Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2022 6:09:02 GMT -5
You only know that when you wake up but at the time you're dreaming you think it's real. If it wasn't real why would you experience fear when you're being chased by a tiger who wants to eat you? That’s not an argument for saying that pink giraffes are real. It’s an argument for pointing out the power of thought-induced delusion. if you see a pink giraffe in your dream does the dream character say, this is not real?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2022 6:29:08 GMT -5
beliefs and teachings are good because they help you get to a certain point where you get tired of them and then poof! Exactamente!! Strings more often, eventually get used for tying knots. Talking of knots. "Limitless Bliss: This is Self-Realisation; and thereby is cut asunder the hridaya-granthi or the Knot of the Heart. The false delusions of ignorance, the vicious and age-long tendencies of the mind, which constitute this knot, are destroyed. All doubts are dispelled and the bondage of Karma is severed." Ramana Maharshi
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jul 25, 2022 6:35:13 GMT -5
Exactamente!! Strings more often, eventually get used for tying knots. Talking of knots. "Limitless Bliss: This is Self-Realisation; and thereby is cut asunder the hridaya-granthi or the Knot of the Heart. The false delusions of ignorance, the vicious and age-long tendencies of the mind, which constitute this knot, are destroyed. All doubts are dispelled and the bondage of Karma is severed." Ramana Maharshi CUT!
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jul 25, 2022 6:46:35 GMT -5
True, her Reefs research runs deep, and who knows how in depth that bunny hole goes. I shudder to think. Black hole-like nothingy at the bottom of all these appearing LOVE triangles.
|
|
|
Post by shadowplay on Jul 25, 2022 6:55:36 GMT -5
That’s not an argument for saying that pink giraffes are real. It’s an argument for pointing out the power of thought-induced delusion. if you see a pink giraffe in your dream does the dream character say, this is not real? The dream character is also a thought-induced delusion.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 25, 2022 6:57:16 GMT -5
Yes, but I'm pretty sure you know that they are MORE than 'JUST appearances'. 'Appearance' can be a useful conceptual tool in spiritual conversations, but I think we have to careful about falling into a position in which we take the conceptual tool too literally, and reduce the world around us to 'just appearances'. You are more than 'an appearance' to me it's interesting that you should say I'm more than an appearance to you because what am I here? I'm just words on the screen. It's not as if we hang out and I come over for dinner once a week. Alright, well to clarify the issue, then your friends that you do hang out with, should be more than just an 'appearance' to you. What we perceive/experience are not actually ''appearances''. That word is just a conceptual tool. Sometimes in the last few years I have seen people talk as if what they perceive/experience, are, actually, ''appearances''. The academic concept has become literal. To be fair, I never saw you talk like that on the other forum (though it's not like I read all your messages!) In a really odd and backwards way, when the concept of 'appearances' gets taken literally, there is an objectification of 'what appears', which completely destroys the value of the concept.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jul 25, 2022 6:59:58 GMT -5
You only know that when you wake up but at the time you're dreaming you think it's real. If it wasn't real why would you experience fear when you're being chased by a tiger who wants to eat you? Imagination/not-correct-perception, like snake-rope. You only know that when you wake up...but at the time you're dreaming you think it's real. 🍓 -When God has fallen into ITS own dream, and then suddenly notices/SEES the dream-marker.- (a la Zen: Two Tigers and the Strawberry & Mark Twain's The Mysterious Stranger)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2022 7:02:29 GMT -5
if you see a pink giraffe in your dream does the dream character say, this is not real? The dream character is also a thought-induced delusion. No, you are not thinking that while you are dreaming therefore it is not a delusion as far as you the dreamer are concerned. When you wake up you say I dreamt.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 25, 2022 7:05:57 GMT -5
Yes, but I'm pretty sure you know that they are MORE than 'JUST appearances'. 'Appearance' can be a useful conceptual tool in spiritual conversations, but I think we have to careful about falling into a position in which we take the conceptual tool too literally, and reduce the world around us to 'just appearances'. You are more than 'an appearance' to me it's interesting that you should say I'm more than an appearance to you because what am I here? I'm just words on the screen. It's not as if we hang out and I come over for dinner once a week. Just one more thing....if you notice, you instinctively and habitually communicate here, as if there is an awareness at the other end. And as you say, you've never even seen me. I mean, you are even (generally) respectful. It's all an indication of JUST how powerful our instinct/intuition/knowing is. The word you used was 'compelled', and it's a good one. You are compelled without any rational evidence at all. That 'compulsion' is a very natural thing, and can point us to something deeper that can be realized.
|
|
|
Post by shadowplay on Jul 25, 2022 8:07:23 GMT -5
The dream character is also a thought-induced delusion. No, you are not thinking that while you are dreaming therefore it is not a delusion as far as you the dreamer are concerned. When you wake up you say I dreamt. So, you see a rope and think it’s a snake. But it’s not, under any circumstances (it never was, it never will be), a snake - even to the deluded you - you just THINK it’s a snake. All you’ve done here is push back the delusion on to the dream character (and this is where the analogy starts to fail) the dream character is deluded since there never were, under any circumstances, any pink giraffes. The DC just thinks there are.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jul 25, 2022 8:26:24 GMT -5
Gopal- Get your ass back in here whenever you're ready.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 25, 2022 9:35:00 GMT -5
If perception = creation ( nod to the frog(, then 'stability' indicates collective creation. If you were the only perceiver, then the moment you fell asleep at night, you'd fall through the bed. In fact, the whole universe were disappear. Your body would be gone. And then you wouldn't dream. The fact that you dream indicates that your body is stable. Why is it stable? Because you are not the only perceiver. What do you think of the logic? That's the problem. He got that from Enigma. It's not a bad pointer, and I haven't seen it expressed that way by any other source old or contemporary. E' spent many pages pointing out to gopal how gopal had misinterpreted and misapplied it.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 25, 2022 9:37:48 GMT -5
it's interesting that you should say I'm more than an appearance to you because what am I here? I'm just words on the screen. It's not as if we hang out and I come over for dinner once a week. Alright, well to clarify the issue, then your friends that you do hang out with, should be more than just an 'appearance' to you. What we perceive/experience are not actually ''appearances''. That word is just a conceptual tool. Sometimes in the last few years I have seen people talk as if what they perceive/experience, are, actually, ''appearances''. The academic concept has become literal. To be fair, I never saw you talk like that on the other forum (though it's not like I read all your messages!) In a really odd and backwards way, when the concept of 'appearances' gets taken literally, there is an objectification of 'what appears', which completely destroys the value of the concept. The appearance dilemma is all Gopal's fault. Everything is an appearance for him.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 25, 2022 9:40:19 GMT -5
You did, I did, Muttley did, Andrew, Satch, SN, Z, Rowan/thurfore ( ), the crazy hare doctor.. Pls don't include Z. He's never been to the Gab site. there was this really bad imposter that only lasted for about 5 posts once a few years back.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 25, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5
That's the problem. He got that from Enigma. It's not a bad pointer, and I haven't seen it expressed that way by any other source old or contemporary. E' spent many pages pointing out to gopal how gopal had misinterpreted and misapplied it. Yes. For Gopal, perception and creation are the same. But he has to make clear what's occurring in the consciousness of Gopal, and what occurring in Consciousness. That's why sdp considers it vital, crucial, obligatory, to make a distinction between an inside and an outside in some sense. But I basically gave up on that [zd discussion] years ago. A new thread maybe explores all this.
|
|