Page 6 of 6

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 7:55 pm
by GreatandWiseTrixie
mtmynd1 wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:How can one obtain nothingness, as a means to erase doubt from one's mind about it's existence?
One cannot 'obtain' nothingness, Trixie. However one can [b']attain'[/b] the 'state of no thingness'.
True nothingness cannot be remembered, if it could, it would not be nothingness, but "somethingness."
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.
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?

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 8:41 pm
by mtmynd1
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?
Really? I expected a wee bit more than this out of the "greatandwise".

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.

Posted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:24 pm
by thedoc
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.

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:35 am
by mtmynd1
thedoc wrote:Well stated, especially considering that language is incapable of accurately expressing that which cannot be stated by language.
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.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 1:01 am
by thedoc
mtmynd1 wrote:
thedoc wrote:Well stated, especially considering that language is incapable of accurately expressing that which cannot be stated by language.
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.
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.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:12 am
by attofishpi
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.
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.

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.

Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:17 pm
by mtmynd1
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
.
"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.

Please, fire away!

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:38 pm
by attofishpi
mtmynd1 wrote:
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
.
"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.

Please, fire away!
My God? Do you believe there is more than one?

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.

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:17 pm
by mtmynd1
attofishpi wrote: My God? Do you believe there is more than one?
I KNOW there are as many opinions of a god as there are thinkers.
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.
"fish", I repeat, "I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.
Please, fire away!"

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:28 pm
by attofishpi
mtmynd1 wrote:
attofishpi wrote: My God? Do you believe there is more than one?
I KNOW there are as many opinions of a god as there are thinkers.
It DOESNT CHANGE the STATE of GOD.
mtmynd1 wrote:
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.
"fish", I repeat, "I do look forward to your own understanding of what you believe your "god" to be.
Please, fire away!"
Ive posted that countless times on this forum, and there is a website i created dedicated to it, be more resourceful.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:02 pm
by mtmynd1
attofishpi wrote: It DOESNT CHANGE the STATE of GOD.
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..?

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.
attofishpi wrote: Ive posted that countless times on this forum, and there is a website i created dedicated to it, be more resourceful.
I have never come across any of your comments that spoke of "god" or your website.

Using your best calm demeanor, I would happily peruse your website it you can maintain a civil presence.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:41 am
by GreatandWiseTrixie
mtmynd1 wrote:
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?
Really? I expected a wee bit more than this out of the "greatandwise".

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?"
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.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 7:53 am
by mtmynd1
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.
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.

This being a thread you began should end with you.

Re: Questions for Buddhists.

Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:09 pm
by GreatandWiseTrixie
mtmynd1 wrote:
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.
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.

This being a thread you began should end with you.
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.

As for my original statement, we both know you're not in bliss, so we'll leave it at there.