|
|
Post by Figgles on May 3, 2017 15:17:09 GMT
I love what Jeff Foster says about this in his article entitled; WHY THE IMPERSONAL DOES NOT ‘EXIST’The birth and death of fundamentalism in nonduality and Advaita teachings.: Some who get caught upon in nonduality teachings become attached to the idea that they are now beyond or above 'the personal.' From this entrenched position, they proudly and often snidely, mock those who they deem to be still operating and experiencing as a dreaded "person." I've noticed that The belief that I am no longer 'a person' often results in the appearance of an aszhole.  I recall arriving on a spiritual forum, several years ago, to talk about the experience of joy, to be confronted with the accusation; "yeah, but you're still a person," as though the fact that I still engaged with personal stories and cared about the quality of my experience was some kind of crime. Those who eschew the personal in favor of "The Impersonal, are somehow failing to see that there really is no separating the two. Absent expression through the personal, the impersonal has no existence....is just an empty idea referencing some no-thing. Coming full circle means seeing the impersonal in the personal, and to do that, you cannot eschew the personal. If you find yourself speaking snidely of 'people-peeps,' from a position of being very sure you are not one, you would do well to look into that. ****** I can't quote you haha. There are no [ ] appearing! Gopal will be cross with me he he. (I will look into this..see if there's something amiss...the inability to quote thingy) |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 3, 2017 15:26:29 GMT
I love what Jeff Foster says about this in his article entitled; WHY THE IMPERSONAL DOES NOT ‘EXIST’The birth and death of fundamentalism in nonduality and Advaita teachings.: Some who get caught upon in nonduality teachings become attached to the idea that they are now beyond or above 'the personal.' From this entrenched position, they proudly and often snidely, mock those who they deem to be still operating and experiencing as a dreaded "person." I've noticed that The belief that I am no longer 'a person' often results in the appearance of an aszhole. I recall arriving on a spiritual forum, several years ago, to talk about the experience of joy, to be confronted with the accusation; "yeah, but you're still a person," as though the fact that I still engaged with personal stories and cared about the quality of my experience was some kind of crime. Those who eschew the personal in favor of "The Impersonal, are somehow failing to see that there really is no separating the two. Absent expression through the personal, the impersonal has no existence....is just an empty idea referencing some no-thing. Coming full circle means seeing the impersonal in the personal, and to do that, you cannot eschew the personal. If you find yourself speaking snidely of 'people-peeps,' from a position of being very sure you are not one, you would do well to look into that. There is no such thing called personal, it doesn't exist, only Impersonal Consciousness exist and this impersonal consciousness itself is the looker, when it look at a perception, It misidentified as person through that perception. Would you say 'experience' exists? Fwiw, I (personally...hehe...) find the term "exist" to be very troublesome in these conversations. As I see it, if something is experienced, it has a sort of 'existence.' But, even then, I prefer not to use that term. That's why the question (Do you exist) that so many are fond of posing on ST, usually had me refraining from giving an answer. Instead of giving an answer to that, I choose to stick with the simple assertion, "I am." The 'you' and 'exist' in the question posed, imo, is begging an answer that says something beyond "I am." I would say at third mountain position, full circle, any and all interest in dividing 'isness' up into categories of 'existent', 'non existent,' falls away. If it's 'happening', if it's known, if it's arising, it plain and simply, IS. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 16:30:44 GMT
There is no such thing called personal, it doesn't exist, only Impersonal Consciousness exist and this impersonal consciousness itself is the looker, when it look at a perception, It misidentified as person through that perception. Would you say 'experience' exists? Fwiw, I (personally...hehe...) find the term "exist" to be very troublesome in these conversations. As I see it, if something is experienced, it has a sort of 'existence.' But, even then, I prefer not to use that term. That's why the question (Do you exist) that so many are fond of posing on ST, usually had me refraining from giving an answer. Instead of giving an answer to that, I choose to stick with the simple assertion, "I am." The 'you' and 'exist' in the question posed, imo, is begging an answer that says something beyond "I am." I would say at third mountain position, full circle, any and all interest in dividing 'isness' up into categories of 'existent', 'non existent,' falls away. If it's 'happening', if it's known, if it's arising, it plain and simply, IS. Actually what I meant to say was 1) If you are the living inside your physical brain, then you are a person, you are guiding your life from there! 2)If you are consciousness and everything physical appears in consciousness then you are not a person. First case, you are perceiver and decision maker. Second case, you are creating what you are perceiving, this includes your own body. So I said person doesn't exist. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 3, 2017 20:57:55 GMT
