|
Post by tzujanli on Sept 29, 2014 5:14:45 GMT -5
No, your 'experience' of those "words, labels, descriptions, etc etc" is true/happening.. the words only become 'true for you' when you believe they do.. Yes, that an experience of the "words, labels, etc etc" happens is true, and yes, "true" only when believed and in a relative contextual sense. Your insistence on separation being the case is just that, believed to be true. And such separation can not appear true without that belief. Perhaps in the quietness of mind, if not for a sec, an awareness of that will dawn. What gives rise to the insistence of separation, which actually takes effort to maintain? 'True for you', indicates the separation between mindscapes.. separation is a concept and oneness is a concept, the experience that that is labeled separation is commonly experienced among most people.. the idea that 'oneness/nonduality is truth' is the experiencer's imagined idea about what is happening.. separation is tangibly experiencable, nonduality is a mind-play..
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Sept 29, 2014 8:24:57 GMT -5
Yes, that an experience of the "words, labels, etc etc" happens is true, and yes, "true" only when believed and in a relative contextual sense. Your insistence on separation being the case is just that, believed to be true. And such separation can not appear true without that belief. Perhaps in the quietness of mind, if not for a sec, an awareness of that will dawn. What gives rise to the insistence of separation, which actually takes effort to maintain? (1)'True for you', indicates the separation between mindscapes.. separation is a concept and oneness is a concept, the experience that that is labeled separation is commonly experienced among most people.. (2)the idea that 'oneness/nonduality is truth' is the experiencer's imagined idea about what is happening.. (3)separation is tangibly experiencable, nonduality is a mind-play.. 1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>>
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 29, 2014 9:27:37 GMT -5
(1)'True for you', indicates the separation between mindscapes.. separation is a concept and oneness is a concept, the experience that that is labeled separation is commonly experienced among most people.. (2)the idea that 'oneness/nonduality is truth' is the experiencer's imagined idea about what is happening.. (3)separation is tangibly experiencable, nonduality is a mind-play.. 1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>> SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha.
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 29, 2014 12:06:51 GMT -5
It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. It is turtles all the way down, but they get really fuzzy towards the end One of the ways to realize you're lucid dreaming while sleeping through the night is to try to read the fine print in a book/newspaper. The nightly dream never gets detailed enough to let you read text in a book or to flip light switches. Similarly, the waking dream never gets detailed enough to see atoms and subatomic particles. One of the current theories proposes that they are clouds of probability, but in truth they were not created [yet] in great enough detail to be seen. So, the last turtle is the 'creator' - but s/he can't be seen by looking down the fuzzy chain of turtles - because the creator (the 'last' turtle) is the one looking. The turtles are in a circle!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 29, 2014 15:27:25 GMT -5
1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>> SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 29, 2014 15:33:42 GMT -5
It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. It is turtles all the way down, but they get really fuzzy towards the end One of the ways to realize you're lucid dreaming while sleeping through the night is to try to read the fine print in a book/newspaper. The nightly dream never gets detailed enough to let you read text in a book or to flip light switches. Similarly, the waking dream never gets detailed enough to see atoms and subatomic particles. One of the current theories proposes that they are clouds of probability, but in truth they were not created [yet] in great enough detail to be seen. So, the last turtle is the 'creator' - but s/he can't be seen by looking down the fuzzy chain of turtles - because the creator (the 'last' turtle) is the one looking. The turtles are in a circle! Is that like the King Aurthur dealio but with mutant-ninja-turtle nights instead of funny dudes with English accents??
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Sept 29, 2014 20:06:49 GMT -5
1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>> SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. Your opening premise could use some clarity.. what is is being contested is not whether others have had a 'cosmic consciousness experience', but whether they agree with your description of that experience.. i'm not interested in trying to describe 'my' experience or even that special words be used, rather i'm interested that others have the opportunity for the same sort of experience without the illusion that only special words and phrases are valid descriptors.. I ask students to suspend thinking and imagining, to let the mind be still, and just notice what's happening.. then, after a while, i ask them to describe what they noticed.. when the experiencer has had a still-minded experience and they are describing it, they quickly realize the difference between what they experienced and what they 'think' about the experience.. the imagining you asked the students to do, that is flaw in the nonduality model, it's ideas, and word-play.. in the same experiement ask the students to try to 'breathe' water, see if they can figure-out where they begin and water ends.. both experiments form the same illusion, 'ideas' about what is happening.. there's water, okay to drink, not so okay to breathe..
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 30, 2014 8:26:56 GMT -5
Is that like the King Aurthur dealio but with mutant-ninja-turtle nights instead of funny dudes with English accents?? Absolutely, though they are still-mind-not-knowing-ninja-turtles!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 30, 2014 13:53:44 GMT -5
the limitation of metaphor is always demonstrated by the inevitable misuse of it by the thinking reasoning emoting mind, which in no sense other than the most absurd could be characterized as "still" .. unless, of course, we change the meaning of the word "still", in "still mind" to mean "remains as"... yup! that's still mind!
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Oct 3, 2014 21:24:10 GMT -5
1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>> SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. Yeah, at the time I thought I'd have an open honest discussion and see what became of it. I would say that Tzu honestly thinks he is fighting the good fight. But the fact is, he is still fighting. That effort is what defines the separate self. That suffers. So, I think, "How ironic."
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Oct 3, 2014 21:42:51 GMT -5
SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. Your opening premise could use some clarity.. what is is being contested is not whether others have had a 'cosmic consciousness experience', but whether they agree with your description of that experience.. i'm not interested in trying to describe 'my' experience or even that special words be used, rather i'm interested that others have the opportunity for the same sort of experience without the illusion that only special words and phrases are valid descriptors.. I ask students to suspend thinking and imagining, to let the mind be still, and just notice what's happening.. then, after a while, i ask them to describe what they noticed.. when the experiencer has had a still-minded experience and they are describing it, they quickly realize the difference between what they experienced and what they 'think' about the experience.. the imagining you asked the students to do, that is flaw in the nonduality model, it's ideas, and word-play.. in the same experiement ask the students to try to 'breathe' water, see if they can figure-out where they begin and water ends.. both experiments form the same illusion, 'ideas' about what is happening.. there's water, okay to drink, not so okay to breathe.. Could it be that you don't like the "non-duality model" for reasons you've believed? Granted, it seems like word play on the surface. You're only noticing the waves, not the ocean it points to.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 4, 2014 8:01:56 GMT -5
1-OK, so separation and oneness are concepts when thought about, when perceived by the mind. Most people understand life from the limited perspective, as such. Therefore, most people would consider the conversations found on this website a total waste of time. Fair enough. 2- All ideas are simply of the mind. Yes. Some of the greatest and wealthiest 'teachers' merely speak about these things, without having any genuine clue as to what the ideas are ACTUALLY pointing. This situation creates a game context in which only the mind is a player, interacting through its mindscape reality. Many of such mindscapes are that players ONLY reality, giving rise to a limited personal view of reality (sometimes quite prison-like). Without such limited personal points of view and perspective on what another player is seeing as reality, the game never starts. 3- Separation is experienced because of the assumed validity of the believed thoughts that compell the mind (a limited tool) to idenitfy as that "separate" existence (i.e., from the rest of existence). These senses, used by the mind to interact with its (assumed) "other" physical surroundings, give the feeling that this separation is true. As one starts to question all of this conditioned personal point of view, things start to get a little wonky, sending the mindscape into a bit of a tailspin. The suffering that has always been there beneath the surface, becomes more apparent. Methods are created that help the organism cope with that, which more or less appears as "the search". From that perspective, nonduality looks like a mind game, because it does not equate with what is rationalized, felt to be true, or otherwise. The pointers are judged in much the same fashion by that limited PPoV. It is another ploy by the ego (self-identified ruler of the mindscape) to remain central, real, correct, etc. Its methodology gets twisted, more confused, more pronounced... If sincere seeking for Truth continues, all of these methods may be seen to fail. What was once held in its tight grip slips,,, <<Break>> SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. Here's the image I came up with a few years ago. If you think you are wholly separate person, have someone padlock you in a walk-in refrigerator, and