|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2020 5:00:56 GMT -5
I was expecting a next question from you as to how one single perceiver can have two view point? Infact, I don't know whether other view point is real but I am surmising that other view point is real. So I may create an answer out of logic. The possibility could be,
Assume one perceiver is perceiving from Perception 1.
Perception1=Gopal Perception2=Andrew Perception3=Enigma Perception4=Figgles Perception5=Laughter Perception6=Gopal Perception7=Andrew Perception8=Enigma Perception9=Figgles Perception10=Laughter - - - - - - - So when the perception happens so fast in which it is projecting individual, Gopal Individual is projected by perceiving Perception1,Perception6,Perception11.. This is only way I can think of If one perceiver has multiple view point. But I don't know whether other view point exist so I don't put too much attention here.
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 19, 2020 18:30:27 GMT -5
I was expecting a next question from you as to how one single perceiver can have two view point? Infact, I don't know whether other view point is real but I am surmising that other view point is real. So I may create an answer out of logic. The possibility could be,
Assume one perceiver is perceiving from Perception 1.
Perception1=Gopal Perception2=Andrew Perception3=Enigma Perception4=Figgles Perception5=Laughter Perception6=Gopal Perception7=Andrew Perception8=Enigma Perception9=Figgles Perception10=Laughter - - - - - - - So when the perception happens so fast in which it is projecting individual, Gopal Individual is projected by perceiving Perception1,Perception6,Perception11.. This is only way I can think of If one perceiver has multiple view point. But I don't know whether other view point exist so I don't put too much attention here.
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right? Individuations all experiencing their own universe is a pretty good way to look at it, though ultimately the idea of 'one perceiver' is misconceived. Since there is no conception to replace the false one, the personal universe idea is as good as any.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 1:13:02 GMT -5
I was expecting a next question from you as to how one single perceiver can have two view point? Infact, I don't know whether other view point is real but I am surmising that other view point is real. So I may create an answer out of logic. The possibility could be,
Assume one perceiver is perceiving from Perception 1.
Perception1=Gopal Perception2=Andrew Perception3=Enigma Perception4=Figgles Perception5=Laughter Perception6=Gopal Perception7=Andrew Perception8=Enigma Perception9=Figgles Perception10=Laughter - - - - - - - So when the perception happens so fast in which it is projecting individual, Gopal Individual is projected by perceiving Perception1,Perception6,Perception11.. This is only way I can think of If one perceiver has multiple view point. But I don't know whether other view point exist so I don't put too much attention here.
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right? How come? In your perception my body appears which is associated with my Perception1 and Perception6 and laffy body appears which is associated with Perception5 and Perception10. So shared reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 1:13:59 GMT -5
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right? Individuations all experiencing their own universe is a pretty good way to look at it, though ultimately the idea of 'one perceiver' is misconceived. Since there is no conception to replace the false one, the personal universe idea is as good as any. If you say oneness is the case or everybody is one(Non-duality), then you have to come to the point of One perceiver, otherwise, oneness is meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 20, 2020 1:34:41 GMT -5
Individuations all experiencing their own universe is a pretty good way to look at it, though ultimately the idea of 'one perceiver' is misconceived. Since there is no conception to replace the false one, the personal universe idea is as good as any. If you say oneness is the case or everybody is one(Non-duality), then you have to come to the point of One perceiver, otherwise, oneness is meaningless. Are you the perceiver or is it consciousness /awareness? Maybe you are the perceived, a perception imagined by the mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 2:17:41 GMT -5
If you say oneness is the case or everybody is one(Non-duality), then you have to come to the point of One perceiver, otherwise, oneness is meaningless. Are you the perceiver or is it consciousness /awareness? Maybe you are the perceived, a perception imagined by the mind. Yes, I am the perceiver.
Consciousness/Awareness=Perceiver.
I am not the perceived, but Perceived is inbuilt in with my awareness. Awareness is simply knowing the moment of perception, this knowing is happening IN awareness so inseparable.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 20, 2020 2:44:59 GMT -5
Are you the perceiver or is it consciousness /awareness? Maybe you are the perceived, a perception imagined by the mind. Yes, I am the perceiver.
Consciousness/Awareness=Perceiver.
I am not the perceived, but Perceived is inbuilt in with my awareness. Awareness is simply knowing the moment of perception, this knowing is happening IN awareness so inseparable.