Would you say 'experience' exists? Fwiw, I (personally...hehe...) find the term "exist" to be very troublesome in these conversations. As I see it, if something is experienced, it has a sort of 'existence.' But, even then, I prefer not to use that term. That's why the question (Do you exist) that so many are fond of posing on ST, usually had me refraining from giving an answer. Instead of giving an answer to that, I choose to stick with the simple assertion, "I am." The 'you' and 'exist' in the question posed, imo, is begging an answer that says something beyond "I am." I would say at third mountain position, full circle, any and all interest in dividing 'isness' up into categories of 'existent', 'non existent,' falls away. If it's 'happening', if it's known, if it's arising, it plain and simply, IS. Actually what I meant to say was 1) If you are the living inside your physical brain, then you are a person, you are guiding your life from there! 2)If you are consciousness and everything physical appears in consciousness then you are not a person. First case, you are perceiver and decision maker. Second case, you are creating what you are perceiving, this includes your own body. So I said person doesn't exist. Yes, okay. I see you describing two ways of experiencing life. I don't think it is ever really that cut & dry though. I think there can be crossing over between the first experience and the 2nd. One can see that ultimately, what is happening is that Consciousness is expressing, but even in one who has realized that, there can still be times where a sense of 'guiding' life and circumstances can be experienced.....and both those experiences can co-exist without their being a sense of contradiction. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 2:33:16 GMT
Actually what I meant to say was 1) If you are the living inside your physical brain, then you are a person, you are guiding your life from there! 2)If you are consciousness and everything physical appears in consciousness then you are not a person. First case, you are perceiver and decision maker. Second case, you are creating what you are perceiving, this includes your own body. So I said person doesn't exist. Yes, okay. I see you describing two ways of experiencing life. I don't think it is ever really that cut & dry though. I think there can be crossing over between the first experience and the 2nd. One can see that ultimately, what is happening is that Consciousness is expressing, but even in one who has realized that, there can still be times where a sense of 'guiding' life and circumstances can be experienced.....and both those experiences can co-exist without their being a sense of contradiction. Yeah, it's a half step to completely letting go and flowing with the guiding of life in total faith. Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 3:33:29 GMT
There is no such thing called personal, it doesn't exist, only Impersonal Consciousness exist and this impersonal consciousness itself is the looker, when it look at a perception, It misidentified as person through that perception. Good morning, Gopal Personal and Impersonal are just attempts to describe though, right? They're both just labels. So, I suppose we could say the Impersonal doesn't exist either for that reason. It's just an attempt to describe. Words fail beyond mind. I sense this is why the whole no-thingness/now thingness is so difficult to talk about. Form and emptiness, emptiness and form. One intelligence energy might be good. Or Source energy...  Impersonal and Personal comes into play when we try to describe two different reality 1)person lives inside his brain(outer physical reality is true) (You are a person here) 2)Only Awareness exist and everything is appearing(Outer physical reality is simply appearing doesn't exist itself). (you are consciousness here) |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on May 4, 2017 13:38:54 GMT
Yeah that's a very very good point. Yes, is one way, there is ONLY the personal. And the non dual exploration boils down to interest in the nature of our experience, which is obviously personal. We make up abstract concepts, none of which refer to anything that tangibly exists. We can taste an orange, feel joy and sadness, smell a flower, hear music. And if every sensory experience associated with the outer world was removed from us, I suspect that there could still be a felt sense of love. All tangible, all personally experienced. It seems to me that the real value of abstract concepts and ideas that come with non duality is to challenge previously held conditioned ideas. In a way, we make up new ideas to get rid of old ideas. But because of the nature of our old ideas, we might attach to,and elevate, the new ideas hehe. I guess eventually it just gets boring, and simple joys of life are enough. Maybe that's what happened with Jeff. All are inner! Inner and outer are arbitrary measurements, so when there is an inner, there has to be an outer. When you want to eat an orange the experience is of reaching for one, and then the experience of tasting is inner. Experiencing is dependent on these measurements. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on May 4, 2017 13:39:31 GMT
(I will look into this..see if there's something amiss...the inability to quote thingy) Seems to me working okay now, maybe I was just having a semi senior moment the other day! |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on May 4, 2017 13:40:08 GMT
....Dare we say........ Love? I think we should dare! |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 4, 2017 15:39:05 GMT
Yes, okay. I see you describing two ways of experiencing life. I don't think it is ever really that cut & dry though. I think there can be crossing over between the first experience and the 2nd. One can see that ultimately, what is happening is that Consciousness is expressing, but even in one who has realized that, there can still be times where a sense of 'guiding' life and circumstances can be experienced.....and both those experiences can co-exist without their being a sense of contradiction. Yeah, it's a half step to completely letting go and flowing with the guiding of life in total faith. Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk Yes, agreed, but It's also important to note that even in a full on letting go and flowing with the guiding of life, plans will sometimes still get made, and a sense of 'guiding' things might still arise. Orchestration of a plan is not necessarily evidence that one is NOT flowing along with life. |
|
