Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2013 18:44:08 GMT -5
My impression is that you're trying very hard to make oneness into an experience. You said, The point is that experience IS the movement of thought. You're not having any non-dual experiences before thought steps in and ruins the day. Right on, dude. Experience is already duality and looking for a mon-ality experience is a wild giraffe chase. The idea that experience is already duality is a preconceived one. Thought actually creates the duality, not the experience. Thought says you are a body, which is duality. But all you actually 'know' about a body is the current experience of the sensation of your butt cheeks on the chair. That present moment perception of a sensation is one thingy, not two. Fortunately or unfortunately we have 'thought' to fill in the imaginary experiences of being a whole body. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2013 20:05:48 GMT -5
I'm going to agree with this.  It's difficult to make a distinction between thinking imaginary scenarios, which we would likely all agree is a set up for suffering, and perceiving 'what is', whatever that actually means. There isn't actually a point where we stop perceiving and start imagining. Before we start feeding the 'what is' bird, we have to know it's a bird and not a mountain lion, and we have to know what bird seed is and what it's for and have a conception of why feeding the bird would be a good thingy. We have to have conceptions about time and space and how to interact with it in order to carry out that feeding. No perception is processed and no action takes place without all this mind processing going on at some level, and I say this processing is also imagination, illusion, 'unreal', etc, etc. So we haven't actually drawn a line between mind and no-mind, or real and unreal or actuality and illusion. All lines are arbitrary. We could easily say all experiencing is illusion, imagination, 'unreal'. IOW, it's all a dream. However, it's not really useful to do so. What we're interested in is making the distinction between experience that results in suffering, and experience that does not, and for that we need to know the precise point of suffering. We need to know what happens in the experience that results in suffering. Obviously, we don't suffer from knowing how to operate in time space as a body/mind. We don't suffer from knowing what a bird is and from feeling the urge to feed it what we know to be bird seed. We can call all of this body knowledge instead of mind but really, it's still mind. What I would prefer is that we make a distinction between what is actually perceived and the self referential thoughts about what is perceived. All struggling thoughts are about 'what I want or don't want', and this is where imagination really takes off. 'Something is not as it should be' is at the core of all suffering.
If the 'me' to which all these thoughts refer is an actual, separate, volitional 'me', then suffering is inevitable and everybody is screwed. If that to which the thoughts refer is itself nothing more than a thought, then everybody is already free. The 'me', to which these thoughts refer, IS an actual, separate, volitional 'me', AND it is also nothing more than a thought.. rather than create separation between these actualities, and the illusions that either perspective is or should be superior.. there is liberation in the understanding of how these perceptions relate to what 'is'.. It can't actually be both actual AND just a thought. I know that paradox is a popular concept in spirituality, and usually it's about trying to have one's cake and eat it too. From what you've said in the past, I think your idea is that the parts are all interconnected, which is not what oneness actually is. There are no parts. There is no liberation in that understanding. The irony is that suffering is very much about imagining and pretending. What's required is to stop doing that. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2013 21:00:51 GMT -5
Greetings.. My impression is that you're trying very hard to make oneness into an experience. You said, The point is that experience IS the movement of thought. You're not having any non-dual experiences before thought steps in and ruins the day. So.. why do you indulge so many ruined days, with the thought necessary to post and present your beliefs as communications? Thought is essential in this medium of communication, the choice to be here and communicate your beliefs that "thought steps in and ruins the day", seems contradictory and maybe a little disingenuous.. i do not say this to be confrontational, but as a fair judgment of the situation, as the situation looks like a "do as i say, not as i do" situation.. Be well.. Methinks it was facetious. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2013 21:43:33 GMT -5
Right on, dude. Experience is already duality and looking for a mon-ality experience is a wild giraffe chase. The idea that experience is already duality is a preconceived one. Thought actually creates the duality, not the experience. Thought says you are a body, which is duality. But all you actually 'know' about a body is the current experience of the sensation of your butt cheeks on the chair. That present moment perception of a sensation is one thingy, not two. Fortunately or unfortunately we have 'thought' to fill in the imaginary experiences of being a whole body. Sensations, ungrounded by conception, are not experiences. You won't be able to recall this mysterious, uncaused sensation that isn't occurring somewhere and has no meaning and is not part of some temporal flow. Experience is a flow of events, and without it there is no chance of interacting. What do you know of your butt cheeks and chairs? The moment you turn that sensation into something you know enough about to form an experience, you've already entered the realm of thought. You may see illusions for what they are. You may even see yourself in every 'other' because you know there is no other, but you will always perceive the dream from within the dream. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 8, 2013 22:10:04 GMT -5
