|
Post by justlikeyou on Jan 21, 2024 21:15:50 GMT -5
Let me me flog the damn horse again, you don't know 100% what you actually are, so there is a belief in that. You take your body and mind, with all its beliefs, thoughts and memories, as absolute proof of your personal existence. As proof that you are. That you exist. And that's all fine and good. But why argue with others who look deeper than you do, are more interested in what it is that actually animates the body and enlivens the mind in the first place, before a single thought or belief can even be had?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 21, 2024 22:03:51 GMT -5
Why are we here? Whatever other planes or dimensions that might exist, why is the material vibration the most significant? Why do we incarnate? What is it about time and space that teaches? I can think any thought whatsoever, feel anything, but thoughts or feelings are insignificant compared to doing, to bodily actions. We are coming up to a crossroads. We can't turn right or left until we actually get to the crossroads. Until our body gets to the crossroads. Until our body gets to the crossroads, in time and space. Until our body gets to the crossroads in time and space, in the present moment. Bhagavan Das said it pretty well, "Be here now". (He got that from Neem Karoli Baba). I read that book exactly 50 years ago. I read The Tao Te Ching exactly 50 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 21, 2024 23:12:47 GMT -5
I respect your right to your opinion, and I actually perceive it as my interpretation of an event, created by my subconscious for my benefit: a lesson and a guidance. It isn't solipsism, at all, as a newborn, a preschooler, a student, ... who would recognize their limited level of comprehension, aren't solipsists. It is what the Delphic maxims point to: know what you are; don't exceed it; if you do then there's suffering. To clarify, solipsism in this case would be, 'I am responsible for the memory that you are experiencing'. For me, that would be an overly simplistic way of explaining why you are experiencing the memory that you are experiencing. If you don't believe in linearity, why do you trust your memory at all? It seems to me that trust in memory assumes 'likelihood', and likelihood is only possible, if linearity is believed to be the case. If we hadn't agreed to experience linearity, why do we even have memory? I respect your right to your opinion, ... A slightly different way of explaining my view. You believe that we are here to learn, like in a 'school' right? Well, to go with that analogy, I'm suggesting that your 'level or 'grade' of learning comes with certain rules, and it's those rules that enable you to learn and grow in the ways that you are interested in. In a sense, your 'classroom' is the template/format that I mentioned, and linearity would be part of that template/format. And it sounds like you have probably learned a tremendous amount, and perhaps your learnings are actually more reflective of a class above you. But the format of your classroom remains unchanged. For example, the politicians of our world remain incompetent lol. So I'm speculating that to some extent, the application of those learnings doesn't wholly apply to your current classroom. One by one: No. My subconscious gives me access only to my memory. Your subconscious gives you access only to your memory. Our subconsciouses are interconnected, for now, because our beliefs and expectations create a situation / reality that satisfies the needs of both of us. We don't experience identical realities, and there is an endless number of other realities for the same point in time, 3d-space, identities. In altered states of consciousness, one can project, focus in others' memories; his subconscious allows conscious contact with other subconsciouses and their memories, but this is beyond the point of this discussion (I experienced it). It isn't that I trust my memory. I work with the memory that my subconscious gives me access to. I have no choice in this matter. There is belief in time linearity and causality only as a learning framework. Actually, your current beliefs determine the past that you read from your memory. The cause is created to justify the effect. I am what my memory tells me that I am. I may or may not have experienced what my memory tells me that I did. I may actually unconsiously jump form one point of the physical hyperspace to another with no continuity, including back and fore in time, and forming new identities / fragments, according to the needs of evolvement of my entity; and this just by changing the memory that I am allowed to access. Linearity is observed but it isn't real, as causality is observed but it actually works from the effect to the cause, changing the past to fit the present beliefs and expectations. There isn't a classroom attended by a group of entities. There is my entity's current level that causes temporary inner associations with some entities that have objectives that interlock (for example a victim with a victimizer). But, I experience only the reality created by my own subconscious. Politicians in my reality seem incompetent because this satisfies my unconscious needs to learn in evolve, that offers me lessons, and tests my progress, from which I can draw guidance. Everything that I experience applies to my entity's needs as it participate in this learning framework. Everything that attracts my attention should be the object of my interpretation, as deep as possible, for learning.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 22, 2024 0:25:42 GMT -5
Notice how in the examples there is a house (while ownership is cited as the belief)? Ah, perhaps you were following that dialog about assumptions. .. but thanks, yes, I didn't think to note that specifically. So it seems people are aware of what is a given compared to whatever they believe.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 22, 2024 0:29:04 GMT -5
