Guest guest Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 Suppose a CD were available that would perfectly simulate the Nis list. And if you played it every morning, it would provide you with new Emails signed by all the usual posters. And if you responded to such Emails, credible answers would show up in a few minutes. How long would you care to keep up such game, no matter how realistic and interesting the answers would be? Would even Tooms, who claims no one really exist, keep on playing for long? So what's keeping you and me here? Is it the notion that there is a real Lewis in New York, A Werner in Germany, and an Al and a Kip in Sweden? Or Is it the notion that there is consciousness on the other side, or purpose? Is it free will? Or is it the notion that our words make a difference somehow? What would a perfectly realistic simulation lack to turns us off? Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2005 Report Share Posted March 19, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > Suppose a CD were available that would perfectly > simulate the Nis list. And if you played it every > morning, it would provide you with new Emails > signed by all the usual posters. And if you > responded to such Emails, credible answers > would show up in a few minutes. How long would > you care to keep up such game, no matter how > realistic and interesting the answers would be? > > Would even Tooms, who claims no one really exist, > keep on playing for long? So what's keeping you > and me here? Is it the notion that there is a > real Lewis in New York, A Werner in Germany, and > an Al and a Kip in Sweden? Or Is it the notion that > there is consciousness on the other side, or purpose? > Is it free will? Or is it the notion that our words make > a difference somehow? What would a perfectly > realistic simulation lack to turns us off? > > Pete > Hi Pete, you ask: What would a perfectly realistic simulation lack to turn us off? A: Impulse, stimulation. It simply doesn't stimulate an interest, reaction or response. Holds no meaning. Like you and Lewis were demonstrating with the gobbeldy-goo language. If I read a 'language' that means nothing to me, there is no interest, reaction or response stimulated, unless there is an impulse to find the meaning, if any, of that language. ~freyja > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 > Would even Tooms, who claims no one really exist, > keep on playing for long? Hm, has Toombaru claimed that? Would be nice to hear his opinion on this! I have my problems with such sort of claims. People announcing that no one exists fall into the liar's paradox. Such statesments seem to constitute fruits of amalgamations or are often plainly hysterical (Not in Toombaru's case, I guess). Using the term " really " leaves a subterfuge: I said " really " exist, not exist! Why not talk about accepting that you are a sexed being with a restricted live-span and accept the mourning this will or would cause? Toombaru offers a short-cut to elude the passage through anxiety I consider essential. It may take several years, perhaps a decade or two or longer until " the question " evaporates or maybe it never will but I consider this painful passage through the " ordeal of anxiety " as a fundamental process. Mourning continues or begins even after realization but with a slightly different texture and perspective. Life is coupled to suffering. The acceptance of this in its whole extension leads to the depicted mourning and to the desire to help. It could be asked why should someone change anxiety with mourning? Anxiety itself is looking for a way out. It depends in which degree anxiety leads to self-sabotage and self-mutilation and simultaneously in which degree it causes suffering and pain around you. At some point the desire will emerge to come to terms with it or perhaps not. That's what Ramana called to have the head in the fauces of the tiger. This is the ordeal of anxiety. My critique is adressed to enunciations which try to elude or by-pass the ordeal of anxiety. The intentions might be right but it only postpones the resolution of the problem or situation, i.e. to pass through the ordeal of anxiety. " Know thyself " means to come into terms with all the shortcomings of a sexed being with a restricted life-span and simultaneously to desidentify from it with the emergence of the witness to begin with. There are many sadhanas, many different paths and I am talking here more to those, with a propention to intelectualize. Bakthi is equally fine and sometimes it could be better to realize soon enough that it could constitute a more effective way. However none of the depicted paths are capable to spare the seeker the ordeal of anxiety and the consecutive mourning related to the end of the fiction. The subject of the unconscious is the absence of an absence and on account of it impossible to define, determine nor exhibit through language directly. There are only pointers to it. You can't become what you already are. All:One Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 You can't become what you already are. > > > All:One > Kip Almazy or perhaps better, you can't become more than you already is KA wasn't it a song of Frank Zappa, " You are what you is " ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2005 Report Share Posted March 20, 2005 Hi Kip Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy> wrote: > > > Would even Tooms, who claims no one really exist, > > keep on playing for long? > > > Hm, has Toombaru claimed that? Would be nice to hear his opinion on > this! I have my problems with such sort of claims. People announcing > that no one exists fall into the liar's paradox. f. When they say 'no one exists' or no one " really " exists, it is simply code for there are no actual separate boundaried individuals who could actually get, have or possess anything, including spiritual material. It doesn't mean it is bad to own " stuff " or take care of stuff. It is about the importance placed on this stuff, including the spiritual stuff. So, does the old saying, " there ain't no luggage racks on hearses " have any relevance here? Also, it does give one pause over why people kill people over " stuff " . Including " land " . It must be that they are identified with this " stuff " and think it will help them survive better, and suffer less, whether on earth or in the afterlife or whatever they think. Such statesments > seem to constitute fruits of amalgamations or are often plainly > hysterical (Not in Toombaru's case, I guess). Using the > term " really " leaves a subterfuge: I said " really " exist, not exist! > Why not talk about accepting that you are a sexed being with a > restricted live-span and accept the mourning this will or would > cause? f. I prefer the description " sensing being " over sexed being because sexed is but one aspect. Yes, it is sometimes tough in this 'heavy' physical realm and sometimes would like to throw off this suit and disappear, but simultaneously am so in awe and so grateful for life, for awareness, for consciousness, for all of it. And it is precious. Therefore, I like the affirmation, " Always do your best " while knowing simultaneously that " best " is always changing, depending on conditions. It is tempting to hold up standards and compare. It is about whatever is best moment to moment, seeing each moment, each situation, in as fresh a light as possible. Toombaru offers a short-cut to elude the passage through > anxiety I consider essential. It may take several years, perhaps a > decade or two or longer until " the question " evaporates or maybe it > never will but I consider this painful passage through the " ordeal > of anxiety " as a fundamental process. Mourning continues or begins > even after realization but with a slightly different texture and > perspective. Life is coupled to suffering. The acceptance of this in > its whole extension leads to the depicted mourning and to the desire > to help. It could be asked why should someone change anxiety with > mourning? Anxiety itself is looking for a way out. It depends in > which degree anxiety leads to self-sabotage and self-mutilation and > simultaneously in which degree it causes suffering and pain around > you. At some point the desire will emerge to come to terms with it > or perhaps not. That's what Ramana called to have the head in the > fauces of the tiger. This is the ordeal of anxiety. My critique is > adressed to enunciations which try to elude or by-pass the ordeal of > anxiety. The intentions might be right but it only postpones the > resolution of the problem or situation, i.e. to pass through the > ordeal of anxiety. " Know thyself " means to come into terms with all > the shortcomings of a sexed being with a restricted life-span and > simultaneously to desidentify from it with the emergence of the > witness to begin with. There are many sadhanas, many different paths > and I am talking here more to those, with a propention to > intelectualize. Bakthi is equally fine and sometimes it could be > better to realize soon enough that it could constitute a more > effective way. However none of the depicted paths are capable to > spare the seeker the ordeal of anxiety and the consecutive mourning > related to the end of the fiction. The subject of the unconscious is > the absence of an absence and on account of it impossible to define, > determine nor exhibit through language directly. There are only > pointers to it. You can't become what you already are. > f. Very nice, Kip > > All:One > Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 Hi Freyja, KA: I have my problems with such sort of claims. People announcing that no one exists fall into the liar's paradox. f. When they say 'no one exists' or no one " really " exists, it is simply code for there are no actual separate boundaried individuals who could actually get, have or possess anything, including spiritual material. It doesn't mean it is bad to own " stuff " or take care of stuff. It is about the importance placed on this stuff, including the spiritual stuff. So, does the old saying, " there ain't no luggage racks on hearses " have any relevance here? Also, it does give one pause over why people kill people over " stuff " . Including " land " . It must be that they are identified with this " stuff " and think it will help them survive better, and suffer less, whether on earth or in the afterlife or whatever they think. KA: I doubt it is necessary in a spiritual discourse to get into a discussion of existence in this lapidary manner presented in many spiritual lists. It might have a pedagogical value otherwise it would be plainly meaningless. I think that how you described the circumstance is effectual enough. A question of interpretation. There is a life to be lived, with or without existence and, that's what actually matters. If someone likes to live without existing it is OK for me but, what actually could enable or permit then such a non- existing someone to draw general conclusions on existence? Isn't it absurd? People identify with everything even non-existence. What's the wit in changing one conditioning by another using such a " simplycystic " dichotomy? BTW, what do you mean with " when they say " ? Who are " they " , Carolina? Talking Heads? ) > Why not talk about accepting that you are a sexed being with a > restricted live-span and accept the mourning this will or would > cause? f. I prefer the description " sensing being " over sexed being because sexed is but one aspect. KA: One doesn't exclude the Other, quite the opposite! Yes, it is sometimes tough in this 'heavy' physical realm and sometimes would like to throw off this suit and disappear, but simultaneously am so in awe and so grateful for life, for awareness, for consciousness, for all of it. And it is precious. Therefore, I like the affirmation, " Always do your best " while knowing simultaneously that " best " is always changing, depending on conditions. It is tempting to hold up standards and compare. It is about whatever is best moment to moment, seeing each moment, each situation, in as fresh a light as possible KA: Yes! Very nice, Carolina. As I said above there is a life to be lived with all the instances it might carry along. And we fail, and it is nothing wrong with it. To become adult means to stop blaming someone or something for the " burden of living " . Acceptance. That the texture of existence is dreamlike doesn't change the human condition. Resistance is needed to fight the battle of that dream; a battle nobody has ever won. Always do your best is a great maxim and to accept when you and me were not able to do the best. Most of our (my) problems have been always homemade. All:One Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy> wrote: > > Hi Freyja, > > KA: I have my problems with such sort of claims. People > announcing that no one exists fall into the liar's paradox. > > > f. When they say 'no one exists' or no one > " really " exists, it is simply code for there are no actual separate > boundaried > individuals who could actually get, have or possess anything, > including spiritual > material. It doesn't mean it is bad to own " stuff " or take care of > stuff. > It is about the importance placed on this stuff, > including the spiritual stuff. So, does the old saying, > " there ain't no luggage racks on hearses " have > any relevance here? Also, it does give one pause over > why people kill people over " stuff " . Including > " land " . It must be that they are identified with this " stuff " > and think it will help them survive better, and suffer > less, whether on earth or in the afterlife or whatever they think. > > KA: I doubt it is necessary in a spiritual discourse to get into a > discussion of existence in this lapidary manner presented in many > spiritual lists. It might have a pedagogical value otherwise it would > be plainly meaningless. I think that how you described the > circumstance is effectual enough. A question of interpretation. There > is a life to be lived, with or without existence and, that's what > actually matters. If someone likes to live without existing it is OK > for me but, what actually could enable or permit then such a non- > existing someone to draw general conclusions on existence? Isn't it > absurd? People identify with everything even non-existence. What's > the wit in changing one conditioning by another using such > a " simplycystic " dichotomy? BTW, what do you mean with " when they > say " ? Who are " they " , Carolina? Talking Heads? ) > f. Well, yes Kip it is absurd. I don't understand why you are asking me who are " they " ? Isn't it simple - It is the same " they " you first posited as saying the ones who say they don't exist are liars, that's all. > > > Why not talk about accepting that you are a sexed being with a > > restricted live-span and accept the mourning this will or would > > cause? > > f. I prefer the description " sensing being " over sexed being > because sexed is but one aspect. > > KA: One doesn't exclude the Other, quite the opposite! > f. Yes. > Yes, it is sometimes tough in this 'heavy' physical realm and > sometimes would > like to throw off this suit and disappear, but simultaneously > am so in awe and so grateful for life, for awareness, for > consciousness, for all of it. And it is precious. Therefore, I like > the affirmation, " Always do your best " while knowing > simultaneously that " best " is always changing, depending > on conditions. It is tempting to hold up standards and > compare. It is about whatever is best moment to moment, > seeing each moment, each situation, in as fresh a light as possible > > KA: Yes! Very nice, Carolina. As I said above there is a life to be > lived with all the instances it might carry along.>> f. Yes, and I think that people try everything to escape fully living by looking for structures. I like to watch the " earthy " ones. The only way to escape living is to do suicide or if one is unconscious - a vegetable. So, I like those that really get down with it, really feeling the rhythms of life, employing all senses fully. Not in a " i gotta do, see and experience everything before i die " kind of way, though. Just fully engaging with what's presenting. And we fail, and > it is nothing wrong with it. To become adult means to stop blaming > someone or something for the " burden of living " . Acceptance. That the > texture of existence is dreamlike doesn't change the human condition. f. yes > Resistance is needed to fight the battle of that dream; a battle > nobody has ever won. Always do your best is a great maxim and to > accept when you and me were not able to do the best. Most of our (my) > problems have been always homemade. > f. I try to make them key lime homemade problems as often as I can. > All:One > Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.