Greetings.. It can't actually be both actual AND just a thought. I know that paradox is a popular concept in spirituality, and usually it's about trying to have one's cake and eat it too. From what you've said in the past, I think your idea is that the parts are all interconnected, which is not what oneness actually is. There are no parts. There is no liberation in that understanding. Be still, just look and see.. there are many (7 billion) 'parts', interconnected as an organic whole.. "Oneness" is a concept, existent only as mind-play. The 7 billion individual 'parts' are observable with a still mind and clear vision, but.. 'Oneness', the belief that there are no 'parts', requires that the observer deny what they see and experience, it requires that others convince the observer what they 'know' to be so, isn't so.. it is an illusion of denial and pretense, where the alternative is to to actually 'do' something to make a real difference.. So.. there is this village in Africa, the corrupt government troops routinely bring harm to the village because the village is thought to assist rebels, and.. the rebels routinely plunder the village for supplies, while raping women and children because they think it gives them power, but there's more.. the region is in its fourth year of drought, there is no fresh water supply, and medical service is restricted by the government and plundered by the rebels.. so, the village population is declining with the average life expectancy at 42.. the HIV infection rate for this village is estimated at more than 60%.. This is real, it is happening.. "Suffering" is a 'word' that means different things to different people.. some will equate 'suffering' to some conceptually philosophical beliefs, and express their mental prowess by their success at convincing others to agree with their beliefs, which, ironically, is suffering for those being targeted for their disagreement with these preferred beliefs.. "Suffering" is also a reference to inescapable pain, abuse, and oppression a person or people endure as a function of being manifested in this physical existence.. i equate the common understanding of 'suffering' with this version of the meaning of the word, and with the general condition of the occupants of the village described above.. Now, the non-dualist suggests that the villagers should " stop doing that", imagining and pretending they are suffering.. i will ask the question, which is more useful: imagining that what is real, isn't, or.. identifying what is real, and finding real solutions, common-sense isness.. What remains clear, to those seeing clearly, is that too much of the human condition is suffering due to ideologies, beliefs, and conceptual mind-play.. philosophizing.. while the commitment to get out of your illusionary mind-play and actually do something to help the villagers and others 'actually' suffering, requires more than playing keyboard guru.. real suffering, not the imaginary ideological suffering of philosophical geniuses, real suffering and real abusers and real oppressors, and real corruption thrives because people prefer to let a few dedicated people 'do' the work they 'imagine' they are doing with their philosophical concepts.. This is 'isness', telling it like it 'is'.. oneness/non-duality, tells those suffering to "stop doing that", stop pretending and imagining you're suffering.. try telling that to the village described above.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2013 22:35:53 GMT -5
Greetings.. It can't actually be both actual AND just a thought. I know that paradox is a popular concept in spirituality, and usually it's about trying to have one's cake and eat it too. From what you've said in the past, I think your idea is that the parts are all interconnected, which is not what oneness actually is. There are no parts. There is no liberation in that understanding. Be still, just look and see.. there are many (7 billion) 'parts', interconnected as an organic whole.. "Oneness" is a concept, existent only as mind-play. The 7 billion individual 'parts' are observable with a still mind and clear vision, but.. 'Oneness', the belief that there are no 'parts', requires that the observer deny what they see and experience, it requires that others convince the observer what they 'know' to be so, isn't so.. it is an illusion of denial and pretense, where the alternative is to to actually 'do' something to make a real difference.. So.. there is this village in Africa, the corrupt government troops routinely bring harm to the village because the village is thought to assist rebels, and.. the rebels routinely plunder the village for supplies, while raping women and children because they think it gives them power, but there's more.. the region is in its fourth year of drought, there is no fresh water supply, and medical service is restricted by the government and plundered by the rebels.. so, the village population is declining with the average life expectancy at 42.. the HIV infection rate for this village is estimated at more than 60%.. This is real, it is happening.. "Suffering" is a 'word' that means different things to different people.. some will equate 'suffering' to some conceptually philosophical beliefs, and express their mental prowess by their success at convincing others to agree with their beliefs, which, ironically, is suffering for those being targeted for their disagreement with these preferred beliefs.. "Suffering" is also a reference to inescapable pain, abuse, and oppression a person or people endure as a function of being manifested in this physical existence.. i equate the common understanding of 'suffering' with this version of the meaning of the word, and with the general condition of the occupants of the village described above.. Now, the non-dualist suggests that the villagers should " stop doing that", imagining and pretending they are suffering.. i will ask the question, which is more useful: imagining that what is real, isn't, or.. identifying what is real, and finding real solutions, common-sense isness.. What remains clear, to those seeing clearly, is that too much of the human condition is suffering due to ideologies, beliefs, and conceptual mind-play.. philosophizing.. while the commitment to get out of your illusionary mind-play and actually do something to help the villagers and others 'actually' suffering, requires more than playing keyboard guru.. real suffering, not the imaginary ideological suffering of philosophical geniuses, real suffering and real abusers and real oppressors, and real corruption thrives because people prefer to let a few dedicated people 'do' the work they 'imagine' they are doing with their philosophical concepts.. This is 'isness', telling it like it 'is'.. oneness/non-duality, tells those suffering to "stop doing that", stop pretending and imagining you're suffering.. try telling that to the village described above.. Be well.. Correcting your misconceptions would easier by referring you back to the last time this was discussed (which was quite recently) rather than starting all over again as though that conversation never happened. |
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Feb 8, 2013 23:02:05 GMT -5
Greetings.. It can't actually be both actual AND just a thought. I know that paradox is a popular concept in spirituality, and usually it's about trying to have one's cake and eat it too. From what you've said in the past, I think your idea is that the parts are all interconnected, which is not what oneness actually is. There are no parts. There is no liberation in that understanding. Be still, just look and see.. there are many (7 billion) 'parts', interconnected as an organic whole.. "Oneness" is a concept, existent only as mind-play. The 7 billion individual 'parts' are observable with a still mind and clear vision, but.. 'Oneness', the belief that there are no 'parts', requires that the observer deny what they see and experience, it requires that others convince the observer what they 'know' to be so, isn't so.. it is an illusion of denial and pretense, where the alternative is to to actually 'do' something to make a real difference.. So.. there is this village in Africa, the corrupt government troops routinely bring harm to the village because the village is thought to assist rebels, and.. the rebels routinely plunder the village for supplies, while raping women and children because they think it gives them power, but there's more.. the region is in its fourth year of drought, there is no fresh water supply, and medical service is restricted by the government and plundered by the rebels.. so, the village population is declining with the average life expectancy at 42.. the HIV infection rate for this village is estimated at more than 60%.. This is real, it is happening.. "Suffering" is a 'word' that means different things to different people.. some will equate 'suffering' to some conceptually philosophical beliefs, and express their mental prowess by their success at convincing others to agree with their beliefs, which, ironically, is suffering for those being targeted for their disagreement with these preferred beliefs.. "Suffering" is also a reference to inescapable pain, abuse, and oppression a person or people endure as a function of being manifested in this physical existence.. i equate the common understanding of 'suffering' with this version of the meaning of the word, and with the general condition of the occupants of the village described above.. Now, the non-dualist suggests that the villagers should " stop doing that", imagining and pretending they are suffering.. i will ask the question, which is more useful: imagining that what is real, isn't, or.. identifying what is real, and finding real solutions, common-sense isness.. What remains clear, to those seeing clearly, is that too much of the human condition is suffering due to ideologies, beliefs, and conceptual mind-play.. philosophizing.. while the commitment to get out of your illusionary mind-play and actually do something to help the villagers and others 'actually' suffering, requires more than playing keyboard guru.. real suffering, not the imaginary ideological suffering of philosophical geniuses, real suffering and real abusers and real oppressors, and real corruption thrives because people prefer to let a few dedicated people 'do' the work they 'imagine' they are doing with their philosophical concepts.. This is 'isness', telling it like it 'is'.. oneness/non-duality, tells those suffering to "stop doing that", stop pretending and imagining you're suffering.. try telling that to the village described above.. Be well.. This is the post which any good normal person agree