I don't know about you guys, but I know this is what it's like and have no doubt about it.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 22, 2024 8:37:18 GMT -5
I'm really okay with the idea that I have beliefs (or that there are beliefs being stored in my consciousness/brain etc). It makes sense to me. I believe that our beliefs create our reality, so the floor that I am apparently walking on, is ultimately a product of belief, and I believe the floor will support me, and I won't tumble through it, spinning into a vortex of eternal space lol. But, there's a difference between having beliefs, and experiencing beliefs. And I think that what the folks you are talking to here are saying is that they don't 'experience' belief. I don't really experience 'beliefs' much either. I think I might be right in saying that the experience of a belief comes with an experience of projecting ourselves into the future or past, and in contrast, when we are experiencing ourselves as present...or presence....in the moment, there's no experience of belief. When you are meditating, are you experiencing belief? (Again, I understand that there are beliefs there somewhere). But even when you think that "you are in the moment" you actually experience that as a belief, don't you? This is because you can't be in the moment for any amount of time: that moment instantly became past and you just recall it. Then when you get out of meditating, you recall an experience. There is no way to know that you really had it, or you made it up, or it was somehow implanted, dreamed, imagined, whatever word illustrates it better for you. Not experiencing beliefs is just an assessment, honest maybe, but it doesn't make it truth. The Present is not an interval of time. It is eternal, and completely sideways to time. Any given instant, free of thought of future or past, is a sort of shadow, a hint of the Present.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 22, 2024 8:40:20 GMT -5
Have you ever been punched in the face? No, you haven't, or you couldn't write this. lol I have. Maybe that does explain some things!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 22, 2024 22:19:55 GMT -5
Ah, perhaps you were following that dialog about assumptions. .. but thanks, yes, I didn't think to note that specifically. So it seems people are aware of what is a given compared to whatever they believe. If approached with something similar to your meditation, it is as direct a path as possible. If approached with mind it can be an endless bunny warren. The Flat Earth dealio is one such example.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 22, 2024 23:54:52 GMT -5
So it seems people are aware of what is a given compared to whatever they believe. If approached with something similar to your meditation, it is as direct a path as possible. If approached with mind it can be an endless bunny warren. The Flat Earth dealio is one such example. I think the essence of the theory is supposing there is no objective universe, ergo everything must be a belief.
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 23, 2024 1:27:29 GMT -5
If approached with something similar to your meditation, it is as direct a path as possible. If approached with mind it can be an endless bunny warren. The Flat Earth dealio is one such example. I think the essence of the theory is supposing there is no objective universe, ergo everything must be a belief. My understanding is that there is no objective physical universe, but that on the other hand there is a physical reality framework that reflects an inner reality. Each one of the participants in this physical reality framework perceives it according to its individual beliefs, a physical reality presented to each individual's physical senses by its subconscious. All the participants, no matter their level of evolvement, are connected at the non-physical level. For example, the (physical) human body is composed of organs, cells, particles, each one being a materialization of a non-physical counterpart. The gestalt of consciousness that is materialized as human body is composed of elements that correspond to those physical components. The gestalt structure means that the state of physical body is determined at the body's consciousness level, and not at its physical components' level. The association between the body gestalt of consciousness and its elements is dynamic, the elements that don't resonate anymore with the gestalt leave it, and new elements that start to resonate with the gestalt join it. I think that this is something that some models of reality ignore, assuming there is some kind of magic, a belief, an illusory reality created form "thin air". This is detrimental, because it causes an imbalance due to the high instability, the high turn over.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 23, 2024 12:46:24 GMT -5
If approached with something similar to your meditation, it is as direct a path as possible. If approached with mind it can be an endless bunny warren. The Flat Earth dealio is one such example. I think the essence of the theory is supposing there is no objective universe, ergo everything must be a belief. That seems to me a common thread running through various perspectives, but I don't think they each tie together in exactly that simple way.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 23, 2024 22:03:12 GMT -5
I think the essence of the theory is supposing there is no objective universe, ergo everything must be a belief. That seems to me a common thread running through various perspectives, but I don't think they each tie together in exactly that simple way. We'll have to boil off the liquid and see what remains. We could make coffee in the meantime, at least.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 23, 2024 22:07:27 GMT -5
I think the essence of the theory is supposing there is no objective universe, ergo everything must be a belief. My understanding is that there is no objective physical universe, but that on the other hand there is a physical reality framework that reflects an inner reality. Each one of the participants in this physical reality framework perceives it according to its individual beliefs, a physical reality presented to each individual's physical senses by its subconscious. All the participants, no matter their level of evolvement, are connected at the non-physical level. For example, the (physical) human body is composed of organs, cells, particles, each one being a materialization of a non-physical counterpart. The gestalt of consciousness that is materialized as human body is composed of elements that correspond to those physical components. The gestalt structure means that the state of physical body is determined at the body's consciousness level, and not at its physical components' level. The association between the body gestalt of consciousness and its elements is dynamic, the elements that don't resonate anymore with the gestalt leave it, and new elements that start to resonate with the gestalt join it. I think that this is something that some models of reality ignore, assuming there is some kind of magic, a belief, an illusory reality created form "thin air". This is detrimental, because it causes an imbalance due to the high instability, the high turn over. I'm going with Gopal's 'perception is creation' theory for now, but I'll have to embellish it to account for the apparent order of things.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 26, 2024 14:59:04 GMT -5
I don't care what a few non dualists think in regards to my definition of words. The thing is, is that we all believe what we believe things to mean. You have just illustrated this perfectly. You just resonate with a few other's in regards to what conceptual words mean. That's all. I keep flogging the dead horse cos it appears peeps don't actually understand what a belief system means and qualifies as.. Let me me flog the damn horse again, you don't know 100% what you actually are, so there is a belief in that. The belief system in effect reflects what you believe yourself to be that can stub your toe in the first place. It's no good stating you have a direct experience of it if for example you believe you are just an appearance of a person. You have to have a belief in place that encompasses an experience where what you are can stub their toe. Beyond the self and mind there is no experience of banging your toe. There is no reference to you or the toe. So we have to be mindful of our experience. You said you directly experience bashing your toe. So what is it that bangs their toe. You don't know do you. What you don't know 100% to be true is a belief. It's not that difficult to understand. But, there's a difference between having beliefs, and experiencing beliefs. And I think that what the folks you are talking to here are saying is that they don't 'experience' belief. I don't really experience 'beliefs' much either. I think I might be right in saying that the experience of a belief comes with an experience of projecting ourselves into the future or past, and in contrast, when we are experiencing ourselves as present...or presence....in the moment, there's no experience of belief. When you are meditating, are you experiencing belief? (Again, I understand that there are beliefs there somewhere). .. I have been speaking about an integrated belief system, and that is why one doesn't have to continuously experience the belief of the floor underneath their feet will support their weight. The belief is already there. When something changes in regards the floor beneath their feet, then their belief system would reflect this. It's similar to peeps that think that they are beyond mind mind simply because they stop the mental chitter chatter, well one doesn't have to continuously chitter chatter to still be of the mind. In regards to meditating, it depends on what state one acquires, is one simply meditating to whale music or has one transcended somewhat? This thing about experiencing beliefs is a little messed up for it's a little misconceived. It's a little like being aware of breathing and then not, just because you aren't aware of breathing doesn't mean to say you're not.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 26, 2024 15:05:58 GMT -5
Let me me flog the damn horse again, you don't know 100% what you actually are, so there is a belief in that. You take your body and mind, with all its beliefs, thoughts and memories, as absolute proof of your personal existence. As proof that you are. That you exist. And that's all fine and good. But why argue with others who look deeper than you do, are more interested in what it is that actually animates the body and enlivens the mind in the first place, before a single thought or belief can even be had? You obviously haven't followed or perhaps understood anything that I have said over the years. I don't have any absolute's. I can look as deep as the next peep, but I have been speaking about what is known to be 100% true and that which isn't. That which isn't is a belief held to be true. Talking about what is prior to a belief had is not a reflection of someone saying they don't have beliefs lol. We have to remain in context here. This is why you get some peeps arguing that they are not even here. Peeps trying to speak about no beliefs when believing what they do is kinda silly. Perhaps you need to look deeper into this before you want to cast aspersions.
|
|