You have no image of yourself.

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:50 am

Ihoardpoetry wrote:
Of course, this radical freedom arises from the ability to separate - or, as Sartre calls it, nihilate - since we can always reject any current influence (facticity about ourselves, such as past events) on our behaviour and radically choose something for ourselves. Nothing constrains us in our freedom, and anguish is the response to becoming aware of this, the realisation that we must constantly choose to re-make ourselves again and again through our action, and nothing we can do will allow us to avoid this.
This idea is illustrated in Genesis 1 where Adam and Eve eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 'Before' the people did this they were as bound to instinctive behaviour as any other animal or the wild grasses. 'Before', there was no conscious choice and the people had to do as the creator dictated, like other inanimate and animate things.

Dontaskme's claim would deny that the state of affairs after eating that fruit of differentiation exists, and that we can dispel the discomfort of Angst by clinging to the Garden of Eden. Thus, Eastern metaphysics can be compared with Western metaphysics. I wonder if among that rich pantheon there is a god which addresses the problem of Angst.

http://www.atimes.com/article/age-hollo ... ad-sartre/

https://aramam.wordpress.com/2011/09/01 ... istianity/

The nearest connection of Sartrean Angst with Hindu mythology is how Arjuna suffered from what we may perhaps identify with Angst before the battle whereupon Krishna showed Arjuna that in effect Arjuna was ruled by facticity even to the extent of killing his cousins in battle.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:23 am

ihoardpoetry wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:30 pm
I like the concept of knowledge being related to the knower in that instant at which they are perceiving something. Though it has radical conclusions, perhaps, such as knowledge of past experiences perhaps being cut off since we do not 'perceive' the past as such in the way we are talking. Although I suppose, if knowledge is just a collection of what we're perceiving, would you class the perception of a memory as knowledge in this way?
Yes all knowledge is memory...this immediate moment is in a constant state of pure not-knowing potential...becoming known in the instant it arises falling away into memory in the same instance. Knowledge is just a fiction arising and falling in the empty space of pure potential....if something can be imagined then it must have already existed to have been imagined...this idea can take some grasping..but I feel you are a very open minded individual that is why you have been attracted to this topic.

There is no doubt that the universe is a totally mental phenomena and all ideas come from that rational mind, and that they are that mind and no-thing other than that rational mind. There is a rational mind behind all phenomena, for no phenomena could arise without one... It's totally self-evident without doubt or error. I say it's rational simply because life is just so incredibly wise and intelligent and it works so beautifully and gracefully and effortlessly. That can only come from a rational mind...not an irrational mind.

Since the knower cannot be known, and knowing is in the instant it arises one with the knowing, all knowledge is a fictional story appearing from not-knowing pure awareness. Pure awareness is the natural state of everything known..it's the ultimate ground of all being without an object...it is that in which all objects appear and disappear. ... It's called the pure SELF...it's not the fictional self which comes and goes in the pure self, it's the ''no self'' - ''no mind'' ..Which has to be...just like the screen behind the movie has to be in order for the movie to appear...the fictional self is just the movie playing on the screen which I call PURE AWARENESS...the I without an object.

Objects appear in this..this has to be for an object to appear, and while objects appear and disappear...awareness does not, it cannot, it IS everywhere at once, there is nowhere for it to go. It's not going anywhere or coming from anywhere it's already here now always perfectly ageless and still. It's synonymous to space. Everything in the universe is literally made out of the space it's appearing in which is this immediate empty fullness one without a second.

Did that explain to you what I mean by Latent Pure Awareness? ...this is your true natural nature. You are infinity for eternity experiencing itself as pure popped aware potential appearing as everything in spacetime duality...you aka conscious awareness will get to experience every experience that is possibly conceivable because that is what's already appearing to be happening.

But this is just an idea...let's be clear about that..take what is of value, what you resonate with and reject all else.

Oh and there is no end to this as long as there is the desire for it..which there clearly is. :D :wink:

.

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:31 am

There is no doubt that the universe is a totally mental phenomena
Many people doubt this. I myself doubt this. "The universe" is both mental and material. Dontaskme, do you truly believe that there is nothing out there besides mental events?

