|
Post by tenka on Nov 23, 2018 4:24:33 GMT -5
I know what you mean Pilgrim, however I don't really buy into the dream / actor / character analogies much, it doesn't carry much weight with me . I don't believe I am something I am not if you understand me . All I am saying is that within context you are not for example responsible for what I say or do . Individuality is just that while what we are experiences the mind body, there isn't really any sharing of my pain while you are dancing for joy etc . This isn't to say that there are others that are not what we are or anything of the sort . The unrealized walks around in ignorance while the Self realized isn't . One has to take note of these individual / unique differences it would be silly not too . Even if I say that I am you and you are me is saying so from a individual / unique position, it is not you saying to me you are me and I am you . I am an advocate of individual resonance within a collective / whole . Individual growth awareness . It's true to say that one can be aware of what another isn't . It's a simple test that is full proof . I read just now ramana saying that he strongly discouraged devotees from adopting a renunciate lifestyle and renouncing their responsibilities. Which one is primary Us or Me? Or isn't Us, just Me experienced as the Collective, i.e Consciousness. In regards to physical peeps as individuals, I don't know how many individual souls were created at once so to speak . There only requires a knowing / awareness of another for there to be an us rather than just me . I would say there is an us, until there isn't . There is both an us and there isn't . As ramana put it in a quote I referenced yesterday, 'When there is no self to witness, there is no witnessing either'. Collectiveness can only be related too as that when there is a self to witness and another witnessed . There cannot be individuality without collectiveness and vice versa . This is why we can recognise the two and the differences that pertain to the two .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 23, 2018 4:25:31 GMT -5
I was pulling your chain .. I don't think I am going to get any responses either, I kan't think how one would wriggle out of this. I know lets just sweep it under the carpet and pretend the theory still holds up Can you see your eyeballs without a mirror? Nope, eye can't see my eyeballs without a mirror ...
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 23, 2018 4:55:37 GMT -5
The thing is Lolz, you refer to the hand-body as billions of sensations which pop in and out of existence butt it makes no difference to say it like that when you lift up the weights at the gym . You hands don't disappear long enough for you to even know that is happening . If you hadn't read that theory in a book somewhere you never would have attained that theory . I have spoken about vibrating before, but I have never had the impression that I am disappearing and appearing in every moment . Do you know who had a realization of that? Your description of what occurs regarding the mountain disappearing and such likes is eggsactly like lifting the weights . The mountain doesn't disappear enough so for to no longer see the mountain at any point in time . Your thoughts about the disappearing act is not the same as the others here . They believe it no longer exists, it disappears completely . It will never reappear for as long as there is no conscious perceiver present . Now there isn't even a conscious perceiver present so god only know what's going on with the mountain . Who created the robot and the robots sensors? A conscious aware 'thing'? So when you say of course a human being is a living thing then are you saying there can be a living thing that disappears and reappears like how the others see mountains disappear or are you implying that a living thing is aware? If not then who created the living things and who/m or what designed it so that living things can appear and disappear . Using reefs quote the other day about the teacher telling his students that the elephant was in the form of God, IS EGGSACTLY what I have been talking about regarding appearances . It's not just an appearance of an elephant, it is God as an elephant, and God in elephant form is alive / conscious / aware and doesn't disappear when a peep shuts there eyes . It's not that things don't exist, it's that they are not what they think they are. In the film The Truman Show, Truman had a mother. Truman thought she was his mother, but she was merely an actress playing his mother. He had a best friend, but his best friend did and said what director Christof told him to do. He was not really Truman's best friend. Going out of the town there was a bridge, but it wasn't really a bridge but a barrier, a separating wall. At the end of the film Truman tried to cross the sea in a boat in a storm. But it wasn't an ocean, it was a huge prop, a huge tank (another barrier to keep Truman imprisoned). And it wasn't a real storm, the storm was created by Cristof with a weather machine. Everything was "real" in certain sense, but was not what it seemed to be. We live in Maya, most things are not what they seem to be. ....Truman finally hit the end of the ocean/tank with his boat. He then walked up some steps and through a door...into the real world. Movie ends there... Truman for the first time in his life entering the actual world. For me, this is expressed as the difference between 'things' and 'form'.
