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

Re: You Don't Say

Expand Messages
  • dan330033
    ... D: Yes, that is what I m saying. Although, I m not making a claim. I m expressing myself through language the best I can, while acknowledging
    Message 1 of 15 , Oct 25, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
      >
      > >
      > > D: Now, it is you who are misunderstanding me.
      >
      > Very possibly.
      >
      >
      > >There are no actual divisions, separations - the way there seem to be divisions and separations when mental activities arise and are misconstrued as accurately representing what is. Language, memory and related emotional reactions, thought - can imply divisions that are imagined to be actual - but not as directly perceived. With no mediation, no thought form in between, no memory-oriented "self" >directing things.
      >
      >
      > OK, as I read that you claim that apparent divisions are created as a result of, inter alia, language, memory and related emotional reactions/thought.

      D: Yes, that is what I'm saying. Although, I'm not making a claim. I'm expressing myself through language the best I can, while acknowledging limitations of language that suggest I don't see myself as making a claim, nor take anyone else's language "claims" (if that's how they see them) as establishing anything definitive. In other words, we are not figuring out what reality is through exchanging words. One may be having fun communicating, is how I see it.

      > So let me ask you this. Are there real divisions among the languages, memories, thoughts and emotional reactions (because, of course, if there were no real divisions there, we couldn't get these ideas of divisions in re which you claim to be illusory.

      D: I disagree. The idea of division doesn't meant there is actual division. It means there are provisional treatments of reality, through words, thoughts, emotion associated with thought - as if division were fact. However, once one sees through the illusion involved - one sees that the thoughts, the ideas of division, and so on, are arising without any actual division occurring.

      One sees this in a timeless instant - but expressed through words it seems to take time, seems to involve some kind of progression and association - which it doesn't.

      So, for example, one could say, "I have a thought of division and a related emotional reaction of anger and mistrust because my daughter is dating a young man of a different race and ethnicity than ours." However, seeing/being the full picture of what is, one sees that thought arising in a context, including history, various events in memory, in a manner that all perceptual events are mutually defining and co-arising. So, history, experience, time, breathing, air, food, a planet, space, thought, etc., are all mutually arising without division - past, present, and future, so this event is perceived, including whatever sense of separation (my race vs. that other race, mistrust, etc.)

      I realize this sounds very involved, but as immediate awareness, it isn't complicated. You sound interested in understanding what I'm saying, so, what the heck. That's the best I can put it.


      > But, if those things may be distinguished, we've got items that are really different, haven't we? And....why stop there?

      D: Again, difference doesn't involve any actual division. Indeed, differences imply non-division. It is through relativity that difference is perceptible. And relativity implies non-division, this co-arising with that, black seen against white, and white seen against black, etc.

      > > Differences, such as emerge through dialogues, and in many other ways, aren't problematic, don't require there be any actual division in the nature of reality. This is perceived directly, immediately.
      > >
      >
      >
      > FWlittleIW, many years ago, I did a Ph.D. dissertation on Spinoza, a philosopher who held many of the same views you espouse above. I found his philosophy comforting. It's a beautiful picture.

      D: I have read very very little Spinoza.

      > The thing is, even though he wrote his _Ethics_ "in more geometrico" the more I studied, the more I realized--to my dismay--that so many of his freaking inferences were fallacious. I hated that....but what can you do? There's a world out there and we've got to deal with it--make decisions, live well, grow old, etc. (and that's an extremely unpleasant "etc.")

      D: Yes, and all of these perceived events unfold as you're expressing it, choicelessly, nondivided.

      I am not denying that choices are made. Choices are made every day, in all kinds of different situations, that are formed and perceived without division, without a separately existing chooser, and thus, choicelessly. (The notion that choices can be made in an ultimately choiceless way seems fairly logical to me, by the way).

      > I wish it weren't so, and if your views give you comfort, I have no wish to dissuade you.

      D: I don't find the views I'm expressing to be comforting. It's just how language is being used to express perception. If an elephant steps on my foot, I will scream, and my foot will swell, etc.

      > I object only to the assuredness with which you claim them. It's really possible to have thought about these things and not agree.

      D: Disagreement can be fun. If I sound assured it's just that I'm expressing direct perception the best I can. That's all there is to it. I'm not taking the expression through words, which is indirect, to stand in for the perception as the moment of being - which is direct.

