|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 19:50:24 GMT -5
So if a snake is seen to be a rope, you hang onto the idea that it is a snake, and somehow go beyond snakes or sumthin? Illusions are subjective misintrpretations. They don't continue after you cease to misinterpret. I would say you concluded correctly since your 'realizations' are really just more ideas. Yes, 'realizations' are really just more ideas. The snake/rope metaphor does not apply to this. I may have had the realization that 'Andrew' is not who I am, but at no point has 'Andrew' been discarded. Someone calls my name and there is a recognition that I am being spoken to. I have no interest in whether Andrew is or isn't an illusion these days, either way is just another point of perception. You don't like the implications that Andrew is an illusion, so you lose interest in the question. Get in line behind 7 billion other mind identified peeps.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 19:51:55 GMT -5
Are you mocking?! Yes! Then you'll stop b!tching about other's mocking?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 19:58:03 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. There is ignorance of self that must be overcome before challenging ignorance in others.. assuming you have the clarity and authority to challenge others on the grounds of ignorance, reveals your own.. that is your weakness, carrying your battleground around, and throwing down a challenge, when you have no intention of open honest challenge, you come to conquer and convert.. unwilling to discuss your own beliefs rationally.. Be well.. Bob, answer honestly now ... of the logins that you've corresponded with over the past few years, what percentage of those interactions would you characterize as peaceful, non-confrontational, non-combative? If you are of an open mind, ALL of them.. Bill, answer honestly, now.. what is your intention in discussions with 'Tzu'? Be well..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 20:02:59 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. No matter how many times a belief is repeated, nor by whom, it remains a belief.. 'oneness' is a concept, a meaning assigned to a word.. Be well.. Obviously, but what that word refers to is the truth. No matter how many times that belief is repeated, nor by whom, it remains a belief.. truth is a model, an arbitrary set of standards that differ according to each person's beliefs about the word.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 20:04:49 GMT -5
Greetings.. Yes, 'realizations' are really just more ideas. The snake/rope metaphor does not apply to this. I may have had the realization that 'Andrew' is not who I am, but at no point has 'Andrew' been discarded. Someone calls my name and there is a recognition that I am being spoken to. I have no interest in whether Andrew is or isn't an illusion these days, either way is just another point of perception. You don't like the implications that Andrew is an illusion, so you lose interest in the question. Get in line behind 7 billion other mind identified peeps. I'm sure you actually believe that you, alone, know all of the answers.. but, no matter how many times that belief is repeated, nor by whom, it remains a belief.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 20:08:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. You and i may have realizations that conflict with what is realized by the other.. What i find is that folks can have different depths of clarity regarding a realization, which is a function of how well mind translates, but realizations cannot conflict. One of us is most certainly wrong. I'm sure that you believe that you are right, but.. no matter how many times that belief is repeated, nor by whom, it remains a belief.. you're still stuck in a right/wrong belief system, either/or.. you live the reality of the duality you say you don't believe.. which is really kinda funny.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 2, 2013 20:10:36 GMT -5
I believe you may have become obsessed with the word belief Tzu.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:06:57 GMT -5
So in your experience, you've realized stuff and then unrealized it? I had realizations which had a profound impact, but eventually realizations were realized to be just another point of perception, another idea that is not necessarily true or false. I still realize stuff, but the realizing happens on the surface these days. They are just more 'waves'. Sounds like something happened that made you want to dismiss realizations, so you imagined you realized realizations don't mean anything.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:16:40 GMT -5
I don't know that we're talking about different things, except that you seem to be talking about how mind responds to the realization, which of course is an experience. But the realization itself was not a sequence of events, right? Did the realization unfold over a period of time, or was it mind that 'unfolded'? Wasn't the realization itself instantaneous? Did it come to you in pieces that you had to assemble? The realization was indeed instantaneous. It was as if a light was suddenly turned on within that illumined what was previously unseen. I can liken it to sitting in a dark room and someone has turned on the lights unexpectedly. The eyes instantly see the Light but the eyes are not the Knower of the Light. Gouge out the eyes and the Knower still is. But the eyes are the sense organ that inform the Knower of the lights presence. Without the eyes the Knower would not know the light has come. In the same way, the mind is not the Knower, but it is the sense organ that informs the Knower of the presence of inner Light. Without the mind, the Knower would not know. A man knocked out for surgery doesn't not know he exists, though exist he does. Only when the mind is back online does the Knower know he exists. For this reason I say the Knower experienced the Light, but only because the mind did too. Yes. Your characterization of a realization demonstrates that you know what it is, and more importantly, what it is not.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:22:55 GMT -5
