|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 18, 2024 14:45:04 GMT -5
This is the most genuine and honest thing you've written. Did you watch the "diaper-guy" video, just a few minutes long, a couple days ago? (That term came from laughter's wife, who first called Ramana diaper guy, it's a kind of term of affection, 'round here). His teaching was centered around the question; "Who am I"? You can follow that question all the way to your basic being. Most everybody here gets Ramana at least to some extent. Lots of stuff falls away asking that question. That's why I made the reference to wearing a diaper in the post you replied to with that video, that I didn't watch. I browsed some Ramana quotes, and I found some of his views compatible with mine, although many seem (to me) interpreted differently by others. I don't know what was Ramana's intended meaning with "who am I", nor if the English version correctly reflects what he meant. What you assume to be true when you ask that question, will affect your answer. Even asking "who" and not "what" reflects a bias. Then, the method of learning will affect the answer further. What most everyone here is trying to do, or has done, is get past all assumptions, that's the whole point. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 18, 2024 15:45:53 GMT -5
This is the most genuine and honest thing you've written. Did you watch the "diaper-guy" video, just a few minutes long, a couple days ago? (That term came from laughter's wife, who first called Ramana diaper guy, it's a kind of term of affection, 'round here). His teaching was centered around the question; "Who am I"? You can follow that question all the way to your basic being. Most everybody here gets Ramana at least to some extent. Lots of stuff falls away asking that question. That's why I made the reference to wearing a diaper in the post you replied to with that video, that I didn't watch. I browsed some Ramana quotes, and I found some of his views compatible with mine, although many seem (to me) interpreted differently by others. I don't know what was Ramana's intended meaning with "who am I", nor if the English version correctly reflects what he meant. What you assume to be true when you ask that question, will affect your answer. Even asking "who" and not "what" reflects a bias. Then, the method of learning will affect the answer further. The question, 'who/what am I?' is one that has been very relevant for me in the last 25 years. It's still relevant. I mean, that's why I'm replying to you. It DOES assume that there is a 'who/what/am/I'. So I looked into all those assumptions. I discovered that every movement of attention/awareness carries an assumption. And every movement is therefore subjective i.e I cannot assign absolute truth to it. That's why I speak of faith/truth a fair bit....like you, I am cautious of 'absolute truth' or 'Truth', though contextually, it does have a place for me. What would you say is the very first assumption, out of which all other assumptions are created? |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 18, 2024 16:53:12 GMT -5
That's why I made the reference to wearing a diaper in the post you replied to with that video, that I didn't watch. I browsed some Ramana quotes, and I found some of his views compatible with mine, although many seem (to me) interpreted differently by others. I don't know what was Ramana's intended meaning with "who am I", nor if the English version correctly reflects what he meant. What you assume to be true when you ask that question, will affect your answer. Even asking "who" and not "what" reflects a bias. Then, the method of learning will affect the answer further. What most everyone here is trying to do, or has done, is get past all assumptions, that's the whole point. is a main difference between my views and others'. I start from "no assumptions", and continuously leave aside all my beliefs and expectations. What you describe comes from the opposite direction, and it doesn't work because it throws you off the pass by whatever you believes to know for sure, an unchallengeable truth. Nobody here has got past all assumptions, no matter what they believe. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 18, 2024 17:07:32 GMT -5
What most everyone here is trying to do, or has done, is get past all assumptions, that's the whole point. is a main difference between my views and others'. I start from "no assumptions", and continuously leave aside all my beliefs and expectations. What you describe comes from the opposite direction, and it doesn't work because it throws you off the pass by whatever you believes to know for sure, an unchallengeable truth. Nobody here has got past all assumptions, no matter what they believe. Are you sure? I think there must be some assumptions involved with starting from 'no assumption'....? |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 18, 2024 17:49:44 GMT -5
