|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 4, 2024 2:15:40 GMT -5
yep, thanks for clarifying that. Key words that leapt out at me are empathy, deeper sense of peace, deeper understanding, expanse/deeper sense of awareness. I don't know about you, but from what I read on the forums, when teachers are asked questions, they always have answers to them. I suppose it depends on where their information is coming from, whether it is recited from scriptures or from their own understandings. I don't have answers for mathematical equations or solving problems with engineering issues, but for some reason since my transcendence I can have an answer come to mind for a lot of stuff lol. This deeper understanding that I spoke about allows one to see things one never did before, feel things differently etc. I am going to go woo woo here, but though I would mention it. I saw this chap a few months ago and had a 2hr consultation paullambillion.co.uk/index.phpI know him through mutual friends and he came to mind (well his alien friends did) and thought I would reach out. He reads energy and auras as well as channel e.t's and he spoke about how integration of such experiences for use of a better word allow one to see things differently. The energy system has to facilitate the expanded awareness, it is really interesting and I agree with him. He pretty much read me simply by looking at my light. He even brought up a philosopher from spirit that works with me. Kant think of his name right now  Love a bit of woo woo! It makes sense to me too that the energy system has to facilitate the expanded awareness. I suspect there's going to be plenty of that this year. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 4, 2024 2:27:31 GMT -5
I hadn't specifically considered this before, but I think so, yes. In the case of what is self-evident... 'spiritually' speaking, what is self-evidently known would be the same as what is known to be true of oneself. The words to express that might be 'I exist' or 'I Am', but the sense of that knowing goes deeper than the words convey (the words interrupt the self-evident nature of the knowing). And this adds up when I speak of being in a 'void' which is sort of the opposite of 'knowing what is self-evident'. In this state, there is no strong/clear sense of something being 100% true of oneself (though I understand that in order to interpret it as 'void', there is still a 'self-reference' happening on some level within me). Thanks for having a go at answering mate, you are the only one and that speaks volumes really when trying to get to the bottom of so called knowings that are 100% true when no bloody peep knows 100% what they are lol. To me it's obvious, but the click bait is zero, so I guess that peeps do 'know' excuse the pun so sweep it under the carpet. What you speak of regarding the void is true enough to say, if there are no thoughts of oneself, there is no self measure of what is true referring to that. Same goes to beyond mind. This is why this 'knowing' direct experience stuff I have been asking for specific experiences. It is perhaps more agreed upon now that whatever is spoken of regarding such moments becomes conceptual beliefs based upon our conditionings of such words used. So taking a strong stance referring the world to be a dream or the self is an illusory character, (for example) doesn't then reflect the so called foundation of a direct knowing that is 100% true and not a belief. It just doesn't work. It just doesn't. Yeah. I think a lot of spiritual words are like...metaphors, or analogies, or even just 'descriptions of the way somethings seem in the experience of them'. And some of these concepts can be useful, as can the descriptions. Words like 'illusion' and 'appearance' spring to mind. About 15 years ago, we were traveling round Europe without a map, and before Google was popularly used. Just....driving by instinct. Went to Turkey, and then guided into Syria. The border was tough, it was a 2 day process, and we had to hand passports over. I was stressed at one point, tuned into the divine and heard, 'none of it is real'. And in that moment, it was useful for me. The sense of pressure eased off. Often these words have a measure of truth, from a certain perspective. Much like Obi-Wan, when confronted by Luke over the questionable story Obi had told Luke about his father. Obi's reply was something like...'it was true from a certain perspective' lol. But the nuts and bolts matter too, and when I see you talking about the self reference, you are talking about nuts and bolts. No analogy, no metaphor, just talking about what's going on. And that's surely useful too. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jan 4, 2024 7:58:45 GMT -5
Taking an ST hiatus after this.
There is no self, person, ego, mind, it is an illusion, and yes it is contradictory that I'm saying this because it is in fact very true that what I'm saying doesn't match my actions, and also yes the argument that the person isn't but an induvidual is, is about as flimsy as cellophane.
The is no suffering, but there is pain, but saying pain is not suffering is plain stupid. So this is also contradictory. But there is no suffering and that's about as compassionate as one can get. It only makes sense in a certain light. I can't turn on that light for you with words, because it is wholly unrelated to words.