throw away the key, and see how that works for ya.......... However, from the non-dual perspective, I don't get the absolute emphasis on oneness (turtles only) vs complexity. Have you ever seen a whirlpool in a river? The non-dual perspective is like saying, there is no whirlpool, there is just a swirl of water. We're all made up of a certain combination of elements. The non-dual perspective is like saying that since we are all made up of the same elements, there is no separate you, no separate me. I'd rather look at the purpose and meaning of the separation and complexity rather than the origination via oneness. I can write down the letters, A,B,C,D..............W,X,Y,Z, and point out that all the books ever written in English are composed by combinations of those 26 letters. (Digital language goes even further to express everything by 1 & 0, essentially off and on). SO WHAT? The meaning of those books is not contained in the letters. The meaning of life comes from actual complexity. The meaning of the books comes from symbolic complexity. sdp
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2014 1:46:20 GMT -5
When will this distortion of women stop? Considering the anti-female views proselytized by many (if not most) of the world's religions, and the fear that most uneducated men have regarding women gaining power or equality of any kind, I suspect that it will be a long long time in the future. I've thought for a few good years now, that it is only when the real peaceful women of Islam, become educated elders of their communities. That this persecution will end, and the downright ludicrous treatment of Muslim women will have been totally diluted away. The Arabic nation will one day, probably when all the oil has dried up, recognise that their Moon God of Allah, really is the Arms, Leg and Heart of all people. And the nation as a civilisation will then still be 10 years behind the Industrialised world, and their then generational implementation. Yes, you will just be photographs and bones in a meticulously tended field by then, but, wish it through my man, wish it through.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 5, 2014 9:17:07 GMT -5
SN: I suspect that you're wasting your time here. Unless someone has directly experienced the unity and oneness of the cosmos via a cosmic consciousness experience, or seen through the culturally-indoctrinated mindscape to what lies beyond, there is almost no hope of understanding what's being pointed to. For some people the word "oneness" is a concept, only, but for peeps who have seen what the word points to, the word is a pointer, only. One of the exercises I used to ask college students to do was to imagine drinking a glass of water and then decide precisely when the water ceased to be something external and became "them." Most students half-heartedly thought about it, but couldn't quite grasp what the exercise was pointing to. I would ask them to consider where the boundary of "their body" was when they opened their mouth. Ha ha. IOW, as the water entered the gap between "their" lips and teeth, when did it penetrate the boundary of "themselves" and become part of "them?" One evening after explaining the exercise, one student got a strange look on his face, and almost gasped in amazement. He looked at me, and quizzically asked, "What am I?" I replied, "That's the whole point; most people have no idea. They assume that they're a thing, a human body, interacting with an external world composed of things, but is that the truth? Contemplate the boundaries that define who you think you are. Is the air in front of your face before you breathe it in you or not you? When you take the next breath, when, precisely, does that air become you?" By the look on his face, I could see that he was the only person in the room who was actually sensing, intuitively, what was being pointed to. Usually the mind remains in charge and the questioning never goes deep enough, but when it does, watch out! It's turtles all the way down! Ha ha. Here's the image I came up with a few years ago. If you think you are wholly separate person, have someone padlock you in a walk-in refrigerator, and throw away the key, and see how that works for ya.......... However, from the non-dual perspective, I don't get the absolute emphasis on oneness (turtles only) vs complexity. Have you ever seen a whirlpool in a river? The non-dual perspective is like saying, there is no whirlpool, there is just a swirl of water. We're all made up of a certain combination of elements. The non-dual perspective is like saying that since we are all made up of the same elements, there is no separate you, no separate me. I'd rather look at the purpose and meaning of the separation and complexity rather than the origination via oneness. I can write down the letters, A,B,C,D..............W,X,Y,Z, and point out that all the books ever written in English are composed by combinations of those 26 letters. (Digital language goes even further to