Doing and Happening

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Iamit

There is a teaching often attributed to The Buddha that events happen but there is no doer thereof. It seems this is the basis of the Neo Advaita reference to there being noone. This teaching resonates with many as there are plenty of Buddhists but it seeems does not reasonate with you. There are other alternatives such as practise that might resonate as previosly mentioned. I hope you find somethig that does work for you.

Again Iamit, you fail to even acknowledge what I am saying to you .. Tony Parsons, Buddha, Niz, are all part of the dream and there is no one here or there ... it's all dream stuff .

There is no more truth to one dream character to the next when it's all dream material .

You keep passing the buck and don't address what I speak about .

You need to acknowledge the foundation of your own premise, then you will realise how futile it is to recommend the teachings of an illusory individual that is named Buddha that doesn't speak the truth by your own admission (based upon what you have already said)..

If there is no doer, there is no one that can gain any understandings of what is said or taught . It's all dream material .

Until you actually respond to me with acknowledging this, your in denial and totally ignoring what is said .

I have suggested that we get the foundation right to begin with but like said you continue to say to me to me that I am not seeing or understanding your premise, but alas there is no one here and nothing to see that is of any real truths .

I find it a rather silly game to be honest, round and round we go, I ask you something and you point me to an illusory self dream character for answers while ignoring what I say ..

Again, this is why happens to non dualer's that can't really explain their premises with all respect ..


x daz x

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Again Iamit, you fail to even acknowledge what I am saying to you .. Tony Parsons, Buddha, Niz, are all part of the dream and there is no one here or there ... it's all dream stuff .

There is no more truth to one dream character to the next when it's all dream material .

You keep passing the buck and don't address what I speak about .

You need to acknowledge the foundation of your own premise, then you will realise how futile it is to recommend the teachings of an illusory individual that is named Buddha that doesn't speak the truth by your own admission (based upon what you have already said)..

If there is no doer, there is no one that can gain any understandings of what is said or taught . It's all dream material .

Until you actually respond to me with acknowledging this, your in denial and totally ignoring what is said .

I have suggested that we get the foundation right to begin with but like said you continue to say to me to me that I am not seeing or understanding your premise, but alas there is no one here and nothing to see that is of any real truths .

I find it a rather silly game to be honest, round and round we go, I ask you something and you point me to an illusory self dream character for answers while ignoring what I say ..

Again, this is why happens to non dualer's that can't really explain their premises with all respect ..


x daz x

Repeating will achieve nothing so we are done. This is my last post to you. Be well.

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Again Iamit, you fail to even acknowledge what I am saying to you .. Tony Parsons, Buddha, Niz, are all part of the dream and there is no one here or there ... it's all dream stuff .

There is no more truth to one dream character to the next when it's all dream material .

You keep passing the buck and don't address what I speak about .

You need to acknowledge the foundation of your own premise, then you will realise how futile it is to recommend the teachings of an illusory individual that is named Buddha that doesn't speak the truth by your own admission (based upon what you have already said)..

If there is no doer, there is no one that can gain any understandings of what is said or taught . It's all dream material .

Until you actually respond to me with acknowledging this, your in denial and totally ignoring what is said .

I have suggested that we get the foundation right to begin with but like said you continue to say to me to me that I am not seeing or understanding your premise, but alas there is no one here and nothing to see that is of any real truths .

I find it a rather silly game to be honest, round and round we go, I ask you something and you point me to an illusory self dream character for answers while ignoring what I say ..

Again, this is why happens to non dualer's that can't really explain their premises with all respect ..


x daz x

hey godlike - both of you are starting with different premises and reaching different results. There is no room for a meeting of the minds because neither will accept the premises the other is espousing.

this is like looking at different sides of a crystal but not realizing you see the same thing and thus categorizing them as different... or describing different parts of an elephant but not knowing there is only one thing there...

mathematically it is like the difference between using cartesian and polar coordinates. If you value using cartesian coordinates lines will seem easy to describe and circles will seem relatively hard; but if you value using polar coordinates circles will seem easy to describe and lines will seem hard. Unfortunately from the discussion of occams razor you might realize people value 'easy' over 'hard' and thus whatever seems easiest seems self evident, and more 'right' than whatever seems difficult or hard to see. So people will value different coordinate systems then argue all day long in favor of what seems self-evident to them - never realizing a coin has two sides and if you'd just go to the effort to flip it over you'd see a different picture entirely. But IMO you are in the better position because you've got rationality on your side. You would have a chance of figuring it out if you weren't busy trying to get him to agree your premises are best...

Originally Posted by Iamit

Repeating will achieve nothing so we are done. This is my last post to you. Be well.

In other words, you are doing the same thing over and over, so ending the back and forth is what is happening.
or is nobody not doing the same thing and nothing is happening... I get confused. Or is nobody confused??
There is nobody not having any non confusion, as neither I nor confusion exist???

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by ketzer

In other words, you are doing the same thing over and over, so ending the back and forth is what is happening.
or is nobody not doing the same thing and nothing is happening... I get confused. Or is nobody confused??
There is nobody not having any non confusion, as neither I nor confusion exist???

All the explanations asked for have been supplied. If you want to understand, you can read them.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

hey godlike - both of you are starting with different premises and reaching different results. There is no room for a meeting of the minds because neither will accept the premises the other is espousing.

this is like looking at different sides of a crystal but not realizing you see the same thing and thus categorizing them as different... or describing different parts of an elephant but not knowing there is only one thing there...

mathematically it is like the difference between using cartesian and polar coordinates. If you value using cartesian coordinates lines will seem easy to describe and circles will seem relatively hard; but if you value using polar coordinates circles will seem easy to describe and lines will seem hard. Unfortunately from the discussion of occams razor you might realize people value 'easy' over 'hard' and thus whatever seems easiest seems self evident, and more 'right' than whatever seems difficult or hard to see. So people will value different coordinate systems then argue all day long in favor of what seems self-evident to them - never realizing a coin has two sides and if you'd just go to the effort to flip it over you'd see a different picture entirely. But IMO you are in the better position because you've got rationality on your side. You would have a chance of figuring it out if you weren't busy trying to get him to agree your premises are best...

Agreement is not required for mutal undestanding of different points of view. Unfortuately that could not be achieved.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Iamit

Repeating will achieve nothing so we are done. This is my last post to you. Be well.

I am repeating myself because you're not answering anything I put question too .

Your not acknowledging anything I am saying, it's like you have your fingers in your ears ....

I have no further interest in trying to communicate with someone who avoids conversing in a straight forward way .. All I am getting from you are pointers to other non individuals that don't actually exist, that are illusory and dreamy and don't have the capacity to even know what they are talking about .

This is the foundation you are working with and it doesn't work and for some reason you avoid acknowledging why it doesn't .

No hard feelings, be well --


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

hey godlike - both of you are starting with different premises and reaching different results. There is no room for a meeting of the minds because neither will accept the premises the other is espousing.

Hey :)

Sure we have different premises, but I have stated that we need to address the foundation as a starting point . Iamit isn't interested in acknowledging his premise as a foundation and ignores it while continuing to contradict himself while trying to prove his point .

For example if there is no one here and what is here is a dreamy character it is no good telling me to read about some other dream character's teachings when I am not here and neither is the teacher lol . What is written by the teacher isn't a true reflection of what is, because the premise doesn't allow the truth to told or known or realised . Only real individual conscious aware peeps can know ---

Do you see why there is this merry-go-round because there is total contradiction from the word go .

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

is like looking at different sides of a crystal but not realizing you see the same thing and thus categorizing them as different... or describing different parts of an elephant but not knowing there is only one thing there...

mathematically it is like the difference between using cartesian and polar coordinates. If you value using cartesian coordinates lines will seem easy to describe and circles will seem relatively hard; but if you value using polar coordinates circles will seem easy to describe and lines will seem hard. Unfortunately from the discussion of occams razor you might realize people value 'easy' over 'hard' and thus whatever seems easiest seems self evident, and more 'right' than whatever seems difficult or hard to see. So people will value different coordinate systems then argue all day long in favor of what seems self-evident to them - never realizing a coin has two sides and if you'd just go to the effort to flip it over you'd see a different picture entirely. But IMO you are in the better position because you've got rationality on your side. You would have a chance of figuring it out if you weren't busy trying to get him to agree your premises are best...

