|
|
Post by Beingist on Jan 24, 2012 15:38:11 GMT -5
Why say I exist? Because some think 'they' don't exist. Hehe. No, why say 'I' exist? Do I exist? If I think I do, then either 'I' is all that exists, or 'I' is separate from everything else that exists. If the former, one can rest easy in solipsism. If the latter, then 'I' implies separation. Do rhinocerouseseses think, 'I am'? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 15:53:36 GMT -5
Yes, if grasped as a concept seen through the belief in separation, but as I said, this existence is known before those thoughts. Those thoughts are conclusions about what exists. He's not talking about identification as a separate person. He's suggesting that the sense of existing itself appears along with consciousness in the body and is not existence itself. In order to sense existence we have to experience ourselves as separate FROM existence. I don't get that. |
|
|
|
Post by desertrat on Jan 24, 2012 15:56:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 15:58:34 GMT -5
Put it this way. Without any thought at all, there would be no sense of our existence and no knowing that we exist. How could there be? In a very subtle way, thought and sensing go hand in hand. And the thing is, we dont even need to get rid of thought altogether in order to no longer sense our existence or know that we exist. We just have to release the attachment to the duality of truth/falsity. I would say even a bug knows it exists, even with no thought about it. I also don't know why you talk about it as though it's a problem. I guess because you see it as knowing something true, which implies the attachment you mention? If so, I suggest mind is working too hard on that. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2012 15:58:49 GMT -5
In order to sense existence we have to experience ourselves as separate FROM existence. I don't get that. Okay, well we aren't separate from existence in any way, right? In order to sense it, we would somehow have to be separate from it. Which we are not of course, but we can experience the illusion of being separate from it. In this illusion of being separate from existence, we get to sense existence. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 15:59:52 GMT -5
An interesting thing about Niz is that I can quite clearly see a progression on his path between the time he wrote his first book and last book. A little quote from one of his last ones... ''Once the body and the sense of being (‘I am’) goes what remains is the Original, which is unconditioned, without attributes, and without identity.'' Seems like we talk about that all the time here. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2012 16:04:42 GMT -5
Put it this way. Without any thought at all, there would be no sense of our existence and no knowing that we exist. How could there be? In a very subtle way, thought and sensing go hand in hand. And the thing is, we dont even need to get rid of thought altogether in order to no longer sense our existence or know that we exist. We just have to release the attachment to the duality of truth/falsity. I would say even a bug knows it exists, even with no thought about it. I also don't know why you talk about it as though it's a problem. I guess because you see it as knowing something true, which implies the attachment you mention? If so, I suggest mind is working too hard on that. I wouldnt say a bug knows its exists. It is too fully immersed in the experience, it doesnt experience any depth of illusion of being separate from existence. Its self-awareness is virtually non-existent. But yes, its the knowing something is true thing. The attachment. Im not working hard on it, as I said, I cant honestly say that I know I exist anymore. It would be somewhat crazy to deny the existence of existence, but its the 'knowing' point that I am addressing. It also ties in with what Ive been saying about seeing that there is no separate person isnt the same as actually releasing the underlying need to believe that something is true or false. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 16:06:19 GMT -5
Why say I exist? Because some think 'they' don't exist. Hehe. No, why say 'I' exist? Do I exist? If I think I do, then either 'I' is all that exists, or 'I' is separate from everything else that exists. If the former, one can rest easy in solipsism. If the latter, then 'I' implies separation. Do rhinocerouseseses think, 'I am'? I don't know what rhinoceri think. I shudder to think what they think. Hehe. Yes, I mean all that exists. I'm not comfy with what I know about solipsism because it seems to be trying to expand personhood to be all inclusive instead of beginning with all inclusiveness, but maybe the end result is the same. I guess your issue is with the word "I". I didn't get much flack when I said to Moses "I am that I am". He seemed to be okay with it. Hehe. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 16:07:56 GMT -5
whether you invented it or somebody else really makes no difference. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jan 24, 2012 16:15:20 GMT -5
No, why say 'I' exist? Do I exist? If I think I do, then either 'I' is all that exists, or 'I' is separate from everything else that exists. If the former, one can rest easy in solipsism. If the latter, then 'I' implies separation. Do rhinocerouseseses think, 'I am'? I don't know what rhinoceri think. I shudder to think what they think. Hehe. Yes, I mean all that exists. I'm not comfy with what I know about solipsism because it seems to be trying to expand personhood to be all inclusive instead of beginning with all inclusiveness, but maybe the end result is the same. I guess your issue is with the word "I". I didn't get much flack when I said to Moses "I am that I am". He seemed to be okay with it. Hehe. Oh. Well, I don't remember ever meeting Moses, myself. But, then, as Niz points out, 'I' was never born. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 16:18:45 GMT -5
Okay, well we are existence, right? Not separate from it in any way. In order to sense it, we would somehow have to be separate from it. Which we are not of course, but we can experience the illusion of being separate from it. In this illusion of being separate from existence, we get to sense existence. Yes, the sense of existence appears to existence, and is not existence itself, as I've said. So i guess I see how you could see that as feeling separate from existence.....maybe.....somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2012 16:27:01 GMT -5
Okay, well we are existence, right? Not separate from it in any way. In order to sense it, we would somehow have to be separate from it. Which we are not of course, but we can experience the illusion of being separate from it. In this illusion of being separate from existence, we get to sense existence. Yes, the sense of existence appears to existence, and is not existence itself, as I've said. So i guess I see how you could see that as feeling separate from existence.....maybe.....somehow. Yes. When there is no illusion at all of being separate from existence, we dont sense existence. How could we? Now, Im not saying that I dont experience any illusion all of being separate from existence - thoughting obviously still happens in this bodymind. On the other hand, it seems that the illusion is not persistent or primary or intense enough for me to be able to say with honesty that I can sense my existence or that I KNOW I exist. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 16:28:25 GMT -5
I would say even a bug knows it exists, even with no thought about it. I also don't know why you talk about it as though it's a problem. I guess because you see it as knowing something true, which implies the attachment you mention? If so, I suggest mind is working too hard on that. I wouldnt say a bug knows its exists. It is too fully immersed in the experience, it doesnt experience any depth of illusion of being separate from existence. Its self-awareness is virtually non-existent. 'Being separate from existence' still sounds very odd to me for one who knows he exists, and I wouldn't say self awareness is required to know that. I'm not suggesting thoughts are involved. Yeah, you're doing something with that 'knowing point' that I don't understand obviously. (I'm really not trying to, BTW. It kinda wears me out.) |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2012 16:30:59 GMT -5
I don't know what rhinoceri think. I shudder to think what they think. Hehe. Yes, I mean all that exists. I'm not comfy with what I know about solipsism because it seems to be trying to expand personhood to be all inclusive instead of beginning with all inclusiveness, but maybe the end result is the same. I guess your issue is with the word "I". I didn't get much flack when I said to Moses "I am that I am". He seemed to be okay with it. Hehe. Oh. Well, I don't remember ever meeting Moses, myself. But, then, as Niz points out, 'I' was never born. Moses was a riot. He used to whap people over the head with that staff of his, which is where the idea came from for the Zen stick. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jan 24, 2012 16:35:24 GMT -5
Oh. Well, I don't remember ever meeting Moses, myself. But, then, as Niz points out, 'I' was never born. Moses was a riot. He used to whap people over the head with that staff of his, which is where the idea came from for the Zen stick. ;D Yeah, and I guess there were 15 commandments, originally, but one of the tablets got broke. At least according to Mel Brooks. |
|
