Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:25:11 GMT -5
In my way of talking, conditioning happens when Intelligence engages experience as a point of perception (like Andy). I'm not sure what it would mean to condition an appearance. That's pretty much how I see it. Gopal - how can an appearance be conditioned? Especially difficult if an appearance has no properties. If other people are mere appearance, then those conditions are arising from you for that figments. Intelligence engages experiences is not necessary for that condition to happen, even in our dream conditioned individuals arrives. He might be correct if other individuals are real. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:28:25 GMT -5
That's pretty much how I see it. Gopal - how can an appearance be conditioned? Especially difficult if an appearance has no properties. If other people are mere appearance, then those conditions are arising from you for that figments. Intelligence engages experiences is not necessary for that condition to happen, even in our dream conditioned individuals arrives. He might be correct if other individuals are real. I don't understand. An appearance is a single image to you, right? And then the image changes and you see a different image? And these images have no properties. So how is an image conditioned? In order for there to be conditioning there has to be forces (and properties) involved...I'm not seeing where those forces are in your model. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:31:51 GMT -5
Just pointing out WIBIGO. I could find things to argue with tenka about, but we are aligned on what I consider to the most important issues For example, the issue of whether what is prior to appearances/expressions is divided or not, is an important one as I see it. I cannot get on board with gopal's model because it means that consciousness could be divided. So I would rather debate with him and laughter on that subject, than argue the fine points of something with tenka. If there is one consciousness and all other individuals are real, then Enigma's solution may be one of the solution(without dividing consciousness) but it's pure speculation. There might be many problem with such a model. God can't perform integrated expression but it's happening in our reality. Integrated expression is possible, If only 1)There is a mysterious force which orchestrate all individuals. 2)other individuals must be figment of my imagination. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:35:28 GMT -5
I am giving the name to the perceiver, Consciousness. Oh okay. So it's not that you know you are Consciousness, you know you are a perceiver, which you also call 'Consciousness'...? Consciousness=perceiver. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:37:12 GMT -5
If other people are mere appearance, then those conditions are arising from you for that figments. Intelligence engages experiences is not necessary for that condition to happen, even in our dream conditioned individuals arrives. He might be correct if other individuals are real. I don't understand. An appearance is a single image to you, right? And then the image changes and you see a different image? And these images have no properties. So how is an image conditioned? In order for there to be conditioning there has to be forces (and properties) involved...I'm not seeing where those forces are in your model. This takes two divisions If other people are real, then as Enigma points out to you, it happen when Intelligence engages mind. If other people are figments, then those appearances moves as if it were conditioned, but those conditioned arises from me. First one must be surely wrong, beecause their conditioned are done purposefully. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:37:34 GMT -5
I could find things to argue with tenka about, but we are aligned on what I consider to the most important issues For example, the issue of whether what is prior to appearances/expressions is divided or not, is an important one as I see it. I cannot get on board with gopal's model because it means that consciousness could be divided. So I would rather debate with him and laughter on that subject, than argue the fine points of something with tenka. If there is one consciousness and all other individuals are real, then Enigma's solution may be one of the solution(without dividing consciousness) but it's pure speculation. There might be many problem with such a model. God can't perform integrated expression but it's happening in our reality. Integrated expression is possible, If only 1)There is a mysterious force which orchestrate all individuals. 2)other individuals must be figment of my imagination. You consider it to be speculation, but an undivided consciousness is a direct knowing for me. To me, it's not a speculation. I see no way that consciousness could be divided, because my fundamental experience is of unity. Because of this, I also know that there are other points of perception...there has to be, because an undivided consciousness cannot be confined to just me (as Andrew, the point of perception). In your model, the possibility of divided consciousness HAS to exist. I see this as a major problem in spiritual terms. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:38:14 GMT -5
Oh okay. So it's not that you know you are Consciousness, you know you are a perceiver, which you also call 'Consciousness'...? Consciousness=perceiver. Yes. But what you know is that you are perceiving. THEN you say...okay I will swap that word for Consciousness. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:39:01 GMT -5
I don't understand. An appearance is a single image to you, right? And then the image changes and you see a different image? And these images have no properties. So how is an image conditioned? In order for there to be conditioning there has to be forces (and properties) involved...I'm not seeing where those forces are in your model. This takes two divisions If other people are real, then as Enigma points out to you, it happen when Intelligence engages mind. If other people are figments, then those appearances moves as if it were conditioned, but those conditioned arises from me. First one must be surely wrong, beecause their conditioned are done purposefully. You're not addressing the question I am asking. Simply, how does an image move? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:40:18 GMT -5
If there is one consciousness and all other individuals are real, then Enigma's solution may be one of the solution(without dividing consciousness) but it's pure speculation. There might be many problem with such a model. God can't perform integrated expression but it's happening in our reality. Integrated expression is possible, If only 1)There is a mysterious force which orchestrate all individuals. 2)other individuals must be figment of my imagination. You consider it to be speculation, but an undivided consciousness is a direct knowing for me. To me, it's not a speculation. I see no way that consciousness could be divided, because my fundamental experience is of unity. Because of this, I also know that there are other points of perception...there has to be, because an undivided consciousness cannot be confined to just me. In your model, the possibility of divided consciousness HAS to exist. I see this as a major problem in spiritual terms. I can bet all the individual's life here that you can't know whether other point of perception exist or not. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:41:34 GMT -5
This takes two divisions If other people are real, then as Enigma points out to you, it happen when Intelligence engages mind. If other people are figments, then those appearances moves as if it were conditioned, but those conditioned arises from me. First one must be surely wrong, beecause their conditioned are done purposefully. You're not addressing the question I am asking. Simply, how does an image move? Assume TV frames, how you are perceiving the movement of the actors when the frame moves. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:42:04 GMT -5
You consider it to be speculation, but an undivided consciousness is a direct knowing for me. To me, it's not a speculation. I see no way that consciousness could be divided, because my fundamental experience is of unity. Because of this, I also know that there are other points of perception...there has to be, because an undivided consciousness cannot be confined to just me. In your model, the possibility of divided consciousness HAS to exist. I see this as a major problem in spiritual terms. I can bet all the individual's life here that you can't know whether other point of perception exist or not. I do know. That doesn't mean that it is true, but I still know. I know undivided consciousness to be the case, therefore I know that consciousness cannot be confined to just one point of perception, or one appearance. Consciousness is expressed through, and as, ALL that is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:42:59 GMT -5
Yes. But what you know is that you are perceiving. THEN you say...okay I will swap that word for Consciousness. Yes, that makes sense, but still consciousness is conscious of something, That's why I am considering the word 'consciousness' for me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 6:43:23 GMT -5
I can bet all the individual's life here that you can't know whether other point of perception exist or not. I do know. That doesn't mean that it is true, but I still know. I know undivided consciousness to be the case, therefore I know that consciousness cannot be confined to just one point of perception, or one appearance. Consciousness is expressed through, and as, ALL that is. Nonsense! |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:43:59 GMT -5
You're not addressing the question I am asking. Simply, how does an image move? Assume TV frames, how you are perceiving the movement of the actors when the frame moves. Okay, so you are saying the image doesn't move but the frame does. But, conditioning itself is a process (a movement) that pertains to movement. As a simple example, a child can be conditioned to know how to do Maths. How does that happen in the image/frames model? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 21, 2016 6:44:32 GMT -5
Yes. But what you know is that you are perceiving. THEN you say...okay I will swap that word for Consciousness. Yes, that makes sense, but still consciousness is conscious of something, That's why I am considering the word 'consciousness' for me. Okay, yes that makes sense why you would pick that word |
|