That's why I made the reference to wearing a diaper in the post you replied to with that video, that I didn't watch. I browsed some Ramana quotes, and I found some of his views compatible with mine, although many seem (to me) interpreted differently by others. I don't know what was Ramana's intended meaning with "who am I", nor if the English version correctly reflects what he meant. What you assume to be true when you ask that question, will affect your answer. Even asking "who" and not "what" reflects a bias. Then, the method of learning will affect the answer further. The question, 'who/what am I?' is one that has been very relevant for me in the last 25 years. It's still relevant. I mean, that's why I'm replying to you. It DOES assume that there is a 'who/what/am/I'. So I looked into all those assumptions. I discovered that every movement of attention/awareness carries an assumption. And every movement is therefore subjective i.e I cannot assign absolute truth to it. That's why I speak of faith/truth a fair bit....like you, I am cautious of 'absolute truth' or 'Truth', though contextually, it does have a place for me. What would you say is the very first assumption, out of which all other assumptions are created? is an interesting question, and it depends what you mean by it. It can be looked at from the point of view of the evolvement of a new incarnational personality, or from the point of view of what I (impersonal here) know and how I build up my understanding of reality. When an entity decides to form a new personality, or branch a fragment, it loads it with some assumptions, like the bios of a computer, that allows it basic input / output operations at telepathic level. Then, through those connections the personality starts to learn to operate in the physical reality that is created by its subconscious. Those assumptions are tailored to the level of evolvement of the entity, and personality, to their goals. When you start to question what reality is, what you are, you start with a baggage. You have a level of evolvement, some innate assumptions, and some after-birth conditioning. As you dig into it, you start to peel off some assumptions and add others, according to the path you follow. The path you follow isn't determined by your awake (when not asleep) self, but by your multidimensional personality, as guided by dedicated guiding entities. The learning happens mostly in the deep sleep, the awake state being when the personality is focused to apply and test it. You-when-awake is a state of you-as-multidimensional-personality, in the same way as a student is a state of the kid / person who is enrolled in that school. It is a matter of focus, that comes with limitations, some of them necessary, some of them unnecessary and even detrimental. At some point, you start glimpsing what you might be, as part of your progress, but the process isn't only of accumulation of knowledge, but of increased discrimination of the details and meanings of it. You might try, for example, to find whatever you can really know for sure, to start on a "firm ground", and might realize that you just know that "you are", that you exist, that you are self-conscious, and nothing more. Then, while still operating in the physical reality based on your belief system (of which you know that is at least partially incorrect), you can try to add assumptions that sem to have a higher degree of probability to be accurate, or at least less distortive, less detrimental to your learning. Probably the first assumption that is really helpful, is that you are part of process with a purpose, and that there is something that watches and helps you stay on it. It is a basic separation between you that exists (nothing more than existing) and the rest. You may assume that there is a part of the rest that is dedicated to your interfacing with the rest, which I call subconscious. Then, once you establish a relation with this subconscious, and through it with you inner guidance, you begin forming a picture of reality, that gradually gets more and mre detailed, but you have to continuously be aware that your level of evolvement and all your beliefs necessary for operating in this framework, distort your perceptions, your picture. The most detrimental to your progress is the belief that "you know" for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 18, 2024 17:52:16 GMT -5
This is a main difference between my views and others'. I start from "no assumptions", and continuously leave aside all my beliefs and expectations. What you describe comes from the opposite direction, and it doesn't work because it throws you off the pass by whatever you believes to know for sure, an unchallengeable truth. Nobody here has got past all assumptions, no matter what they believe. Are you sure? I think there must be some assumptions involved with starting from 'no assumption'....? Besides that you exist, what from what you know isn't an assumption, in your opinion? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 18, 2024 19:35:15 GMT -5
Are you sure? I think there must be some assumptions involved with starting from 'no assumption'....? Besides that you exist, what from what you know isn't an assumption, in your opinion? In replying to you here, hopefully I'll also clarify my previous question (thanks for the well thought out reply). In my opinion, anything I can speak out carries an assumption. Even if I speak out things that, by definition, I can't speak out (or there's nothing to say about)....I can find an assumption. So this would include a knowing that I exist (because I can speak about it). Only an 'unknown unknown' would carry no assumption. But to be clear, I am using the word 'assumption' unconventionally. For me, an 'assumption' doesn't have to be linguistic or conceptual. They can be deep, subtle, and pre-conceptual. As said, where there is a movement of attention/awareness, I'd say there is an 'assumption'. In this moment (assuming there's a moment), in this experience (assuming experience is happening), I'm sat on a laptop, on a sofa, eating trail mix, talking with you (all of those carry assumptions). So there's a ton of assumptions happening in every moment of experience. If I was to take a position right now of 'no assumption', I'd have to do something purposeful and deliberate. I could certainly release some of the superficial assumptions easily, and drop into a deep meditative state. And I find that can be a good thing to do. But my opinion is that even if 'starting from no assumption' means something different for you, the intention and interest in doing that, and the value that you find in doing that, would be backed by assumptions. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 18, 2024 22:29:28 GMT -5