express everything by 1 & 0, essentially off and on). SO WHAT? The meaning of those books is not contained in the letters. The meaning of life comes from actual complexity. The meaning of the books comes from symbolic complexity. sdp SDP: The turtles metaphor is used not as a pointer to complexity but to the whole of reality and the mistake of imagining separate and/or complex aspects of reality. Physicists began asking, "What composes matter?" This question led them to the idea that matter is composed of atoms. They then asked, "Well, what composes atoms?" This question led them to the idea of protons, neutrons, and electrons. They then asked, "Well, what composes those three things?" This led them to the idea of muons, mesons, quarks, and a whole host of other imaginary components. Today, they are still asking the, "Well what composes_______?" but it's turtles all the way down. The turtles metaphor is pointing away from this kind of thinking so that the Wholeness underlying all ideas can be intuited or perceived directly.The complexity you are referring to is like a cartoon of a human body compared to the real thing. When oneness is seen, the idea of complexity becomes laughable in comparison. The human mind cannot comprehend the vastness of the One; it can only comprehend the idea of oneness. All of the statements about non-duality you made in this post have nothing to do with what is being pointed to. To understand, the mind must be left behind, at least temporarily. How does one get from here to there? Simply stop imagining, and incessant thinking will then cease to obscure the obvious. The truth cannot be imagined, and whatever is imagined takes the mind in the wrong direction. Psalms 46:10 says, "Be still and know (the Absolute)." It doesn't say, "Think and know."
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 5, 2014 20:52:43 GMT -5
Here's the image I came up with a few years ago. If you think you are wholly separate person, have someone padlock you in a walk-in refrigerator, and throw away the key, and see how that works for ya.......... However, from the non-dual perspective, I don't get the absolute emphasis on oneness (turtles only) vs complexity. Have you ever seen a whirlpool in a river? The non-dual perspective is like saying, there is no whirlpool, there is just a swirl of water. We're all made up of a certain combination of elements. The non-dual perspective is like saying that since we are all made up of the same elements, there is no separate you, no separate me. I'd rather look at the purpose and meaning of the separation and complexity rather than the origination via oneness. I can write down the letters, A,B,C,D..............W,X,Y,Z, and point out that all the books ever written in English are composed by combinations of those 26 letters. (Digital language goes even further to express everything by 1 & 0, essentially off and on). SO WHAT? The meaning of those books is not contained in the letters. The meaning of life comes from actual complexity. The meaning of the books comes from symbolic complexity. sdp SDP: The turtles metaphor is used not as a pointer to complexity but to the whole of reality and the mistake of imagining separate and/or complex aspects of reality. Physicists began asking, "What composes matter?" This question led them to the idea that matter is composed of atoms. They then asked, "Well, what composes atoms?" This question led them to the idea of protons, neutrons, and electrons. They then asked, "Well, what composes those three things?" This led them to the idea of muons, mesons, quarks, and a whole host of other imaginary components. Today, they are still asking the, "Well what composes_______?" but it's turtles all the way down. The turtles metaphor is pointing away from this kind of thinking so that the Wholeness underlying all ideas can be intuited or perceived directly.The complexity you are referring to is like a cartoon of a human body compared to the real thing. When oneness is seen, the idea of complexity becomes laughable in comparison. The human mind cannot comprehend the vastness of the One; it can only comprehend the idea of oneness. All of the statements about non-duality you made in this post have nothing to do with what is being pointed to. To understand, the mind must be left behind, at least temporarily. How does one get from here to there? Simply stop imagining, and incessant thinking will then cease to obscure the obvious. The truth cannot be imagined, and whatever is imagined takes the mind in the wrong direction. Psalms 46:10 says, "Be still and know (the Absolute)." It doesn't say, "Think and know."Hey, maybe that's what it really says, and it was just mistranslated. Hehe. Seems like I keep encountering the 'same substance' idea and the 'interconnected parts' idea to describe oneness. I actually used to think oneness was pretty self explanatory as a concept. It used to confuse me when peeps would ask to have it defined. Now I get what the problem is anyhoo.
|
|