Never said nothing bout 'no Mind. Question is, if you got the "No Thing", why you wasting time with these backwater forums? Shouldn't you be out with your Alpha and Omega?mtmynd1 wrote:One cannot 'obtain' nothingness, Trixie. However one can [b']attain'[/b] the 'state of no thingness'.GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:How can one obtain nothingness, as a means to erase doubt from one's mind about it's existence?
That which we remember is tangible, a 'thing-ness' if you will. Whereas when we attain the state of "No Thing-ness' that also includes the Sacredness of Silence from which all becomes their own 'thing-ness'. No Thing is the Beginning and End, the Alpha and Omega, from which Existence began and Existence shall return. When you say true nothingness cannot be remembered is Mind speaking for Mind, insistent upon questions and answers to give itself purpose of Being. Mind is Some Thing. Beyond Mind is Consciousness wherein our given Consciousness is a reflection of Pure Consciousness. This is not an obtainable state, of which necessitates the presence of Mind, but rather Pure Consciousness being the transcendental presence which encompasses Mind as Silence doth embrace all Sound... a state of Enlightenment of All and No Thing.True nothingness cannot be remembered, if it could, it would not be nothingness, but "somethingness."
Questions for Buddhists.
- GreatandWiseTrixie
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Really? I expected a wee bit more than this out of the "greatandwise".GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: Never said nothing bout 'no Mind. Question is, if you got the "No Thing", why you wasting time with these backwater forums? Shouldn't you be out with your Alpha and Omega?
It's clear you do not have the ability to converse with any degree of intelligence, Trixie, which begs the question "why you wasting time with these forums?"
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
mtmynd1 wrote: One cannot 'obtain' nothingness. However one can [b']attain'[/b] the 'state of no thingness'.
That which we remember is tangible, a 'thing-ness' if you will. Whereas when we attain the state of "No Thing-ness' that also includes the Sacredness of Silence from which all becomes their own 'thing-ness'. No Thing is the Beginning and End, the Alpha and Omega, from which Existence began and Existence shall return. When you say true nothingness cannot be remembered is Mind speaking for Mind, insistent upon questions and answers to give itself purpose of Being. Mind is Some Thing. Beyond Mind is Consciousness wherein our given Consciousness is a reflection of Pure Consciousness. This is not an obtainable state, of which necessitates the presence of Mind, but rather Pure Consciousness being the transcendental presence which encompasses Mind as Silence doth embrace all Sound... a state of Enlightenment of All and No Thing.
Well stated, especially considering that language is incapable of accurately expressing that which cannot be stated by language.
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Indeed, the language of such is one that must be as well-stated so to be understood. Our language, English, really does not have a developed language when communicating about this, so it is with gratitude I thank you for your understanding of what I have written here, thedoc.thedoc wrote:Well stated, especially considering that language is incapable of accurately expressing that which cannot be stated by language.
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Thankyou, but I must admit that the understanding preceded the writing, but it was the understanding that allowed me to recognize what you had written. I fear that after many years the understanding is blurring, so it's nice to read a refresher of what I had learned many years ago.mtmynd1 wrote:Indeed, the language of such is one that must be as well-stated so to be understood. Our language, English, really does not have a developed language when communicating about this, so it is with gratitude I thank you for your understanding of what I have written here, thedoc.thedoc wrote:Well stated, especially considering that language is incapable of accurately expressing that which cannot be stated by language.
- attofishpi
- Posts: 13319
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Sorry to have to interrupt the party that you two are having, and let me concur i understand where you are coming from in relation to something so esoterically ethereal as God but i assure you understanding 'no thing' and alluding to this God being beyond mundane existence is so far off the mark its ridiculous, pointless and indeed ignorant of the truth.mtmynd1 wrote:One will never KNOW God by seeking a God outside themselves. Should the seeker "go within" they may find that "God" is "No Thing", a pure transcendental presence within all life which is "Pure Consciousness"... all-knowing beyond time and space, beyond matter, beyond belief, logic and intellect. Nobody can offer you or anyone else, "proof" of "No Thing" as that is a foolish expectation. Until you attain "nothingness" you will forever doubt the existence of "No Thing," pure transcendental presence beyond mundane existence, within all life, sustaining all Life.
Still, its nice to have wishy washy feelings that through our language you appear incapable of expressing and make us feel good about existence, but it couldn't be farther from the true understanding of the existence of God.
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
"But" (a word you seem to rely on to express what you feel), you don't seem to have a firm grasp of metaphysics, fish. "But" I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.attofishpi wrote:"... but i assure you understanding 'no thing' and alluding to this God being beyond mundane existence is so far off the mark its ridiculous, pointless and indeed ignorant of the truth.
"... but it couldn't be farther from the true understanding of the existence of God.
Please, fire away!
