Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 6:22:43 GMT -5
All physical things are appearing, I am getting tired now. I don't understand why you are understanding this simple logic. Let's stop here. Rest of the forum member would get bored . It's tiring defending something that doesn't make sense because you have to find ways to get round it. What exactly is tired? Is Consciousness tired? Or is gopal the appearance tired? If gopal goes for a long walk, what gets tired if he has no legs?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 6:23:40 GMT -5
Enigma says more than 1000 times that 'Everything appears'. That's right. But you will ALSO see him talk about body-minds in other conversations. Enigma is often wrong about a great many things hehe, but he doesn't deny the existence of the body-mind in EVERY context. He DOES deny the existence of body. He say everything is appearing, Was it not clear to you that he was denying existence of body? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 6:33:07 GMT -5
Appearance is appearing. How appearance can have brain or sensory organs? I am completely convinced that you can't get this logic. So Let's give up here. I understand that in the absolute context, that brains and sensory organs are appearances. It is a simple idea to understand. But in your attempt to show that there is no relative context, you create a huge mess for yourself. Gopal is an appearance, correct? Tell me about this appearance, if this appearance has no physical body, no brain, no skin etc......? You also talk about gopal in India, gopal that walks and watches movies, gopal that programs computers. i could tell you a hundred things about gopal that gopal has told me. And now you say this same gopal appearance has no body, yet photos of gopal are posted with hair and glasses. You see the absurdity? How can appearance have human body? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:11:31 GMT -5
you said it switches modes from one to the other. I did not say it switches the mode. I said consciousness is imagining dream as well reality in the same way, it differs in the way it creates the stability. These were your words ''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.'' Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/4132/world?page=5409#ixzz4KQ6pMIsXSo what switches modes? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:14:37 GMT -5
when individuals have moved away from you and towards you, do they not have bodies? We know they have no brain, but no legs and arms? Does gopal use his arms for his work? I saw you talking once about a nice walk that you used to go on when you were young, did gopal walk without legs? When gopal watches movies, does he do so without eyes? When I say no brain, no physical body either. Why this is not clear to you? So what constitutes the appearance that is Gopal or Andrew exactly? You speak of Gopal often...Gopal programs, lives in India, drinks pepsi, watches movies....these are all things you have said. So what is the appearance of Gopal that you talk about, if not a body? Presumably you see bodies all the time...what are they if they are not bodies? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:15:23 GMT -5
It's tiring defending something that doesn't make sense because you have to find ways to get round it. What exactly is tired? Is Consciousness tired? Or is gopal the appearance tired? If gopal goes for a long walk, what gets tired if he has no legs? no answer again.... |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:19:19 GMT -5
That's right. But you will ALSO see him talk about body-minds in other conversations. Enigma is often wrong about a great many things hehe, but he doesn't deny the existence of the body-mind in EVERY context. He DOES deny the existence of body. He say everything is appearing, Was it not clear to you that he was denying existence of body? because I've been talking to him since 2009/2010 and I know there have been hundreds of conversations that require him to speak in the context of assuming there is a body-mind that interacts and relates to other body-minds, and the world in general. I've talked to him many times about the difference between human adults, babies and children. Every one of these conversations is speaking in the context of assuming a bodymind that interacts and relates to the world. You don't believe animals suffer, but humans do, right? Do the animals that you speak of have a brain and body? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:24:01 GMT -5
I understand that in the absolute context, that brains and sensory organs are appearances. It is a simple idea to understand. But in your attempt to show that there is no relative context, you create a huge mess for yourself. Gopal is an appearance, correct? Tell me about this appearance, if this appearance has no physical body, no brain, no skin etc......? You also talk about gopal in India, gopal that walks and watches movies, gopal that programs computers. i could tell you a hundred things about gopal that gopal has told me. And now you say this same gopal appearance has no body, yet photos of gopal are posted with hair and glasses. You see the absurdity? How can appearance have human body? Let's say in your nightly dreams, you dream about Andrew..is there a physical body that pertains to 'Andrew' in the dream? |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Sept 16, 2016 7:24:02 GMT -5
That's right. But you will ALSO see him talk about body-minds in other conversations. Enigma is often wrong about a great many things hehe, but he doesn't deny the existence of the body-mind in EVERY context. All this 'everything appears' stuff is hogwash .. isn't it .. I went through this in great length regarding everything appears and I got no answer regarding HOW everything just appears . It is vital to understand the nature of what appears and how that appearance comes to be .. Otherwise peeps might think that the magic hat just conjures stuff out of thin air like I have suggested many times before . There was the notion that what appears comes to be just cos a perceiver perceives it lol, and that explanation held no foundation / weight based upon many examples I gave that questions such a notion and no further answers were received as to how the perceiver actually creates a physical bus or moon simply by bringing it into existence .. As you and I have discovered and a bunch of others here on the forums, the answers given are not answers as such .. It's the classic dodge and morph technique .. I don't think it's hogwash. Images of what's around us appear in our brains and get interpreted by our conditioning (beliefs and such). Depending on what those beliefs are and how strongly we are attached to them, the difference between what's actually there and what one sees can be so far off as to be unrecognizable. On the spiritual path, maybe attachment to beliefs loosen or dissolve or the belief itself might drop away. Then the difference between actual and perceived gets closer. (We get clearer). But we're still perceiving through the brain and still dealing with images and interpreting them. The question then becomes - what's actually there that generates the image? You can point to a lot of woo woo stories to conclude that 'what's there' isn't actually anything solid. I can go with that, having seen a few woo woo things myself. What I can't go with is that we're making all of it up. We're making up our interpretation, yes, but the essentialness, the noumenon, exists - just as I exist. The limit of "it's all appearance in consciousness" shows up when we see suffering. The limit shows up if the stories don't matter. To me, it makes much more sense to say it's all consciousness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 7:32:04 GMT -5
