Enlightenment

[Leyla Shen]

How is being slave to not-slave circumvented?

By overcoming the negative-positive plebeian discourse of the master.

[Dennis Mahar]

The carrot and stick?

[Dennis Mahar]

You and Diebert run a carrot and stick protocol on each other.
Plebeian discourse?

[Leyla Shen]

Think, Dennis. Think.

You do it all the time:

How is being slave to not-slave circumvented?

^Plebeian dialectic. How will you overcome it?

[Dennis Mahar]

Dependent arising declares no true rank.

lust for power (desire)
No true rank.

[TheImmanent]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

[Dennis Mahar]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

there's 2 things goin' on there:

just the idea of someone (a matter for enrolment)

not even someone (a matter for enrolment)

parts of your curriculum of education.

concepts are checked out for enrolment.

what's at stake is correct view.

[TheImmanent]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

there's 2 things goin' on there:

just the idea of someone (a matter for enrolment)

not even someone (a matter for enrolment)

parts of your curriculum of education.

concepts are checked out for enrolment.

what's at stake is correct view.

There is no stakeholder.

[Dennis Mahar]

conceptualising mind is stakeholder.

for instance,
'lust for power' is conceptualised, doesn't exist otherwise, enrolled in and practiced as if absolute. a possibility.
named and formed.

just the idea of someone

the idea is enrolled in, taken up, that's how it exists, conceptualised, believed in (enrolment).
named and formed.
given life to.

that's what you are implying.

as soon as separate self is believed, survival options/lust for power shows up.

conceptualising mind runs this bizzo.

it's easy to see a mind conceiving 'lust for power' and the 'lust for power' a mind conceives is uncertain.

nirvana is a change of mind.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

How is being slave to not-slave circumvented?

The very idea of "not slave" is the negation central to "plebeian dialectic". Just like the idea of any circumvention. Just like your question mark.

Dependent arising declares no true rank. Lust for power (desire) [has] no true rank.

Lust for power, will, has no rank. It's the ranking itself taking place.

It's easy to see a mind conceiving 'lust for power' and the 'lust for power' a mind conceives is uncertain.

It can only properly conceive through evaluation, the weiging between values. You can only "see" how things are being "conceptualized" by having your power first and then eat it too.

There's no freaking way you can keep saying "power" is conceptual without using "power". There's no answer to this, no way of analyzing it this way or that. Just seeing inside out.

[Dennis Mahar]

Bloody Nora!
you are saying causes/conditions lad.
savvy?

clearly set in train.
entrainment.
named and formed.

the Immanent groks it too.

belief in separate self sets in train suffering. entrainment.
named and formed.

[Pam Seeback]

Me me me is revealed in every post as condition.
as a basis for grounds.
believe me.
A plea bargain to enrol in me.

You obviously believe your bliss is exempt from this plea bargain or you wouldn't be painting the scarlet letter of causes/conditions on my chest, you'd be wearing it yourself.

What you cannot see is that after bliss heals the heart, conscience (conscious spirit) steps up to bat. It's story is of tremendous value, for it is one of love of will and will to love. Of standing one's ground in me, I am, but of knowing that all conscious beings stand on the same (w)holy ground. But you dismiss the story of conscious love again and again, preferring instead the healing waters of unconscious bliss, as you say, completeness in detachment. But spirit won't lie down and drown because it can't lie down. Your presence here is proof, you fight to remain conscious even if you cannot see this truth for yourself.

[Pam Seeback]

Bloody Nora!
you are saying causes/conditions lad.
savvy?

clearly set in train.
entrainment.
named and formed.

the Immanent groks it too.

belief in separate self sets in train suffering. entrainment.
named and formed.

Will or spiritual energy does not die because one lets go of the idea of separate self. As a matter of fact, it is only when one transcends their idea of separate self that spiritual will is displayed in all its power and glory. This is when wisdom opens its mouth.

[Pam Seeback]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

No someone, but subjective or individual consciousness and its will to be. If this were not so, you would not, you could not be here.

Your very name bespeaks your subjective will.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

you are saying causes/conditions lad.

All saying is just another form of causes/conditions.

So you are saying I'm just saying.

Savvier??

the Immanent groks it too.

Only because of causes/conditions; grokking is like a more complex intuitive mode of reasoning itself. Stop toeing the waters with your inflatable blisses: dive with the big waves!

Belief in separate self sets in train suffering. Entrainment. Named and formed.

Causes and conditions. Naming is separating is shaming. Suffering comes only with refusing to weave, to bend, to move with truth. Or when trying to undo, hiding or invalidating way.

That's why I say: Dennis the Menace! Unresolved suffering selling resolution baby!

[TheImmanent]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

No someone, but subjective or individual consciousness and its will to be. If this were not so, you would not, you could not be here.

Your very name bespeaks your subjective will.

The idea of a conglomeration of ideas as an agent. Such is the individual, subjective consciousness and its will to be. A concept.

[Dennis Mahar]

The idea of a conglomeration of ideas as an agent. Such is the individual, subjective consciousness and its will to be. A concept.

Correct view.
perfect wisdom.
conceptualised, named and formed, understood, re-cognised.
set in train.

out of which bliss.

emptiness/bliss.

meanwhile, back at the game of thrones (:

[Leyla Shen]

The idea of a conglomeration of ideas as an agent. Such is the individual, subjective consciousness and its will to be. A concept.

Hegelian Idealism in a nutshell.

[Pam Seeback]

Someone is just the idea of someone. Such is enrollment. There is not even someone to enroll.

No someone, but subjective or individual consciousness and its will to be. If this were not so, you would not, you could not be here.

Your very name bespeaks your subjective will.

The idea of a conglomeration of ideas as an agent. Such is the individual, subjective consciousness and its will to be. A concept.

No, not an agent, as in the presence of a self, but as the way the infinite spirit is expressed. Is not your thought world different than mine and everyone else's? Is not the thought world of a dog different than every other dog's thought world? Every moment of every expression exists in the same reality, but every moment of this same reality is different. One could look at it as: same subject, existence: different objects, appearance of existence.

As for these things being a concept, of course they are. Are you implying that an enlightened spirit is one that abandons all concepts?

[Pam Seeback]

The idea of a conglomeration of ideas as an agent. Such is the individual, subjective consciousness and its will to be. A concept.

Correct view.
perfect wisdom.
conceptualised, named and formed, understood, re-cognised.
set in train.

out of which bliss.

emptiness/bliss.

meanwhile, back at the game of thrones (:

If you have always understood will to be to be the emergent experience of existence out of which comes bliss, why do you present your wisdom of being as emptiness/bliss and not emptiness/will to be? Or emptiness/will to be/bliss?

[Dennis Mahar]

It just is.
inexpressable, unimaginable,
Beyond conceptualising
your conception is bound up in character and plot.

ineffable silence.

[Leyla Shen]

You're full of shit, Dennis.

There's no difference between your conceptualising by inference Pam's conceptualising of character and plot, and your being bound up in conceptualising a feeling of unimaginable, ineffable silence.

[Pam Seeback]

Your stories of carrying the cross of Jesus and placing a blanket over a dying creature and making a birthday girl go wet with desire are not conceptions of character and plot? If not, then what? And is not character and plot caused just like everything else? What's the big deal? Causation just is, so what?

[Pam Seeback]

Leyla, Dennis still has not grasped that the hidden void is not separate from the concepts it causes or wills to appear/to be.

[Dennis Mahar]

Ineffable silence.
correct view
non conceptual

'Hidden void' etc merely conventional designations.