- attofishpi
- Posts: 13319
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
My God? Do you believe there is more than one?mtmynd1 wrote:"But" (a word you seem to rely on to express what you feel), you don't seem to have a firm grasp of metaphysics, fish. "But" I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.attofishpi wrote:"... but i assure you understanding 'no thing' and alluding to this God being beyond mundane existence is so far off the mark its ridiculous, pointless and indeed ignorant of the truth.
"... but it couldn't be farther from the true understanding of the existence of God.
Please, fire away!
You should have asked what i KNOW about God, and followed it up with what do i BELIEVE about God, if you were actually interested.
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
I KNOW there are as many opinions of a god as there are thinkers.attofishpi wrote: My God? Do you believe there is more than one?
"fish", I repeat, "I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.You should have asked what i KNOW about God, and followed it up with what do i BELIEVE about God, if you were actually interested.
Please, fire away!"
- attofishpi
- Posts: 13319
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
It DOESNT CHANGE the STATE of GOD.mtmynd1 wrote:I KNOW there are as many opinions of a god as there are thinkers.attofishpi wrote: My God? Do you believe there is more than one?
Ive posted that countless times on this forum, and there is a website i created dedicated to it, be more resourceful.mtmynd1 wrote:"fish", I repeat, "I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.attofishpi wrote:You should have asked what i KNOW about God, and followed it up with what do i BELIEVE about God, if you were actually interested.
Please, fire away!"
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Shhh... no need to yell, fish. A discussion can be be successful without 'capitalizing' your frustration. It only shows you are clearly being misunderstood. Is that my own shortcoming or is it your ability to communicate successfully..?attofishpi wrote: It DOESNT CHANGE the STATE of GOD.
The "state of god"..? Even that suggestion limits the any concept that I know of this god you speak of.
Dismiss, in this time of multiplicities of ideas and opinions, the age old belief of monotheism, fish... it just doesn't hold water like our life-long indoctrination has led the majority to merely accept as being true. Acceptance of beliefs does not make the belief any more true.
I have never come across any of your comments that spoke of "god" or your website.attofishpi wrote: Ive posted that countless times on this forum, and there is a website i created dedicated to it, be more resourceful.
Using your best calm demeanor, I would happily peruse your website it you can maintain a civil presence.
- GreatandWiseTrixie
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Put it in a language that you could understand. You tell me you are a spiritual man who's on the road of eternal bliss. Doesn't seem to me you got not bliss, alpha o omega. My idea of heaven wasn't going on internet forums word policing peeps like an anal retentive who's got lame insults poopin out his ass. My idea of heaven did involve some kind'a ass tho. "If the hand says ow, the body says ow." Dunno if ull get the anal-o-gy, might be too complex for 'ya.mtmynd1 wrote:Really? I expected a wee bit more than this out of the "greatandwise".GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: Never said nothing bout 'no Mind. Question is, if you got the "No Thing", why you wasting time with these backwater forums? Shouldn't you be out with your Alpha and Omega?
It's clear you do not have the ability to converse with any degree of intelligence, Trixie, which begs the question "why you wasting time with these forums?"
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Once again you grasp for insults rather than engage in civil discourse to justify your inability to communicate in a meaningful way. It's become a routine that I find boring and uninteresting. It's obvious we will never find a middle ground.GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: Put it in a language that you could understand. You tell me you are a spiritual man who's on the road of eternal bliss. Doesn't seem to me you got not bliss, alpha o omega. My idea of heaven wasn't going on internet forums word policing peeps like an anal retentive who's got lame insults poopin out his ass. My idea of heaven did involve some kind'a ass tho. "If the hand says ow, the body says ow." Dunno if ull get the anal-o-gy, might be too complex for 'ya.
This being a thread you began should end with you.
- GreatandWiseTrixie
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Re: Questions for Buddhists.
Here we go again with the victim game. Do you watch NBA? I don't really watch sports, but NBA players would foul others then act like crybabies and fall all over the place when someone fouled them back. Anyone with basic reading comprehension can see what you did. No amount of fancy words, british-speak and lexicon will cover it up.mtmynd1 wrote:Once again you grasp for insults rather than engage in civil discourse to justify your inability to communicate in a meaningful way. It's become a routine that I find boring and uninteresting. It's obvious we will never find a middle ground.GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: Put it in a language that you could understand. You tell me you are a spiritual man who's on the road of eternal bliss. Doesn't seem to me you got not bliss, alpha o omega. My idea of heaven wasn't going on internet forums word policing peeps like an anal retentive who's got lame insults poopin out his ass. My idea of heaven did involve some kind'a ass tho. "If the hand says ow, the body says ow." Dunno if ull get the anal-o-gy, might be too complex for 'ya.
This being a thread you began should end with you.
As for my original statement, we both know you're not in bliss, so we'll leave it at there.