Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:07:40 GMT -5
Yes there's a logical progression of ideas. What of it? But if I say to someone, go within, connect with the silence within, is that logical? Coming full circle now, the original premise for this discussion is that the logic which you employed was faulty. Had you not employed logic, there would not be an issue, but you did. It's kind of unavoidable. It's like saying as Ramana said that the purpose of practice is to end all practices. Is that logical? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2016 23:10:31 GMT -5
Coming full circle now, the original premise for this discussion is that the logic which you employed was faulty. Had you not employed logic, there would not be an issue, but you did. It's kind of unavoidable. It's like saying as Ramana said that the purpose of practice is to end all practices. Is that logical? Saying things that are not logical is unavoidable. Employing logic in a false way is not. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:11:03 GMT -5
How would you know? Do you know the transcendent truth? I know I can't know what transcends knowledge. You skip that one in advaita class? This is logic 101 dude. There's that old logic thingy again. Difficult to avoid isn't it? If you transcend thought who is the knower of that? Find out. It's the Advaita final examination but you won't get a certificate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:14:44 GMT -5
It's kind of unavoidable. It's like saying as Ramana said that the purpose of practice is to end all practices. Is that logical? Saying things that are not logical is unavoidable. Employing logic in a false way is not. That doesn't seem logical. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 26, 2016 23:16:26 GMT -5
Saying things that are not logical is unavoidable. Employing logic in a false way is not. That doesn't seem logical. How's that? |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Aug 26, 2016 23:24:19 GMT -5
I know I can't know what transcends knowledge. You skip that one in advaita class? This is logic 101 dude. He was prowling the woodlands that day looking for hikers with cheap cameras.  Cameras that transcend cameras?  |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Aug 26, 2016 23:25:53 GMT -5
I know I can't know what transcends knowledge. You skip that one in advaita class? This is logic 101 dude. There's that old logic thingy again. Difficult to avoid isn't it? If you transcend thought who is the knower of that? Find out. It's the Advaita final examination but you won't get a certificate. My assumption is our ideas about what transcendence entails are gonna be at odds. Just a guess. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:26:34 GMT -5
That doesn't seem logical. How's that? If employing logic in a false way is avoidable (cancelling the double negative) then it is not logical to say that saying illogical things is unavoidable if the first statement is always true. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:27:50 GMT -5
There's that old logic thingy again. Difficult to avoid isn't it? If you transcend thought who is the knower of that? Find out. It's the Advaita final examination but you won't get a certificate. I disagreeumption is our ideas about what transcendence entails are gonna be at odds. Just a guess. You can guess, but I'm not guessing. |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Aug 26, 2016 23:29:39 GMT -5
I disagreeumption is our ideas about what transcendence entails are gonna be at odds. Just a guess. You can guess, but I'm not guessing. Your thinking mind will not and can never transcend your own thinking. That's just a satch flawful logic thang which I'm happy to use your prior post to expound upon. Bare with me now, I will be using logic. (OH THE HORROR!!!) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 23:33:30 GMT -5
You can guess, but I'm not guessing. Your thinking mind will not and can never transcend your own thinking. That's just a satch flawful logic thang which I'm happy to use your prior post to expound upon. Bare with me now, I will be using logic. (OH THE HORROR!!!) What does the experience of pure awareness, which is transcending thought, have to with logic? |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Aug 27, 2016 0:11:45 GMT -5
Your thinking mind will not and can never transcend your own thinking. That's just a satch flawful logic thang which I'm happy to use your prior post to expound upon. Bare with me now, I will be using logic. (OH THE HORROR!!!) What does the experience of pure awareness, which is transcending thought, have to with logic? What is aware of experience isn't an experience. What's wrong with you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 0:18:54 GMT -5
What does the experience of pure awareness, which is transcending thought, have to with logic? What is aware of experience isn't an experience. What's wrong with you? That's fine. I agree. To say awareness is an experience is just a concession to language because the word experience is interchangeable with knowing in common usage. But I did explain in great detail previously about how an experience requires a subject as knower and object to be known. As awareness is subject only, it is not an experience BUT it is known otherwise no one would talk about it. How do you think it is known? |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Aug 27, 2016 0:27:37 GMT -5
What is aware of experience isn't an experience. What's wrong with you? That's fine. I agree. To say awareness is an experience is just a concession to language because the word experience is interchangeable with knowing in common usage. But I did explain in great detail previously about how an experience requires a subject as knower and object to be known. As awareness is subject only, it is not an experience BUT it is known otherwise no one would talk about it. How do you think it is known? Because there is a knowing that precedes knowledge, and it's obviously not an experience.  You know there is knowing by logical inference. But I know how much you hate logic, god forbid an inference. God forbid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 0:34:58 GMT -5
That's fine. I agree. To say awareness is an experience is just a concession to language because the word experience is interchangeable with knowing in common usage. But I did explain in great detail previously about how an experience requires a subject as knower and object to be known. As awareness is subject only, it is not an experience BUT it is known otherwise no one would talk about it. How do you think it is known? Because there is a knowing that precedes knowledge, and it's obviously not an experience. You know there is knowing by logical inference. But I know how much you hate logic, god forbid an inference. God forbid.
If you require logic and inference then you don't know it. If you know it because it is self evident to you then there is no need of logic and inference. All one can say about transcendent awareness is that it is self evident. It cannot be objectified or described in the same way you cannot describe blue. No one who has practised meditation for any length of time would say they need logic to know awareness. |
|
You know there is knowing by logical inference. But I know how much you hate logic, god forbid an inference. God forbid.