Know Thyself?

@richrf,

Hey TT Man,

I wonder if I could get you to share with us some of what your OWN personal thinking is in this area? Are you into metaphysics yourself in any way? Are you rather more scientific in your approach?

My dreaming mind thinks all kinds of things. But that is not the Ultimate me however. And I understand this.

Perhaps you and I are coming from two separate paradigms on this. We will have to be very careful to speak with each other in a respectful manner, or we will get nowhere on understanding each other. This is sometimes hard to do.

Spirit isn’t a part of the mind. Spirit is simultaneous to the mind on another dimension altogether. What some have called “superimposition.” That is why it is possible for it to be both eminent and transcendent at the same time. (Eminent meaning found within the mind/world but not of the mind/world.)

Egoism or ego itself is the belief that you are the story /personality that you have been writing since birth. These are concepts developed by the mind. They are woven out of air and just as substantial as air.

I base that I am Spirit on raw and direct experience of Spirit, experience that happens Immediately. Thinking comes along slowly only after a processing period. I look right at Spirit all of the time, ("Spirit knows Spirit as Spirit"). Mind only ‘knows of’ Spirit. This is like an echo.

You cannot figure out Spirit with the same tools that you have been using to figure out your mind.

Subjectivity9

@TickTockMan,

TickTockMan;93397 wrote:

This seems like an excellent strategy for absolving oneself of responsibility for one's actions.

One only wishes. The universe is the final judge and trust me, if I fall out of line, KAPOW! I don't need to judge myself. There are plenty of other people and things to do that for me. You should see what happens to me if I walk out in a hurricane without first observing what I am doing.

TickTockMan;93397 wrote:

I may have to try this sometime at work when my boss tries to tell me I screwed something up, or better yet when I am driving, drunk of course, backwards down a one-way street in a residential area and firing my .357 magnum randomly out the window.

Exactly. There are many, many people and things waiting to judge whether you are doing what is correct. However, your problem is that everyone sees right and wrong differently. Makes life interesting trying to satisfy everyone's version of correctness.

TickTockMan;93397 wrote:

My concern though is that I would be marginalizing myself somehow by adopting this philosophy. Thoughts?

Actually, you end up having fairly good relations by not trying to teach people about right and wrong - particularly your children. Of course, at a job you have to play whatever role you have to play.

Rich

@richrf,

Ken,

Yes, how much of our life actually remains a magical "mystery" tour to us?

The psychologists tell us about our subconscious, and even our collected unconscious. Are we in fact the driver of many of these seats? I think not.

Not only that but, a good deal of how we know (what we know) takes place much quicker than thinking, within a fraction of a second, like many of our facial expressions. It is not just if we smile but how many fractions of a seconds do we smile, and does it include a change in our eyes, etc.

We may decide if we are safe with another, or if we trust another by use of these clues. In other words some part of us notices what is taking place very subtly, but we do not notice that we notice?

Social outcomes seem to flow naturally from these, these parts of our consciousness unprocessed by thoughts.

Subjectivity9

---------- Post added 09-25-2009 at 08:34 AM ----------

Rich,

Ah yes, I find (Zhi) “intention” fascinating. I do question however if intention is within our personal power as individuals or actually flows through us like a river. The choice and/or intention to move and act may in fact simply be a natural outcome much like a tree grows from a seed. Does the tree intend to become a tree?

So it is not merely the surrounding influences that shape our capacity for choice or how our intentions manifests themselves, but there are intrinsic factors as well. (Factors far beyond just being physical and mental) Some have said that we are more like holograms, outcomes that manifest the whole, rather than we are originators.

If by "free" (free will) we mean that we are free to act in a way that seems predestined by a multitude of influence, like a river is free to travel between her banks, I wonder if we shouldn’t rethink what free (free will) means?

On the finite level, we seem to be an orchestra rather than one single band member. How we play, what music we play, is pretty much determined by the piece of music that we as members of that orchestra take part in.

Subjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93478 wrote:

If by "free" (free will) we mean that we are free to act in a way that seems predestined by a multitude of influence, like a river is free to travel between her banks, I wonder if we shouldn't rethink what free (free will) means?

On the finite level, we seem to be an orchestra rather than one single band member. How we play, what music we play, is pretty much determined by the piece of music that we as members of that orchestra take part in.

Subjectivity9

It could be, but I see universal manifestation beginning with the intention (Zhi) of creating (Yi - creative mind) and observing the creation (Yi - awareness). This is what I see as the premise of our existence. I doubt we are here simply to flow, because I observe us all creating.

