|
Post by relinquish on Jun 13, 2013 3:21:58 GMT -5
To look upon the world with innocence is to see the world AS innocence.
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Jun 13, 2013 7:02:01 GMT -5
FWIW, andrewperm, the way I understand 'no idea is ultimately true' isn't a reference to an ultimate or absolute case. It's just another way of saying that one shouldn't get too invested in their thoughts. It's a reminder to relax the focus a little, open up, smell the roses. It's a pointer to the fact that ideas are just ideas. What it is not is an invitation to spin with it and say, 'But that's just an idea.....and that.....and that! What if we replace "No idea is ultimately true" with "Nothing lasts forever" ? Any chance the word-lawyers will be more lenient with it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 8:14:46 GMT -5
It's not true that there's nothing to know so much as it's false that there IS something to know. Mind tricks itself by making stuff up, and when somebody reveals that illusion, mind thinks some truth is being declared about the absence of what it made up. Its not necessarily false there there is something to know. I think we looked at ideas and saw the same thing basically i.e. that ideas define each other and therefore have no solid foundation. Out of that you came up with 'nothing is ultimately true'. Out of that I came up with 'its all subjective' (which is self-referencing). So when I look at ideas/things, I see an absolute subjectivity. A play of ideas. I see form that is empty of inherent existence and this emptiness is empty of emptiness hehe. What you see is a fixed 'ultimate'. In my frame of reference, there is not necessarily a foundation. In yours, there is. In my frame of reference, there is no fixed belief. In yours, there is. I carbonfreezehansolo with "not necessarily." This fits nicely under the certainty, or not, theme. While it's true that "not necessarily" can be attached to anything, however, I'm open to the possibility that this is just another form of self-deception -- identification to doubt and skepticism, for example. But that's me. I don't claim any modicum of realization either, just going on basic reasoning and doubt. What is curious to me, andrew, is that you claim to be fairly highly realized and also share this skeptical view. And what you say in this post about 'it's all subjective' is pretty much the exact same thing I've heard your arch nemesis enigma say. It makes me wonder if your emphasis on 'not necessarily' is again more about your rivalry with enigma. I still don't see how 'it still posits truth/falsity outside of ideas' follows from 'no idea is ultimately true.' The latter is just a paradox. If anything it points to the fact that the human experience is wrought with contradiction. But it's true, truth/falsity is not undermined. Truth and falsity happen, given a proper context. But paradox happens too. Again, this is stuff you agree with I think, which makes me wonder what the source of disagreement is. And this is where I wonder if its sour grapes or something.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 13, 2013 8:20:12 GMT -5
It's a pointer to the fact that ideas are just ideas. What it is not is an invitation to spin with it and say, 'But that's just an idea.....and that.....and that! What if we replace "No idea is ultimately true" with "Nothing lasts forever" ? Any chance the word-lawyers will be more lenient with it? In terms of talking about ideas, no, it doesn't work. There has to be a clear self-recursion that points to absolute subjectivity.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 13, 2013 8:27:07 GMT -5
Greetings.. Did you feel....ALIVE, when you were writing that? There no interval that i don't feel alive.. Life and living is 'i am', Life living itself.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 13, 2013 8:35:43 GMT -5
Its not necessarily false there there is something to know. I think we looked at ideas and saw the same thing basically i.e. that ideas define each other and therefore have no solid foundation. Out of that you came up with 'nothing is ultimately true'. Out of that I came up with 'its all subjective' (which is self-referencing). So when I look at ideas/things, I see an absolute subjectivity. A play of ideas. I see form that is empty of inherent existence and this emptiness is empty of emptiness hehe. What you see is a fixed 'ultimate'. In my frame of reference, there is not necessarily a foundation. In yours, there is. In my frame of reference, there is no fixed belief. In yours, there is. I carbonfreezehansolo with "not necessarily." This fits nicely under the certainty, or not, theme. While it's true that "not necessarily" can be attached to anything, however, I'm open to the possibility that this is just another form of self-deception -- identification to doubt and skepticism, for example. But that's me. I don't claim any modicum of realization either, just going on basic reasoning and doubt. What is curious to me, andrew, is that you claim to be fairly highly realized and also share this skeptical view. And what you say in this post about 'it's all subjective' is pretty much the exact same thing I've heard your arch nemesis enigma say. It makes me wonder if your emphasis on 'not necessarily' is again more about your rivalry with enigma. I still don't see how 'it