The entrance of wishlessness

[gregkavarnos]

I am pretty sure he was referring to TMingyur.

Of course I was! This statement in particular:

And you are clinging to concepts of "existence" and "non-existence" beyond that. I never had the slightest thought of "existence" or "non-existence" when writing. You are a philosopher. We will always talk at cross purposes since you are having "existence" and "non-existence" in your mind.

It is about the validity of terms, not about "existence" or "non-existence" ... you won't understand.

Actually TM I think we all understand quite well!

[ground]

I never had the slightest thought of "existence" or "non-existence" when writing.

Yes, you did. You have to in order to use the verb "is" or as in "I never had the slightest thought" indicating that as you write, you have a thought of "existence" and "non-existence". Also when you write "but there is a direct experience..."

Having a thought of "is" or "is not" is requirement for using any form of the verb "to be".

N

In order to use "is" I just have to know the term "is" and the context it "is" applied. There "is" a direct experience because there "is" a correlated of what "is" called direct experience.

It "is" as I already said:

It is about the validity of terms, not about "existence" or "non-existence" ... you won't understand.

Kind regards

[gregkavarnos]

You can not have a mediated experience of a direct experience. Once it is mediated it is only that: mediated (corelated)

You can either have a direct experience or a mediated experience.

You could try to relate a direct expreience to a third party but then it has been coloured by your mind and their mind.

This is why in Buddhism there is an emphasis on practice with explanations being utilised only as "rough" guidelines. That is why study is not enough to lead to enlightenment.

[Malcolm]

In order to use "is" I just have to know the term "is" and the context it "is" applied. There "is" a direct experience because there "is" a correlated of what "is" called direct experience.

So for you there is a correlate of "being" and likewise a correlate of "non-being"

This makes you a substantialist, caught up in the trap of duality.

[ground]

In order to use "is" I just have to know the term "is" and the context it "is" applied. There "is" a direct experience because there "is" a correlated of what "is" called direct experience.

So for you there is a correlate of "being" and likewise a correlate of "non-being"

This makes you a substantialist, caught up in the trap of duality.

Oh man, time to de-condition yourself ... delete the tenet operating system ... it is compatible with tenets but nothing else.

Try some poetry ... that may loosen your clinging to fixed ideas and projecting those onto words and it may enhance your intuition for the variety of meanings in language.

Kind regards

[Mr. G]

The thread has been cleaned up. Personal and Ad hom attacks have been removed.

All, please remember to keep on topic, and provide citations for positions.

[Malcolm]

In order to use "is" I just have to know the term "is" and the context it "is" applied. There "is" a direct experience because there "is" a correlated of what "is" called direct experience.

So for you there is a correlate of "being" and likewise a correlate of "non-being"

This makes you a substantialist, caught up in the trap of duality.

Oh man, time to de-condition yourself ... delete the tenet operating system ... it is compatible with tenets but nothing else.

Try some poetry ... that may loosen your clinging to fixed ideas and projecting those onto words and it may enhance your intuition for the variety of meanings in language.

Kind regards

I am merely pointing out the contradictions in your statements. I don't have a position.

[Rael]

Since I don't have a view of either "existence" or "non-existence", your statement is irrelevant to me. You are the one obsessed with "existence" or "non-existence", not me.

can you elaborate on this view you have....

from this statement one would think you are enlightened....

seriously...no sarcasm.....
it's one thing to make claim to have this view than another to actually own it....

from that last discourse we had where you inserted a what i termed a mish mash....and we discussed and discussed....

my radar is screaming.....we might have a genuine enlightened being with us....

and we can rejoice


no sarcasm here....genuine....