Leave your message here:
Dude posted:
Leave your message here:
Words on screens often have meanings.
Zhuangzi suggested how the meanings are
not fixed and, once the words used have
communicated their intent, t'hats t'hat.
To say words are always mere words
can be said for a reason, per haps.
Yet, if so, how could meanings obtain forms
of communication might be a question of might.
Tang's premise, that words are mere words,
might be true given a context. Words are just
pixels on a screen, atoms and light waves.
Waves are waves, by definition.
Some may be heavy at night
when light changes meanings.
- thanks! aye. Cheers!
Your messages has been noted: Good work my bros!
Dude posted:
Your messages has been noted: Good work my bros!
Reminds me of an old video game.
Zero Wing, apparently is the name.
Not having played it, as a self, well played
is yet an other saying which may be said.
In a.b.s.f.g., perhaps there are no selves,
or, if there are, no permanent ones.
A name that is that names a name that was
might be the same, or different, at times.
- thanks! aye. Cheers!
Good point. Thanks. I'm feeling better now, knowing there's someone out there to talk to
The question is, is there a soul, a monad, in each individual person?
If so, there must be billions and billions of them of them. Where do
they go when we die? Is the soul like a spirit?
My position, and the position of most idealists, is that consciousness
is the ultimate reality. It makes sense when you think about it, and profound when you think it over for a long time.
Because without consciousness, you don't exist!
It is very difficult to argue against this logical notion.
First you would have to defeat the arguments of the Buddhist logicians
that invented the Mahayana Buddhism. Then, one by one, you could debate
with Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche.
My sect, the Zen sect, is very simple. All you have to do is sit.
Sitting is enlightenment. You only need one single word in the zen philosophy: "no".
That's it!
The only thing we really know, absolutely for sure, is the simple
feeling of Being. YMMV.
Dude posted:
Good point. Thanks. I'm feeling better now, knowing there's someone out
there to talk to
Lots of times I'm Way far out there.
The question is, is there a soul, a monad, in each individual person?
A wave may pass through its own self at a point.
It might expand and contract, passing through
its self and its selves at many points.
For me, a paradigm is able to be constructed
such that the Universe is a wave form.
Using a modern scientific type of theory,
once upon a time before time in a space
where there was no space, everything was
prior to being every thing naturally.
All the Mass-energy (Me), was at a point.
Suddenly and for no reason, that is to say
without a cause, being ontologically prior
to effects having bins introduced, it, went
Bang. And it was Big almost as suddenly.
The rest is cosmology.
If so, there must be billions and billions of them of them. Where do
they go when we die? Is the soul like a spirit?
When a wave returns to an ocean, a notion
can be like a returning to what once was.
On the surface, the face of things, prior
to being born as a form as a wave all was
calm, so to speak, metaphorically.
My position, and the position of most idealists, is that consciousness
is the ultimate reality. It makes sense when you think about it, and
profound when you think it over for a long time.
A problem for me can be with nouns.
Consciousness tends to be reified,
cemented as if it were a thing
in a pattern of thought flowing.
Even to think a thing called, reality,
exists may be problematic at times.
Lots of premises are taken for granted.
Then, a chain of statements is made.
A conclusion might be valid. That is
until a premise is challenged and then,
a logical argument might not be sound.
Because without consciousness, you don't exist!
Presumably, a compelling idea may be rocks and
the moon called the Moon exist, even when no eyes
are looking at them. Without being conscious
of them, they could be said to be thought.
Thought to exist.
Things exist as thoughts. Nouns.
Actions tend to be verbs naturally.
Without consciousness, a rock might break away
from a mountain and is then, not the mountain.
Like when a leaf leaves a tree and suddenly
it is not the tree naturally.
It is very difficult to argue against this logical notion.
Once upon a time a rock rolled down the side
of the mountain and was in a stream which then
carried it to a river and eventually an ocean.
Grain by grain the rock was worn away until
one day a wave broke it down to being two
grains and then, after that, again.
Suddenly, after quite a long time, the two
began to ask each other as they othered
what was a single self, which one is
the rock, or are they both.
First you would have to defeat the arguments of the Buddhist logicians
that invented the Mahayana Buddhism. Then, one by one, you could debate
with Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich
Nietzsche.
I'm not very familiar with any of those.
To win an argument might be fun. To converse
for the sake of having a conversation as well
may be simply for its own self, tzu-jan, zi-ran.
With Taoism and Neo-Taoism an idea of everything
and every thing being for its own self may occur.
No ulterior stuff. Simply things as they are.
Nouns, verbs, maps and territories.
My sect, the Zen sect, is very simple. All you have to do is sit.
Sitting is enlightenment. You only need one single word in the zen
philosophy: "no".
That's it!
Sometimes, when there's nothing to do,
simply sitting, a thought occurs to me
how I've accomplished Nothing! Wu! Mu!
Emptiness, the void, an expansive oceanic
feeling could be felt in terms of contrast.
The only thing we really know, absolutely for sure, is the simple
feeling of Being. YMMV.
When asleep, dreaming, Zhuangzi,
aka Chuang Tzu, was a butterfly.
Awakening, he wasn't sure if he was
the butterfly dreaming of being Zz.
Transformations occur, I think he wrote
or was said to have written about it.
Epistemology, ontology, ways. Fun stuff.
- thanks! aye. Cheers!
A famous philosopher was always seen looking up at the sky and he fell
into a ditch.
"rUaWhatever else consciousness may or may not be in physical terms, the difference between it and unconsciousness is first and foremost a matter
of subjective experience.
Either the lights are on, or they are not.
Consciousness is the one thing in this universe that cannot be an
illusion." - Sam Harris
Dude posted:
Consciousness is the one thing in this universe that cannot be an illusion." - Sam Harris
To think it's a thing is possible.
Once upon a time, a so-called individual awakened.
Suddenly all that had previously been deemed,
such as it was, was seen different.
aye posted:
Dude posted:
Consciousness is the one thing in this universe that cannot be an illusion." - Sam Harris
To think it's a thing is possible.
Some people might question consciousness its self
and wonder what is, technically, an illusion.
As if consciousness were a self
or had a self, or is, the Self.
Dude wrote a bout:
... Usenet ...
... ignorance ...
Some forms of ignorance may include bliss.
eye posted:
aye posted:
Dude posted:
Consciousness is the one thing in this universe that cannot be an
illusion." - Sam Harris
To think it's a thing is possible.
Some people might question consciousness its self
and wonder what is, technically, an illusion.
As if consciousness were a self
or had a self, or is, the Self.
For a non-dualist, there is no question.
- thanks! aye. Cheers!
aye wrote:
For a non-dualist, there is no question.
Nice!
Famous Asian non-dual philosophers: ...
Famous Western non-dual philosophers: ...
dart200 wrote:
Dude wrote:
Your message has been noted on the Message Board.
Thanks, Nick!
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 12:08:04 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
5 files (10,064K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,374 |