|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2015 2:16:27 GMT -5
I think the pointing is an egotistic apparition that stems from the desire to be a guru figure. I think you tend to look for the self centered motives in folks.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2015 2:18:58 GMT -5
What is pointed to is neither an experience nor a conceptual understanding. It's more subtle than that, which is why it's called a pointer rather than a description or a model. What the pointer points toward is whatcha call a realization. What the pointer points to is what that experiencer has understood about the experiences they've had.. 'realization' is what you understand about some of the experiences you've been almost present for.. if you had been fully present, you would have realized that realization is just a conceptual model you prefer.. it's called a 'pointer' to create the illusion that it shouldn't be scrutinized along with other ideas.. It's not possible to converse about something that has never happened to you.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2015 2:29:31 GMT -5
It's disingenuous to argue for the wrongness of others for years, and then call it wrong to say others are wrong and I'm right. Every post in every contentious discussion here makes that implied claim. If you were actually so gentle as to say 'I see it differently, but your view is equally true', then I would take a different approach in this response, but that's not how you operate. If you did, I would probly say you are caught up in some new age idea that every view is equally valid, then sing a bar of Kumbaya. Some ideas are seriously problematic. Illusions and self delusions are not conducive to freedom and Peace, and discussing what is illusion and what is not has potential value. Making everybody right, not that you even remotely have that in mind, has no potential beyond making friends and playing the smile game. I don't argue for the wrongness of others, i point out inconsistencies, others 'feel' wrong due to the realization that their understanding is inconsistent, and they try to blame the messenger..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 17, 2015 3:49:55 GMT -5
Seems to me that the only reason to engage the appearance of insincerity is to confirm the appearance, and once that's done, any further engagement is just amplifying it. That's a specific relevant to my general mea culpa. I spose it's mine too. I presume the potential for others to benefit from that engagement, but perhaps not. The question of benefit is tricky isn't it? Someone brings their ideas to the marketplace to be validated, and it's really not too hard to figure out if they have zero interest in examining why that's not happening. The potential benefit might be in the future in that case, who's to say for sure? On the other side of the equation is cost.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 17, 2015 5:05:00 GMT -5
I think the pointing is an egotistic apparition that stems from the desire to be a guru figure. I think you tend to look for the self centered motives in folks. I don't, not in the way you think anyway, and I can understand making a pointing gesture in passing, but I think when it becomes a predominant behavior it seems somewhat obsessive, authoritative and a little overbearing. In that case, I wonder what kind of egocentricity is being served by the behaviour.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2015 5:44:40 GMT -5
It's disingenuous to argue for the wrongness of others for years, and then call it wrong to say others are wrong and I'm right. Every post in every contentious discussion here makes that implied claim. If you were actually so gentle as to say 'I see it differently, but your view is equally true', then I would take a different approach in this response, but that's not how you operate. If you did, I would probly say you are caught up in some new age idea that every view is equally valid, then sing a bar of Kumbaya. Some ideas are seriously problematic. Illusions and self delusions are not conducive to freedom and Peace, and discussing what is illusion and what is not has potential value. Making everybody right, not that you even remotely have that in mind, has no potential beyond making friends and playing the smile game. I don't argue for the wrongness of others, i point out inconsistencies, others 'feel' wrong due to the realization that their understanding is inconsistent, and they try to blame the messenger.. isn't this description the very definition of pompous?
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 17, 2015 6:29:52 GMT -5
I don't argue for the wrongness of others, i point out inconsistencies, others 'feel' wrong due to the realization that their understanding is inconsistent, and they try to blame the messenger.. isn't this description the very definition of pompous? I don't know, it seems reasonable to point out contradictions (which is what I think inconsistencies are).
