Guest guest Posted September 28, 1999 Report Share Posted September 28, 1999 HS Re: Gloria asks... Glo, you asked (below): >>Bruce: >No, it's a variable. >>Observe a rock, then a >>dragonfly. Both change, >>the rates vary. In the >>moment, nothing changes >>and all abides, without >>thought's comparative >>activity there's no >>measurement of change. >> > >GLORIA ASKS: > >And some of us have rocks in our heads for brains?? Where >did the labeling of who said what break down here?? I had >to guess. Me, I'm just waiting for the dust to settle on >this latest go-round about conscious mind, so we can go on >and discuss the really good unconscious stuff. > >Look here------------> (insert picture of a brain with no >memory cells) > >Ok, how functional can this be? The very ability for you >guys to have this stupid ..er, I mean brilliant discussion >is wholly dependent on your memory and yet you ( Bruce?) >keep wanting to imply we all just appear here moment by >moment with no continuity. Gene: Do you suffocate between breaths? No, your breathing is 'transparent' to you, as are the underlying mechanics existence, whatever they may be. Certain yogis and others have been able to 'see' and know these hidden realities, which Bruce and others point to. Further, on the level that you seem to be pointing to, it is the continual 'giving of meaning' which creates the illusion of a flow of time and experience. Meaning which is given, comes from past association; this is how humans assign meaning, and a side-effect of this behaviour (that of assigning meaning) is counteracted by the 'nondual perspective' (we can argue about what that is, later). The side-effect of assigning meanings to the present emanation of the unknown, is that the unknown is masked by those pasted-on meanings; the 'nondual perspective' is designed to inform the practitioner that movement is an illusion, an assesment, a judgement, an opinion, an assumption. For those so informed, the present loses it's connection with the past. Each instant is a complete universe in itself, which speaks clearly it's own story; the total emanation, at once, is an expression which is usually disregarded by those who, like archeologists, keep digging for what is hidden, and thus miss cues to a coming storm. The voice of the universe speaks loudly and is called 'reality'. Debating over the past utterances of the living universe is no more logical than arguing with the author of Moby Dick, over how he used his words. We may if we dare, be in the way of the living universe; we may find ourselves to be a totality of present emanation, with no hidden factors and no mysteries. In this regard, consider the nature of radio waves after they 'leave' the antenna of the braodcaster; we cannot argue with those signals once they have been sent. We can only receive them in the form that they are in as they emanate from the antenna. Similarly, we cannot argue with 'what is'; but we can make tomorrow's 'what is' into what we want it to be, if we know how. So, it is the superimposition of thoughts upon the unknown which obscure the present real-time voice of the living universe; we shout louder than 'reality' because we want a different 'what is' than the one we think we are getting. We shout in desire, and we shout in aversion. We react, only because of set standards as to 'what should be'. This shouting is the theme-song of Camp Wouldashouldacoulda. >That is like a person with >Alzheimer's reality, not anyone with a normal, everyday >sense of reality. Glo, what is a 'normal, everyday sense of reality'? >I know you guys enjoy making these >abstruse distinctions, but Bruce, really... without >thought's comparative activity.. there is no >nothing...your simplest sensory perception is a learned >activity of your brain/mind. Not only that, but he would not know the difference between a good argument and a bad one. >Continuity is essential for >memory and learning to occur and so what if people also >create a sense of identity with that process... Continuity is created in the mind; it is a tagging of events with signifiers of meaning. It is the province of the survival-talent of the organism itself; it is the basis of the ability to predict. By predicting, we can be in the rigght place at the right time. Like home at dinnertime! >you have >done the same, whether you care to admit it or not. Its a >bit more than just convenient. Geesh... If you don't >notice and measure change,,you won't last long enough to >know what you are missing, either. Not to mention that I >have barely the least idea even who I am talking TO by >this point... :) > >Glo Gene: You are noticing change, but do you notice sameness? The attempt to find salvatory meaning _only in change_, masks the salvatory meaning in (unseen) sameness. Not 'similarity' but sameness. It is all one thing, thus it is the same as it is, and never changes. It is always the self-emanation that it is. It is all the self-display that it is; it is always