That's the beauty of it, the truth. If it all fit in a neat logic box, it wouldn't be true.
The invitation is to explore something that is outside the bounds of what you now consider true or real. Like the Tao Te Ching says if it can be explained, it is not the truth.
There is no way to prove what I know to be true convincingly. I can only offer some compelling ideas that question your current perspective. But if you're happy with it, your perspective, then cool, no point in prolonging the discussion unless you enjoy arguing which has lost its flavor for me. I used to enjoy it so I understand the draw.
There's this weird need to prevail that I like exploring. You might want to explore it also.
|
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 4, 2024 8:15:47 GMT -5
Taking an ST hiatus after this. There is no self, person, ego, mind, it is an illusion, and yes it is contradictory that I'm saying this because it is in fact very true that what I'm saying doesn't match my actions, and also yes the argument that the person isn't but an induvidual is, is about as flimsy as cellophane. The is no suffering, but there is pain, but saying pain is not suffering is plain stupid. So this is also contradictory. But there is no suffering and that's about as compassionate as one can get. It only makes sense in a certain light. I can't turn on that light for you with words, because it is wholly unrelated to words. That's the beauty of it, the truth. If it all fit in a neat logic box, it wouldn't be true. The invitation is to explore something that is outside the bounds of what you now consider true or real. Like the Tao Te Ching says if it can be explained, it is not the truth. There is no way to prove what I know to be true convincingly. I can only offer some compelling ideas that question your current perspective. But if you're happy with it, your perspective, then cool, no point in prolonging the discussion unless you enjoy arguing which has lost its flavor for me. I used to enjoy it so I understand the draw. There's this weird need to prevail that I like exploring. You might want to explore it also. ✅ Sanity ✅ Clarity without existential conundrums ✅ Life unfolds ✅ Perfectly so |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 4, 2024 9:45:14 GMT -5
Adventurous! You can sometimes be a very patient man.  Lol yes....sometimes! As I'm now in Oregon for a while...famously woke as I'm sure you know (there are exceptions, and I guess you can think of one).... I guess it's also fair to say that I've been becoming acquainted with the new waters I find myself swimming in! Aces! I have a cousin in the eastern part of the state who is definitely not "woke". There's a political movement the goal of which is to create a giant middle-finger on the map to the entire West Coast. The obsessions of the wokester's with characteristic-based-identity is, in many ways, the opposite of the culture of Tolle, Adya and Spira. But, all roads lead to Rome, and you get a discussion on twitter, like the one you describe, that's accidentally about " Mu!" .. aces! |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 5, 2024 15:17:38 GMT -5
.. If this is the question I missed my apologies. Well it can't be true based upon your foundation. self and what is illusory are conceptual beliefs. What? All beliefs are conceptual. "self" can mean many things, "illusion" means something very specific when I use it. As in:
There are however plenty of astonishing claims that I read, some say there is no doer or no self. That's astonishing for sure If we were to agree just for the sake of a debate that there can be existential truth based upon experiences had where the illusory self is true then again this would boil down to if what is true is realised to be that. Then we would have to bend the foundation of what is beyond as not beyond and then try and make everything fit to suit all the hypotheticals Would most people agree with "there is only what I am/we are"? My hunch that most people's sense of personhood is an illusion is based on my hunch that they wouldn't. Existential belief is about .. well .. you know .. existence. It's beliefs that explain the existential question, which has many forms, such as "what is the source of thought/emotion?", "what happens when I die?" or "how can it be that there is no existential separation between us when, you are not me, and I am not you"? Now, I won't deny that this sounds like a belief, but it's not quite that simple. I have an absence of existential belief. My belief that others are not absent these beliefs is based on what I hear them say or reading what they write. And as soon as you put that into words it has to filter through your existential beliefs that reflect your conditioning of what concepts mean to you, no matter how far one want's to exclude themselves from them. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 5, 2024 15:22:01 GMT -5
