Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 11:35:40 GMT -5
enigma, if your committed to the truth, or rather what is not true, why do you keep your philosophy to a select few? Especially when it's the non selective who have it wrong? I don't have an agenda. So if there is just YOU, why are YOU selective with YOU when you talk about your psychosis?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2015 13:06:32 GMT -5
Zackly. You're getting a glimpse (at least) of some of the fundamental illusions mind creates about perception, and over time accepts as fact. Our direct experience is not actually showing us an 'out there'.It IS unsettling, but maybe it's a little comfort to know that your daughter is literally in your heart. (Heart of being) enigma, how do you feel about knowing that what you said, sounds like your suffering from hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis, to people? ........... .............. ................ ................... ....................... ..................... ..................... .......................... Oh.........wait a minute.......hE's right. Although I don't agree with E concerning his full view of nonduality, and I do believe that there is an >out there<, we do not have ~ direct~ experience of what's out there. We only have direct experience of our own sensations. So E is essentially correct. What we see isn't out there, it's in our head/mind-body.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2015 13:15:40 GMT -5
So if there is just YOU, why are YOU selective with YOU when you talk about your psychosis? Yea........I've had this conversation with E numerous times. I've suggested previously that even if he is right, he can't function in life without a sense of separation. He just comes back with, Why not? source has nailed you here, THAT is why not. I'll be interested in your answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 13:15:39 GMT -5
Now THAT'S unsettling. Hehe
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 13:20:29 GMT -5
enigma, how do you feel about knowing that what you said, sounds like your suffering from hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis, to people? ........... .............. ................ ................... ....................... ..................... ..................... .......................... Oh.........wait a minute.......hE's right. Although I don't agree with E concerning his full view of nonduality, and I do believe that there is an >out there<, we do not have ~ direct~ experience of what's out there. We only have direct experience of our own sensations. So E is essentially correct. What we see isn't out there, it's in our head/mind-body. stardustpilgrim, isn't "our head/mind-body" part of what "isn't out there"?
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jan 27, 2015 13:24:27 GMT -5
Zackly. You're getting a glimpse (at least) of some of the fundamental illusions mind creates about perception, and over time accepts as fact. Our direct experience is not actually showing us an 'out there'. It IS unsettling, but maybe it's a little comfort to know that your daughter is literally in your heart. (Heart of being) Yeah cool,. but then it's not just her in there! That's a function of where and how you cast your attention :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 13:30:56 GMT -5
So if there is just YOU, why are YOU selective with YOU when you talk about your psychosis? Yea........I've had this conversation with E numerous times. I've suggested previously that even if he is right, he can't function in life without a sense of separation. He just comes back with, Why not? source has nailed you here, THAT is why not. I'll be interested in your answer. Hi stardustpilgrim, the way I see it, is that the senses and the dynamics of perception associated with them don't function any differently just because of mental psychosis. Even if there is just YOU, YOU will still jump out of the way of an illusory truck, so that YOU don't get run over and killed by YOU.
