|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:14:33 GMT -5
I have been irritated in this conversation at times, and I think that's partly because gopal and me sometimes have very normal conversations off the forum. I enjoy talking to him and he posts some pretty cool (normal) stuff on Facebook. I understand fully that different situations demand different kinds of conversation, but when he says what he says here...I'm like....wtf? There seems to be an incongruence in his choices that bothers me personally because we do have a bit of a personal relationship (though based on what he says here, I dont know how he sees it). I guess this was written more for gopal than you. I have been very cool here as well but you continue to fail to understand what I say that irritates you, So I am not responsible for that. Hang on. Are you saying that Consciousness has been very cool here? Or the appearance has been very cool here? Can an appearance be very cool but has no brain or sensory organs? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:16:01 GMT -5
I find it both ridiculous and interesting that the same thing is said over and over again for 2 weeks - and will probably be repeated for 2 months hahaha. I never care anything goes further or not, argument always moves me according to my rollercoaster. Infact the more appropriate word would be My rollercoaster takes the expression in the form of argument. Argument moves Consciousness or moves the appearance? Does the rollercoaster belong to Consciousness or to the appearance? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:20:20 GMT -5
Believing that you are looking at the world through your eye. it is 100 per cent true that the eyes are involved with seeing. Hence, if you close them, you can't see the cars coming. The problem is that you have no relative context. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:27:29 GMT -5
It's just that I don't ever recall you writing in such a matter. This is the conversation andrew is having with Gopal... why do you write one way on facebook and and another way here. Gopal can post when and where he wishes. If you don't like it then just don't read his posts. So the gopal appearance has no brain and no sensory organs, but can post messages when and where he wishes. Are you beginning to see the boundary of the Consciousness/appearances model yet? Enigma has an advantage over you, in that he is willing to jump ship to other contexts when it suits him (which is most of the time). He's actually correct to do so, because all these spiritual models have a boundary. There is a time to abandon Consciousness/appearances and speak of individuations that have bodies, brains, personalities and which do function in the world in alignment with scientific principles. The Consciousness/appearance model that you are offering abandons all science. It abandons all relative truth. Which is why some of your answers to questions being asked to you are looking very odd. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 3:27:51 GMT -5
Doesn't he??  I would say Andrew falls asleep and has a nightly dream, but then I would also say Andrew has a brain, heart, sensory organs. Gopal does not think Andrew has those things. Do you? Yes, Gopal doesn't think Andrew has brain,heart,sensory organs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 3:28:54 GMT -5
I feel happy and I feel unhappy. So Consciousness feels happy or the appearance feels happy? I=Consciousness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 3:29:52 GMT -5
Consciousness or appearance? consciousness. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:30:04 GMT -5
I would say Andrew falls asleep and has a nightly dream, but then I would also say Andrew has a brain, heart, sensory organs. Gopal does not think Andrew has those things. Do you? Yes, Gopal doesn't think Andrew has brain,heart,sensory organs. Yet Andrew can fall asleep at night, does have characteristics (that move him towards and away from gopal), does live in England, can post messages.... You see? Your model is bursting at the seams here. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 3:33:27 GMT -5
So Consciousness feels happy or the appearance feels happy? I=Consciousness. Okay so now you have just assigned Consciousness a ton of qualities. Consciousness can be happy or sad, it can suffer or not suffer etc If gopal has no brain or sensory organs, does Consciousness have a brain and sensory organs? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 16, 2016 4:05:31 GMT -5
