|
Post by enigma on Oct 8, 2013 20:58:47 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced.
That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false.
As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Oct 8, 2013 20:59:50 GMT -5
I think the subject of 'truth' is a lot more complicated than that - unless you want to talk about one 'kind' of truth over another. Sometimes we think something is true and we find out later, it isnt or that isn't the whole story / big picture, if you will... Truth as in telling the truth, is usually based on what we want it to be. And then we've got 'scientific' truths or facts - it's never ever quite the whole enchilada. mmmm... enchiladas.... you silly old bear!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 9, 2013 2:55:55 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced. That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false. As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator. Truthin'!
|
|
|
Post by silver on Oct 9, 2013 8:25:19 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced. That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false. As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator. Truthin'! So, you choose to label what we often traditionally 'know' and understand as 'god' Truth -- even if this Truth seems to be some Great Big Container that contains a bunch of stuff that isn't so very much true. Hmm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 9:59:11 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced. That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false. As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator. To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 10:31:37 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced. That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false. As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator. To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh. Sure, thats one model and set of experiences, all can say is that my experience is different. I'm with you that ALL knowledge is suspect in a way, and am fine with setting it aside, I'm actually an advocate of it. In my experience, if you want to see God, first you have to clear away EVERY idea or concept of God that you may have....none of them can be accurate anyway, and those mental overlays sometimes, nay, OFTEN block the view of what is obvious. In fact, its good to forget about EVERY concept you have regarding this spiritual stuff....just sit quietly without pe-conception, and look without naming or defining. There IS something there in an uncommunicable way....you can call it an all pervading ISNESS, or as I often do at the forum you can call it GOD in everything and everywhere that you look....or call it anything you want...or better yet, don't call it anything, just experience it without defining or naming it, or trying to figure out if it is a thing of the mind or something divine etc....just look, sit quietly and openly and alertly and look, and whatever IT is is everywhere, its incredibly obvious....where IT stops being obvious, is when you try to figure IT out, define IT, categorize IT, and figure out if it is something greater than you or lessor than you. Let go of trying to find proof of whether IT is greater than you or lessor than you....that doesn't matter, because the effect of residing in consciousness of this all pervading IT is the same whether IT is "of" you or you are "of" IT or both....set all that aside and just look and be in IT and IT in you. No questions or knowing about IT brings any benefit....and yet IT is there, always there and here and EVERYWHERE, inside and out. IT is so obvious that it cannot be denied or doubted, only your particular attempts to understand it can be denied or doubted....let the knowing and understanding of IT go, and just BE in it and IT within you....this is enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 10:56:15 GMT -5
To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh. Sure, thats one model and set of experiences, all can say is that my experience is different. I'm with you that ALL knowledge is suspect in a way, and am fine with setting it aside, I'm actually an advocate of it. In my experience, if you want to see God, first you have to clear away EVERY idea or concept of God that you may have....none of them can be accurate anyway, and those mental overlays sometimes, nay, OFTEN block the view of what is obvious. In fact, its good to forget about EVERY concept you have regarding this spiritual stuff....just sit quietly without pe-conception, and look without naming or defining. There IS something there in an uncommunicable way....you can call it an all pervading ISNESS, or as I often do at the forum you can call it GOD in everything and everywhere that you look....or call it anything you want...or better yet, don't call it anything, just experience it without defining or naming it, or trying to figure out if it is a thing of the mind or something divine etc....just look, sit quietly and openly and alertly and look, and whatever IT is is everywhere, its incredibly obvious....where IT stops being obvious, is when you try to figure IT out, define IT, categorize IT, and figure out if it is something greater than you or lessor than you. Let go of trying to find proof of whether IT is greater than you or lessor than you....that doesn't matter, because the effect of residing in consciousness of this all pervading IT is the same whether IT is "of" you or you are "of" IT or both....set all that aside and just look and be in IT and IT in you. No questions or knowing about IT brings any benefit....and yet IT is there, always there and here and EVERYWHERE, inside and out. IT is so obvious that it cannot be denied or doubted, only your particular attempts to understand it can be denied or doubted....let the knowing and understanding of IT go, and just BE in it and IT within you....this is enough. I like to call it raw existence. But your stuff about it being "there, always there and here and everywhere, inside and out" seems to be just more conclusion/belief. None of that is necessary, it's just fun conjecture. I suspect it has to do with a fundamental insecurity about the utter lack of foundation.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 9, 2013 10:58:24 GMT -5
Obviously, conceptual, dualistic truth, as in a true/false idea, is subject to perspective and is potentially variable. In a spiritual context, what is meant by Truth is that unchanging presence within which all change occurs, and by virtue of which all change can be experienced. That idea is not what Truth refers to. Truth is that to which the concept points. It's not about true as opposed to false. As to why it must be unchanging, that's just the nature of that which knows change. That which knows change cannot be changing along with the change, or it could not be noticed, a bit like moving at a constant speed inside an elevator. To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh. Anything that sounds like a conclusion has been handled by the thinker and in that, it is what it is. For example, here are two different suggestions: 1) There is a subject that is not subject to identification and that is what you are -- you can't know the knower because if you turn around to look you just see more objects. You can't get behind yourself. What you are is not subject to objectification. 2) Turn your attention 180 degrees, and look directly inward and be aware of being aware. To the intellect, these sound like opposites -- or at least, as if they contradict one another, but they're pointing to exactly the same ineffable absence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 11:05:51 GMT -5
Sure, thats one model and set of experiences, all can say is that my experience is different. I'm with you that ALL knowledge is suspect in a way, and am fine with setting it aside, I'm actually an advocate of it. In my experience, if you want to see God, first you have to clear away EVERY idea or concept of God that you may have....none of them can be accurate anyway, and those mental overlays sometimes, nay, OFTEN block the view of what is obvious. In fact, its good to forget about EVERY concept you have regarding this spiritual stuff....just sit quietly without pe-conception, and look without naming or defining. There IS something there in an uncommunicable way....you can call it an all pervading ISNESS, or as I often do at the forum you can call it GOD in everything and everywhere that you look....or call it anything you want...or better yet, don't call it anything, just experience it without defining or naming it, or trying to figure out if it is a thing of the mind or something divine etc....just look, sit quietly and openly and alertly and look, and whatever IT is is everywhere, its incredibly obvious....where IT stops being obvious, is when you try to figure IT out, define IT, categorize IT, and figure out if it is something greater than you or lessor than you. Let go of trying to find proof of whether IT is greater than you or lessor than you....that doesn't matter, because the effect of residing in consciousness of this all pervading IT is the same whether IT is "of" you or you are "of" IT or both....set all that aside and just look and be in IT and IT in you. No questions or knowing about IT brings any benefit....and yet IT is there, always there and here and EVERYWHERE, inside and out. IT is so obvious that it cannot be denied or doubted, only your particular attempts to understand it can be denied or doubted....let the knowing and understanding of IT go, and just BE in it and IT within you....this is enough. I like to call it raw existence. But your stuff about it being "there, always there and here and everywhere, inside and out" seems to be just more conclusion/belief. None of that is necessary, it's just fun conjecture. I suspect it has to do with a fundamental insecurity about the utter lack of foundation. I think you misunderstand me...When I say that IT is there everywhere inside and out....I mean its everywhere that you are capable of perceiving....Who cares whether it is more or beyond that. Thats what I mean when I say to not concern yourself with whether or not it is greater or lessor than YOU, or whether you are OF it or if IT is OF you. Does it really matter....IT is there everywhere you perceive is not?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 11:10:37 GMT -5
To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh. Anything that sounds like a conclusion has been handled by the thinker and in that, it is what it is. For example, here are two different suggestions: 1) There is a subject that is not subject to identification and that is what you are -- you can't know the knower because if you turn around to look you just see more objects. You can't get behind yourself. What you are is not subject to objectification. 2) Turn your attention 180 degrees, and look directly inward and be aware of being aware. To the intellect, these sound like opposites -- or at least, as if they contradict one another, but they're pointing to exactly the same ineffable absence. Whenever I've done the headless exercises, the main thing that I've noticed is that my field of attention or focus snaps wide open. It goes from a narrow focus -- the object where the finger is pointing -- to "everything" -- when the finger is pointing back, 180. That in itself is pretty fun. While driving is fun because all of a sudden the whole world is getting sucked into the windshield. But how does this support the idea that what you are is unchanging? no comprendo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 11:13:25 GMT -5