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:32 am

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:31 am
There is no doubt that the universe is a totally mental phenomena
Many people doubt this. I myself doubt this. "The universe" is both mental and material. Dontaskme, do you truly believe that there is nothing out there besides mental events?
There is a rational mind behind all phenomena, for no phenomena could arise without one... It's totally self-evident without doubt or error. I say it's rational simply because life is just so incredibly wise and intelligent and it works so beautifully and gracefully and effortlessly. That can only come from a rational mind...not an irrational mind.
What a Pollyanna you are, DAM!

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:38 am

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:31 am
There is no doubt that the universe is a totally mental phenomena
Many people doubt this. I myself doubt this. "The universe" is both mental and material. Dontaskme, do you truly believe that there is nothing out there besides mental events?
Of course it's both mental and material...as is the mind/body Cartesian dualism...can't have one without the other..but they are inseparably one and the same thing are they not? ..this is what nonduality is saying.

The material body is perceived information by the mental faculty is it not?

The material body is a mental phenomena is it not?

Notice the faculty for perception has the word ''cult'' in it.. :o

The whole idea there is a separate body is a fiction perceived by that which cannot be perceived.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:43 am

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:32 am

What a Pollyanna you are, DAM!
Okay..believe what you want, it's your prerogative...but I ..this one here does not have to believe it.

It's your own projection of the world not mine. Think about what you are projecting out-there....what are you without those projections...think on these things once in a while instead of allowing your thoughts to dominate you..

.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:53 am

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:31 am
There is no doubt that the universe is a totally mental phenomena
Many people doubt this. I myself doubt this. "The universe" is both mental and material. Dontaskme, do you truly believe that there is nothing out there besides mental events?
The body is not the perceiver...the body is the perceived...there is no denying there is an external world here at all, I don't know where you are getting that idea from...the external perceived objects are inseparable from the perceiver that cannot be perceived.

There is no space between what is out-there and what is perceiving what is out-there....there is no gap, it's all one phenomena seamlessly appearing to itself.

Every time you aka consciousness makes a comparison, or a distinction, it artificially creates the illusion of distance between this and that, here and there...this is the dual aspect of the mind, without which nothing would make sense, but it's a fiction...it's the divider of that which cannot ever be divided...this is what you as consciousness have to realise...but it will not happen until life evolves that to happen to you.

This is what evolution of consciousness is all about ..it's about moving on to greater levels of being and not getting stuck in the same old groove.

The purpose of consciousness is to wake up to it's unity and to experience the potential of it's infinite vastness to experience all possible experiences it can imagine.

Believing you are a separate human being is your own projected limitation...it's of the world...but what you truly are is beyond the world, you are beyond spacetime duality where the experiences happen...you are limitless, that believes in limits..

.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:11 pm

A related Osho exerpt
The first thing is that in this world, matter and consciousness are not two separate things. What we call matter is consciousness asleep, and what we know as consciousness is matter awakened. In reality matter and consciousness are not different; they are different manifestations of the same thing. Existence is one, and that one is godliness or brahman or whatsoever you want to call it. When that one is asleep it appears as matter, and when awake it is consciousness. So don’t treat matter and consciousness as separate entities; they are only utilitarian terms. They are not really different.

Even science has come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as matter. How amusing it is that fifty years ago Nietzsche declared that God is dead, and fifty years from now science will have to declare that God may or may not be dead but matter is certainly dead. As science goes deeper and deeper into matter it finds that matter is no more and only energy remains, only energy is.

What remains after the explosion or splitting of the atom is only particles of energy. And what we know as electrons, protons and neutrons are particles of electricity. In fact, it is not correct to call them particles, because particles imply matter. The scientists had to find a new word, which is quanta, which has a different connotation altogether. Quanta is both a particle and a wave. It is difficult to comprehend how something could be both a particle and a wave simultaneously, but quanta is both. Sometimes it behaves as a particle – which is matter; and sometimes it behaves as a wave – which is energy. Wave and energy are behaviors of the same quanta.

When science dug deep it found that only energy is, and when spirituality delved deep it found that only spirit or atman or soul is. And soul is energy. The time is just around the corner when a synthesis of science and religion will be achieved, and the distance that separates them will simply disappear. When the gap between matter and truth has proved to be false, the gap between science and religion cannot exist for long. If matter and consciousness are not two, how can religion and science be two? The separation of science and religion was dependent on the separation of matter and consciousness.

