Grizzly

Would a board dedicated to mysticism be filled with empty pages....

Vajradhara

Namaste mirage,

the only difficult bit to the idea is that this would apply to sentient beings like ourselves... we, too, are not permentant.. and there is no part of us that we can say is.

this is the difficult part, for most beings, since their habituated and conditioned sense consciousness tends to project a seeming solid and permenant reality in which we exist "in here" and they exist "out there". a real subject/object dichotomy that can be difficult to overcome.

not impossible, obviously

anatta_anicca_dukkha

Aside from the fact that this thread got kicked out of the EOG area and booted over here...

Mysticism is the belief in direct experience of the devine. Direct experience of impermanence seems to be hard for most people -- they keep clinging to the notion that they 'exist'.

---

No essence. No permanence. No perfection.

anatta_anicca_dukkha

I'd agree -- although I think the lack of essence or 'self' is harder for most to experience. We keep creating new words aimed at capturing some mythical essence.

---

No essence. No permanence. No perfection.

anatta_anicca_dukkha

No. Just pages where the words had no meaning....

makebate dags

Ok, let's assume you don't exist? Who's the one with which I communicate now?

- d r i f t

anatta_anicca_dukkha

I didn't say that I "don't exist." I neither exist nor non-exist. I happen.

I think the notion of existence is broken.

What 'you' communicate with 'now' is a confluence of conditions -- a mixture of comings and goings. This mixture is without essence (or 'self'), has no fixed nature, and consists only of stressed action.

---

No essence. No permanence. No perfection.

makebate dags

Why do you prefer to happen? What difference does it really make?

- d r i f t

anatta_anicca_dukkha

In a process view of reality moral behavor follows naturally. In an object (atoministic) view of reality evil notions of dominion and God follow -- along with killing in the name of your God.

Besides, the process view is better supported by experimental evidence.

---

No essence. No permanence. No perfection.

makebate dags

If a bird with all it's atoms lined up and processing reality chose to attack and devour a lion one day, then that would be a confused bird. In an atoministic view, the lion and bird are made up of atoms, basically the same right? Yet, even the birds understand the difference between them and avoids this confusion.

If a person with all of their atoms lined up and processing reality chose to carry on a productive disscusion they'd have to understand each others language. You seem to be using english, yet your either trying to make it difficult to understand or you really don't see the difference?

I think i've given you a sample of the language I'm using, the language you are using again i've seen a sample of it. If we cannot get on the same page, then i suppose nothing but confusion, although I see it as intentional.

My problem being; I think I'm using language in a way that is simple enough for other people to understand; my intention - to convey something understandable.

If you cannot express something intelligible then I must cease this communication. I feel you do this purposefully to make communication difficult, not to communicate.

Am I wrong to think your trying to be difficult, or was your answer sincere. I don't mean to have you break character, but really If you are still living, then you must eat, drink, breathe, and many things that other people do? How is it that you seem to be so far out of this world, unless it's intentional.

When really your just as connected to the oxygen tank of earth as I am to live? When really you were born just as I was? When really you partake of life in many of the same ways as me and the multitude of your fellows here on earth do? Well I suppose I don't expect a reply, but you know where I'm coming from, where it goes from here - is up to you.

- d r i f t