|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 22, 2019 4:21:09 GMT -5
I'm not arguing with or disputing your understanding as you express it. I'm simply saying that telling someone there is only what you are isn't going to be of much help to them. Is that because the style of language always sets up a 'what you are not'? It doesn't matter what the style of language is. You can't talk or think yourself into liberation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 4:24:25 GMT -5
Is that because the style of language always sets up a 'what you are not'? It doesn't matter what the style of language is. You can't talk or think yourself into liberation. Oh, is that why you're telling him that.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 22, 2019 4:26:27 GMT -5
It doesn't matter what the style of language is. You can't talk or think yourself into liberation. Oh, is that why you're telling him that. Yes and it applies to most of the conversations that happen in this forum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 4:30:18 GMT -5
I'm curious. SR is not relevant to solipsism. I see your point. Is solipsism relevant to SR? IOW, can a solipsist be SR and why or why not? fwiw, I take all the advice Niz gave most often as encouraging what could be labeled a sort of solipsism. Repeatedly returning to the sense of being, knowing that to be the only real truth, and that all that appears, all that moves, makes noise and can be sensed, appears to THAT - which is unchanging, unconditioned, and eternal. Although, he was quick to slap-down any mental gymnastics people would do around that, no matter how skillfully they stuck the landing. And can only be thought, to be not That.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 22, 2019 4:31:07 GMT -5
Sure, we can associate many metaphors describing what is happening and for the reasons why, but if a peep doesn't actually know the answer, perhaps for the reason given that it is beyond comprehension then they negate their own suggestion that beyond the mind there is nothing that is of any quality. You can't say things are beyond comprehension and then comprehend that there is no quality beyond .. Potential Potentialling. I think anything that is said in these ways refers to a quality beyond which for some will be incorrect statement. Like said to figs, anything said to describe what is beyond and for the reasons why there is experience of the mind will assign qualities to that which is beyond. 'Potential' however is a mind referenced term but things do manifest in there own way and there has to be something that can potentially create anything in such away lol .. A rose bush can potentially grow as big as a house, but how was the rose bush created? What was the intelligence behind the manifestation of such a rose? Everything in my eyes has a life signature and has qualities and properties so for peeps to say that these things just manifested from nothing of any quality is incorrect even though quality is a mind reference just like 'nothing' is lol .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 4:31:07 GMT -5
Oh, is that why you're telling him that. Yes and it applies to most of the conversations that happen in this forum. Just this one, or Gab as well?
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 22, 2019 4:33:02 GMT -5
Yes and it applies to most of the conversations that happen in this forum. Just this one, or Gab as well? Gab?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 4:34:39 GMT -5
I think anything that is said in these ways refers to a quality beyond which for some will be incorrect statement. Like said to figs, anything said to describe what is beyond and for the reasons why there is experience of the mind will assign qualities to that which is beyond. 'Potential' however is a mind referenced term but things do manifest in there own way and there has to be something that can potentially create anything in such away lol .. A rose bush can potentially grow as big as a house, but how was the rose bush created? What was the intelligence behind the manifestation of such a rose? Everything in my eyes has a life signature and has qualities and properties so for peeps to say that these things just manifested from nothing of any quality is incorrect even though quality is a mind reference just like 'nothing' is lol . There doesn't have to be something, until you say there has to be something. And then the search for that something kicks in.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 22, 2019 4:35:37 GMT -5
You have concluded what you have based upon your own understanding and use that same understanding to negate mine lol. My understanding simply encompass everything based upon the realization that there is only what you are .. It's quite a basic and simple understanding that ripples across all self existential, experiential awareness .. I'm not arguing with or disputing your understanding as you express it. I'm simply saying that telling someone there is only what you are isn't going to be of much help to them. Saying for examples sake that what is impermanent is not what you are isn't going to help either .. What you are being all there is, is helpful because it encompasses everything. It doesn't divide or separate at all and this is the crux of realizing what you are. Peeps as I see it are from a position of self awareness waving their hands about pointing to everything they are not. This isn't helpful, it's actually misleading I would say.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 22, 2019 4:37:53 GMT -5
I'm not arguing with or disputing your understanding as you express it. I'm simply saying that telling someone there is only what you are isn't going to be of much help to them. Saying for examples sake that what is impermanent is not what you are isn't going to help either .. What you are being all there is, is helpful because it encompasses everything. It doesn't divide or separate at all and this is the crux of realizing what you are. Peeps as I see it are from a position of self awareness waving their hands about pointing to everything they are not. This isn't helpful, it's actually misleading I would say. Well you're a meditator aren't you? Why don't you recommend that instead of conceptual thinking?