To me, only one is; two simply don’t exist. There is no place for duality; so the question of matter and consciousness does not arise. If you like the language of matter, you can say that everything is matter. And if you like the language of consciousness, you can say that everything is consciousness. I for one prefer the language of consciousness. Why do I prefer it? Because, in my view, one should always prefer the language of the higher, which has greater potential; one should not prefer the language of the lower, where potential is less and less.

Consciousness asleep is matter, and consciousness awakened is consciousness. All is consciousness.

~Signed Consciousness.

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:41 pm

dontaskme, is your last post quoted from someone called Osho? Whatever .I like it.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:07 am

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:41 pm
dontaskme, is your last post quoted from someone called Osho? Whatever .I like it.
Glad you liked it, so did I. Yes, it was an excerpt from Osho..I've quoted him a few times.

I had to look up what pollyanna meant...not heard that before...I thought is was meant to be some kind of idealist...but it doesn't mean that. Idealisms are in the story which I see through as illusions and not the true nature of what it is to be alive...although story is a part of that life.

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:36 am

Dontaskme, I looked up Osho and discovered that he is the late Rajneesh. Are you like Rajneesh followers who dressed in pink or orange? They were really nice people. One Pinky girl who was a qualified joiner (carpenter) did some really good work for me in my last house, and she was pleasant to be around. I gather that Rajneesh himself got to be too rich upon the contributions of his nice followers.

When I call you an idealist, I don't mean idealist in the sense of someone with high principles and ideals and unjustified optimism, like Pollyanna of the novel, although you are probably that as well. In philosophy an idealist is someone who believes that the appearance of the material world of the senses is caused by mind, and without mind there would be no material world of the senses.

The sort of opposite of a philosophical idealist is called a materialist. A philosophical materialist holds that minds are caused by nothing but brains , and by the material world in general.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:04 am

Belinda wrote:
Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:36 am
Dontaskme, I looked up Osho and discovered that he is the late Rajneesh. Are you like Rajneesh followers who dressed in pink or orange? They were really nice people. One Pinky girl who was a qualified joiner (carpenter) did some really good work for me in my last house, and she was pleasant to be around. I gather that Rajneesh himself got to be too rich upon the contributions of his nice followers.
No, I have never followed any cult in my entire life...not even science...never even smoked a joint either...I'm just a naturally happy high spirited kid that always looks on the bright side of life.

I like to think I am in sync with the natural flow of life living as and through this body-mind mechanism which appears to be a me. I sense the nondual reality that is a life living itself, and I like to flow with it where ever it wants to take me without any resistance.

I've tried resistance to what is in the past, but I failed every time...everything when wrong the more I tried to control, the worse my life was...now I've let go and let be..what ever will be will be...none of it is me.

As for being rich..in the story of I exist as a separate being...we somehow have to earn a living and pay our way using money...nothing wrong with how we choose to make our livings....and it is no business of any one else but our own.

.

I know all the knowledge Osho teaches, but I personally would never dream of making money out of this knowledge..money is just not my cup of tea...each to their own.

.

Belinda
Posts: 1783
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Belinda » Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:08 am

dontaskme wrote:
As for being rich..in the story of I exist as a separate being...we somehow have to earn a living and pay our way using money...nothing wrong with how we choose to make our livings....and it is no business of any one else but our own.

.
Silly! Modern slavers , drug traffickers, burglars, earn their livings in ways that we all must condemn.
You need to think before you write. You understand new age idealism and it's a pity you are so undisciplined.Are you too lazy to study in a disciplined way, or what?

ihoardpoetry
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:15 am

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by ihoardpoetry » Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:58 pm

Belinda wrote:
Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:50 am

Ihoardpoetry wrote:

Of course, this radical freedom arises from the ability to separate - or, as Sartre calls it, nihilate - since we can always reject any current influence (facticity about ourselves, such as past events) on our behaviour and radically choose something for ourselves. Nothing constrains us in our freedom, and anguish is the response to becoming aware of this, the realisation that we must constantly choose to re-make ourselves again and again through our action, and nothing we can do will allow us to avoid this.


This idea is illustrated in Genesis 1 where Adam and Eve eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 'Before' the people did this they were as bound to instinctive behaviour as any other animal or the wild grasses. 'Before', there was no conscious choice and the people had to do as the creator dictated, like other inanimate and animate things.

Dontaskme's claim would deny that the state of affairs after eating that fruit of differentiation exists, and that we can dispel the discomfort of Angst by clinging to the Garden of Eden. Thus, Eastern metaphysics can be compared with Western metaphysics. I wonder if among that rich pantheon there is a god which addresses the problem of Angst.

http://www.atimes.com/article/age-hollo ... ad-sartre/

https://aramam.wordpress.com/2011/09/01 ... istianity/

The nearest connection of Sartrean Angst with Hindu mythology is how Arjuna suffered from what we may perhaps identify with Angst before the battle whereupon Krishna showed Arjuna that in effect Arjuna was ruled by facticity even to the extent of killing his cousins in battle.


Ah. Religious iconography and symbolism. This is something I really enjoy (despite not being a believer), I'm glad you've made the comparison as it is one I'd never have thought to make myself. Discussions around free will and the Original Fall are something I find especially interesting.

Though I don't think the comparison between Sartrean conceptions of freedom and the fall necessarily fit. In fact, I'd say minimally so because Sartrean conceptions of freedom begin from an atheistic premise: that objects, which have a predetermined functionality - i.e. a knife has a predetermined essence, there is essential properties about it, as it has been designed. Meanwhile, humans lack this: "existence precedes essence" for persons, as there is no designer who created us. We bring a nothingness into the world since there is nothing concrete about our existence: we are incomplete, and therefore we create ourselves constantly. Sartrean freedom actually bears no impact on awareness of choice (as in the Fall, they were not truly free until they had the knowledge of alternatives like evil), so how much someone knows about their choices and also how practical their choices are does not effect their freedom. Essentially, even a prisoner within an isolated wall who is completely alienated from knowledge and the outside world would ultimately still free.

This is why I do not think the Original Fall can be comparable to Sartrean freedom. In the Original Fall, humans were designed without total freedom (as they did not have the capacity to commit evil, amongst other things) and upon eating the fruit from the tree, then Fell and gained the capacity for these things, becoming totally free in now having complete choice. Although, the problem arises of how, if they did not possess this capacity in the first place, they were able to betray God and commit an evil in eating the fruit.

I'm unsure how someone could 'cling to the Garden of Eden' to dispel their Angst if they were aware and believed the story. For if they believed the story of the Fall, they could not cling to the Garden of Eden in order to suppress their Angst by still claiming human innocence, and thus, not having a choice. So anyone who Believed could not dispel their faith in this way; but anyone who didn't believe (atheist or agnostic) would not need refer to the Garden of Eden and the Fall for their freedom, either - as Sartre did not - and thus would be irrelevant.

In fact, under Sartrean discourse there would be no way for humans to be free before or after the fall, since, in believing the creationist story, God has created humanity, therefore with a design in mind, and humans are not free. They are not free because God provided them with a predetermined essence: their existence would be complete, there would be a shared human nature. This is anti-thetical to Sartrean theory. Unfortunately, I am simply doubtful about the capacity to form a symbiosis between Sartrean freedom and theology, irrelevant of how interesting I find that possibility and your comments (which, is very).

Angst does not arise out of being ruled by facticity. In that situation, given what you have said (as I have no other knowledge of it) it appears to me that Krishna is attempting to deceive Arjuna into a position of bad faith. If we accept bad faith as the denial of one's freedom, we can also see it as affirming that you are ruled by your facticity (which, according to Sartre, is false). Angst arises, I would posit, when we rise up out of our bad faith and come to accept our freedom. But bad faith is also a response to this angst, since it is an uncomfortable feeling. However, I would be interesting to hear more about your proposal on this idea and how Krishna is speaking to Arjuna about freedom.

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: You have no image of yourself.

Post by Dontaskme » Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:41 pm

Belinda wrote:
Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:08 am
dontaskme wrote:
As for being rich..in the story of I exist as a separate being...we somehow have to earn a living and pay our way using money...nothing wrong with how we choose to make our livings....and it is no business of any one else but our own.

.
Silly! Modern slavers , drug traffickers, burglars, earn their livings in ways that we all must condemn.
You need to think before you write. You understand new age idealism and it's a pity you are so undisciplined.Are you too lazy to study in a disciplined way, or what?
Supposing I became a master at being diciplined ...then what?

Would that mean I would be finally fulfilled or something....?

And what does it matter how people choose to earn a living....why condemn it....if there are no eternal moral values...surely we can just do what the heck we like...since we are free to make up our own minds about how we want to spend our temporal life experience ...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests