|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Mar 28, 2019 23:48:01 GMT -5
You had to google it? Don't be shy. I wanna see that plenty of people list. Nah, though, you're welcome to look it up yourself. Google embodiment, awakening, spiritual bypassing, and similar such ideas.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 3:32:18 GMT -5
I don't see eye to eye on your belief model, in my eyes to say that there are no beliefs is just another belief in my book that stems from something you believe to be true, that is why you have an opinion of certain concepts are wrong Right, we don't see eye to eye on this point. Ramana ultimately did not believe in the existence of a mind-body. Yes, this is all a way of talking that is appropriate for some contexts but not ultimately true. Which is why even when I am saying it, I am not saying it. It only appears as if I am saying it. Actually, not even that. Only the one who sees this opinion and reflection must acknowledge it as such. Actually there are no opinions or reflections. Even when I say that I have an opinion that is not strictly true. Why do you preserve your mind-body? Why do you eat to keep it functioning, why don't you stick pins in your eyes or stand in front of an oncoming bus? You see for you to do this and not that you have a firm identity to that which is 'you'. I don't for an instance believe peeps live like you say they do, not being associated as such but steer clear of danger lol and make sure they have there meals each day and wash their bodies. If there is no 'I' that is associated to the mind-body then you would have no hesitation to jump off a cliff and start flapping your arms. You don't do this because you have beliefs that are directly associated in regards to what you think you are.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 29, 2019 6:43:40 GMT -5
Yeah, right? There's like, L.E.D.'s, halogen, incandescent .. But to play devils advocate about "further", perhaps some of that talk is to challenge people who might have declared victory too soon. Isn’t incandescent, like, banned now? Can never remember It’s tricky about these early declarations of victory, because of course everyone IS already that which they seek. The idea that they aren’t is the primary target for elimination. So on the face of it any declaration of victory is just the truth and in a way to be encouraged as preferable to seeing realization as some future achievement. Life outs the false realizations soon enough anyhow. But nevertheless, of course, in some sense it does seem to be a problem... and to that I would far rather use the idea of stability than integration. Is one’s realization firm, or does it feel like one goes in and out? When one understands why this is a trick question, that’s victory. Oh, no doubt and, to my eye, that's some common ground between two perspectives that would seem to a logical, critical thinker to be coming from completely opposite directions. Certainly, anyone with any substantive objection to "you are what you seek", is self-defining a fine opportunity for a focus of inquiry.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Mar 29, 2019 7:50:49 GMT -5
Why do you preserve your mind-body? Why do you eat to keep it functioning, why don't you stick pins in your eyes or stand in front of an oncoming bus? You see for you to do this and not that you have a firm identity to that which is 'you'. I don't for an instance believe peeps live like you say they do, not being associated as such but steer clear of danger lol and make sure they have there meals each day and wash their bodies. If there is no 'I' that is associated to the mind-body then you would have no hesitation to jump off a cliff and start flapping your arms. You don't do this because you have beliefs that are directly associated in regards to what you think you are. You're watching a movie. Someone asks you: are you a character in the movie? You say no. "Oh yeah, then how come the movie character still jumps out of the way of oncoming buses and brushes his teeth?"
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 8:33:02 GMT -5
Why do you preserve your mind-body? Why do you eat to keep it functioning, why don't you stick pins in your eyes or stand in front of an oncoming bus? You see for you to do this and not that you have a firm identity to that which is 'you'. I don't for an instance believe peeps live like you say they do, not being associated as such but steer clear of danger lol and make sure they have there meals each day and wash their bodies. If there is no 'I' that is associated to the mind-body then you would have no hesitation to jump off a cliff and start flapping your arms. You don't do this because you have beliefs that are directly associated in regards to what you think you are. You're watching a movie. Someone asks you: are you a character in the movie? You say no. "Oh yeah, then how come the movie character still jumps out of the way of oncoming buses and brushes his teeth?" Forget about the movie and the movie character for a moment if you please it doesn't work for me, I would just like to know why you preserve your mind-body in innumerable ways when you don't prescribe to believing there is an 'I AM'. To even ask me to relate to a movie means you relate to a me that can relate to a movie. If these associations were illusory, why bother addressing them? No point speaking to a supposed reflection or a shadow self or to yourself depending on how you see it. It's the same approach in my eyes where peeps say no-one is here and then publish a book about it. Who's going to read it? If you truly believed that there was an illusory association to what you are that is aware with the mind-body persona you would not hesitate to do anything that 'I' for instance wouldn't do. That which 'I' wouldn't do because I know of such consequences if 'I' did. There is no reason for you to brush your teeth if there is no 'I AM' that you relate too, you would not associate teeth as your teeth, if you only see teeth as an illusory association then it matters not if you brush them or not. Do you brush them? Wash your body, put clothes on to go out in public? It doesn't matter if you eat food or not, drink or not, wear clothes or not for If there were no real consequences to anything that was experienced then why conform to living as you do .. It is hypocritical as I see it and just alludes to you buying into an associated self even though you say your not.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Mar 29, 2019 8:39:24 GMT -5
