|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:14:46 GMT -5
I dare to say that it's entire probably, not just possible, that you word-lawyered your way out of attachments without out letting go of any attachments at all by buying into your own kind of self-hypnosis. ::sigh:: Just because you want your precious realizations to be something more than they are. It's a pointer. It's not 'something'. Stop licking the pointer and turn it into 'something'. Look where it is pointing, that's enough.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:16:22 GMT -5
You seem to confuse 'talks about realizations' with 'realizations', i.e. the pointer with what the pointer is pointing to. Trust me, it's worth delineating here. The difference is obvious. Are you saying there that you resonate with 'its all imaginary... except realizations' or 'its all dream stuff...except realizations'? Say you do. Go on. Well, obviously it isn't obvious to you. Or else we wouldn't have this conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:20:41 GMT -5
Yes. I'm done, too. Hehe. I suggest Andy sends us a memo when he's finally dropped his cherished assumption and then we can have another try. To repeat myself, assumptions are held when tied to something more concrete than other assumptions i.e. conclusions or 'realizations'. A great irony here is that you guys accuse me of turning realizations into conclusions, when you have done that very thing by making them into something fixed, timeless, other than imaginary, other than conceptual. That's a false assumption. You are accused of not being able to tell a realization apart from a conclusion because you never had a realization but only conclusions, hehe. And the more you keep talking the more you prove our point.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:23:38 GMT -5
Farmer said "something was there and it's gone". What doesn't exist can't be attached to. Yes, but a new experience, a new perception, a new belief can be attached to. The point was that something ceased to exist. Without being immediately replaced by something else. Why is this so hard to grasp? Maybe that doesn't fit into your idea play ontology.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:25:27 GMT -5
No. Conclusions remove attachments and immediately create new ones. That's how identity poker works. Lots of options. A conclusion already IS an attachment. That's why realizations can, and do. create new ones. I'm not saying a realization is an attachment in itself, I am saying that attachments follow realizations. That's why there are so many spiritual personas, spiritual 'identities' attached to. Its absurd to say that all these spiritual people have never had realizations, that they have only ever 'concluded'. You have to say that though I guess. That's why you are so attached, hehe. Your head is full of conclusions and assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:26:15 GMT -5
I'd say it matters very much that you finally let go of that assumption. ::facepalm:: I have openly said that it is an assumption. That's the point! No. The point is that you can't let go of that assumption, that you are attached to certain assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:29:25 GMT -5
And that's why you question your existence per se, because Niz said 'I am' is an idea? That's loco. Leave those books alone! Niz is loco. Hehe. Maybe. But also very sane. But my interest doesn't lie with Niz these days. What you don't get is that anything experienced/perceived/sensed/felt/intuited/realized is subjective i.e. questionable. That's what makes it empty. Existence is empty. Yikes, that must be a bit of a scary one for you. Yes, you've turned Niz into a paradoxicon.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 30, 2013 9:40:34 GMT -5
'I am' can be seen through. yes. stop. there. Nothing said, thought, reasoned, synthesized, modified, codified or selectified beyond this is sensical, useful, nobel or either true or false. The sentence embodies a paradox and thinking beyond it is to gun the engine of your car after you've driven off of a cliff. Yes. I'm tempted to say more.....but in this instance....I think I will hold that temptation on ice.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 30, 2013 9:41:17 GMT -5
Realizations happen, what that means is that they are ideas. When we say 'it can't be talked about', we are describing the nature of that idea. No. The point of the phrase 'it can't be talked about' is throw a monkey wrench into your hyper-minding machine. It's not intended to describe anything. Saying 'it can't be talked about' is saying something about it. Its an idea.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 30, 2013 9:42:57 GMT -5
Yo B, I've come up with another way of trying to talk about this: Anything experienced, perceived, sensed, intuited, realized, felt, conceived of....its all existence Now the problem with saying that is the word 'existence' implies a foundation, objectiveness, concreteness, substance. And that's why we might talk about 'Being' or something prior to existence....its a way of pointing away from the substantial nature implied by the word 'existence'. But in this sense, 'Being' is just something conceived of within existence, and 'Beingness' is something sensed or felt within existence. Its all existence. However, this doesn't resolve the implication of a foundation in the idea of 'existence'. So we might say 'its all an idea', 'its all conceptual', 'its all imaginary', as a way of pointing to the emptyness of anything perceived, experienced, sensed, realized etc. Its a way of saying 'yes, things exist, but not quite in the way they might seem superficially' The slight challenge you might face would be in noticing that Beingness is conceived within existence. This is why Niz has said that 'Brahman' is also an illusion. First we stabilize in 'I am' i.e. we see through the foundation implied by 'existence' but create another foundation to be stable in. Many non-dualists do this in their own way. Then this newly conceived foundation is also seen through/dissolved. I can only describe this as 'floating free'. Okay, I think I can follow this to clackety-clack being an idea, but we have to settle on some definitions, first. I agree that anything perceived (i.e., experienced, sensed, etc.) is all existence. However, to me existence is illusory. Only Being is real. This contradicts what you say above, but the key point is that existence is illusory, just as an idea is illusory. Therefore, the keyboard on which I clackety-clack is illusory, just as an idea. Okay, so, clackety-clack is now an 'idea' in this discussion, and for the sake of understanding you, I'm willing to accept that experience, or perception, is an idea. Now, shat was your next point, again?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 30, 2013 9:43:06 GMT -5
Assumptions aren't held onto here, because they have not been attached to anything more solid than other assumptions. You have attached to assumptions by linking them to something more solid. You are stuck in your 'all is a play of ideas' loop. Isn't that obvious? Its obvious that you have attached to assumptions by linking them to something more solid than an assumption. 'Its all imaginary. Except realizations'. Hehe. 'Everything is a play of ideas' points away from ideation but you can't see that.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:44:11 GMT -5
No. The point of the phrase 'it can't be talked about' is throw a monkey wrench into your hyper-minding machine. It's not intended to describe anything. Saying 'it can't be talked about' is saying something about it. Its an idea. Only Mr Extra-Literal could say that.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 30, 2013 9:45:40 GMT -5
As I said, there could only be an attachment to assumptions if assumptions are tied to something more concrete than other assumptions. This is a play of ideas. Its all empty. There's your assumption again, which has become a broken record by now, meaning you have trouble letting go of that. Of course its an assumption. Its all an assumption (even this). There ain't nothing there for me to hold onto, I am not linking assumptions to something more than an assumption.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:46:27 GMT -5
You are stuck in your 'all is a play of ideas' loop. Isn't that obvious? Its obvious that you have attached to assumptions by linking them to something more solid than an assumption. 'Its all imaginary. Except realizations'. Hehe. ' Everything is a play of ideas' points away from ideation but you can't see that. There's your assumption again you just can't let go of.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 30, 2013 9:48:16 GMT -5
There's your assumption again, which has become a broken record by now, meaning you have trouble letting go of that. Of course its an assumption. Its all an assumption (even this). There ain't nothing there for me to hold onto, I am not linking assumptions to something more than an assumption. That assumption is one of your absolute certainties, conclusion you just can't let go of.
|
|