Is the I (Gopal) the perceiver or its just an illusionary name. You see, Gopal means lover of cows. Gopal is Krsna's name. Krsna the Supreme Brahman. You know Him? He's depicted in the Bhagavad Gita sa Arjuna s spiritual teacher /driver. So you think Gopal is the perceiver or is it you, this consciousness perceiving Gopal. Is Gopal an imagination of the mind or Gopal who is Krsna is the subject. Not the object deemed as the truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 4:56:52 GMT -5
Yes, I am the perceiver.
Consciousness/Awareness=Perceiver.
I am not the perceived, but Perceived is inbuilt in with my awareness. Awareness is simply knowing the moment of perception, this knowing is happening IN awareness so inseparable.
Is the I (Gopal) the perceiver or its just an illusionary name. You see, Gopal means lover of cows. Gopal is Krsna's name. Krsna the Supreme Brahman. You know Him? He's depicted in the Bhagavad Gita sa Arjuna s spiritual teacher /driver. So you think Gopal is the perceiver or is it you, this consciousness perceiving Gopal. Is Gopal an imagination of the mind or Gopal who is Krsna is the subject. Not the object deemed as the truth. Gopal is the name to this view point, krsnaraja is the name to the another point, view point is perceving! Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 20, 2020 9:49:53 GMT -5
Is the I (Gopal) the perceiver or its just an illusionary name. You see, Gopal means lover of cows. Gopal is Krsna's name. Krsna the Supreme Brahman. You know Him? He's depicted in the Bhagavad Gita sa Arjuna s spiritual teacher /driver. So you think Gopal is the perceiver or is it you, this consciousness perceiving Gopal. Is Gopal an imagination of the mind or Gopal who is Krsna is the subject. Not the object deemed as the truth. Gopal is the name to this view point, krsnaraja is the name to the another point, view point is perceving! Cheers! You mean Gopal and Krsnaraja are simultaneously one and yet different?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 20, 2020 10:32:55 GMT -5
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right? How come? In your perception my body appears which is associated with my Perception1 and Perception6 and laffy body appears which is associated with Perception5 and Perception10. So shared reality. A shared reality is a 'co-creative' reality i.e two or more viewpoints are together creating a 'shared reality'. Because this reality is shared, it is no longer entirely subjective. There must be an objectivity of sorts, because if one of those viewpoints was removed, the creation would 'remain' because of the existence of the other creative viewpoint. This is why it made sense to me when you said viewpoints are disconnected from each other i.e there is an independent universe being created in each viewpoint. It means that each universe is entirely subjective, without any objectivity at all. I believe in a shared reality, hence I have to believe in an objectivity of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 20, 2020 10:57:03 GMT -5
I'm fine with the logic of 1 perceiver looking through 2 disconnected viewpoints... But it means that you each experience separate universes i.e viewpoint 1 is only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences) and viewpoint 2 is also only ever experiencing appearances (with no other existences). There can be no 'shared reality'. You are never looking at another viewpoint. You understand why, right? Individuations all experiencing their own universe is a pretty good way to look at it, though ultimately the idea of 'one perceiver' is misconceived. Since there is no conception to replace the false one, the personal universe idea is as good as any. Words here are tricky, I think I prefer 'sovereignty' to 'own universe', and actually, my focus this year so far (for first time in a while) has leaned towards the 'sovereignty' of personal creation. That's another way of saying that Abe-Hicks has been kicking my as.s a bit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 19:27:36 GMT -5
Gopal is the name to this view point, krsnaraja is the name to the another point, view point is perceving! Cheers! You mean Gopal and Krsnaraja are simultaneously one and yet different? I did not say they are different, they are one.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 21, 2020 19:46:30 GMT -5
You mean Gopal and Krsnaraja are simultaneously one and yet different? I did not say they are different, they are one. From your point of view, both are one, of course. The names Gopal and Krsnaraja are the same person. Krsnaraja loves cows. That's why the former was named Gopal. But literally they are different. If you spell G.. O.. P.. A.. L. Won't become K.. R.. S.. N.. A.. R.. A.. J.. A.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 21, 2020 20:53:14 GMT -5
Individuations all experiencing their own universe is a pretty good way to look at it, though ultimately the idea of 'one perceiver' is misconceived. Since there is no conception to replace the false one, the personal universe idea is as good as any. If you say oneness is the case or everybody is one(Non-duality), then you have to come to the point of One perceiver, otherwise, oneness is meaningless. Oneness does not mean one Mr Perceiver. It means one Consciousness within which all perceivers arise. And what arises is not other than Consciousness itself. Be careful what you do with the made up idea of Consciousness or Awareness.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 22, 2020 0:37:45 GMT -5
You mean Gopal and Krsnaraja are simultaneously one and yet different? I did not say they are different, they are one. One and different isn't a contradiction.
|
|