|
Post by laughter on Oct 29, 2013 23:16:07 GMT -5
GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTWanted to give a heads-up here in that even though the thread title doesn't indicate it, I'm going to moderate the thread as no-attack from here on out. My understanding of no-attack would subject the following to moderation: - any personal disparagement - any disparagement of ideas that either the writer or the reader have closely identified with the writer. The method of moderation will be to move the moderated content into a parallel thread in the unmoderated board. Only overtly offensive material will be deleted. Please direct any comments or questions on this to this thread. Please direct any requests for moderation of content that you might consider subject to no-attack moderation to this thread or PM me and I'll begin a conversation on it there. Thank you for your attention! bump
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 13:36:45 GMT -5
There's monograph free to view if you sign up to the fellowship website. They're archiving all his talks, both in audio and transcribed format. under the audio archives there are literally hundreds of taped talks and their corresponding transcriptions; but the monograph is under the "monographs" section and is entitled "A Mystic View of the World" or something similar... He mentions in "The Philosophy of Consciousness Without and Object, too." Here's a relevant excerpt from the monograph: "Taking as a base the transcendent state of consciousness, conceive the universe in the primordial sense as an utter Fullness in every sense, and potentially capable of producing every discrete particularization. In the primordial sense there is full Consciousness without self-consciousness. Now, to complete Fullness nothing can be added, except awareness of this Fullness as Fullness. But we can conceive of something less than fullness. Without undertaking to explain how the process could start, predicate an effect produced in the Fullness which we might call a partial blanking out by a willed act of negation. The effect produced by this would be something on the order of emptiness or a true void. This void produces the only possible contrast with the Fullness and, for the first*time, relative consciousness becomes possible. This we may call a process of partial blinding or blanking out."When Wolff talks of "voidness" here he means voidness as in nescience or non-consciousness, not Voidness as in Shunyata. He gives a wonderful account of the latter in a talk entitled "On the Meaning of Voidness." It's quite brilliant. Thanks I'm checking out his stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 13:53:36 GMT -5
I have no idea what you might desire. Most people are looking for answers to existential questions, and I was pointing to what can collapse all such questions (ie. seeing through the questioner). To question is about accepting the unknown - not about finding answers. That's interesting. To question may be about finding answers, in which case one could say it is not about accepting the unknown. But to question may just be the articulation of a diving board on the precipice of an abyss, where there is acceptance of the lack of a pool that one would be swan diving into. As soon as freefall is happening the diving board is moot. One thing that occurred to me today is that there is no positive version of unbeknownst. Or, if there is, it is unbeknownst to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 14:28:21 GMT -5
To question is about accepting the unknown - not about finding answers. That's interesting. To question may be about finding answers, in which case one could say it is not about accepting the unknown. But to question may just be the articulation of a diving board on the precipice of an abyss, where there is acceptance of the lack of a pool that one would be swan diving into. As soon as freefall is happening the diving board is moot. One thing that occurred to me today is that there is no positive version of unbeknownst. Or, if there is, it is unbeknownst to me. If I ask where to find baked beans in the shop, then that question is one that seeks an answer. So sometimes questions are for finding answers. But sometimes it is beneficial to take the stock answer (in this case, know thyself) and put it into a state of question. It is not that there is no substance in the answer, but there is a paradoxical state in which the answer is lived through the question. In my life, I have found a realisation that is eye opening in one moment...and I have gone on to share that eye opening realisation many times after the moment has passed. In this way, the knowing/wisdom of a moment, develops into knowledge or doctrine in the next. To allow the question to form anew in each moment, it may be that we find a similar answer again and again, but, it also opens a doorway for new possibilities or for the unknown to enter into our realisation.
|
|