I am not sure why you replied to my post to the Pilgrim in highlighting my misunderstandings by attaching a illustration of Plontinus's theory. Not that I mind, it's just I am pulling a bit of a face thinking what did you get from my post to the Pilgrim. What are you basing my supposed misunderstandings from? Your theories? The Pilgrims? All the other forum members or just Plontinus? Why do you see me having the misunderstandings and it not being all the other's? Because the theory you present is believed more than some other theory? Just asking, it's something a long the lines with Laffy and not believing in conceptual beliefs but will present a conceptual belief to make a point that isn't true or any truer than any other. My experience all lots of different dimensional energies has been ongoing for a few decades now, from elementals to E.T's I am not sure where they fit with the illustration, if I get time I will have a look, it is my last day off work so from tomorrow onwards I won't have the headspace to give any attention to it. I will say though that certain individual souls even though they have transcended the physical plane are not of the high mind at all. Some are, some are not. Some are really dense for use of a better word in their energy. You see this is why vibrations and frequencies really do come into the equation which reflects one's light. I mainly get snippets from those that come from spirit, I have journals of their visitations, some come on their birth or death anniversaries as conformation, some are picked up by other's in my circle also, many of them work with me in specific fields, some prophets work on my premonitions. Like just the other day when I get en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Francis_Richter from spirit come by I know there is going to be an earthquake. Japans earthquake was no surprise. There is too much to go into any of this really and this type of talk doesn't go down too well with other's here. It's the first time in a long time that I have really spoke about it. Interesting stuff. I was mostly basing it on what I've read, and it is not necessarily just 'your' misunderstandings. You and SDP have typically been the more openly 'anti-ND' and 'anti-NDists' (totally fine and completely understandable), which leads me to comment on the words presented for anyone else who might actually be reading along. There's not much I can prove, so it may just sound like I'm just being an ass. I'll have to get back to this later; loads on the plate in the coming days with the new year. Enjoy your adventure, mate. No worries mate, it's just that of late it just seems to be a thing where I am not on the same page as everyone else and it's me that has the misunderstandings. I question Non duality because it seems at times so fcuked up. You have to follow the N.D. handbook or you end up looking like an outsider who doesn't know his elbow from his a$$. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 5, 2024 15:34:04 GMT -5
Thanks for having a go at answering mate, you are the only one and that speaks volumes really when trying to get to the bottom of so called knowings that are 100% true when no bloody peep knows 100% what they are lol. To me it's obvious, but the click bait is zero, so I guess that peeps do 'know' excuse the pun so sweep it under the carpet. What you speak of regarding the void is true enough to say, if there are no thoughts of oneself, there is no self measure of what is true referring to that. Same goes to beyond mind. This is why this 'knowing' direct experience stuff I have been asking for specific experiences. It is perhaps more agreed upon now that whatever is spoken of regarding such moments becomes conceptual beliefs based upon our conditionings of such words used. So taking a strong stance referring the world to be a dream or the self is an illusory character, (for example) doesn't then reflect the so called foundation of a direct knowing that is 100% true and not a belief. It just doesn't work. It just doesn't. Yeah. I think a lot of spiritual words are like...metaphors, or analogies, or even just 'descriptions of the way somethings seem in the experience of them'. And some of these concepts can be useful, as can the descriptions. Words like 'illusion' and 'appearance' spring to mind. About 15 years ago, we were traveling round Europe without a map, and before Google was popularly used. Just....driving by instinct. Went to Turkey, and then guided into Syria. The border was tough, it was a 2 day process, and we had to hand passports over. I was stressed at one point, tuned into the divine and heard, 'none of it is real'. And in that moment, it was useful for me. The sense of pressure eased off. Often these words have a measure of truth, from a certain perspective. Much like Obi-Wan, when confronted by Luke over the questionable story Obi had told Luke about his father. Obi's reply was something like...'it was true from a certain perspective' lol. But the nuts and bolts matter too, and when I see you talking about the self reference, you are talking about nuts and bolts. No analogy, no metaphor, just talking about what's going on. And that's surely useful too. For sure at times one can put forward a mantra or string of something or other in order to calm the self down somewhat. I can imagine that was stressy mate in Syria . Try Butlins instead, Oh maybe not, that can be more stressy with the kids In regards to the nuts and bolts and analogies, I agree and from a certain contexts equally are valid, it's just at times it seems as if metaphors and analogies are used when the nuts and bolts are required. Straight questions at times require straight answers, not poetry. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 5, 2024 19:46:11 GMT -5
Lol yes....sometimes! As I'm now in Oregon for a while...famously woke as I'm sure you know (there are exceptions, and I guess you can think of one).... I guess it's also fair to say that I've been becoming acquainted with the new waters I find myself swimming in! Aces! I have a cousin in the eastern part of the state who is definitely not "woke". There's a political movement the goal of which is to create a giant middle-finger on the map to the entire West Coast. The obsessions of the wokester's with characteristic-based-identity is, in many ways, the opposite of the culture of Tolle, Adya and Spira. But, all roads lead to Rome, and you get a discussion on twitter, like the one you describe, that's accidentally about " Mu!" .. aces! Interesting! We drove through Idaho into Oregon, and stayed at an isolated town in west Oregon on Xmas day. It was a pleasingly quiet time, and I noted with interest some visible support for conservatives. I'm now in one of the grey central areas (on the map), and the vibe is different. Instinctively, I avoid resistance, and so I notice there seems to be a 'malleability' to my consciousness, that adapts to wherever I am. Within limit. The people I am house sitting for seem good people, but while they are away, I took the liberty of putting their BLM protest sign that usually sits outside the front door, into the garage  Missoula was a city that seemed to suit my consciousness quite well. Conservative at heart, but the college brings a younger more progressive vibe to it, which altogether, I found balancing. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 6, 2024 14:31:00 GMT -5
Interesting stuff. I was mostly basing it on what I've read, and it is not necessarily just 'your' misunderstandings. You and SDP have typically been the more openly 'anti-ND' and 'anti-NDists' (totally fine and completely understandable), which leads me to comment on the words presented for anyone else who might actually be reading along. There's not much I can prove, so it may just sound like I'm just being an ass. I'll have to get back to this later; loads on the plate in the coming days with the new year. Enjoy your adventure, mate. No worries mate, it's just that of late it just seems to be a thing where I am not on the same page as everyone else and it's me that has the misunderstandings. I question Non duality because it seems at times so fcuked up. You have to follow the N.D. handbook or you end up looking like an outsider who doesn't know his elbow from his a$$. Perhaps I am not clear on what you think is fcucked up about ND. I have no idea what ND handbook you're referring to, but it sounds like you think of it as a list of rules or what can be said that is true (as opposed to what is not true), so just leave that aside. That is, pointers are not the Truth being pointed to, nor are they pointing to what one can or cannot do (or believe) after realizing Truth. I think this is where your rub is. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 6, 2024 14:35:07 GMT -5
No worries mate, it's just that of late it just seems to be a thing where I am not on the same page as everyone else and it's me that has the misunderstandings. I question Non duality because it seems at times so fcuked up. You have to follow the N.D. handbook or you end up looking like an outsider who doesn't know his elbow from his a$$. Perhaps I am not clear on what you think is fcucked up about ND. I have no idea what ND handbook you're referring to, but it sounds like you think of it as a list of rules or what can be said that is true (as opposed to what is not true), so just leave that aside. That is, pointers are not the Truth being pointed to, nor are they pointing to what one can or cannot do (or believe) after realizing Truth. I think this is where your rub is. Tenka doesn't even know conceptually, set aside, gnosisly, the illusory nature of (the small s) self. It boils down to that. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 6, 2024 14:50:56 GMT -5
What? All beliefs are conceptual. "self" can mean many things, "illusion" means something very specific when I use it. As in:
Would most people agree with "there is only what I am/we are"? My hunch that most people's sense of personhood is an illusion is based on my hunch that they wouldn't. Existential belief is about .. well .. you know .. existence. It's beliefs that explain the existential question, which has many forms, such as "what is the source of thought/emotion?", "what happens when I die?" or "how can it be that there is no existential separation between us when, you are not me, and I am not you"? Now, I won't deny that this sounds like a belief, but it's not quite that simple. I have an absence of existential belief. My belief that others are not absent these beliefs is based on what I hear them say or reading what they write. And as soon as you put that into words it has to filter through your existential beliefs that reflect your conditioning of what concepts mean to you, no matter how far one want's to exclude themselves from them. existential belief? Be specific. You're mistaking a statement of absence for something that it is not. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 6, 2024 14:52:55 GMT -5
Aces! I have a cousin in the eastern part of the state who is definitely not "woke". There's a political movement the goal of which is to create a giant middle-finger on the map to the entire West Coast. The obsessions of the wokester's with characteristic-based-identity is, in many ways, the opposite of the culture of Tolle, Adya and Spira. But, all roads lead to Rome, and you get a discussion on twitter, like the one you describe, that's accidentally about " Mu!" .. aces! Interesting! We drove through Idaho into Oregon, and stayed at an isolated town in west Oregon on Xmas day. It was a pleasingly quiet time, and I noted with interest some visible support for conservatives. I'm now in one of the grey central areas (on the map), and the vibe is different. Instinctively, I avoid resistance, and so I notice there seems to be a 'malleability' to my consciousness, that adapts to wherever I am. Within limit. The people I am house sitting for seem good people, but while they are away, I took the liberty of putting their BLM protest sign that usually sits outside the front door, into the garage Missoula was a city that seemed to suit my consciousness quite well. Conservative at heart, but the college brings a younger more progressive vibe to it, which altogether, I found balancing. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 6, 2024 15:24:05 GMT -5
No worries mate, it's just that of late it just seems to be a thing where I am not on the same page as everyone else and it's me that has the misunderstandings. I question Non duality because it seems at times so fcuked up. You have to follow the N.D. handbook or you end up looking like an outsider who doesn't know his elbow from his a$$. Perhaps I am not clear on what you think is fcucked up about ND. I have no idea what ND handbook you're referring to, but it sounds like you think of it as a list of rules or what can be said that is true (as opposed to what is not true), so just leave that aside. That is, pointers are not the Truth being pointed to, nor are they pointing to what one can or cannot do (or believe) after realizing Truth. I think this is where your rub is. I have read along with peeps for 10 years on forums, the hardcore ND peeps all sing from the same hymn sheet. From the illusory peep, to the dream world scenario. I just read something on another forum from this lady who declared she knows everything about Non duality and knows for certain life is a dream. I mean you just don't get this from ordinary folk. It's like a cult. Peeps read stuff and recite it like it's the truth. You can spot a N.D. peep a mile off. You ask a question against their core beliefs and it goes pear shaped pretty quickly, You're either not even here to begin with and if you are you're an illusory dream character that arises in consciousness. It's not normal mate. Soz, butt it ain't. This type of talk belongs in a niche club, that recites the scriptures when push comes to shove. I mean I like ZD and find him highly respectful butt he doesn't know what the spirit or soul refers too, only consciousness. I used to pull figs up on her posts, for they weren't normal. Its was like a non duality language that you wouldn't dare speak of down the pub with your mates. There is defo a code here that N.D.'s speak of, the general public wouldn't have a clue what's been said. The thing is, half of what is said, isn't known lol, and if it is, it's only a pointer what is True, that can't be conceptualised. I am not having a rant here, I am not anti N.D. peeps, it's just I see through it all . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 6, 2024 15:39:18 GMT -5
And as soon as you put that into words it has to filter through your existential beliefs that reflect your conditioning of what concepts mean to you, no matter how far one want's to exclude themselves from them. existential belief? Be specific. You're mistaking a statement of absence for something that it is not. I don't have to go treasure hunting here. Anything that is said will be constructed through a belief system that is conditional, based upon what one believes to be true. Okay, let's use your thoughts about burning everything in a Zen style fashion. This which is reflected upon what is said conceptually. Prior to having any understanding of what anything means or refers too, there cannot be something that relates to that which can be made to be in someway not associated. I understand we don't see eye to eye here and that is okay, butt you are in some respects trying to wiggle it around to fit somehow based upon I don't perhaps understand what you are meaning by something or other. I understand perfectly well that there is either beyond a conditioned concept or not. It's when one wants to somehow merge the two and make something acceptable as a pointer even though one wants to burn what is pointed too because it is a conditioned, conceptual belief. |
|