DISPLAY. ==Gene Poole== Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 1999 Report Share Posted September 28, 1999 Re: Gloria asks... Glo, you asked (below): >>Bruce: >No, it's a variable. >>Observe a rock, then a >>dragonfly. Both change, >>the rates vary. In the >>moment, nothing changes >>and all abides, without >>thought's comparative >>activity there's no >>measurement of change. >> > >GLORIA ASKS: > >And some of us have rocks in our heads for brains?? Where >did the labeling of who said what break down here?? I had >to guess. Me, I'm just waiting for the dust to settle on >this latest go-round about conscious mind, so we can go on >and discuss the really good unconscious stuff. > >Look here------------> (insert picture of a brain with no >memory cells) > >Ok, how functional can this be? The very ability for you >guys to have this stupid ..er, I mean brilliant discussion >is wholly dependent on your memory and yet you ( Bruce?) >keep wanting to imply we all just appear here moment by >moment with no continuity. Gene: Do you suffocate between breaths? No, your breathing is 'transparent' to you, as are the underlying mechanics existence, whatever they may be. Certain yogis and others have been able to 'see' and know these hidden realities, which Bruce and others point to. Further, on the level that you seem to be pointing to, it is the continual 'giving of meaning' which creates the illusion of a flow of time and experience. Meaning which is given, comes from past association; this is how humans assign meaning, and a side-effect of this behaviour (that of assigning meaning) is counteracted by the 'nondual perspective' (we can argue about what that is, later). The side-effect of assigning meanings to the present emanation of the unknown, is that the unknown is masked by those pasted-on meanings; the 'nondual perspective' is designed to inform the practitioner that movement is an illusion, an assesment, a judgement, an opinion, an assumption. For those so informed, the present loses it's connection with the past. Each instant is a complete universe in itself, which speaks clearly it's own story; the total emanation, at once, is an expression which is usually disregarded by those who, like archeologists, keep digging for what is hidden, and thus miss cues to a coming storm. The voice of the universe speaks loudly and is called 'reality'. Debating over the past utterances of the living universe is no more logical than arguing with the author of Moby Dick, over how he used his words. We may if we dare, be in the way of the living universe; we may find ourselves to be a totality of present emanation, with no hidden factors and no mysteries. In this regard, consider the nature of radio waves after they 'leave' the antenna of the braodcaster; we cannot argue with those signals once they have been sent. We can only receive them in the form that they are in as they emanate from the antenna. Similarly, we cannot argue with 'what is'; but we can make tomorrow's 'what is' into what we want it to be, if we know how. So, it is the superimposition of thoughts upon the unknown which obscure the present real-time voice of the living universe; we shout louder than 'reality' because we want a different 'what is' than the one we think we are getting. We shout in desire, and we shout in aversion. We react, only because of set standards as to 'what should be'. This shouting is the theme-song of Camp Wouldashouldacoulda. >That is like a person with >Alzheimer's reality, not anyone with a normal, everyday >sense of reality. Glo, what is a 'normal, everyday sense of reality'? >I know you guys enjoy making these >abstruse distinctions, but Bruce, really... without >thought's comparative activity.. there is no >nothing...your simplest sensory perception is a learned >activity of your brain/mind. Not only that, but he would not know the difference between a good argument and a bad one. >Continuity is essential for >memory and learning to occur and so what if people also >create a sense of identity with that process... Continuity is created in the mind; it is a tagging of events with signifiers of meaning. It is the province of the survival-talent of the organism itself; it is the basis of the ability to predict. By predicting, we can be in the rigght place at the right time. Like home at dinnertime! >you have >done the same, whether you care to admit it or not. Its a >bit more than just convenient. Geesh... If you don't >notice and measure change,,you won't last long enough to >know what you are missing, either. Not to mention that I >have barely the least idea even who I am talking TO by >this point... :) > >Glo Gene: You are noticing change, but do you notice sameness? The attempt to find salvatory meaning _only in change_, masks the salvatory meaning in (unseen) sameness. Not 'similarity' but sameness. It is all one thing, thus it is the same as it is, and never changes. It is always the self-emanation that it is. It is all the self-display that it is; it is always DISPLAY. ==Gene Poole== Geovani: for heavens glory!! With those cows by the waterfall, and Gene at his best.....what?.....even the cows are gona be enlightened!! More.....more.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 1999 Report Share Posted September 29, 1999 Hi Gene, A thought just occurred to me... Feel free to kick it around. I wonder if this present argument on the list doesn't have a lot in common with the wave/quanta problem. Is energy composed of waves or quanta (discrete bits)? There's one set of equations to use when you assume it's waves, and another set to use if you assume it's quanta. They both work, but not at the same time! So you can treat energy as waves or quanta, but not both at once. It seems to me that if you assume this manifest world is blinking into and out of existence at every moment then both views make sense. It's like the pictures that make a movie... they're so fast they don't seem to be discrete pictures. I do think, as you said, that "Each instant is a complete universe in itself." Everything flashes forth from the All and subsides again. But I also think the continuity of daily life is real too... quite real enough for all practical purposes. Is this a meaningful comparison? quanta events or or waves continuity Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 1999 Report Share Posted September 29, 1999 On 9/28/99 at 4:58 PM magus wrote: [...] > >Continuity is created in the mind; it is a tagging of events with >signifiers of meaning. It is the province of the survival-talent of the >organism itself; it is the basis of the ability to predict. By predicting, >we can be in the rigght place at the right time. Like home at dinnertime! Setting a house on fire will cause the house to burn out, unless some action is undertaken. The fire just continues until everything that can burn, has been burnt. Likewise, aging of a living body will continue until some vital part will fail. In these examples, continuity is an observation; it is not created in the mind. Human relations are created in the mind; they are not based on observation but association. One's mother at age 20 looks very different from the same mother at age 80 but this won't change the relationship (in fact, often improves it). Relationships are based on continuity and the knowledge that this continuity is an illusion does not change that. The sense of continuity is the (dualistic) interpretation of what is "leaking through" from the Unchanging. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 1999 Report Share Posted September 29, 1999 In a message dated 9/28/99 8:16:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time, fisher1 writes: << quanta events or or waves continuity Love, Dharma >> Dear Dharma: Yes, I agree that it is very much the same problem/interpretation. I sent an earlier Email in which I discuss the material/information/quanta aspects, prior to reading this post. So, my comments will follow this one, although I read it some time before. Still catching up with my Email! Blessings Love, Zenbob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 1999 Report Share Posted September 30, 1999 Dharma wrote: > > A thought just occurred to me... Feel free to kick it around. > > I wonder if this present argument on the list doesn't have a lot in common > with the wave/quanta problem. Is energy composed of waves or quanta > (discrete bits)? There's one set of equations to use when you assume it's > waves, and another set to use if you assume it's quanta. They both work, > but not at the same time! So you can treat energy as waves or quanta, but > not both at once. It seems to me that if you assume this manifest world is > blinking into and out of existence at every moment then both views make > sense. It's like the pictures that make a movie... they're so fast they > don't seem to be discrete pictures. > > I do think, as you said, that "Each instant is a complete universe in > itself." Everything flashes forth from the All and subsides again. But I > also think the continuity of daily life is real too... quite real enough > for all practical purposes. Is this a meaningful comparison? > > quanta events > or or > waves continuity > > Love, > Dharma Hello Dharma, << From the Copenhagen Interpretation, at the base of the quantum paradoxe (or was it Socrates ? : "On this interpretation it was agreed that, as Dirac explained, the wave function represented our knowledge of the system, and the reduced wave packets our more precise knowledge after measurement." >> A quote a bit more in context at: http://pages.infinit.net/carrea/physics/stapp.htm I guess you have a more precise knowledge and other time a less precise one. Which defines the reality one creates or looks at depending on the perspective one allows itself to have. I just love this freedom to Be that is offered to us objects of knowings. Antoine 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.