|
Post by Gopal on Mar 5, 2021 3:40:05 GMT
One day you will seethe truth that consciousness is creating the reality. I will wait until then. Creator/Creation is one, but the distinction is absolute. Reality begins to look purely creative, rather than logical or reasonable. Of course, contextually speaking, meaning, logic, and reason have their place as mind-based tools/functions. Clarity changes the inner and outer totally! This tells me I am not only a perceiver but also creating while I am perceiving, but not consciously creating!
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Mar 5, 2021 3:49:28 GMT
But if you include the perception and the perceiver this way then you can say EITHER: there is no inside, and no outside, OR, you can say that there is both inside, and outside.
This dichotomy you state here is ultimately false. It's a logical consistency, but logic cannot reach what we point to as not-two. The dichotomy only makes sense in relative terms, but the totality of perceiver and perception isn't relative. In relative terms, you cannot deny both the perceiver and the perceived, you have to include them both. Another way of saying this is that appearances appear in terms that are both subjective, and objective. Your personal perception does not create the pull of the Earth on your feet or the rays of the Sun on your skin. In relative terms, your feeling of these is subjective, but the apparent source of the cause of these feelings is objective.
In absolute terms, there is no dichotomy, no perceiver, no perceived. Even to say that there is perception is a concession to the relative, as perception, change, and movement, are always ephemeral, always relative. But, what you are is the source of the perception, which is neither subjective, nor objective, but rather, what we can point to with the notion, of the absolute, which is not an appearance, and so, never appears.
We can't know whether other individual is real or figment. So if other individual is figment, then I create the gravity(pull of the earth). But you still don't know why we say other individual is real or figment can't be known. so you are yet to cross the first step! heh heh .. that old chestnut.
Not knowing about the nature of other's can be an auspicious perspective similar to witnessing, but only if you're really not-knowing. Deciding that you'll always "not-know" is different from that. I'm not saying that there's anything that you can learn that answers the question, but realization puts an end to that and all other existential questions.
This is logic where it doesn't belong, and there is no personal creator-entity that causes gravity. I understand that the prospect of letting go of that logical dichotomy seems ludicrous and unsatisfying to you, but, that's what genuine not-knowing is all about. Letting go of what you think you know is often uncomfortable at times, disorienting, and even irritating and confusing. But there is a flip side to this, as well. A profound feeling of spaciousness, like a free-fall. It's just another body/mind state, but .. a fun one.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Mar 5, 2021 3:58:16 GMT
We just had a dialog about it less than a few weeks back. Wait awhile. Yes, but I feel like you are seeing a division which actually doesn't exist. We both agree that there is no division, and yet, your description of witnessing suggests a contradiction to that. It might just be the limits of language, but the other questions you have suggest to me otherwise.
Raj .. the mind is a trickster. We can convince ourselves of just about anything. You've convinced yourself that your witnessing is absent divide. From the outside looking in, all I can say is .. I dunno'. Only you can say for sure about your own state of body/mind. Do you trust yourself?
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Mar 5, 2021 4:01:08 GMT
We can't know whether other individual is real or figment. So if other individual is figment, then I create the gravity(pull of the earth). But you still don't know why we say other individual is real or figment can't be known. so you are yet to cross the first step! heh heh .. that old chestnut.
Not knowing about the nature of other's can be an auspicious perspective similar to witnessing, but only if you're really not-knowing. Deciding that you'll always "not-know" is different from that. I'm not saying that there's anything that you can learn that answers the question, but realization puts an end to that and all other existential questions.
This is logic where it doesn't belong, and there is no personal creator-entity that causes gravity. I understand that the prospect of letting go of that logical dichotomy seems ludicrous and unsatisfying to you, but, that's what genuine not-knowing is all about. Letting go of what you think you know is often uncomfortable at times, disorienting, and even irritating and confusing. But there is a flip side to this, as well. A profound feeling of spaciousness, like a free-fall. It's just another body/mind state, but .. a fun one.
All I know is, everything is emerging from me, If you are real, then everything emerging from us. That's what clarity changes the inner and outer world totally.