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jan 27, 2015 13:45:31 GMT -5
Zackly. You're getting a glimpse (at least) of some of the fundamental illusions mind creates about perception, and over time accepts as fact. Our direct experience is not actually showing us an 'out there'.It IS unsettling, but maybe it's a little comfort to know that your daughter is literally in your heart. (Heart of being) enigma, how do you feel about knowing that what you said, sounds like your suffering from hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis, to people? I'll put my two cents in this pot so-to-speak ;-) If what Enigma wrote sounds like hallucination or psychosis, have you considered the possibility that your own direct experience may not be the totality of all people's experience? Said another way...To form an intellectual opinion that what E wrote is some sort of illusion or derangement, is assuming that you yourself have plumbed the depths of direct experience on this matter, and assumes that becuase you have not directly experienced what E said that E must be dillusional....Frankly it's a lack of genuine scientific curiosity that would lead folks to assume that because E's stated experience is different than their own, that E must be wrong. It's a way of discounting another's direct experience, and this usually occurs as a result of someone clinging rigidly to their own views and direct personal experiences, with little interest in further exploration ;-) In response to folks like that, I generally don't argue the points intellectually, or enter into a philosophical debate, as this generally only entrenches folks into their current views more deeply. Instead, I find it useful to offer to show them a method by which they can have a similar direct experience of phenomena like 'no-out-there' or everything being inside you. Here is a quick query for you...when you look at a tree, or a table, where does this seeing occur?...where does the table appear? Recently Laughter posted a link to a group of astro-physicists whose math posits that becuase of nature's extreme efficiency, and because all phenomena really only appear within our experience as interpreted by our brain, that mathematically it's very likely that reality as most believe it does not exist, and that instead, the math and the rules of nature would suggest that we are more likely all just Brains floating in empty space. If you take that further, and don't stop with a Brain floating in empty space as nature's lowest common denomenator, then a more accurate representation of the ultimate efficiency of nature would be that we are all nodes of conciousness floating in some ether, creating an erray of experiences that we are not in any way seperate from. All of that is of course an intellectual exploration, there are means of directly experiencing this if you are interested? Do you meditate deeply Source?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 14:45:49 GMT -5
enigma, how do you feel about knowing that what you said, sounds like your suffering from hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis, to people? I'll put my two cents in this pot so-to-speak ;-) If what Enigma wrote sounds like hallucination or psychosis, have you considered the possibility that your own direct experience may not be the totality of all people's experience? Said another way... To form an intellectual opinion that what E wrote is some sort of illusion or derangement, is assuming that you yourself have plumbed the depths of direct experience on this matter, and assumes that becuase you have not directly experienced what E said that E must be dillusional....Frankly it's a lack of genuine scientific curiosity that would lead folks to assume that because E's stated experience is different than their own, that E must be wrong. It's a way of discounting another's direct experience, and this usually occurs as a result of someone clinging rigidly to their own views and direct personal experiences, with little interest in further exploration ;-) In response to folks like that, I generally don't argue the points intellectually, or enter into a philosophical debate, as this generally only entrenches folks into their current views more deeply. Instead, I find it useful to offer to show them a method by which they can have a similar direct experience of phenomena like 'no-out-there' or everything being inside you. Here is a quick query for you...when you look at a tree, or a table, where does this seeing occur?...where does the table appear? Recently Laughter posted a link to a group of astro-physicists whose math posits that becuase of nature's extreme efficiency, and because all phenomena really only appear within our experience as interpreted by our brain, that mathematically it's very likely that reality as most believe it does not exist, and that instead, the math and the rules of nature would suggest that we are more likely all just Brains floating in empty space. If you take that further, and don't stop with a Brain floating in empty space as nature's lowest common denomenator, then a more accurate representation of the ultimate efficiency of nature would be that we are all nodes of conciousness floating in some ether, creating an erray of experiences that we are not in any way seperate from. All of that is of course an intellectual exploration, there are means of directly experiencing this if you are interested? Do you meditate deeply Source? hi steve, the descriptions of hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis are all associated with the loss of being in touch with reality, as it is normally conceived. But anyone who has an interest in spirituality, truth or the ultimate reality doesn't actually conceive of reality as it is normally conceived. That change in the conceiving of reality is therefore a mental psychosis. People, or rather society in general, see that change in the conceiving of reality in a negative and not a positive way. So from my point of view, it's quite possible that it is societies mental psychosis which is out of touch with reality.
