|
Post by serpentqueen on Jul 22, 2013 17:03:59 GMT -5
Greetings.. Who is it that's having the dreams? Why do the dreams not match? Be well.. To the first part: The dreamer is itself a dream....a dream of a dreamer To the second part, I'm not sure what you mean by "match", but it seems that what distinguishes them is that in the waking dream we have moved further into absorption and engagement of the dream, in sleeping dreams, less so. Have you noticed that in sleeping dreams, that there is ALWAYS a subjective quality, in that you are observing yourself in a dream...whatever personality or identity that you have in a sleeping dream, that identity, is observed just as the occurrences and environment of the sleeping dream are observed....in the waking dream, very often we are so absorbed in the dream of self and what is occurring that there is no more subjectiveness...often, in the waking dream, there is no seeing of oneself and one's environment as a kind of picture show of self and environment that we experience in the sleeping dream. What we call "waking life" seems to be a kind of moving further into the dream of self and experience, a deeper immersion into the dream, where the dream seems more "real". Waking dream is also highly subjective. The difference between sleep-dream and waking-dream may simply be a matter of focus and logic. Sleep dream is unfocused; wake dream is focused. In sleep dream you are not as bound by the 3D logic of time or space, or object permanence. You can fly, for example, and a tree can morph into an alien. I say "as bound" because surely some have wake-experiences that defy logic, time, and even space, such as in meditation, no? Or in psychosis when one hallucinates. Or doing psychedelics. But maybe these experiences happen simply because the experiencer has taken on a different logic? Or the brain is just bathed in a different set of chemicals? Hmm, and now it all starts to unravel.. now one can't be sure of anything, really, can they?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2013 17:12:14 GMT -5
To the first part: The dreamer is itself a dream....a dream of a dreamer To the second part, I'm not sure what you mean by "match", but it seems that what distinguishes them is that in the waking dream we have moved further into absorption and engagement of the dream, in sleeping dreams, less so. Have you noticed that in sleeping dreams, that there is ALWAYS a subjective quality, in that you are observing yourself in a dream...whatever personality or identity that you have in a sleeping dream, that identity, is observed just as the occurrences and environment of the sleeping dream are observed....in the waking dream, very often we are so absorbed in the dream of self and what is occurring that there is no more subjectiveness...often, in the waking dream, there is no seeing of oneself and one's environment as a kind of picture show of self and environment that we experience in the sleeping dream. What we call "waking life" seems to be a kind of moving further into the dream of self and experience, a deeper immersion into the dream, where the dream seems more "real". Waking dream is also highly subjective. The difference between sleep-dream and waking-dream may simply be a matter of focus and logic. Sleep dream is unfocused; wake dream is focused. In sleep dream you are not as bound by the 3D logic of time or space, or object permanence. You can fly, for example, and a tree can morph into an alien. I say "as bound" because surely some have wake-experiences that defy logic, time, and even space, such as in meditation, no? Or in psychosis when one hallucinates. Or doing psychedelics. But maybe these experiences happen simply because the experiencer has taken on a different logic? Or the brain is just bathed in a different set of chemicals? Hmm, and now it all starts to unravel.. now one can't be sure of anything, really, can they? Haha, there are no truths...only perspectives in a dream A picture show that is as "real" as we make it.
|
|
|
Post by esponja on Jul 23, 2013 7:44:29 GMT -5
Esponja: THIS does whatever It does, so It manifests differently through different people. I'm generally pointing toward a way of escaping the dominance of mind. Thinking that one should always be aware of what is happening in the present moment is just another idealistic thought. What I'm saying is that if you spend MOST of your time thinking, your thoughts will usually add a layer of extra trouble on top of whatever other troubles THIS presents. As Jesus said, "Each day has troubles enough of its own." Ha ha. If you're in pain, you would obviously like for it to go away, but thinking that it SHOULDN"T be happening is a kind of psychological resistance to "what is." FWIW, some sages have claimed that if the mind remains quiescent for a long period of time, dreams eventually stop arising. Seng 'Stan, for example, wrote, "If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease." I assume that this is what he was referring to, but I have no direct experience of that. I do lots of thinking about lots of stuff, so I'm not expecting dreams to stop anytime soon. Ha ha. I understand, it is simple really and I have been adopting your 'shift' approach with ease the last day or so.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 25, 2013 1:46:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. LOL.. "Bang the gong", brother.. chase the evil Tzu away.. wouldn't want to actually get still and see for yourself, eh.. just let Niz do your realizin' for ya.. The thing is, i'm clear about what my theories are, and they're not 'beliefs'.. but, you and the other disciples keep on chanting your beliefs, you wear your beliefs like wet robes, dripping with self-righteousness.. Be well.. First, I understand that most of what I refer to as ‘what I know’, is what I ‘believe’ I scrutinize my own beliefs and understandings, I sincerely try to find fault with the beliefs and understandings I accept as consistent with ‘what is so’ I have am comfortable that my understanding of mind, what I believe about mind, is that mind is a medium common to all perception, awareness, experiences, imagination, reasoning, recollecting, and