|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 13:59:02 GMT -5
The illusion of personhood.....now thats another can of worms! I agree the realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, but unless I am misunderstanding you, I still don't think you are answering the question I'm asking you. I'm asking you if you believe there is a 'that which cannot be named'? That is sometimes referred to as the ineffable or the indescribable? Do you believe there is something that can only be indirectly pointed to that is not within the realm of ideas?(and I'm not saying I believe there isn't). As I implied with my first answer: To say anything about "the ineffable" other than it is "the ineffable" is nonsense. I can't claim to have never spoken nonsense. the problem lies with the question. <nonesense> to state a belief or a disbelief in or about "the ineffable" is more nonsense </nonsense> "the ineffable" is ineffable. To state something ABOUT 'the ineffable' is nonsense, but to say whether one believes or doesn't believe in this alleged 'ineffable' (beyond the realm of ideas) is not nonsense. Its not wholly dissimilar to asking someone if they believe in God. I am asking you if you believe there is such thing given that you speak of it. If not, what is your relationship to it? For me its simple. Its a case of maybe there is such thing beyond the realm of ideas, and maybe there isn't.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 10, 2013 14:01:30 GMT -5
[...] maybe there is such thing beyond the realm of ideas, and maybe there isn't. Okay, A, now, if you just stay right there. Don't move.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 14:04:35 GMT -5
[...] maybe there is such thing beyond the realm of ideas, and maybe there isn't. Okay, A, now, if you just stay right there. Don't move. That's a big ask Mr. B!
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 10, 2013 14:13:21 GMT -5
Okay, A, now, if you just stay right there. Don't move. That's a big ask Mr. B! Okay, well, it's worth a try, since you (at least used to) move around conceptually more than hands on an active Ouija board.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 14:43:33 GMT -5
Okay, well, it's worth a try, since you (at least used to) move around conceptually more than hands on an active Ouija board. Its been a couple of months since I wrote any spiritual words in earnest so time will tell, but I think there is a pretty strong likelihood that there will be some moving around conceptually. It all depends on the conversation. Unless it doesn't hehe.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 10, 2013 14:49:06 GMT -5
Okay, well, it's worth a try, since you (at least used to) move around conceptually more than hands on an active Ouija board. Its been a couple of months since I wrote any spiritual words in earnest so time will tell, but I think there is a pretty strong likelihood that there will be some moving around conceptually. It all depends on the conversation. Unless it doesn't hehe. Okay. Thanks for the warning.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 10, 2013 15:06:57 GMT -5
Yanno, this is kind of interesting wedged between the word-origin conversation. You could actually ask, is there anything sacred beyond the realm of ideas? - since ineffable means too sacred/great for words to express. What would be your answer to that, Andrew? Where does 'sacredness' fit in for you? (Couldn't resist butting in for the coincidence. Hope you don't mind.) My instinctive answer is that there is something sacred beyond the realm of ideas and which does include the realm of ideas. But for me its a matter of faith rather than a matter of conclusion or even realization. Ok, that's interesting. Cause it seems like much of the time you're arguing that there's not. No 'prior' or 'beyond'. But maybe I'm just confused about what you're saying. Likely that I am.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 16:29:37 GMT -5
My instinctive answer is that there is something sacred beyond the realm of ideas and which does include the realm of ideas. But for me its a matter of faith rather than a matter of conclusion or even realization. Ok, that's interesting. Cause it seems like much of the time you're arguing that there's not. No 'prior' or 'beyond'. But maybe I'm just confused about what you're saying. Likely that I am. Yes I can see why it would seem like that. Certainly I experience there to be something beyond what we understand to be the realm of ideas, something sacred, something....good, something ineffable, and I advocate 'residing' primarily in this unknown. However this residing is based on faith (and perhaps intuition) only, and that's because it is beyond what the rational thinking mind can understand or comprehend. I have no actual proof that there IS something prior or beyond (and neither do I seek proof), but that doesn't mean that it isn't provable. What I have often warned about on here is turning the idea of a 'prior' or 'beyond' or 'ultimate' into something more than an idea and more than just a possibility, i.e. turning it into a belief, into something real, something concrete or foundational. The moment that happens, is the moment that faith/trust is being placed primarily once again in the rational thinking mind. Which, perhaps oddly, is why it is important to see that it is just another idea created in mind. To repeat Niz again, ''everything is a play of ideas''. Its why I said above, 'maybe there is an ineffable, maybe there isn't'. I see the possibility as the door to faith and to the unknown. Just because I experience something 'there' doesn't necessarily make it true that there really is something 'there'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 16:36:51 GMT -5
The question is to be or not to be.
To believe or not to believe in God is not to be.