I don't see anything the same as Iamit, we are at a completely different place within self awareness and Self awareness .

I speak to you because I know you exist as an individual even though you are fundamentally not separate from what I am .

The idea that there is no doer for example is not realised, it's a concept made up in mind by an individual that has realised Self beyond the concept of Self -

I started a thread a while ago that relates to realisation and what is concluded thereafter .

All this dream stuff too is a conceptual conclusion made that is created post realisation of what you are that is beyond the concept of the dream or the world .

So when someone tells me I am not really here and it makes no sense at all, because like said the realisation of Self is beyond the thought of anything .

It's fine to have concepts and conclusions about reality but some concepts end up being counter productive and end up negating their premise .



x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by ketzer

In other words, you are doing the same thing over and over, so ending the back and forth is what is happening.
or is nobody not doing the same thing and nothing is happening... I get confused. Or is nobody confused??
There is nobody not having any non confusion, as neither I nor confusion exist???

There is the suggestion that no one is here although one's behaviour say's different .

It's all about living by your actual belief not living by what some dude said in a book whom supposedly isn't here to begin with and whatever is said isn't the truth because it a dream reality .

This is what I have been pointing out to no avail .

Now it the premise was different in that there is a real world and a real individual that isn't separate from (all there is) then you can have a reality and an environment that sustains the relative truth and allows it to be said and known and realised to certain degrees .

Without this foundation in place everything said means nothing to no-one .. it's purely dream material .. I am not interested in dream stuff .. I might as well watch the Simpsons than listen to a dream character who isn't really here .


x daz x

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Again Iamit, you fail to even acknowledge what I am saying to you .. Tony Parsons, Buddha, Niz, are all part of the dream and there is no one here or there ... it's all dream stuff .

There is no more truth to one dream character to the next when it's all dream material .

You keep passing the buck and don't address what I speak about .

You need to acknowledge the foundation of your own premise, then you will realise how futile it is to recommend the teachings of an illusory individual that is named Buddha that doesn't speak the truth by your own admission (based upon what you have already said)..

If there is no doer, there is no one that can gain any understandings of what is said or taught . It's all dream material .

Until you actually respond to me with acknowledging this, your in denial and totally ignoring what is said .

I have suggested that we get the foundation right to begin with but like said you continue to say to me to me that I am not seeing or understanding your premise, but alas there is no one here and nothing to see that is of any real truths .

I find it a rather silly game to be honest, round and round we go, I ask you something and you point me to an illusory self dream character for answers while ignoring what I say ..

Again, this is why happens to non dualer's that can't really explain their premises with all respect ..


x daz x

Hi GL

I don’t really consider myself a non-dualist or nondualer (as you put it) but I have addressed what you speak about on a couple of occasions. I’ll have a quick go again.

Now I agree with some of what Iamit says but not all of it (for everyone you talk to about non-duality, you’ll get a slightly - or sometimes very - different interpretation.) For a start I don’t think that apparent things are illusions as such - but to take them as inherently existing, independent and separate (from the whole - that’s what separation means) is a delusion.

So a wave on the ocean has an ontology - it has a kind of existence, obviously. But when we really look into it - right now - as it is - we might realise that a wave is not other the ocean wave-ing. Right now, you cannot separate the wave from the ocean except conceptually - as an abstraction.

Well in a similar way a person is Source (universe, Life, existence, consciousness) person-ing. It’s always and only Source.

So who awakens? In the light of the above insight, the question becomes faulty. Source plays the game of delusion - seeking - and finding. And in the finding it is seen that there never was a separate, independent, inherently existing finder.

But (and this is where I sympathise with you) this does happen VIA the play of the body-mind organism. The body-mind matrix IS the vehicle VIA which awakening takes place. But in this awakening comes the realisation that all along it was a play of Source. In this sense it is analogous to a lucid dream.

So once again, organisms are not illusions (look around - like the wave they have an ontology which cannot be denied) but to take them as inherently existing, independent, separate entities is a form of delusion. (Delusion simply means seeing something that is not actually there.)

I hope this is helpful - if not please keep any questions concise and to the point so that there is less room for any misunderstandings.