Shakespeare nailed it

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: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

RZoo wrote:
movingalways wrote:Your thoughts above are perfect examples of the mind's natural urge to divide and conquer taken to suffering's peak, that is, into the expression of hatred. Do you envision a consciousness beyond hatred that integrates its necessity to reject but no longer requires this necessity? And if so, do you accept or reject this vision?
I can envision a very feeble and weak consciousness which neither hates nor loves, a consciousness that is beyond all judgement and valuation, even of life or death. Such a consciousness would have to be cared for by others, lacking the motivation or reason to lift its arm even to feed and sustain itself. Therefore, I envision this consciousness lying in a hospital bed with atrophied muscles, almost comatose. I judge this consciousness not as the pinnacle of humanity, but as a pinnacle of human sickness. While it may be true that this consciousness has less delusions than the rest of us and dwells in the "absolute truth", he is missing something key! He is missing the realization of his own sickness, the realization that his unwavering desire for "truth" is what makes and keeps him sick, the realization: "What is 'truth', but another metaphysical lie and falsehood that we humans have invented to torture each other? And now I am being tortured, to the point of death, by this cruel concept, this illusion?" If he can grasp this, the tremendous, useless burden of "the absolute" will be lifted and all he will be free to get up off the hospital bed and start living life.
You do realize that if you were speaking the truth as you know it to be when you pressed "Submit" after completing your answer that you were doing the will of The Absolute? This is the spontaneity after reflection to which I was referring in a previous thread, which I see as being no different than speaking the truth after one has, as you put it, desired for the truth.

You may have, as I once had, a misunderstanding of what it means to "dwell in the absolute." It does not mean you have all the answers or that you no longer need answers or that you have found the permanent right answer, rather, that you know the right answer will come, for now, if you rest your question in the answer realm. If I use the biblical metaphor of The Father and Son, The Father is the answer, the Son is the question, I and the Father are One. This is the meaning of knock and the door shall be opened, seek and the answer shall be given to you. Suffering/release from suffering, suffering/release from suffering, this is the Way and the Truth and the Life of the Son who loves the Father, aka, wisdom. Some call the Father the conscience, let your conscience be your guide.

The consciousness I was referring to in my original question is the consciousness of accepting the relationship of the question to the answer, the relationship of darkness (suffering) to light (release from suffering). Which means one can let go of their hatred of having been made to suffer. What is the point of hating something that is a requirement for knowing? I don't know if you are familiar with the singer/songwriter Leonard Cohen, but this lyric from his song "Anthem": “There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in.”

Some believe the light should or can or does exist independently of the darkness (the will to stop thinking/questioning) which is what I believe you were alluding to above when you spoke of a consciousness that is above all judgment or evaluation, but the wise ones know that the Father is nothing without the Son, that they come as a package deal, and that when they come, neither love or hate is being spoken.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

A post script to my conclusions above: Since one is not always caused to suffer to ask a question of the emotion-less light of the absolute for the sake of knowing what is the right thing to be said or done - tension and its release - in other words, one is not always thinking, these are the times when consciousness is "free" to play in the non-thinking emotional realm, to relax, to dance, to watch television, to read a novel, to listen to music, to play a sport, to paint, etc. That this is what it means to live a balanced "male and female" conscious existence.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

What is interesting, concerning this conversation is, no one has stated what Shakespeare has nailed is referring to when stated: "to be or not to be" other than one being aware of choice of directions to be taken based, not on Spirit Principles & Patterns, but one shouldered angel or demon.

Also, irrespective of what is referenced by Shakespeare's, or any other person's relative words, to stand dignified, or wage war of partiality upon conditions which are applicable only upon ones own deference of living in their dual world. Nor does Shakespeare's words tell "to die, to sleep," to oppose anything does not do away with them, but cause things to lay dormant in the mind until thought tips the balance of angel or demon power.