The unknown in which the belief/non-belief appears is to be.
It is the 'I AM' before the 'I AM' a believer/non-believer appears.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jun 10, 2013 16:37:05 GMT -5
Still itches, huh? Shocker. I have no interest and inclination to stand idiocy gladly on the forum at the moment. Probably best for both of us if you talk to people that don't think you are an idiot. Please | tell | me | how |
| you | really | feel | Andrew |
We are not separate. It just appears so. Hugs.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 10, 2013 16:39:31 GMT -5
Ok, that's interesting. Cause it seems like much of the time you're arguing that there's not. No 'prior' or 'beyond'. But maybe I'm just confused about what you're saying. Likely that I am. Yes I can see why it would seem like that. Certainly I experience there to be something beyond what we understand to be the realm of ideas, something sacred, something....good, something ineffable, and I advocate 'residing' primarily in this unknown. However this residing is based on faith (and perhaps intuition) only, and that's because it is beyond what the rational thinking mind can understand or comprehend. I have no actual proof that there IS something prior or beyond (and neither do I seek proof), but that doesn't mean that it isn't provable. What I have often warned about on here is turning the idea of a 'prior' or 'beyond' or 'ultimate' into something more than an idea and more than just a possibility, i.e. turning it into a belief, into something real, something concrete or foundational. The moment that happens, is the moment that faith/trust is being placed primarily once again in the rational thinking mind. Which, perhaps oddly, is why it is important to see that it is just another idea created in mind. To repeat Niz again, ''everything is a play of ideas''. Its why I said above, 'maybe there is an ineffable, maybe there isn't'. I see the possibility as the door to faith and to the unknown. Just because I experience something 'there' doesn't necessarily make it true that there really is something 'there'. Just a note for clarification: Niz's quote that "everything is a play of ideas" is contextual-- Just wanted to get the context out there, before there is any further discussion or any confusion (which can often happen when one swims in concepts). Also, please note that he suggests a 'state free from ideation'.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 16:50:29 GMT -5
The question is to be or not to be. To believe or not to believe in God is not to be. The unknown in which the belief/non-belief appears is to be. It is the 'I AM' before the 'I AM' a believer/non-believer appears. Its still all just ideas unless proved otherwise, but I wouldn't say that seeking proof is a particularly worthwhile endeavour.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 16:52:08 GMT -5
Yes I can see why it would seem like that. Certainly I experience there to be something beyond what we understand to be the realm of ideas, something sacred, something....good, something ineffable, and I advocate 'residing' primarily in this unknown. However this residing is based on faith (and perhaps intuition) only, and that's because it is beyond what the rational thinking mind can understand or comprehend. I have no actual proof that there IS something prior or beyond (and neither do I seek proof), but that doesn't mean that it isn't provable. What I have often warned about on here is turning the idea of a 'prior' or 'beyond' or 'ultimate' into something more than an idea and more than just a possibility, i.e. turning it into a belief, into something real, something concrete or foundational. The moment that happens, is the moment that faith/trust is being placed primarily once again in the rational thinking mind. Which, perhaps oddly, is why it is important to see that it is just another idea created in mind. To repeat Niz again, ''everything is a play of ideas''. Its why I said above, 'maybe there is an ineffable, maybe there isn't'. I see the possibility as the door to faith and to the unknown. Just because I experience something 'there' doesn't necessarily make it true that there really is something 'there'. Just a note for clarification: Niz's quote that "everything is a play of ideas" is contextual-- Just wanted to get the context out there, before there is any further discussion or any confusion (which can often happen when one swims in concepts). Also, please note that he suggests a 'state free from ideation'. Rez with that quote.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 10, 2013 17:05:03 GMT -5
Greetings..
We are One..
We are many..
We are separate..
We are seamlessly whole..
There is a common self-evident awareness in the concepts stated above, followed by the concept, idea, belief.. there is conflict, contradiction, and attachment in the concepts and beliefs..
To look upon the world with innocence, still the mind.. silence the internal voice that tells you what your parents, clergy, teachers, mentors, friends, peers, and the books, and movies, and communication media want you to hear and believe.. silence the internal voice that tries to tell you what you see, what you should believe..
In the stillness and silence is a new innocence, a fresh perspective and vision..
We are.. together, we can explore that 'are-ness' for what it 'is', rather than what we think it is, rather than what we were conditioned to believe it is, but.. to do that, we need to let go of the beliefs and knowings, so that we are all seeing with the same eyes..
Be well..
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 17:08:42 GMT -5
Greetings.. We are One.. We are many.. We are separate.. We are seamlessly whole.. For my part, I see this as a healthy way to see the world and to function in the world.
|
|