|
Post by Figgles on Nov 11, 2019 1:16:46 GMT
What if you are only real person in the world? I don't see how that would change anything I said there. Ultimately, I can/don't know. The appearance of sentience is engaged with and that's that. The individual has different responses to circumstance if/when there is an absence of identification. The example of 'blaming' I gave is a good one. And when that is absent, of course, so is 'blameful anger.' The very same circumstance could arise; Ex: Someone cuts you off in traffic. If there is still identification, blameful anger may arise and you chase the offender down to make him pay. Where there is no identification, blameful anger cannot arise, and thus, the behavior towards that driver also changes. It's unlikely you'd chase someone down to make him pay when you don't hold him fundamentally to blame. The one thing that does not need to change, is the circumstance 'being cut off in traffic.' I don't tie emotional responses to circumstance the way you do. There is the circumstance and then, there is the response to that, and the response changes depending upon whether there is identification/separation in play, or not.
|
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Nov 11, 2019 1:34:45 GMT
That problem disappears when we speak about a Peace (that is ultimately an absence), that can abide all arising/surface feelings. That's pure fiction. Where did you get this idea that there can be something constant like that. From other nondualist people? 😀 You've been selling the idea that there's constant bliss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 1:45:48 GMT
That's pure fiction. Where did you get this idea that there can be something constant like that. From other nondualist people? 😀 You've been selling the idea that there's constant bliss. You and figgles need to get away from the myth that within your body mind experience there is going to be something permanently abiding all the time. "The idea of enlightenment or self-realisation as a onetime event or a lasting and permanent state or experience is an erroneous concept." From rowan's quote from Bob Adamson in the "what is realization" thread. Yes bliss is pretty constant but it's mixed in with other changing experience and therefore there is an overall experience. You could say that Bliss permeates experience. You are never going to be in a state where there is only abiding Being all of the time. I know it's a nice idea and both you and figgles have latched onto it and use that as your ultimate test of realization, but neither of you experience that yourselves so it has just become part of your nonduality belief system.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 11, 2019 1:51:30 GMT
That's pure fiction. Where did you get this idea that there can be something constant like that. From other nondualist people? 😀 You've been selling the idea that there's constant bliss. Yes!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 1:57:29 GMT
That's pure fiction. Where did you get this idea that there can be something constant like that. From other nondualist people? 😀 What can be constant is an absence Nope! Another one of your myths and which you don't experience yourself. Be honest.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 11, 2019 2:01:59 GMT
/thread"]You and figgles need to get away from the myth that within your body mind experience there is going to be something permanently abiding all the time. I've been saying the opposite. That which fundamentally abides all experience is not a some-thing that appears in experience. You cherry-picked that one out of context. The general gist of that quote was that 'wakefulness' 'SR' is a present moment thing, not 'time-bound.' When I asserted such in the past, you argued against me.
Fwiw, Being is not a state. And whether you are aware of it or not, Being constantly/continually abides ALL arising experience, regardless of what's happening. If that were not the case, there would be nothing 'unchanging'....no 'ground.' Is that what you are suggesting?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 11, 2019 2:04:05 GMT
What can be constant is an absence Nope! Another one of your myths and which you don't experience yourself. Be honest. So, you think it's a mere myth that the SVP/separation can be 'constantly' absent?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 2:09:31 GMT
/thread"]You and figgles need to get away from the myth that within your body mind experience there is going to be something permanently abiding all the time. I've been saying the opposite. That which fundamentally abides all experience is not a some-thing that appears in experience. You cherry-picked that one out of context. The general gist of that quote was that 'wakefulness' 'SR' is a present moment thing, not 'time-bound.' When I asserted such in the past, you argued against me.
Fwiw, Being is not a state. And whether you are aware of it or not, Being constantly/continually abides ALL arising experience, regardless of what's happening. If that were not the case, there would be nothing 'unchanging'....no 'ground.' Is that what you are suggesting?
If Being is not a state then what is it that enables you to know it? Well I'll tell you. You cannot know it except as a reflection in your individual consciousness which means that it is not always abiding as that reflected experience. In fact you cannot experience Being at the same time as you are absorbed in a thought. When there is Self there is no world. When there is world there is no Self. - Sri Atmananda
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 2:22:03 GMT
What if you are only real person in the world? I don't see how that would change anything I said there. Ultimately, I can/don't know. The appearance of sentience is engaged with and that's that. The individual has different responses to circumstance if/when there is an absence of identification. The example of 'blaming' I gave is a good one. And when that is absent, of course, so is 'blameful anger.' The very same circumstance could arise; Ex: Someone cuts you off in traffic. If there is still identification, blameful anger may arise and you chase the offender down to make him pay. Where there is no identification, blameful anger cannot arise, and thus, the behavior towards that driver also changes. It's unlikely you'd chase someone down to make him pay when you don't hold him fundamentally to blame. The one thing that does not need to change, is the circumstance 'being cut off in traffic.' I don't tie emotional responses to circumstance the way you do. There is the circumstance and then, there is the response to that, and the response changes depending upon whether there is identification/separation in play, or not. The thing is, the circumstance 'being cut off in traffic' wouldn't occur. And I have no way to communicate this to you because this is what I am seeing the change but you did not see that change. So let's agree to disagree this one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 2:40:57 GMT
Nope! Another one of your myths and which you don't experience yourself. Be honest. So, you think it's a mere myth that the SVP/separation can be 'constantly' absent? I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. What I can tell you is that the manifestation of personal self becomes fully integrated with the unbounded as one unified living experience.
|
|