|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 19:24:58 GMT -5
"There is only what you are" and "I AM" do not have special dispensation that make them more valid or true than 'Consciousness'. LOL, Consciousness is a made up word ... being aware of I AM doesn't need words .. LOL, Being aware of awareness doesn't need words either, but talking about it does, in precisely the same was as being aware of I AM does.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 7, 2019 19:34:12 GMT -5
This is how I play CD's. It's not hypothetical. Great. And does there come a day when it is enjoyable and nonsensical to do anything other, than to put the right CD's back in the right CD cases? Yea, that happens. When I get tired of that stack and am ready for a change, they go back into their own case, and it starts all over with a new stack.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 19:35:17 GMT -5
The dream analogy is very clear and simple. "I AM awareness" can mean a half dozen different things and I wouldn't know where to start to begin sorting it out. The dream analogy isn't clear at all because you have no comparison for what isn't . It's hot air, nuffin more, nuffin less . Unless u wanna tell me about the reality you have experienced that isn't a dream, butt I have asked u this a 100 times now . And I'll answer it yet again. You know what a nightly dream is because you have a belief about what waking life is. That belief is the comparison for knowing what a nightly dream is, and also what a waking dream actually is.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 19:42:52 GMT -5
On the whole 'no world' issue, what is meant is that there is no objective world 'out there' and the experience is happening in Consciousness. It does not mean there is no experience of a world. The idea of there being nobody here is similar. It doesn't mean there isn't the appearance and experience of a someone. Some of it is a bit overstated, much like Satch's 'obliterate mind'. How anyone see's things is subjective, what bloody consciousness means or is is also subjective, u like many here speak with conviction and yet the world is but a dream and the awareness of self or I isn't stable or true or real .. Stop trying to be convincing when your foundation is only subjective, concluded by a non entity .. It really takes the biscuit, the foundation is riddled with instabilities .. I'm saying you dismiss the idea of 'no world' because you misinterpret it to mean 'no experience'.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 19:50:42 GMT -5
I don't understand the last paragraph, but the notion that creation and perception are the same comes from the realization that there is no objective world to perceive (no intermediate cake level) and no time in which such a process can occur. Obviously, this is the larger context of Consciousness, which donald trumps the smaller context of objects, brains, world. "My Daddy is bigger than your Daddy!!" Not interested in your Daddy issues.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 7, 2019 22:34:44 GMT -5
The Peace being pointed to is found on No Mountain, but you'll have to leave everything you hold dear at the Gateless Gate. As a free agent, you'll also receive a free decoder ring and cloaking device for your adventures on the subsequent trip to Mountain Again. I suggest peeps purchase their own cloaking device from a reputable retailer as the free ones are prone to failure, and that can lead to repeated false identifications. The instructions clearly say to only wear them when you absolutely need to appear that you are actually there. Or, they could be wearing them inside out, which has been known to create dizziness, confusion, and even mild bouts of constipation. But yeah, there could be liability issues if the false identifications keep re-occurring.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 23:08:16 GMT -5
The difference between you and Gopal, you think Nothing is in control of things happening, events. Gopal, and I, see an Encompassing Intelligence Operating. I've spoken of Intelligence many times. It's even possible that Gopal got it from me. It's my preferred term for Consciousness/Awareness.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 23:22:52 GMT -5
I don't understand the last paragraph, but the notion that creation and perception are the same comes from the realization that there is no objective world to perceive (no intermediate cake level) and no time in which such a process can occur. Obviously, this is the larger context of Consciousness, which donald trumps the smaller context of objects, brains, world. The main point is you don't consider there is a smaller context. There is.And for most people the smaller context is the controlling factor. The very meaning of smaller context is that everything ~passes through~ the conditioning of the smaller context. Therefore, perception is creation. We see what we are. We project on-to the world what we are. In the context of the Whole, All That Is, is a Tapestry. We see the back side, a mess. The Whole sees an intricate marvelous picture, the front side. When you agree that there exists millions of stitched weavings, in time and space, I'll begin to listen to you. Of course there is. There are innumerable contexts. The impersonal contexts reveals the personal context to be illusion.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 7, 2019 23:29:15 GMT -5
The difference between you and Gopal, you think Nothing is in control of things happening, events. Gopal, and I, see an Encompassing Intelligence Operating. When people say that there is nothing in control.. they mean that what is 'in control' isn't a thing, as in it isn't anything that the human mind can successfully conceptualise, because it has no form, other than what's happening right now. When I say it I mean there is no thing or non thing in control. Control is a notion born of human fear. Boundless creation has no interest in control. God is literally out of control.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 8, 2019 0:22:21 GMT -5
When people say that there is nothing in control.. they mean that what is 'in control' isn't a thing, as in it isn't anything that the human mind can successfully conceptualise, because it has no form, other than what's happening right now. Yes, I agree, I understand. But I don't think E accepts even this. Yes, he will say that Intelligence is operating (but he will not define that intelligence), but ATST he says the Whole isn't conscious of itself, the Whole isn't Conscious of the Whole. IOW, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. That makes no sense to me. I, see, coordination, within the Whole. (The Whole is simultaneously the back messy side of the tapestry and the marvelous picture front side). IOW, events occur in time, and space. Consciousness takes the messy back side stitches and makes of them a beautiful picture. Consciousness constantly, in time, makes lemonade out of lemons. IOW, the small context cannot mess up the larger context. The way I see it, The universe is Love, perfection, harmony, beauty, wonder; the body of God. It's not intended, it simply is because God is. It is also not known. In order to know anything, a dichotomy must form such that Love may be known by that which seems to not be Love. Enter the illusion of mind. God has fallen into his own dream of limitation, boundaries, beginnings and endings. He has fallen into ignorance so that the truth can be known, walked into prison so that freedom can be found. It's one thing to be Love, and quite another to know Love. But indeed, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. God is not a knower, he only dreams of knowing. Not a Lover, he only dreams of Loving. And out of that dream the wonder of God is made manifest.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 8, 2019 0:39:55 GMT -5
'I AM' is flexible and vague enough to refer to a person or a BIG Self person as well as being a recognition in form of transcendent existence, and I'm pretty sure Tenka has availed himself of one of the first two. I'm pushing against that, and Tenka's notion that the term is singularly not vague or pointy. As you say, in the process, some deep attachment is being uncovered. The attachment would be understandable if it were the last bastion of the self. What part of "I Am " as an experience and not as a concept do you not understand? You're not listening to me. Tenka denies that it is a pointer.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Dec 8, 2019 0:51:07 GMT -5
What part of "I Am " as an experience and not as a concept do you not understand? You're not listening to me. Tenka denies that it is a pointer. Then he would be right because it isn't a pointer.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 8, 2019 0:51:41 GMT -5
The silly thing here is that this I AM awareness is the point of perception where concepts about I AM awareness derives so to speak .. What I have said all along is if one has a belief that this awareness of self (which is I AM aware) has a foundation of falsities and can't be trusted, and is dreamy as a foundation then neither can the belief that I AM isn't real, true or to be trusted lol It's all self defeating an negating the point they are making .. There can only be a real foundation and a true foundation otherwise nuffin holds weight . Absolutely nuffin holds anymore weight than another concept or pointer . But what happens is that although this supposed belief is entertained regarding the falsities one still tries to argue their point lol . This is why me being on 1st mountain and someone else who is waving the S.R. flag on it's peak holds no weight, but peeps want to believe in that, but not in something else .. lol ... I find it completely bonkers to do that and it's really odd . It's like these non false peeps can't help themselves in this regard .. There is a nickname for dudes who react to a charging elephant with a thought: pancake. But a thoughtful pancake.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 8, 2019 0:57:02 GMT -5
I didn't imply I did. Just saying it's irrelevant.Ahh, I can read it the way you meant it now, thanks. And sorry.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 8, 2019 1:02:10 GMT -5
Ego rises up in defense of the self, which is why I called it a pattern of self referencing thoughts. It's the self image that's being defended. I think the self referencing thoughts occur after the fact. They do reinforce the reaction, erect defenses, soften the blow, but the reaction is not the thoughts that follow it. And this is the weird thing about mushin, the reaction still happens, like a bulge in the blanket when you are making the bed. It forms but gets smoothed out. The thoughts don't follow. Because eveything that rises is allowed, fits perfectly, even Gopal's quirkiness. Example: If your mother tells you you're a piece sh$$t and she regrets ever given birth to you, the knot in the chest forms and then subsides. There is no thinking after the fact. "She really didn't mean it. She was drunk. She needs to die. I hate her. I love her. I need to move her to a home. I need to move." Now I'm offering this version because this is how I experience life in a "no-thought" state. I'm open to the possibility that an SR person might experience it differently. You might not react at all. I'm open to that notion, which could imply there's something there in mushin still identifying with the story. But this is as far as I can get and it is actually quite awesome, life just flows. Ego spends most of it's time underground.
|
|