You're watching a movie. Someone asks you: are you a character in the movie? You say no. "Oh yeah, then how come the movie character still jumps out of the way of oncoming buses and brushes his teeth?" Forget about the movie and the movie character for a moment if you please it doesn't work for me, I would just like to know why you preserve your mind-body in innumerable ways when you don't prescribe to believing there is an 'I AM'. To even ask me to relate to a movie means you relate to a me that can relate to a movie. If these associations were illusory, why bother addressing them? No point speaking to a supposed reflection or a shadow self or to yourself depending on how you see it. It's the same approach in my eyes where peeps say no-one is here and then publish a book about it. Who's going to read it? If you truly believed that there was an illusory association to what you are that is aware with the mind-body persona you would not hesitate to do anything that 'I' for instance wouldn't do. That which 'I' wouldn't do because I know of such consequences if 'I' did. There is no reason for you to brush your teeth if there is no 'I AM' that you relate too, you would not associate teeth as your teeth, if you only see teeth as an illusory association then it matters not if you brush them or not. Do you brush them? Wash your body, put clothes on to go out in public? It doesn't matter if you eat food or not, drink or not, wear clothes or not for If there were no real consequences to anything that was experienced then why conform to living as you do .. It is hypocritical as I see it and just alludes to you buying into an associated self even though you say your not. Ok, let me put it another way. None of these things happen. None of the things you mention happen. These words I am writing are not words, and I am not writing them. Now, how can that be understood just by thinking about it? Yet that is what you are trying to do.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 8:44:33 GMT -5
Forget about the movie and the movie character for a moment if you please it doesn't work for me, I would just like to know why you preserve your mind-body in innumerable ways when you don't prescribe to believing there is an 'I AM'. To even ask me to relate to a movie means you relate to a me that can relate to a movie. If these associations were illusory, why bother addressing them? No point speaking to a supposed reflection or a shadow self or to yourself depending on how you see it. It's the same approach in my eyes where peeps say no-one is here and then publish a book about it. Who's going to read it? If you truly believed that there was an illusory association to what you are that is aware with the mind-body persona you would not hesitate to do anything that 'I' for instance wouldn't do. That which 'I' wouldn't do because I know of such consequences if 'I' did. There is no reason for you to brush your teeth if there is no 'I AM' that you relate too, you would not associate teeth as your teeth, if you only see teeth as an illusory association then it matters not if you brush them or not. Do you brush them? Wash your body, put clothes on to go out in public? It doesn't matter if you eat food or not, drink or not, wear clothes or not for If there were no real consequences to anything that was experienced then why conform to living as you do .. It is hypocritical as I see it and just alludes to you buying into an associated self even though you say your not. Ok, let me put it another way. None of these things happen. None of the things you mention happen. These words I am writing are not words, and I am not writing them. Now, how can that be understood just by thinking about it? Yet that is what you are trying to do. So was there the awareness of teeth being brushed or not? You clearly have a reference to words that are written so you know if words appear or not? Which is it?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 29, 2019 8:45:38 GMT -5
Right, well, I'm suggesting that a realization which does not eliminate the illusion of doership does not deserve the term 'self-realization.' What more do you see SR as? Exactly. This idea that doership gets seen through in a separate realization from volition which is a separate realization from the seeing through of separation, is just silliness. In complete SR, various erroneous ideas get seen through all at once, all under the same one realization. This may be true for some people, but certainly not for most people. I've talked to numerous sages in person, and I've asked a lot of questions about their paths, and most of them had numerous realizations and/or experiences of oneness along the path to eventual freedom and what we call "the natural state" (SS).
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Mar 29, 2019 8:45:55 GMT -5
So was there the awareness of teeth being brushed or not? You clearly have a reference to words that are written so you know if words appear or not? Which is it? The words that are appear are not words. The awareness of teeth being brushed is not awareness of teeth being brushed. How can you possibly understand what I'm saying without a reference in your own experience?
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 8:54:01 GMT -5
So was there the awareness of teeth being brushed or not? You clearly have a reference to words that are written so you know if words appear or not? Which is it? The words that are appear are not words. The awareness of teeth being brushed is not awareness of teeth being brushed. How can you possibly understand what I'm saying without a reference in your own experience? Was there teeth brushed today?
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Mar 29, 2019 8:59:04 GMT -5
The words that are appear are not words. The awareness of teeth being brushed is not awareness of teeth being brushed. How can you possibly understand what I'm saying without a reference in your own experience? Was there teeth brushed today? Right, I could give you the commonsense answer and say yes, but it wouldn't be true. Which do you want -- the answer you expect, or the truth? The truth is that there is no such thing called brushing your teeth.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 29, 2019 9:05:50 GMT -5
Was there teeth brushed today? Right, I could give you the commonsense answer and say yes, but it wouldn't be true. Which do you want -- the answer you expect, or the truth? The truth is that there is no such thing called brushing your teeth. I think consistency here demands then that there's no truth either
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 9:06:45 GMT -5
Was there teeth brushed today? Right, I could give you the commonsense answer and say yes, but it wouldn't be true. Which do you want -- the answer you expect, or the truth? The truth is that there is no such thing called brushing your teeth. If there is no such thing as brushing your teeth how do you have a reference for it? How do you know what I am talking about. When I ask you about brushing teeth you know I don't mean wiping your butt, right? So lets relate to what you know I am saying and from that level of understanding, was there the brushing of teeth. You say there is no such thing but did you taste the toothpaste? Don't tell me there is no such thing as taste either and yet you can tell apart the taste of toothpaste from dirt right?
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Mar 29, 2019 9:09:00 GMT -5
Right, I could give you the commonsense answer and say yes, but it wouldn't be true. Which do you want -- the answer you expect, or the truth? The truth is that there is no such thing called brushing your teeth. I think consistency here demands then that there's no truth either Truth relates to an association doesn't it. If there is no association there cannot be any truth.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 29, 2019 9:15:15 GMT -5
I think consistency here demands then that there's no truth either Truth relates to an association doesn't it. If there is no association there cannot be any truth. A concept can be used as a pointer, but in the context of being told a truth, then yep, it relates to an association.
|
|