I like to call it raw existence. But your stuff about it being "there, always there and here and everywhere, inside and out" seems to be just more conclusion/belief. None of that is necessary, it's just fun conjecture. I suspect it has to do with a fundamental insecurity about the utter lack of foundation. I think you misunderstand me...When I say that IT is there everywhere inside and out....I mean its everywhere that you are capable of perceiving....Who cares whether it is more or beyond that. Thats what I mean when I say to not concern yourself with whether or not it is greater or lessor than YOU, or whether you are OF it or if IT is OF you. Does it really matter....IT is there everywhere you perceive is not? Oh so when folks use unchanging and everywhere it just means right here right now? That's funny! So, when some enlightened bloke prattles on about Oneness and the universe, they're just talking about their little perception bubble? Okay, check! Back to qualia!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 11:30:41 GMT -5
That in itself is pretty fun. While driving is fun because all of a sudden the whole world is getting sucked into the windshield. You've stopped at describing it as pretty fun. The windshield is a convenient protection.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 12:04:31 GMT -5
I think you misunderstand me...When I say that IT is there everywhere inside and out....I mean its everywhere that you are capable of perceiving....Who cares whether it is more or beyond that. Thats what I mean when I say to not concern yourself with whether or not it is greater or lessor than YOU, or whether you are OF it or if IT is OF you. Does it really matter....IT is there everywhere you perceive is not? Oh so when folks use unchanging and everywhere it just means right here right now? That's funny! So, when some enlightened bloke prattles on about Oneness and the universe, they're just talking about their little perception bubble? Okay, check! Back to qualia! I have no idea what other folks mean, nor do I mean anything, what I'm saying is what does finding the right model of how things are matter....why are you trying to fi d the right model of understanding, quailia, or god or otherwise? What purpose would having the right answer serve? And how can you ever be sure that you have the right answer, the right understanding? The experience and awareness of Raw Existence, as you call it, is quite enough really why complicate it with explanations and models and understandings? Its as though you are trying to find a hidden reality that is right here right now all around and within you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 12:10:22 GMT -5
That in itself is pretty fun. While driving is fun because all of a sudden the whole world is getting sucked into the windshield. You've stopped at describing it as pretty fun. The windshield is a convenient protection. Now that's the kind of poke I love about this place!
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 9, 2013 12:12:02 GMT -5
Greetings.. To me, the unchanginess sounds like a conclusion. And if the conclusion is held so strongly as to be called Truth, then it's a conclusion that is strongly believed in. There is nothing that can know whether something is unchanging. Of course the escape clause to this is Realization, or some other kind of spiritual or mystical or otherworldly experience where some sort of special insight or knowledge or understanding or whatever 'informs the mind' to re-assert the truthiness of it. You can tip toe around this and say that it's the removal of knowledge or whatever but the removal is still some sort of extra-special thingy. And we're back to Believers 101 conversation: Why do you think God exists? Because I know it. Why don't I "know" it? Because you haven't realized it. Oh. Anything that sounds like a conclusion has been handled by the thinker and in that, it is what it is. For example, here are two different suggestions: 1) There is a subject that is not subject to identification and that is what you are -- you can't know the knower because if you turn around to look you just see more objects. You can't get behind yourself. What you are is not subject to objectification. 2) Turn your attention 180 degrees, and look directly inward and be aware of being aware. To the intellect, these sound like opposites -- or at least, as if they contradict one another, but they're pointing to exactly the same ineffable absence. They are pointing to the person you are suggesting to "Turn your attention 180 degrees, and look directly inward", that person is the 'doer' of the awareness you are suggesting they turn inward.. what they will be aware of is themselves looking outward, experiencing their interconnected existence.. the mystical implications of 'being aware of being aware' are nonexistent, it is the person's 'self-awareness', the reference point for their physical existence, their 'part' of their 'whole'.. Be well..
|
|