|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2013 0:02:14 GMT -5
If there wouldn't be the assumption that a realization realization has some kind of cause or could be induced then the question if seeking is valuable or not, good or bad wouldn't even arise. Seeking happens. Deal with it. Well, yeah. Did someone ask you if you want to become a seeker or not? Did you have a choice or something? I'd say that's one of those no-brainers again the more brainy folks find so problematic.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 18, 2013 0:38:11 GMT -5
... so uhm ... how exactly do you propose to .... "deal with it"? Yes, the dirty Harry approach looks very convincing. the question was loaded! the bullet was the word "you"!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2013 0:46:54 GMT -5
Yes, the dirty Harry approach looks very convincing. the question was loaded! the bullet was the word "you"! Is the seeker dead now?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 18, 2013 0:51:40 GMT -5
the question was loaded! the bullet was the word "you"! Is the seeker dead now? can't kill something that never had life
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 2:44:41 GMT -5
These things work great on skeeters, though flies require a tricky backhand technique. Yeah, flies are tricky. They refuse to get electrocuted. They're too dang quick, like pure instinct with wings.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 2:48:46 GMT -5
Seems like malformed and meaningless questions are both the result of misconceiving the question. Once the question is seen for what it is, it goes away, assuming one doesn't settle on and answer, in which case it leads to a new question. (This ongoing questioning process is the goal of seeker, hencely the speerichual circus.) Heaven forfend someone should ask a question around here, then. **rolleyes**. I swear, sometimes, I wonder why I bother. Asking questions is a good way to explore their boundaries. The smarmy attitude effectively gets in the way.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 2:59:47 GMT -5
Yeah, flies are tricky. They refuse to get electrocuted. You could try this to finish 'em off: Here's one of my own 'paintings'
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 3:02:15 GMT -5
That's just mind locking itself up in ambiguous paradoxicality. You don't have a reference for realization, so you don't know it isn't a conclusion. That's what it means to say realization is self evident. It means no proof is required. A realization is a shift in our frame of reference, or in our point of perception, at no point do thoughts/ideas become necessarily true or false. You have not had the realization that ideas/thoughts are not necessarily true or false. I didn't say I have.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 3:04:11 GMT -5
Yes, the answer is that the question is misconceived, and it collapses into a little greasy spot. Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. I've realized that the question is misconceived. I haven't concluded it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 3:15:55 GMT -5
What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ? As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** Aren't all questions imagined? How else is one supposed to 'undo' what the mind has 'done', per Niz? I think it's rather presumptuous to dismiss out of hand a simple but no less significant question as 'what is it that even asks questions?'. Ramana is rolling in his grave at such knowitallness. I didn't dismiss the question. I tried to point to the realization that it is misconceived. You missed all that and took offense at your question not being validated. If you follow Andrew down his current bunny hole, you'll find yourself in the same state of paradoxical confusion, and something tells me you won't find it as freeing as he does.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 18, 2013 3:27:49 GMT -5
What questions are there, really, when there are no answers? Have you ever really found any answers? Sounds like another misconceived question. Only one answer I've received, ultimately--I am. But, I'd never have found that, had I not asked a plethora of other questions, first. Frankly, I'm somewhat offended that peeps around here are so quick to dismiss the necessity of seeking in order to realize that there is nothing for which to seek. You're offending yourself, then, cuz nobody's doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 18, 2013 3:42:14 GMT -5
You could try this to finish 'em off: Here's one of my own 'paintings' Seems Freddy wasn't much into delineating between real/illusory. How about this one here:
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 18, 2013 3:59:29 GMT -5
A realization is a shift in our frame of reference, or in our point of perception, at no point do thoughts/ideas become necessarily true or false. You have not had the realization that ideas/thoughts are not necessarily true or false. I didn't say I have. There's a problem right there then, you have not yet apprehended the nature of ideas/things. You assume that there necessarily IS something 'prior', or 'beyond', and this assumption is still in the realm of ideas/things. You might then say 'well, its all imaginary', but this too assumes a prior imaginer. As a pointer it may have some value, but its B.S really. And because you assume that there necessarily is some 'ultimate' at which no ideas are true, you look at ideas/things and posit 'context' (or 'structure') in an objective way that enables you to say that something ' really is true' within the realm of ideas. Its a crock.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 18, 2013 4:00:46 GMT -5
Aren't all questions imagined? How else is one supposed to 'undo' what the mind has 'done', per Niz? I think it's rather presumptuous to dismiss out of hand a simple but no less significant question as 'what is it that even asks questions?'. Ramana is rolling in his grave at such knowitallness. I didn't dismiss the question. I tried to point to the realization that it is misconceived. You missed all that and took offense at your question not being validated. If you follow Andrew down his current bunny hole, you'll find yourself in the same state of paradoxical confusion, and something tells me you won't find it as freeing as he does. I am pointing to not-knowing. Apprehending the paradoxical, contradictory and ambiguous nature of ideas does not mean that the experience here is one of confusion or uncertainty.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 18, 2013 4:07:40 GMT -5
Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. I've realized that the question is misconceived. I haven't concluded it. There's nothing wrong with realizing something but you haven't realized that no idea is necessarily true, so you will be believing ideas to be true or false. You are really quite open about that ('it REALLY IS Thursday'). So what you are still in the realms of is 'concluding' and 'answers' i.e. 'the question is misconceived' is an answer that you believe is true (but not 'ultimately true'!)
|
|