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jan 27, 2015 14:57:11 GMT -5
I'll put my two cents in this pot so-to-speak ;-) If what Enigma wrote sounds like hallucination or psychosis, have you considered the possibility that your own direct experience may not be the totality of all people's experience? Said another way... To form an intellectual opinion that what E wrote is some sort of illusion or derangement, is assuming that you yourself have plumbed the depths of direct experience on this matter, and assumes that becuase you have not directly experienced what E said that E must be dillusional....Frankly it's a lack of genuine scientific curiosity that would lead folks to assume that because E's stated experience is different than their own, that E must be wrong. It's a way of discounting another's direct experience, and this usually occurs as a result of someone clinging rigidly to their own views and direct personal experiences, with little interest in further exploration ;-) In response to folks like that, I generally don't argue the points intellectually, or enter into a philosophical debate, as this generally only entrenches folks into their current views more deeply. Instead, I find it useful to offer to show them a method by which they can have a similar direct experience of phenomena like 'no-out-there' or everything being inside you. Here is a quick query for you...when you look at a tree, or a table, where does this seeing occur?...where does the table appear? Recently Laughter posted a link to a group of astro-physicists whose math posits that becuase of nature's extreme efficiency, and because all phenomena really only appear within our experience as interpreted by our brain, that mathematically it's very likely that reality as most believe it does not exist, and that instead, the math and the rules of nature would suggest that we are more likely all just Brains floating in empty space. If you take that further, and don't stop with a Brain floating in empty space as nature's lowest common denomenator, then a more accurate representation of the ultimate efficiency of nature would be that we are all nodes of conciousness floating in some ether, creating an erray of experiences that we are not in any way seperate from. All of that is of course an intellectual exploration, there are means of directly experiencing this if you are interested? Do you meditate deeply Source? hi steve, the descriptions of hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis are all associated with the loss of being in touch with reality, as it is normally conceived. But anyone who has an interest in spirituality, truth or the ultimate reality doesn't actually conceive of reality as it is normally conceived. That change in the conception of reality is therefore a mental psychosis. People, or society in general, sees that change in the conceiving of reality in a negative and not a positive way.Haha, conception is a funny word....most folks in these circles would say to set aside conceptions, and look at what's actually there without pre-conceptions, which is a way of shifting one's perspective of course. But having shifted one's perspective, and experienced a new angle on reality,one then converts that to a conception in order to relate their experience to another. So one might say that there are conceptions about conceptions, and there are conceptions about direct experience, the former is a compounding removal from the direct experience, while the latter is a less compounded removal fro. The direct experience...most folks in these circles try to point away from conceptions, and toward direct experience. ZD and Tzu both do this almost exclusively here. Having said all that, with regard to your post, I think a good bit of that may be in your imagination. As a point of practical experience, I've found that the general population generally responds positively to statements like: "Everything is one, we are all ONE, connected, not seperate, ONE being sharing countless experiences." In contradiction to your view that the general population views comments and exoeriences like that as a psychosis, my exoerience is that the general population, constituting the 'norm', recieved things like that rather well, and in fact, it's only a small minority's that views statements like that as a kind of psychosis ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 15:08:32 GMT -5
hi steve, the descriptions of hallucination, delusion and mental psychosis are all associated with the loss of being in touch with reality, as it is normally conceived. But anyone who has an interest in spirituality, truth or the ultimate reality doesn't actually conceive of reality as it is normally conceived. That change in the conception of reality is therefore a mental psychosis. People, or society in general, sees that change in the conceiving of reality in a negative and not a positive way.Haha, conception is a funny word....most folks in these circles would say to set aside conceptions, and look at what's actually there without pre-conceptions, which is a way of shifting one's perspective of course. But having shifted one's perspective, and experienced a new angle on reality,one then converts that to a conception in order to relate their experience to another. So one might say that there are conceptions about conceptions, and there are conceptions about direct experience, the former is a compounding removal from the direct experience, while the latter is a less compounded removal fro. The direct experience...most folks in these circles try to point away from conceptions, and toward direct experience. ZD and Tzu both do this almost exclusively here. Having said all that, with regard to your post, I think a good bit of that may be in your imagination. As a point of practical experience, I've found that the general population generally responds positively to statements like: "Everything is one, we are all ONE, connected, not seperate, ONE being sharing countless experiences." In contradiction to your view that the general population views comments and exoeriences like that as a psychosis, my exoerience is that the general population, constituting the 'norm', recieved things like that rather well, and in fact, it's only a small minority's that views statements like that as a kind of psychosis ;-) Hi steve, I don't know about any of that. I was only responding to the point you made that I some how or other thought enigma was deranged. I would say that he is far from it.