I understand perfectly. Gopal understands this also, but Gopal believes there are no trees, period (nothing called a tree in an exterior world, nothing which we give the name tree to, for him there isn't even an exterior world) there are only appearances of trees. Gopal has only one context, period. I'm trying to point out actually the correctness of your position. However....I think I'm really done this time with Gopal....... Gopal doesn't understand that even though "no one has ever seen a tree" this doesn't mean there are no trees. I can see why Gopal might say what he says, but I can't see that it makes any difference at all. In Zen we regard the physical world as "real as a rock," but there is also an understanding that the field of our being is beyond intellectual grasp. A ZM would refuse to discuss anything theoretical with Gopal. She'd probably bop him on the head with her Zen stick, and dismiss his talk of appearances completely. But let's assume Gopal is 100% correct. So what? It wouldn't make any difference in the way we live life. Almost all of us interact with the physical world as if it's as real as a rock. ATST, some of us have read enough about "miracles" and supposedly "impossible" or non-local events that we appreciate that there is an insubstantial aspect to even the most rock-solid "stuff." Parasambhava supposedly grabbed the hand of a doubting monk and thrust it through a rock wall. Jesus and Kabir supposedly performed a wide range of miracles, and many of us have had lesser woo-woo experiences that strongly challenge the idea of anything "solid" or "fixed." Innumerable sages have made statements similar to, "All there is is consciousness." That's only going to be a problem for people who are strongly attached to an objective physical reality. If there's no attachment to ideas, then there's no problem as I see it. The miracles may or may not have happened. My guess is that most of them are just fairytales. Probably all of them. For instance, it makes a far more compelling story if Joseph accepted Mary as pregnant with an unknown earthly sperm donors kid. It actually explains much of what Jesus said about his heavenly father and his attitudes about peeps in general. But the fact that intellect has discovered the bounds of solidity for what it is not only can't be denied, the impact of this on the culture and peoples ideas about their reality is unmistakable, and yeah, how people conceive of the world they live in does influence how they interact with it. How couldn't it? How can anyone with a sense of conceptualized identity (unconscious or otherwise) not define themselves to some degree by what they think of where they find that identity playing itself out? The message I got from the Zen sources was to suspend any and all of that, and just look, listen, touch and taste. This comported quite well with those physical activities in life I enjoyed the most, and after having the thinking process implode by following Tolle's advice, the Zen message was credible. But quite obviously, the koans are meant to disrupt and sow the kind of confusion to the world view that precipitates, motivates and catalyzes direct interaction and direct perception. If peeps conception of the world doesn't matter, why bother with the koans at all? If it doesn't matter, then why make the point of "real as rock"? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 16, 2016 4:10:12 GMT -5
How is telling someone to "put their house in order" not trying to control something that can't be controlled? . He could preface by: If I were you dot.dot.dot... (I think a lot of us here are trying to help Gopal put his house in order....it's become a sort of fun game.....it actually seems Gopal has lost touch with reality...really...[like, do the words rabbit hole mean anything?...].that's why I asked the any context question....)... , then you easily could have written the same thing about attempting to control to satch' then. From what I can tell most of what you call helping gopal put his house in order is just you and some others just not making an effort to account for an acute differential in your cultural lens relative to his coupled with a stubborn refusal to agree to disagree all the way around the table. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 4:10:14 GMT -5
No, It surely makes a difference, it would puts us into creator mode. If we haven't seen this, then we would remain in perceiving mode. The statement "Seeing through illusion changes the experience" can only be true If we are in creator mode. Consciousness remains in perceiving mode or appearance remains in perceiving mode? Consciousness. Appearance can't do anything. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 4:13:09 GMT -5
Nobody has brains,hearts or sensory organs. If other one is real, then they are also consciousness perceiving from another view point. Okay, so gopal the appearance has no brain, heart or sensory organs? hehehe But appearances DO have stamped characteristics? Andrew doesn't have any brain as well  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 4:13:40 GMT -5
My(Gopal) dream and My(Gopal) Reality, Is that clear now? Okay, so gopal has no brain but does have access to dreaming state and real state.....? Consciousness creates the dream and reality, both are appearing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 4:14:06 GMT -5
I live and when I reach clarity that reorganize the universe, that would put me into the creator mode, that's the reason I am interested in the area of whether outer world exist or not, whether other individual is real or not. But in the case of you, you haven't met any such realization, So this is all irritating you. Put Consciousness into creator mode or put appearance in creator mode? Consciousness creates the appearance. |
|