To say that you don't experience time and space is nonsense. We are experiencing physical reality and that means experiencing something in a different location, regardless of whether time and space is an illusion or not. It is self-evident that a dog exists far more than it is self-evident that a dog is an appearance. It may be technically accurate that there are no 'objects', but nevertheless we do experience objects. You do experience dogs (the existence of them). You really do have an unusual filter in your perception. I'd say this is pretty much where your agenda consumes the conversation. You haven't gotten him to admit the answer you've been holding and so now you tell him that's what he's supposed to be saying. If I ever fall into doubt about what I'm experiencing, i know I can always come to Andrew to explain it to me.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:26:30 GMT -5
Greetings.. I'd say this is pretty much where your agenda consumes the conversation. You haven't gotten him to admit the answer you've been holding and so now you tell him that's what he's supposed to be saying. In the same way that E redundantly repeats the "oneness is truth".. it like shouting "fire!!" in a crowded theater, and no one runs for the the door.. E expects people to accept his beliefs, A suspects that E can actually see what is actually happening, but E has invested too much of his 'identity' into the 'oneness' mantra, and is willing to continue the ruse.. i suspect so, too.. it would be more productive to explore Life happening that sorting-out the beliefs that become obstacles to that exploration.. Be well.. Oneness is the truth! Everybody run for your lives! Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:35:02 GMT -5
I'd say this is pretty much where your agenda consumes the conversation. You haven't gotten him to admit the answer you've been holding and so now you tell him that's what he's supposed to be saying. I'm not telling E what he's supposed to be saying, I'm telling him what he is experiencing but is in denial of. Though in one way, it's true that E does sorta experience the appearance of a dog rather than the existence of a dog, but that's because there is abstract conceptualization filtering his perception. You know some things about dogs that I don't know because you're looking through some beliefs that I don't hold to be true. In the same way that you conflate your ideas about a realization with the realization itself, you take your thoughts about appearances to be your actual experience of appearances. I have those thoughts too, but I don't mistake them for what's actually appearing. Woof! Woof!
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jul 2, 2013 21:37:01 GMT -5
The realization was indeed instantaneous. It was as if a light was suddenly turned on within that illumined what was previously unseen. I can liken it to sitting in a dark room and someone has turned on the lights unexpectedly. The eyes instantly see the Light but the eyes are not the Knower of the Light. Gouge out the eyes and the Knower still is. But the eyes are the sense organ that inform the Knower of the lights presence. Without the eyes the Knower would not know the light has come. In the same way, the mind is not the Knower, but it is the sense organ that informs the Knower of the presence of inner Light. Without the mind, the Knower would not know. A man knocked out for surgery doesn't not know he exists, though exist he does. Only when the mind is back online does the Knower know he exists. For this reason I say the Knower experienced the Light, but only because the mind did too. Yes. Your characterization of a realization demonstrates that you know what it is, and more importantly, what it is not. And your recognition of my recognition indicates that you know as well and that's good to know.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:50:43 GMT -5
Welp, I'm making a distinction that prolly has no significance to most as they relate to their own realizations, but it becomes important when mind starts dismissing it as an idea or an experience or some sort of mind play that has no more significance than any thought. I've been 'looking' at the 'process' of realization for a long time as it really is essential, and yet it simply cannot be 'done' since it is not a task for mind. More and more I'm noticing that peeps really do have realizations and then turn them over to mind out of ignorance, so maybe it can be useful to challenge some of that ignorance. I agree that it is important not to dismiss a realization as an idea. That was never my problem. Mine was always not to interpret too much into it, make it into something more significant than it is. In the end, it's just getting back to your true nature, which was there all along, so, really, it's no big deal. Right, though getting back to your true nature really IS a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 21:54:31 GMT -5
Welp, I'm making a distinction that prolly has no significance to most as they relate to their own realizations, but it becomes important when mind starts dismissing it as an idea or an experience or some sort of mind play that has no more significance than any thought. I've been 'looking' at the 'process' of realization for a long time as it really is essential, and yet it simply cannot be 'done' since it is not a task for mind. More and more I'm noticing that peeps really do have realizations and then turn them over to mind out of ignorance, so maybe it can be useful to challenge some of that ignorance. There is one crucial realization that you've missed, or that hasn't happened, that supersedes all the other non-dual realizations. And will rescue me from dissolving into the heart of God. Yes, I know about that one.
|
|