Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:13 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 12:06 am In observing a thought one can observe, through self reflection, that nothing occurs behind it except a certain formlessness. This formlessness is the gap between one thought and another much in the same manner a gap in memory results in the seperation between memories. Thus a thought lies behind a thought given this inevitable gap occurs.
According to your logic this gap - as you are aware of it - has to be a thought as well... no?
Or are you saying that reality exists of thoughts and formless gaps? But then again... you are aware of the gap... so it has to be a thought as well...

All thoughts are intrinsically empty in and of themselves thus necessitate the gap as inherently part of the thought. To observe the gap is to observe the multiplicity of thoughts much in the same manner the observation of a gap between multiple particles is to observe multiple particles. Like rings within rings, both containing emptiness and further rings, so the gap occurs much in the same manner.


Also: Who is doing the observing? Is there a separate observer? If so, who or what is this observer?
If you are aware of this observer, then it would have to be a thought as well, right?

The observer is that which assumes, with that which assumes being a formless state. All observation relies upon an intrinsic emptiness of form through which form is imprinted. Under these terms, where observation is an act of imprintation, consciousness extends beyond the human condition and into creation itself.



Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 12:06 am Void is the boundary condition which both forms the phenomenon and seperates it. And example is a glass half full of water, half full of air. A boundary occurs between the air and water, which while simultaneously defining them also is empty in itself. Emptiness thus acts as a means of distinction.
Ok... as "void" is only an idea there really is no boundary at all... (besides the idea, of course)

Void is formlessness, formlessness is multiplicity where void is observed only through the relationship between parts. This relationship between parts is determined by the limits which manifest them. For example a glass half of water and half of air observes the medial line between the air and water as intrinsically empty. The line of distinction is in fact void and this void individuated the phenomenon as exist in themselves as well as separating them. Void both seperates and unifies.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 12:06 am The field of color reflects itself through an infinite variation of colors
A "thing" can never be infinite - by being infinite it gives up its "thingness" and automatically "turns into everything".

False a line can be broken down into infinite lines with each line as manifesting further lines. Finiteness is multiple infinities where 1,2,3 or more lines is in fact multiple infinities.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am False a line can be broken down into infinite lines with each line as manifesting further lines. Finiteness is multiple infinities where 1,2,3 or more lines is in fact multiple infinities.
"A line can be broken down into infinite lines" only if the line itself is already infinite - but this breaking down is nothing but a mental exercise...
You imagine thought up infinities, while the "original" and only one infinity itself has actually never been broken (it cannot be broken down as there is only it and every attempt at dissecting it will only result in the illusion of separation - again: this is only a mental exercise, but not reflected in reality).
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am All thoughts are intrinsically empty in and of themselves thus necessitate the gap as inherently part of the thought.
Yes, every phenomenon, all things (including thought) are empty of any sort of independent or intrinsic nature - but this doesn't mean that the gap is part of thought. It means that the observation of a thought depends on the gap being there before and after the thought arises.
The thought arises "in" the gap, or rather: on the eternal/infinite background (=the gap, which is also called: consciousness) as an expression of the background/consciousness (but, at the same time, it is not separate from it).
The gap/consciousness is actually not a gap at all, but rather the always present background/screen on which thoughts and "the rest" of direct experience arises.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am All observation relies upon an intrinsic emptiness of form through which form is imprinted. Under these terms, where observation is an act of imprintation, consciousness extends beyond the human condition and into creation itself.
Not sure what you are talking about... are you attempting to describe the generation of a conceptual memory (of an observation)?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 12:19 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am False a line can be broken down into infinite lines with each line as manifesting further lines. Finiteness is multiple infinities where 1,2,3 or more lines is in fact multiple infinities.
"A line can be broken down into infinite lines" only if the line itself is already infinite - but this breaking down is nothing but a mental exercise...
You imagine thought up infinities, while the "original" and only one infinity itself has actually never been broken (it cannot be broken down as there is only it and every attempt at dissecting it will only result in the illusion of separation - again: this is only a mental exercise, but not reflected in reality).


Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am All thoughts are intrinsically empty in and of themselves thus necessitate the gap as inherently part of the thought.
Yes, every phenomenon, all things (including thought) are empty of any sort of independent or intrinsic nature - but this doesn't mean that the gap is part of thought. It means that the observation of a thought depends on the gap being there before and after the thought arises.
The thought arises "in" the gap, or rather: on the eternal/infinite background (=the gap, which is also called: consciousness) as an expression of the background/consciousness (but, at the same time, it is not separate from it).
The gap/consciousness is actually not a gap at all, but rather the always present background/screen on which thoughts and "the rest" of direct experience arises.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Nov 27, 2020 4:37 am All observation relies upon an intrinsic emptiness of form through which form is imprinted. Under these terms, where observation is an act of imprintation, consciousness extends beyond the human condition and into creation itself.
Not sure what you are talking about... are you attempting to describe the generation of a conceptual memory (of an observation)?
This argument can be broken down to a simple contradiction:

You claim there is no division in reality yet seek to divide thought from reality when it is an inherent phenomenon which emerges from reality. If all is connected and there is no seperation you cannot seperate thought from reality.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 4:45 am This argument can be broken down to a simple contradiction:

You claim there is no division in reality yet seek to divide thought from reality when it is an inherent phenomenon which emerges from reality. If all is connected and there is no seperation you cannot seperate thought from reality.
I never said thought is separate - I actually said: thought arises on the eternal/infinite background (which is also called: consciousness) as an expression of consciousness (but, at the same time, it is not separate from it)

The only "things" that are separate are the concepts and ideas that manifest as a result of (chains of) thoughts.
These conceptual interpretations form a new - mirage like - reality, a world of concepts, in which separation, relativity, cause and effect etc etc exist, while, in fundamental reality, all of these are absent.
Fundamental reality is the screen on which the colours of direct experience flow - the world of concepts is the movie, colors turn into all kinds of objects, characters and activities, judgments and preferences...
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 8:18 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 4:45 am This argument can be broken down to a simple contradiction:

You claim there is no division in reality yet seek to divide thought from reality when it is an inherent phenomenon which emerges from reality. If all is connected and there is no seperation you cannot seperate thought from reality.
I [color=#FF0080]never said thought is separate - I actually said: thought arises on the eternal/infinite background (which is also called: consciousness)[/color] as an expression of consciousness (but, at the same time, it is not separate from it)

The only "things" that are separate are the concepts and ideas that manifest as a result of (chains of) thoughts.
These conceptual interpretations form a new - mirage like - reality, a world of concepts, in which separation, relativity, cause and effect etc etc exist, while, in fundamental reality, all of these are absent.
Fundamental reality is the screen on which the colours of direct experience flow - the world of concepts is the movie, colors turn into all kinds of objects, characters and activities, judgments and preferences...
Thought as not seperate from being, yet seperate from eachother necessitates being as seperate from being. One thought as seperate from another necessitates the thought of being as seperate from being itself (which is also a thought considering thought and being are connected).
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 6:10 pm Thought as not seperate from being, yet seperate from each other necessitates being as seperate from being. One thought as seperate from another necessitates the thought of being as seperate from being itself.
There is no thought separate from another thought - you never experience two thoughts being separate from each other.
You can only experience a thought stating "this thought is separate from the last" - but, this conclusion is flawed as the last thought is not present anymore to actually experience this separation - there being a separation between the two is thus only an interpretation based on our ideas of phenomena moving in time and space, but not actually directly experienced.

Also: all thoughts are "made from" the same essence - namely: consciousness - which simply appears as one form and then another - but this doesn't mean that one form is separate from any other.
Its like the field of vision - which is "made of" colors: there is no separation anywhere to be found, no empty places that could qualify as a proper separator between patterns of color. Again: The separation between patterns (objects) is a conceptual interpretation, but never directly experienced.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:36 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Nov 28, 2020 6:10 pm Thought as not seperate from being, yet seperate from each other necessitates being as seperate from being. One thought as seperate from another necessitates the thought of being as seperate from being itself.
There is no thought separate from another thought - you never experience two thoughts being separate from each other.
You can only experience a thought stating "this thought is separate from the last" - but, this conclusion is flawed as the last thought is not present anymore to actually experience this separation - there being a separation between the two is thus only an interpretation based on our ideas of phenomena moving in time and space, but not actually directly experienced.

