A spiritual person is...

[Lunitik]

False.

How is it still my idea when you have applied your own perceptions to it? Do you believe that you are understanding poetry the way the author intended?

By not being an extremist or control freak.

Union is complete, there are no degrees thereof. You can get closer, but there is no union when there are still two.

If someone tells you that a drug is bad for you, and will kill you, do you have to meditate to believe them? If one person says something is true, and another says it is false, you think meditation provides you the answer?

This isn't really how meditation works, since these are dual concepts - true or false, right or wrong.

It is quite normal for a criminal to renounce responsibility.

A criminal is the exact opposite of a spiritual person. A spiritual person, in realizing how everything is intertwined, attempts to assist all they encounter. A criminal, believing they are the only one that matters, has no compassion for anyone else at all.

It seems you are the dualist. How do you love a rock? How do you have faith in a rock? How are you honest with a rock? A rock is an object, but a rock does not care, does not have a will, and it is not counting on whether you lied or not. It has no power, no perception, whereas a person does. People may interact through objects, but they interact with each other. If someone throws a rock at you, it is not the rock that is hating you. People, subjects, interact through objects.

What is the nature of the rock? Do you think its chemical makeup is not found within yourself? How can you know anything about a rock? You make assumptions, but you cannot know because there is no feedback in any way. A rock is like a true spiritual person in that it just is, it doesn't have biases at all, I think you could learn a lot from a rock if you contemplated its complete detachment from its surroundings. The rock has no perspective on what may happen to it, it doesn't see the river wearing it away as a negative thing, it accepts it.

That said, you are also showing your complete lack of understanding of the terms "object" and "subject"... the dictionary, in this context, defines object as "A person or thing to which a specified action or feeling is directed". Unless in your experience a conversation happens entirely within a single mind, then the person you are talking to is the object of your speech. Thus, each is the object and subject variously during the discussion.

 

[luecy7]

How is it still my idea when you have applied your own perceptions to it? Do you believe that you are understanding poetry the way the author intended?

You argue whether communication is possible.

Union is complete, there are no degrees thereof. You can get closer, but there is no union when there are still two.

Extremist.

This isn't really how meditation works, since these are dual concepts - true or false, right or wrong.

So your meditation fails to answer those questions. Thus I say: it takes one for the mental masturbation, and two for faith.

A criminal is the exact opposite of a spiritual person. A spiritual person, in realizing how everything is intertwined, attempts to assist all they encounter. A criminal, believing they are the only one that matters, has no compassion for anyone else at all.

A criminal often denies responsibility.

What is the nature of the rock? Do you think its chemical makeup is not found within yourself?

As I have said, you see people as their flesh rather than as a spirit.

How can you know anything about a rock?

Measurement. How can you know anything about a person?

You make assumptions, but you cannot know because there is no feedback in any way. A rock is like a true spiritual person in that it just is, it doesn't have biases at all, I think you could learn a lot from a rock if you contemplated its complete detachment from its surroundings. The rock has no perspective on what may happen to it, it doesn't see the river wearing it away as a negative thing, it accepts it.

So you likewise wish to be a rock, an object, a lump of matter, likening it to a spiritual person.

That said, you are also showing your complete lack of understanding of the terms "object" and "subject"... the dictionary, in this context, defines object as "A person or thing to which a specified action or feeling is directed". Unless in your experience a conversation happens entirely within a single mind, then the person you are talking to is the object of your speech. Thus, each is the object and subject variously during the discussion.

So I say: Love, faith, and honesty are shared between two or more subjects.

There is the choice of whether to behave as an object, or to behave as a spirit, and the choice of whether to view and treat others as objects, or to view and treat others as spirits, and the choice of whether to masturbate, or to congregate. It wasn't what you read in a dictionary, but you call one of those choices, "being a spiritual person".

 

[Lunitik]

You argue whether communication is possible.

Well, no, I question whether true understanding is possible. Our entire dialog is presenting the answer to this question quite clearly.

Extremist.

Feel free to explain how it is possible to have union where separation still exists.

So your meditation fails to answer those questions. Thus I say: it takes one for the mental masturbation, and two for faith.

Faith takes one, only you need convince yourself of something, no one else need have any input at all.

A criminal often denies responsibility.

You are plainly wrong, most criminals commit crime because of a sense of responsibility which cannot be satisfied through legal avenues.

As I have said, you see people as their flesh rather than as a spirit.

Wrong, except there is only one Spirit.

Measurement. How can you know anything about a person?

Measurement.

So you likewise wish to be a rock, an object, a lump of matter, likening it to a spiritual person.

I have said a spiritual person can learn a lot from a rock, it is impossible for a person to be a rock however, so your assertion is irrelevant. Do you believe there is no Spirit in a rock? Recall that I have equated spirit with quantum mechanics before answering.

