Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 21:02:50 GMT -5
Yes, exactly. ZD is stuck on second mountain, I think that's also called Zen sickness. (?) I keep offering him a loophole, but he just keeps doubling down. . Explain real and unreal in non-duality. Chatgpt: “ In non-duality, the term "real" refers to the unchanging, timeless, and ever-present nature of ultimate reality or absolute truth. It points to the underlying essence that permeates all phenomena, beyond their transient and changing forms. This reality is often described as pure awareness, consciousness, or the ground of being. It is considered to be the foundation upon which all appearances arise. On the other hand, the term "unreal" is used to describe the illusory nature of phenomena when seen as separate and independently existing entities. It implies that the world of appearances, including thoughts, emotions, and physical objects, lacks inherent, permanent substance or separate existence. It does not mean that these phenomena do not have relative existence or practical utility within the realm of dualistic experience. Rather, they are recognized as temporary and ever-changing expressions of the underlying reality.” I hope this isn't the way things are going but I'm going to completely ignore any post that's been written by chat gpt. It doesn't know the difference between correct and incorrect information. It sounds convincing whether it's right or wrong. AI is not intelligent although it appears to be. How's that for an illusion? |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on May 9, 2023 21:13:30 GMT -5
How's that for an illusion? ChatGPT: That's a classic example of using sarcasm to convey irritation! By saying "How's that for an illusion?" in response to my previous explanation, you're sarcastically suggesting that my answer might not have been satisfactory or accurate. The sarcastic tone implies that you're actually not impressed or satisfied with my response, and you're using sarcasm as a way to express your irritation indirectly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 21:20:27 GMT -5
You didn't answer my question about what is the consensus paradigm but never mind. I suppose I would really like to know what you don't like about duality. Apart from the fact that I don't recognize Adya as a spiritual authority, I do not agree that there are two types of SR. I have no idea why you have reached this conclusion. What you describe are two steps to the one realization. Essentially the shift to awareness is second mountain which is not SR and that is followed by Unity or This as you put it and that is third mountain which is SR. In fact Ramana described it perfectly in the quote you alluded to. Question: “Brahman (the Supreme Spirit) is real. The world is illusion” is the stock phrase of Sri Sankaracharya. Yet others say, “The world is reality.” Which is true? Sri Ramana Maharshi: Both statements are true. They refer to different stages of development and are spoken from different points of view. The (spiritual) aspirant starts with the definition, that which is real exists always. Then he eliminates the world as unreal because it is changing. The seeker ultimately reaches the Self and there finds unity as the prevailing note. Then, that which was originally rejected as being unreal is found to be a part of the unity. Being absorbed in the reality, the world also is real. There is only being in Self-realisation, and nothing but being. Yes, that's the quote by Ramana that I was going to search for. Thanks. I have no problem with the conventional definition of "duality," but my point is that it's a creation of the intellect, and it's no more actual than the idea of being a SVP. Using language we can only point to the truth using a word like "THIS," or "Tao," or "the Infinite." I prefer to call SR "THIS-realization" rather than "Self-realization" simply because many westerners don't resonate with the word "Self" with a capital "S." What many of us call "the concensus paradigm" is the common set of beliefs that reality is composed of separately-existing things that are seen by a separately-existing thing called "me." Charles Tart, the psychologist, called it "a consensus trance state" created by cultural conditioning. The illusion of separately-existing things can be realized as an illusion by simply searching for actual boundaries. The common example I use is asking people to use a pen or magic marker and draw a line where the boundary lies between a hand and a wrist or a wrist and an arm. For most people it only takes a moment or two to realize that there is no actual boundary (except in imagination) and that a hand, wrist, and arm are inseparably one. ITSW, all other boundaries are exactly the same as lines of latitude and longitude. This is really where I want to throw my hands up in the air and say so what? Why the heck should I be concerned about duality? Is this what I should be thinking about when I'm shopping for groceries in the duality grocery store. For me absolutely not. I'm completely unconcerned about duality. I don't care about illusions because there aren't any. If there is nothing but the Self then what is created by the intellect is just as actual as anything else. It is the reality because there is nothing that is not the reality so in that case why turn duality into some kind of Illusion or trance. Just enjoy it for what it is. Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. If that is so you cannot separate something from the one indivisible reality and call it a trance because that would mean there isn't one indivisible reality. I would never dream of teaching these kinds of concepts to anybody. I just say live your life. Keep away from these non-duality concepts because they will poison your mind. Instead just go back to silence. That's all you have to do and then everything will take care of itself automatically. But when you use the mind, the very instrument that you are claiming to be an illusion but somehow you're taking part of that mind as being some kind of arbiter of Truth where's the sense in that. It's like the thief pretending to be a policeman in order to catch the thief. The mind cannot think itself out of this conundrum so what's the point of telling anyone that the world is not composed of many things when that's exactly what it looks like? I say forget about duality. It is what it is, but go within to discover you are unlimited and then questions about duality won't arise. This is what western non-duality teachers keep banging on about, how illusory and false duality is. It's nonsense! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 21:26:42 GMT -5
