|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 13, 2022 19:17:11 GMT
Not at all. I really am just curious how you yourself reconcile your obvious continued interest to engage in these discussions with your strong disdain for the content of them. I generally reply to the parts where I think there may be a smidgen of a chance of you understanding what I am saying. It's become abundantly clear you have zero reference for the Truth I keep pointing to....I've grown weary of trying to find new ways to point when it's clear you're not really interested in even trying to follow those pointers to their intended destination. You are only interested in maintaining and arguing for your 'in the story' position. I don't actually use a lot of 'scriptural' type talk when I speak of Truth. Like or not, there is a viewpoint that lies beyond the one that is seemingly happening via the body/mind/person of the character you take yourself to be. Until and unless there is some kind of interest in finding out if there is such a viewpoint on your part, which would mean an interruption of your intent to prove what I am saying to be nothing more than nonsense, all we'll be doing each time we converse, is arguing from two very distinctly different points of view. It really is akin to a sighted man trying to explain the color blue to a blind man who insists there is no such thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Feb 13, 2022 19:29:38 GMT
Nah, I am not at all .. and for the record you can talk as you like .. All I am saying is that it's bonkers talking in a way that isn't a natural expression . It's not lived . Your non duality talk is based upon stuff that isn't realised . But it is! Life after waking up is very different than life prior--the locus of seeing has shifted from a position within the character to beyond--I assure you, that difference is monumental. It's a shift from bondage to freedom....from being a slave to the world, to being deeply at peace, regardless of what is happening in the world. There is nothing made up about 'the abiding ground of awareness, giving rise to the appearing world.' It's the clearest and most obvious seeing IF/WHEN the imagined position of seeing through the eyes of a limited person dissolves. We've had conversations in the past where you make it clear that you do not discern any difference in terms of Truth, between your seeing of 'what you ultimately are,' vs. your ideas about being a something/someone who experiences multiple lives/existences. The sense I got through those conversations was that you regard the idea that lived a past life as such and such to be completely on level with the seeing of 'what' you are. Nonduality addresses a Truth that lies 'beyond' any idea we could ever entertain about why or how we are having the experience we are seemingly having....in fact, it addresses that very erroneous idea that I am a 'something' that IS 'having an experience.' When you say, "I am all of it," you mistake the 'me character/Tenka' to be an existent entity/thing that is giving rise to experience. The Truth is; The me character/Tenks is arising/appearing, completely dependent upon (thus absent it's own inherent existence) the abiding ground of impersonal awareness. The Tenka character is a facet of experience not a something that is actually giving rise to experience/appearance. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Mar 2, 2022 3:29:11 GMT
I don't understand figgles dream idea. I never have done. And more than that what is the difference between waking up to the dream and waking up in the dream. The mind boggles! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2022 7:14:02 GMT
I don't understand figgles dream idea. I never have done. And more than that what is the difference between waking up to the dream and waking up in the dream. The mind boggles! There is both doership and non doership There is unity in diversity and diversity in unity. The Self is both unmanifest and manifest Satch --------------- It is, and yet it is not
All happens as it needs, yet nothing happens
I do what seems to be necessary, but at the same time I know that nothing is necessary
Niz
------------------
Hey I thought you didn't think that truth was paradoxical. You dismissed my paradoxes but you seem okay with Niz's paradoxes. What's he paying you? 😀
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Mar 9, 2022 7:36:17 GMT
There is both doership and non doership There is unity in diversity and diversity in unity. The Self is both unmanifest and manifest Satch --------------- It is, and yet it is not
All happens as it needs, yet nothing happens
I do what seems to be necessary, but at the same time I know that nothing is necessary
Niz
------------------
Hey I thought you didn't think that truth was paradoxical. You dismissed my paradoxes but you seem okay with Niz's paradoxes. What's he paying you? 😀
