|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 17, 2013 11:36:41 GMT -5
Yeah, flies are tricky. They refuse to get electrocuted.  You could try this to finish 'em off:  Hehe, thanks, Silver. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2013 11:52:48 GMT -5
Not quite. Seeing the questions to be a nonsense is a conclusion that can be questioned. What happens is that it is seen that no idea is necessarily (or provably) true or false (including this one). For example, there may be a questioner or there may not be. In the face of this, there is no point in any more questions. That's just mind locking itself up in ambiguous paradoxicality. You don't have a reference for realization, so you don't know it isn't a conclusion. That's what it means to say realization is self evident. It means no proof is required. A realization is a shift in our frame of reference, or in our point of perception, at no point do thoughts/ideas become necessarily true or false. You have not had the realization that ideas/thoughts are not necessarily true or false. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2013 11:54:04 GMT -5
'Seeing a question for what it is' comes with an answer in itself. Yes, the answer is that the question is misconceived, and it collapses into a little greasy spot. Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 17, 2013 12:03:57 GMT -5
Yes, the answer is that the question is misconceived, and it collapses into a little greasy spot. Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2013 12:09:33 GMT -5
Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. Aye! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2013 12:31:11 GMT -5
Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. A more useful exploration may be to look inside at what YOU can know or not know, versus looking at others to see what is knowable. Can YOU know anything? If not, why keep exploring? |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 17, 2013 12:45:47 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. A more useful exploration may be to look inside at what YOU can know or not know, versus looking at others to see what is knowable. Can YOU know anything? If not, why keep exploring? Obviously, you guys just don't get it. I've already said a gazillion times that I don't know jack. But, that doesn't mean that there's no longer questions. But, according to E, that's some sort of wrong. Like he shoots you right out of the gate--your question is obviously misconceived. I'm likely to quote these words of his, the very next time he asks a question, himself. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Jun 17, 2013 12:50:53 GMT -5
Its not necessarily true or false that the question is misconceived. As you can see, you have concluded that the questions are misconceived, and your basis for that conclusion is another unquestioned conclusion. Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ? As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 17, 2013 12:54:36 GMT -5
What was the question now?  |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 17, 2013 13:00:27 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ? As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** Aren't all questions imagined? How else is one supposed to 'undo' what the mind has 'done', per Niz? I think it's rather presumptuous to dismiss out of hand a simple but no less significant question as 'what is it that even asks questions?'. Ramana is rolling in his grave at such knowitallness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2013 13:01:47 GMT -5
A more useful exploration may be to look inside at what YOU can know or not know, versus looking at others to see what is knowable. Can YOU know anything? If not, why keep exploring? Obviously, you guys just don't get it. I've already said a gazillion times that I don't know jack. But, that doesn't mean that there's no longer questions. But, according to E, that's some sort of wrong. Like he shoots you right out of the gate--your question is obviously misconceived. I'm likely to quote these words of his, the very next time he asks a question, himself. What questions are there, really, when there are no answers? Have you ever really found any answers? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2013 13:01:54 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm leaning this way, myself. Seems like more belief, more attachment. More smug knowitallness. What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ?As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** Highlighted bit is a conclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Jun 17, 2013 13:08:33 GMT -5
What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ? As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** Aren't all questions imagined? How else is one supposed to 'undo' what the mind has 'done', per Niz? I think it's rather presumptuous to dismiss out of hand a simple but no less significant question as 'what is it that even asks questions?'. Ramana is rolling in his grave at such knowitallness. We could say that the "real you" is asking the question. We can observe the content (questions/thoughts) but not the context (observer/consciousness/awareness). We can't turn the "real me" into observable content-only stuff. There's always going to be something missing. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Jun 17, 2013 13:10:19 GMT -5
What if instead of "the question is misconceived" we say "the question is imagined" ?As Tzu recommends, can you still your mind and then watch the questions pop in and out of existence? Can you notice them fly by? What am I doing here? Why am I doing this? How did I get here? Why am I itchy? Why am I hungry? How come one question more important than another? What am I supposed to do? I can't take it anymore! *** Gets off the chair and starts looking for peanuts *** Bit in red is a conclusion.  |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 17, 2013 13:10:49 GMT -5
Obviously, you guys just don't get it. I've already said a gazillion times that I don't know jack. But, that doesn't mean that there's no longer questions. But, according to E, that's some sort of wrong. Like he shoots you right out of the gate--your question is obviously misconceived. I'm likely to quote these words of his, the very next time he asks a question, himself. What questions are there, really, when there are no answers? Have you ever really found any answers? Sounds like another misconceived question.  Only one answer I've received, ultimately--I am. But, I'd never have found that, had I not asked a plethora of other questions, first. Frankly, I'm somewhat offended that peeps around here are so quick to dismiss the necessity of seeking in order to realize that there is nothing for which to seek. |
|
