I Am That discussion groups

[Guest guest]

 

 

In a message dated 11/5/2008 12:29:02 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

 

I agree with Phil and am also quite willing to admit that I am not 'Awakened', so that makes at least 2 people willing to admit that. :)The main reasons I come here Bennett, is to test out ideas that I have and ideas I have heard. I also know that this chase for knowledge that I wilfully participate in, will never get me any closer to being awakened, I do it simply because I find it entertaining, what else would I do with my spare time? I enjoy mental masturbation.The simplest truth I have learnt, is that the simple fact of 'awakendness' is that you already are who you seek, I'll let you know when I eventually decide to stop struggling and realise that for myself. :)tyga

 

 

WooHoo! Two unenlightened peeps on the very same forum. What are the odds? Hehe.

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bennett " <gyanarthi wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > In a message dated 11/4/2008 6:30:39 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> > lastrain@ writes:

> >

> > > > We don't have addictions......We ARE addictions.

> > > > :-)

> > > > toombaru

> > > >

> > >

> > > I'm listening...with close attention...

> > > 'We', of course, aren't the person, and addiction is just one

of

> the dynamics contained in the belief structure that is the

person,

> though you might say a dominant one. It seems an oversimplification

> to equate the egoic belief structure to addiction. Would we say

> we're addicted to not liking broccoli or scary movies? Are the

> enjoyment of creativity and beauty addictions? Maybe a 12 step

> program: 'Sunset Lovers Anonymous.?

>

> >

> > We are addicted to our preferences.

> > We are the channels that direct the flow of our " choices " .

> > We are the groves worn into our imaginary world by our habitual

> > tendencies.

> > Yes......some of us are " addicted " to sunsets, kisses and

chocolate

> > ice cream.

> > The self is composed of nothing but preferences.

> > toombaru

>

> >

> > The self is composed of an entire paradigm of separateness that

> implies opposition, fear, struggle, suffering, need, as well as

> loving kindness, compassion, astounding creativity, innovation,

> imagination and beauty. Tears of sorrow, longing and joy.

> > When self is reduced to a single dimension of mechanical

friction,

> something within objects to that oversimplification because it was

> never true. It doesn't ring true to the sacred aspect that is

> brilliantly present throughout all our wild, ignorant spinning to

> nowhere. We love the sunsets, kisses and chocolate ice cream, the

> grandkids and the politics and the 'save the whales' T-shirts and

men

> who die in battle and women who break our hearts.

> To pretend it isn't so is to cleave our hearts in hopes of making

> them whole.

> When the dreamer awakens, insipid life is not abandoned as a

product

> of swirling neumonic debris and addiction, it's embraced for the

> miracle that it always was. One does not finally come to understand

> the banality of human existence, but instead falls madly in love

with

> the mystery. You will never recognize your divinity while doing

> battle with your humanity. They are the same.

> Set it all free or remain in prison.

> >

>

> With all due respect...

> the question keeps coming up for me:

> Do you all really know what you are talking about? Or are you

> inferring it from the objective knowledge you have obtained?

>

> If I have stumbled onto a group of Jnani's here, perhaps I need to

> just sit quietly in the back of the room and take it all in, until I

> am told to leave because I am taking up too much space...

>

> please advise...

>

> much love

> bennett/gyanarthi

>

 

Bennett

 

Very welcome to the orchestra of cyber-sadhus. We, whirling bundles

of energy, like to perform our skills and tricks, predominantly

semantics, on the waning ripples of 'Master Jnani's' legacy.

 

We all have got used to our embarrasments, I think we've sort of

grown to love 'm.

 

So please join us, make a fool of yourself and speak of THAT that

can't be known.

 

Johan

[Guest guest]

Groovy, man.

 

 

 

In a message dated 06/11/2008 11:40:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, gyanarthi writes:

thank you Johan, Phil, and tyga -I appreciate your candidness - candidity? :)Story: I was in SF, 1966, and heard a swami interviewed on a radioshow. He was talking about the Bhagavad Gita. He said he wasenlightened. I was very excited by this and went to see him the next day. I arrived unannounced, and was greeted at the door by a man who saidhe was the Swami's secretary. He invited me in. We talked. I wanted toknow about this enlightenment... whether the swami was enlightened,etc. After awhile he said to me "You wouldn't know an enlightened manif you tripped over him on the street." I didn't recognize the openingthere, got uptight, and left.But I never forgot what he said.As it turns out the secretary was the Swami (can't remember his nameat the moment). A person I met awhile back who was at that CaliforniaSt. center at the time, told me the Swami often greeted visitors that way.Since that time I've been blessed to have met others who wereenlightened or claimed to be or their followers claimed it for them.One of them told me that he sees everyone as enlightened, not as aconcept, but that is what he experienced. He said he didn't knowwhether or not a person knew his reality or not until speaking withhim. I get that same understanding from reading N.I take to heart N.'s admonition not to speak as if I am enlightenedunless I am in that state. The problem for many I believe, and for myself at times, has been thatI have mistakenly taken an experience and the state that followed tobe that.Most often, I just get off on wrestling with the concepts,contemplating them, and clarifying my thoughts by writing them down.And then reading them - sometimes like someone else has written them.I think this contemplative exercise can be helpful... as long as Idon't fall into the trap of believing I have the answers. I do have toremember always to clarify because I tend to be forceful andauthoritative in my words. I vary between feeling it's not good to talk about "innerexperiences," and that it's OK to do so since I feel they are justhuman experiences and nothing special. In fact sometimes it helps meto talk about them to keep them in perspective - to keep thespecial-ness at bay.Certainly a recent encounter I had with a hermit-monk swami visitingTallahassee helped me immensely when he told me quite clearly that anexperience that I had been puzzling over for several years which wasquite profound was "an experience, but not THE experience." Iimmediately qualified his statement, but he very insistently repeatedthe exact words he used "an experience..." and wouldn't let meextrapolate from them. That helped me a lot. And since then, finding N. and rereadingMaharshi has helped even more.Well I don't want to go on to long... just to say I appreciate theforum... the contact with like minded people... I don't know manyfolks where I live who want to explore this stuff. Most people who saythey do, seem to want to just tell me "how it is." Asking them, How do you know that? doesn't generally get very far...thanks for being here,much lovebennett/gyanarthi

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga wrote:

>

> souldreamone wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> > Hi Bennett

> > I understand the dilemma and I shared it for a long time. Speaking

> > generally, folks have a wide range of experiences and insights and

> > are jabbering from a wide range of clarity and delusion, wisdom

> > and ignorance, and it's up to you to find out which is which. Some

> > speak from the mind, some from the heart, some with a mixture of

> > both. Some are conscious and some unconscious. Some have read a

> > lot of books and sound good but don't really get it, while others

> > are not well read but have connected to something powerful inside.