      - D -
    • walterhorn
      ... Hi again. I wonder if observers have noticed how when you want to urge unity, you give an example of race and ethnic distinctions to be overcome, while
      Message 2 of 15 , Oct 25, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@...> wrote:

        >
        > So, for example, one could say, "I have a thought of division and a related emotional reaction of anger and mistrust because my daughter is dating a young man of a different race and ethnicity than ours." However, seeing/being the full picture of what is, one sees that thought arising in a context, including history, various events in memory, in a manner that all perceptual events are mutually defining and co-arising. So, history, experience, time, breathing, air, food, a planet, space, thought, etc., are all mutually arising without division - past, present, and future, so this event is perceived, including whatever sense of separation (my race vs. that other race, mistrust, etc.)
        >


        Hi again. I wonder if observers have noticed how when you want to urge unity, you give an example of race and ethnic distinctions to be overcome, while when I wanted to highlight differences, I juxtaposed a starving Somalian child and a rich Westchester resident, evolutionary science and creationism, etc. Rhetorical flourishes are big, no?

        Anyhow, come to Boston sometime, I'll buy you a beer (but not one of Sandeep's stale ones, hopefully), and maybe we'll convince each other of the errors of our ways--or have fun trying!

        Cheers,

        W
      • dan330033
        ... D: Interesting. I work on a multi-ethnic college campus, where issues of race related to dating can be major in some families. ... D: Sounds good.
        Message 3 of 15 , Oct 25, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "walterhorn" <calhorn@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
          >
          > >
          > > So, for example, one could say, "I have a thought of division and a related emotional reaction of anger and mistrust because my daughter is dating a young man of a different race and ethnicity than ours." However, seeing/being the full picture of what is, one sees that thought arising in a context, including history, various events in memory, in a manner that all perceptual events are mutually defining and co-arising. So, history, experience, time, breathing, air, food, a planet, space, thought, etc., are all mutually arising without division - past, present, and future, so this event is perceived, including whatever sense of separation (my race vs. that other race, mistrust, etc.)
          > >
          >
          >
          > Hi again. I wonder if observers have noticed how when you want to urge unity, you give an example of race and ethnic distinctions to be overcome, while when I wanted to highlight differences, I juxtaposed a starving Somalian child and a rich Westchester resident, evolutionary science and creationism, etc. Rhetorical flourishes are big, no?

          D: Interesting. I work on a multi-ethnic college campus, where issues of race related to dating can be major in some families.

          > Anyhow, come to Boston sometime, I'll buy you a beer (but not one of Sandeep's stale ones, hopefully), and maybe we'll convince each other of the errors of our ways--or have fun trying!

          D: Sounds good. Convincing someone else to talk like me seems like a losing proposition. I'd rather just enjoy hearing them talk in whatever way seems natural for them, and if they accept me doing the same - great!

          > Cheers,

          ... and beers.

          ... or actually, a glass of a good wine, would be fine,

          - D -
        • walto
          ... Wine is fine by me. But...if you want it to be GOOD wine, you ll have to pick it! (I m a $10 a bottle guy.) While we plan the venue, How about a little
          Message 4 of 15 , Oct 26, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "walterhorn" <calhorn@> wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
            > >
            > > >
            > > > So, for example, one could say, "I have a thought of division and a related emotional reaction of anger and mistrust because my daughter is dating a young man of a different race and ethnicity than ours." However, seeing/being the full picture of what is, one sees that thought arising in a context, including history, various events in memory, in a manner that all perceptual events are mutually defining and co-arising. So, history, experience, time, breathing, air, food, a planet, space, thought, etc., are all mutually arising without division - past, present, and future, so this event is perceived, including whatever sense of separation (my race vs. that other race, mistrust, etc.)
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Hi again. I wonder if observers have noticed how when you want to urge unity, you give an example of race and ethnic distinctions to be overcome, while when I wanted to highlight differences, I juxtaposed a starving Somalian child and a rich Westchester resident, evolutionary science and creationism, etc. Rhetorical flourishes are big, no?
            >
            > D: Interesting. I work on a multi-ethnic college campus, where issues of race related to dating can be major in some families.
            >
            > > Anyhow, come to Boston sometime, I'll buy you a beer (but not one of Sandeep's stale ones, hopefully), and maybe we'll convince each other of the errors of our ways--or have fun trying!
            >
            > D: Sounds good. Convincing someone else to talk like me seems like a losing proposition. I'd rather just enjoy hearing them talk in whatever way seems natural for them, and if they accept me doing the same - great!
            >
            > > Cheers,
            >
            > ... and beers.
            >
            > ... or actually, a glass of a good wine, would be fine,
            >
            > - D -
            >

            Wine is fine by me. But...if you want it to be GOOD wine, you'll have to pick it! (I'm a $10 a bottle guy.)

