Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 12:19:52 GMT -5
That's quite simple. If I thought nothing existed, I would lay still, until I died. (What alternative would there be)? Hehe. That's hillarious! **picks himself up off the floor and dusts himself off*** Even if the experience you're having is eggzakly the same after that knowledge as it was before that knowledge, you would prefer to literally lay down and die than continue to live that experience? Do you see what enormous importance you've placed on that idea of 'exists'? It's just an idea. It's pretty wild hey, when laid out in black and white like that...?
At least he is completely honest about the importance he assigns to that idea of 'existing.' Maybe with it right out here now, we can try to get to the bottom of precisely why that idea is given so much importance. No doubt there are other ideas that are gonna spool out as the thread gets tugged. All sorts of ideas concerned personal values....judgements....ideas about 'why' we're here, that kind of thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 12:34:21 GMT -5
Until the music starts to play and then you dance and forget about this nonsense. Exactly. *puts on dance shoes and dances a little jig* And then your appearing dance partner steps on your toe and in your certainty that he did did it on purpose, is to blame, you go into a rage and punch him in the nose.
That which is realized is not held in mind as an idea/thought, thus, it's wrong to speak about 'forgetting about this nonsense.'
Realization abides arising experience, not as a thought/idea held in mind, not as mind content at all, but as presence itself....there is abidance in being vs. abidance in mind, and what that means is that the surface conditions no longer have to be deemed perfect for the impetus to dance to arise. Dancing becomes a way of life.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Aug 26, 2019 13:16:04 GMT -5
Realization abides arising experience, not as a thought/idea held in mind, not as mind content at all, but as presence itself....there is abidance in being vs. abidance in mind, and what that means is that the surface conditions no longer have to be deemed perfect for the impetus to dance to arise. Dancing becomes a way of life. Your abidance in Being would be shattered in an instant if I stepped on your toe!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 13:51:28 GMT -5
Realization abides arising experience, not as a thought/idea held in mind, not as mind content at all, but as presence itself....there is abidance in being vs. abidance in mind, and what that means is that the surface conditions no longer have to be deemed perfect for the impetus to dance to arise. Dancing becomes a way of life. Your abidance in Being would be shattered in an instant if I stepped on your toe! "Abidance in Being" is yet another term that you define differently from how I define it.
For me, the term 'abidance' references something more than just a period of time/dutation where purposeful meditation is happening, rather, it's a means to refer to what it's like in SR, when mind has been permanently relegated to the 'back seat' and Being/Awareness never leaves the forefront.
Do you think SR goes out the window when a sage gets his foots stomped upon? Even in moments of physical pain, in SR, being continues to abide and mind takes a back-seat. What that means is that thoughts about the pain when a foot gets stomped remain on the back-burner, and Being continues at the forefront. So even amidst the pain of such an event, abidance in being is NOT lost, never mind "shattered."
In SR, Abidance in being means that regardless of what happens in experience, (S)elf awareness, is never lost.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 26, 2019 15:45:22 GMT -5
Hehe. That's hillarious! **picks himself up off the floor and dusts himself off*** Even if the experience you're having is eggzakly the same after that knowledge as it was before that knowledge, you would prefer to literally lay down and die than continue to live that experience? Do you see what enormous importance you've placed on that idea of 'exists'? It's just an idea. It's pretty wild hey, when laid out in black and white like that...? At least he is completely honest about the importance he assigns to that idea of 'existing.' Maybe with it right out here now, we can try to get to the bottom of precisely why that idea is given so much importance. No doubt there are other ideas that are gonna spool out as the thread gets tugged. All sorts of ideas concerned personal values....judgements....ideas about 'why' we're here, that kind of thing.
Tell me this, what makes an appearance, not a mirage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 15:57:38 GMT -5
It's pretty wild hey, when laid out in black and white like that...? At least he is completely honest about the importance he assigns to that idea of 'existing.' Maybe with it right out here now, we can try to get to the bottom of precisely why that idea is given so much importance. No doubt there are other ideas that are gonna spool out as the thread gets tugged. All sorts of ideas concerned personal values....judgements....ideas about 'why' we're here, that kind of thing.
Tell me this, what makes an appearance, not a mirage. The mirage metaphor references a misconception...an assignation to an appearance that is based upon an erroneous assumption/conclusion. Just as one mistakingly looks to a mirage and believes he can quench his thirst by heading out there, those who are deluded, think they can look to an appearance and trust that their thirst for absolute knowledge can be satisfied by what is appearing.
ie; One sees what to him appears to be an SVP and thus, concludes that by virtue of seeing such, it's gotta be Truth. Or one sees what appears to him to be a cause of other stuff appearing and thus he takes that to mean that actual causes to other happenings is the case, rather than seeing the Truth, that the story/experience complete with apparent sequential happenings and causes, is but a singular, unified movement...no actual separation in any way.