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Nov 23, 2018 7:40:17 GMT -5
Can you see your eyeballs without a mirror? Nope, eye can't see my eyeballs without a mirror ... Watch it carefully! Are you very sure you are looking through your eyes? Aren't you perceiving everything directly?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Nov 23, 2018 8:07:17 GMT -5
Nope, eye can't see my eyeballs without a mirror ... Watch it carefully! Are you very sure you are looking through your eyes? Aren't you perceiving everything directly? What do you mean by 'looking'? Do you put 'looking' in the same category as 'smelling', 'tasting', 'hearing'? Or does 'looking' mean 'aware'? In which case, the question is....'are you aware through your eyes?'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2018 8:11:23 GMT -5
Let me give an analogy that might apply. Take a film. In many cases there is one writer of the script. He might write for 4 or 6 or 10 or 20 characters, and different actors say the words, but they originate from One Source. One person creates all the dialogue. So lets say there is a character Tenka. Tenka has read the script and learned his lines. But at some point the actor forgets he is an actor and thinks he is Tenka, he has "fallen into the dream". ...But then the writer comes onto the set and says, I have a rewrite, please learn these new lines. And Tenka says, What (tf) are you talking about?, I AM Tenka, these are MY words, I have chosen every word I said. And the Writer says, No, you're an actor being paid to say MY words. Tenka is identified, asleep. Tenka has forgotten he is merely an actor. You can argue all you want, say things over and over and over. One view or the other is right. The correct view supersedes the illusory view. Comprende? (Incidentally, this is very easily seen in most Woody Allen films. You can see that every character is saying the words written by Woody Allen). Almost everybody lives from a certain perspective, a certain paradigm, a certain conceptual world view. For almost everyone their view is a box. They think they live in the whole world but they really live in a tiny box. Their conceptual box forms the limit of their world. To be able to enter the world of another, you have to be able to see that your own world might be a conceptual construct. (One man's realizations are another man's conceptual constructs, and vice versa). I know what you mean Pilgrim, however I don't really buy into the dream / actor / character analogies much, it doesn't carry much weight with me . I don't believe I am something I am not if you understand me . All I am saying is that within context you are not for example responsible for what I say or do . Individuality is just that while what we are experiences the mind body, there isn't really any sharing of my pain while you are dancing for joy etc . This isn't to say that there are others that are not what we are or anything of the sort . The unrealized walks around in ignorance while the Self realized isn't . One has to take note of these individual / unique differences it would be silly not too . Even if I say that I am you and you are me is saying so from a individual / unique position, it is not you saying to me you are me and I am you . I am an advocate of individual resonance within a collective / whole . Individual growth awareness . It's true to say that one can be aware of what another isn't . It's a simple test that is full proof . I read just now ramana saying that he strongly discouraged devotees from adopting a renunciate lifestyle and renouncing their responsibilities. I think I can help with this one. Though I speak not from knowledge, but from mentation as Reefs calls it. Consider this, you can see without eyes. You see in dreams, so the seeing doesn't occur in the eyes. When you sense your hand touching a rock in your back yard. If you just focus on the pure sensation, it's really not occurring outside your body or on your body, but in your head. If you try to sense your head, where is that sensation occurring? Somewhere that you really can't place. So what's happening doesn't really come together into a meaningful picture until thinking starts to piece everything together. So a big component of the panorama is the apparatus that puts everything in an order that makes sense to the human person. So what you perceive isn't necessarily what's really out there, but it's an interpretation of what's out there. If you get looped enough, like on LSD, the apparatus gets tweaked and gives you a totally different version. I imagine that in kensho you might even get a more "real" version. Some believe there's nothing out there just God projecting a story. Ultimately the qualities and features of the story come from you. You are not the person. The person appears because the apparatus is tuned to produce that entity. Something like that.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 23, 2018 8:30:10 GMT -5