still posits truth/falsity outside of ideas' follows from 'no idea is ultimately true.' The latter is just a paradox. If anything it points to the fact that the human experience is wrought with contradiction. But it's true, truth/falsity is not undermined. Truth and falsity happen, given a proper context. But paradox happens too. Again, this is stuff you agree with I think, which makes me wonder what the source of disagreement is. And this is where I wonder if its sour grapes or something. I was using the word 'necessarily' to talk about this before I met Enigma, but the 'necessarily' is quite crucial. There MAY be a foundation...or there may not be. There MAY be an 'ultimate'....or there may not be. There MAY be a ground of being....or there may not be. It MAY be true that Awareness is prior or it may not be. Its not provable either way. Its not necessarily true either way. Nothing is necessarily true (including that statement). Of course, I could talk about what I experience, but just because I experience something, doesn't make it necessarily true! There is a quality of certainty within this ambiguity and apparent uncertainty, but its not the kind of certainty that comes with knowing something to be true beyond all doubt. Enigma may say 'its all subjective', but he insists on positing a ground, a foundation, an ultimate, a dreamer. As I see it, the dominance of mind is hidden behind a facade/disguise of not-knowing. Every 'non-dual' idea has to be seen for what it is...i.e. another idea, and there may be truth to the idea or there may not be. Some of these ideas can be useful by way of breaking through old conditioned patterns of thought, but it doesn't make them necessarily true. To say that 'no idea is true' assumes that there is truth. Its not necessarily true that there is truth! Its ALL ambiguous (and that is meant to be self-recursive). In looking at the nature of ideas, it is imperative that the duality of truth/falsity be undermined. I do agree that the human experience is wrought with contradiction and that paradox happens. I think you might like to think that there is a sour grapes issue because you have said it a few times, but if you would like to do some digging you will see that in the time we have been here, Enigma has directly sought me out at least as much as I have sought him out. Even in the forum hiatus he consistently spoke of me. I'm not going to deny that he does get on my nerves sometimes though!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 9:05:27 GMT -5
I think you might like to think that there is a sour grapes issue because you have said it a few times, but if you would like to do some digging you will see that in the time we have been here, Enigma has directly sought me out at least as much as I have sought him out. Even in the forum hiatus he consistently spoke of me. I'm not going to deny that he does get on my nerves sometimes though! Noted and acknowledged.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 13, 2013 9:23:36 GMT -5
I carbonfreezehansolo with "not necessarily." This fits nicely under the certainty, or not, theme. While it's true that "not necessarily" can be attached to anything, however, I'm open to the possibility that this is just another form of self-deception -- identification to doubt and skepticism, for example. But that's me. I don't claim any modicum of realization either, just going on basic reasoning and doubt. What is curious to me, andrew, is that you claim to be fairly highly realized and also share this skeptical view. And what you say in this post about 'it's all subjective' is pretty much the exact same thing I've heard your arch nemesis enigma say. It makes me wonder if your emphasis on 'not necessarily' is again more about your rivalry with enigma. I still don't see how 'it still posits truth/falsity outside of ideas' follows from 'no idea is ultimately true.' The latter is just a paradox. If anything it points to the fact that the human experience is wrought with contradiction. But it's true, truth/falsity is not undermined. Truth and falsity happen, given a proper context. But paradox happens too. Again, this is stuff you agree with I think, which makes me wonder what the source of disagreement is. And this is where I wonder if its sour grapes or something. I was using the word 'necessarily' to talk about this before I met Enigma, but the 'necessarily' is quite crucial. There MAY be a foundation...or there may not be. There MAY be an 'ultimate'....or there may not be. There MAY be a ground of being....or there may not be. It MAY be true that Awareness is prior or it may not be. Its not provable either way. Its not necessarily true either way. Nothing is necessarily true (including that statement). Of course, I could talk about what I experience, but just because I experience something, doesn't make it necessarily true! There is a quality of certainty within this ambiguity and apparent uncertainty, but its not the kind of certainty that comes with knowing something to be true beyond all doubt. Enigma may say 'its all subjective', but he insists on positing a ground, a foundation, an ultimate, a dreamer. As I see it, the dominance of mind is hidden behind a facade/disguise of not-knowing. Every 'non-dual' idea has to be seen for what it is...i.e. another idea, and there may be truth to the idea or there may not