Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2013 14:05:01 GMT -5
We could say that Intelligence forms individuated perspectives, and thinks and acts through the conditioning of each perspective; experiencing, creating, and experiencing that creation, forming and developing the conditioning spontaneously, and ultimately transcending the boundaries defined by that perspective. As such, we can't say the perspective is doing anything volitionally, but we also can't say Intelligence is doing anything volitionally. Mind/body cannot act without Intelligence, and Intelligence cannot act without mind/body. It is what it is and mind does what it does, but Intelligence that is the creative principal (God/you) is fully active and present always, and so creation is not in any way mechanical. Infinite potential is present in every moment. This is God being, from within his own dream of becoming. It is vibrantly alive and unbounded. Intelligence, creative principle, infinite potential... all give me the heebie jeebies.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 23, 2013 14:41:02 GMT -5
Yes, it's a good point and a valid distinction. Realizing there is no Santa isn't the 'Realization' we're talking about, of course, and yet there isn't a clear conceptual dividing line between a Santa realization and a Realization. To me, there IS a clear distinction in the Realizing, but I don't know what other minds do with it or how it is experienced. I do see where some appear to have a Realization and then turn it over to mind and throw it back into doubt, but I can't be certain this is happening. It could all be a conceptual game. I have a thin memory of an experience that seemed like a Realization -- the one where you were stepping me through some questions regarding nonlocality and ZD punched me with a comment about how what is looking through these eyes is the same as what was looking through these eyes as a child. Time and space vaporized, it seemed, and my life flash before my eyes. Sounds pretty groovy describing it now. But I can't say now that this is a Realization, because I really don't see any difference in how I lived before that experience and after that experience. Maybe this is the conceptual game being played really well. Yes, no part of that list is anything I would utter as part of this 'bodymind experience.' The experience I related above had that feel, but impermanent, which is expected. Yes, I had the same realization, and from your description, I would call it that for you. Not all realizations have obvious life altering effects, and mind can take it and distort it because realizations are not knowledge. Don't think of realization as an experience or memory. The memory is not the realization. It is always now. You should be able to look again and see what you saw. What effect a particular realization has, even if it is allowed to inform mind, varies depending on the conditioning and the significance of the particular realization. What is the significance of knowing that you have not changed since you were a child? Or was that your realization?
|
|
|
Post by gooseone on May 23, 2013 15:45:57 GMT -5
Not as I imagine Realization means, which I'm not really clear on. This is why I say I can not even approach using it in a genuine way. I understand it to mean that it's the loss of knowledge. Knowledge that has basically been a filter or distorting influence on clear perception of reality. Once I believed in Santa Claus. I thought presents that showed up on Christmas morning were delivered by some guy wearing a red suit. I looked out the window one Christmas eve and could see Rudolph's red nose gliding past stars and I could hear bells jingling. I lost that 'knowledge,' which was really just an unquestioned belief told to me by others. I gained knowledge too: how adults and others conspire to keep up a deception to have a good time. More evidence that they can't really be trusted. Is that a Realization or just understanding? "Do not mistake understanding for realization, and do not mistake realization for liberation." Yes, it's a good point and a valid distinction. Realizing there is no Santa isn't the 'Realization' we're talking about, of course, and yet there isn't a clear conceptual dividing line between a Santa realization and a Realization. To me, there IS a clear distinction in the Realizing, but I don't know what other minds do with it or how it is experienced. I do see where some appear to have a Realization and then turn it over to mind and throw it back into doubt, but I can't be certain this is happening. It could all be a conceptual game. Oneness is a Realization. Non-volition is a Realization. The fact that one cannot be that which one is observing is a Realization. The true nature of duality is a Realization. Even the futility of permanent happiness is a Realization. All of these things and more must be 'seen' and cannot be worked out conceptually. The way I seem to know this is that in each case there was a moment of timeless, nonconceptual 'seeing'in which an idea collapsed instantly and completely. The concepts were already understood but they had no self evident nature until they were Realized, and then doubt and confusion was gone. In the actuality of this self evident seeing, the distinction between understanding and Realization is very clear. You mention that one cannot be what one observes , when ( presupposing one does take such physical appearances as they appear for a moment ) in a capacity as human experiencing vehicle i have no way of knowing if there is an "I" being self-conscious or if this planet , nature , universe , oneness is being self-conscious through having a human experience. After noticing this i wondered how the hell i had come to contemplate such a thing ...after which my brain seemed to turn to mush for a while. If you were talking about how most people tend to move through life , continuously under the impression they are not what they are observing ( which is a realization ) , then things make sense. Where i am conscious enough that i appear to be in a minority with such a view , which would make it more reasonable to conclude i am not making sense.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 23, 2013 17:45:26 GMT -5
Yes, it's a good point and a valid distinction. Realizing there is no Santa isn't the 'Realization' we're talking about, of course, and yet there isn't a clear conceptual dividing line between a Santa realization and a Realization. To me, there IS a clear distinction in the Realizing, but I don't know what other minds do with it or how it is experienced. I do see where some appear to have a Realization and then turn it over to mind and throw it back into doubt, but I can't be certain this is happening. It could all be a conceptual game. Oneness is a Realization. Non-volition is a Realization. The fact that one cannot be that which one is observing is a Realization. The true nature of duality is a Realization. Even the futility of permanent happiness is a Realization. All of these things and more must be 'seen' and cannot be worked out conceptually. The way I seem to know this is that in each case there was a moment of timeless, nonconceptual 'seeing'in which an idea collapsed instantly and completely. The concepts were already understood but they had no self evident nature until they were Realized, and then doubt and confusion was gone. In the actuality of this self evident seeing, the distinction between understanding and Realization is very clear. You mention that one cannot be what one observes , when ( presupposing one does take such physical appearances as they appear for a moment ) in a capacity as human experiencing vehicle i have no way of knowing if there is an "I" being self-conscious or if this planet , nature , universe , oneness is being self-conscious through having a human experience. After noticing this i wondered how the hell i had come to contemplate such a thing ...after which my brain seemed to turn to mush for a while. If you were talking about how most people tend to move through life , continuously under the impression they are not what they are observing ( which is a realization ) , then things make sense. Where i am conscious enough that i appear to be in a minority with such a view , which would make it more reasonable to conclude i am not making sense. Most folks take themselves to be something they observe. I mean observe in the sense of knowing something about it. (Body/mind/ego)
|
|
|
Post by amit on May 24, 2013 1:05:31 GMT -5
hi Enigma,
Oneness does all by and to itself. My use of the term Oneness has already been made clear but lets rephrase the question in a way you may be happier with. Why does the manifestation,torture, killing, and rape appear? You can apply my comments to that question and continue that aspect of the discussion if you like.
Despite its desire to solve the problem of feeling disconnected, the mind may be so conditioned to condemn that it may not be able to accept that Oneness is both rapist and raped.assimilate the unacceptable aspects of nonduality because they are a step to far
|
|
|
Post by amit on May 24, 2013 1:22:17 GMT -5
hi Enigma,
Oneness does all by and to itself. My use of the term Oneness has already been made clear but lets rephrase the question in a way you may be happier with. Why does the manifestation appear and why does torture, killing, and rape appear within it? You can apply my comments to that question and continue that aspect of the discussion if you like.
In its desire to solve the problem of feeling disconnected, the mind may recognize the unconditional transcendence of nonduality but may be so conditioned to condemn that it may not be able to accept that Oneness is both rapist and raped.
This complete lack of discrimination is why I refer to the illusion of separation as "Love dreaming difference where there is none". What is meant by 'Love' in that statement is of course unconditional love.
amit
|
|
|
Post by amit on May 24, 2013 2:10:11 GMT -5
Hi laughter,
Lets see if we can relate this to how we feel about why we are alive. For me there is a desire to continue living because I find many aspects of life joyful and interesting and my mind works on discomfort. From a nondual perspective this is simply Oneness amiting.
In your view what role does desire play in driving manifestation, and do you have a view on how, from a nondual perspective, one appears as the illusion of two? I'm not used to thinking about this in the terms you have used so please pose the question differently if necessary to suit you.
amit
amit I
|
|
|
Post by gooseone on May 24, 2013 8:42:40 GMT -5
You mention that one cannot be what one observes , when ( presupposing one does take such physical appearances as they appear for a moment ) in a capacity as human experiencing vehicle i have no way of knowing if there is an "I" being self-conscious or if this planet , nature , universe , oneness is being self-conscious through having a human experience. After noticing this i wondered how the hell i had come to contemplate such a thing ...after which my brain seemed to turn to mush for a while. If you were talking about how most people tend to move through life , continuously under the impression they are not what they are observing ( which is a realization ) , then things make sense. Where i am conscious enough that i appear to be in a minority with such a view , which would make it more reasonable to conclude i am not making sense. Most folks take themselves to be something they observe. I mean observe in the sense of knowing something about it. (Body/mind/ego) Offcourse , i forgot that it is not even common to question the reality of one's thoughts. And @ amit , I kinda wondered why you had made your initial post but i guess it to provoke reactions , in which you have succeeded. Seeing you invoke the non-dualist equivalent of a Godwin when mentioning Hitler , i would assume you are occupied with the good vs bad dilemma for which you seem to have found a good solution which works for you. It's a human capacity to judge , aside from providing entertainment there's not much reason to take it seriously. So if you were making "bad" things "not actually bad things" your still being judgmental. I mean even without thinking my physical body would probably automatically seek recourse to imminent death and it is highly likely that i would also conjure up something to prevent such a thing from happening in most cases , yet judging death as something that should not be happening seems highly absurd. Life would seem pretty dim if everyone is convinced something that is inevitable should not happen.This does not mean i never have an aversion to observing "bad things" happening. And can i ask you why your breathing and waking every morning seems not enough reason to live ? Do you actually need another desire on-top of that ?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 24, 2013 9:37:09 GMT -5
hi Enigma, Oneness does all by and to itself. My use of the term Oneness has already been made clear but lets rephrase the question in a way you may be happier with. Why does the manifestation,torture, killing, and rape appear? You can apply my comments to that question and continue that aspect of the discussion if you like. Despite its desire to solve the problem of feeling disconnected, the mind may be so conditioned to condemn that it may not be able to accept that Oneness is both rapist and raped.assimilate the unacceptable aspects of nonduality because they are a step to far Because the belief in separation brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 10:23:26 GMT -5
hi Enigma, Oneness does all by and to itself. My use of the term Oneness has already been made clear but lets rephrase the question in a way you may be happier with. Why does the manifestation,torture, killing, and rape appear? You can apply my comments to that question and continue that aspect of the discussion if you like. Despite its desire to solve the problem of feeling disconnected, the mind may be so conditioned to condemn that it may not be able to accept that Oneness is both rapist and raped.assimilate the unacceptable aspects of nonduality because they are a step to far Because the belief in separation brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear. Is it necessarily the specific "belief in separation" that brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear, or is it belief/attachment itself that's the problem? As I see it, it is belief about what is needed to be at peace, that gets in the way of Peace. You seem to be saying that unless one has 'realized' Oneness and understands it to be true, and separation false, he will inevitably experience a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear...? I say, it's possible to let go of attachment to ideas about what we need to experience peace, simply by seeing through the idea of absolute 'truth.' No 'realization' of oneness necessary. There is no specific belief (about the nature of reality) that needs to fall away for Peace to abide, but rather, a seeing through of belief itself. When all beliefs about the nature of 'this' are released, that includes the idea of Oneness as being true and Separation being false. In an experience where the word 'truth' no longer applies, calling something that is appearing, 'false' also no longer applies.
|
|
|
Post by silver on May 24, 2013 10:54:03 GMT -5
hi Enigma, Oneness does all by and to itself. My use of the term Oneness has already been made clear but lets rephrase the question in a way you may be happier with. Why does the manifestation,torture, killing, and rape appear? You can apply my comments to that question and continue that aspect of the discussion if you like. Despite its desire to solve the problem of feeling disconnected, the mind may be so conditioned to condemn that it may not be able to accept that Oneness is both rapist and raped.assimilate the unacceptable aspects of nonduality because they are a step to far Because the belief in separation brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear. It's clear to me, that this sentiment runs outta gas at a certain point up the road.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 24, 2013 11:03:44 GMT -5
Because the belief in separation brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear. Is it necessarily the specific "belief in separation" that brings a sense of lack, divisiveness and fear, or is it belief/attachment itself that's the problem? The belief in the separate, volitional self is at the core of suffering. I think most folks aren't interested in peace and just want to be happy. The illusion of separation must be 'seen through'. This IS the realization of oneness. Most suffering folks have no interest in peace and never heard of absolute truth. What does it mean to see through belief itself? Is belief really something other than belief?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:38:22 GMT -5
The belief in the separate, volitional self is at the core of suffering. Extreme emotional pain (which is what I'd call suffering) hinges upon a sense that something very, very important (a need) is currently missing from my experience. Is it really the belief in 'a separate volitional person' that lies behind my emotional pain over the fact that someone stole my new car, or is it the belief that I cannot be at peace/happy (whatever label you choose to give to that state of being that is absent of emotional pain and need) without my new car? If one had made peace with the idea that material goods come and go and although I very much liked my new car, my sense of well being need not be wrapped up in it, there will be no 'suffering' over it. It has nothing to do with whether or not one experiences a separate, volitional self or not. It's about seeing through the idea that something is needed to be anything different than what it is in this moment. Peace...Happiness....joy...well being....sense of ease.......All names 'most folks' would give to describe a state of being that is absent of emotional pain. You keep saying that separation must be seen through, but really the idea that experience is either actual or illusive or there is One or two, is itself an overlay we place upon the present moment of experience. What needs to be seen through is the idea that we can know, understand, realize, with certainty what's actually going on behind this experience. When attachments really do fall away, there will no longer be any need to determine with certainty what lies behind or beyond the experience.....life simply IS...and that's more than good enough. really? I'd say most who are suffering are intensely interested in having the emotional pain cease. And the nature of being human seems to have us seeking answers, seeking 'what is true,' so I'd say an interest in 'absolute truth' is a driving force in all of us. Again, you have this perception of 'others' that is incredibly limited...a really lowly opinion it seems in general regarding 'most folks.' I'm obviously much more optimistic in my views about the capacity of humans in general, but then, that is a reflection of my everyday experience...hehe.... Looks like we're both taking our individuated experiences of others to form an opinion about 'what the world at large' is like. I'm pretty pleased with my experience/opinion in this regard, how 'bout you? Belief is attachment to the idea of 'truth.' To see through belief is to see that it's all thought...all mind minding...all just a play of ideas. And while we still may resonate with certain ideas, the idea that we could know with certainty that something is actually 'true,' is no longer there. So, while you might say that when it is seen that it's all just a play of ideas, we also 'see through' the separate, non-volitional self, and in a sense that is so....but we also see through the idea of oneness being true, or the idea that there is not a separate non-volitional self. The difference is in the level of attachment to the idea. IN an actual seeing through of, there is no need to be certain of the truth or falsity of the matter. It is equally valid then to say that 'there is' separation, as it is to say 'there is no separation.' At this point, it just no longer matters. Seeing through and releasing belief is really about releasing the need to 'be certain'...releasing the need to know with absolute certainty, precisely 'what in the blazes is going on here.' freedom is no longer 'needing' to know anything about what lies beyond 'this.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 13:21:31 GMT -5
The illusion of separation must be 'seen through'. This IS the realization of oneness. What needs to be seen through is the idea that we can know, understand, realize, with certainty what's actually going on behind before, this experience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 14:29:43 GMT -5
What needs to be seen through is the idea that we can know, understand, realize, with certainty what's actually going on behind before, this experience. Sure, that works. With the use of the word 'behind' I was trying to capture the sense that some have that there is something going on behind the scenes, so to speak....what is 'really' going on in comparison to what is only appearing/being experienced.
|
|