I know what you mean Pilgrim, however I don't really buy into the dream / actor / character analogies much, it doesn't carry much weight with me . I don't believe I am something I am not if you understand me . All I am saying is that within context you are not for example responsible for what I say or do . Individuality is just that while what we are experiences the mind body, there isn't really any sharing of my pain while you are dancing for joy etc . This isn't to say that there are others that are not what we are or anything of the sort . The unrealized walks around in ignorance while the Self realized isn't . One has to take note of these individual / unique differences it would be silly not too . Even if I say that I am you and you are me is saying so from a individual / unique position, it is not you saying to me you are me and I am you . I am an advocate of individual resonance within a collective / whole . Individual growth awareness . It's true to say that one can be aware of what another isn't . It's a simple test that is full proof . I read just now ramana saying that he strongly discouraged devotees from adopting a renunciate lifestyle and renouncing their responsibilities. I think I can help with this one. Though I speak not from knowledge, but from mentation as Reefs calls it. Consider this, you can see without eyes. You see in dreams, so the seeing doesn't occur in the eyes. When you sense your hand touching a rock in your back yard. If you just focus on the pure sensation, it's really not occurring outside your body or on your body, but in your head. If you try to sense your head, where is that sensation occurring? Somewhere that you really can't place. So what's happening doesn't really come together into a meaningful picture until thinking starts to piece everything together. So a big component of the panorama is the apparatus that puts everything in an order that makes sense to the human person. So what you perceive isn't necessarily what's really out there, but it's an interpretation of what's out there. If you get looped enough, like on LSD, the apparatus gets tweaked and gives you a totally different version. I imagine that in kensho you might even get a more "real" version. Some believe there's nothing out there just God projecting a story. Ultimately the qualities and features of the story come from you. You are not the person. The person appears because the apparatus is tuned to produce that entity. Something like that. Sure, there are plenty of platforms where one does not require physical eyes to perceive a reality . You do however require physical eyes to see the physical reality while engaging physically . At times when I meditate I can find myself out of body like many can, you can see the physical reality without being of the body so to speak . What is happening here on the forums though is that peeps are using the context of physical sight perception, so it's no point mixing contexts and saying you don't need physical eyes to see in a dream or out of body / astral travelling . The earth plane has it's own foundation and has it's own set of properties and qualities . If a peep in the physical waking world is running for a bus and then closes his eyes he loses sight of the bus, it's that simple . The theory of things disappearing and appearing is based upon our ability to see something with our physical eyes open not closed . All this sensing / sensation stuff would not occur if there was not something in your hand and a hand to sense . The mind / sense / senor / awareness / feeling is all tied up in the physical moment . There would not be the experience otherwise . The actual thought and sense of the thought is located at the brow center . In a way that is your location / beacon in regards to where self stands in this world . There is always attention there even when you are focussing elsewhere . One is always drawn back to this point . Shut your eyes and see, you are aware of this point continuously, if you focus on it the more it is apparent . I guess it's the same regarding breathing, it's always occurring but it becomes more apparent when you focus on it ..
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 9:49:56 GMT -5
Nope, eye can't see my eyeballs without a mirror ... Watch it carefully! Are you very sure you are looking through your eyes? Aren't you perceiving everything directly? Why would you insist Tenka is a conscious perceiver as you are and perceiving exactly the way you are perceiving? Remember, you told us you can't know if Tenka is even perceiving, let alone the exact way he is perceiving.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 10:22:51 GMT -5
What? You have told me clearly that no appearance is conscious i.e no human or animal or tree or paperclip is conscious. How could 'consciousness' be of any use in the personal context then? What use does it have? E caught. Notice that Andrew's question was "What is conscious?" and how Enigma fails to address this directly. He talks about consciousness instead. So he replied to the question, but he didn't answer it. The same seems to happen regularly to Tenka's questions.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 10:38:43 GMT -5
Assuming there ARE other perspectives, all perspectives are intimately connected through Consciousness. There is only Consciousness forming point(s) of perception. This is why the same moon appears to all points of perception. (and are then interpreted differently) But Consciousness is just a made up word. lol. That's precisely the problem here, too many words that have no actual meaning put in key places of the ontology.