Rich

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93478 wrote:

Ken,

Yes, how much of our life actually remains a magical "mystery" tour to us?

Subjectivity9

But not, I hope, I am in a bus trying to get home after a long day. I do hope the driver knows where he is going, and will get me there. Don't you? Maybe not.

@richrf,

Ken,

Ah Ken, if life were only that simple, wouldn’t life be grand. I guess we all like to believe that we can depend on some things.

Know the scientific types are telling us that chaos, (Chaos Theory), is not only built into our universe, but that chaos is entirely necessary.

What next!

Surprisingly one of the things that the elderly have the most psychological trouble with is, that they can often see (all to clearly) where their physical self is going. Sickness, old age, and death are a given.

We as a species seem to do better when there is a certain amount of surprise or mystery build into our lives. We find it stimulating.

Subjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93539 wrote:

We as a species seem to do better when there is a certain amount of surprise or mystery build into our lives. We find it stimulating.

Subjectivity9

Yes!

One can go even further. We can say we created the mystery in order to break the boredom. To have fun! It is like playing a game of Where's Waldo or Hide-and Seek. Smile

Rich

@kennethamy,

Subjectivity9;93435 wrote:

Hey TT Man,

I wonder if I could get you to share with us some of what your OWN personal thinking is in this area? Are you into metaphysics yourself in any way? Are you rather more scientific in your approach?

I could, but then I'd have to kill you. Much like the Buddha I met on the road many years ago. I'm kidding, of course.

I did my time in the metaphysical ring starting some 30 years ago or so when someone loaned me Casteneda's "Teachings of Don Juan." Since then I've read many volumes of quaint and curious lore and found most of them to be somewhat lacking in physical usefulness, as far as my actual day-to-day activities are concerned. Some notable exceptions might be some of Suzuki's thoughts on Zen, some of the writings of Thich Nhat Hanh, and the late Chogyam Trungpa. Certain aspects of Taoism also interest me.

As far as my interest in things metaphysical, I think this passage sums up my feelings most accurately:

Before I studied Zen, mountains were mountains,
and water was water.
After studying Zen for some time,
mountains were no longer mountains,
and water was no longer water.
But now, after studying Zen longer, mountains
are just mountains, and water is just water.

Depending on your definition of scientific, yes, I guess you'd have to say that's how I tend to approach things.
If I've got my definitions correct, I tend toward pragmatism and rationalism. I like evidence. I find it useful. When someone is trying to sell me snake oil, I like to be able to identify it as what it is.

Philosophically, I find myself drawn to studies such as linguistic philosophy (language and semantics fascinate me), logic, existentialism and the like. Once in awhile, I explore determinism, indeterminism and probabilism to provide a jarring counterpoint to my existentialist leanings. Also, I'm a bit of a Redneck.

As far as metaphysics goes, I don't really have any issues with it per se . . . at least up until the point where it turns into New Age gibberish or worse, outright paranormal nonsense. Then I have a problem.

Subjectivity9;93435 wrote:

Perhaps you and I are coming from two separate paradigms on this.

This seems to go without saying.

Subjectivity9;93435 wrote:

We will have to be very careful to speak with each other in a respectful manner, or we will get nowhere on understanding each other. This is sometimes hard to do.

I'm not sure I'm capable of this. How about this as a compromise: I won't take myself too seriously if you don't take yourself to seriously? That way, I can poke fun at you and you can poke fun at me and no one will get their feelings hurt. If our intentions are not mean-spirited, then I think we should have no problems and learning something from one another becomes a nice little bonus along the way. The path is the goal, right?

That being said . . .

Subjectivity9;93435 wrote:

Spirit isn't a part of the mind. Spirit is simultaneous to the mind on another dimension altogether. What some have called "superimposition." That is why it is possible for it to be both eminent and transcendent at the same time. (Eminent meaning found within the mind/world but not of the mind/world.)

I base that I am Spirit on raw and direct experience of Spirit, experience that happens Immediately. Thinking comes along slowly only after a processing period. I look right at Spirit all of the time, ("Spirit knows Spirit as Spirit"). Mind only 'knows of' Spirit. This is like an echo.

. . . I have no idea what most of this means. My Redneck mind is recoiling in horror.

richrf;93440 wrote:

One only wishes.

I hope you are speaking for yourself. I insist on taking responsibility for my actions. Why wouldn't you want to be responsible for your actions?

richrf;93440 wrote:

Exactly. There are many, many people and things waiting to judge whether you are doing what is correct. However, your problem is that everyone sees right and wrong differently.

Should we be seeing them as the same?

richrf;93440 wrote:

Actually, you end up having fairly good relations by not trying to teach people about right and wrong - particularly your children.

Are you advocating that children not be taught the difference between right and wrong?

kennethamy;93500 wrote:

But not, I hope, I am in a bus trying to get home after a long day. I do hope the driver knows where he is going, and will get me there. Don't you? Maybe not.

Clearly you are not properly grokking the scene, man. The idea of "home" is an illusion in and of itself, so what does it matter where
you go, it's all the same. Your home, my home, what's the dif, baby? Groovy.

@richrf,

Rich,

I fully realize that you probably know more about this, in most details, than I do. I have divided myself between multiple religions and philosophies. But Taoism is an all time favorite of mine.

Another Chinese masterpiece is Chan, also a favorite. Consequently I have a great appreciation and respect for Zen, the ingenious child of these two.

I believe it would be an underestimation of the “flow” to think of it simply as passive. The flow IMO would be as complex as the universe herself. (I won’t get into the Spiritual aspects of Tao, and her flow at this time.)

I believe that even creativity or Yi (creative mind) is a part of the flow. The Tao is always flowing and everywhere center.

No one would suggest, I don’t believe, that the Tao was lacking in creativity. So if the Tao were to flow through us, and it does, one of the ways that the Tao would flow through us is through our own creativity.

What do you think?

Subjectivity9

---------- Post added 09-25-2009 at 01:33 PM ----------

Rich,

There are many paradigms to explain the “Why” of the universe and her various ways.

Saying that “we created Mystery in order to break the boredom” is very similar to the Hindu’s idea that all of this, the universe and us included, is God’s playing or a dance that He is doing.

When we say that this earth and her children are just having fun, we have to go even further and figure out why so much suffering in this world would be fun, don’t we?

I am not saying that you are wrong by any means. Only questioning how this is possible. I have answers to this. Do you?

Subjectivity9

@richrf,

TT Man,

Thank you for taking the trouble to answer me at such length. It was very interesting.

I’ll tell you a secret. I killed Buddha approaching me on the road, too. This will have to be our little secret.

; ^ )

Philosophically speaking, I live closest (in this finite world/finite expression) to being a phenomenologist. This is not because I am an expert on Edmund Husserl “by any stretch of the imagination,” but rather because this seems to be who I am at this finite level, naturally. I look directly, and put together what I believe I am seeing.

More recently some have called this ‘Mindfulness,’ which is very Tibetan. (This is only a close match however.)

Ah yes, Casteneda, I love that guy. Well I really like Don Juan the best. Don’t tell Carlos. I read all the books more than once, a guilty pleasure. I enjoy shamans, and witch doctors, etc. (So much truth in so many flavors.) Why cut our selves off from anything?

Suzuki, Thigh Nat Hahn, Chogyam Trungpa, Yes/yes/yes. And Taoism, you certainly have a full plate.

Yes first there were mountains, not really mountain, and back to mountains…and yet, not really the same.

Scientific as evidence, that is as good as any definition. Scientist’s do tend towards materialistic evidence though, generally speaking. Some have said that they (scientists) thinking themselves to be dealing only with hard evidence are overlooking/cutting themselves off from many other forms of evidence. (We can speak later about pragmatism and rationalism I hope. I love to learn.)

Ya, snake oil! Must not be too quick though, new doors are always opening.

Yes language is fascinating. I particularly enjoy Sanskrit. Words can be magic and teach us a lot.

Great minds in Existentialism, but I feel they stop short of the mark. Most of them couldn’t make the “Leap of Faith.” (I don’t mean this religiously.)

I am educated Blue-collar, is that city for Redneck? : - }

Depends on what you include in New Age. Much of New Age is psychology really. (Spiritual Psychology, perhaps.) There is lots of wisdom here and there in this too. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

For those who are gifted in this area of the paranormal there is some good to be had. For those who are not gifted, it seems like gibberish or out right craziness. Not to say that it doesn’t get a bit over the top sometimes.

People, who are advanced spiritually, often have some of these paranormal gifts. These gifts do end up as distractions sometimes if you aren’t careful, and they feed the ego.

Seriously, I don’t think I take myself too seriously. I do also have a sense of humor, without it I would probably be dead by now. Is that too serious? : + )

If my feelings get hurt, just shoot me!

I may have misjudged you. I feared that you were here JUST to poke fun. I apologize for that quick judgment on my part.

The path isn’t my goal. But we can get into that later. Learning and growing is fun.

No, no, horrified grasshopper let me say it better:

I do not see mind and Spirit as being one thing. They are both here and now, but they can never be united into one thing. They abide in two different dimensions. Spirit is fundamental. Mind is Spirit seen incorrectly. So in essence, mind is a mistake.

Some have tried to depict this idea like, (Story) on seeing a pole in the dark you might mistakenly think it to be a man. When the light go on however you see your error. You see that it was always a pole. Seeing a man there was merely a mistake. Spirit is represented by the pole in this story, the man mistakenly seen represent the mind or physical/mental existence. The mistaken idea was mind. It was Spirit all along.

So the mistake is superimposed upon the truth. Truth is, and the mistake really isn’t substantial.

So:

There are mistakes granted. But we drop these mistakes as soon as we see correctly.

Does that help?

Do you want me to explain the Immediate and why mind is slow?

Subjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Thanks for the reply, Subjectivity9.

I'd like to continue this discussion, but I'm trying to get out of work early today so I can go camping in the mountains this weekend.

Won't be able to post anything back to you until Monday, most likely.

I'll see if I can come up with some way to refute your ludicrous comments while I ponder the stars this weekend.

Again, I am poking fun.

I hope you appreciate your weekend,

Tock

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

I believe it would be an underestimation of the "flow" to think of it simply as passive. The flow IMO would be as complex as the universe herself. (I won't get into the Spiritual aspects of Tao, and her flow at this time.)

Yes, I agree that the flow is there and everywhere. But I also believe that consciousness has an aspect of Intention (Zhi) which allows it to create.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

I believe that even creativity or Yi (creative mind) is a part of the flow. The Tao is always flowing and everywhere center.

Yes, in a way it is. I would consider it an aspect of the flow.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

No one would suggest, I don't believe, that the Tao was lacking in creativity. So if the Tao were to flow through us, and it does, one of the ways that the Tao would flow through us is through our own creativity. What do you think?

Yes, I agree. There is the overall flow. Call this the Shen/Spirit. Then there is the creative/aware mind (Yi/Mind) which is an aspect of the Shen. Then there is the actual movement/intention aspect. This would be the Zhi/Will. So all are part of the overall flow (Shen), but are aspects, just like the different waves in the ocean are aspects of the ocean.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

Saying that "we created Mystery in order to break the boredom" is very similar to the Hindu's idea that all of this, the universe and us included, is God's playing or a dance that He is doing.

Yes, I am not surprised that this may be an aspect of other Eastern philosophies such as Hinduism. In can also be found in ancient South American Inca cultures.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

When we say that this earth and her children are just having fun, we have to go even further and figure out why so much suffering in this world would be fun, don't we?

Yes, it would take a reworking of the notion of play and an altogether different viewpoint about life - especially the nature of transcendental life and the nature of learning.

[/QUOTE]I am not saying that you are wrong by any means. Only questioning how this is possible. I have answers to this. Do you? [/QUOTE]

I think it is possible but one has to be very, very comfortable with transcendental life and what it means to learn from playing.

Thanks very much for your insights and comments.

Rich

---------- Post added 09-25-2009 at 03:45 PM ----------

TickTockMan;93564 wrote:

Should we be seeing them as the same?

I don't think in terms of should. I think more along the lines of what is. From what I observe, everyone comes to an event (let's call it that), from a different perspective (literally), a different point of view, and different life experiences (I believe it multiple physical lives belonging to a transcendental life). So, I would not expect anyone two people to see things exactly the same, though they can agree on something since it suffices for all practical purposes.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

Are you advocating that children not be taught the difference between right and wrong?

I think children are taught what is necessary to survive and thrive in a specific environment, which is what we do. However, what one considers right and wrong is radically different from one culture to another.

Subjectivity9;93565 wrote:

Clearly you are not properly grokking the scene, man. The idea of "home" is an illusion in and of itself, so what does it matter where you go, it's all the same. Your home, my home, what's the dif, baby? Groovy.

There are differences depending upon the rules of the game.

Rich

---------- Post added 09-25-2009 at 03:45 PM ----------

TickTockMan;93564 wrote:

Should we be seeing them as the same?

I don't think in terms of should. I think more along the lines of what is. From what I observe, everyone comes to an event (let's call it that), from a different perspective (literally), a different point of view, and different life experiences (I believe it multiple physical lives belonging to a transcendental life). So, I would not expect anyone two people to see things exactly the same, though they can agree on something since it suffices for all practical purposes.

TickTockMan;93564 wrote:

Are you advocating that children not be taught the difference between right and wrong?

I think children are taught what is necessary to survive and thrive in a specific environment, which is what we do. However, what one considers right and wrong is radically different from one culture to another.

TickTockMan;93564 wrote:

Clearly you are not properly grokking the scene, man. The idea of "home" is an illusion in and of itself, so what does it matter where you go, it's all the same. Your home, my home, what's the dif, baby? Groovy.

There are differences depending upon the rules of the game. There are rules.

Rich

@richrf,

Rich,

I wonder just how much your ideas of the Tao mirror my ideas of Spirit?

When people speak of the Tao, they seem to come at it from many sides or even dimensions, don’t they?

One person might see the Tao as ‘Mother Nature’ or rather ‘Mother Cosmic Nature;' almost like you throw the whole material/mental world into a bag, mix it up a bit, and then throw it back out again like a cornucopia.

Another might see the Tao as transcendent or only the ‘Mother of all possibility’ like what you call Shen or Spirit.

Which do you think is the case and why?

Are "aspects” in your way of seeing it just one of the many 'names' of the Tao, all equal yet viewed from alternate perspectives? (Like the story about the elephant. One guy touching the elephant’s truck describes elephant as being long and hollow, another guy touching the elephants leg describes elephant as fat and stable, etc.) Or are aspects more of a hierarchy, first there is Ultimate Consciousness/Tao and then it descends (if you will) down into the aspects much like white light can be divided up into colors by a prism?

I wonder if you are familiar with the viewpoints of Meister Eckhart (Christian Mystic) in this similar area? He sees God (Tao/Spirit, just various words for the same thing IMO) divided up into an Unknowable God (both deep and dark) and an aspect that is more what you call the Creative (perhaps the light).

A lineal mind, and that is how our mind works, would try to understand what an “All at once Tao’ was one aspect at a time. And perhaps even, an ‘All at once Tao’ would be more like white noise (for want of a better way of saying it) than like a jigsaw puzzle once again united and yet somehow still separate individual pieces.

I always like the wave analogy because waves are simply energy, and the scientists tell us that the water doesn’t actually move. (Only the energy does.) Isn’t that weird? This is like Spirit unmoving and yet this world of energy seeming to take place if only temporarily. Mysterious Yes?

Because this Truth that we are speaking of here is the Essential Truth, there is no place on earth where the people are blocked from knowing it. This isn’t something that was invented and improved on over history as I have heard some scholar say, this is discovered within our very being. So yes, I am not surprised that the Inca culture had tasted of this.

The fact is that “Suffering is” has a lot to teach us. (Very Buddhist)

Obviously the only way that suffering could be play is if it wasn’t really us suffering. This would be similar to a movie about suffering being entertaining. (Transcendence, what is it?)

Could we be playing at suffering? Or is Shakespeare right in that “All of the world is a stage”…or a dream? The Hindu see Brahma (The creative aspect of God) as dreaming multiple dreams, dreams within dreams.

Krishna told Arguna, in the Bhagavad Gita, "You are not the doer." (Not the sufferer?)

Of course this is all metaphysical explanation. How do we come upon this directly as Self or Being knowing Self?

I see speaking like this as a kind/of contemplation, because it makes me look right at Spirit in order to see and understand.

Subjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Rich,

I wonder just how much your ideas of the Tao mirror my ideas of Spirit?

I am sure they are very similar and any distinction is probably not worth contemplating. Dao, is that thing that cannot be named or imagined. Spirit/Shen in Chinese metaphysics is that spark of life that gets everything going. But it originates from the Dao, and can be thought of as a spark from the Dao.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

When people speak of the Tao, they seem to come at it from many sides or even dimensions, don't they?

Absolutely. Everyone has their own thoughts about it. Mine are mine alone, and are mostly derived from actual experience as well as my studies of Chinese medicine. Good health directly manifests from an understanding of the aspects of the human being.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

One person might see the Tao as 'Mother Nature' ... 'Mother of all possibility' like what you call Shen or Spirit.

Yes, this is certainly possible.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Which do you think is the case and why?

I envision the Dao as an bored singularity that wants to have some fun. So it starts curling into itself (as the Taiji symbol exemplifies) and starts to create stuff. Sort of like a child who first begins drawing by scribbling, and slowly learns how to change those scribbles into interesting forms.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Are "aspects" in your way of seeing it just one of the many 'names' of the Tao, all equal yet viewed from alternate perspectives?

I think so. We are all just waves seeing ourselves from a different point of view. It is what creates conflict, interesting perspectives, enjoyment and kills boredom.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Or are aspects more of a hierarchy, first there is Ultimate Consciousness/Tao and then it descends (if you will) down into the aspects much like white light can be divided up into colors by a prism?

I don't think so, unless one can look at the waves in an ocean and say that one is higher in the hierarchy than the other. And they are all part of the same thing. So, it is all equal but different.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

I wonder if you are familiar with the viewpoints of Meister Eckhart (Christian Mystic) in this similar area? He sees God (Tao/Spirit, just various words for the same thing IMO) divided up into an Unknowable God (both deep and dark) and an aspect that is more what you call the Creative (perhaps the light).

I would agree.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

A lineal mind, and that is how our mind works, would try to understand what an "All at once Tao' was one aspect at a time. And perhaps even, an 'All at once Tao' would be more like white noise (for want of a better way of saying it) than like a jigsaw puzzle once again united and yet somehow still separate individual pieces.

Yes. I think it is a nice way to look at it. When we play the game of Monopoly it is very lineal. We are moving around in one way. But we can step aside and look at the game as a whole and it is much different. It is about building, competing, forming alliances, etc. So, if you can step outside the game, you might have a different perspective. The physicist Bernard d'Espagnat credits artists with have this kind of perspective.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

I always like the wave analogy because waves are simply energy, and the scientists tell us that the water doesn't actually move. (Only the energy does.) Isn't that weird? This is like Spirit unmoving and yet this world of energy seeming to take place if only temporarily. Mysterious Yes?

Yes, scientists love giving themselves a pat on the back for replacing the word God/Dao/Spirit with the word energy. From my viewpoint, energy is just the Spirit (consciousness) creating.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Because this Truth that we are speaking of here is the Essential Truth,

I tend not to speak in terms of Truth. Everyone has and is entitled to (by the rules of the game), their own notion of truth. I just observe, explore and share. People can judge it anyway they want. I don't claim that my thoughts are any closer to the truth than anyone else's. I respect everyone's journey.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

The fact is that "Suffering is" has a lot to teach us. (Very Buddhist)

I think that suffering is the prime motivator for learning and change. Without it, we would all be lying around enjoying the bliss and getting really bored in the process.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Yes. This seems to be a very distinct way of looking at it. But one has to be very comfortable with the idea.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

Of course this is all metaphysical explanation. How do we come upon this directly as Self or Being knowing Self?

By continuing to observe and understand. Slowly it begins to make sense. It is like observing a game of chess. First it seems rather odd and confusing. Over time, it begins to make sense.

Subjectivity9;93652 wrote:

I see speaking like this as a kind/of contemplation, because it makes me look right at Spirit in order to see and understand.

Yes. Same with me. The reason I am on this forum is to gather new ideas to contemplate.

Thanks a lot! Smile

Rich

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93539 wrote:

Ken,

Ah Ken, if life were only that simple, wouldn't life be grand. I guess we all like to believe that we can depend on some things.

Know the scientific types are telling us that chaos, (Chaos Theory), is not only built into our universe, but that chaos is entirely necessary.

What next!

Surprisingly one of the things that the elderly have the most psychological trouble with is, that they can often see (all to clearly) where their physical self is going. Sickness, old age, and death are a given.

We as a species seem to do better when there is a certain amount of surprise or mystery build into our lives. We find it stimulating.

Subjectivity9

What has this to do with the bus driver going where you want him to go?

@richrf,

Let me see if I can offer something here and do always forgive me if I reiterate something another might have said for I have not read all the posts.

We cannot consciously change, nor do we consciously create anything. The mind does that, on its own effortlessly, if you let it. Now that's the hard part to actually realize and if you think you can, you can't. It's when we try we get into trouble and go against that natural flow of ideas, thoughts that are present in every single one of us and what keeps us from communicating better.

When we observe others and see different than us we try to understand that difference whether it is good or bad and that is only done from separate perspectives of what is good and bad. And that is when conflict occurs or argument or chaos or negative feelings are arouse when he who thinks he is right tries to correct he who is in their individual perception on all that has occurred in their life, who is wrong as we point out why it is wrong from our perception. See how confusing it can get on a conscious level when you think about it.

Now when we meet on neutral grounds and don't think about it and let nature take it course inexplicably carry you to that which is complimentary/positive to you and it will come absolutely with out a second thought. That is god in motion between two of his divine parts. That is divine magnetism. Now when we "consciously think we can find it" we venture off in wrong directions and are subject to our own perceptions as we look for that which is complimentary with us to form a group. That is like those wishing to form a family and are attracted to what each think will bring them together, often too late only discovering what we found was not what we were looking for and that entire group/family suffers.

Now Rich and his eastern philosophy is on the mark and if you will note that innate family that is oriental is a rather "in touch group" and are harmonically getting along without effort. It is only when outside "aliens" come in (foreigners) is when that group begins to feel a lack of harmony. That is the wisdom of the east we often refer to.

Now America, is not only different, it is tragically so for here is the model of what can happen when so many cultures are force to get along with each other and follow one set of rules. It can't be done, not in the short run any way. It takes time to understand those barriers that have separated us for thousands of years.

When we think a set of laws can force that change we create criminals who rebel against anyone who tries to force them to change. Now if those cultures have features, characteristics and language that are in common it is much easier to understand one another and the chance are good the will eventually get along, but it will take time; something we don't think we have as many view this life as terminal and only have so much time to do anything.

Now pardon me for I am about to broach a subject that will be hard for me to explain for it will be contrary to many other perceptions as I understand that and will go slowly.

When you have two cultures that are visibly different as black and white and force them to get along you are asking for trouble. We are not that civilized yet. Though I sure hope we learn to be. When you take two cultures that are as different as night and day who have become linked genetically, intellectually, and separately as the black man and the white man for thousands of years and force them to bond by one set of laws you invite disaster. It can't be done, never. It takes more time and that is what we don't think we have in the west, and that is the sole reason why my signature reads as it does for I grew up here and know that to be true.

Each have their own unique offerings to bring to the table and they must come naturally, in time. When we stop judging a book by it's cover and take the time to understand what lies between those pages, we learn from those different books and it will make us stronger as we develop a synergy that dictates the two parts are better than when they existed separately and both benefit from it. Again it takes time to read a book from cover to cover. Now the pages in that book will determine how long that culture has been around on this planet. Now what's in that book can be extremely beneficial if that which is contained within is not used to consciously control another. That is were we keep screwing up over and over again. The errant ego personified as those old books try to consciously control other books they truly have not read and think they understand. What a pity.

It's hard to tell if what I have in my book is getting through to you and your book, for most value what there books have within their covers in fear someone might criminalize them for their own benefit and keep the knowledge that can be gained, closely guarded.

So in time, through patience and trust which the east as an ample supply of one, and little of the other, evident in their close restrictions on who enters their domain, we will truly get to know each other. They are indeed a patient lot where the white man and the west are surely not. The east agrees more with my signature, where as the west doesn't want to evident by their impatience.

Now apply that wisdom to all cultures and it will become extremely clear as to why we are in the mess we are in.

As always, in my most honest opinion, ha, I think I stayed on topic, but knowing me, I might have ventured a bit.:bigsmile:

William

@richrf,

Literally ken,

I guess any extrapolation on these complex issues might be hard to follow. But it all comes back to a matter of ‘TRUST.’

We have to believe that when we get in our car, or a bus, and set off from work that we will get home. Obviously we have no way of knowing this because too many other forces are also going their own ways, and sometimes collide AKA ‘accidents happen.’

I believe this is why it (Life and our intensions) remains a mystery or where we are actually going is up for grabs. Are we if fact going home or rather going to get there? Isn’t this really wishful thinking based on the hope that we WILL arrive home and that the percentages say we probably will?

; ^ )

This is why so many wise Taoist hold the perspective of, “Wait and See.”

Or as Rich might say, “We can only intend.”

Or as the Bhagavad Gita states, “Outcomes do not belong to us.” (Make your best effort and than let it go or wait and see.)

Anxiety comes directly out of this trying to control the future.

Or as a friend of mine once said, “If I knew how things were going to work out, I’d get into the stock market and make a million.” HA!

Subjectivity9

@Subjectivity9,

Subjectivity9;93719 wrote:

Literally ken,

I guess any extrapolation on these complex issues might be hard to follow. But it all comes back to a matter of 'TRUST.'

We have to believe that when we get in our car, or a bus, and set off from work that we will get home. Obviously we have no way of knowing this because too many other forces are also going their own ways, and sometimes collide AKA 'accidents happen.'

I believe this is why it (Life and our intensions) remains a mystery or where we are actually going is up for grabs. Are we if fact going home or rather going to get there? Isn't this really wishful thinking based on the hope that we WILL arrive home and that the percentages say we probably will?

; ^ )

This is why so many wise Taoist hold the perspective of, "Wait and See."

Or as Rich might say, "We can only intend."

Or as the Bhagavad Gita states, "Outcomes do not belong to us." (Make your best effort and than let it go or wait and see.)

Anxiety comes directly out of this trying to control the future.

Or as a friend of mine once said, "If I knew how things were going to work out, I'd get into the stock market and make a million." HA!

Subjectivity9

None of this has anything to do with the bus driver. Both you and I don't want him to take us on a magical mystery tour. Not unless that is what we want him to do, and pay him to do.

The fact is that chance and surprise have their places (especially when children open up their presents). But mature adults need and want predictability. And, of course, science operates on the belief that there is predictability, and that it is possible to predict the future. (Indeed, if you come to think about it, the future is the only thing it is possible to predict. So, unless we can predict the future, we can predict nothing). The way Rich claims to run his life (but, of course, does not, since no one could run his life that way) would be unsurvivable. By the way, I have never, not once, not gotten home on my bus, although it gets a bit slow sometimes. How many times has your method of transportation failed you?

@richrf,

Hey William,

I can see that you have given this a good deal of thought. Thanks for sharing.

There is more than one kind of creating IMO. One takes place when you already have two things, for instance neurology and psychology as two separate disciplines and by bringing them together as neuropsychology we create something bigger than its two parts.

The other creativity seems to come out of our subconscious, if you will, more like an artist painting something the way only s/he sees it. This type of creativity often follows a process, beginning with a passionate effort, followed by a period of relaxation, and then pop, it shows up whole. Read a book on this, years back.

I wonder if too you are familiar with the term xenophobia, or the fear of strangers? This seems to be naturally built into the human psyche. I agree with you ‘social psychology’ is fascinating.

I sometimes wonder if with personal change we are always the last one to know. So much seems to be going on unbeknownst to me in that area. I have actually woken up in the morning changed in some way. Or again, thought something that showed me that Spiritually I had finally understood something that I had been grappling with for years, like a gift.

The mind like the body is carrying on in a complex fashion that isn’t always right there on center stage. Often when it works something out, it sends me a memo.

One big reason for conflict between persons holding different ideas is that, they identify themselves as those ideas, and so when the ideas are questioned they feel personally under attack.

I used to think that the reason that people didn’t see things the way that I saw then was because they simply didn’t understand them. So I would try to explain. But I don’t think that any more. People are so very unique and often drastically different. One man might actually kill another man because it was fun. Blame the DNA if you want.

But too, subjectively speaking, we are not really living in the same world. Who was it that said, “We don’t live in the world. We live in that little space between our ears?”

I know my cat isn’t coming from where I’m coming from on this world. He sees more, he hears more, he smells more, is he smarter? He certainly has more information than I do in certain area? If I had to catch a mouse for supper, I would die of hunger. I don’t have the stealth. ; ^ )

As far as getting along with others persons/races goes I tend toward the Vedanta ideas on compassion. We have to allow in good part that people must be who they are. There is room for all of us. (Granted society has a right to protect itself against violence.) But we do not have to walk in lock step.

People generally speaking believe that their happiness is to be attained out there in the world. So they start moving other people around like they were furniture. When they finally realize that happiness is found within, they stop all that. This IS “peace on earth.”

If I have missed something that you wish I had addressed, please bring this t my attention and I will try my best.

Subjectivity9

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;93724 wrote:

By the way, I have never, not once, not gotten home on my bus, although it gets a bit slow sometimes. How many times has your method of transportation failed you?

Many, many, many times. Trains, cars, buses, planes. In Chicago breakdowns, detours, delays, buses and trains never arriving, construction delays and detours are a regular occurrences. Streets are blocked for parades and baseball games or events. There are influences all around us that change our intended directions.

Most of the things in my life (maybe all) do not turn out as expected. Things happen. For example, you probably didn't expect this answer, did you?

There is what we intend and then there are all the influences around us that intend otherwise, and life is about navigating between where we want to go and what the influences will allow. Some people may try to overwhelm all influences with Will Power and end up dying early from exhaustion. Others may try less exhausting routes.

Rich

Philosophy Forum

Quick Links

My Account

able2know