So I say: Love, faith, and honesty are shared between two or more subjects.

You can only be sure of these things in yourself, the subject. You can assume nothing about the object at all, everything you feel towards the object is something you have fabricated alone.

There is the choice of whether to behave as an object, or to behave as a spirit, and the choice of whether to view and treat others as objects, or to view and treat others as spirits, and the choice of whether to masturbate, or to congregate. It wasn't what you read in a dictionary, but you call one of those choices, "being a spiritual person"..

You cannot, however, dictate whether another behaves a certain way.

Also, the problem with congregating is that you tend to accept what you are told by those given leadership roles. If their understanding is flawed, you will not even question. This is the problem with all organized religion, the blind are leading the blind. No, I do not hold Buddhism as an exception... all organized religion is empty, all spiritual growth is personal.

 

[luecy7]

Feel free to explain how it is possible to have union where separation still exists.

Ok, thanks.

Faith takes one, only you need convince yourself of something, no one else need have any input at all.

You may wish to think your example through.

You are plainly wrong, most criminals commit crime because of a sense of responsibility which cannot be satisfied through legal avenues.

You claim to know the mind of a criminal.

Wrong, except there is only one Spirit.

As you wish.

Measurement.

Wrong.

I have said a spiritual person can learn a lot from a rock, it is impossible for a person to be a rock however, so your assertion is irrelevant. Do you believe there is no Spirit in a rock? Recall that I have equated spirit with quantum mechanics before answering.

Maybe you should pick something that everyone knows even lesser about, like the composition and behavior of a quasar or a black hole.

You can only be sure of these things in yourself, the subject. You can assume nothing about the object at all, everything you feel towards the object is something you have fabricated alone.

You might consider what objects you love, have faith in, and invest time being honest with, or consider what objects love you, have faith in you, and invest time being honest with you.

You cannot, however, dictate whether another behaves a certain way.

I was not the one claiming that union was absolute!

Also, the problem with congregating is that you tend to accept what you are told by those given leadership roles. If their understanding is flawed, you will not even question. This is the problem with all organized religion, the blind are leading the blind. No, I do not hold Buddhism as an exception... all organized religion is empty, all spiritual growth is personal.

You say I look to you like a person who does not question?

You can see what you can see by doing nothing, and think that you see everything. Then you do something, and you see something that you did not see before. Then someone else does something, and you see something further that you did not see before. Then you can do something together, like standing next to each other at the edge of a cliff. It presents the option to see some good things, and the option to see some negative things. You can decide which is which. Or, you can sit and meditate doing nothing, only thinking about something, and nothing, but not seeing everything.

 

[Lunitik]

Maybe you should pick something that everyone knows even lesser about, like the composition and behavior of a quasar or a black hole.

Most people know less about themselves and their true nature than either of the topics you have suggested here. Even a simple rock is better understood by most than themselves for few actually look within themselves to see what exactly they are.

You might consider what objects you love, have faith in, and invest time being honest with, or consider what objects love you, have faith in you, and invest time being honest with you.

Objects that direct love, faith, and honesty in me do not effect me at all, it is pleasant that they hold me in high regard and yet utterly irrelevant for it is impermanent. As for where my similar considerations are directed, they are not, for I am the same with a long time associate as I am with someone I have never talked to before. Why should it be any other way? Everyone on this planet is going through the same things as one another, all are seeking the same answers, and all are equally worthy.

I was not the one claiming that union was absolute!

Is it not? You are either in union or you are separate, even a small distance apart is no longer union. The Christian Faith does not emphasize this union, neither does Islam in most of its sects, and yet these are the two most materialistic faiths in the world. Those that practice and recognize the significance of true union with the divine would never commit such atrocities as these groups have throughout history.

You say I look to you like a person who does not question?

Quite the contrary, you question anything that doesn't fit your current perception, only the East would call your current perceptions maya - they are false, an illusion.

You can see what you can see by doing nothing, and think that you see everything. Then you do something, and you see something that you did not see before. Then someone else does something, and you see something further that you did not see before. Then you can do something together, like standing next to each other at the edge of a cliff. It presents the option to see some good things, and the option to see some negative things. You can decide which is which. Or, you can sit and meditate doing nothing, only thinking about something, and nothing, but not seeing everything.

All such decisions are extremes, all groupings of negative and positive are a bias which must be overcome. Meditation is a popular technique for overcoming, for realizing that these are things the mind has invented and you can be liberated from them. This is the purpose of meditation, to find ultimate absolute truth. It does not mean that you must avoid society and become a recluse, quite the contrary, you should go out into the world and place the seeds of liberation in all that you encounter. This is the true love, wishing that everyone be awakened from their slumber to the truth.

