deci belle

The Center has no Location

Recommended Posts

True meditation is not relative to doing~ it is just a way to refer to abiding in no-mind naturally.

 

re: no-mind

 

Isn't this just sameness as One [universal] Mind?

 

Meaning, I take No-mind to mean No [separate, individual] Mind (?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dawei said:

re: no-mind

 

Isn't this just sameness as One [universal] Mind?

 

Meaning, I take No-mind to mean No [separate, individual] Mind (?)

 

 

I think so, to some extent, dawei. There is a matter of degree and people tend to consider such concepts as absolutes.

 

The critical aspect is in its application. Without taking this into account, there is no enlightening function of subtle adaption, which is the basis of all authentic teaching traditions on this planet.

 

In terms of the context of my statement as quoted, oneself abiding in no-mind naturally is one's natural pristine aware function open and untrammeled, sensitive and effective, calm and unperturbable in everyday ordinary situations.

 

It is the natural stability of one's lucid capacity shining; (the red-headed little sparrow-mind having folded its wings).

 

In terms of no separate individual mind, this little sparrow having folded its wings is not at all different than no-mind itself. There are no two minds. Mind is one. It is the sparrow's two wings which are emblematic of duality— not the tao-mind vs. the human mentality. When the sparrow folds its wings, it is as of yore …which is as before the first thought in perpetuity.

 

This is not a reference to the absolute or sudden illumination. Before the first thought is already the integral capacity of one's awareness, uncreated all-at-once immediate knowledge. This is the context of no-mind as quoted. It is one's spiritual nonpsychological perceptivity activated and not dwelling on anything. In the active sense, it's literally not minding.

 

Ironically, in terms of self-refinement, it is the result of minding mind and not minding things which arrives at the world-honored result of the stabilization of one's long and gradual process of conditioning oneself to resting the mind on no-mind, until it folds its wings over and over and over again. That is, freeing oneself from the habit of (ar)resting the mind on things, thoughts, etc.

 

Revisiting (returning to) this is the natural refreshment of the pristine essence of awareness within each alternation of yin and yang by virtue of created karmic cycles. It is the meaning of the saying use the false to find the true.

 

Eventually, after a long time, the mind puts its artificial habit-energy wings away for good (the highest good) and one ascends to heaven in broad daylight to pay court to the Queen of the West in the Kun-Lun mountains…❤︎ heeheehee!!

 

oh dear, has i been reading too many romance novels?!! I cannot read too many romance novels!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that hard, Dawei. haha.

 

You're looking for meaning. If you don't care about meaning or no meaning then you're already there. Then you just do that over and over in every circumstance.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually, after a long time, the mind puts its artificial habit-energy wings away for good (the highest good) and one ascends to heaven in broad daylight to pay court to the Queen of the West in the Kun-Lun mountains…❤︎ heeheehee!!

 

Speaking of the Queen... can you say more about her, here or in another thread?

 

I still have habits but my wings have seen her... in retrospect: that may of been the wings of another I was flying on...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Other" is close enough.

 

Xi Wangmu (Hsi Wang Mu), the Queen Mother of the Western Court in the Kunlun mountain range (purported to exist west of the cultural homeland of the Han) is the doyenne of the celestial organization of Taoist immortals.

 

It is an origin myth of sorts. I use the term "myth" advisedly.

 

Oh~ I lied about the romance novels. I only read the covers of teen romance comics… heehee!! Perhaps that will be the source of my next avatar!!❤︎

 

I'll be on the lookout for a guuud one~

 

 

 

 

ed note: add the Queen Mother's name to 1st paragraph

Edited by deci belle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to apologize in advance for using terms taken from multiple locations. Descriptors for the ultimately undescribable are poor at best but seem to have the only method for objective evaluation.

 

The concept of center is not inherently related to a fixed point. This appears to be self-evident. As we move through the universe spatially and through time there is always a relative center. This is a basic principle of science as well as a philosophical construct. I believe this is what, to me, the definition of the Dharma is. It has nothing to do with being a righteous or holy but rather following the center path. Will have things put in our way that causes to deviate from the center; occasionally small and occasionally quite large to spin us off completely. The beauty is… There is always a new center no matter how far off the path you've wandered.

 

Knowing that, to what end? If all things are equal then why bother? If you follow a traditional Daoist construct that in general you will be happier doing so, that may be enough. Some other mystical philosophies postulate that the path to enlightenment can be achieved in two ways: aim for it directly or suffer so greatly that you are passively pushed there. Both end up in the same place. The difference is how much you have to be in pain along the Way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no new center.

 

What is new (to you) is having gone through yet another typical creative cycle and gone along helplessly with the change and calling that you wandering, Jace. What it is, is you subject to kinetic subterfuge (karmic momentum) without you knowing it. That is the working definition of ignorance, mon ami.

 

What's the point of that? The point is that you do not know you are not created, therefore you are subjecting your illusionary existence to delusional forces and their consequences. That is beyond philosophy, that's what.

 

It is not even that you are unaware of your essential nature… the mystery can only be experienced intimately oneself and matured within (incubated is the taoist term) over a long period of time before one can even begin to manifest what it means to realize it. It has nothing to do with understanding. There is nothing to understand.

 

The Center is not relative to you. When you come to the practical realization that you do not exist separately, outside of a particularly functional aspect that has falsely usurped the natural spiritual order, you will then begin to develop an affinity with this Center.

 

Please realize yours is a very typical notion relative to philosophical speculation and does not contribute to the basis of this thread, as I do not write for those who have no affinity in this basis. Sorry.

 

There is no place, and this is it, whether you know it or not— such is the homeland of nothing whatsoever. The difference is whether or not you can use it to take over creation, steal potential, step over eternity, and enter the Way in reality.

 

The authentic traditions of spiritual perception on this planet have always been kept alive by their application, not by the verbally reasoned pastimes of philosophically speculative hobbyists.

 

It seems, that at this point in time, your concern, ultimately, is for your own comfort. Don't be petty.❤︎

 

The point is to have the full capacity of your uncreated awareness present, intact and activated without dwelling on the temporal aspect of phenomena (especially your own self-reifying concepts)— which is the entire buddhist canon in one sentence.

 

 

 

ed note: add to 2nd paragraph; add 3rd paragraph

Edited by deci belle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

The authentic traditions of spiritual perception on this planet have always been kept alive by their application, not by the verbally reasoned pastimes of philosophically speculative hobbyists.

<snip>

Seems so simple that it is almost embarrassing that it took so long for me to get it.. Once "gotten," though, it triggered a cascade of paradigm shifts.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Brian, it seems to open up of itself when we stop using mind in the same old reasonably self-reflective way.

 

Real Knowledge's application is activated in NOT using the intellectual/psychological apparatus.

 

That's why it is called the nonpsychological. People do not understand that the nonpsychological is spiritual.

 

How embarrassingly simple is it to stop employing the shining mind to validate the false identity of the human mentality? "As easy as turning over your hand."

 

Yet another facet of The Secret of the Golden Flower's brilliant term turn the light around.

 

 

 

 

 

ed note: add last line

Edited by deci belle
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if this hasn't been said here before (it's too late at night for reading the whole thread) but the center has no location because in infinite space the center is everywhere.

 

Another way to say this is that ALL of the Universe is "central". (All right, in a sense, there are centers of higher and lower order, but I'm afraid it's too late to go into this right now, as well.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not matter of the created universe, Michael. You seemed to have had a grasp of this already from what I had gathered from your earlier posts elsewhere. Evidently, I was mistaken.

 

Though it may work for you conceptually, since it is a matter of inconceivability, those with the will to enlightenment must invariably step over eternity to enter the Way in reality. Therefore, why not just drop it altogether from the very start?

 

That it has no location is not dependent on anything. It is the created which depends on this. Arriving at its pivot is beyond your ken to cleverly consider by such nonsensical logic. Honor you essential nature and arrive at its basis which is the homeland of nothing whatsoever. Then you will come to discover that infinity, space, center, ALL, higher and lower (in your current lexicon) is neither here not there (in terms of my lexicon).

 

I don't disuade you from using the created as an example to describe reality, but do not pretend to manifest something in the way of rhetoric where it does not apply— even when you might have an eternity to throw away. So don't go off half-cocked and be cheap with your posts on my threads, mr Star-Lord. When you actually have dispensed with eternity, we might have something to talk about wordlessly.

 

It is the province of adepts to use creation to arrive at the real within the context of each created cycle. This is the working definition of immortality, being the fact that one does not go along with creation.

 

There is no order for you to contrive in the sense of the topic of my threads, Michael. Either you get it or you don't. Getting it is not within the realm of any order you might contrive intellectually. Either you know it or you don't …and you don't.

