beliefs/definitive conclusions do and do not limit your perspective... get it??

PoisonFlowerz

I did and did not become liberated instantly upon realizing that anything and everything in life has a yin and a yang...

Every thought, every emotion can and cannot be positive, which can and cannot be said for sure...

you want a something for certain reasons and also don't want that something for a certain reason/reasons...

when you are uncertain you are certain of your uncertainty...

This realization did and did not allow me to gain non-enlightened enlightenment much faster then strict discipline/claiming certain human qualities are limiting THEN attempting to transcend these alleged 'limiting qualities'...

You may even believe that due to 'past karma' it will take one several lifetimes to attain enlightenment...
This is or is not just another rule that a man wrote down to make sense of his life...and it did and didn't help many people...
The teaching of buddha has definitive conclusions about life in it, it DID help some by leading them to a righteous life..

and DIDN'T help some by causing confusion/misinterpretation...

you know what is and is not limiting you? the fact that you truly believe that specific thoughts and what have you's are limiting you... As soon as you wholeheartedly believe something lets say for example...\

' if you act this way, your gonna be reborn a hell being '

if you believe that, that's how you see the world, and you can and cannot see it any other way...
SEE you CAN see it another way IF you stop putting faith into that... but you WONT while putting all faith into it..

The philosophy of no philosophy...in the totality that is life there is and is not yin and yang...

PoisonFlowerz

totality that is and is not life**

I simultaneously am and am not trying to prove a point, proving the point of no points.

i am or am not an extreme non-extremist

I can win i can loose, I can't win I can't loose, I do and don't have a set of specific beliefs therefore can and cannot be combated

PoisonFlowerz

Now i finally am and am not free, I will and wont call it attaining mental liberation with or without jumping through hoops ! I can and cannot finally be myself and this may or may not work for you

Jeffrey

How do you know you are yourself?

Now i finally am and am not free, I will and wont call it attaining mental liberation with or without jumping through hoops ! I can and cannot finally be myself and this may or may not work for you

PoisonFlowerz

How do you know you are yourself?

Now i finally am and am not free, I will and wont call it attaining mental liberation with or without jumping through hoops ! I can and cannot finally be myself and this may or may not work for you

I do and don't know, i am and am not self conscious, i will and wont come to a final/finite conclusion about my life

how do you know you are yourself?

Cloud

@PoisonFlowerz, Do we have to "is" and "is not", "am" and "am not", all over the place? Emphasizing the duality is not being beyond the duality, it's being stuck in the awareness of duality. That's all I'm going to say because it's like a broken record that doesn't sound very liberated or liberating. Ciao.

PoisonFlowerz

@PoisonFlowerz, Do we have to "is" and "is not", "am" and "am not", all over the place? Emphasizing the duality is not being beyond the duality, it's being stuck in the awareness of duality. That's all I'm going to say because it's like a broken record that doesn't sound very liberated or liberating. Ciao.

someone who is liberated must sound liberated to anyone and everyone?

is it emphasizing/being stuck in the awareness of duality or is it realizing the duality in everything


by doing this i can or cannot see the world in a boundless/infinite number of ways

Jeffrey

How do you know you are yourself?

Now i finally am and am not free, I will and wont call it attaining mental liberation with or without jumping through hoops ! I can and cannot finally be myself and this may or may not work for you

I do and don't know, i am and am not self conscious, i will and wont come to a final/finite conclusion about my life

how do you know you are yourself?

I am caught up in the stories and body feelings so I don't really know what or who I am. In some sense I am a bunch of drives for an attempt at relaxation.

PoisonFlowerz

by doing this i have gotten similar liberating results then when i have practiced buddhism, though when i practiced buddhism liberation was something which took much time, effort and discipline.

During my Buddhist practice, since i was fighting off desires and certain impulses often during the road to liberation there was rigidness within me and i couldn't be myself on the journey until i reached enlightenment, then the enlightenment i got from it never lasted longer a week before i 'relapsed' back to being desire laden...

