|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 21:57:35 GMT -5
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. Not if it's always there, and has always been there.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 22:08:54 GMT -5
Really? I guess I should do more reading. To be clear, I've read a bunch of authors who've hinted or implied at Oneness, or even used the term itself. Just no one I've read ever said, "oneness is true", or "oneness is the case". I'll take your word for it since I'm not very well edumacated on guru teachings. Do they say oneness might be what's goin down but we just can't be sure, or how do they talk about it?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 2, 2013 22:14:50 GMT -5
Right, though getting back to your true nature really IS a big deal. Not if it's always there, and has always been there. Yes, even if it has always been there. Has Amit convinced you of his logic?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 22:16:16 GMT -5
To be clear, I've read a bunch of authors who've hinted or implied at Oneness, or even used the term itself. Just no one I've read ever said, "oneness is true", or "oneness is the case". I'll take your word for it since I'm not very well edumacated on guru teachings. Do they say oneness might be what's goin down but we just can't be sure, or how do they talk about it? Naw. My take is that it is assumed. A no-brainer. Thus, it is only touched upon, almost a footnote. Greater reference is made to separation, in the effort to point to what is not, than what is. What is left is Oneness, Truth, Reality. Hawkins is an exception.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2013 22:25:13 GMT -5
Right, though getting back to your true nature really IS a big deal. Not if it's always there, and has always been there. Well then since it's always here you can afford to put it off for a few more lifetimes...
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 22:29:16 GMT -5
Not if it's always there, and has always been there. Well then since it's always here you can afford to put it off for a few more lifetimes... Put what off? What are you putting off?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2013 22:34:48 GMT -5
Well then since it's always here you can afford to put it off for a few more lifetimes... Put what off? What are you putting off? Getting back to your true nature...
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:33:42 GMT -5
Well, you're the one assembling the model for me. I'm just telling you what they are not. And telling me what they are.By telling you that it's not 10 o'clock I'm telling you what time it is now?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:35:19 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'. Well, that's how it goes with conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:41:00 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. Yes, similar to Top. The story has been written a long time ago. However, the answers he gets from Enigma are not in the script. And the script cannot be changed. So Enigma has to change, fess up, face it and come clean. That's why the conversations get a little heated if Enigma just doesn't want to fess up.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:43:04 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. IOW, you are telling Enigma what he should be saying if he were just honest and man enough to stick to your version of reality (i.e. your script).
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:47:32 GMT -5
Greetings.. Mind doesn't appear to you.. it is inherent as an aspect of what you are, it is not separate from 'you'.. you E, use mind to try to defeat mind, and consequently defeat your beliefs about mind.. you are not 'looking', you are 'thinking' about how to create illusions about mind.. just look, and there is no need to concern yourself with 'mind'.. mind is an enemy 'you' have created.. Be well.. Mind is not an enemy. It is, however, an appearance that comes and goes and changes, and is therefore not the fundamental intelligence that you are in essence. Only mind could make mind an enemy as part of an escape plan.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 23:49:33 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. When did I say that and what does it have to do with this discussion? Andy's goal is to make you fess up, to admit that you are wrong. The goal justifies the means.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 3, 2013 0:00:39 GMT -5
Then you'll stop b!tching about other's mocking? If the movement is there, maybe/maybe not ...
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 3, 2013 0:05:27 GMT -5
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. Maybe because nothing really changed after these numerous realizations (except verbiage).
|
|