|
Post by enigma on Jun 8, 2013 22:49:45 GMT -5
So you read "cannot return to innocence", and heard "Can't let go completely"? Then you went about painting pictures about what you imagined you heard? As I see it, innocence is the absence of false knowledge, or what we sometimes call delusion. Once you have knowledge about something, say separation or volition, you can't unknow it or let go of the knowledge like dropping a rock. If it seems true, then you can't make it not seem true because you want it to not be true. It's necessary to see through illusion, and when you do, the knowledge remains, and so it is still not the absence of that knowledge. You still know what separation and volition are, you just don't believe it anymore. Transcendence is not the same as innocence. In any case, it's not about letting go completely. As I see it, if it seems we cannot return to innocence, it is only because we've accumulated knowledge that we cannot let go of. How the heck do you let go of knowledge? Can you unknow that the sky is blue by choosing to let it go? Yes, and darned useful at times. Why must we have that discussion again? So the innocent infant has conjecturated that there is no need for him to attach to the concept of absolute truthification? No such ideas ever occurred to the infant, which is why it is innocent.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 8, 2013 22:54:54 GMT -5
It's a bit of facetious silliness about alleged forum gang activity, isn't it? You know, if you keep it light, there's a good chance Reefs would do the same and there would be less tension around these here parts. uhm ... what "parts" might those be kemosabe? That's it pardner. This town ain't big enough fer the two of us........Draw!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 8, 2013 22:56:18 GMT -5
What? It's not knowledge that has oppressed man, but ignorance, by which i mean false knowledge; illusion, self delusion. How do you know the difference between knowledge and false knowledge? False knowledge isn't true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:03:29 GMT -5
Are you talking about eliminating an idea by replacing it with a more righter one, so that the old wronger one goes away? That's cool if you are, could be the best approach for something I don't understand I guess... but at the risk of sounding repetitive....that's to complicated for me.... I'm talking about seeing an idea as not more than an idea. Is that too complicated for you? Nope, that's pretty easy to follow. Is there anything that's not just an idea?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:04:47 GMT -5
How do you know the difference between knowledge and false knowledge? False knowledge isn't true. Lol, okay, I'll buy that. What knowledge IS true?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:06:47 GMT -5
uhm ... what "parts" might those be kemosabe? That's it pardner. This town ain't big enough fer the two of us........Draw! Hy @$/%# Batman, you win! You brought bazooka's to this gunfight!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:16:31 GMT -5
So, since they can't trust their ability to discern true from false, they assume it's not possible? So then the games begin about 'can't know nuthin' and 'not attached to needing to know', and then 'If you know something, I know you must be self deluded, though I can't be certain about that certainty.' Sounds like a reasonable explanation for a lot of the nonsense going on. Dear Dude/Dudette, Precisely. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Again, Sorry for interrupting this conversation, but when you are done talking with Enigma about our state of delusion, could you help me out with said delusion by answering these questions: yesterday at 7:26pm The Great Blue Hole Of Belize said: Dear Dude/Dudette, You said:Simple reason for that. They don't see clearly. They did the discerning in the past and since it was minding and not seeing, it didn't work out well. So the conclusion is the true/false thingy must be false. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize I think you were talking to Enigma there, so forgive me if I'm being rude by jumping in here... And then I said:I am confused about something though.....What's the difference between "minding" and "seeing"? Is it in some way beneficial to know what the difference is? Also, what knows the difference between "minding" and "seeing"....is it the mind, or the seeing, or something else entirely? And finally, are you ABSOLUTELY sure of your answers....most of the time when I've thought that the answer that I had was the only right one, I was wrong Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/2811/world-innocence?page=5#ixzz2VgmJ4ZXa
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:18:48 GMT -5
