|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 25, 2021 3:43:43 GMT
Seeing that 'the passage of time' is only ever a presently arising idea arising alongside what is immediately presenting as appearance, is all in the interests of clarity...WIBIGO. While it may seem 'silly' to point out that passage of time and of one thing/circumstance/condition changing to another never appears directly/immediately, but rather, only arises as a present memory/idea of a past circumstance, in the interest of Truth, that is what's actually so. The passage of time is far more than an idea. It's something that your body is constantly manifesting. Completely visceral. The Zen people refer to the understanding of reducing everything to an idea as "skin deep". So what is it? A feeling...a sense...? An arinsing experience? If you look closely, the 'experience of' time passing does not present immediately, directly. It's inferred. It's an 'add-on' of mind, upon present moment experience. The only 'kind of' experience there IS. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 25, 2021 4:02:10 GMT
Yes, both at same time, but still, with the absolute 'trumping' the relative. One of E's more amusing and memorable quips .. "Donald Trumps the relative". Drew quite the crowd of angry villager's.  Even in that simple statement though, there lurks a temptation for intellect to grasp at some sort of "relationship" between the relative - which can be known to arbitrary precision and depth, in mechanistic terms - and what can be pointed to by the notion of the absolute.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 25, 2021 5:01:45 GMT
Pointed this out the last time we went down this garden path: the potential meaning of your position is ambiguous. People can make the case for the here and now in completely relative terms, or, in the terminology you prefer, in terms of the dream. It doesn't necessarily point to the "Truth" or indicate that they've found it.  My position...my meaning, is not at all ambiguous. But of course, there is 'potential' for my words to be taken differently than what was intended. Same can be said for anything that gets posted here, of course. No, not everything. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 25, 2021 5:10:40 GMT
The passage of time is far more than an idea. It's something that your body is constantly manifesting. Completely visceral. The Zen people refer to the understanding of reducing everything to an idea as "skin deep". So what is it? A feeling...a sense...? An arinsing experience? If you look closely, the 'experience of' time passing does not present immediately, directly. It's inferred. It's an 'add-on' of mind, upon present moment experience. The only 'kind of' experience there IS. Why do you insist on repeating the same dialogs endlessly? It's always the TMT tornado's, too ...
To parrot Tolle, there is "psychological time", which is the way you describe it: a creation of mind. Not strictly imagination, as it's based on experience, which isn't imagined, but mostly our minds fill-in-the-blanks. I wouldn't argue that "psychological time" isn't an illusion, but it's not the way I'd describe it.
There is also "clock time", which is simply the process of physical change. Unlike "psychological time", "clock time" isn't dependent on your individuated, personal mind. It's objective.
Your use of the word "experience" is uncommon, and that's fine. It suggests various states and degree of consciousness altered from what is considered the common consensus state. These can be illuminating as to the nature of the appearance of time, but they don't mean that the common meaning of the word "experience", which is time-bound, refers to an illusion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 25, 2021 5:10:41 GMT
I think you're mixing contexts. Her 'not knowing' is not relative, it's transcendent. Within the dream, as the story goes, sure,relatively speaking, there's a world assumed to be, beyond immediate, present perception. But, if we're talking Truth...what IS actually known for certain, what actually is beyond refute, the very suggestion that the not knowing of something there, beyond immediate perception of an appearance, does not mean that nothing is there, is misconceived. There's a pre-supposition there of the possibility of 'something' suspected to be, beyond the immediate perception of 'something.' Truth leaves no room for such theorizing. That which is known....can be known....is obvious. Speculation, assumption don't fit that bill. Appearances, whether in the form of an idea/thought, sense, idea, feeling, circumstance, object...can only be said to be appearing, if they arise presently...immediately. There is no such thing as a 'past appearance' that is not a presently arising idea/memory. We interpret what spongy wrote very differently, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion. We were talking about what was known in relative terms, and she set the boundaries at the walls of her room. That's got nothing to do with "Truth". And you're reading into what I wrote: I didn't argue that there was something to be known beyond the limits of your personal perception - although there is and I could - I simply pointed out that limitation doesn't preclude the possibility of something beyond it. You keep repeating the same point about the here and now, but, frankly, you're simply talking past what I'm writing, all the while ignoring what I'm writing that's in agreement with it by taking certain phrases out of context. Do you see the question then, "what do I know for absolute certain" as a merely relative question? As I see it, Esponja was speaking from the position of what she actually knows vs. what is surmised....and what is surmised then, (that which appears or doesn't beyond the door that is currently appearing to her) she is saying remains unknown. It's completely on par with what Adyashanti is speaking about in this excerpt below;
"You need to be willing to question everything, to stop and ask yourself, "do I really know what I think I know, or have I just taken on the beliefs and opinions of others? What do I actually know, and what do I want to believe or imagine? What do I know for certain? This one question--"What do I know for certain?"--is tremendously powerful. When you look deeply into this question, it actually destroys your world. It destroys your whole sense of self, and it's meant to. You come to see that everything you think you know about the world, is based on assumptions, beliefs, and opinions--things you believe because you were taught or told that they were true. Until we start to see these false perceptions for what they really are, consciousness will be imprisoned within the dream state. In the same way, as soon as we allow ourselves to realize, "My gosh, I know almost nothing; I don't know who I am. I don't know what the world is. I don't know if this is true. I don't know if that is true," something within our being opens up. When we are willing to step into the unknown and it's inherent insecurity, and not run back to anything for cover or for comfort--when we are willing to stand as if facing an oncoming wind and not wince--we can finally face actual self. Investigating the question; "What do I know for certain"/ is also an invaluable tool once awakening has happened. Asking yourself this question aids in the dissolution of limitations and ideas, as well as the tendency to fixate--all of which continue after awakening. NO matter where you are on the path, then, it's this willingness to stand up within yourself and ask this question and to be open and sincere about what you find that is the most important thing. It's the backbone on which the entirety of your awakening and your life after awakening depends." - Adyanshani |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 25, 2021 5:13:15 GMT
My position...my meaning, is not at all ambiguous. But of course, there is 'potential' for my words to be taken differently than what was intended. Same can be said for anything that gets posted here, of course. No, not everything. Can you give an example of something that has zero potential to be taken differently than how it was intended? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 25, 2021 5:17:25 GMT
So what is it? A feeling...a sense...? An arinsing experience? If you look closely, the 'experience of' time passing does not present immediately, directly. It's inferred. It's an 'add-on' of mind, upon present moment experience. The only 'kind of' experience there IS. Why do you insist on repeating the same dialogs endlessly? It's always the TMT tornado's, too ... To parrot Tolle, there is "psychological time", which is the way you describe it: a creation of mind. Not strictly imagination, as it's based on experience, which isn't imagined, but mostly our minds fill-in-the-blanks. I wouldn't argue that "psychological time" isn't an illusion, but it's not the way I'd describe it.