Also: all thoughts are "made from" the same essence - namely: consciousness - which simply appears as one form and then another - but this doesn't mean that one form is separate from any other.
Its like the field of vision - which is "made of" colors: there is no separation anywhere to be found, no empty places that could qualify as a proper separator between patterns of color. Again: The separation between patterns (objects) is a conceptual interpretation, but never directly experienced.
Conceptual interpretation is thus seperate from direct experience, yet both are emergent from being thus necessitating a seperation. You contradict yourself.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:38 am Conceptual interpretation is thus seperate from direct experience, yet both are emergent from being thus necessitating a seperation. You contradict yourself.
Not really...
Imagine... you look at the room you're in... the direct experience of seeing itself is simply this ever changing field of color.
Suddenly you recognise a specific pattern - a thought arises: "Apple"
Now this thought "apple", just like the field of color, is your direct experience, but the concept "Apple" at which the thought points, is not a separate entity at all - its only a specific pattern of color, not actually separate from the rest of the field of colors.
Its only our conceptual interpretation of this colourful pattern, of what an "apple" actually is, that suggests that this pattern is an independent, separately existing object, which is meant to be separate from the rest of the experienced colors.
But in reality, this independent object "apple" is never actually experienced, all you experience is: color - the separate object is as such not experientially real - it is only conceptually real (one could also say: its imaginary, an illusion of independent existence)
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:24 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:38 am Conceptual interpretation is thus seperate from direct experience, yet both are emergent from being thus necessitating a seperation. You contradict yourself.
Not really...
Imagine... you look at the room you're in... the direct experience of seeing itself is simply this ever changing field of color.
Suddenly you recognise a specific pattern - a thought arises: "Apple"
Now this thought "apple", just like the field of color, is your direct experience, but the concept "Apple" at which the thought points, is not a separate entity at all - its only a specific pattern of color, not actually separate from the rest of the field of colors.
Its only our conceptual interpretation of this colourful pattern, of what an "apple" actually is, that suggests that this pattern is an independent, separately existing object, which is meant to be separate from the rest of the experienced colors.
But in reality, this independent object "apple" is never actually experienced, all you experience is: color - the separate object is as such not experientially real - it is only conceptually real (one could also say: its imaginary, an illusion of independent existence)
Reality is thus seperate from illusion, yet illusion emerges from reality and as such is a degree of reality. One degree of reality is thus seperate from another.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 4:49 am Reality is thus seperate from illusion, yet illusion emerges from reality and as such is a degree of reality. One degree of reality is thus seperate from another.
There are no degrees of reality (and realty is not separate from anything else, simply because there is only reality).

What's the "degree of reality" of a mirage in a desert?
How much water will you find in this imagined oasis?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:08 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 4:49 am Reality is thus seperate from illusion, yet illusion emerges from reality and as such is a degree of reality. One degree of reality is thus seperate from another.
There are no degrees of reality (and realty is not separate from anything else, simply because there is only reality).

What's the "degree of reality" of a mirage in a desert?
How much water will you find in this imagined oasis?
A mirage is the manifestation of an image away from its source. The mirage is disconnected from the actual state of water thus necessitating a degree of seperation between one phenomenon and another. Yet the mirage exists as an extension of being, and so does the water, thus one state of being is seperate from another.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:09 am A mirage is the manifestation of an image away from its source.
In direct experience (reality) a mirage, just like any other visual impression, is simply the momentary field of color - not "an image away from its source".
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:09 am The mirage is disconnected from the actual state of water thus necessitating a degree of seperation between one phenomenon and another. Yet the mirage exists as an extension of being, and so does the water, thus one state of being is seperate from another.
That's all imaginary gobbledygook, not your actual direct experience.

Anyway, lets agree to disagree and leave it with that.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 3:01 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:09 am A mirage is the manifestation of an image away from its source.
In direct experience (reality) a mirage, just like any other visual impression, is simply the momentary field of color - not "an image away from its source".

False, the mirage of water and water are disconnected in the respect one is liquid and another is not.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:09 am The mirage is disconnected from the actual state of water thus necessitating a degree of seperation between one phenomenon and another. Yet the mirage exists as an extension of being, and so does the water, thus one state of being is seperate from another.
That's all imaginary gobbledygook, not your actual direct experience.

Gobbledygook is a direct experience of a phenomenon.

Anyway, lets agree to disagree and leave it with that.

How can we disagree if all is connected?

AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by AlexW »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 3:16 am How can we disagree if all is connected?
I wouldn't say it is all connected, as this creates the impression of separate things being connected in some magical way - I would rather say that there is no separation.
This is an acknowledgment of the fact that separate things actually do not existing in direct experience (and thus there is nothing to connect in the first place).
See, you are talking about phenomena, about separate (but maybe: connected?) things - you believe you actually experience these separate things (right?) - whereas I don't.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Perfection is Both Relative and Absolute

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

AlexW wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 3:30 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 3:16 am How can we disagree if all is connected?
I wouldn't say it is all connected, as this creates the impression of separate things being connected in some magical way - I would rather say that there is no separation.
This is an acknowledgment of the fact that separate things actually do not existing in direct experience (and thus there is nothing to connect in the first place).
See, you are talking about phenomena, about separate (but maybe: connected?) things - you believe you actually experience these separate things (right?) - whereas I don't.
An absence of connection is seperation............in direct experience of one thing comes an absence of direct experience in another.

Anyhow our beliefs are seperate and belief is emergent from reality.
Post Reply