How the heck do you let go of knowledge? Can you unknow that the sky is blue by choosing to let it go? Must an observation of the sky being blue, necessarily become a 'knowing' that the sky is blue? When living in the present moment becomes the norm, things are observed and even noted, but the attachment to ideas that arise in the moment are not attached to in a 'long term way that makes them become a 'knowing.' So the innocent infant has conjecturated that there is no need for him to attach to the concept of absolute truthification? No such ideas ever occurred to the infant, which is why it is innocent. [/quote] I'd say, in an infant/child, there is an absence of attachment to any idea as being 'absolutely true.' Ideas just come and go, without 'ideas' arising about those ideas. No 'conjecture' necessary if the idea of something being true, has not yet occurred.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:24:42 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, Precisely. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Again, Sorry for interrupting this conversation, but when you are done talking with Enigma about our state of delusion, could you help me out with said delusion by answering these questions: yesterday at 7:26pm The Great Blue Hole Of Belize said: Dear Dude/Dudette, You said:Simple reason for that. They don't see clearly. They did the discerning in the past and since it was minding and not seeing, it didn't work out well. So the conclusion is the true/false thingy must be false. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize I think you were talking to Enigma there, so forgive me if I'm being rude by jumping in here... And then I said:I am confused about something though.....What's the difference between "minding" and "seeing"? Is it in some way beneficial to know what the difference is? Also, what knows the difference between "minding" and "seeing"....is it the mind, or the seeing, or something else entirely? And finally, are you ABSOLUTELY sure of your answers....most of the time when I've thought that the answer that I had was the only right one, I was wrong Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/2811/world-innocence?page=5#ixzz2VgmJ4ZXaEnigma, please feel free to jump in here, as surprisingly for two separate human beings, you and Blue seem to share perfectly identical points of view on everybody and everything discussed here....as such, I'll take it that your's and Blue's answers are the same, no need to make an extra post saying: Zackery! Unless you want to ;-) Actually.....never mind on that last bit, it could very helpful to watch both of you guys answer the same question.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 8, 2013 23:45:01 GMT -5
Greetings..
The still mind is a return to innocence, an opportunity to see/experience without the distortions of beliefs and knowings..
Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:53:46 GMT -5
You might be wondering why I'm poking at Blue's and Enigma's belief's, the answer is simple, it's a kinda self centeredness about shedding beliefs that I might not be aware of.
You see, I have this kinda irresistible hobby of picking at the lnots of ideas and beliefs that get all tangled up, its like a fun puzzle.
and in my estimate that there, there are three people posting here regularly that seem to have absolute certainty, and that's a knot/puzzle that's fun to pick at.
Blue Enigma Tzu
My interaction with Max recently helped me get rid of a foundational idea, and hopefully by picking at these guys ideas it will jujitsu one again....but if not, maybe my picking at idea knots will undo one of their ideas....
Tzu I don't know that well
But as for BlueEnigma, In many many years of posting, and what must be tens of thousands of posts, I don't recall ever seeing Enigma not having the answer, never once saw him say anything approximating "I don't know"
Gosh, that's a whole lot of certainty that's there to pick at lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:54:45 GMT -5
Greetings.. The still mind is a return to innocence, an opportunity to see/experience without the distortions of beliefs and knowings.. Be well.. :-) Well said
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 8, 2013 23:55:27 GMT -5
Greetings..
The attachment to the idea that the infant is somehow less attached or has some guruesque quality is founded in beliefs about which there is only speculation and projected beliefs based on the desires of more mature minds.. for all of the beliefs and projected desires for the infant's detached awareness, it is noteworthy that the infant cannot survive of its own accord.. mind, awareness, and identity evolve and mature as a collective and cooperative effort, notwithstanding sometimes formidable challenges to that process..
Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 23:57:57 GMT -5
Greetings.. The still mind is a return to innocence, an opportunity to see/experience without the distortions of beliefs and knowings.. Be well.. Well said Babes are the model of innocence, kinda odd how most people that you ask on the street will think of a Baby when you ask them to think of the model of innocence, but around here it becomes so complicated with speeeerachul mumbo jumbo ideas lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2013 0:50:41 GMT -5
Greetings.. The attachment to the idea that the infant is somehow less attached or has some guruesque quality is founded in beliefs about which there is only speculation and projected beliefs based on the desires of more mature minds.. for all of the beliefs and projected desires for the infant's detached awareness, it is noteworthy that the infant cannot survive of its own accord.. mind, awareness, and identity evolve and mature as a collective and cooperative effort, notwithstanding sometimes formidable challenges to that process.. Be well.. Haha, it's just an assumption that infants are innocent....I love this place, I'll call it the idea shredder lol
|
|