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 22, 2019 4:44:42 GMT -5
I think anything that is said in these ways refers to a quality beyond which for some will be incorrect statement. Like said to figs, anything said to describe what is beyond and for the reasons why there is experience of the mind will assign qualities to that which is beyond. 'Potential' however is a mind referenced term but things do manifest in there own way and there has to be something that can potentially create anything in such away lol .. A rose bush can potentially grow as big as a house, but how was the rose bush created? What was the intelligence behind the manifestation of such a rose? Everything in my eyes has a life signature and has qualities and properties so for peeps to say that these things just manifested from nothing of any quality is incorrect even though quality is a mind reference just like 'nothing' is lol . There doesn't have to be something, until you say there has to be something. And then the search for that something kicks in. What you are is present regardless of what you or I say or don't say.. Whatever is present is present, we can call it something or nothing but what we are remains present. From that presence what we know of ourselves of the mind is experienced. So all that really needs to be addressed is how your self existence came to be in this reality. If peeps don't know then that's fine, but if they don't know then they can't assign no qualities to how that is possibly so.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 22, 2019 4:51:37 GMT -5
Saying for examples sake that what is impermanent is not what you are isn't going to help either .. What you are being all there is, is helpful because it encompasses everything. It doesn't divide or separate at all and this is the crux of realizing what you are. Peeps as I see it are from a position of self awareness waving their hands about pointing to everything they are not. This isn't helpful, it's actually misleading I would say. Well you're a meditator aren't you? Why don't you recommend that instead of conceptual thinking? Understanding what you are conceptually is a helpful tool, it's more helpful to understand there is only what you are rather than not. I am not an advocate of suggesting conceptual understanding is the only way forward, I would recommend meditation forever more, but while I am here debating, if everyone was meditating there would be no-one debating.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 22, 2019 4:54:08 GMT -5
Well you're a meditator aren't you? Why don't you recommend that instead of conceptual thinking? Understanding what you are conceptually is a helpful tool, it's more helpful to understand there is only what you are rather than not. I am not an advocate of suggesting conceptual understanding is the only way forward, I would recommend meditation forever more, but while I am here debating, if everyone was meditating there would be no-one debating. Understanding conceptually that there is only what you are is utterly meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 22, 2019 5:22:17 GMT -5
Understanding what you are conceptually is a helpful tool, it's more helpful to understand there is only what you are rather than not. I am not an advocate of suggesting conceptual understanding is the only way forward, I would recommend meditation forever more, but while I am here debating, if everyone was meditating there would be no-one debating. Understanding conceptually that there is only what you are is utterly meaningless. From that perspective anything anyone say's is meaningless, including the so called masters. We could step it up a little and say that as well as being meaningless it's all a load of old bollocks too .. Saying what you are is consciousness as a general example is a load of old tripe as well lol .. It means absolutely nuffin to those that haven't realized what they are and even then such peeps haven't realized that what they are as being consciousness .. It's just another conceptual understanding isn't it .. No point in suggesting my conceptual understanding is meaningless and another's isn't if we are basing concepts as just concepts. It's a no win situation but it makes no sense in my eyes for you to speak of your own concepts when you know they are meaningless and bollocks or is the understanding that what you are is consciousness more meaningful as a concept in your eyes? Why do you entertain them when you know they are old hat and nothing more? Why don't you meditate instead?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 9:48:56 GMT -5
Amazing post Enigma. Have read a good post after a long time. Look at the bolder where you say suffering is never reached, That means your unfolding story changes. I know this is a common theme with you but no, the unfolding story doesn't change because there's no reference point to tell you whether it has. You wouldn't be able to make a judgment about whether the story has changed from one story to another story. The point of suffering is never reached because there is never a point where there is a sufferer. The mind is always in the past or the future. So even if the mind has an expectation of suffering due to circumstances, that point never comes because experience of the changing story is always superseded by presence if you are established in it, which is outside of space and time, therefore no suffering. Excellent explanation.
hehe...I just spent 8 minutes or so, trying to put together a response to Gopal. finished it, read it through, sneered, and trashed it. Well said.
|
|