 

 

 

 

ed note: add last line

Edited by deci belle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I feel hurt to the marrow of my bone, Deci Belley! I think I will poll for a while...

 

Okay, back from polling.

 

That it has no location is not dependent on anything. It is the created which depends on this. Arriving at its pivot is beyond your ken to cleverly consider by such nonsensicallogic. Honor you essential nature and arrive at its basis which is the homeland of nothing whatsoever. Infinity, space, center, ALL, higher and lower (in your lexicon) is neither here not there (in terms of my lexicon).

Do you seriously think that when I speak of the infinite I am talking about the created Universe? By definition, the infinite IS transcendent or metaphysical. No, it doesn't depend on anything. Neither the infinitely big nor the infinitely small (the point = the center). The manifest world has its existence between these two poles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am speaking of what you cannot, Michael.

 

Do not bring down the nature of my content to your recreational level. That's called pirating.

 

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The infinite BY MY DEFINITION, is creation.

 

On my threads, you will use MY criteria— therefore I dissuade you from talking about a "center" YOU DO NOT KNOW.

 

Having stepped OVER infinity— that is my prerogative to do so.

 

Now go play Star-Lord on a thread of your own making and go to town with it— I won't be following you.

 

That you cannot grasp that which is beyond philosophical speculation defines your inability to meet the criteria for contributing at a level of MY determination.

 

Exercise your free-speech elsewhere until you can turn the light around yourself, and prove it in actual affairs.

 

I expect you to raise the bar, Michael. Do so and thank me in another lifetime.❤︎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the province of adepts to use creation to arrive at the real within the context of each created cycle. This is the working definition of immortality, being the fact that one does not go along with creation.

 

ha... ti teg i :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thread doesn't belong to anybody, my dear, or better yet, to everybody who contributes to it. This could perhaps have been a worth-wile discussion but you are either not interested in or not capable of such. I'm not impressed...

 

Best,

Michael

Edited by Michael Sternbach
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my threads, you will use MY criteria—

 

~~~ moderator message ~~~

Members are free to post without hindrance

in any thread started in any of the open forums.

For more detailed information on this,

see the top link in my sig line.

TTB provides personal forums for this very reason.

~~~~ end ~~~

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing I haven't already said before, but this is my general take on anyone wishing to partake in these kind of threads:

 

57

For he who should agree he can speak of belief; yet for he who speaks without agreement might twist the fate of things into what he may not later acknowledge.

On the other hand, he who may acknowledge keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He shall attemper his brightness also, and by his acknowledgement let any belief he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Agree-er’s ability to Accept.

Acceptance for such a man will not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Agreement for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility for such a man depends on his ability to acknowledge.

 

57

For he who would accept he may speak of acknowledgement; yet for he who speaks without acceptance could twist the fate of things into what he can’t later believe in.

On the other hand, he who can believe keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He will attemper his brightness also, and by his belief let any acknowledgement he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Accepter’s ability to Agree.

Agreement for such a man shall not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Acceptance for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to believe.

 

57

For he who could believe he shall speak of agreement; yet for he who speaks without belief would twist the fate of things into what he won’t later accept.

On the other hand, he who will accept keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He can attemper his brightness also, and by his acceptance let any agreement he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of a Believer’s ability to Acknowledge.

Acknowledgement for such a man cannot be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Belief for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to accept.

 

57

For he who might acknowledge he will speak of acceptance; yet for he who speaks without acknowledgement should twist the fate of things into what he shan’t later agree with.

On the other hand, he who shall agree keeps his mouth shut and closes up the portals of his nostrils, making dull the sharp and loosening complications. He may attemper his brightness also, and by his agreement let any acceptance he has remain in obscurity. This is the Mystery of an Acknowledger’s ability to believe.

Belief for such a man may not be treated familiarly or distantly; while yet Acknowledgement for him is beyond all consideration of profit or injury, nobility or meanness for such a man depends on his ability to agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will determine what I shall.

 

If Michael is unable to regard the OP and posts unconsciously out of habit, That is not EVEN off-topic.

 

It's called pissing on a post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the context of this created cycle, I would have to say that dealing with Michael the way I have is to acknowledge that I am not speaking of physics nor philosophy. I do not pretend to be reasonable. Recreational philosophers do that quite well, it seems.

 

Therefore there is no basis for discussion with one who cannot see that his premise is ignorant of the topic.