The moment of awareness lives in the moment of awareness. Each moment which dies, is the continuum of the moments of life's resurrection of what is the ever renewing, ever unfolding expression of infinite life. Man's awareness, contemplation, studying for knowledge and enlightenment, nor anything else has to do with the law of the spirit of life, nor the myth of a God, which men ignorantly believe they can become aligned to by human thinking and thoughts interpretation of that which has no form or comeliness. Spirit does not know the difference of light or darkness, nor work or relaxation. Spirit only abides in, not my interpreted choice [to be or do, or oppose], but "they will BE DONE." Who knows the will of God, or the will of Consciousness here?

Spontaneity is a reflex to do the will of the angel or demon in possession of an individuals will in the moment. It is a condition of ones Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde dual personlty.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

Spirit, God is the cause of the appearance of consciousness, of duality, therefore, spirit, God, cannot be taken off the hook for human angel/demon consciousness. Every man and woman is conscious is sentient, therefore, every man and woman is caught in the catch 22 position of to be or not to be, to love or to hate, etc. Acceptance of this truth is to find some peace of mind. My reference to doing the will of the absolute is the action of the spirit angel or the spirit demon, not of a spirit that knows not of the difference (no such spirit exists).
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

We're all in this 'peace of mind' business together. Tough business. :-)
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

God is not only the cause of appearance, God is the cause of effect. Cause as effect, however, is established by the Conscious of ONE. What is established in ONES Consciousness is not defined by two conscious thoughts, but by a WORD which cannot be divided because the SPOKEN WORD is whole, perfect, complete and pure, and cannot return any other way. God is the whole, perfect. complete, and pure Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the Law of the Spirit of life which moves over chaos of division.

Being God's THOUGHT, and WORD of ESTABLISHMENT cannot be divided, then Job 38:2 -
"Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?. . .For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD. 9"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts."

"The devil in the detail": God is saying no sentient mind can know, speak, or say what He is and what He has done, because the sentient being is only a messenger carrying THE WORD, but knows nothing about THE PLAN OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.

Man does not possess the knowledge of existence, thus, the knowledge for the cause of anything which occur within existence. Not even the logic for their own reason for being aware.


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »


Religious mumbo-jumbo, steeped in emotionalism. But why would anyone want to write that on this forum? The torturous element is the only redeeming part I suppose.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Religious mumbo-jumbo, steeped in emotionalism. But why would anyone want to write that on this forum? The torturous element is the only redeeming part I suppose.
Why would anyone interject their opinion into a thread as if it was knowledgeable and authoritative, then
ask an ignorance question, and end their stupidity with a benighted supposition?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

ps. I see you haven't noticed this forum is full of religious mumbo-jumbo topics and threads. Any further intrusion by you into this topic not dealing with the subject matter will be ignored by this writer.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

jufa wrote:Why would anyone interject their opinion into a thread as if it was knowledgeable and authoritative
That's called a discussion forum. For you it's just another platform for your dreams to materialize in pixels. You cannot accept challenges to any of your ingrained fortifications.
Any further intrusion by you into this topic not dealing with the subject matter will be ignored by this writer.
I've heard that before but you cannot resist always, can't you? That's okay, I've changed my position on such things as well a few times here.

But since you ask for comment on content, here it is, as far as I could decipher your personal language, its opaqueness showing disrespect for your readers, who are not supposed to ask?
jufa wrote:The moment of awareness lives in the moment of awareness.
That's pretty much nonsense living inside nonsense.
Who knows the will of God, or the will of Consciousness here?
Anyone who knows themselves can answer that affirmatively. Because if one knows one self, ones will and powers, there's no question left in this regard.
Spontaneity is a reflex to do the will of the angel or demon in possession of an individuals will in the moment.
Talking about angels and demons is not an advancement in any discussion. It's degeneration of thought and discussion. It's a crutch for weaker minds and schizophrenics, usually.
It is a condition of ones Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde dual personlty.
Talking about angels and demons surely could be another hallmark.
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

To those who do not know
A dialogue is very different from what we normally call a discussion or debate. A discussion is usually between people who have adopted definite points of view and who wish to convince each other or compare their outlooks. They are usually committed to a certain opinion, ideology, religious belief, political system or nationality and argue from that particular point of view. Most of our university seminars and symposia as well as international diplomatic exchanges are of such a nature. So are the dialectical discussions between philosophers or religious heads of different persuasions. They begin with knowledge, encourage an exchange of ideas and end in more knowledge and more ideas.

