Re: Cats have 9 Lives; Stream Enterers have 7 Lives (was Re: No

On May 11, 4:03 pm, Keynes <Key...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 11:22:18 -0700 (PDT), DharmaTroll
<dharmatr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >On May 11, 1:07 pm, Keynes <Key...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 11 May 2008 08:43:27 -0700 (PDT), DharmaTroll
<dharmatr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On May 11, 11:15 am, Keynes <Key...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 11 May 2008 07:13:46 -0700 (PDT), DharmaTroll
<dharmatr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On May 11, 12:37 am, Robert Epstein <vze25...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Well, first of all, if you were an enlightened master,
> >> >> >> I think you'd know it.
>
> >> >> >I'm not sure you would.  You might reflect on your having a good
time
> >> >> >or being happy, but since awakening tends to be expressed as a
lack of
> >> >> >neuroses, that is, the non-arising of craving, aversion, and
delusion,
> >> >> >and hence the non-arising of unneeded suffering, you might not
notice
> >> >> >the absence of them, only the positive things you happen to be
> >> >> >experiencing.
>
> >> >> So awakening is a contraction of awareness?
> >> >> That's a rationalization, a speculation, and
> >> >> pretty silly IMO.
>
> >> >Actually, you completely misinterpreted what I said, which is why it
> >> >sounds silly.
>
> >> You said "you might not notice the absence of them.."
> >> Isn't this a contraction of awareness rather than expansion?
>
> >No, it certainly is not!
>
> >First, springs and muscles contract and expand.
>
> >Second, there is no such thing (literally) as 'awareness'.
>
> >That's just a language game.  Aware is a predicate, not a thing.  It
> >is a relation****p.  There is no such thing as 'awareness' just as
> >there is no such thing as 'between-ness' but between is a
> >relation****p.  So there is just being aware of something or some
> >thought or feeling or other.  There certainly is no thing that is
> >contracting and expanding.  It's easy to get muddled on this.
>
> In case you haven't noticed we are playing the language game,
> and only little children keep changing the rules in the middle
> so they can win.   Cheer up.  I'm going to let you win because
> you can't bear to lose.  But not yet.  No premature ejaculation.

Actually, you're going to let me win because I'm simply better.

> >> If you don't want to sound silly, don't say silly things
> >> and then blame other folks for thinking you know
> >> what you're talking about.
>
> >Sorry, Keynes, I will not take responsibility for your being clueless.
> >And for God sakes, take off that silly hat when we're having a
> >conversation.
>
> Now you're just trying to hurt my feelings.
> I'm crushed.   Hat and all.

No, my intention is not to hurt your feelings.

I'm simply pointing out that when you don't understand, or repeat the
same misunderstanding or if you repeat one of your same old stories
and use words like "non-dual" which really don't mean anything, that
it's not my fault that you don't understand.

If I'm standing next to you and you stick your head in the sand or up
your ass, I'm not taking responsibility for your not seeing me.  It's
your choice.


> >> >I said nothing about "contraction" what ever that might mean.
>
> >> >I'm saying we might not notice that we're perfectly healthy, but we
> >> >always notice when we're sick.  That's all I'm saying.  No
> >> >contractions.
>
> >> You are now thinking dualisticly as is the common
>
> >There you go with one of your woo-woo words "dualistically".
>
> >It's one of those words like "God" that lots of people use to mean a
> >different thing every sentence and it turns out to just water down the
> >term to meaninglessness.
>
> Dualism (in case you didn't get the bulletin) is the
> conceptual division of perceptions into exclusive
> polarities of dubious validity and parentage.

More garbage.  When you're wrong most of the time, the line "there is
no right or wrong, everything is equally bull****, and saying some
ideas are right and some are wrong is just dualistic thinking" becomes
very appealing, doesn't it?  Nice game, but it doesn't work.  Some
opinions and theories and ideas actually are better than others, and
some correspond to the world, at least to some extent, and some
don't.  Deal with it.

> >> Dualists can only think this OR that, one thing OR the other,
> >> one thing at a time, and that's it.
>
> >No, you want the word 'linear' (another terribly misused term) if
> >you're talking about an ordered sequence of events.
>
> 'Linear' is another bogus swindle.
> Give up your 'linear dualitiy' and join
> me on the moon.   I have candy.

Can't.  I don't have a tin foil hat.

> >> I'm not saying emotions are awakening, but that
> >> release is weightless ecstacy that may last for weeks.
>
> >I think that is rather silly.  In my years of experience meditating,
> >I've found that I went from moods that lasted a long time (especially
> >unpleasant ones) years ago, to ones that only last minutes or
> >seconds.
>
> >My experience has been that at the start of my meditation practice I
> >had long moods like the rain here in Wa****ngton, DC -- when it rains
> >and is muggy and yucky in the morning, it's probably going to be like
> >that all day and maybe tomorrow as well.
>
> >My present experience after years of meditation is like Florida
> >weather when I go to visit my extended family and hang out at the
> >beach.  It's pouring rain out and I say "oh well, no beach for me
> >today".  I go get my book, find the page where I left off, am about to
> >sit down and I look up and the sun is ****ning.  Well that's how my
> >moods are now.  I still get bad moods as well as good ones, but they
> >all come and go and very quickly.  Last night when I had thoughts
> >about some rude person and I suddenly felt anger and tension in my
> >body (now that's actual contraction -- of muscles in my shoulders and
> >so forth) I watched it and in about a minute or two it passed and I
> >felt great again.
>
> >Sounds to me like you have an ideal of permanence and you idealize
> >blissful states or orgasms to last for weeks, or eventually
> >permanently.
>
> I'm speaking from experience, not theorizing.
> You are free to believe it or not.  But what will
> you gain from not believing?

The same as I gain from not believing that you are on the moon with
candy, as this claim is almost as absurd (not quite, because it's not
a physical claim).

Suppose you aren't lying.  I still wouldn't believe you.  I'd go for
the more likely explanation: that you are in denial, and that you
selectively cherry-pick experiences and memories that fit your story
and discard or explain away the rest.  That's what astrologist do.
I've met many astrologist and all of them believe (and I think they
are being honest) that they really can tell when people were born.
Yet meta-analysis of over 40 well-done studies involving astrologists
and using control groups and sound methodology have found zero
correlation and none of them have done better than chance, though in
their own experience and memories, they swear by it.

So I'm not calling you a liar.  I'm saying that I for now would place
my bet on the best explanation available, which is that your
interpretations are skewed and biased and involve selective cherry-
picking.  My bet is, based on the horribly flimsy evidence of 'fluff'
on the screen that you're a normal opinionated deluded fellow who is
happy sometimes and depressed at others; and that your grandiose
claims are misinterpretations of your ideal of permanence, and that no
matter how much you talk of non-dualism, you deep down think you can
separate yin from yang and chop the south pole off your magnet.  Any
more speculation than that and I risk doing a Tang-ism and projecting
a fantasy history onto you.  I'll leave that to the Cardinal.  I'm
just saying that given only the evidence of your particular flavor of
fluff on the screen, my best guess is that you are misinterpreting and
that you probably suffer as much and as often as most others on this
list.

> The long and lonesome road has an end.
> Read all about it in the literature.

I did.  The yellow brick road ends in the City of Oz.  But the wizard
turns out to be a false teacher, a charlatan, a quack, who is hiding
behind the curtain, projecting a grandiose fantasy on the wall.  The
good news is that you have always possessed the ability to get back
home all along.

--DharmaTroll