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Nov 23, 2018 10:42:44 GMT -5
Watch it carefully! Are you very sure you are looking through your eyes? Aren't you perceiving everything directly? Why would you insist Tenka is a conscious perceiver as you are and perceiving exactly the way you are perceiving? Remember, you told us you can't know if Tenka is even perceiving, let alone the exact way he is perceiving. I said I can't know whether other people are perceiving. So I assume Tenka is perceiving.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 10:53:43 GMT -5
yeah. The difficulty is that in other messages, they will both clearly talk a lot about functioning human bodies (and let's not ignore the fact that Gopal puts on his glasses each day), just as everyone does. So it seems obvious to me that there is a context in which they believe in functioning human bodies, though Gopal is more likely to deny this context/belief than Enigma. In my opinion, Enigma's contexts just need re-arranging...whereas for Gopal, it would be good if he learned what context is. Mixed signals from both parties is how I see it that's why the conversations are impossible at times . The huge uturns and mixed concepts are there for all to see . Did you see my add on to the post where I said They don't perceive their own eyes unless reflected in a mirror .So that rules out the need to perceive something into existence so to speak This is where it gets funny again. It has been said that when you turn around and stop looking at the moon, the moon ceases to exist because perception is creation. If put that way, then the physical eyes, or perception via the physical eyes, does the creating. That's what's implied here. If, however, the physical eyes are also just appearances and since appearances don't create anything and perception doesn't happen via appearances then why would the moon cease to exist when an appearance turns around?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 11:06:45 GMT -5
I know what you mean Pilgrim, however I don't really buy into the dream / actor / character analogies much, it doesn't carry much weight with me . I don't believe I am something I am not if you understand me . All I am saying is that within context you are not for example responsible for what I say or do . Individuality is just that while what we are experiences the mind body, there isn't really any sharing of my pain while you are dancing for joy etc . This isn't to say that there are others that are not what we are or anything of the sort . The unrealized walks around in ignorance while the Self realized isn't . One has to take note of these individual / unique differences it would be silly not too . Even if I say that I am you and you are me is saying so from a individual / unique position, it is not you saying to me you are me and I am you . I am an advocate of individual resonance within a collective / whole . Individual growth awareness . It's true to say that one can be aware of what another isn't . It's a simple test that is full proof . I read just now ramana saying that he strongly discouraged devotees from adopting a renunciate lifestyle and renouncing their responsibilities. I think I can help with this one. Though I speak not from knowledge, but from mentation as Reefs calls it. Consider this, you can see without eyes. You see in dreams, so the seeing doesn't occur in the eyes. When you sense your hand touching a rock in your back yard. If you just focus on the pure sensation, it's really not occurring outside your body or on your body, but in your head. If you try to sense your head, where is that sensation occurring? Somewhere that you really can't place. So what's happening doesn't really come together into a meaningful picture until thinking starts to piece everything together. So a big component of the panorama is the apparatus that puts everything in an order that makes sense to the human person. So what you perceive isn't necessarily what's really out there, but it's an interpretation of what's out there. If you get looped enough, like on LSD, the apparatus gets tweaked and gives you a totally different version. I imagine that in kensho you might even get a more "real" version. Some believe there's nothing out there just God projecting a story. Ultimately the qualities and features of the story come from you. You are not the person. The person appears because the apparatus is tuned to produce that entity. Something like that. Kensho shouldn't be confused with woo-woo experiences. In realizations, what is seen is irrelevant, what is important is how it is seen, i.e. from the personal or the impersonal perspective. In woo-woo experiences, there's someone having an experience in time, in kensho, there's no one there and it is also not happening in time.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 23, 2018 11:09:08 GMT -5
Why would you insist Tenka is a conscious perceiver as you are and perceiving exactly the way you are perceiving? Remember, you told us you can't know if Tenka is even perceiving, let alone the exact way he is perceiving. I said I can't know whether other people are perceiving. So I assume Tenka is perceiving. Why do you always without exception assume he is actually perceiving?
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Nov 23, 2018 11:09:41 GMT -5
Mixed signals from both parties is how I see it that's why the conversations are impossible at times . The huge uturns and mixed concepts are there for all to see . Did you see my add on to the post where I said They don't perceive their own eyes unless reflected in a mirror .So that rules out the need to perceive something into existence so to speak This is where it gets funny again. It has been said that when you turn around and stop looking at the moon, the moon ceases to exist because perception is creation. If put that way, then the physical eyes, or perception via the physical eyes, does the creating. That's what's implied here. If, however, the physical eyes are also just appearances and since appearances don't create anything and perception doesn't happen via appearances then why would the moon cease to exist when an appearance turns around? What a Joke! Today I am seeing the truth that you understood nothing of what we have been talking about. You are a perfect person to be in the team of andrew and Tenka.
|
|