One must distinguish between two kinds of learning. There is the learning which is accumulation of knowledge, which is a matter of time and effort. This is essentially the cultivation of skills or of thought and memory. There is also a more important learning which is the capacity to discern what is true and discard what is false and thereby come upon a deeper meaning and significance of everything in life including love, religion, beauty and death. This learning is not accumulative, therefore it is not a matter of time. It has the nature of a holistic awareness, a deep understanding, a long vision, wisdom and compassion. With time one necessarily grows in knowledge and experience but not in wisdom. It is only when the mind has a deep insight or a direct perception of a truth that an illusion drops away and there is a greater wisdom or understanding of life. To keep ones mind in such a state of dialogue is the art of learning.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Source The Art of Dialogue by Prof. P. Krishna, Rector, Rajghat Education Centre, Krishnamurti Foundation India, Varanasi 221001, India.

I guess you forgot to mention you copied it over from somewhere. It's for me also about the amount of care one gives to communication and not relying on others to guess all inferences.

Your quotation is in error though, this is a forum for discussion not just for the type of dialog Krishna or Krisnamurti is suggesting, which is close to a cultist one, one without challenges, without true opposition. You're suggesting perhaps a dialog where you have established yourself as teacher, as knowledgeable and this position cannot be debated. You block that with every utterance. Which needs a different kind of challenge, sometimes ugly indeed but that's life.

As for the higher spiritual dialogue, I do support it and have studied Krishamurti's ideas on this in the past but like the example of the tennis players, they need to be in the same court, agreeing to the same rules and play in the same competition. Otherwise this won't be possible. It takes only a little wisdom to understand that and realize one cannot always have these high quality states with everyone. Yes, in one owns cult it's probably easy but very tempting as fortification of one's self. This is where this forum offers a unique possibility for especially people like you!
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

jufa: "The devil in the detail": God is saying no sentient mind can know, speak, or say what He is and what He has done, because the sentient being is only a messenger carrying THE WORD, but knows nothing about THE PLAN OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.
Wisdom is correct here, there is no plan of cause and effect because The Word is a living, moving thing. I am not aware of anyone on this board that claims they know THE PLAN of cause and effect. Knowing philosophically that the way of "God" is the way of causal rest and motion is an entirely different understanding that is the religious belief that one knows God's caused plan.

Wisdom of causality, the use of logic, does not claim to know THE logic for existence. Just the reverse. It is logic and only logic that cuts away at this delusion. Logic is of the living Father, logic is the way the Father keeps thoughts from clogging His thinking pipeline. It has to be the universality of logic that performs this task because only the universality of logic can awaken the individual from his or her sleep of suffering belief in a fixed plan of man or God. If not logic, then what?
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

If not logic, then what?
That is not the question to be asked. The question of the individual is: If God did not create it, who did? Can sentient logic take one to the fullness of time and reasoning of why, when, where, what, and who? Whose logic can contend with God's and circumcise ("cuts away at this delusion") that which is not covered, nor hid from CAUSE? Who says the elephant in the room is not real. Is the delusion of the life you live yours, or God's? And who told you it was delusional? And does it deviate one (1) septillionth from the Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the whole, perfect, complete, and pure unchanging law of the Spirit of life? If you say it does, then how?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