cognitive processes, and it is upon and through such medium that ‘that which is’ is made known in relation to itself (self-awareness). Mind is infinite and isolated at the same time, allowing for that which ‘is’ to utilize mind according to its intention, as an independently functioning ‘part’ of the infinite, and/or as ‘all’ of the eternal infinite, for exploring its own existence. Mind allows for isolated ‘parts’ of its wholeness to experience privacy as different ‘unique patterns’ of the same essence, like the unique snowflakes that are all the same essence of water. In this way, ‘that which is’ senses and perceives its existence in the same medium, mind, as the ‘isolated parts’ of itself experiences their freely interactive experiences with other ‘parts’, and with the part’s inherent awareness of itself as ‘that which is’, too.. a functional equality, as necessary to be true to your own experience of ‘You’.. E qually acknowledged, are the beliefs that create harmony, like the beliefs that alert us to danger, or that remind us of necessary activities for our well-being, or that counsel us of our relationship with the continuum of Life. And the best for last! it is my understanding that the mindscapes are stored in consciousness as intact and precise energetic echoes of the original, a Cosmic Memory, accessible through when someone's mind is so still that the individuated 'interface'/barrier falls away and the individuated perspective establishes coherence with the Whole.. in this understanding, the energetic signature that is the individuated being resonates with other 'memories', people/places/events, having similar energetic signatures, allowing for clarity to reveal ever greater interactions with the Cosmic Whole, either through stored memories or as what is actually happening, now.. Quite a monstrosity of belief structure there hidden in plain sight.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 25, 2013 9:21:45 GMT -5
Greetings.. And the best for last! Quite a monstrosity of belief structure there hidden in plain sight. It's a Tzu's theory, not a belief.. as such, it is subject to change as new information suggests a more accurate understanding of what is actually happening.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 25, 2013 16:13:06 GMT -5
Greetings.. Quite a monstrosity of belief structure there hidden in plain sight. It's a Tzu's theory, not a belief.. as such, it is subject to change as new information suggests a more accurate understanding of what is actually happening.. Be well.. That's how everyone is with their beliefs. The rigidity of the beliefs is usually dependent on how willing one is to hear that new information though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 17:50:18 GMT -5
Greetings.. It's a Tzu's theory, not a belief.. as such, it is subject to change as new information suggests a more accurate understanding of what is actually happening.. Be well.. That's how everyone is with their beliefs. The rigidity of the beliefs is usually dependent on how willing one is to hear that new information though. The perceiver, which is what we are, is neither willing nor not willing to hear new information about theories and beliefs, only perceptions can do that... And the perceiver isn't the doer of perceptions... The perceiver is stuck with Tzu's perceptions, whatever they may be...just like it's stuck with yours or mine...
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 25, 2013 18:08:26 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. It's a Tzu's theory, not a belief.. as such, it is subject to change as new information suggests a more accurate understanding of what is actually happening.. Be well.. That's how everyone is with their beliefs. The rigidity of the beliefs is usually dependent on how willing one is to hear that new information though. What follows is my understanding of terms that i use, and i realize that there may be differences in usage which i try to account for in general conversation.. Belief is a psychological state where the experiencer holds a proposition or supposition to be true, regardless of justification.. Knowledge is a psychological state where there is reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance as justification for believing a belief is true.. Understanding is the ability to adequately, intelligently, and successfully relate/integrate knowledge with the environment of the experiencer's existence, physically, mentally, and spiritually, and in this understanding there is the presupposition that that the universal constant, 'change', affects all understanding, knowledge and belief with the effect of rendering fixed attachment to any understanding, knowledge or belief as a fundamental error of awareness and judgement.. These usages have served me well over decades of exploring philosophical and metaphysical explanations and paths related to the nature of existence.. i do not claim they are right or true, merely functional for maintaining consistency.. i share these 'personal criteria' in hope that it will improve 'understanding' between you and me, and others .. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 25, 2013 18:19:55 GMT -5
That's how everyone is with their beliefs. The rigidity of the beliefs is usually dependent on how willing one is to hear that new information though. The perceiver, which is what we are, is neither willing nor not willing to hear new information about theories and beliefs, only perceptions can do that... And the perceiver isn't the doer of perceptions... The perceiver is stuck with Tzu's perceptions, whatever they may be...just like it's stuck with yours or mine... You're talking in an entirely different context.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 18:30:14 GMT -5
The perceiver, which is what we are, is neither willing nor not willing to hear new information about theories and beliefs, only perceptions can do that... And the perceiver isn't the doer of perceptions... The perceiver is stuck with Tzu's perceptions, whatever they may be...just like it's stuck with yours or mine... You're talking in an entirely different context. Oh I thought you were talking about willingness...