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Mar 5, 2021 4:02:53 GMT
Yes, but I feel like you are seeing a division which actually doesn't exist. We both agree that there is no division, and yet, your description of witnessing suggests a contradiction to that. It might just be the limits of language, but the other questions you have suggest to me otherwise.
Raj .. the mind is a trickster. We can convince ourselves of just about anything. You've convinced yourself that your witnessing is absent divide. From the outside looking in, all I can say is .. I dunno'. Only you can say for sure about your own state of body/mind. Do you trust yourself?
If you explain me once again what's the divide actually in place when one is locating himself to be witness?
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Mar 5, 2021 4:41:43 GMT
We both agree that there is no division, and yet, your description of witnessing suggests a contradiction to that. It might just be the limits of language, but the other questions you have suggest to me otherwise.
Raj .. the mind is a trickster. We can convince ourselves of just about anything. You've convinced yourself that your witnessing is absent divide. From the outside looking in, all I can say is .. I dunno'. Only you can say for sure about your own state of body/mind. Do you trust yourself?
If you explain me once again what's the divide actually in place when one is locating himself to be witness?
Nah, the explanations aren't of any use. If you've got a question like this, it's only you who can answer it.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Mar 5, 2021 4:50:46 GMT
heh heh .. that old chestnut. Not knowing about the nature of other's can be an auspicious perspective similar to witnessing, but only if you're really not-knowing. Deciding that you'll always "not-know" is different from that. I'm not saying that there's anything that you can learn that answers the question, but realization puts an end to that and all other existential questions. This is logic where it doesn't belong, and there is no personal creator-entity that causes gravity. I understand that the prospect of letting go of that logical dichotomy seems ludicrous and unsatisfying to you, but, that's what genuine not-knowing is all about. Letting go of what you think you know is often uncomfortable at times, disorienting, and even irritating and confusing. But there is a flip side to this, as well. A profound feeling of spaciousness, like a free-fall. It's just another body/mind state, but .. a fun one.
All I know is, everything is emerging from me, If you are real, then everything emerging from us. That's what clarity changes the inner and outer world totally. Emergence is a process, involving time and a unique perspective. Everything emerges relative to this unique perspective. The process, and the perspective, are not illusions: I am not you, and you are not me. But neither are you and I of a different awareness. There is only one reality. This reality isn't an entity, and can't be grasped in terms of subject or object, but rather, is transcendent of subject and/or object. This source of the process, and what emerges, isn't bound by this logical dichotomy. You'll never realize the truth of that source by attention to the process and what emerges from it.
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Mar 5, 2021 6:30:52 GMT
If you explain me once again what's the divide actually in place when one is locating himself to be witness?
Nah, the explanations aren't of any use. If you've got a question like this, it's only you who can answer it. I don't have any question when I am locating myself to be a witness!
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Mar 5, 2021 6:36:48 GMT
All I know is, everything is emerging from me, If you are real, then everything emerging from us. That's what clarity changes the inner and outer world totally. Emergence is a process, involving time and a unique perspective. Everything emerges relative to this unique perspective. The process, and the perspective, are not illusions: I am not you, and you are not me. But neither are you and I of a different awareness. There is only one reality. This reality isn't an entity, and can't be grasped in terms of subject or object, but rather, is transcendent of subject and/or object. This source of the process, and what emerges, isn't bound by this logical dichotomy. You'll never realize the truth of that source by attention to the process and what emerges from it. You are talking about the camera view. For an example, There are three camera with three different angles, Now let me take my turn to look one after another. let me look via the first camera and the second and then third. Now three perspective came into the play but one perceiver(Awareness). The same case is happening here in reality If I don't take turns to look at first and then second and then third. Assuming that I am looking at all three camera simultaneously. So the looking awareness is same but have gotten the three perspective, one is me, another one is you, another one is someNothing. But this kind of view only be assumed but can't be proved to be real from my perspective, I can't know whether other camera view point is really being looked by me.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Mar 5, 2021 19:31:39 GMT
Nah, the explanations aren't of any use. If you've got a question like this, it's only you who can answer it. I don't have any question when I am locating myself to be a witness! But, do the questions recur, otherwise?
|
|