To say there is both doership and non doership = paradox. You cannot have both. That is akin to saying there is both separation and Oneness. But Niz is not contradicting himself there and the fact that you equate what he is saying with what you are saying is very telling. You evidently don't have reference for the absolute context he is speaking from in the latter statement, "including" the relative context of the former. Doership is an illusion, but appearances appearing....stuff happening is not. There IS experience. To acknowledge experience is not to engage in an illusion/delusion...but to insist upon doership is to engage in an illusion/delusion. To buy into an experience/sense of doership involves an erroneous mistake of mind....it requires a sense of separation to have the irrefutable knowing/sense of being a doer...of being a some-thing that is causing/catalyzing stuff to happen. When he says he does what is necessary, he's acknowledging that stuff gets done, and then the latter bit drives home the point that 'doing what is necessary,' is couched within the higher seeing that "ultimately" nothing is necessary. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2022 2:08:06 GMT
There is both doership and non doership There is unity in diversity and diversity in unity. The Self is both unmanifest and manifest Satch --------------- It is, and yet it is not
All happens as it needs, yet nothing happens
I do what seems to be necessary, but at the same time I know that nothing is necessary
Niz
------------------
Hey I thought you didn't think that truth was paradoxical. You dismissed my paradoxes but you seem okay with Niz's paradoxes. What's he paying you? 😀
To say there is both doership and non doership = paradox. You cannot have both. That is akin to saying there is both separation and Oneness. But Niz is not contradicting himself there and the fact that you equate what he is saying with what you are saying is very telling. You evidently don't have reference for the absolute context he is speaking from in the latter statement, "including" the relative context of the former. Doership is an illusion, but appearances appearing....stuff happening is not. There IS experience. To acknowledge experience is not to engage in an illusion/delusion...but to insist upon doership is to engage in an illusion/delusion. To buy into an experience/sense of doership involves an erroneous mistake of mind....it requires a sense of separation to have the irrefutable knowing/sense of being a doer...of being a some-thing that is causing/catalyzing stuff to happen. When he says he does what is necessary, he's acknowledging that stuff gets done, and then the latter bit drives home the point that 'doing what is necessary,' is couched within the higher seeing that "ultimately" nothing is necessary. You are an accomplished non-duality word contortionist. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Mar 10, 2022 4:49:09 GMT
To say there is both doership and non doership = paradox. You cannot have both. That is akin to saying there is both separation and Oneness. But Niz is not contradicting himself there and the fact that you equate what he is saying with what you are saying is very telling. You evidently don't have reference for the absolute context he is speaking from in the latter statement, "including" the relative context of the former. Doership is an illusion, but appearances appearing....stuff happening is not. There IS experience. To acknowledge experience is not to engage in an illusion/delusion...but to insist upon doership is to engage in an illusion/delusion. To buy into an experience/sense of doership involves an erroneous mistake of mind....it requires a sense of separation to have the irrefutable knowing/sense of being a doer...of being a some-thing that is causing/catalyzing stuff to happen. When he says he does what is necessary, he's acknowledging that stuff gets done, and then the latter bit drives home the point that 'doing what is necessary,' is couched within the higher seeing that "ultimately" nothing is necessary. You are an accomplished non-duality word contortionist. You simply have no reference for what those words are pointing to, so of course, it appears to you as though what I'm saying is nothing more than twisting words for the purpose of amusement. I assure you...there's something more going on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2022 5:01:02 GMT
You are an accomplished non-duality word contortionist. You simply have no reference for what those words are pointing to, so of course, it appears to you as though what I'm saying is nothing more than twisting words for the purpose of amusement. I assure you...there's something more going on. My "reference" is that for the last 15 years I have lived in the natural state of sahaja samadhi. What's yours? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Mar 10, 2022 5:10:08 GMT
You simply have no reference for what those words are pointing to, so of course, it appears to you as though what I'm saying is nothing more than twisting words for the purpose of amusement. I assure you...there's something more going on. My "reference" is that for the last 15 years I have lived in the natural state of sahaja samadhi. What's yours? Nice story but you're clearly kidding yourself. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2022 5:12:51 GMT
My "reference" is that for the last 15 years I have lived in the natural state of sahaja samadhi. What's yours? Nice story but you're clearly kidding yourself. Really? Is that all you've got? |
|