 

Presence is a quality of immediacy. Off-hand treatment of an ill-conceived glib repartee completely missing the point of the title of this thread is unacceptable.

 

The moderator has a job to do and I have MY job to do. The social butterfly has nothing invested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Nestentrie's observation…

 

In terms of the Center having no location, where can there be agreement? It is immaterial. It cannot be discussed. It can only be corroborated by those whose experience in its application is verifiable by knowing. The one who would agree has no knowledge to corroborate.

 

If he didn't already know that, he STILL doesn't know that.

 

The point of knowing this Center has its inherent application, which is not a matter of doing.

 

Those who see, have this applied by virtue of inherent potential in ordinary situations such as this one. It does not require doing, only seeing. The mod doesn't see shit. I don't need agreement. I already have a thread of my OWN making with a topic that cannot be approached by convention.

 

The working definition of delusion is not knowing one is deluded. The one who would agree doesn't know he doesn't know.

 

Here's what I know: THERE IS NOTHNG TO KNOW. What is there to discuss with one who would agree with something unknowable? I cannot help these people. They are helpless of themselves. I'm not here for them.

 

Those who don't, don't know where to begin~ therefore in putting on a show of belief in agreement, those invested in reason (the moderator and the recreational philosopher) only wish (as was proved) to usurp terminology. biG w00p. Now they're gone.

 

I DO NOT DISCUSS TOPICS BASED ON REASON OR BELIEF. Nor I do not court favor or avoid censure.

 

In other words, not agreeing later is the same as not agreeing before. Nothing has changed here. Creation came and went.

 

Before and after, right and wrong: Who decides it's all the same?

 

The social moderator and the social butterfly on the social media site got stuck with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dawei wrote:

 

deci belle, on 07 Feb 2015 - 18:06, said:snapback.png

It is the province of adepts to use creation to arrive at the real within the context of each created cycle. This is the working definition of immortality, being the fact that one does not go along with creation.

 

Duh.❤︎ I will add a little more now that I'm back in the mood…

 

Creation happens.

 

Michael is a perfect example. He just wanted to have fun and I didn't go along. Why? Michael has been on a social whirl as of late and I took note of it earlier this week. I actually liked one of his posts because he was able to hold several points together and took the time to address each point in turn, logically.

 

He knows how to argue properly, orderly, and thoroughly (at least it felt that way, as I did not actually read his post). It seems he was having his way with the hapless bum he was addressing (whether or not that's true is immaterial as Michael was acting like he was). I didn't even care what Michael wrote. I just liked how it felt~ confident. Besides, it was pure rhetoric— why would I care? Maybe he's an attorney.

 

It is the only post I've read other than those that appear on my threads in quite a long time. At any rate, I decided to unlike that post shortly thereafter as I did not want to taint his reputation with any association from one such as I~ heehee!!

 

So a few days later, who decides to grace me with a second-hand glance by way of a "too-hip-gotta-go-but-here's-this-titbit… like I'm supposed to be impressed? Not.

 

That's what this is all about. He was screwed before the first thought. And on top of everything he's got nothing to offer this thread. Poor thing feels misunderstood— I get that much.

 

Feeling misunderstood is how you feel when your potential gets ripped off by creation for no reason.

 

Then he got to feel validated by the moderator spraying about "anyone can say anything about anything anywhere… blah, blah, party-line, blah, blah").

 

Creation happens. If only Michael could address the OP, he wouldn't have to be a dashing, dabbling, social-media dervish on his way to somewhere more important than where he's at right now. Yawn.

 

If he could address it, he wouldn't have to, much less be in suuuch a rush to act like it's a simple matter of rhetorical slap-dash. This was a mark he had to make look easy.

 

It's not easy, Michael. But it is simple. It's called open sincerity without words.

 

 

 

 

 

ed note: add everything after "Duh.❤︎"

Edited by deci belle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will determine what I shall.

 

If Michael is unable to regard the OP and posts unconsciously out of habit, That is not EVEN off-topic.

 

It's called pissing on a post.

 

 

Yes, thats fine, Dear. So long as you remember that, at TTB, Michael, and everyone else, has the right to piss on whatever post they choose, so long as they do it respectfully. If you wish to assure complete adherence to your topics as you perceive them, you need to start to them in your personal practice forum. But of course you know that already.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you LEARN, dear, that yours is a TEMPORARY assignment and that I do not follow your directives.

 

I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO GRASP THAT FACT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.