite
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:46 pm

I was referring to a mode of being for human being.
A distinction for human being.
A way of being for human being.
immersed detachment.
If you like, a being-towards buddhahood.
A necessary stage on the way.

You are discounting the condition.
I'm recognising it.


I do not discount the condition of "two", I comprehend it for what it is, ignorance, and I am acting upon, being true to, this comprehension.

True nature is hard to catch.

If it's impossible to deny existence.


I do not deny existence, for here I am! I am saying existence is one thing and to be this one thing, one must remove the covering of ignorance of "two" [seeing a condition].

If it's impossible to claim phenomena is self-established.
Then it is clear existence and phenomena lack inherency.
That it is empty.
Now, we have to see that 'empty' also depends for existence.
For 'empty' depends on there being phenomena to be 'empty'.

If you've got that straight,
you are looking straight down the gun barrell at 'true nature'.

no-thing
not finite


And yet, when most come to this realization of "not finite," they continue analyzing the world as if their finite words are true or real. There is a scripture that addresses the crossroad that every man faces at some point in his truth seeking: "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."

Either one's attention and identification is directed wholly on the singularity of consciousness, the inherent emptiness or suchness of form, or it is not. Being singularly focused is the way duality is removed or dissolved or burned in one's consciousness. This burning by way of keeping one's attention on the single "I" of existence IS the burning of logic and of reasoning, for it is by way of logic and reasoning that conditional causes continue to arise.

I am enjoying our languaging. :-)
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:18 am

See how you use causes/conditions as well!
You can't tick me off for analyzing and be straight with me too.

I am saying existence is one thing and to be this one thing, one must remove the covering of ignorance of "two" [seeing a condition].


condition : to be this one thing
cause : one must remove the covering of ignorance of 'two'

We can't really escape causality as a human being because human being is causes/conditions.

Buddha was a human being who attained omniscience.
He was causes/conditions.
It was reported his death was caused by eating bad pork.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:20 am

I am enjoying our languaging.


Yes thanks.
I don't think Language is doing too well tho'.

We've got rid of pronouns.
there's no me/mine, you/yours, them/theirs.

Thanks to you we've got rid of adjectives and adverbs.

Now, if a condition can be seen as a noun,
and a cause can be seen as a verb.

and they have to go.

what about prepositions?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:55 pm

Pam,
It's all about the appearance.
Buddha mind, which is available as a possibility for all of us,
still has appearance and a sense of Self (not separate self), (not nihilism).
existence is one organism, one mind.
what it sees is endless purity.
a point of view.
it can communicate because it also sees every other point of view.

What it says about other points of view is:
'your trouble is you don't understand how non-virtuous actions have cause/effect consequences'
that is why the four noble truths were provided as a remedy.
when a non-virtuous action is enacted the assumption is that the appearance being acted against has inherent existence and is solid and is a threat to a separate me.

When I go to sleep and dream,
appearances show up and my dreaming mind completely accepts the appearances and reacts to them as pleasure or pain. (complete ignorance).
sometimes I wake up in the dream and recognise it as junk.
sometimes I wake up, still in the dream, and feeling emotionally affected, till I realise it was just a dream and it clears.

When I'm alert and operating in the world,
I've come to realise appearances are not solid,
lack inherent existence,
are empty,
that existence is a single organism,
one mind,
feel empathy/compassion.
experience freedom from attachment.
detached immersion.

Long way to go,
occasional glimpses of endless purity.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:48 am

Pam,

It's all about the appearance.
Buddha mind, which is available as a possibility for all of us,
still has appearance and a sense of Self (not separate self), (not nihilism).
existence is one organism, one mind.
what it sees is endless purity.
a point of view.
it can communicate because it also sees every other point of view.


What Buddha mind sees is Purity, it is the intellect that sees "endless" Purity.

Communicating one's awareness that everything already is PURE is the becoming fully conscious of this Pure Awareness. This is all that needs to be said when speaking to another who is ignorant of this truth. There is no need to engage them in their story of ignorance. The buck stops with me, with you, with everybody who knows the truth of the emptiness of form, the infinite purity of spirit forms.

Practically put, if someone comes to me and gives me their "story in time," their causes and their effects, whether good or bad, and they cannot hear the truth of "there is no such thing as time", then I smile, wish them well, and walk away. To engage them in what I know to be but an appearance as if it is real, is to engage in THE lie. To expose this lie is the 'holy' message of Buddha hood or of Christ Consciousness.

What it says about other points of view is:
'your trouble is you don't understand how non-virtuous actions have cause/effect consequences'
that is why the four noble truths were provided as a remedy.
when a non-virtuous action is enacted the assumption is that the appearance being acted against has inherent existence and is solid and is a threat to a separate me.