movingalways: If not logic, then what?
That is not the question to be asked. The question of the individual is: If God did not create it, who did? Can sentient logic take one to the fullness of time and reasoning of why, when, where, what, and who? Whose logic can contend with God's and circumcise ("cuts away at this delusion") that which is not covered, nor hid from CAUSE? Who says the elephant in the room is not real. Is the delusion of the life you live yours, or God's? And who told you it was delusional? And does it deviate one (1) septillionth from the Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the whole, perfect, complete, and pure unchanging law of the Spirit of life? If you say it does, then how?
It is precisely the question to ask because it is only by way of reasoning that the universe can think about itself. And no, these questions and answers of "to be or not to be" do not change its absolute laws of nature. For example, the absolute law of the universe appearing as lion is to eat gazelle. As is it true that the universe appearing as tennis racket meeting tennis ball is the absolute law of action/reaction. Where the relativity of the universe is expressed, however, is in its reasoning ability to change the laws (rules) of how the game of tennis is played. Absolute and relative - two different ways the universe expresses itself.

As for the question of delusion, if the reasoning universe believes that as a flesh and blood lion it can change the rules of the game of tennis, it is delusional. If however, the reasoning universe uses its imagination to create a lion changing the rules of the game of tennis and it knows it is using its imagination, then it is not delusional.

It is my understanding that the thinking, changing universe expresses itself through the unchanging (absolute) laws of duality-relativity (the thinking universe is bound to the principle of change) and that this is its suffering in a nutshell. I suffer the paradox of absolute-relative, do you?
User avatar
divine focus
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:48 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by divine focus »

movingalways wrote:I cannot see a scenario when opposition/death, therefore suffering, is absent from sentient consciousness. The basic eternal struggle to find something to eat or drink is born of the opposition to death. Who here hasn't caused some form of suffering in their quest for food and drink? And who here is able, even if they were willing, to live without the words that inevitably cause opposition in varying degrees when released into the world?

As I see it, for those who do, as do I, acknowledge that opposition (suffering) is the cost of sentient consciousness, be it non-conceptual or be it conceptual, the question is, can we oppose without bringing true Hamlet's prophecy of taking arms against a sea of troubles? I believe such a life is possible, a conscious life of suffering's acceptance in concert with a conscious life not to willfully cause suffering. This is why I come here, to find within myself and to express to others this middle or balanced way. In my offline life, humour, therefore laughter is my preferred suffering medicine.
The true cause of suffering is desire, and then suffering is exacerbated by resistance. What gives you your desires is your subjective self, or your "unconscious," which is quite conscious and personable. In merging your objective self--you in your waking state--with the subjective self, all desires are extinguished. This is the "attainment" of enlightenment.

The keys to life are trust and acceptance. In trust of self--the subjective self is you--life is effortless and suffering is minimal. With acceptance, or non-judgment, the desire to end suffering is given up and so suffering or pain is light and not a problem. Be careful, though: to be accepting is to be non-judgmental of what was once good and bad, right and wrong.
eliasforum.org/digests.html
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

No one is in control of anything except the activity within their consciousness. No one knows why they exist in an existence which gives no logic and reason to the one who claims to be 'I'. Should one attach 'I' to themselves, then they attach all 'I's' of mankind to themselves, because 'I' can only be claimed by awareness. No one knows they are this or that. One only knows they are aware of being a part of that which they are consciously aware of. No one who takes personal possession of 'I' knows what existence is, nor can tell themselves "of the fullness of time and reasoning of why, when, where, what, and who?" No one know anything about anything except they are aware, but don't know why?

If's are speculations and do not answer any questions by direct knowledge, especially
Is the delusion of the life you live yours, or God's? And who told you it was delusional? And does it deviate one (1) septillionth from the Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the whole, perfect, complete, and pure unchanging law of the Spirit of life? If you say it does, then how?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
RZoo
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 5:26 am