There is also "clock time", which is simply the process of physical change. Unlike "psychological time", "clock time" isn't dependent on your individuated, personal mind. It's objective.
Your use of the word "experience" is uncommon, and that's fine. It suggests various states and degree of consciousness altered from what is considered the common consensus state. These can be illuminating as to the nature of the appearance of time, but they don't mean that the common meaning of the word "experience", which is time-bound, refers to an illusion.
It's extremely important to see what is actually known for certain vs. what is mere opinion, assumption, erroneous belief. Inherent in that is seeing what is actually appearing vs. where mind is filling blanks with what it thinks it knows. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 25, 2021 5:18:08 GMT
No, not everything. Can you give an example of something that has zero potential to be taken differently than how it was intended? Ah, my bad. Intention is only one facet of ambiguous meaning. And, in particular, not everything people write is existentially ambiguous, but "there is only here and now", is something that is. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 25, 2021 5:19:18 GMT
Why do you insist on repeating the same dialogs endlessly? It's always the TMT tornado's, too ... To parrot Tolle, there is "psychological time", which is the way you describe it: a creation of mind. Not strictly imagination, as it's based on experience, which isn't imagined, but mostly our minds fill-in-the-blanks. I wouldn't argue that "psychological time" isn't an illusion, but it's not the way I'd describe it.
There is also "clock time", which is simply the process of physical change. Unlike "psychological time", "clock time" isn't dependent on your individuated, personal mind. It's objective.
Your use of the word "experience" is uncommon, and that's fine. It suggests various states and degree of consciousness altered from what is considered the common consensus state. These can be illuminating as to the nature of the appearance of time, but they don't mean that the common meaning of the word "experience", which is time-bound, refers to an illusion.
It's extremely important to see what is actually known for certain vs. what is mere opinion, assumption, erroneous belief. Inherent in that is seeing what is actually appearing vs. where mind is filling blanks with what it thinks it knows. heh heh .. an impersonalized prevarication of what's really on yer mind. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Feb 25, 2021 5:24:23 GMT
We interpret what spongy wrote very differently, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion. We were talking about what was known in relative terms, and she set the boundaries at the walls of her room. That's got nothing to do with "Truth". And you're reading into what I wrote: I didn't argue that there was something to be known beyond the limits of your personal perception - although there is and I could - I simply pointed out that limitation doesn't preclude the possibility of something beyond it. You keep repeating the same point about the here and now, but, frankly, you're simply talking past what I'm writing, all the while ignoring what I'm writing that's in agreement with it by taking certain phrases out of context. Do you see the question then, "what do I know for absolute certain" as a merely relative question? As I see it, Esponja was speaking from the position of what she actually knows vs. what is surmised....and what is surmised then, (that which appears or doesn't beyond the door that is currently appearing to her) she is saying remains unknown. It's completely on par with what Adyashanti is speaking about in this excerpt below;
"You need to be willing to question everything, to stop and ask yourself, "do I really know what I think I know, or have I just taken on the beliefs and opinions of others? What do I actually know, and what do I want to believe or imagine? What do I know for certain? This one question--"What do I know for certain?"--is tremendously powerful. When you look deeply into this question, it actually destroys your world. It destroys your whole sense of self, and it's meant to. You come to see that everything you think you know about the world, is based on assumptions, beliefs, and opinions--things you believe because you were taught or told that they were true. Until we start to see these false perceptions for what they really are, consciousness will be imprisoned within the dream state. In the same way, as soon as we allow ourselves to realize, "My gosh, I know almost nothing; I don't know who I am. I don't know what the world is. I don't know if this is true. I don't know if that is true," something within our being opens up. When we are willing to step into the unknown and it's inherent insecurity, and not run back to anything for cover or for comfort--when we are willing to stand as if facing an oncoming wind and not wince--we can finally face actual self. Investigating the question; "What do I know for certain"/ is also an invaluable tool once awakening has happened. Asking yourself this question aids in the dissolution of limitations and ideas, as well as the tendency to fixate--all of which continue after awakening. NO matter where you are on the path, then, it's this willingness to stand up within yourself and ask this question and to be open and sincere about what you find that is the most important thing. It's the backbone on which the entirety of your awakening and your life after awakening depends." - Adyanshani Oh, that's a question that was central for me at one point in time, and one I worked on both consciously and subconsciously for decades. You're over analyzing the dialog. Go back and re-read what she wrote, it was quite simple: "I don't even know what exists outside my own room, unless my mind tells me." Then go back and look at exactly how I replied. Did I contradict what she said, or did I affirm it? Pay attention to the actual words on the page. |
|