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jan 27, 2015 15:13:01 GMT -5
Haha, conception is a funny word....most folks in these circles would say to set aside conceptions, and look at what's actually there without pre-conceptions, which is a way of shifting one's perspective of course. But having shifted one's perspective, and experienced a new angle on reality,one then converts that to a conception in order to relate their experience to another. So one might say that there are conceptions about conceptions, and there are conceptions about direct experience, the former is a compounding removal from the direct experience, while the latter is a less compounded removal fro. The direct experience...most folks in these circles try to point away from conceptions, and toward direct experience. ZD and Tzu both do this almost exclusively here. Having said all that, with regard to your post, I think a good bit of that may be in your imagination. As a point of practical experience, I've found that the general population generally responds positively to statements like: "Everything is one, we are all ONE, connected, not seperate, ONE being sharing countless experiences." In contradiction to your view that the general population views comments and exoeriences like that as a psychosis, my exoerience is that the general population, constituting the 'norm', recieved things like that rather well, and in fact, it's only a small minority's that views statements like that as a kind of psychosis ;-) Hi steve, I don't know about any of that. I was only responding to the point you made that I some how or other thought enigma was deranged. I would say that he is far from it. Haha....no that's a mis-understanding....when I used the word 'you' a few posts back, I was using 'you' as a proxy for the gen pop you eluded to ;-)
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2015 15:18:32 GMT -5
........... .............. ................ ................... ....................... ..................... ..................... .......................... Oh.........wait a minute.......hE's right. Although I don't agree with E concerning his full view of nonduality, and I do believe that there is an >out there<, we do not have ~ direct~ experience of what's out there. We only have direct experience of our own sensations. So E is essentially correct. What we see isn't out there, it's in our head/mind-body. stardustpilgrim, isn't "our head/mind-body" part of what "isn't out there"? Hey source, I said very clearly that the external world does exist >out there<. So yes, your head/mind-body exists in the external world, but the senses always mediate, the brain takes the raw materials of chemical and electrically coded information and turns it into what we see, hear, taste, touch and smell. "There's no light inside your head. It's dark in there. There's no sound entering your brain either. It's quite inside. .......You're cortex doesn't really know or sense the world directly. The only thing to cortex knows is the pattern streaming in on the input axons. Your perceived view of the world is created from these patterns, including your sense of self. In fact, your brain can't directly know where the body ends and the world begins. ..........The senses create patterns that are sent to the cortex, and processed....to create a model of the world". Pages 56, 59, 60, 64 On Intelligence by Jeff Hawkins, 2004
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 19:40:04 GMT -5
stardustpilgrim, isn't "our head/mind-body" part of what "isn't out there"? Hey source, I said very clearly that the external world does exist >out there<. So yes, your head/mind-body exists in the external world, but the senses always mediate, the brain takes the raw materials of chemical and electrically coded information and turns it into what we see, hear, taste, touch and smell. "There's no light inside your head. It's dark in there. There's no sound entering your brain either. It's quite inside. .......You're cortex doesn't really know or sense the world directly. The only thing to cortex knows is the pattern streaming in on the input axons. Your perceived view of the world is created from these patterns, including your sense of self. In fact, your brain can't directly know where the body ends and the world begins. ..........The senses create patterns that are sent to the cortex, and processed....to create a model of the world". Pages 56, 59, 60, 64 On Intelligence by Jeff Hawkins, 2004 Hi stardustpilgrim, I was responding to your point that " and I do believe that there is an >out there<", which is subtlety different than " the external world does exist >out there<". I have no problem with the senses perceiving and objectifying a world out there. I just don't believe that the objects of perception have their own existence.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2015 20:19:24 GMT -5
So if there is just YOU, why are YOU selective with YOU when you talk about your psychosis? Because some individuations don't understand and may grossly misinterpret.
|
|