The four noble truths and the ten commandments were indeed provided as a remedy, for those who believe they are sick [impure], which is all of humanity until it awakens to the truth of Pure Consciousness. What happens, though, to the the individual who knows of cause and effect, but knows also that cause and effect is an illusion, and knowing this, has mostly purified this illusion from his consciousness? No longer is he moved by greed or hate or lust, the movers of the appearance of cause and effect, but of the residue of these impure thoughts? And then, what happens when even the reside of belief in the impurity of form is no more? Does he stand still on this total purification of his human thinking? No, this is not possible, for the nature of Spirit is to expand Itself, of Itself. This is why nihilism, fear of the void, is a groundless fear of the intellect. There is no void in Spirit Consciousness.

When I go to sleep and dream,
appearances show up and my dreaming mind completely accepts the appearances and reacts to them as pleasure or pain. (complete ignorance).
sometimes I wake up in the dream and recognise it as junk.
sometimes I wake up, still in the dream, and feeling emotionally affected, till I realise it was just a dream and it clears.

When I'm alert and operating in the world,
I've come to realise appearances are not solid,
lack inherent existence,
are empty,
that existence is a single organism,
one mind,
feel empathy/compassion.
experience freedom from attachment.
detached immersion.


Wisdom of cause and effect, the noble life, the spiritual life. Not many walk this path, but I am here to say that when you have walked yourself to the end of empathy and compassion, to the end of logic and reason, another path opens up. It has to...man is infinite as God or The Tao is infinite...where is the beginning or ending of the infinite?

Long way to go,
occasional glimpses of endless purity.


In the words of the Buddha:

In whatever situation or mental state one enters, whether high or low, whether fine or foul, whether subtle or gross, whether far or near,one knows, notes, reflects and remembers the facts exactly like this: 'Whatsoever herein is form, feeling, experience, mental construction, & bare consciousness, all this is impermanent, transient, passing, unstable, decaying, and vanishing; all this is miserable, painful, ill, a thorn, a tumor, a disaster, a torture, and a burning pit; all this is remote, alien, impersonal, ownerless, void of stable substance & keepable entity, completely empty of any self-ego-me-I-mine-identity-or-personality...'

One thereby directs mind away from those unsafe phenomena and turns it towards the freedom of the Deathless Dimension: Nibbâna like this: 'But this is peace, the supreme stilling of all construction, the relinquishing of acquisition, the sublime release of all clinging, the calming of all craving, disgust, disillusion, ceasing of all noise, perception & sensation, Nibbâna...'Firmly established in this safe mode of reflection, one either eliminates the mental fermentations completely and thus attains Nibbâna - here and now - in this very life, or if not that, then one is reborn spontaneously in the pure abodes, the pure lands, the pure realms, the pure spheres, of fine material, where one clears the 5 lower fetters - the 5 minor mental chains - & attains Nibbâna from there, without ever returning to this world from that level...


The Buddha is telling us that the condition can be, and is supposed to be, transcended permanently.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby Dennis Mahar » Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:39 am

What Buddha mind sees is Purity, it is the intellect that sees "endless" Purity.


Yes, the adjective 'endless' is useless.

Given the truth you disclose,
the real.
We can make a distinction.
the real and the apparent.
This projection, Dennis, for the time being,
a being-towards-death,
is open to the vagaries of cause/effect,
and must make a stand.
A stand in the face of it's approaching destruction.
Each night a tiny welling of grief and a moistened pair of eyes bids adieu to this existence in the certain knowledge it will no longer be.
This certain knowledge of conditions brings a way of being forward,
which would be the opportunity.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Why causality is an illusion

Postby movingalways » Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:55 pm

Given the truth you disclose,
the real.
We can make a distinction.
the real and the apparent.


And of this wisdom, the apparent is reconciled to to the real.

This projection, Dennis, for the time being,
a being-towards-death,
is open to the vagaries of cause/effect,
and must make a stand.
A stand in the face of it's approaching destruction.
Each night a tiny welling of grief and a moistened pair of eyes bids adieu to this existence in the certain knowledge it will no longer be.
This certain knowledge of conditions brings a way of being forward,
which would be the opportunity.


Rumi:

The drum of the realization of the promise is beating,
we are sweeping the road to the sky. Your joy is here today, what remains for tomorrow?
The armies of the day have chased the army of the night,
Heaven and earth are filled with purity and light.
Oh! joy for he who has escaped from this world of perfumes and color!
For beyond these colors and these perfumes, these are other colors in the heart and the soul.
Oh! joy for this soul and this heart who have escaped
the earth of water and clay,
Although this water and this clay contain the hearth of the
philosophical stone.
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

PreviousNext

Return to GENIUS FORUM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests