|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 1, 2022 23:01:26 GMT
Ideas can indeed be and are attached to, and yes they = suffering. (Not cause it!)
You, Reefs, Ouroboros and ZD, are all attached to the idea that it can be realized that appearing people are perceivers. It's attachment to the idea of appearances having existence that is the problem!
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 2, 2022 8:08:07 GMT
For a dude that wanted me off the ST forum so bad, who banned and blocked me, you sure do like to talk about me a lot.
If you want to talk about the quote you mention above, why not come here and actually have a direct conversation about it? I cannot even imagine the emotional/mental stance it would take to behave as you are; Banning someone from my forum, refusing to engage them in conversation, but still continuing to talk about them and their past posts in a disparaging way. Pretty shitty. Very immature.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2022 9:36:42 GMT
For a dude that wanted me off the ST forum so bad, who banned and blocked me, you sure do like to talk about me a lot. If you want to talk about the quote you mention above, why not come here and actually have a direct conversation about it? I cannot even imagine the emotional/mental stance it would take to behave as you are; Banning someone from my forum, refusing to engage them in conversation, but still continuing to talk about them and their past posts in a disparaging way. Pretty shitty. Very immature. That was a great and true quote from you back then but you've certainly changed your tune since then haven't you? Unfortunately you now think it's all about seeing through illusions. Where did it all go wrong for you? Was it enigma's influence? He's a bad frog! |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 4:28:29 GMT
For a dude that wanted me off the ST forum so bad, who banned and blocked me, you sure do like to talk about me a lot. If you want to talk about the quote you mention above, why not come here and actually have a direct conversation about it? I cannot even imagine the emotional/mental stance it would take to behave as you are; Banning someone from my forum, refusing to engage them in conversation, but still continuing to talk about them and their past posts in a disparaging way. Pretty shitty. Very immature. That was a great and true quote from you back then but you've certainly changed your tune since then haven't you? Well, although there has indeed been somewhat of a shift in my seeing since then, that's not a direct quote of what I actually said. Reefs is mischaracterizing the point I was trying to make...which as I said above, is pretty shitty considering I am banned from ST to address that. There's only one singular illusion that needs to be seen through and then the lesser ones fall like dominoes.... and that is "separation." In terms of influence, if you want to assign blame, it's ultimately that elusive gal called "Grace" whose at fault.   |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 5:49:44 GMT
Oh, the irony. The insistence that "aliveness/perceiving on the part of all appearing things" is a realization that is a necessary component of SR/wakefulness = an attachment of sorts to thought/mind's content. To truly see that ALL experiential content is empty and devoid of Truth goes hand in hand with the willingness to relinquish thought/conceptual knowing in favor of "not knowing." You mean "seen to be misconceived"? I do indeed talk about this topic a lot, simply because this is a sticky place where many get hung up upon; mistaking mystical experience and 'in the dream insights,' for Truth. The "totality" of appearance...anything and all things "perceived," must be clearly and easily seen and denoted as "empty experiential content" arising dependent upon the abiding ground, absent it's own inherent existence, for freedom the dream in it's entirety to BE. You have clearly failed to see the importance of seeing the inherent absence of existence relative to ALL appearance....you are trying to hold on to your erroneous knowings about perceiving shoes and things/objects that are alive and conscious at all costs....even if it means inventing stories about those who DO see the importance of seeing that inherent absence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 6:00:00 GMT
Yup. It seems this conversation somehow always ends up getting misconstrued as: "It is known for absolute certain that the me character is the only personal viewpoint." When really, the assertion is: There is but one "absolute, known for certain" personal viewpoint and the ground of awareness within that appears.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 6:24:13 GMT
Yes! This bit is key. The supposed absolute knowing of perception that some are asserting has it's initial basis in the appearance of an object/thing/form.
But then, we have Reefs and ZD insisting that there really are no "things/distinct objects" at all. So essentially they are saying the appearing body/mind of the person before you, is illusion/imaginary, but then they insist that they somehow know for absolute certain that that appearing body/mind is "a perceiver..is alive....is conscious." It's a nonsense.
If 'thingness" collapses to reveal some kind of alive, conscious, aware field that has fundamental existence, then it's ridiculous to also claim that that thing (appearing body/person) is known for absolute certain to be alive, perceiving, conscious, having a unique experience.
It's akin to saying there is no entity, but I know for absolute certain, the appearing body to be a perceiver.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 7:00:08 GMT
It can be realized that the appearing world is an expression arising within/to awareness, not separate, dependent upon that. In that, the 'what' of an appearance is seen to be misconceived as is the question "what is an appearance."
There is no-thing that "comprises/makes up" an appearance. The idea that that is so is based upon conceptualizing that which must be realized. All appearance is an empty, ephemeral arising/expression within/to awareness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 3, 2022 7:03:05 GMT
It is the very same thing re: your Kensho/CC. It too is a memory that you harken back to when you insist that you now know all people who appear to be perceiving.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 4, 2022 17:19:14 GMT
A good example of an entirely "in the dream" view of things, that is easily mistaken by the unwakened as Truth/transcendent. This is new age/self help, NOT Nonduality.
The fact that he begins by asserting "what you are fundamentally," and then moves directly into talk about what science says to augment his point, says it all.
Nonduality doesn't give a bugger what science says....science is a facet of the dream-scape.
|
|