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 17, 2015 6:36:12 GMT -5
I don't argue for the wrongness of others, i point out inconsistencies, others 'feel' wrong due to the realization that their understanding is inconsistent, and they try to blame the messenger.. isn't this description the very definition of pompous? Thanks for asking.. no, it isn't. It's interesting that a group of aligned believers feel empowered to point out the inconsistencies they see in others, and tell the others what is the 'right' way to believe, but.. when someone points out inconsistencies, and doesn't tell others the 'right' way to believe, trusting that letting go of beliefs and knowings is sufficient in itself to expose 'isness' and actuality, which is all that is needed.. when it is suggested that the absence of attachment to any belief or knowing, including oneness and nonduality, is liberation.. the attachment to beliefs about oneness/nonduality/pointing/beliefs compels the attached believer to react with accusatory illusions..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 17, 2015 6:54:18 GMT -5
What the pointer points to is what that experiencer has understood about the experiences they've had.. 'realization' is what you understand about some of the experiences you've been almost present for.. if you had been fully present, you would have realized that realization is just a conceptual model you prefer.. it's called a 'pointer' to create the illusion that it shouldn't be scrutinized along with other ideas.. It's not possible to converse about something that has never happened to you. That's your way of dodging discussions that expose the contradictions in your beliefs.. you make claim that "It's not possible to converse", then follow that claim with your misrepresentation of actuality, you paint an illusion about me to distort the perceptions of others.. the problem is that you insist that those that have had the same experience also understand that experience in the same way you do.. rather than crusade an agenda of conformity to your beliefs, why not apply the understanding of the realization to the Life that is actually happening.. I have actually been where you are in the process of self-discovery, but i didn't get attached to it or trapped by it like some people..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2015 7:10:42 GMT -5
isn't this description the very definition of pompous? Thanks for asking.. no, it isn't. It's interesting that a group of aligned believers feel empowered to point out the inconsistencies they see in others, and tell the others what is the 'right' way to believe, but.. when someone points out inconsistencies, and doesn't tell others the 'right' way to believe, trusting that letting go of beliefs and knowings is sufficient in itself to expose 'isness' and actuality, which is all that is needed.. when it is suggested that the absence of attachment to any belief or knowing, including oneness and nonduality, is liberation.. the attachment to beliefs about oneness/nonduality/pointing/beliefs compels the attached believer to react with accusatory illusions.. sorry, I forgot any conversation with you will revolve around your misunderstandings of nonduality ... which you erroneously believe to be a dogma
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 17, 2015 7:31:39 GMT -5
Thanks for asking.. no, it isn't. It's interesting that a group of aligned believers feel empowered to point out the inconsistencies they see in others, and tell the others what is the 'right' way to believe, but.. when someone points out inconsistencies, and doesn't tell others the 'right' way to believe, trusting that letting go of beliefs and knowings is sufficient in itself to expose 'isness' and actuality, which is all that is needed.. when it is suggested that the absence of attachment to any belief or knowing, including oneness and nonduality, is liberation.. the attachment to beliefs about oneness/nonduality/pointing/beliefs compels the attached believer to react with accusatory illusions.. sorry, I forgot any conversation with you will revolve around your misunderstandings of nonduality ... which you erroneously believe to be a dogma What is it that i don't understand about nonduality?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2015 7:37:58 GMT -5
sorry, I forgot any conversation with you will revolve around your misunderstandings of nonduality ... which you erroneously believe to be a dogma What is it that i don't understand about nonduality? Who have you written that to?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2015 7:47:38 GMT -5
sorry, I forgot any conversation with you will revolve around your misunderstandings of nonduality ... which you erroneously believe to be a dogma What is it that i don't understand about nonduality? you could start with this... What is pointed to is neither an experience nor a conceptual understanding. It's more subtle than that, which is why it's called a pointer rather than a description or a model. What the pointer points toward is whatcha call a realization. What the pointer points to is what that experiencer has understood about the experiences they've had.. 'realization' is what you understand about some of the experiences you've been almost present for.. if you had been fully present, you would have realized that realization is just a conceptual model you prefer.. it's called a 'pointer' to create the illusion that it shouldn't be scrutinized along with other ideas..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2015 12:21:18 GMT -5
I spose it's mine too. I presume the potential for others to benefit from that engagement, but perhaps not. The question of benefit is tricky isn't it? Someone brings their ideas to the marketplace to be validated, and it's really not too hard to figure out if they have zero interest in examining why that's not happening. The potential benefit might be in the future in that case, who's to say for sure? On the other side of the equation is cost. Well, often there's no serious idea of the one being discussed with benefiting, but yeah, the focus is just in 'looking' and talking about it. I don't think I'm qualified to know how or when one might benefit.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 17, 2015 12:22:17 GMT -5
I think you tend to look for the self centered motives in folks. I don't, not in the way you think anyway, and I can understand making a pointing gesture in passing, but I think when it becomes a predominant behavior it seems somewhat obsessive, authoritative and a little overbearing. In that case, I wonder what kind of egocentricity is being served by the behaviour. That's what I'm saying.
|
|