be. Some of these ideas can be useful by way of breaking through old conditioned patterns of thought, but it doesn't make them necessarily true. To say that 'no idea is true' assumes that there is truth. Its not necessarily true that there is truth! Its ALL ambiguous (and that is meant to be self-recursive). In looking at the nature of ideas, it is imperative that the duality of truth/falsity be undermined. I do agree that the human experience is wrought with contradiction and that paradox happens. I think you might like to think that there is a sour grapes issue because you have said it a few times, but if you would like to do some digging you will see that in the time we have been here, Enigma has directly sought me out at least as much as I have sought him out. Even in the forum hiatus he consistently spoke of me. I'm not going to deny that he does get on my nerves sometimes though! How can ambiguity escape the turn of the wheel? If everything is ambiguous, then nothing is.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 13, 2013 9:39:10 GMT -5
I was using the word 'necessarily' to talk about this before I met Enigma, but the 'necessarily' is quite crucial. There MAY be a foundation...or there may not be. There MAY be an 'ultimate'....or there may not be. There MAY be a ground of being....or there may not be. It MAY be true that Awareness is prior or it may not be. Its not provable either way. Its not necessarily true either way. Nothing is necessarily true (including that statement). Of course, I could talk about what I experience, but just because I experience something, doesn't make it necessarily true! There is a quality of certainty within this ambiguity and apparent uncertainty, but its not the kind of certainty that comes with knowing something to be true beyond all doubt. Enigma may say 'its all subjective', but he insists on positing a ground, a foundation, an ultimate, a dreamer. As I see it, the dominance of mind is hidden behind a facade/disguise of not-knowing. Every 'non-dual' idea has to be seen for what it is...i.e. another idea, and there may be truth to the idea or there may not be. Some of these ideas can be useful by way of breaking through old conditioned patterns of thought, but it doesn't make them necessarily true. To say that 'no idea is true' assumes that there is truth. Its not necessarily true that there is truth! Its ALL ambiguous (and that is meant to be self-recursive). In looking at the nature of ideas, it is imperative that the duality of truth/falsity be undermined. I do agree that the human experience is wrought with contradiction and that paradox happens. I think you might like to think that there is a sour grapes issue because you have said it a few times, but if you would like to do some digging you will see that in the time we have been here, Enigma has directly sought me out at least as much as I have sought him out. Even in the forum hiatus he consistently spoke of me. I'm not going to deny that he does get on my nerves sometimes though! How can ambiguity escape the turn of the wheel? If everything is ambiguous, then nothing is. I'm not sure what 'turn of the wheel' you mean, but you are correct that if everything is ambiguous, then nothing is (or at least, not necessarily so). Hence why form is empty of inherent existence (and emptiness is empty of emptiness!). To repeat what I said though, the statement that 'its all ambiguous' is also ambiguous. So again, what is being pointed to is an absolute subjectivity, a subjectivity that is so subjective, that its own subjectivity is in question! I have no problem with the experience of knowing something when knowing something happens. Its only on the forum that things seem ambiguous, contradictory and paradoxical. Beyond the forum its like...'hmmm, make a sandwich'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2013 10:43:55 GMT -5
I was using the word 'necessarily' to talk about this before I met Enigma, but the 'necessarily' is quite crucial. There MAY be a foundation...or there may not be. There MAY be an 'ultimate'....or there may not be. There MAY be a ground of being....or there may not be. It MAY be true that Awareness is prior or it may not be. Its not provable either way. Its not necessarily true either way. Nothing is necessarily true (including that statement). Of course, I could talk about what I experience, but just because I experience something, doesn't make it necessarily true! There is a quality of certainty within this ambiguity and apparent uncertainty, but its not the kind of certainty that comes with knowing something to be true beyond all doubt. Enigma may say 'its all subjective', but he insists on positing a ground, a foundation, an ultimate, a dreamer. As I see it, the dominance of mind is hidden behind a facade/disguise of not-knowing. Every 'non-dual' idea has to be seen for what it is...i.e. another idea, and there may be truth to the idea or there may not be. Some of these ideas can be useful by way of breaking through old conditioned patterns of thought, but it doesn't make them necessarily true. To say that 'no idea is true' assumes that there is truth. Its not necessarily true that there is truth! Its ALL ambiguous (and that is meant to be self-recursive). In looking at the nature of ideas, it is imperative that the duality of truth/falsity be undermined. I do agree that the human experience is wrought with contradiction and that paradox happens. I think you might like to think that there is a sour grapes issue because you have said it a few times, but if you would like to do some digging you will see that in the time we have been here, Enigma has directly sought me out at least as much as I have sought him out. Even in the forum hiatus he consistently spoke of me. I'm not going to deny that he does get on my nerves sometimes though! How can ambiguity escape the turn of the wheel? If everything is ambiguous, then nothing is. Haha, yeah, the universal relativity of stuff seems to render it irrelevant :-) I like that place.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 13, 2013 11:53:05 GMT -5
