|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 10:38:08 GMT -5
I'm talking about trusting your experience to tell you a transcendent truth. I thought that was obvious, like your comments about thinking. Experiencing the transcendent is the only experience you can trust. The transcendent can only be realized.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Dec 1, 2019 10:42:00 GMT -5
Experiencing the transcendent is the only experience you can trust. The transcendent can only be realized. Abiding in transcendental consciousness is not realization. It is easily experienced by a novice meditator.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 1, 2019 11:50:14 GMT -5
Experiencing the transcendent is the only experience you can trust. The transcendent can only be realized. Virtually every mystic in the world would disagree with that statement. The transcendent/Infinite can be directly apprehended via a human, which also results in a realization. The realization is only known as a realization following the direct apprehension, because there is no separate entity involved in the direct experience. Long ago many of us agreed to disagree about this. Nothing has changed in that respect as far as I know.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 1, 2019 14:58:03 GMT -5
I am just confirming whether you believe that way. I am just confirming whether you believe that way?
Because you said you are not a doer, you can't agree with me now that awareness is the creator, If awareness is not the creator , then who is creating the perception in your awareness? You know nothing exist other awareness, eh?
The person is literally an expression of limitation. Not an entity, not a doer, but it is an expression of Awareness, which is also not a doer or an entity. Well that's a given because the person reflects the individual .. As soon as you start to associate the person as an expression of awareness you again add unnecessary layers .. (just saying) .. and to point out again that your other post reflected that consciousness and awareness are just pointers . What we are is all there is . What we are is the doer . There cannot be a non doer when doing is happening . To say there is no entity when there is an entity is denial . When there is no entity, there is no doer . Calling the doer as an example as awareness and then suggesting awareness doesn't do, is silly .. One might as well personalise awareness as the doer, while there is an individual present .. It all goes boobs up when one dismisses the doer because of there being no doer beyond doing .
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 19:31:51 GMT -5
There is only what you are, so only what you are creates, or does this or does that, or doesn't do anything .. Problems arise when what you are tries to say what that is primarily .. When what you are experiences the mind-body construct what you are experiences that, what you are creates a lifetime's with of memories, what you are experiences personal love and tastes ice cream .. What you are beyond the mind-body experience won't have a thought about who does what or what beer tastes like . The mistake made as I see it is for those that compare what you are beyond with what you are that is present . When this happens one can say there is no-one here and what is here isn't doing anything . Okay, so you say What You Are creates your perception,right? The problem we have been discussing here is, how it can perceives while simultaneously it involves in the creation of the same perception. I have been arguing with Satch so far. He gets confused because he has been saying so far that he is not the doer but now he doesn't know whether he is the doer or not.
This is where the idea of God falling into his own dream becomes useful, but I know you resist that idea.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 19:36:38 GMT -5
Okay, so you say What You Are creates your perception,right? The problem we have been discussing here is, how it can perceives while simultaneously it involves in the creation of the same perception. I have been arguing with Satch so far. He gets confused because he has been saying so far that he is not the doer but now he doesn't know whether he is the doer or not.
I don’t prescribe to the creation equals perception premise as you do so I don’t have any confusion in this regard. What we are perceives the creation of the earth plane via the creation of a physical mind body that entertains the senses as part of it’s creation. I have always rejected that perceiving the moon as an example is also creating the moon at the same time, it’s not something that is Truthy nor is it realised .. So all we have here is a theory that has been created as a foundation that makes no sense to me and becomes problematic in ways that you are experiencing. In your way of looking at things, there is a creator and then there is a creation. You establish creation as objective, and this makes two. There is only what you are.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 19:39:48 GMT -5
I don’t prescribe to the creation equals perception premise as you do so I don’t have any confusion in this regard. What we are perceives the creation of the earth plane via the creation of a physical mind body that entertains the senses as part of it’s creation. I have always rejected that perceiving the moon as an example is also creating the moon at the same time, it’s not something that is Truthy nor is it realised .. So all we have here is a theory that has been created as a foundation that makes no sense to me and becomes problematic in ways that you are experiencing. Sure.You are right here that you should not be having this problem when you believe in objective reality. This problem is for the people those who believe that universe exist only in perception.
Yes, exactly.