How's that for an illusion? ChatGPT: That's a classic example of using sarcasm to convey irritation! By saying "How's that for an illusion?" in response to my previous explanation, you're sarcastically suggesting that my answer might not have been satisfactory or accurate. The sarcastic tone implies that you're actually not impressed or satisfied with my response, and you're using sarcasm as a way to express your irritation indirectly. I could have given that response to anybody who used chat GPT instead of their own words, so it's not a criticism of your post as such. This is a worry for many people and I've come across FB groups expressing concerns about the use of AI to answer questions. What's interesting is my immediate visceral feeling when I read your post and saw that it was from chat GPT so I'm thinking to myself this is not real, this is not a real response from you. And it immediately made me lose interest because it's not coming from you. I find myself in a quandary. Who am I actually interacting with here? What's the follow-up going to be is it going to be from you or AI are you going to mix the two where's the continuity here with a real person. It's very concerning and there will be a growing debate on this subject about what to trust. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 9, 2023 22:05:56 GMT -5
Yes, that's the quote by Ramana that I was going to search for. Thanks. I have no problem with the conventional definition of "duality," but my point is that it's a creation of the intellect, and it's no more actual than the idea of being a SVP. Using language we can only point to the truth using a word like "THIS," or "Tao," or "the Infinite." I prefer to call SR "THIS-realization" rather than "Self-realization" simply because many westerners don't resonate with the word "Self" with a capital "S." What many of us call "the concensus paradigm" is the common set of beliefs that reality is composed of separately-existing things that are seen by a separately-existing thing called "me." Charles Tart, the psychologist, called it "a consensus trance state" created by cultural conditioning. The illusion of separately-existing things can be realized as an illusion by simply searching for actual boundaries. The common example I use is asking people to use a pen or magic marker and draw a line where the boundary lies between a hand and a wrist or a wrist and an arm. For most people it only takes a moment or two to realize that there is no actual boundary (except in imagination) and that a hand, wrist, and arm are inseparably one. ITSW, all other boundaries are exactly the same as lines of latitude and longitude. This is really where I want to throw my hands up in the air and say so what? Why the heck should I be concerned about duality? Is this what I should be thinking about when I'm shopping for groceries in the duality grocery store. For me absolutely not. I'm completely unconcerned about duality. I don't care about illusions because there aren't any. If there is nothing but the Self then what is created by the intellect is just as actual as anything else. It is the reality because there is nothing that is not the reality so in that case why turn duality into some kind of Illusion or trance. Just enjoy it for what it is. Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. If that is so you cannot separate something from the one indivisible reality and call it a trance because that would mean there isn't one indivisible reality. I would never dream of teaching these kinds of concepts to anybody. I just say live your life. Keep away from these non-duality concepts because they will poison your mind. Instead just go back to silence. That's all you have to do and then everything will take care of itself automatically. But when you use the mind, the very instrument that you are claiming to be an illusion but somehow you're taking part of that mind as being some kind of arbiter of Truth where's the sense in that. It's like the thief pretending to be a policeman in order to catch the thief. The mind cannot think itself out of this conundrum so what's the point of telling anyone that the world is not composed of many things when that's exactly what it looks like? I say forget about duality. It is what it is, but go within to discover you are unlimited and then questions about duality won't arise. This is what western non-duality teachers keep banging on about, how illusory and false duality is. It's nonsense! I'm sure you know, this is the classical position......buried in the fine print... Thanks for the sanity. |
|
|
|
Post by shadowplay on May 10, 2023 5:23:30 GMT -5
Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. Well, yes! That’s the key here. I’m sure that ZD is not addressing that particular audience. Most people/seekers live in a reality in which they are hostage to their minds - lost in narratives that perpetually reinforce the illusion (because it IS an illusion) of separation. Then one day BANG! Something happens, the mind drops and the direct recognition is revealed. You recommend going back to silence. Yes, because this is a way for the seeker to undermine the problematic nature of the mind’s disposition for abstraction, division and reification. So I don’t see a real difference here apart from the fact that ZD is being more explicit about the nature of the problem in the context of a forum discussion.