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by RZoo »

movingalways wrote:You do realize that if you were speaking the truth as you know it to be when you pressed "Submit" after completing your answer that you were doing the will of The Absolute?
"The Absolute" = ??? And it has a will? And it cares about "truth"? How do you know any of this? Or did you simply define it? This sounds like religious mumbo jumbo....
movingalways wrote:You may have, as I once had, a misunderstanding of what it means to "dwell in the absolute." It does not mean you have all the answers or that you no longer need answers or that you have found the permanent right answer, rather, that you know the right answer will come, for now, if you rest your question in the answer realm.
The "answer realm" = ??? How do you know that the answer will come? Again, I call bullshit.
movingalways wrote:The consciousness I was referring to in my original question is the consciousness of accepting the relationship of the question to the answer, the relationship of darkness (suffering) to light (release from suffering). Which means one can let go of their hatred of having been made to suffer. What is the point of hating something that is a requirement for knowing?
It wouldn't be suffering if it was comfortable and didn't evoke the emotions (ie. hatred). If one can let go of their hatred of being made to suffer, then they can no longer gain anything from their suffering (if you can even call it suffering); they've shielded themselves by becoming emotionally detached. In the process of cutting off hatred, you also cut off joy. Without emotions, a person cannot have motivations. Taken to the extreme, they should retire to a hospital bed to be cared for by others, as they themselves have no reason to continue living.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

RZoo wrote:Without emotions, a person cannot have motivations.
That sounds like an extreme claim only loosely based on a mishmash of perhaps popular neuroscience or otherwise unclear or generic definitions.

Motivations obviously are complex things: instincts, reflexes, curiosity and love are already four motivators not, or not limited to, emotion. Based on my experience and some of the literature on the topic, I see many good reasons to describe emotions purely as "social passions", which would include anger, jealousy, humiliation, pride, shame, apathy and pithy. And to become a social passion it needs first a public stage, imagined, inwards or actual. Or at least it's happening always in regards to some other ("the hell, that's the other", as Sartre noted). Personally I'd call emotion the "social coinage".

Fear and desire are more tricky to call emotion as they are related often to instinct and other primal processes, for example trying to avoid death, hunger or disaster in general. While fears and desires are instrumental in the emotional world, they can be seen more general as "embrace" and "rejection" or push and pull, love and hate. For example, a man might desire a relationship with a woman but when he enters, a whole complex of social passions come into play and will dominate everything, creating the usual push and pull drama. Desire then as path leading to social passions but that doesn't make desire an emotion.
RZoo
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 5:26 am

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by RZoo »

Do you think that desire or fear could exist without emotions? Would a man without emotions still desire a woman? Would a man without emotions enjoy sex?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

No one knows why they exist in an existence which gives no logic and reason to the one who claims to be 'I'.
Correct, the universe does not know why it exists. Which is why the universe uses logic and reasoning.
One only knows they are aware of being a part of that which they are consciously aware of. No one who takes personal possession of 'I' knows what existence is, nor can tell themselves "of the fullness of time and reasoning of why, when, where, what, and who?"

Here you are providing the logical reason why the universe uses logic and reasoning when it addresses why, where, what and who.
No one is in control of anything except the activity within their consciousness.
Is this a reasoned statement or an absolute statement?
If's are speculations and do not answer any questions by direct knowledge, especially
Quote:
Is the delusion of the life you live yours, or God's? And who told you it was delusional? And does it deviate one (1) septillionth from the Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the whole, perfect, complete, and pure unchanging law of the Spirit of life? If you say it does, then how?
What to you is direct knowledge? And by you, I do not mean all of mankind, I mean just you.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

movingalways wrote:
You do realize that if you were speaking the truth as you know it to be when you pressed "Submit" after completing your answer that you were doing the will of The Absolute?
"The Absolute" = ??? And it has a will? And it cares about "truth"? How do you know any of this? Or did you simply define it? This sounds like religious mumbo jumbo....
Fair enough, allow me to restate. Once one has reasoned what must be said or done (thinking) what is said or done (the outcome of thinking) is what is to be said or done.
movingalways wrote:
You may have, as I once had, a misunderstanding of what it means to "dwell in the absolute." It does not mean you have all the answers or that you no longer need answers or that you have found the permanent right answer, rather, that you know the right answer will come, for now, if you rest your question in the answer realm.
The "answer realm" = ??? How do you know that the answer will come? Again, I call bullshit.
Using metaphors, will try again. I know the answer will come because there is no question that cannot be reasoned. Can you think of one?
jufa
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by jufa »