Andrew likes to read that Spirit is having a human experience, though he doesn't like to read it like this!  Yeah, but right now, I am completely tired of repeating the same thing again and again. ..but you'll carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 16, 2016 7:33:17 GMT -5
All this 'everything appears' stuff is hogwash .. isn't it .. I went through this in great length regarding everything appears and I got no answer regarding HOW everything just appears . It is vital to understand the nature of what appears and how that appearance comes to be .. Otherwise peeps might think that the magic hat just conjures stuff out of thin air like I have suggested many times before . There was the notion that what appears comes to be just cos a perceiver perceives it lol, and that explanation held no foundation / weight based upon many examples I gave that questions such a notion and no further answers were received as to how the perceiver actually creates a physical bus or moon simply by bringing it into existence .. As you and I have discovered and a bunch of others here on the forums, the answers given are not answers as such .. It's the classic dodge and morph technique .. I don't think it's hogwash. Images of what's around us appear in our brains and get interpreted by our conditioning (beliefs and such). Depending on what those beliefs are and how strongly we are attached to them, the difference between what's actually there and what one sees can be so far off as to be unrecognizable. On the spiritual path, maybe attachment to beliefs loosen or dissolve or the belief itself might drop away. Then the difference between actual and perceived gets closer. (We get clearer). But we're still perceiving through the brain and still dealing with images and interpreting them. The question then becomes - what's actually there that generates the image? You can point to a lot of woo woo stories to conclude that 'what's there' isn't actually anything solid. I can go with that, having seen a few woo woo things myself. What I can't go with is that we're making all of it up. We're making up our interpretation, yes, but the essentialness, the noumenon, exists - just as I exist. The limit of "it's all appearance in consciousness" shows up when we see suffering. The limit shows up if the stories don't matter. To me, it makes much more sense to say it's all consciousness. Peeps have been speaking about mothers 'just appearing' in consciousness similar to those dream characters that just appear in consciousness . I have been making clear distinctions how our mothers come about and how the pink elephant in our dreams come about . Certain folk on the forums suggest that certain things like our physical eye doesn't exist as it just appears in consciousness .. What my angle presents is having an understanding how an eye comes to be .. It doesn't just appear does it .. A physical eye doesn't appear in the non physical realms does it .. So why the need for a physical eye of the physical plane? A few of us have established / acknowledged / experienced that an eye of the physical environment allows us to perceive our present environment .. What others are saying regarding the eye does not exist and such likes is a nonsense as the saying goes .. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2016 7:35:27 GMT -5
Andrew likes to read that Spirit is having a human experience, though he doesn't like to read it like this! There are no humans in gopal's model. Humans have bodies. Spirit having a human experience doesn't mean that there really are humans. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 16, 2016 7:38:50 GMT -5
Or it could be that appearances are based on interaction with an actual external world, and it is imagined that appearances are fundamentally imagined into 'apparent' existence. Considering one true over the other is a subjective predilection. Most people here don't understand that. Most people here believe their ideas and haven't mastered the ability to see through them to the simple actuality that lies beneath. I was going to reply to a post of Gopal's...so this is for him also. There is a heirarchical structure to reality (or appearances, if that makes you happier). Take the military, bottom rung, private. Above private, sergeant. To simplify, Major, then General. Each has certain duties, but each higher is over the whole of the lower. The higher has command over the lower, but the lower ~plays out~ unless problems arise. Ultimately, Consciousness is the 5-Star General. So let's take this to the body. Does the General control every aspect of what happens in the body? No, He has more important stuff to do, He has hundreds of Majors to watch over. So the private has ~regional~ control over an individuated body. Example, private sees to it the body functions properly, on this scale, eyes are necessary to gather light, the nervous system codes it and sends it to processing in the brain. On this scale, you can't see without eyes. Does this mean we see with eyes? No, consciousness sees. It just means the body does its part. This is just how things work on this level. Is there more to the process? Absolutely. Could Consciouness/5-Star General do things differently? Absolutely. Are there people who can see who don't have eyes? Absolutely, just see Master Po on Kung Fu. Are there people who live without eating food? I would not say no. But these are exceptions, a different order of laws are at work here. Do these examples negate the ordinary working of our ordinary world? No. Ultimately, does Consciousness "control" everything in a Cosmic Dance? Yes, surely. But Consciousness chooses a hierarchy of ordered orders whereby to Dance. We exist at the bottom rung, ordinary rules apply (eyes are needed for sight) but in some cases ordinary rules are superceded. ..... |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Sept 16, 2016 7:39:51 GMT -5
There are no humans in gopal's model. Humans have bodies. doesn't mean that there really are humans. Yes it does. It's right there in the sentence. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 16, 2016 7:40:53 GMT -5
There are no humans in gopal's model. Humans have bodies. Spirit having a human experience doesn't mean that there really are humans. The key words there being ''really are'' You could also swap around for a classic ''in truth'' or throw in an ''actually'' I understand what you mean but these are philosophical concepts. |
|