Another example; One sees what appears to him to be sentience, experiencing, on the part of the other and he takes that appearance to be his absolute proof of sentience, experiencing arising there.
edit: So to directly answer your question; So long as you are not taking what appears and assigning substance/Truth to it that it does not actually have, it's not a mirage...just an appearance seen for what it is. An appearance 'only.'
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:13:43 GMT -5
I'm not prepared to say appearances constitute a happening. In the same way I wouldn't say imagining a duck quacking is a happening. Of course it is. The imagining is a happening! Appearances change, and that's a happening, and you are experiencing/perceiving an unfolding sequence of appearances, which is a happening. I think what you mean is 'nothing exists but something is still happening'. That's not what I mean but there's no point in pursuing the matter.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:16:07 GMT -5
Oh, I just meant 'look at what you said through the eyes of the reader'. I heard what you said. I just don't know what it means.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:22:03 GMT -5
'Appearances are arising' isn't enough to give me the context of the discussion. Or even what you think it is. Okay, the context of saying that 'appearances are arising' is to say that 'something is actually happening'. This is central to what Fig and you have been saying. (In contrast to Sifting's approach which is 'nothing is happening') The point is that if something is actually happening, then there is time in some way. It's not 'time' as we have learned it, but is still time. If you experienced an appearance and then experienced another appearance, that's 'time'. And what I'm trying to say is nothing is actually happening.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:28:34 GMT -5
The only definition of illusion that makes sense to me is 'appearing to be other that it is'. This bypasses the idea of having to rise to the status, or the assassination of applying to everything that appears, rendering the term useless, and not even that. What is it other than what it appears to be? I keep asking you this question but you can't answer it. And I know you will never be able to answer it other than as some vague abstract idea in your mind. And I keep answering it. It depends on what it appears to be. If it appears to be an objective physical object, separate from other objects, it is an illusion. If it appears to be what you fundamentally are, it is an illusion. How many examples do you need before you stop asking that question?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:30:13 GMT -5
What is it other than what it appears to be? I keep asking you this question but you can't answer it. And I know you will never be able to answer it other than as some vague abstract idea in your mind. Could be just a lazy or convenient way of saying the materialist view of consciousness is, at a minimum, incomplete and a maximum, is wrong. Yes, it's wrong and silly.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:34:19 GMT -5
Okay, the context of saying that 'appearances are arising' is to say that 'something is actually happening'. This is central to what Fig and you have been saying. (In contrast to Sifting's approach which is 'nothing is happening') The point is that if something is actually happening, then there is time in some way. It's not 'time' as we have learned it, but is still time. If you experienced an appearance and then experienced another appearance, that's 'time'. Bingo. If there are appearances there is certainly time. Or to attempt to be even more hair-splittingly precise, nothing can be said to be happening, or there is no one to say that there is anything happening, or the very categories of 'is-ness,' 'happening,' 'appearance,' 'nothing,' 'anything,' and so on are false. You're so good at nullifying everything, I was certain you could nullify time. Though probly you do, by nullifying appearances, but the appearance of appearances is self evident.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:42:45 GMT -5
So instead of arguing about the definition of the word illusion, the solution is for both of us to agree to banish the word illusion from our vocabulary and then if we just speak about the fact that phenomena is changing and appearing and disappearing then we should both be in agreement. Except there is still the issue of those tricks of mind.....those mirages that at first have you convinced there is a lovely place out there where your thirst can be quenched, but of which you come to realize, there is no actual water....no actual means of quenching thirst.
The separate volitional person is just such a 'mirage.'
Yes, we still need a word, so it makes sense to use illusion as it's defined by the rest of the world. il·lu·sion "a thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted by the senses."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 17:43:14 GMT -5
Bingo. If there are appearances there is certainly time. Or to attempt to be even more hair-splittingly precise, nothing can be said to be happening, or there is no one to say that there is anything happening, or the very categories of 'is-ness,' 'happening,' 'appearance,' 'nothing,' 'anything,' and so on are false. You're so good at nullifying everything, I was certain you could nullify time. Though probly you do, by nullifying appearances, but the appearance of appearances is self evident. Correct!
(hehe.... )
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2019 17:46:12 GMT -5
Hehe. That's hillarious! **picks himself up off the floor and dusts himself off*** Even if the experience you're having is eggzakly the same after that knowledge as it was before that knowledge, you would prefer to literally lay down and die than continue to live that experience? Do you see what enormous importance you've placed on that idea of 'exists'? It's just an idea. It's pretty wild hey, when laid out in black and white like that...? At least he is completely honest about the importance he assigns to that idea of 'existing.' Maybe with it right out here now, we can try to get to the bottom of precisely why that idea is given so much importance. No doubt there are other ideas that are gonna spool out as the thread gets tugged. All sorts of ideas concerned personal values....judgements....ideas about 'why' we're here, that kind of thing.
Yes, I really would like to be able to wrap my head around that idea. To him, it's literally a matter of life and death.
|
|