Clearly they don't. Andrew and Figs are clubhouse aligned for the most part, but Tzu is following his own yellow brick road, and Silver is following her strongest feeling. They seem to share the same "clarity" about you lol Is consensus a prerequisite to clarity? And anyway, what F@%# is clarity? Please don't answer that hehehe The FigAndrew club aligns itself with the same clarity about virtually everything and everybody, but everyone else has their own story about Enigma that says more about the storyteller than the character. lol
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 13, 2013 11:57:40 GMT -5
Clearly they don't. Andrew and Figs are clubhouse aligned for the most part, but Tzu is following his own yellow brick road, and Silver is following her strongest feeling. I think it's sometimes safer to speak for one's self... Of course, but then I'm not trying to play it safe. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jun 13, 2013 12:01:40 GMT -5
I think it's sometimes safer to speak for one's self... Of course, but then I'm not trying to play it safe. Sure. When I said '...safer to speak for one's self' - I was speaking for myself - not implying anything in your direction, fyi.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 13, 2013 12:15:56 GMT -5
Greetings.. HAHAHAHAHA!!! Man you are hilarious!!! Cause you don't chant ANY mantra's on here!!! BBBAAAAAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!! You could be a verse to the song "Ironic" had Alanis wrote it now that she's into non-duality. "An old man, thought he was awake.... thought everyone had an unconscious take (He'd try to) preach and preach about ev-ver-ry-thing Unaware, it was his ego speaking Isn't it ironic.... Don't ya think?" Are you daft? Of course i chant a mantra, "Let go of beliefs and attachments, and see clearly".. the difference, is i'm not suggesting what should be seen.. E and some others chant mantras saying that oneness and nonduality should be seen, and.. well, you just want people to see you, so you try to provoke and annoy people, so you can say: 'Look at what the Hole did, he provoked and annoyed people'.. LOL.. wait, will it be clearer for you if i make it into a mocking verse? or, if i laugh at you? Who's Alanis? and how can anyone be "into non-duality".. yikes! i asked you a question, as if you could do anything other than try to annoy and provoke and mock.. but, your whole non-duality/oneness fantasy belief, is negated by your belief that you can effect change in 'oneness' by mocking the same oneness, which.. would require someone separate from the oneness, and separate from you, and.. nevermind, occasionally i try to have a conversation with you, but you consistently reveal your intention to not have a conversation that might reveal who or what you actually think you are.. you just keep playing your abrasive role and annoying little Chiuaua-like ankle-biter persona pissin' on those that challenge your beliefs or the beliefs of your masters.. If you think you've provoked me, yep, when i see people intentionally and pointlessly trying to incite conflict to make a point, i'm provoked/motivated to engage them at the same level.. it's the level they've revealed that they understand.. but, i 'get it', there's a 'you', and there's a 'me', and 'we' just disagree.. i don't have a problem with being provoked, or with responding by keeping you dancing at the end of your chain of beliefs.. i don't have any beliefs that make me feel good about provoking or mocking, i only do that as a reflection of 'what i get', in hopes that the reflected energy finds some level of clarity from its source, but.. so far, you've crushed those hopes, LOL.. Rather than continuing your redundantly consistent aggressive opposition to those whose understandings threaten your beliefs, why not engage in discussions that might produce understandings that allow you to exist in a more coherent and less confrontational relationship with the collective membership of this forum? Be well.. As I see it, you live almost entirely in a fantasy world of your mind, projecting outward everything that you know yourself to be within, and which you have no way of avoiding. Some of it is quite beautiful, and much of it rather ugly. I have no way of knowing how that's working out for you, but I guess if it wasn't, something would change.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 13, 2013 12:20:12 GMT -5
Of course, but then I'm not trying to play it safe. Sure. When I said '...safer to speak for one's self' - I was speaking for myself - not implying anything in your direction, fyi. Okey dokey.
|
|