------- ZD.
Earlier you talked about ‘looking at the world without distinction’. I don’t see distinction as an issue - only the mistaking of distinction for separation. In reality, not even the tiniest slither of separation or inherent-ness can be found - except, as you say, in imagination.
Now, in this no-separation realisation there is the same differentiation of forms as before - nothing has changed on (let’s say) the horizontal axis. Yet (on the vertical axis) there can be the felt-sense that ALL is the articulation or be-ing of a ‘singular event’ - the One Reality behind things. In a sense it’s very ordinary. Nothing dramatically changes, the universe doesn’t congeal into an undifferentiated blob and awareness certainly doesn’t need to be in a rarefied state devoid of everyday forms and so on.
Complete cessation of forms can happen in deep states such as NS but this is not the goal of realisation since it’s a temporary condition which will arise and pass. Meanwhile the ‘one life’ intrinsic to ALL states is radiantly present as the articulation of this very moment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2023 5:49:26 GMT -5
Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. Well, yes! That’s the key here. I’m sure that ZD is not addressing that particular audience. Most people/seekers live in a reality in which they are hostage to their minds - lost in narratives that perpetually reinforce the illusion (because it IS an illusion) of separation. Then one day BANG! Something happens, the mind drops and the direct recognition is revealed. You recommend going back to silence. Yes, because this is a way for the seeker to undermine the problematic nature of the mind’s disposition for abstraction, division and reification. So I don’t see a real difference here apart from the fact that ZD is being more explicit about the nature of the problem in the context of a forum discussion.
------- ZD.
Earlier you talked about ‘looking at the world without distinction’. I don’t see distinction as an issue - only the mistaking of distinction for separation. In reality, not even the tiniest slither of separation or inherent-ness can be found - except, as you say, in imagination.
Now, in this no-separation realisation there is the same differentiation of forms as before - nothing has changed on (let’s say) the horizontal axis. Yet (on the vertical axis) there can be the felt-sense that ALL is the articulation or be-ing of a ‘singular event’ - the One Reality behind things. In a sense it’s very ordinary. Nothing dramatically changes, the universe doesn’t congeal into an undifferentiated blob and awareness certainly doesn’t need to be in a rarefied state devoid of everyday forms and so on.
Complete cessation of forms can happen in deep states such as NS but this is not the goal of realisation since it’s a temporary condition which will arise and pass. Meanwhile the ‘one life’ intrinsic to ALL states is radiantly present as the articulation of this very moment. A forum discussion for whom exactly? Seekers? It must be because you wouldn't have this discussion with someone who is self-realized. So if it's a discussion for seekers I think my point is why, because there's nothing you can do about being a hostage to your mind unless you go out of your mind. So how is this discussion useful? It's only useful if a seeker thinks it's useful, but it's not useful. If ZD is a seeker he thinks it's useful to think about this kind of thing but it's not. That's what I'm here to say. Because it's not the truth. I couldn't put it better than Pilgrim who said he's flying with one wing. What's the implication of such a discussion. Where do you take it? So you're a hostage to the mind. You're in the consensus trance whatever the hell that means. What are you going to do about it? Oh I know. You go back to silence. That's what I said. You can have this discussion add infinitum about the projecting power of Maya which gives rise to the world and the individual and talk incessantly about why it's broken and why it's got to be fixed. That's not the approach of Vedanta which says attend to the veiling power of Maya which prevents you from knowing Brahman. Let the world and the individual be what they are and let them do what they do. The projecting power of Maya is not the problem. This kind of discussion captures the mind and perpetuates a conceptual approach to non-duality which is completely invalid. There's nothing you can do about individuality. You are not in control of it. It's a waste of time to talk about imagining separation for instance as if it's possible to unimagine separation and realize you're not separate by listening to a few pointers. That's not going to work. It's just going to keep engaging the mind in a perpetual merry go round and trying to think yourself out of the box your mind is in. It's a discussion that will keep going though because that's what the mind likes. But it comes across as if there's something wrong with duality. There isn't. duality is a wonderful thing. Duality itself isn't the cause of suffering, it's not knowing that you are Being that causes suffering. So let's leave duality alone shall we and just play in the sandbox of duality because it ain't going anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 10, 2023 5:58:31 GMT -5
Yes, that's the quote by Ramana that I was going to search for. Thanks. I have no problem with the conventional definition of "duality," but my point is that it's a creation of the intellect, and it's no more actual than the idea of being a SVP. Using language we can only point to the truth using a word like "THIS," or "Tao," or "the Infinite." I prefer to call SR "THIS-realization" rather than "Self-realization" simply because many westerners don't resonate with the word "Self" with a capital "S." What many of us call "the concensus paradigm" is the common set of beliefs that reality is composed of separately-existing things that are seen by a separately-existing thing called "me." Charles Tart, the psychologist, called it "a consensus trance state" created by cultural conditioning. The illusion of separately-existing things can be realized as an illusion by simply searching for actual boundaries. The common example I use is asking people to use a pen or magic marker and draw a line where the boundary lies between a hand and a wrist or a wrist and an arm. For most people it only takes a moment or two to realize that there is no actual boundary (except in imagination) and that a hand, wrist, and arm are inseparably one. ITSW, all other boundaries are exactly the same as lines of latitude and longitude. This is really where I want to throw my hands up in the air and say so what? Why the heck should I be concerned about duality? Is this what I should be thinking about when I'm shopping for groceries in the duality grocery store. For me absolutely not. I'm completely unconcerned about duality. I don't care about illusions because there aren't any. If there is nothing but the Self then what is created by the intellect is just as actual as anything else. It is the reality because there is nothing that is not the reality so in that case why turn duality into some kind of Illusion or trance. Just enjoy it for what it is. Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. If that is so you cannot separate something from the one indivisible reality and call it a trance because that would mean there isn't one indivisible reality. I would never dream of teaching these kinds of concepts to anybody. I just say live your life. Keep away from these non-duality concepts because they will poison your mind. Instead just go back to silence. That's all you have to do and then everything will take care of itself automatically. But when you use the mind, the very instrument that you are claiming to be an illusion but somehow you're taking part of that mind as being some kind of arbiter of Truth where's the sense in that. It's like the thief pretending to be a policeman in order to catch the thief. The mind cannot think itself out of this conundrum so what's the point of telling anyone that the world is not composed of many things when that's exactly what it looks like? I say forget about duality. It is what it is, but go within to discover you are unlimited and then questions about duality won't arise. This is what western non-duality teachers keep banging on about, how illusory and false duality is. It's nonsense! I almost always enjoy your replies because you say what's on your mind (or in your heart) in that moment. You are fun to read, even if/when I don't always agree with you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2023 6:06:08 GMT -5
This is really where I want to throw my hands up in the air and say so what? Why the heck should I be concerned about duality? Is this what I should be thinking about when I'm shopping for groceries in the duality grocery store. For me absolutely not. I'm completely unconcerned about duality. I don't care about illusions because there aren't any. If there is nothing but the Self then what is created by the intellect is just as actual as anything else. It is the reality because there is nothing that is not the reality so in that case why turn duality into some kind of Illusion or trance. Just enjoy it for what it is. Duality is not an issue if you have the direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited. If that is so you cannot separate something from the one indivisible reality and call it a trance because that would mean there isn't one indivisible reality. I would never dream of teaching these kinds of concepts to anybody. I just say live your life. Keep away from these non-duality concepts because they will poison your mind. Instead just go back to silence. That's all you have to do and then everything will take care of itself automatically. But when you use the mind, the very instrument that you are claiming to be an illusion but somehow you're taking part of that mind as being some kind of arbiter of Truth where's the sense in that. It's like the thief pretending to be a policeman in order to catch the thief. The mind cannot think itself out of this conundrum so what's the point of telling anyone that the world is not composed of many things when that's exactly what it looks like? I say forget about duality. It is what it is, but go within to discover you are unlimited and then questions about duality won't arise. This is what western non-duality teachers keep banging on about, how illusory and false duality is. It's nonsense! I almost always enjoy your replies because you say what's on your mind (or in your heart) in that moment. You are fun to read, even if/when I don't always agree with you. That's because that moment is all there ever is so it's good to make the most of it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 10, 2023 6:06:56 GMT -5
. Explain real and unreal in non-duality. Chatgpt: “ In non-duality, the term "real" refers to the unchanging, timeless, and ever-present nature of ultimate reality or absolute truth. It points to the underlying essence that permeates all phenomena, beyond their transient and changing forms. This reality is often described as pure awareness, consciousness, or the ground of being. It is considered to be the foundation upon which all appearances arise. On the other hand, the term "unreal" is used to describe the illusory nature of phenomena when seen as separate and independently existing entities. It implies that the world of appearances, including thoughts, emotions, and physical objects, lacks inherent, permanent substance or separate existence. It does not mean that these phenomena do not have relative existence or practical utility within the realm of dualistic experience. Rather, they are recognized as temporary and ever-changing expressions of the underlying reality.” I hope this isn't the way things are going but I'm going to completely ignore any post that's been written by chat gpt. It doesn't know the difference between correct and incorrect information. It sounds convincing whether it's right or wrong. AI is not intelligent although it appears to be. How's that for an illusion? yeah, this was my reticence with Gopal's use of it. Spirituality is, in part, about authenticity. It's about Life expressing itself in the moment. Few days ago, driving out in the Scottish hills, we drove past this beautiful black bird with a rainbow of markings on its wings. It was splashing around joyfully in one of the many tremendous pot holes that cover our back roads (the pot hole was full of rain water) The bird jumped out the way as we drove by, and then I looked in the mirror as we drove past, and it had hopped back in. And I reflected...That....That is everything. That is Life, and there's nothing more or better or greater. Just a bird taking a happy splashy bath in a pothole. And then...get this....we drove down the road yesterday, and the same bird was splashing around in the same pot hole! As we approached, he hopped out, I looked in the mirror, and sure enough, he'd jumped back in again! Not sure what Life was trying to tell me, but....something. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2023 6:19:49 GMT -5
I hope this isn't the way things are going but I'm going to completely ignore any post that's been written by chat gpt. It doesn't know the difference between correct and incorrect information. It sounds convincing whether it's right or wrong. AI is not intelligent although it appears to be. How's that for an illusion? yeah, this was my reticence with Gopal's use of it. Spirituality is, in part, about authenticity. It's about Life expressing itself in the moment. Few days ago, driving out in the Scottish hills, we drove past this beautiful black bird with a rainbow of markings on its wings. It was splashing around joyfully in one of the many tremendous pot holes that cover our back roads (the pot hole was full of rain water) The bird jumped out the way as we drove by, and then I looked in the mirror as we drove past, and it had hopped back in. And I reflected...That....That is everything. That is Life, and there's nothing more or better or greater. Just a bird taking a happy splashy bath in a pothole. And then...get this....we drove down the road yesterday, and the same bird was splashing around in the same pot hole! As we approached, he hopped out, I looked in the mirror, and sure enough, he'd jumped back in again! Not sure what Life was trying to tell me, but....something. Oh that's sweet! I think what opened my eyes was listening to an interview by a quantum physicist who was making the point that AI is just a clever predictive text program. Chat GPT gets all its information by trawling through the entire internet. But he gave this example. He said that if you had done this crazy science experiment when you were a kid and you knew it was nonsense but you were just having a little bit of fun but you wrote up a scientific paper to make it sound credible AI would also trawl that and just assume that it was correct and incorporate it into its answers. That's the problem it doesn't know what's true and what's false. It presents facts as being true, it doesn't know a false fact but because of its language skills it sounds credible even if it's nonsense. Another interesting YouTube vide was of a secondary school science teacher and he fed in exam questions and he got answers that superficially looked good but sometimes it was producing the right answer but using entirely the wrong logic to explain the answer. If it's going to be problematic with science and mathematics which consists of basically right and wrong answers what the heck is it going to do with spirituality. It's better to quote from scriptures and sages even if you don't agree with them because at least that text has been verified. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 10, 2023 6:22:35 GMT -5
Well, yes! That’s the key here. I’m sure that ZD is not addressing that particular audience. Most people/seekers live in a reality in which they are hostage to their minds - lost in narratives that perpetually reinforce the illusion (because it IS an illusion) of separation. Then one day BANG! Something happens, the mind drops and the direct recognition is revealed. You recommend going back to silence. Yes, because this is a way for the seeker to undermine the problematic nature of the mind’s disposition for abstraction, division and reification. So I don’t see a real difference here apart from the fact that ZD is being more explicit about the nature of the problem in the context of a forum discussion.
------- ZD.
Earlier you talked about ‘looking at the world without distinction’. I don’t see distinction as an issue - only the mistaking of distinction for separation. In reality, not even the tiniest slither of separation or inherent-ness can be found - except, as you say, in imagination.
Now, in this no-separation realisation there is the same differentiation of forms as before - nothing has changed on (let’s say) the horizontal axis. Yet (on the vertical axis) there can be the felt-sense that ALL is the articulation or be-ing of a ‘singular event’ - the One Reality behind things. In a sense it’s very ordinary. Nothing dramatically changes, the universe doesn’t congeal into an undifferentiated blob and awareness certainly doesn’t need to be in a rarefied state devoid of everyday forms and so on.
Complete cessation of forms can happen in deep states such as NS but this is not the goal of realisation since it’s a temporary condition which will arise and pass. Meanwhile the ‘one life’ intrinsic to ALL states is radiantly present as the articulation of this very moment. A forum discussion for whom exactly? Seekers? It must be because you wouldn't have this discussion with someone who is self-realized. So if it's a discussion for seekers I think my point is why, because there's nothing you can do about being a hostage to your mind unless you go out of your mind. So how is this discussion useful? It's only useful if a seeker thinks it's useful, but it's not useful. If ZD is a seeker he thinks it's useful to think about this kind of thing but it's not. That's what I'm here to say. Because it's not the truth. I couldn't put it better than Pilgrim who said he's flying with one wing. What's the implication of such a discussion. Where do you take it? So you're a hostage to the mind. You're in the consensus trance whatever the hell that means. What are you going to do about it? Oh I know. You go back to silence. That's what I said. You can have this discussion add infinitum about the projecting power of Maya which gives rise to the world and the individual and talk incessantly about why it's broken and why it's got to be fixed. That's not the approach of Vedanta which says attend to the veiling power of Maya which prevents you from knowing Brahman. Let the world and the individual be what they are and let them do what they do. The projecting power of Maya is not the problem. This kind of discussion captures the mind and perpetuates a conceptual approach to non-duality which is completely invalid. There's nothing you can do about individuality. You are not in control of it. It's a waste of time to talk about imagining separation for instance as if it's possible to unimagine separation and realize you're not separate by listening to a few pointers. That's not going to work. It's just going to keep engaging the mind in a perpetual merry go round and trying to think yourself out of the box your mind is in. It's a discussion that will keep going though because that's what the mind likes. But it comes across as if there's something wrong with duality. There isn't. duality is a wonderful thing. Duality itself isn't the cause of suffering, it's not knowing that you are Being that causes suffering. So let's leave duality alone shall we and just play in the sandbox of duality because it ain't going anywhere. Yeah I get you here. Non-duality can be a form of escapism, and I've definitely been down that path, though it expressed itself in me as a trying to escape both mind/ego. Ultimately, it all has to be accepted, integrated....the separation, the 'illusions', the 'person', the 'separate volitional person'. If it can be conceived, then it basically exists, and s it has to be accepted regardless of whether it is 'true' or 'illusion' or whatever. I don't consider myself 'self-realized'....it's sort of alien and irrelevant to me. I experience attachments, the person, emotion, stress...all of it...and apparently, that doesn't fit in with 'self-realization'. But, I'm no longer running from it, and when I am running....well I'm consciously running from it, and I accept that too. I'm a mess, but it's all kind of a joyful mess, (except when it isn't lol) Though, to add, I did like how Shadowplay expressed himself there. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 10, 2023 6:26:20 GMT -5
