Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Tuesday, December 19

Expand Messages
  • umbada@ns.sympatico.ca
    EVOLVING SYSTEMS by 0000 An Evolving System is capable of regenerating itself. It appears to be in a state of Continuous Booting. It allows reclassification of
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 20, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      EVOLVING SYSTEMS by 0000

      An Evolving System is capable of regenerating itself. It appears to be
      in a state of Continuous Booting. It allows reclassification of
      objects. An object may belong to different classes depending on time
      and other parameters (dimensions) in such a system. An object may even
      become a class. Reflection (self description) is a very important
      aspect of such systems.

      A closed system cannot evolve. It must allow interaction and must
      interact with other systems. Evolution of a system is closely related
      with increasing complexity of interactions. Over time, as the system
      evolves (becomes more formal) the complexity of interactions is reduced
      and it becomes a more natural part of its ecology. Evolution of a
      system drives it towards specialization(s) as if seeking its special
      role.

      Complexity must increase in an expanding universe. This is reflected in
      all systems, natural and man-made. Increasing complexity is not a bad
      thing. It only means that patterns become more and more interesting.
      Systems continue to survive and evolve as long they are able to
      recognize, formalize, and internalize these patterns. In effect, any
      open system survives by its ability to change some aspects of its
      structure or behavior in order to maintain stability in those areas
      that define its core identity. In other words, an evolving language
      must provide new words and grammatical constructs to describe more and
      more complex phenomena. It will become extinct if it fails to do so.

      The evolution of a system is reflected in the refinements it brings to
      its constituent processes. Process B is a refinement of Process A when
      it is faster, cheaper and better than Process B. Also, Process B
      consumes less energy.

      It is important to remember that an Evolving System is not just a
      cartesian sum of its parts. Feedback loops abound not only within
      layers but across layers. Change and stability become contradictory
      requirements. However, an Evolving System continuously renews itself.
      Illya Prigogene, in his work on the characteristics of self- organizing
      systems, calls this "irreversible non-linear transformation under
      conditions far from equilibrium." Dynamic stability apparently emerges
      from the depths of chaos, describing, manifesting, sustaining and
      consuming itself as a process where it is the processor and the process
      it calls life.

      __________________________________________________________________

      ED ARRONS

      Hi Christiana, all members...

      In reflecting on your statement:

      "People identify with their _memory-space_ and perceive a need to give
      voice to that, rather than listen to the movement."

      I sensed its endless ramifications and drifted into wondering if I was
      clear enough, especially to myself, as to what was intended in starting
      the Nondual Dialog list-movement.

      ....Recently I found myself engaging in purposeful face-to-face
      dialogue with people I knew or would meet casually in the town where I
      live. Awareness of a quickening social fragmentation, verified by local
      and world events, seemed to motivate me. I sensed others at NDS were in
      resonance with this awareness.

      My purpose in a face-to-face dialogue was simply to reconnect in a
      meaningful way where/whenever the opportunity arose. So this list was
      begun to exchange ideas with others who were oriented in this
      understanding so as to enhance the clarity and totality of face-to-face
      dialogues. I also saw a value in working with other means to achieve
      connectedness, such as suggested by Jerry, as part of a broader
      movement.

      I ask all of you who consider the above: what is your understanding of
      this movement? Are some of us here for different reasons? That too may
      contribute to the greater understanding of how we may connect in ways
      we are not already connected.

      Thanks for listening.

      Ed http://www.egroups.com/group/NondualDialog

      ---------------------------------------

      "Strangers stopping strangers, just to shake their hand.
      Everybody's playing in the heart of gold band, heart of gold band..."

      Robert Hunter

      Love, Mark

      _________________________________________________________________________

      JAN BARENDRECHT

      http://www.egroups.com/message/NondualitySalon/48428
      http://www.egroups.com/message/NondualitySalon/48432

      _____________________________________________________________________

      JOHN DUFF

      Gene and All,

      Some time ago when I was more active on NDS then I am today, we had
      some dialog (at least I was talking with myself) over my apprehension
      of an apparent external conflict between the pure non-dual position of
      'nothing need be done - no one needs to be awakened' and the apparent
      'doing' of this sort we all seem to engage in.

