XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen
From: meanmrmustard@gmail.com
"Ray Of Heaven the Son of Man the Faithful & True" wrote in message
news:nvobga$teo$1@dont-email.me...
>
> On 11/6/2016 5:39 PM, dagnabit wrote:
> > "noname" wrote in message news:nvo4ho$542$1@dont-email.me...
> >>
> >> dagnabit wrote:
> >> > "Tang Huyen" wrote in message
> >> > news:6623017b-35e1-7321-9055-a40c13163a0f@gmail.com...
> >> >>
> >> >> On 11/6/2016 9:14 AM, dagnabit wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> that certainly does seem to be what god appears as,
> >> >>> yet if there is an understanding that as "we" made a
> >> >>> descent into grosser and grosser forms of physical
> >> >>> density until we came to this glob of protoplasm, our
> >> >>> perspective falls dwell specific to that density and the
> >> >>> levels of lesser and lesser density may only seem to be
> >> >>> a reverie of sorts and dripping with glossy attributes and
> >> >>> nowhere near our current comfort zone levels of negotiation,
> >> >>> so god may seem aloof when it is just that he is non-local
> >> >>> and non-linear and cannot sufficiently act in a grosser arena
> >> >>> of expression like the one that we enjoy. or, maybe not.
> >> >>
> >> >> Very sorry, Jen chérie, as I have said a few times lately, I
> >> >> often fail to understand you, specially early in your descent
> >> >> into grosser forms on Buddhist Usenet in 2002.
> >> >>
> >> >> People kept asking me what I meant (and what Buddhism
> >> >> meant) in the famous expression: "unsupported thought",
> >> >> "un-established mind". (Those are two common translations
> >> >> for one single expression in Indo-Aryan dialects). I struggled
> >> >> to explain, but then it dawned on me that you often used a
> >> >> close equivalent in your inimitable English: "dwell specific",
> >> >> which relates to the same basic meaning of "stay", "stand",
> >> >> "remain", "stick to", "hang on to", etc.
> >> >>
> >> >> < >> >> relying on an appearance of individualisms in order to
> >> >> extrapolate a clarity of focus which is dwell specific cohesive
> >> >> to any particular agenda, or there can be a similar negotiation
> >> >> due to the arena of what is seen as interconnectedness. one
> >> >> doesn't appear to be anymore auspicious than the other
> >> >> though. as long as what might be termed "depth of focus"
> >> >> ensues then a deepening clarity can persist in contrast to
> >> >> what gurdjieff called the sleepwalking public.>>
> >> >>
> >> >> < >> >> zone that dwells specific to the momentum of the trajectory
> >> >> of a given perspective, there can be a natural tendency to
> >> >> resist anything that hasn't been completely explored
> >> >> throughout the filtering schema of the comfort zone itself. this
> >> >> enhances the stagnation of the trajectory momentum agenda
> >> >> and can effectively hold the comfort zone in check when it
> >> >> originally was formulated by the momentum instead of its
> >> >> stagnation.>>
> >> >>
> >> >> < >> >> causality and eternal subsequent consequence to a less than
> >> >> contrived frequency, dissolved at least a dozen universes due
> >> >> to dwell specific resonant drift, and held the vibrational
> >> >> confinement of inter-sub-ratio aspect determinisms to their
> >> >> least frequent usual-ness, and yet no one even blinks.>>
> >> >>
> >> >> < >> >> collective one. where one allows a dwell specific point of
> >> >> focus to gravitate is purely arbitrary. has anyone convinced
> >> >> you that you need to see things from either view, or any other
> >> >> admixtural combination of the two? and if you think that your
> >> >> larger self, as you coin it, could be tunnel visioned by human
> >> >> qualities such as anger, you may wish to dig a little deeper. or
> >> >> maybe not.>>
> >> >>
> >> >> So, what the "unsupported thought", "un-established mind"
> >> >> means is a thought/mind that refrains from dwelling specific to
> >> >> anything, itself included. It floats along with what happens, in
> >> >> raft attention, but does not hang on to, or resist, any bit of it.
> >> >> What happens is allowed to happen (and not blocked out), and
> >> >> treated as clouds passing in the sky or water sliding off a duck's
> >> >> back. Samsara comes, fine, Nirvana comes, fine, they make no
> >> >> difference to it. It takes all kinds.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you again, Jen chérie, for your felicitous language.
> >> >>
> >> >> Tang Huyen
> >> >
> >> > oddly enough, for those who don't understand it,
> >> > it's pretty much useless because they can't grasp
> >> > its meaning, and for those that do understand it, it's
> >> > pretty much useless because they are already there.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> At least it shows poor Tang how he is supposed to think if he wishes to
> >> grow up big and awakened, unfortunately there might be too much rebel
> >> in
> >> the mix to permit him to comply with what is externally imposed and
> >> it's
> >> all been a waste of time. Or he awakens, and it's all been a waste of
> >> time. It's ours to waste, as the wasteland testifies.
> >
> > I agree that it's all a waste of time, the entire reality,
> > since no amount of masquerade via the human disguise
> > can tarnish one's real self, as such. the real you, the
> > one that buddha, christ and krishna knew about, cannot
> > be changed or affected in any way by any temporary
> > human disguise.
>
> I prefer the term the creators of "Banshee" used for that Real-Self the
> boundless omnipotent courage and confidence in the salvation of all
> numberless beings from the cycle of suffering and death
>
> http://tinyurl.com/TheThunderMan
>
> (And that also explains the dream I had with Thor being a close friend)
the only trouble with that is trying to
word it so that it all fits into a fortune
cookie.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