yeah, this was my reticence with Gopal's use of it. Spirituality is, in part, about authenticity. It's about Life expressing itself in the moment. Few days ago, driving out in the Scottish hills, we drove past this beautiful black bird with a rainbow of markings on its wings. It was splashing around joyfully in one of the many tremendous pot holes that cover our back roads (the pot hole was full of rain water) The bird jumped out the way as we drove by, and then I looked in the mirror as we drove past, and it had hopped back in. And I reflected...That....That is everything. That is Life, and there's nothing more or better or greater. Just a bird taking a happy splashy bath in a pothole. And then...get this....we drove down the road yesterday, and the same bird was splashing around in the same pot hole! As we approached, he hopped out, I looked in the mirror, and sure enough, he'd jumped back in again! Not sure what Life was trying to tell me, but....something. Oh that's sweet! I think what opened my eyes was listening to an interview by a quantum physicist who was making the point that AI is just a clever predictive text program. Chat GPT gets all its information by trawling through the entire internet. But he gave this example. He said that if you had done this crazy science experiment when you were a kid and you knew it was nonsense but you were just having a little bit of fun but you wrote up a scientific paper to make it sound credible AI would also trawl that and just assume that it was correct and incorporate it into its answers. That's the problem it doesn't know what's true and what's false. It presents facts as being true, it doesn't know a false fact but because of its language skills it sounds credible even if it's nonsense. Another interesting YouTube vide was of a secondary school science teacher and he fed in exam questions and he got answers that superficially looked good but sometimes it was producing the right answer but using entirely the wrong logic to explain the answer. If it's going to be problematic with science and mathematics which consists of basically right and wrong answers what the heck is it going to do with spirituality. It's better to quote from scriptures and sages even if you don't agree with them because at least that text has been verified. Interesting. I got to go to the shop, but this relates to something I was talking about on Steven's thread. Right and wrong, true and false....these aren't wholly learned things. They aren't wholly programmable. There's an intuitive felt sense, something innate within us, that cannot be programmed. And AI doesn't have that, so it will always be regurgitating, even if it's regurgitating in a high performance way. It can only ever 'perform'. It never 'knows'. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 10, 2023 6:56:18 GMT -5
Well, there are no others because there is no me. There is no world but for the light of awareness. This is all language prodding at the truth though.
Hedderman puts it best when he says there's no crow jumping in and out of a pothole and no Andrew observing it. That dichotomy is an illusion. But there is "crowing." As there is "grocering," "foruming." Etc.
That's what's happening. The problems start when the ego, mind, self, I-thought, starts appropriating what's happening. Then you're on Gopal's Wild Ride rollercoaster and you're living in "what's not happening" much of the time.
Like Bodidharma said to Huike who'd cut off his arm and brought it to Bodidharma:"Bring me your mind, and I will pacify it." Hahaha!
That's where the delusion starts and is perpetuated by this relentless drone of self talk. Hedderman calls this "selfing," and it's initiated with the idea that I am this mind and this body. Then the subject/ object dichotomy begins. I am this, not that. Selfing.
But again this is just prodding at the truth. Prod away my wayward friends. I'm going back to sleep.
|
|
|
|
Post by shadowplay on May 10, 2023 7:06:06 GMT -5
A forum discussion for whom exactly? Seekers? Yes. The audience that ZD unlikely to be addressing is the one where there is the “direct recognition that you are unbounded and unlimited.” So are these messages any use to seekers? Well many seekers will not be happy being told that they are already what they seek or to just sit in silence. Many will feel the need to investigate further (at least initially.) Then it becomes the case of using a thorn to remove a thorn. The mind is engaged (momentarily) in order to see its utter limitation. This was Nagarjuna’s method, he used philosophy to expose the utter uselessness of philosophy. But I agree. At the end of the day all this must be left behind - even non-duality. |
|