 

[luecy7]

Most people know less about themselves and their true nature than either of the topics you have suggested here. Even a simple rock is better understood by most than themselves for few actually look within themselves to see what exactly they are.

It shouldn't come as a surprise to you that: If you do not interact with others in relationships, then you do not truly see yourself interacting with others in relationships.

Objects that direct love, faith, and honesty in me do not effect me at all, it is pleasant that they hold me in high regard and yet utterly irrelevant for it is impermanent. As for where my similar considerations are directed, they are not, for I am the same with a long time associate as I am with someone I have never talked to before. Why should it be any other way? Everyone on this planet is going through the same things as one another, all are seeking the same answers, and all are equally worthy.

That is partly why I said: love, faith, and honesty are between subjects.

Is it not? You are either in union or you are separate, even a small distance apart is no longer union. The Christian Faith does not emphasize this union, neither does Islam in most of its sects, and yet these are the two most materialistic faiths in the world. Those that practice and recognize the significance of true union with the divine would never commit such atrocities as these groups have throughout history.

Perhaps I should ask your friends and family what their union with you is like.

Quite the contrary, you question anything that doesn't fit your current perception, only the East would call your current perceptions maya - they are false, an illusion.

Let me know if you see me projecting myself onto others the way that you do, especially such a large population of the planet. It is clearly false.

All such decisions are extremes, all groupings of negative and positive are a bias which must be overcome. Meditation is a popular technique for overcoming, for realizing that these are things the mind has invented and you can be liberated from them. This is the purpose of meditation, to find ultimate absolute truth. It does not mean that you must avoid society and become a recluse, quite the contrary, you should go out into the world and place the seeds of liberation in all that you encounter. This is the true love, wishing that everyone be awakened from their slumber to the truth.

I know a person who was a drug user and dealer that said something very similar. Even the liberation part: since the drugs were outlawed by government in the USA, in his mind he was like a liberator helping people gain access to the experience.

 

[Lunitik]

Let me know if you see me projecting myself onto others the way that you do, especially such a large population of the planet. It is clearly false.

It is all I have seen you do.

This is tiresome, we are getting nowhere and it is not an interesting conversation. Good luck on your path.

 

[luecy7]

It is all I have seen you do.

This is tiresome, we are getting nowhere and it is not an interesting conversation. Good luck on your path.

You are frustrated with the conversation? I don't pretend to say what the people of the USA, Europe, Africa, or South America think, saying that they think your perception is bunk. It would be a dishonest generalization. I only know a fraction of the people in any country. None, in some cases. I don't speak for my spouse, kids, let alone my neighbor or the people of an entire continent. I am fairly certain that you are only pretending to say what the people in the East think of my perception. You appear dishonest. I would say good luck on your path, but it would not be honest since you don't believe in good, and I don't believe in luck. I hope your future path choices are well selected.

 

[Lunitik]

You are frustrated with the conversation? I don't pretend to say what the people of the USA, Europe, Africa, or South America think, saying that they think your perception is bunk. It would be a dishonest generalization. I only know a fraction of the people in any country. None, in some cases. I don't speak for my spouse, kids, let alone my neighbor or the people of an entire continent. I am fairly certain that you are only pretending to say what the people in the East think of my perception. You appear dishonest. I would say good luck on your path, but it would not be honest since you don't believe in good, and I don't believe in luck. I hope your future path choices are well selected.

It is not frustration at all, it simply isn't advancing in any way.

You are unwilling to contemplate my words, and your words mostly consist of accepting things without any reason for doing so. I am a mystic precisely because I don't want to accept blindly.

I know there is a God because he has led me to looking upon his face, I do not need faith when things are verified. Even if I wanted to deny at this point it is impossible, thus I proceed, watching for what the Lord has in mind for me. Your Bible says those that accept blindly are blessed, I hope that is true for your sake.

 

[luecy7]

It is not frustration at all, it simply isn't advancing in any way.

You are unwilling to contemplate my words, and your words mostly consist of accepting things without any reason for doing so. I am a mystic precisely because I don't want to accept blindly.

I know there is a God because he has led me to looking upon his face, I do not need faith when things are verified. Even if I wanted to deny at this point it is impossible, thus I proceed, watching for what the Lord has in mind for me. Your Bible says those that accept blindly are blessed, I hope that is true for your sake.

It sounds like a start, seeing a face. Perhaps you can advance beyond that.

 

[Lunitik]

It sounds like a start, seeing a face. Perhaps you can advance beyond that.

You have taken me literally in error.

 

[luecy7]

Meditation should never be a conversation, why talk to God?

I know there is a God because he has led me to looking upon his face, I do not need faith when things are verified.

It sounds like a start, seeing a face. Perhaps you can advance beyond that.