      Although I recall this dialog occurring on and off-list, and therefore
      not available for complete review, I recollect me posing the question
      to you, "if this (pure non-doing) is truly so, then why do you continue
      posting?". I recall a non-response to the question, which was wrapped
      up in an overall discussion of choice.

      There was no association (on my part) of the non-response to anything
      in particular, except that I viewed your continuing efforts as sort of
      a tacit admission that there was indeed 'more' insofar as you perceived
      things.

      I remained inwardly puzzled and felt the need to understand the
      underlying contradiction, since much had been personally gained in my
      association with NDS and all of those then participating on the list,
      and what was said was reconcilable, at least internally.

      This 'more' seemed to reveal itself to me through some of your posts,
      again, on and off-list, associated with the word 'responsibility'.
      Clearly an interesting word and concept. But perhaps I projected this
      association in my efforts to reconcile the apparent contradictions.

      Now, returning after some extended hiatus, I find a sense of 'non-dual
      activism' alive in some. I find this somewhat strange, seeing this as
      perhaps an epitome and perhaps one of the more classic
      characterizations of the of the word 'oxymoron'.

      Lest anyone take this as a criticism, let me throw in a, ;-), to
      quickly nip that line of association in the bud.

      Notwithstanding any 'right' or 'wrong'-ness certain psychological parts
      may quickly seek to associate with this paradoxical process. Let me at
      least say, "Uh, it makes sense."

      "Making sense", as subjective as such processes usually are, is, for me
      at least, a bell-weather of a decision to use active force in my life.
      That is, "to go for it".

      Now, for a truly pointless personal tale.

      One has no responsibility.
      One gets responsibility.
      One, again, realizes one has no responsibility, that all is put before
      one,
      or, 'happens'.
      One then becomes responsible for what is put before one.
      One then acts 'responsibly' - as best one has been conditioned.
      One 'fails', or 'succeeds', using this aforementioned conditioning.
      One has no responsibility.
      One, again, realizes, that all is put before one, or, 'happens'.
      One then becomes responsible for what is put before one.

      One *asks*, "What is my responsibility?"

      Tend MY Garden.

      One becomes responsible.

      You are free to realize that you are indeed, God, or Nothing, at any
      point along this former chain of associations.

      The question, to all, remains, even in light of such a realization, is
      there something called responsibility?

      This is not a question that I feel that needs to be answered publicly.
      For the time being, I've answered it for myself. That answer may change
      in the future. No big deal.

      Warm regards, John

      _________________________________________________________________

      MICHAEL READ

      on the nature of the origional mind

      translated by Mike Dickman

      Some excerpts:
      ------------
      You're always adding to things, changing them and turning them into
      lies. And that is exactly why you can't see the origional mind.

      -----------

      The origional mind has always been right before your eyes. There is
      nothing for you to discover or achieve. Nor have you ever lacked that
      which would enable you to see it.

      The fact that you do not is simply because of your incessant jabbering
      to yourselves and others.

      -----------

      It is in your very mania and your need to attain and possess that you
      are lost.

      Seeing the origional mind means seeing it whether there are thoughts in
      your heads or not, whether you are moving about or still, whether
      babblimg away like me or cleaning out the shithouse, whether you be
      emperors, monks or homeless vagabonds. What sort of importance could
      such things have?

      ------------

      You are nothing but thieves! What hope can there be for the likes of
      you?

      To weak to see into the origional mind and to live on your own
      resources, you hide your pettiness and insignificance behind the
      castoffs of others; piling up points of view, cultivating thier
      nuances, differences and convergences.

      What fakes! Because you can amaze idiots with tricks like this, you
      imagine yourselves enlightened?

      ------------

      You should consider the Patriarchs and all old blabbermouths like
      myself as imposters babbling about something they will never be able to
      show you nor put into your hands. The only possible value they might
      have is to show that all beings do, in fact, have Buddha~nature. That,
      however, is for each one of you to seek out for himself without getting
      sidetracked into other considerations until--at last--you each see it
      as it is in all its reality.

      ----------

      If you see the origional mind,
      you seen the entire origional mind and you are Buddha.

      Now listen to me with your utmost attention.

      I'm going to tell you the great
      secret of the origional mind.

      Here it is--the most important thing
      that has ever been said anywhere at any time.....

      Listen,
      there is no secret
      of the orgional mind.

      HAHAHAH and HOHOHO!

      Peace - just be very very quiet - Michael
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.