            While we plan the venue, How about a little Beckett (from _Endgame_):

            CLOV: Why this farce, day after day?

            HAMM: Routine. One never knows. (Pause.) Last night I saw inside my breast. There was a big sore.

            CLOV: Pah! You saw your heart.

            HAMM: No, it was living. (Pause. Anguished.) Clov!

            CLOV: Yes.

            HAMM: What's happening?

            CLOV: Something is taking its course. (Pause.)

            HAMM: Clov!

            CLOV (impatiently): What is it?

            HAMM: We're not beginning to…to…mean something?

            CLOV: Mean something! You and I, mean something! (Brief laugh.) Ah that's a good one!

            [And then, a few pages later]

            HAMM (shouting): Use your head, can't you, use your head, you're on earth, there's no cure for that! (Pause.) Get out of here and love one another! Lick your neighbor as yourself!


            W
          • dan330033
            ... Funny! Laughing, sort of out loud, slightly But ... laughing, - D - P.S. With an initial like that, I hope no one confuses you with George Bush ... hey,
            Message 5 of 15 , Oct 26, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "walterhorn" <calhorn@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > So, for example, one could say, "I have a thought of division and a related emotional reaction of anger and mistrust because my daughter is dating a young man of a different race and ethnicity than ours." However, seeing/being the full picture of what is, one sees that thought arising in a context, including history, various events in memory, in a manner that all perceptual events are mutually defining and co-arising. So, history, experience, time, breathing, air, food, a planet, space, thought, etc., are all mutually arising without division - past, present, and future, so this event is perceived, including whatever sense of separation (my race vs. that other race, mistrust, etc.)
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Hi again. I wonder if observers have noticed how when you want to urge unity, you give an example of race and ethnic distinctions to be overcome, while when I wanted to highlight differences, I juxtaposed a starving Somalian child and a rich Westchester resident, evolutionary science and creationism, etc. Rhetorical flourishes are big, no?
              > >
              > > D: Interesting. I work on a multi-ethnic college campus, where issues of race related to dating can be major in some families.
              > >
              > > > Anyhow, come to Boston sometime, I'll buy you a beer (but not one of Sandeep's stale ones, hopefully), and maybe we'll convince each other of the errors of our ways--or have fun trying!
              > >
              > > D: Sounds good. Convincing someone else to talk like me seems like a losing proposition. I'd rather just enjoy hearing them talk in whatever way seems natural for them, and if they accept me doing the same - great!
              > >
              > > > Cheers,
              > >
              > > ... and beers.
              > >
              > > ... or actually, a glass of a good wine, would be fine,
              > >
              > > - D -
              > >
              >
              > Wine is fine by me. But...if you want it to be GOOD wine, you'll have to pick it! (I'm a $10 a bottle guy.)
              >
              > While we plan the venue, How about a little Beckett (from _Endgame_):
              >
              > CLOV: Why this farce, day after day?
              >
              > HAMM: Routine. One never knows. (Pause.) Last night I saw inside my breast. There was a big sore.
              >
              > CLOV: Pah! You saw your heart.
              >
              > HAMM: No, it was living. (Pause. Anguished.) Clov!
              >
              > CLOV: Yes.
              >
              > HAMM: What's happening?
              >
              > CLOV: Something is taking its course. (Pause.)
              >
              > HAMM: Clov!
              >
              > CLOV (impatiently): What is it?
              >
              > HAMM: We're not beginning to…to…mean something?
              >
              > CLOV: Mean something! You and I, mean something! (Brief laugh.) Ah that's a good one!
              >
              > [And then, a few pages later]
              >
              > HAMM (shouting): Use your head, can't you, use your head, you're on earth, there's no cure for that! (Pause.) Get out of here and love one another! Lick your neighbor as yourself!
              >
              >
              > W



              Funny!

              Laughing, sort of out loud, slightly

              But ... laughing,

              - D -

              P.S. With an initial like that, I hope no one confuses you with George Bush ... hey, wait a second, you're not ... ?
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.