|
Post by Reefs on Nov 27, 2014 12:07:29 GMT -5
There is no 'right and wrong', only consequences.. and the arbitrary nature of the desirability we assign to those consequences.. Truth is the experience itself, not the words, labels, beliefs, and stories that are attached to the experience.. That's not how 'truth' is meant in non-duality. Non-duality is not about experiences. The non-dual pointers are not pointing to an experience.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Nov 27, 2014 12:21:57 GMT -5
There is no 'right and wrong', only consequences.. and the arbitrary nature of the desirability we assign to those consequences.. Truth is the experience itself, not the words, labels, beliefs, and stories that are attached to the experience.. That's not how 'truth' is meant in non-duality. Non-duality is not about experiences. The non-dual pointers are not pointing to an experience. Cool, what are the non-dual pointer pointing to?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 27, 2014 12:41:34 GMT -5
That's not how 'truth' is meant in non-duality. Non-duality is not about experiences. The non-dual pointers are not pointing to an experience. Cool, what are the non-dual pointer pointing to? An absence.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Nov 27, 2014 17:22:30 GMT -5
" Truth cannot be known because it is prior to the arising of experience. Experiences are made of the truth. An experience is the truth- awareness or pure consciousness - that has already taken form- has become manifest in time and space. The truth itself is beyond time and space." - Nukunu I'd heard this before in slightly different words many many times before but yesterday I was really struck by it, especially the first sentence that I separated out - fark..... What quotes/words have you been struck by after hearing them many times before without "feeling" them? Zackly. So,... Looking for truth (to be an event, or for things to be a particular way) is going to be doomed to failure, because that's all stuff that's experienced, and that quote is saying truth is what's there before experience. So if you can't know it as such, aren't you just left with the being of it? the being of all of it? (trying to not get into ideas and just stick with what's happening)
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Nov 27, 2014 18:52:09 GMT -5
Cool, what are the non-dual pointer pointing to? An absence. How do you point to the absence of non-duality pointers?.. at some point in the evolution of the experiencer's awareness, it is realized that even non-duality or oneness misses the mark, and invoking that pointer is the first cut of a 'death by a thousand cuts'.. How is non-duality not about experiences?.. how do you know of the absence except by experiencing the absence, or by missing the experience that is absent?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 27, 2014 20:06:38 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 27, 2014 20:16:50 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve. Maybe he could have said: "How do you point to the absence of non-duality pointers?.. at some point in the experiencer's awareness, it is realized that even non-duality or oneness misses the mark, and invoking that pointer is the first cut of a 'death by a thousand cuts'.. Maybe that's what he meant or was trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Nov 27, 2014 21:34:10 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve. Using the common understanding of the word 'Awareness', as described here, from Wikipedia: Using that commonly understood description of 'Awareness', i understand that the state or ability to perceive and to feel existence does evolve.. what is different about your understanding?..
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 27, 2014 21:39:41 GMT -5
One word. I've heard it but missed it for years. I now hear it all the time on BBC America (especially on Doctor Who). British: oye Would you say that word has changed your life for the better? Oye!
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 27, 2014 21:44:52 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve. Would you say that consciousness evolves?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 27, 2014 21:54:13 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve. Using the common understanding of the word 'Awareness', as described here, from Wikipedia: Using that commonly understood description of 'Awareness', i understand that the state or ability to perceive and to feel existence does evolve.. what is different about your understanding?.. Recall some vivid experience from childhood. Is there any difference between the awareness of that event in the past and the current awareness of whatever is happening? Has anything changed in any way? Has it aged? Does awareness react in any way?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 27, 2014 22:02:05 GMT -5
Awareness does not evolve. Using the common understanding of the word 'Awareness', as described here, from Wikipedia: Using that commonly understood description of 'Awareness', i understand that the state or ability to perceive and to feel existence does evolve.. what is different about your understanding?.. There's nothing in the Wiki definition that implies awareness can evolve.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 27, 2014 22:04:07 GMT -5
Would you say that word has changed your life for the better? Oye! Would you say it has caused you to be monosyllabic?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Nov 27, 2014 22:25:18 GMT -5
Using the common understanding of the word 'Awareness', as described here, from Wikipedia: Using that commonly understood description of 'Awareness', i understand that the state or ability to perceive and to feel existence does evolve.. what is different about your understanding?.. Recall some vivid experience from childhood. Is there any difference between the awareness of that event in the past and the current awareness of whatever is happening? Has anything changed in any way? Has it aged? Does awareness react in any way? Yes, there is a difference between the awareness past and present.. awareness present is expanded by virtue of the additional experience informing the state or ability to perceive of differing parameters.. Since it's not clear to me, are we agreed on the Wiki description of awareness? some correspondents use the word differently, and i want to understand your meaning to reply appropriately..
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 28, 2014 2:19:25 GMT -5
So,... Looking for truth (to be an event, or for things to be a particular way) is going to be doomed to failure, because that's all stuff that's experienced, and that quote is saying truth is what's there before experience. So if you can't know it as such, aren't you just left with the being of it? the being of all of it? (trying to not get into ideas and just stick with what's happening) What you can know about it is what it is not - that's what I am mostly talking about here. What you can also know about it is how it affects experience - that's what most folks are interested in talking about. Which is fine, but it misses the point because non-duality is about what is real, what does not come and go, and experiences come and go and are therefore are false. And so it is a distraction.
|
|