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 25, 2013 18:33:56 GMT -5
Greetings.. That's how everyone is with their beliefs. The rigidity of the beliefs is usually dependent on how willing one is to hear that new information though. What follows is my understanding of terms that i use, and i realize that there may be differences in usage which i try to account for in general conversation.. Belief is a psychological state where the experiencer holds a proposition or supposition to be true, regardless of justification.. Knowledge is a psychological state where there is reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance as justification for believing a belief is true.. Understanding is the ability to adequately, intelligently, and successfully relate/integrate knowledge with the environment of the experiencer's existence, physically, mentally, and spiritually, and in this understanding there is the presupposition that that the universal constant, 'change', affects all understanding, knowledge and belief with the effect of rendering fixed attachment to any understanding, knowledge or belief as a fundamental error of awareness and judgement.. These usages have served me well over decades of exploring philosophical and metaphysical explanations and paths related to the nature of existence.. i do not claim they are right or true, merely functional for maintaining consistency.. i share these 'personal criteria' in hope that it will improve 'understanding' between you and me, and others .. Be well.. The terms are not useful for consistency but rather justifying your own beliefs as something different and special so that they may remain unexamined. It's all totally 100% made up out of thin air.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 25, 2013 18:49:43 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. What follows is my understanding of terms that i use, and i realize that there may be differences in usage which i try to account for in general conversation.. Belief is a psychological state where the experiencer holds a proposition or supposition to be true, regardless of justification.. Knowledge is a psychological state where there is reasonable and necessarily plausible assertions/evidence/guidance as justification for believing a belief is true.. Understanding is the ability to adequately, intelligently, and successfully relate/integrate knowledge with the environment of the experiencer's existence, physically, mentally, and spiritually, and in this understanding there is the presupposition that that the universal constant, 'change', affects all understanding, knowledge and belief with the effect of rendering fixed attachment to any understanding, knowledge or belief as a fundamental error of awareness and judgement.. These usages have served me well over decades of exploring philosophical and metaphysical explanations and paths related to the nature of existence.. i do not claim they are right or true, merely functional for maintaining consistency.. i share these 'personal criteria' in hope that it will improve 'understanding' between you and me, and others .. Be well.. The terms are not useful for consistency but rather justifying your own beliefs as something different and special so that they may remain unexamined. It's all totally 100% made up out of thin air. You should do some 'actual' research, as opposed to believing your own beliefs.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 19:47:20 GMT -5
Greetings.. The terms are not useful for consistency but rather justifying your own beliefs as something different and special so that they may remain unexamined. It's all totally 100% made up out of thin air. You should do some 'actual' research, as opposed to believing your own beliefs.. Be well.. What Silence is, isn't actually a doer...and neither is what Tzu actually is...a doer that is... But the reason...now it's a great doer... And you seem to reside there 100% of the time...in reason that is...
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 25, 2013 20:06:22 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. You should do some 'actual' research, as opposed to believing your own beliefs.. Be well.. What Silence is, isn't actually a doer...and neither is what Tzu actually is...a doer that is... But the reason...now it's a great doer... And you seem to reside there 100% of the time...in reason that is... LOL.. you 'say' one thing, but 'do' another.. Your perception of where i 'reside' is distorted by your beliefs about 'reason'.. i 'reside' where reason is one of many possible tools for navigating the information revealed by awareness.. reason, along with clarity, intelligence, still mind, silence, unconditional curiosity, are among the tools available to those interested in exploring their relationship with 'That which is'.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 20:59:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. What Silence is, isn't actually a doer...and neither is what Tzu actually is...a doer that is... But the reason...now it's a great doer... And you seem to reside there 100% of the time...in reason that is... LOL.. you 'say' one thing, but 'do' another.. Your perception of where i 'reside' is distorted by your beliefs about 'reason'.. i 'reside' where reason is one of many possible tools for navigating the information revealed by awareness.. reason, along with clarity, intelligence, still mind, silence, unconditional curiosity, are among the tools available to those interested in exploring their relationship with 'That which is'.. Be well.. Reason can't explore what is, because reason is a perception of what is... And you'll reside there as long as your attention is focused on the reasonableness that clarity, intelligence, still mind, and silence are what is...which they aren't... There is no relationship between the perceiver and perceived...there aren't two things there to have a relationship.
|
|