Is it not time to make the two one?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Diebert: Ah yes, but you didn't get the point. The vagina: the big zero, just more lips, duplicity and ambiguity, the great reverser. Even comes with a tiny phallus, ready to erect, just to confuse even more!
Are you acknowledging that gender images manifest confusion?
And yes, Adam at the beginning and Christ at the ken forms together the appearance of Man. The spirit animating him, from fall to rise.
Spirit animates, yes, but not into the appearance of Man, rather, into its appearance of Its things. I am That I am. When consciousness apprehends existence by way of Its abstract concept of Man rather than the concreteness of Its things is it not causing Itself to "hang in the air" rather than stand firm on the ground of its being?

The fruit of letting go of Man (and his shadow partner Woman, or if you are a goddess worshiper, the reverse) is that one comes to rest in the Absolute of All Things or Everything. And because of resting in All Things, when spirit animates, it animates the right thought, be it of reason or be it of emotion. This right and perfect thought is the Christ Spirit in action.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

movingalways wrote:Are you acknowledging that gender images manifest confusion?
Just that the female gender represents confusion and being confused very well. Simply because it's not an "opposite": there's nothing like "the opposite gender" unless in a nearly useless abstract sense. The opposite of the male gender is being genderless. Genderization (and generalization!) itself is masculine activity.
The fruit of letting go of Man (and his shadow partner Woman, or if you are a goddess worshiper, the reverse) is that one comes to rest in the Absolute of All Things or Everything. And because of resting in All Things, when spirit animates, it animates the right thought, be it of reason or be it of emotion. This right and perfect thought is the Christ Spirit in action.
The tradition you're invoking calls this thougt-action also the "Son of Man". Which is a rendition of "Supraman", since it's about what goes over and beyond contemporary man (or how one conceived of him really). But it's still quintessential a deeper understanding of humanity as it exists right now. Since one cannot transcend duality in words or images, one can end up with gender images to represent things as truthfully and profoundly as possible. But there's no ultimate image to "say it all" just like there's no one ultimate image or word to annihilate it all: it would only end up confirming the same dualities and relativities. Only less clear.
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Kunga »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote: Since one cannot transcend duality in words or images, one can end up with gender images to represent things as truthfully and profoundly as possible. But there's no ultimate image to "say it all" just like there's no one ultimate image or word to annihilate it all: it would only end up confirming the same dualities and relativities. Only less clear.
But....is there really a duality to transcend ?
Isn't duality the false reality ?
Even though words and images are only words and images.... they themselves are of the essence of the non-dual nature of reality.
How can anything be anything but non-dual ?

Duality is the illusion !

If all is interdependently arisen (empty of inherent/self existence), it's all connected......non-dual.
Duality is the illusion.

Everything comes from the same source, and returns to it.

(This is how I see it anyways...)
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Nonduality is predicated.

It still involves a predicament.
a sense of situationally unpleasant.

nothing is resolved with it.

Diebert's way as a 'strolling accordionist' singing properties of this and that resolves nothing.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Dennis Mahar wrote: singing properties of this and that resolves nothing.

I thought you said there was nothing to resolve. Nothing to fix or change, and from there, apparently no delusion to overcome. How then is it possible that you are pointing out flaws in comprehension so often? Or saying that one might cause 'psychological harm'?
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Kunga »

Dennis Mahar wrote:Nonduality is predicated.It still involves a predicament.a sense of situationally unpleasant.nothing is resolved with it.
Right....but it's only unpleasant when you think it has to be resolved !

No beginning...No ending...like a circle...

We want to understand everything...it give us comfort to know how things work...but you have to let go of a definitive answer...even emptiness .....to not know ...is knowing...

(duh)

then you gotta unknow what you think you know by not knowing...lol
see how I'm going around in a circle already ?
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

We want to understand everything...it give us comfort to know how things work...but you have to let go of a definitive answer...even emptiness .....to not know ...is knowing...
Yeah,
A chemist can natter all day about the properties, characteristics, functions of chemicals and doesn't know what a chemical is.

Schroeder's equation says that 2 boxers slugging it out in a ring are not separate yet appear to be.
So nonduality is a property.

Of what?
Don't know.
All the Buddha said was phenomena has the leading characteristic of lacking inherent existence.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Diebert: The tradition you're invoking calls this thougt-action also the "Son of Man". Which is a rendition of "Supraman", since it's about what goes over and beyond contemporary man (or how one conceived of him really). But it's still quintessential a deeper understanding of humanity as it exists right now.
The Christ Spirit in action has no choice but to act in the now of humanity. I am not suggesting that one deny things of the earth such as male and female but that when one refers to them that one does so through the 'eyes' of having transcended them as ideas of identity. I am aware that I am biologically female but if someone should ask me who or what I am it would never occur to me to answer with my gender. As I see it true genius lies in one's ability to identity with their transcendent spirit (Sky/Father) while being in the world of Earth/Mother. Reason and emotion/spirit and senses in union with conscious will.
Since one cannot transcend duality in words or images, one can end up with gender images to represent things as truthfully and profoundly as possible. But there's no ultimate image to "say it all" just like there's no one ultimate image or word to annihilate it all: it would only end up confirming the same dualities and relativities but obfuscated a bit further.
One cannot transcend duality in actuality in words or images, however, one can 'borrow' a word or words or image or images to represent or suggest the nondual. "I am That" comes to mind as does the image of the spectrum of light.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Seeker,
Are you daft?
What could possibly be broken?
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Cahoot »

"There is nothing wrong with duality as long as it does not
create conflict. Multiplicity and variety without strife is joy."


- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Kunga »

Cahoot wrote:"There is nothing wrong with duality as long as it does not
create conflict. Multiplicity and variety without strife is joy."


- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj


Yes...except most material things were created with conflict, so others can enjoy !
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Kunga: then you gotta unknow what you think you know by not knowing...lol see how I'm going around in a circle already ?
There is a moment in the movie "Moonstruck" when Cher's character smacks the face of her besotted lover and yells at him "snap out of it!" Kunga, snap out of it! :-) There is never a moment when you don't know yourself. If there was, you would cease to exist. Which means that via every thought you think, you know yourself. A specific example:

You think of a tree. That tree must already exist or consciousness of it would be impossible. In the moment of being conscious of "tree", do you not know yourself as that tree and only as that tree? Does it not occupy every space in your consciousness? Is it not true in that moment of thinking "tree" nothing else exists? Not your children, not your dirty floor, not the casserole you have to make for dinner, not even your painful overgrown toenail. You may be conscious of your tree as subatomic particles or you may be conscious of your tree as a red maple tree with falling leaves, the content of your tree is irrelevant. In other words, however "tree" is revealed to your consciousness from the hidden void, you and the tree are always a single understanding.

The truth that you and "tree" are a single understanding is your nondual perception of tree. It is also your absolute knowledge of tree, for no one else is having the exact same experience of tree as you.

Another example, distinctly emotional in nature. When you think to yourself I love my child is not the moment of loving your child a moment of absolute Self knowledge? Is it not the reality of you?
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Cahoot »

“Conflict does produce a certain result by the use of the will, but conflict never is creative.”

- Jiddu Krishnamurti
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Kunga,
No beginning...No ending...like a circle...
That homes in on the authentic experience of temporality.

It always circles around to Now.

the linear projection of time for Dasein setting out on it's list of in order to's for the sake of which's acquisition mode as a means to an end,
projectile, survival options.

circles back to Now.
A simple presence.

Now what?
What's next?
What's on the menu?

Time runner.
Being time, doing time, having time.
Wonderful.
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Kunga »

movingalways wrote: the moment of loving....... a moment of absolute Self knowledge? Is it not the reality of you?
Yes....real love is not just a pathetic human emotion....it is the essence of life...the spark of life...a living spiritual element, similar to the elements of time & space in the material world....(fire,air,earth,water)

movingalways wrote: In the moment of being conscious of "tree", do you not know yourself as that tree and only as that tree? Does it not occupy every space in your consciousness? I
I know that ultimately everything is the stuff of our mind,(consciousness), but I don't automatically identify myself with all that surrounds me....I suppose for my safety, the perception of being separate serves it's purpose. But when meditating and focusing on one object....I will merge with it, and feel one with it.


movingalways wrote:There is never a moment when you don't know yourself. If there was, you would cease to exist. Which means that via every thought you think, you know yourself. A specific example:You think of a tree.
A tree is easy..... try used toilet paper !
The other day I had to cut tennis balls, to put on the end of a walker for someone, (it helps to glide them along). I felt very icky stabbing and cutting the balls , as if I could feel pain, like I was cutting myself !
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Kunga »

Dennis Mahar wrote:circles back to Now.A simple presence.
Yes...but "now" is gone as soon as it arrives !
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

it's empty and meaningless that it's empty and meaningless.
ineffable silence.

you provide the meaning.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Pam says 'I am that'.
A category?

False.

The truth is it's a speech act.
corrected it is 'I am that, that I am that'.
from here it goes 'You are that that you are that'.

Being is a priori to any cute cliche you like to pull out of the reading of a book to paint yourself with.
Merely selfing.
names and forms.
empty words.
house of language.
dread of nothing.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Cahoot »

Call it what you will or won’t, now is never gone.
om tat sat

*

“Above the unity of being is the union of love. Love is the
meaning and purpose of duality.”

- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

all you've shown there is dependent arising.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Cahoot »

That ain’t nothin.


When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

1 Corinthians 13:11
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Once again you've shown causes/conditions,
dependent arising.

can't be refuted.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Cahoot »

You’re merely reading into it,
but before it gets buried in non-sense,
once again,
now is never gone,
no matter what imputation is insisted,
over, and over, and over, again.

The future depends on Depends
ahaaha
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cahoot wrote:“Conflict does produce a certain result by the use of the will, but conflict never is creative.”

- Jiddu Krishnamurti
Consciousness is conflict-dependent because consciousness is will-dependent. Reasoning is the way will fights to remain conscious. Without reasoning our existence we cease to exist.

The balance to will and reasoning is creativity, the sense of temporarily letting go of the fight to remain conscious. Ironically, many (if not all) creative works reflect the sense of letting go of will. It is my observation that Dennis' story of bliss is just such a creative work. Ideally a person would be awake enough to know when reasoning (the fight to remain conscious) is required and when it can be put on the back burner.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Is it not time to make the two one?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis Mahar wrote:Pam says 'I am that'.
A category?

False.

The truth is it's a speech act.
corrected it is 'I am that, that I am that'.
from here it goes 'You are that that you are that'.

Being is a priori to any cute cliche you like to pull out of the reading of a book to paint yourself with.
Merely selfing.
names and forms.
empty words.
house of language.
dread of nothing.
You ask the question "a category?" and then, without waiting for an answer, conclude the statement to be false. Your will against my will, yada yada, can't blame 'em, they can't help themselves, just doin' their jobs.

Time for a will break:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1BwhC3ova8
Locked