Maybe i was not practicing correctly, maybe there is no correct way to attain liberation, none of us are all knowing beings, or maybe we all are all knowing.

maybe there is a set of rules and regulations/ 'how to' ss on how to become enlightened

Perhaps this liberation i have found will cause me to sound like a broken record to someone

PoisonFlowerz

by leaving everything open ended as it is and/or isn't i am or am not leaving an infinite number of outlooks a life, a constantly changing outlook which is not restricted to one way of thinking

PoisonFlowerz

on life*

PoisonFlowerz

and yet is, tis the paradox itself

PoisonFlowerz

@Cloud

Cloud

@PoisonFlowerz, Give it a while, see how you feel about it in a few weeks. Everything changes. It's just more uncertainty.

zenmyste

Night has now come
After a Happy and sunny day
But
Rain could follow Tomorrow
And bring about misery and Sorrow

X

taiyaki

Luminous emptiness.

The realization continually unfolds.

The thought is spontaneously present and yet it spontaneously unfolds onto its own condition.

Nothing to maintain. Nowhere to stay.

person

There's something in Buddhism called a tetralemma, so instead of just is or isn't there is also both and neither. For example after a death a Tathagata neither exists nor does he not exist, he is neither both existent and non-existent nor neither existent and non-existent. Nagarjuna also uses this logic when talking about emptiness, a phenomena isn't positive, negative, both or neither.

@PoisonFlowerz you seem to be using the third possibility that things both are and aren't, you should look into how this is also negated.

DairyLama

The philosophy of no philosophy...in the totality that is life there is and is not yin and yang...

It's still a philosophy though.

DairyLama

I do and don't have a set of specific beliefs therefore can and cannot be combated

I disagree.

PoisonFlowerz

@cloud

well upon going out, my 'realization' fled to a degree and i was absolutely not liberated...by no means did merely looking at the fact there seems to always be a 'is' and 'is not' free me from all thought hindrances.

Cloud

It's still a good thing. I mean what do you understand as "is" and "is not"? If it's that conventional truths are not ultimate truths, that's saying something... that's seeing something, and it's important on the path.

Sile

There's something in Buddhism called a tetralemma, so instead of just is or isn't there is also both and neither. For example after a death a Tathagata neither exists nor does he not exist, he is neither both existent and non-existent nor neither existent and non-existent. Nagarjuna also uses this logic when talking about emptiness, a phenomena isn't positive, negative, both or neither.

@PoisonFlowerz you seem to be using the third possibility that things both are and aren't, you should look into how this is also negated.

Uh oh - quadrality

So I must actually express the concept of this thread as, "I am, am not, both am and am not, and neither am nor am not such-and-such."

Hmm...isn't the "both am and am not" express already, though, in "I am, am not?" I can see how the "neither am nor am not" could be a third situation, one which neither is neither "am" nor "am not," but how is the "both am and am not" different from "I am, am not?" Or are you saying that "both am and am not mean a simultaneous experience of "am" and "am not" which is different in some way?

Cloud

Actually I think those were all questions asked, but none of them had been answered by the Buddha. We're trying to pin down a "who" or "what" that has no fixed identity (no fixed form, no fixed self). It just can't be grasped by such concepts as existence and non-existence.

A human takes a walk and eats an orange, discarding the peel and seeds on the ground. The human gets attacked and eaten by a pack of wolves, leaving behind bones and blood. Where have the orange and the human gone? Anywhere? Were they ever really "an orange" and "a human" to begin with?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.006.than.html

person

There's something in Buddhism called a tetralemma, so instead of just is or isn't there is also both and neither. For example after a death a Tathagata neither exists nor does he not exist, he is neither both existent and non-existent nor neither existent and non-existent. Nagarjuna also uses this logic when talking about emptiness, a phenomena isn't positive, negative, both or neither.

@PoisonFlowerz you seem to be using the third possibility that things both are and aren't, you should look into how this is also negated.

Uh oh - quadrality

So I must actually express the concept of this thread as, "I am, am not, both am and am not, and neither am nor am not such-and-such."

Hmm...isn't the "both am and am not" express already, though, in "I am, am not?" I can see how the "neither am nor am not" could be a third situation, one which neither is neither "am" nor "am not," but how is the "both am and am not" different from "I am, am not?" Or are you saying that "both am and am not mean a simultaneous experience of "am" and "am not" which is different in some way?

Maybe different terms would help clarify.

A) Apple
Orange
C) Both Apple and Orange
D) Neither Apple or Orange

A tetralemma (as opposed to dilemma) is talking about one thing. And I guess it refers to a simultaneity of both A and B.

person

@Sile It occured to me that light is a good example of the third category being both a wave and a particle.