> >

> > In my opinion, nobody here is Awakened, though some would like you

> > to believe that. I've given up qualifying the source because it's

> > not really possible to know for sure unless they admit that

> > they're not Awakened and typically I'm the only one on a list

> > willing to admit that. Besides, it all has to be seen by each

> > individual anyhoo, and it's not a matter of trusting what one

> > says. If it sounds good, maybe meditate/contemplate and see if

> > it's really so. As far me, I'm kinda like the kid on " The Sixth

> > Sense " who says 'I see dead people'. I see things, clearly as the

> > back of my hand, and I talk from that place of seeing. I've had my

> > share of experiences, but I'm not sure what experiences mean and I

> > rarely talk about em. Again, there's no reason for you to believe

> > me or anyone else, and I suggest you don't bother to try. I'd be

> > delighted to read your perspective/insight on whatever you're

> > inclined to talk about.

> >

> > Phil

> >

> >

> I agree with Phil and am also quite willing to admit that I am not

> 'Awakened', so that makes at least 2 people willing to admit that.

>

> The main reasons I come here Bennett, is to test out ideas that I have

> and ideas I have heard. I also know that this chase for knowledge

that I

> wilfully participate in, will never get me any closer to being

awakened,

> I do it simply because I find it entertaining, what else would I do

with

> my spare time? I enjoy mental masturbation.

>

> The simplest truth I have learnt, is that the simple fact of

> 'awakendness' is that you already are who you seek, I'll let you know

> when I eventually decide to stop struggling and realise that for

myself.

>

> tyga

>

Bennett

 

Very welcome to the orchestra of cyber-sadhus. We, whirling bundles

of energy, like to perform our skills and tricks, predominantly

semantics, on the waning ripples of 'Master Jnani's' legacy.

 

We all have got used to our embarrasments, I think we've sort of

grown to love 'm.

 

So please join us, make a fool of yourself and speak of THAT that

can't be known.

 

Johan

------

 

thank you Johan, Phil, and tyga -

I appreciate your candidness - candidity?

 

Story: I was in SF, 1966, and heard a swami interviewed on a radio

show. He was talking about the Bhagavad Gita. He said he was

enlightened. I was very excited by this and went to see him the next day.

I arrived unannounced, and was greeted at the door by a man who said

he was the Swami's secretary. He invited me in. We talked. I wanted to

know about this enlightenment... whether the swami was enlightened,

etc. After awhile he said to me " You wouldn't know an enlightened man

if you tripped over him on the street. " I didn't recognize the opening

there, got uptight, and left.

But I never forgot what he said.

As it turns out the secretary was the Swami (can't remember his name

at the moment). A person I met awhile back who was at that California

St. center at the time, told me the Swami often greeted visitors that way.

 

Since that time I've been blessed to have met others who were

enlightened or claimed to be or their followers claimed it for them.

 

One of them told me that he sees everyone as enlightened, not as a

concept, but that is what he experienced. He said he didn't know

whether or not a person knew his reality or not until speaking with

him. I get that same understanding from reading N.

 

I take to heart N.'s admonition not to speak as if I am enlightened

unless I am in that state.

 

The problem for many I believe, and for myself at times, has been that

I have mistakenly taken an experience and the state that followed to

be that.

 

Most often, I just get off on wrestling with the concepts,

contemplating them, and clarifying my thoughts by writing them down.

And then reading them - sometimes like someone else has written them.

I think this contemplative exercise can be helpful... as long as I

don't fall into the trap of believing I have the answers. I do have to

remember always to clarify because I tend to be forceful and

authoritative in my words.

 

I vary between feeling it's not good to talk about " inner

experiences, " and that it's OK to do so since I feel they are just

human experiences and nothing special. In fact sometimes it helps me

to talk about them to keep them in perspective - to keep the

special-ness at bay.

 

Certainly a recent encounter I had with a hermit-monk swami visiting

Tallahassee helped me immensely when he told me quite clearly that an

experience that I had been puzzling over for several years which was

quite profound was " an experience, but not THE experience. " I

immediately qualified his statement, but he very insistently repeated

the exact words he used " an experience... " and wouldn't let me

extrapolate from them.

That helped me a lot. And since then, finding N. and rereading

Maharshi has helped even more.

 

Well I don't want to go on to long... just to say I appreciate the

forum... the contact with like minded people... I don't know many

folks where I live who want to explore this stuff. Most people who say

they do, seem to want to just tell me " how it is. "

Asking them, How do you know that? doesn't generally get very far...

 

thanks for being here,

much love

bennett/gyanarthi

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bennett " <gyanarthi wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bennett/gyanrthi,

> > you may find these links of mine useful:

> > http://www.scribd.com/people/view/181537-pradeep-apte

> > http://www.lulu.com/content/2194899

> > http://www.lulu.com/content/2469683

> > Love

> > Pradeep

>

> thanks pradeep,

> Yes. thank you very much. Your chart is very beautiful, and

> interesting. I am reminded of diagrams of the Kabalistic Tree of Life

> ... the diagrams are similar in a way... mapping consciousness from

> the personal self back to the unknowable source.

>

> My first take of the kabbalistic tree was framed long ago, and somehow

> the notion of a path from " here to there " lurked always in the

> background of my mind.

>

> I became aware of that as I examined your graphic representation, and

> suddenly saw the kabbalistic tree in the same light as the diagram of

> N.'s teachings. Not that one moved from the bottom world to the top,

> but that one is all.

> Love

> bennett

>

Hi pradeep,

I just wanted to tell you I took the liberty of emailing the link to

your chart, " Dimensionless Map " to " Rabbi Miles. " He has an online

course on Kabbalah, and has a background in Buddhist and Advaita

teachings.

His web address is:

http://www.rainofblessings.org/

 

all the best,

bennett

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bennett " <gyanarthi wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga@> wrote:

> >

> > souldreamone@ wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Hi Bennett

> > > I understand the dilemma and I shared it for a long time.

Speaking

> > > generally, folks have a wide range of experiences and

insights and

> > > are jabbering from a wide range of clarity and delusion,

wisdom

> > > and ignorance, and it's up to you to find out which is

which. Some

> > > speak from the mind, some from the heart, some with a

mixture of

> > > both. Some are conscious and some unconscious. Some have

read a

> > > lot of books and sound good but don't really get it, while

others

> > > are not well read but have connected to something powerful

inside.

> > >

> > > In my opinion, nobody here is Awakened, though some would

like you

> > > to believe that. I've given up qualifying the source

because it's

> > > not really possible to know for sure unless they admit that

> > > they're not Awakened and typically I'm the only one on a

list

> > > willing to admit that. Besides, it all has to be seen by

each

> > > individual anyhoo, and it's not a matter of trusting what

one

> > > says. If it sounds good, maybe meditate/contemplate and see

if

> > > it's really so. As far me, I'm kinda like the kid on " The

Sixth

> > > Sense " who says 'I see dead people'. I see things, clearly

as the

> > > back of my hand, and I talk from that place of seeing. I've

had my

> > > share of experiences, but I'm not sure what experiences

mean and I

> > > rarely talk about em. Again, there's no reason for you to

believe

> > > me or anyone else, and I suggest you don't bother to try.

I'd be

> > > delighted to read your perspective/insight on whatever

you're

> > > inclined to talk about.

> > >

> > > Phil

> > >

> > >

> > I agree with Phil and am also quite willing to admit that I am

not

> > 'Awakened', so that makes at least 2 people willing to admit

that.

> >

> > The main reasons I come here Bennett, is to test out ideas that I

have

> > and ideas I have heard. I also know that this chase for knowledge

> that I

> > wilfully participate in, will never get me any closer to being

> awakened,

> > I do it simply because I find it entertaining, what else would I

do

> with

> > my spare time? I enjoy mental masturbation.

> >

> > The simplest truth I have learnt, is that the simple fact of

> > 'awakendness' is that you already are who you seek, I'll let you

know

> > when I eventually decide to stop struggling and realise that for

> myself.

> >

> > tyga

> >

> Bennett

>

> Very welcome to the orchestra of cyber-sadhus. We, whirling bundles

> of energy, like to perform our skills and tricks, predominantly

> semantics, on the waning ripples of 'Master Jnani's' legacy.

>

> We all have got used to our embarrasments, I think we've sort of

> grown to love 'm.

>

> So please join us, make a fool of yourself and speak of THAT that

> can't be known.

>

> Johan

> ------

>

> thank you Johan, Phil, and tyga -

> I appreciate your candidness - candidity?

>

> Story: I was in SF, 1966, and heard a swami interviewed on a radio

> show. He was talking about the Bhagavad Gita. He said he was

> enlightened. I was very excited by this and went to see him the

next day.

> I arrived unannounced, and was greeted at the door by a man who said

> he was the Swami's secretary. He invited me in. We talked. I wanted

to

> know about this enlightenment... whether the swami was enlightened,

> etc. After awhile he said to me " You wouldn't know an enlightened

man

> if you tripped over him on the street. " I didn't recognize the

opening

> there, got uptight, and left.

> But I never forgot what he said.

> As it turns out the secretary was the Swami (can't remember his name

> at the moment). A person I met awhile back who was at that

California

> St. center at the time, told me the Swami often greeted visitors

that way.

>

> Since that time I've been blessed to have met others who were

> enlightened or claimed to be or their followers claimed it for them.

>

> One of them told me that he sees everyone as enlightened, not as a

> concept, but that is what he experienced. He said he didn't know

> whether or not a person knew his reality or not until speaking with

> him. I get that same understanding from reading N.

>

> I take to heart N.'s admonition not to speak as if I am enlightened

> unless I am in that state.

>

> The problem for many I believe, and for myself at times, has been

that

> I have mistakenly taken an experience and the state that followed to

> be that.

>

> Most often, I just get off on wrestling with the concepts,

> contemplating them, and clarifying my thoughts by writing them down.

> And then reading them - sometimes like someone else has written

them.

> I think this contemplative exercise can be helpful... as long as I

> don't fall into the trap of believing I have the answers. I do have

to

> remember always to clarify because I tend to be forceful and

> authoritative in my words.

>

> I vary between feeling it's not good to talk about " inner

> experiences, " and that it's OK to do so since I feel they are just

> human experiences and nothing special. In fact sometimes it helps me

> to talk about them to keep them in perspective - to keep the

> special-ness at bay.

>

> Certainly a recent encounter I had with a hermit-monk swami visiting

> Tallahassee helped me immensely when he told me quite clearly that

an

> experience that I had been puzzling over for several years which was

> quite profound was " an experience, but not THE experience. " I

> immediately qualified his statement, but he very insistently

repeated

> the exact words he used " an experience... " and wouldn't let me

> extrapolate from them.

> That helped me a lot. And since then, finding N. and rereading

> Maharshi has helped even more.

>

> Well I don't want to go on to long... just to say I appreciate the

> forum... the contact with like minded people... I don't know many

> folks where I live who want to explore this stuff. Most people who

say

> they do, seem to want to just tell me " how it is. "

> Asking them, How do you know that? doesn't generally get very far...

>

> thanks for being here,

> much love

> bennett/gyanarthi

 

 

one don't need to be " enlightened " to have just an ordinary

life....like everybody else

 

one don't need to be " enlightened " to take oneself more serious and

important than others

 

.....

 

 

" enlightenment " is of heavy ego-minded spirutal peoples subject...

 

they are running around all the time to get some (more) attention.....

 

and therefore wish deeply such " enlightenment " in order to advance in

such important role

 

......

 

there is nobody who is missing " enlightenment "

 

there is nobody who isn't already " enlightened "

 

there is nobody who deserve enlightenment

 

there is nobody who need enlightenment

 

 

....

 

Marc

>

[Guest guest]

dennis_travis33 wrote:

>

> one don't need to be " enlightened " to have just an ordinary

> life....like everybody else

>

> one don't need to be " enlightened " to take oneself more serious and

> important than others

>

> ....

>

>

> " enlightenment " is of heavy ego-minded spirutal peoples subject...

>

> they are running around all the time to get some (more) attention.....

>

> and therefore wish deeply such " enlightenment " in order to advance in

> such important role

>

> .....

>

> there is nobody who is missing " enlightenment "

>

> there is nobody who isn't already " enlightened "

>

> there is nobody who deserve enlightenment

>

> there is nobody who need enlightenment

>

>

> ...

>

> Marc

>

>

>

>

> ---

>

We are that which we seek. There is no seeker. Blah blah blah......

 

Why in the hell do we keep repeating it like its some new revelation?

 

Get over it I say, and realise that there is 'nothing here' to

achieve/find except for the pleasure/joy/company of like minded people.

 

Enjoy.

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga wrote:

>

> dennis_travis33 wrote:

> >

> > one don't need to be " enlightened " to have just an ordinary

> > life....like everybody else

> >

> > one don't need to be " enlightened " to take oneself more serious

and

> > important than others

> >

> > ....

> >

> >

> > " enlightenment " is of heavy ego-minded spirutal peoples subject...

> >

> > they are running around all the time to get some (more)

attention.....

> >

> > and therefore wish deeply such " enlightenment " in order to

advance in

> > such important role

> >

> > .....

> >

> > there is nobody who is missing " enlightenment "

> >

> > there is nobody who isn't already " enlightened "

> >

> > there is nobody who deserve enlightenment

> >

> > there is nobody who need enlightenment

> >

> >

> > ...

> >

> > Marc

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---

> >

> We are that which we seek. There is no seeker. Blah blah blah......

>

> Why in the hell do we keep repeating it like its some new

revelation?

>

> Get over it I say, and realise that there is 'nothing here' to

> achieve/find except for the pleasure/joy/company of like minded

people.

>

> Enjoy.

>

> tyga

 

 

people in here are discussing the subject the last days....

you too....as far i see....

 

so, indeed....why in the hell do you keep repeating your discussions

about the subject with others in here?

 

personally, i think that the subject of " enlightenment " is a boring

one.

 

And so my words in here today....take it as an expression of someone

who isn't indeed interested to talk and read much about the subject.

 

....

 

I told you before...

 

if you only need some nice dual talk....sharing your ignorance with

appearent others....

 

that's of your business...

 

.....

 

 

 

Marc

>

[Guest guest]

dennis_travis33 wrote:

>

>

>

> people in here are discussing the subject the last days....

> you too....as far i see....

>

 

Yes indeed, I do discuss it, but I have made it quite clear that I do it

for entertainment. I don't believe any of this chit chat will get me one

step closer to enlightenment.

 

> so, indeed....why in the hell do you keep repeating your discussions

> about the subject with others in here?

>

 

Entertainment. To experience that pleasure/joy/company of like minded

people. And besides, I hardly ever talk about enlightenment, I nearly

always talk about ideas that I might find interesting.

 

> personally, i think that the subject of " enlightenment " is a boring

> one.

>

> And so my words in here today....take it as an expression of someone

> who isn't indeed interested to talk and read much about the subject.

>

 

Oh I dunno, it can be fun to discuss these things, so long as we know

that it's all bullshit.

 

> ...

>

> I told you before...

>

> if you only need some nice dual talk....sharing your ignorance with

> appearent others....

>

> that's of your business...

>

> ....

>

>

>

>

> Marc

>

>

>

>

> ---

>

>

Thanks for the entertainment Marc.

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga wrote:

>

> dennis_travis33 wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> > people in here are discussing the subject the last days....

> > you too....as far i see....

> >

>

> Yes indeed, I do discuss it, but I have made it quite clear that I

do it

> for entertainment. I don't believe any of this chit chat will get

me one

> step closer to enlightenment.

>

> > so, indeed....why in the hell do you keep repeating your

discussions

> > about the subject with others in here?

> >

>

> Entertainment. To experience that pleasure/joy/company of like

minded

> people. And besides, I hardly ever talk about enlightenment, I

nearly

> always talk about ideas that I might find interesting.

>

> > personally, i think that the subject of " enlightenment " is a

boring

> > one.

> >

> > And so my words in here today....take it as an expression of

someone

> > who isn't indeed interested to talk and read much about the

subject.

> >

>

> Oh I dunno, it can be fun to discuss these things, so long as we

know

> that it's all bullshit.

>

> > ...

> >

> > I told you before...

> >

> > if you only need some nice dual talk....sharing your ignorance

with

> > appearent others....

> >

> > that's of your business...

> >

> > ....

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Marc

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---

> >

> >

> Thanks for the entertainment Marc.

>

> tyga

 

 

 

after all.....all this discussions and fabulous blogs of complete non-

sense in here are of nice entertainment....indeed

 

Marc

 

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:17:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

dennis_travis33 wrote:>> one don't need to be "enlightened" to have just an ordinary > life....like everybody else>> one don't need to be "enlightened" to take oneself more serious and > important than others>> ....>>> "enlightenment" is of heavy ego-minded spirutal peoples subject...>> they are running around all the time to get some (more) attention.....>> and therefore wish deeply such "enlightenment" in order to advance in > such important role>> .....>> there is nobody who is missing "enlightenment">> there is nobody who isn't already "enlightened">> there is nobody who deserve enlightenment>> there is nobody who need enlightenment>>> ...>> Marc> >>>> ---> We are that which we seek. There is no seeker. Blah blah blah......Why in the hell do we keep repeating it like its some new revelation?Get over it I say, and realise that there is 'nothing here' to achieve/find except for the pleasure/joy/company of like minded people.Enjoy.tyga

 

I guess it keeps getting repeated because we're trying to convince ourselves of that. Hehe.

Not realizing that "We are that which we seek" is suffering. Realizing it is liberation. Realizing is not exactly acheiving/finding, but in my humble perception, it's a matter of noticing what is, which is dependent upon the willingness to notice ('your' willingness). Also, what is sought is that which is seeking. (I know, another tired phrase) Sooooo, is there any involvement with that or not. You seem to imply there isn't. Believe it or not, I'm not here for fun. There's too much ugliness here for it to be fun.

 

Now, we could drag out another dozen tired phrases to proove what I just said to be absolutely wrong, but this is the fate of words. Nobody ever died from contemplating clearly.AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:46:30 AM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

Oh I dunno, it can be fun to discuss these things, so long as we know that it's all bullshit.

 

Awakening to truth of your Being is bullshit? Liberation from suffering is bullshit? Have we really become so cynical? Is Buddha rolling over in his grave? Is Niz shaking his head? Does Bill East now have me talking in questions? ~

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:07:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

souldreamone wrote:>> I guess it keeps getting repeated because we're trying to convince > ourselves of that. Hehe.> Not realizing that "We are that which we seek" is suffering. Realizing > it is liberation. Realizing is not exactly acheiving/finding, but in > my humble perception, it's a matter of noticing what is, which is > dependent upon the willingness to notice ('your' willingness). Also, > what is sought is that which is seeking. (I know, another tired > phrase) Sooooo, is there any involvement with that or not. You seem to > imply there isn't. Believe it or not, I'm not here for fun. There's > too much ugliness here for it to be fun.> > Now, we could drag out another dozen tired phrases to proove what I > just said to be absolutely wrong, but this is the fate of words. > Nobody ever died from contemplating clearly.>>>> ------Your last sentence is my point really, we could either agree with what you said, and that would be kinda boring, or we could ramble on and add to what you said, or we could disagree and carry on for a while attempting to make convincing arguments. Or we could choose to make the generic answer of "there is no this, there is no that... blah blah..boring. It's all just a game of words and ideas, in my opinion.If we choose to be here, which we do, whether we realise we are suffering or not, we could choose to enjoy the game for what it is, a game of words and ideas.We gain some knowledge too though, through these discussions, which further adds to the ability to make convincing arguments, making the game increasingly more refined and consequently, more fun.I don't really believe anything at all though, how could I? If we come from the most often argued premise, that there is no I to believe anything, then I have no beliefs, only the illusion of beliefs. If I is only the illusion of a belief, then I'm might as well enjoy that illusion of belief for so long as I continues to be an illusion of a belief.I am already that which I seek. This means that I have no need for seeking. I seek only because I choose to seek. But I know full well that the choice of seeking is an illusion of mind. I enjoy the game of seeking then, if I did not enjoy it, I would not continue to do it.What are you here for? You said there is too much ugliness here for it to be fun? This describes how you feel about the discussion but it doesn't describe why you choose to be here?tyga

 

You might say I'm here to realize the futility of seeking. You begin with concepts and you make choices based on those concepts, and what happens is conceptual tail chasing. One of the beliefs you have is that there is no I to believe anything, and yet you do believe there is na I, and those beliefs determine whether you experience freedom or suffering for the rest of your life. At least notice the contradiction. Preferably, look into that more closely and come to a deeper understanding that really makes sense to 'you'.

 

You have no need of seeking, and yet you feel a need to seek. Again, look at the contradiction and see if you can really make some sense out of it. You can, and that's what I do here. Sometimes I think of what Buddha must have done. He obviouslty didn't latch onto some religious concepts and give up before he found out what was really going on. He questioned everything, checked out every possibility. Is there a reason we can't do that? Isn't it in fact much easier for us to do what he did, thanks to him and an army of gurus all pointing in the same direction, saying "Look!"

 

If there's nobody here and nothing to be done, then it's simple; just stop pretending to be here doing stuff. Otherwise, ask yourself why you're following beliefs you don't believe.

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

souldreamone wrote:

>

> I guess it keeps getting repeated because we're trying to convince

> ourselves of that. Hehe.

> Not realizing that " We are that which we seek " is suffering. Realizing

> it is liberation. Realizing is not exactly acheiving/finding, but in

> my humble perception, it's a matter of noticing what is, which is

> dependent upon the willingness to notice ('your' willingness). Also,

> what is sought is that which is seeking. (I know, another tired

> phrase) Sooooo, is there any involvement with that or not. You seem to

> imply there isn't. Believe it or not, I'm not here for fun. There's

> too much ugliness here for it to be fun.

>

> Now, we could drag out another dozen tired phrases to proove what I

> just said to be absolutely wrong, but this is the fate of words.

> Nobody ever died from contemplating clearly.

>

>

>

> ------

Your last sentence is my point really, we could either agree with what

you said, and that would be kinda boring, or we could ramble on and add

to what you said, or we could disagree and carry on for a while

attempting to make convincing arguments. Or we could choose to make the

generic answer of " there is no this, there is no that... blah

blah..boring. It's all just a game of words and ideas, in my opinion.

 

If we choose to be here, which we do, whether we realise we are

suffering or not, we could choose to enjoy the game for what it is, a

game of words and ideas.

 

We gain some knowledge too though, through these discussions, which

further adds to the ability to make convincing arguments, making the

game increasingly more refined and consequently, more fun.

 

I don't really believe anything at all though, how could I? If we come

from the most often argued premise, that there is no I to believe

anything, then I have no beliefs, only the illusion of beliefs. If I is

only the illusion of a belief, then I'm might as well enjoy that

illusion of belief for so long as I continues to be an illusion of a belief.

 

I am already that which I seek. This means that I have no need for

seeking. I seek only because I choose to seek. But I know full well that

the choice of seeking is an illusion of mind. I enjoy the game of

seeking then, if I did not enjoy it, I would not continue to do it.

 

What are you here for? You said there is too much ugliness here for it

to be fun? This describes how you feel about the discussion but it

doesn't describe why you choose to be here?

 

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:08:18 PM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

souldreamone wrote:> In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:46:30 AM Pacific Standard Time, > tyga writes:>> Oh I dunno, it can be fun to discuss these things, so long as we know> that it's all bullshit.>> Awakening to truth of your Being is bullshit? Liberation from > suffering is bullshit? Have we really become so cynical? Is Buddha > rolling over in his grave? Is Niz shaking his head? Does Bill East now > have me talking in questions? ~> > >>>> ------Yes, it is all bullshit, in my opinion.I'm not cynical though, I am only projecting back what I see. If the world and all its ideas and beliefs is bullshit, then the realisation of the bullshit is liberating. But that realisation also applies to the idea that everything is bullshit, so it is not so much the idea of everything being bullshit, it is the fact that we choose to believe that we can have ideas and those ideas can some how behold the truth, which is bullshit.tyga

 

I talked on another forum today about circular thinking. When concepts start chasing their own tails, it's time to start looking with better eyes, because what is being pointed to is being missed.AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

souldreamone wrote:

> In a message dated 07/11/2008 1:46:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> tyga writes:

>

> Oh I dunno, it can be fun to discuss these things, so long as we know

> that it's all bullshit.

>

> Awakening to truth of your Being is bullshit? Liberation from

> suffering is bullshit? Have we really become so cynical? Is Buddha

> rolling over in his grave? Is Niz shaking his head? Does Bill East now

> have me talking in questions? ~

>

>

>

>

>

> ------

Yes, it is all bullshit, in my opinion.

 

I'm not cynical though, I am only projecting back what I see. If the

world and all its ideas and beliefs is bullshit, then the realisation of

the bullshit is liberating. But that realisation also applies to the

idea that everything is bullshit, so it is not so much the idea of

everything being bullshit, it is the fact that we choose to believe that

we can have ideas and those ideas can some how behold the truth, which

is bullshit.

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga wrote:

>

> dennis_travis33 wrote:

> >

> > one don't need to be " enlightened " to have just an ordinary

> > life....like everybody else

> >

> > one don't need to be " enlightened " to take oneself more serious

and

> > important than others

> >

> > ....

> >

> >

> > " enlightenment " is of heavy ego-minded spirutal peoples subject...

> >

> > they are running around all the time to get some (more)

attention.....

> >

> > and therefore wish deeply such " enlightenment " in order to

advance in

> > such important role

> >

> > .....

> >

> > there is nobody who is missing " enlightenment "

> >

> > there is nobody who isn't already " enlightened "

> >

> > there is nobody who deserve enlightenment

> >

> > there is nobody who need enlightenment

> >

> >

> > ...

> >

> > Marc

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---

> >

> We are that which we seek. There is no seeker. Blah blah blah......

>

> Why in the hell do we keep repeating it like its some new

revelation?

>

> Get over it I say, and realise that there is 'nothing here' to

> achieve/find except for the pleasure/joy/company of like minded

people.

>

> Enjoy.

>

> tyga

>

 

You're getting into deep water now Tyga, it's THE mantra of this

forum, there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that, and more...much much

more of there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that.

 

Few, very few people life in bliss, or whatever you will call it,

unfortunately most of us keep kicking and screaming till time's up,

just like we did at time of birth.

 

....someone said you were neither born or..........?

[Guest guest]

johanhb wrote:

>>

>

> You're getting into deep water now Tyga, it's THE mantra of this

> forum, there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that, and more...much much

> more of there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that.

>

> Few, very few people life in bliss, or whatever you will call it,

> unfortunately most of us keep kicking and screaming till time's up,

> just like we did at time of birth.

>

> ...someone said you were neither born or..........?

>

>

> ---

>

> **

>

>

Sure enough, it is the nature of this forum, but we all know that

stating the mantra " there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that " is

insufficient to maintain a forum.

 

A forum is a place of discussion, the discussion of ideas and opinions,

if all we did was repeat " there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that " then

there is no forum.

 

So we might as well all .

 

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , tyga <tyga wrote:

>

> johanhb wrote:

> >>

> >

> > You're getting into deep water now Tyga, it's THE mantra of this

> > forum, there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that, and more...much

much

> > more of there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that.

> >

> > Few, very few people life in bliss, or whatever you will call it,

> > unfortunately most of us keep kicking and screaming till time's

up,

> > just like we did at time of birth.

> >

> > ...someone said you were neither born or..........?

> >

> >

> > ---

> >

> > **

> >

> >

> Sure enough, it is the nature of this forum, but we all know that

> stating the mantra " there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that " is

> insufficient to maintain a forum.

>

> A forum is a place of discussion, the discussion of ideas and

opinions,

> if all we did was repeat " there-is-no-this and there-is-no-that "

then

> there is no forum.

>

> So we might as well all .

>

>

> tyga

>

 

Couldn't agree more, just for fun...look 30000 (even more) thousand

messages back, and you will find that: " there-is-no-this and there-is-

no-that " is very populair here.

Irony is that those who life by Neti-Neti are usually not found on

this forum.

 

Someone lately said we ARE addictions. Soooo easy...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 8:27:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

 

That is a good point but what makes you think it is circular thinking?

 

 

 

****What I mean by circular thinking is, for example, 'Ideas are BS, but if that's so, then the idea that ideas are BS, is BS. But then you can say that idea is BS too. Do you see the tail chasing there? It happens because mind is using it's own process to try to transcend it's own process, which really is what happens on these list all the time. It's like trying to logically argue that logic is illogical. The best that can happen is to get trapped in circular thinking.

 

 

I essentially said that the realisation that everything is bullshit, is liberating.It is liberating because it is a realisation that no idea or concept will ever be sufficient to provide me with what I already know, that I am already that which I seek.

 

 

 

****If you already knew that, you would be 'Awakened', and we've agreed you and I aren't going to pretend that's so, so you don't really know that, right? It's just a concept rather than a realization.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is liberating because it means that I have no need for ideas or concepts. It means that ideas and concepts are games that I choose to play with.This was my point though, that if there is no idea or concept which can provide me what I already have, then what are we doing here except entertaining ourselves with ideas and concepts?What do you suggest is missing or needs to be pointed to?

tyga

 

****Using the example above, beginning with the idea that all ideas are BS, instead of using the mind to circle back around and conclude anything from that, we can realize that the truth of it isn't really known, and so we stop there and look at it.

 

As another example: There is no 'me'. Therefore, there is no 'me' to realize there is no 'me', so I might as well play with the cat. Hehe. This is circular thinking, so we need to stop short of concluding something on the basis of an idea that we don't know to be true, but just think it's true.

 

What I suggest is that if we KNOW something to be true, the next conclusion that the mind would come to, never happens. The question that leads to the false conclusion dissolves in the knowing, and the circular thinking stops.

 

I dunno if I've described it well. Does that make any sense?

 

 

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 8:37:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

 

souldreamone wrote:>> You might say I'm here to realize the futility of seeking.Isn't that what I was saying?

 

 

 

***Sounds like you're saying you already realize it.

 

> You begin with concepts and you make choices based on those concepts, > and what happens is conceptual tail chasing. One of the beliefs you > have is that there is no I to believe anything, and yet you do believe > there is na I, and those beliefs determine whether you experience > freedom or suffering for the rest of your life. At least notice the > contradiction. Preferably, look into that more closely and come to a > deeper understanding that really makes sense to 'you'.> > You have no need of seeking, and yet you feel a need to seek. Again, > look at the contradiction and see if you can really make some sense > out of it. You can, and that's what I do here. Sometimes I think of > what Buddha must have done. He obviouslty didn't latch onto some > religious concepts and give up before he found out what was really > going on. He questioned everything, checked out every possibility. Is > there a reason we can't do that? Isn't it in fact much easier for us > to do what he did, thanks to him and an army of gurus all pointing in > the same direction, saying "Look!"> > If there's nobody here and nothing to be done, then it's simple; just > stop pretending to be here doing stuff. Otherwise, ask yourself why > you're following beliefs you don't believe.> > >I don't feel a need to seek though, I seek because I choose to, there is a difference. I enjoy the company of like minded people rather than doing it out of some compulsion. If there was no joy in what I do, then I would be happy to die, but as it is I have many joys, so why not hang around and enjoy the show?

 

****Well, lets not start a rumor that you're enjoying life and I'm not. Hehe. We're both seeking. Maybe the difference is that you don't believe you can 'find' anything so you don't take it seriously. Besides, I was only making the point that if all we are going to say here is, "there is no this and there is no that" then there is no purpose of being here. I was making the point that we need to discuss ideas and concepts and that ideas and concepts are themselves illusory. So in order to have a forum worth frequenting, there has to be some entertainment, some reward. I enjoy the entertainment. I think it is fun to hang around with people of like mindedness.

tyga

 

 

***Okay, but I'm suggesting that there's something beyond concepts, and this forum, any forum, can serve as a focus that brings clarity. I'm not focusing on the concepts when I jabber here, I'm looking for clarity behind those ideas, and it happens every day. Beyond the concepts, beyond the mere ideas. I'm trying to say something beyond 'There is no this and there is no that'.

 

 

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 07/11/2008 11:32:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, tyga writes:

souldreamone wrote:> In a message dated 07/11/2008 8:27:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, > tyga writes:>> That is a good point but what makes you think it is circular thinking?>> > > ****What I mean by circular thinking is, for example, 'Ideas are> BS, but if that's so, then the idea that ideas are BS, is BS. But> then you can say that idea is BS too. Do you see the tail chasing> there? It happens because mind is using it's own process to try to> transcend it's own process, which really is what happens on these> list all the time. It's like trying to logically argue that logic> is illogical. The best that can happen is to get trapped in> circular thinking.>Oh yeah, of course, that was my point. All concepts and ideas are ultimately circular, I chose to call it bullshit. Circular is a much better way to describe it though. :)I think we are in agreement then, because what you say here is the same thing I was attempting to point out, I believe.> > >>> I essentially said that the realisation that everything is> bullshit, is> liberating.>> It is liberating because it is a realisation that no idea or concept> will ever be sufficient to provide me with what I already know,> that I> am already that which I seek.> > > > ****If you already knew that, you would be 'Awakened', and we've> agreed you and I aren't going to pretend that's so, so you don't> really know that, right? It's just a concept rather than a> realization.>This is the problem with words though, I have to use words like, "know" to describe something which is not knowing at all. Until we can communicate in a way that is better suited to describing those things that are indescribable, then we have to put up with these constant miscommunications and misunderstandings. Mathematics is an example of a language that goes a long way in helping to describe the indescribable but mathematics is limited to describing the physical universe.I cannot claim to be awakened simply because a claim of being awakened is a conceptualisation about something that is inconceptual. If I claimed I was awakened, I would be claiming that I was a concept. I am not a concept, so I am not awakened. I think it much more accurate to claim that I am not awakened and that I realise that I am not awakened.> > > > It is liberating because it means that I> have no need for ideas or concepts. It means that ideas and> concepts are> games that I choose to play with.This was my point though, that if> there> is no idea or concept which can provide me what I already have, then> what are we doing here except entertaining ourselves with ideas and> concepts?>> What do you suggest is missing or needs to be pointed to?> tyga>> ****Using the example above, beginning with the idea that all> ideas are BS, instead of using the mind to circle back around and> conclude anything from that, we can realize that the truth of it> isn't really known, and so we stop there and look at it.>Yes.> > As another example: There is no 'me'. Therefore, there is no 'me'> to realize there is no 'me', so I might as well play with the cat.> Hehe. This is circular thinking, so we need to stop short of> concluding something on the basis of an idea that we don't know to> be true, but just think it's true.>Yes.>> > What I suggest is that if we KNOW something to be true, the next> conclusion that the mind would come to, never happens. The> question that leads to the false conclusion dissolves in the> knowing, and the circular thinking stops.> > I dunno if I've described it well. Does that make any sense?> >I think we make it all way too difficult by believing that we can come to some sort of a conclusion. The only thing we need to realise, in my opinion, is that we do not need to do anything at all. Knowing this is liberating, because it means that we have freed ourselves from suffering, it means that we are able to enjoy what ever may come without expectation or consequence.Play with the cat I say. :)tyga

 

****I believe I lost ya right at the end of my post. Of course, I wasn't suggesting coming to a conclusion. I'm suggesting looking intuitively to see if these ideas are actually so. Can you know this? Of course, you just have to be willing to see.

 

Realizing you don't need to do anything won't free you from suffering. You're not actually 'doing' anything now, and so nothing will change as long as there's still a 'you'.

AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now.

[Guest guest]

souldreamone wrote:

>

>

> Yes, it is all bullshit, in my opinion.

>

> I'm not cynical though, I am only projecting back what I see. *If the

> world and all its ideas and beliefs is bullshit, then the

> realisation of

> the bullshit is liberating. But that realisation also applies to the

> idea that everything is bullshit,* so it is not so much the idea of

> everything being bullshit, it is the fact that we choose to

> believe that

> we can have ideas and those ideas can some how behold the truth,

> which

> is bullshit.

>

> tyga

>

> I talked on another forum today about circular thinking. When concepts

> start chasing their own tails, it's time to start looking with better

> eyes, because what is being pointed to is being missed.

>

>

>

> ------

That is a good point but what makes you think it is circular thinking?

 

I essentially said that the realisation that everything is bullshit, is

liberating.

 

It is liberating because it is a realisation that no idea or concept

will ever be sufficient to provide me with what I already know, that I

am already that which I seek. It is liberating because it means that I

have no need for ideas or concepts. It means that ideas and concepts are

games that I choose to play with.This was my point though, that if there

is no idea or concept which can provide me what I already have, then

what are we doing here except entertaining ourselves with ideas and

concepts?

 

What do you suggest is missing or needs to be pointed to?

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

souldreamone wrote:

>

> You might say I'm here to realize the futility of seeking.

 

Isn't that what I was saying?

 

 

> You begin with concepts and you make choices based on those concepts,

> and what happens is conceptual tail chasing. One of the beliefs you

> have is that there is no I to believe anything, and yet you do believe

> there is na I, and those beliefs determine whether you experience

> freedom or suffering for the rest of your life. At least notice the

> contradiction. Preferably, look into that more closely and come to a

> deeper understanding that really makes sense to 'you'.

>

> You have no need of seeking, and yet you feel a need to seek. Again,

> look at the contradiction and see if you can really make some sense

> out of it. You can, and that's what I do here. Sometimes I think of

> what Buddha must have done. He obviouslty didn't latch onto some

> religious concepts and give up before he found out what was really

> going on. He questioned everything, checked out every possibility. Is

> there a reason we can't do that? Isn't it in fact much easier for us

> to do what he did, thanks to him and an army of gurus all pointing in

> the same direction, saying " Look! "

>

> If there's nobody here and nothing to be done, then it's simple; just

> stop pretending to be here doing stuff. Otherwise, ask yourself why

> you're following beliefs you don't believe.

>

>

>

I don't feel a need to seek though, I seek because I choose to, there is

a difference. I enjoy the company of like minded people rather than

doing it out of some compulsion. If there was no joy in what I do, then

I would be happy to die, but as it is I have many joys, so why not hang

around and enjoy the show?

 

Besides, I was only making the point that if all we are going to say

here is, " there is no this and there is no that " then there is no

purpose of being here. I was making the point that we need to discuss

ideas and concepts and that ideas and concepts are themselves illusory.

So in order to have a forum worth frequenting, there has to be some

entertainment, some reward. I enjoy the entertainment. I think it is fun

to hang around with people of like mindedness.

 

 

tyga

[Guest guest]

souldreamone wrote:

> In a message dated 07/11/2008 8:27:10 PM Pacific Standard Time,

> tyga writes:

>

> That is a good point but what makes you think it is circular thinking?

>

>

>

> ****What I mean by circular thinking is, for example, 'Ideas are

> BS, but if that's so, then the idea that ideas are BS, is BS. But

> then you can say that idea is BS too. Do you see the tail chasing

> there? It happens because mind is using it's own process to try to

> transcend it's own process, which really is what happens on these

> list all the time. It's like trying to logically argue that logic

> is illogical. The best that can happen is to get trapped in

> circular thinking.

>

 

Oh yeah, of course, that was my point. All concepts and ideas are

ultimately circular, I chose to call it bullshit. Circular is a much

better way to describe it though.

 

I think we are in agreement then, because what you say here is the same

thing I was attempting to point out, I believe.

 

>

>

>

>

> I essentially said that the realisation that everything is

> bullshit, is

> liberating.

>

> It is liberating because it is a realisation that no idea or concept

> will ever be sufficient to provide me with what I already know,

> that I

> am already that which I seek.

>

>

>

> ****If you already knew that, you would be 'Awakened', and we've

> agreed you and I aren't going to pretend that's so, so you don't

> really know that, right? It's just a concept rather than a

> realization.

>

 

This is the problem with words though, I have to use words like, " know "

to describe something which is not knowing at all. Until we can

communicate in a way that is better suited to describing those things

that are indescribable, then we have to put up with these constant

miscommunications and misunderstandings. Mathematics is an example of a

language that goes a long way in helping to describe the indescribable

but mathematics is limited to describing the physical universe.

 

I cannot claim to be awakened simply because a claim of being awakened

is a conceptualisation about something that is inconceptual. If I

claimed I was awakened, I would be claiming that I was a concept. I am

not a concept, so I am not awakened. I think it much more accurate to

claim that I am not awakened and that I realise that I am not awakened.

 

>

>

>

> It is liberating because it means that I

> have no need for ideas or concepts. It means that ideas and

> concepts are

> games that I choose to play with.This was my point though, that if

> there

> is no idea or concept which can provide me what I already have, then

> what are we doing here except entertaining ourselves with ideas and

> concepts?

>

> What do you suggest is missing or needs to be pointed to?

> tyga

>

> ****Using the example above, beginning with the idea that all

> ideas are BS, instead of using the mind to circle back around and

> conclude anything from that, we can realize that the truth of it

> isn't really known, and so we stop there and look at it.

>

 

Yes.

 

>

> As another example: There is no 'me'. Therefore, there is no 'me'

> to realize there is no 'me', so I might as well play with the cat.

> Hehe. This is circular thinking, so we need to stop short of

> concluding something on the basis of an idea that we don't know to

> be true, but just think it's true.

>

 

Yes.

>

>

> What I suggest is that if we KNOW something to be true, the next

> conclusion that the mind would come to, never happens. The

> question that leads to the false conclusion dissolves in the

> knowing, and the circular thinking stops.

>

> I dunno if I've described it well. Does that make any sense?

>

>

I think we make it all way too difficult by believing that we can come

to some sort of a conclusion. The only thing we need to realise, in my

opinion, is that we do not need to do anything at all. Knowing this is

liberating, because it means that we have freed ourselves from

suffering, it means that we are able to enjoy what ever may come without

expectation or consequence.

 

Play with the cat I say.

 

tyga