But of course his belief in an objective reality brings with it it's own set of problems.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 23:16:27 GMT -5
I'm posting this again: You're all right, from different perspectives. Creation is the process of Awareness coming back onto itself. It's the only way because that's what has to happen when there's fundamentally only a singularity. www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS8v6jKPP68Something from nothing (potential becoming manifest of it's own accord). Creation is perception, everybody here agrees that .But the problem is, everybody here knows that we are only witnessing the perception but the question comes while there is no outer world exist in itself, how does the same awareness creates that perception while it's perceiving. It's called 'God falling into his own dream'.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 23:34:33 GMT -5
The transcendent can only be realized. Virtually every mystic in the world would disagree with that statement. The transcendent/Infinite can be directly apprehended via a human, which also results in a realization. The realization is only known as a realization following the direct apprehension, because there is no separate entity involved in the direct experience. Long ago many of us agreed to disagree about this. Nothing has changed in that respect as far as I know. A mystic experiences the transcendent. The Self Realized realize the Self. They are not the same.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 1, 2019 23:56:39 GMT -5
Sure.You are right here that you should not be having this problem when you believe in objective reality. This problem is for the people those who believe that universe exist only in perception.
Yes, exactly.
Well you might want to investigate why such a theory doesn't create confusion .. and adds up under scrutiny . An objective reality doesn't create confusion and adds up under scrutiny? Is that what you're saying?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 2, 2019 0:18:36 GMT -5
The person is literally an expression of limitation. Not an entity, not a doer, but it is an expression of Awareness, which is also not a doer or an entity. Well that's a given because the person reflects the individual .. As soon as you start to associate the person as an expression of awareness you again add unnecessary layers .. (just saying) .. and to point out again that your other post reflected that consciousness and awareness are just pointers . What we are is all there is . What we are is the doer . There cannot be a non doer when doing is happening . To say there is no entity when there is an entity is denial . When there is no entity, there is no doer . Calling the doer as an example as awareness and then suggesting awareness doesn't do, is silly .. One might as well personalise awareness as the doer, while there is an individual present .. It all goes boobs up when one dismisses the doer because of there being no doer beyond doing . We're a bit infatuated with entities. We expect to find one at the core of every perception, every creation. Watch Gopal chase entities across the universe and beyond. What if there are no entities, just Intelligence, rapt in it's own dream of love and loss?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 2, 2019 0:43:10 GMT -5
Well that's a given because the person reflects the individual .. As soon as you start to associate the person as an expression of awareness you again add unnecessary layers .. (just saying) .. and to point out again that your other post reflected that consciousness and awareness are just pointers . What we are is all there is . What we are is the doer .There cannot be a non doer when doing is happening . To say there is no entity when there is an entity is denial . When there is no entity, there is no doer . Calling the doer as an example as awareness and then suggesting awareness doesn't do, is silly .. One might as well personalise awareness as the doer, while there is an individual present .. It all goes boobs up when one dismisses the doer because of there being no doer beyond doing . Except you and Andrew,everybody here knows that we are not the doer. We are not the doer because we are only perceiving, Our nature of perception wouldn't allow us to choose between thoughts because we don't what thought it is until it lands on in your awareness and also your present moment is always occupied either by perception or by thought. So the main question arises as to how this perception and thoughts are getting created while we are busy with perceiving. How is your nightly dream created while you are busy slaying dragons? Is it not coming from the same mind that is experiencing the dream?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 2, 2019 0:46:34 GMT -5
You've made it clear numerous times that for you "I" means Awareness. I, as Awareness, am both creating and perceiving. Creating as formlessness, perceiving as form. You are only perceiving, you are not creating, aren't you see this clearly? You are not creating your thoughts, you are perceiving while it's moving. That's the reason is Satch is not answering here because he knows he is not the author of the arising thoughts. I know I am not a person. When you discover that you aren't either, this will be a very different conversation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 1:11:16 GMT -5
Well that's a given because the person reflects the individual .. As soon as you start to associate the person as an expression of awareness you again add unnecessary layers .. (just saying) .. and to point out again that your other post reflected that consciousness and awareness are just pointers . What we are is all there is . What we are is the doer . There cannot be a non doer when doing is happening . To say there is no entity when there is an entity is denial . When there is no entity, there is no doer . Calling the doer as an example as awareness and then suggesting awareness doesn't do, is silly .. One might as well personalise awareness as the doer, while there is an individual present .. It all goes boobs up when one dismisses the doer because of there being no doer beyond doing . We're a bit infatuated with entities. We expect to find one at the core of every perception, every creation. Watch Gopal chase entities across the universe and beyond. What if there are no entities, just Intelligence, rapt in it's own dream of love and loss? I am not chasing, I am saying no such entity exist.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 1:12:18 GMT -5
Except you and Andrew,everybody here knows that we are not the doer. We are not the doer because we are only perceiving, Our nature of perception wouldn't allow us to choose between thoughts because we don't what thought it is until it lands on in your awareness and also your present moment is always occupied either by perception or by thought. So the main question arises as to how this perception and thoughts are getting created while we are busy with perceiving. How is your nightly dream created while you are busy slaying dragons? Is it not coming from the same mind that is experiencing the dream? yes, that's the question I have to ask you. While you are busy watching your nightly dream, who is creating it? Who?
|
|