with. Nothing can be more absurd, and more inhumane than a philosophizing about real suffering which is being done in such a cold blood, - be it about an African village, or about any other alive person. But the meaning of such issues are easily subject to twisting by Enigma &Club. Who needs anything else to be added to REALIZE at last what kind of club it is? It's a club where no one can find humans, - only reptiles... They are watching at you senselessly, they produce different kinds of sounds, they communicate with the same type of species which share their marshes, making gases and enjoying their suffocating atmosphere... It is not new under the sun when some people lack their human part... |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 8, 2013 23:19:17 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Be still, just look and see.. there are many (7 billion) 'parts', interconnected as an organic whole.. "Oneness" is a concept, existent only as mind-play. The 7 billion individual 'parts' are observable with a still mind and clear vision, but.. 'Oneness', the belief that there are no 'parts', requires that the observer deny what they see and experience, it requires that others convince the observer what they 'know' to be so, isn't so.. it is an illusion of denial and pretense, where the alternative is to to actually 'do' something to make a real difference.. So.. there is this village in Africa, the corrupt government troops routinely bring harm to the village because the village is thought to assist rebels, and.. the rebels routinely plunder the village for supplies, while raping women and children because they think it gives them power, but there's more.. the region is in its fourth year of drought, there is no fresh water supply, and medical service is restricted by the government and plundered by the rebels.. so, the village population is declining with the average life expectancy at 42.. the HIV infection rate for this village is estimated at more than 60%.. This is real, it is happening.. "Suffering" is a 'word' that means different things to different people.. some will equate 'suffering' to some conceptually philosophical beliefs, and express their mental prowess by their success at convincing others to agree with their beliefs, which, ironically, is suffering for those being targeted for their disagreement with these preferred beliefs.. "Suffering" is also a reference to inescapable pain, abuse, and oppression a person or people endure as a function of being manifested in this physical existence.. i equate the common understanding of 'suffering' with this version of the meaning of the word, and with the general condition of the occupants of the village described above.. Now, the non-dualist suggests that the villagers should " stop doing that", imagining and pretending they are suffering.. i will ask the question, which is more useful: imagining that what is real, isn't, or.. identifying what is real, and finding real solutions, common-sense isness.. What remains clear, to those seeing clearly, is that too much of the human condition is suffering due to ideologies, beliefs, and conceptual mind-play.. philosophizing.. while the commitment to get out of your illusionary mind-play and actually do something to help the villagers and others 'actually' suffering, requires more than playing keyboard guru.. real suffering, not the imaginary ideological suffering of philosophical geniuses, real suffering and real abusers and real oppressors, and real corruption thrives because people prefer to let a few dedicated people 'do' the work they 'imagine' they are doing with their philosophical concepts.. This is 'isness', telling it like it 'is'.. oneness/non-duality, tells those suffering to "stop doing that", stop pretending and imagining you're suffering.. try telling that to the village described above.. Be well.. Which is easier than you agreeing to an open, honest, and respectful discussion.. we could begin with the understanding that what you believe are my "misconceptions", is based on assumptions you believe to be true, and.. we can agree that attempts to discuss the validity of those assumptions are rejected if the validity is in jeopardy from clarity, as seen from the above quote.. misdirect, side-step, and create more illusion, that's your Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) when clarity reveals your beliefs to be based on invalid assumptions and conceptual mind-play.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 9, 2013 1:38:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. Correcting your misconceptions would easier by referring you back to the last time this was discussed (which was quite recently) rather than starting all over again as though that conversation never happened. Which is easier than you agreeing to an open, honest, and respectful discussion.. we could begin with the understanding that what you believe are my "misconceptions", is based on assumptions you believe to be true, and.. we can agree that attempts to discuss the validity of those assumptions are rejected if the validity is in jeopardy from clarity, as seen from the above quote.. misdirect, side-step, and create more illusion, that's your Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) when clarity reveals your beliefs to be based on invalid assumptions and conceptual mind-play.. Be well.. You wish to have the same discussion over and over, expecting different results. This speaks to your state of mind. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 9, 2013 2:22:23 GMT -5
that was a Physicists definition, not an expert!
|
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 9, 2013 6:37:03 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Which is easier than you agreeing to an open, honest, and respectful discussion.. we could begin with the understanding that what you believe are my "misconceptions", is based on assumptions you believe to be true, and.. we can agree that attempts to discuss the validity of those assumptions are rejected if the validity is in jeopardy from clarity, as seen from the above quote.. misdirect, side-step, and create more illusion, that's your Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) when clarity reveals your beliefs to be based on invalid assumptions and conceptual mind-play.. Be well.. You wish to have the same discussion over and over, expecting different results. This speaks to your state of mind. LOL.. in that case, we are both in the same state of mind.. but, i see your point, i suppose that is as graceful an admission of no valid response to which you are willing to admit.. that's the thing, myself and others reach out to you with the intentions of open honest discussions, and you slip away without engaging while making disparaging remarks (implied state of mind, in this case) about the people wishing to have the discussions.. On your forum you speak in high regard of the quality of 'sincerity', why do you not bring that quality to this forum? Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 9, 2013 12:13:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. You wish to have the same discussion over and over, expecting different results. This speaks to your state of mind. LOL.. in that case, we are both in the same state of mind.. but, i see your point, i suppose that is as graceful an admission of no valid response to which you are willing to admit.. that's the thing, myself and others reach out to you with the intentions of open honest discussions, and you slip away without engaging while making disparaging remarks (implied state of mind, in this case) about the people wishing to have the discussions.. On your forum you speak in high regard of the quality of 'sincerity', why do you not bring that quality to this forum? Be well.. That's the quality you lack, and why engaging is of little value. Any attempt to discuss becomes fodder for more insults. Sincerity means the willingness to engage without all the personal baggage. It means a genuine interest in trying to understand what others are saying without the chip on your shoulder. It means putting your sword down for a minute and actually listening. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2013 12:46:44 GMT -5
The idea that experience is already duality is a preconceived one. Thought actually creates the duality, not the experience. Thought says you are a body, which is duality. But all you actually 'know' about a body is the current experience of the sensation of your butt cheeks on the chair. That present moment perception of a sensation is one thingy, not two. Fortunately or unfortunately we have 'thought' to fill in the imaginary experiences of being a whole body. Sensations, ungrounded by conception, are not experiences. You won't be able to recall this mysterious, uncaused sensation that isn't occurring somewhere and has no meaning and is not part of some temporal flow. Experience is a flow of events, and without it there is no chance of interacting. What do you know of your butt cheeks and chairs? The moment you turn that sensation into something you know enough about to form an experience, you've already entered the realm of thought. You may see illusions for what they are. You may even see yourself in every 'other' because you know there is no other, but you will always perceive the dream from within the dream. The awareness of the sense of touch, not being experienced without thought or conception, is a preconceived idea. I prefer the preconceived idea that all one 'knows' is the awareness of the 'sense' of touch, in the example of feeling ones but cheeks. The arbitrary conception of butt cheeks on a chair is layered onto that experience, in the very next moment, even though it seems to arise at the same time. We can experience our universality in the awareness of the sense of touch, as well as experience the putting of our universality into the confines of arbitrary concepts, or thoughts. Most of us choose to experience the arbitrary world of concepts or thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 9, 2013 14:48:17 GMT -5
Sensations, ungrounded by conception, are not experiences. You won't be able to recall this mysterious, uncaused sensation that isn't occurring somewhere and has no meaning and is not part of some temporal flow. Experience is a flow of events, and without it there is no chance of interacting. What do you know of your butt cheeks and chairs? The moment you turn that sensation into something you know enough about to form an experience, you've already entered the realm of thought. You may see illusions for what they are. You may even see yourself in every 'other' because you know there is no other, but you will always perceive the dream from within the dream. The awareness of the sense of touch, not being experienced without thought or conception, is a preconceived idea. I prefer the preconceived idea that all one 'knows' is the awareness of the 'sense' of touch, in the example of feeling ones but cheeks. The arbitrary conception of butt cheeks on a chair is layered onto that experience, in the very next moment, even though it seems to arise at the same time. We can experience our universality in the awareness of the sense of touch, as well as experience the putting of our universality into the confines of arbitrary concepts, or thoughts. Most of us choose to experience the arbitrary world of concepts or thoughts. What does your experience of your universality look/feel like? |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 9, 2013 14:59:16 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. LOL.. in that case, we are both in the same state of mind.. but, i see your point, i suppose that is as graceful an admission of no valid response to which you are willing to admit.. that's the thing, myself and others reach out to you with the intentions of open honest discussions, and you slip away without engaging while making disparaging remarks (implied state of mind, in this case) about the people wishing to have the discussions.. On your forum you speak in high regard of the quality of 'sincerity', why do you not bring that quality to this forum? Be well.. That's the quality you lack, and why engaging is of little value. Any attempt to discuss becomes fodder for more insults. Sincerity means the willingness to engage without all the personal baggage. It means a genuine interest in trying to understand what others are saying without the chip on your shoulder. It means putting your sword down for a minute and actually listening. Hi Phil: Opportunity knocks at your door in many ways, why do you remain in the prison of your own beliefs, rejecting opportunities to escape.. the thing is, you hold the keys to your own prison, we can only knock at your door and hope for a sincere reply.. Be well.. |
|
It's difficult to make a distinction between thinking imaginary scenarios, which we would likely all agree is a set up for suffering, and perceiving 'what is', whatever that actually means. There isn't actually a point where we stop perceiving and start imagining.