Besides that you exist, what from what you know isn't an assumption, in your opinion? In replying to you here, hopefully I'll also clarify my previous question (thanks for the well thought out reply). In my opinion, anything I can speak out carries an assumption. Even if I speak out things that, by definition, I can't speak out (or there's nothing to say about).... I can find an assumption. So this would include a knowing that I exist (because I can speak about it). Only an 'unknown unknown' would carry no assumption. But to be clear, I am using the word 'assumption' unconventionally. For me, an 'assumption' doesn't have to be linguistic or conceptual. They can be deep, subtle, and pre-conceptual. As said, where there is a movement of attention/awareness, I'd say there is an 'assumption'. In this moment (assuming there's a moment), in this experience (assuming experience is happening), I'm sat on a laptop, on a sofa, eating trail mix, talking with you (all of those carry assumptions). So there's a ton of assumptions happening in every moment of experience. If I was to take a position right now of 'no assumption', I'd have to do something purposeful and deliberate. I could certainly release some of the superficial assumptions easily, and drop into a deep meditative state. And I find that can be a good thing to do. But my opinion is that even if 'starting from no assumption' means something different for you, the intention and interest in doing that, and the value that you find in doing that, would be backed by assumptions. I agree. To me, knowing that "I exist" doesn't imply any assumption. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2024 0:48:23 GMT -5
In replying to you here, hopefully I'll also clarify my previous question (thanks for the well thought out reply). In my opinion, anything I can speak out carries an assumption. Even if I speak out things that, by definition, I can't speak out (or there's nothing to say about).... I can find an assumption. So this would include a knowing that I exist (because I can speak about it). Only an 'unknown unknown' would carry no assumption. But to be clear, I am using the word 'assumption' unconventionally. For me, an 'assumption' doesn't have to be linguistic or conceptual. They can be deep, subtle, and pre-conceptual. As said, where there is a movement of attention/awareness, I'd say there is an 'assumption'. In this moment (assuming there's a moment), in this experience (assuming experience is happening), I'm sat on a laptop, on a sofa, eating trail mix, talking with you (all of those carry assumptions). So there's a ton of assumptions happening in every moment of experience. If I was to take a position right now of 'no assumption', I'd have to do something purposeful and deliberate. I could certainly release some of the superficial assumptions easily, and drop into a deep meditative state. And I find that can be a good thing to do. But my opinion is that even if 'starting from no assumption' means something different for you, the intention and interest in doing that, and the value that you find in doing that, would be backed by assumptions. I agree. To me, knowing that "I exist" doesn't imply any assumption. Cool, yeah, and i guess most here would agree with you on that. So to clarify once again, i mean 'assumption' unconventionally. I observe that any knowing, in any momemt, comes with a shift or internal movement. I cant say I always know I exist. Or if i do always know it, I dont always know that I know it lol. I place significance on what could be called 'the void' or 'the unknown'. For me, there is joy in the 'leap of faith/trust'. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 19, 2024 1:10:30 GMT -5
I agree. To me, knowing that "I exist" doesn't imply any assumption. Cool, yeah, and i guess most here would agree with you on that. So to clarify once again, i mean 'assumption' unconventionally. I observe that any knowing, in any momemt, comes with a shift or internal movement. I cant say I always know I exist. Or if i do always know it, I dont always know that I know it lol. I place significance on what could be called 'the void' or 'the unknown'. For me, there is joy in the 'leap of faith/trust'. I can't imagine what you mean by not-knowing that you exist. How could you be aware if you don't exist? Probably we use some of these words with different meanings. Anyway, that's okay. Regarding the " void" ... In earlier times I experienced such a void, that I didn't know what it meant. It happened, sometimes, when I regressed / projected between lives. More recently, this void morphed into a "black" space with many many lights, like stars, that I could zoom into, and they became realities, and versions of realities, that I could experience at a level I could choose, from witnessing them to participating in them. The explanation provided to me was that it is a matter of threshold of perception, and of focus. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 19, 2024 1:40:04 GMT -5
Are you sure? I think there must be some assumptions involved with starting from 'no assumption'....? Besides that you exist, what from what you know isn't an assumption, in your opinion? This could potentially be a great lesson in Advaita 101. Which are assumptions? 1. I am. 2. I exist. 3. I am conscious. 4. I am perceiving. 5. I am a human being. 6. I am John Doe. 7. I am enlightened. 8. I am not enlightened. 9. I am mortal. 10. I am immortal. 11. You are. 12. You exist. 13. You are conscious. 14. You are perceiving. 15. You are a human being. 16. You are Jane Doe. 17. You are enlightened. 18. You are not enlightened. 19. You are mortal. 20. You are immortal. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Jan 19, 2024 2:01:18 GMT -5
Besides that you exist, what from what you know isn't an assumption, in your opinion? This could potentially be a great lesson in Advaita 101. Which are assumptions? 1. I am. 2. I exist. 3. I am conscious. 4. I am perceiving. 5. I am a human being. 6. I am John Doe. 7. I am enlightened. 8. I am not enlightened. 9. I am mortal. 10. I am immortal. 11. You are. 12. You exist. 13. You are conscious. 14. You are perceiving. 15. You are a human being. 16. You are Jane Doe. 17. You are enlightened. 18. You are not enlightened. 19. You are mortal. 20. You are immortal. After a quick look, I think that 1, 2, 3 are synonymous for the purpose of this question; and that 4 to 20 are based on various layers of assumptions. While the "you" is always an assumption, the "I" has only a gramatical function in those first three expressions; and the same about the verb used. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2024 2:25:36 GMT -5
Cool, yeah, and i guess most here would agree with you on that. So to clarify once again, i mean 'assumption' unconventionally. I observe that any knowing, in any momemt, comes with a shift or internal movement. I cant say I always know I exist. Or if i do always know it, I dont always know that I know it lol. I place significance on what could be called 'the void' or 'the unknown'. For me, there is joy in the 'leap of faith/trust'. I can't imagine what you mean by not-knowing that you exist. How could you be aware if you don't exist? Probably we use some of these words with different meanings. Anyway, that's okay. Regarding the " void" ... In earlier times I experienced such a void, that I didn't know what it meant. It happened, sometimes, when I regressed / projected between lives. More recently, this void morphed into a "black" space with many many lights, like stars, that I could zoom into, and they became realities, and versions of realities, that I could experience at a level I could choose, from witnessing them to participating in them. The explanation provided to me was that it is a matter of threshold of perception, and of focus. That's pretty darn cool. I have cultivated the capacity to focus attention very intently, it comes naturally to me. Depending on what my attention is on, would also determine whether there is a sense of knowing I exist. And it's also possible that this knowing is lurking there, but I don't always know it, though that raises the question of whether we can say that something is known...even when it's not experientially known! Are you familiar with the idea of 'qualia'? Someone on the forum introduced my to the idea many years ago now, and it's a word that I can relate to my experience quite well. If you consider the experience of eating something with intense flavor, or experiencing an emotional state very purely and directly....is the knowing there, during those moments? |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 19, 2024 2:37:43 GMT -5
That's why I made the reference to wearing a diaper in the post you replied to with that video, that I didn't watch. I browsed some Ramana quotes, and I found some of his views compatible with mine, although many seem (to me) interpreted differently by others. I don't know what was Ramana's intended meaning with "who am I", nor if the English version correctly reflects what he meant. What you assume to be true when you ask that question, will affect your answer. Even asking "who" and not "what" reflects a bias. Then, the method of learning will affect the answer further. The question, ' who/what am I?' is one that has been very relevant for me in the last 25 years. It's still relevant. I mean, that's why I'm replying to you. It DOES assume that there is a 'who/what/am/I'. So I looked into all those assumptions. I discovered that every movement of attention/awareness carries an assumption. And every movement is therefore subjective i.e I cannot assign absolute truth to it. That's why I speak of faith/truth a fair bit....like you, I am cautious of 'absolute truth' or 'Truth', though contextually, it does have a place for me. What would you say is the very first assumption, out of which all other assumptions are created? Perceiver of this reality/thought. To whom everything appears. It's very clear, yes? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2024 2:45:01 GMT -5
The question, ' who/what am I?' is one that has been very relevant for me in the last 25 years. It's still relevant. I mean, that's why I'm replying to you. It DOES assume that there is a 'who/what/am/I'. So I looked into all those assumptions. I discovered that every movement of attention/awareness carries an assumption. And every movement is therefore subjective i.e I cannot assign absolute truth to it. That's why I speak of faith/truth a fair bit....like you, I am cautious of 'absolute truth' or 'Truth', though contextually, it does have a place for me. What would you say is the very first assumption, out of which all other assumptions are created? Perceiver of this reality/thought. To whom everything appears. It's very clear, yes? Well. My view is that we are more than that. And in another way, much less. So while I don't disagree with your words/expression (I don't think you are wrong)...... I would rarely express those words myself. |
|
