From: oldernow@dev.null   
      
   On 2024-05-01, D  wrote:   
      
   >>>>> What about all the people who are happy with their   
   >>>>> being! ;)   
   >>>>   
   >>>> What about whether people can be believed about their own   
   >>>> happiness when experience has shown people will lie about   
   >>>> anything/everything for all kinds of reasons, e.g. money,   
   >>>> how they appear to others, etc.? How many egos want to let   
   >>>> on that they're not happy, therein possibly appearing to   
   >>>> be less than the amazingness of a person/being they wish   
   >>>> to project for whatever advantage(s) they imagine that   
   >>>> appearance possibly giving them?   
   >>>   
   >>> Well, if everyone lies about everything, then any   
   >>> investigation and speculations is pointless.   
   >>   
   >> You make a strong case - unless you're lying, of course.... ;-)   
   >   
   > Haha, brilliant! Well, this is why these types of   
   > conversations, like the one on transcendence, tend   
   > to end. If there is not common ground or truth,   
   > there's little to be gained by talking. =/   
      
   I still lean (LOL.. originally typed 'learn'..) more toward   
   transcendence implying, in part, rising above The Problem   
   (I know, I know... *what* "rises"...?), which Problem   
   is seeing (i.e. re-presenting) ineffable reality as   
   though a being isolated from it, which seemingly   
   requires conceptuality / reality to negotiate /   
   manipulate. In that context, words are   
   evidence of still being stuck in The   
   Dream also known as The Problem.   
      
   Which is a long-winded way of saying that what is   
   *potentially* gained by not talking is the possibility   
   of realizing how words are an impediment to transcending   
   The Problem, because using them reinforces the sense of   
   being a being (lol) separate from ineffable reality....   
   -)   
      
   See how useless words are but for chasing their own   
   mutually defined tails? ;-)   
      
   I dunno. I'm often accused of using "word salad", but to   
   me it's just attempting to be rigorous about "heading   
   confusion off at the pass". In a way I want to add even   
   more code-like notation (, I love curly braces!).   
   But it turns out that only makes things worse because it   
   requires an audience that's practiced being that rigorous,   
   or else it looks like word salad to them.... :-)   
      
   So... AGAIN... the uselessness of words, *not* for their   
   being inherently bad/evil, but for the implications /   
   assumptions about ineffable reality that using them   
   implies (aka "seemingly makes seemingly real").   
      
   >>>> I don't think it needs to be eliminated, nor could it be   
   >>>   
   >>> There are religions and goals of meditation where the I   
   >>> definitely should be extinguished.   
   >>   
   >>    
   >   
   > And Buddha is his name!   
      
   Heh, now you've got me wondering if we could make a fire   
   extinguisher icon "stick" in online Buddhist circles? :-)   
      
   >>>> any more than any other thought (you know how thinking   
   >>>> about not thinking is just more thinking). I think (haha)   
   >>>> it's a matter of seeing "I" for what it actually is:   
   >>>> another thought, but a somewhat special thought for being   
   >>>> thought (haha) to possess special attributes/powers,   
   >>>> and that seeing it accurately is more a loss of that   
   >>>> specialness. It's simply another re-presentation, not   
   >>>> some actual underlying reality possessing the likes of   
   >>>> "free will".   
   >>>   
   >>> That's another way to spin it.   
   >>   
   >> Words == Spin!   
   >   
   > Spin... as in spinning a yarn?   
      
   Yes! Perhaps - to attempt to drive "it" (the meaning)   
   home even more starkly - spinning a (seeming) *reality*....   
      
   Despite my considering words mostly useless for anything   
   "underlying-ly important", there's still the comedy aspect,   
   which to me is generally about exposing our predicament.   
   We generally do that with a sort of resignation, as though   
   there's no way out. But even merely acknowledging the   
   predicament humorous like seems a degree of at least   
   not ignoring it.   
      
   Of course, "liberals" are making haste to destroy comedy,   
   which I believe I heard Jerry Seinfeld waxing eloquently   
   on a few days ago. To me, their underlying impetus is   
   taking the so-called self not only seriously, but far too   
   seriously, which is completely at odds with ever seeing   
   how that notion of a self is at the very heart of The   
   Problem. All selves are so real that they must be boringly   
   equal, to *never* be made fun of regardless how ridiculous   
   they become, etc.   
      
   Violate that reality view, and yo ass is *cancelled*, baby!   
      
   (See how my salvation - aka my black woman identification -   
   is bearing verbiage fruit even as I type? ;-) )   
      
   --   
   oldernow   
   xyz001 at nym.hush.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)