tell us how do you know
the universe does not know why it exists?
Have not provided any logic or reason as to
why the universe uses logic and reasoning when it addresses why, where, what and who.
My position is:
One only knows they are aware of being a part of that which they are consciously aware of.
. There is no mention, nor indication of
the universe uses logic and reasoning when it addresses
anything. Not even when it is stated:
No one who takes personal possession of 'I' knows what existence is.
No one can purchase an item for 50 cents with 50 cents and demand a quarter in change This metaphor is in response to your asking the question to the preceding statement :
No one is in control of anything except the activity within their consciousness.<

Is this a reasoned statement or an absolute statement?
You have yet to answer the following:
Is the delusion of the life you live yours, or God's? And who told you it was delusional? And does it deviate one (1) septillionth from the Principled Substance and Patterned Essence of the whole, perfect, complete, and pure unchanging law of the Spirit of life? If you say it does, then how?
Being you can definitively state:
Correct, the universe does not know why it exists.
base upon your lack of knowledge, logic and reasoning why anything exist. Then you can definitively state, by your experiential awareness of
your existence, whether what you know your life of existence is because of you or God.
Direct knowledge.
"
Should your existence be of your cause, and as you mentioned earlier
We're all in this 'peace of mind' business together.
then it is also my cause, and the wish from me is will you tell me how you did it, and what power did you use to accomplish what no one else, from "in the beginning" has not been blessed to figure out?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Pam Seeback »

jufa, you speak as if you know as do I speak as if I know. Shall we both revert to the clumsy communication technique of opening each statement with "I think?" As for your thinking that I avoided your question (I don't think I did) I think you too avoided one or more of my questions. So what? I'm ending our conversation with a Dicken's quote just because I think it expresses so wonderfully the contradictory way in which the mind says things as if they are true (factual) when in truth, no man can prove to another man that what he is saying is indeed absolutely true.

“A wonderful fact to reflect upon, that every human creature is constituted to be that profound secret and mystery to every other.”
― Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities
RZoo
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 5:26 am

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by RZoo »

movingalways wrote:
movingalways wrote:
You may have, as I once had, a misunderstanding of what it means to "dwell in the absolute." It does not mean you have all the answers or that you no longer need answers or that you have found the permanent right answer, rather, that you know the right answer will come, for now, if you rest your question in the answer realm.
The "answer realm" = ??? How do you know that the answer will come? Again, I call bullshit.
Using metaphors, will try again. I know the answer will come because there is no question that cannot be reasoned. Can you think of one?
I'd like to hear you reason "why does anything exist?" or "why does life exist?" or "why does my consciousness exist?"
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Shakespeare nailed it

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

RZoo wrote:Do you think that desire or fear could exist without emotions?
A better question would be if emotions could ever form without desire and fear. But since I had already defined emotions situational, as social passions, the answer on your question would be yes because many instances of primal desires and fears are equivalent to knee jerks or reactions on stimuli which are not connected to culture, race, situation, some particular knowledge or age. Like the growling of a lion under your window will cause a change in your readiness to fight or flight (or more likely just freeze up). There's no point in trying to achieve some prevention of that primal reaction although it will help if the head remains clear.
Would a man without emotions still desire a woman? Would a man without emotions enjoy sex?
And would he still taste his food or feel relief with a bowel movement? It depends if you'd include the senses themselves or things like simple enjoyment or amusement as emotion. Personally I don't see reason to include those. It's different when we'd talk about greed, lust, depravity and decadence, although I've to add that I think modern people hardly know "simply enjoyment" anymore. The senses are too far gone for that and much of the interaction is firmly embedded in the social passions first and foremost.
Locked