UnbornTao

If you recognize and then set aside everything you think is true (believe), you might be left with a deep sense of uncertainty or openness, so go do that.

We could do this all day. If I'm understanding you correctly, you mean the experience of grass? "Grass" for you would be a different experience than for everyone else if you were blind, or didn't know of its existence at all. Even before language there would be some learned correlation or distinction between that thing and that other thing. I'd say this faculty of recognition is not a function of language, although it does add to the experience of objects. Sounds good. Some additions, just for fun: "Grass" isn't a fact of the universe. You had to learn it, recognize it, differentiate it. Imagine how humans lived prior to the development of the conceptual mind. It might not have been a given at all. It might have been invented. And then it became a given. I'm just using the mind as an example. It's likely that by "the thing by itself" we still mean our cognition of it, our experience of it. We may be trying to open the door to some kind of direct encounter with being, independent of perception. Tricky.

Not sure "irritation" is the most appropriate term here, but I take your point. What's underneath the desire to destroy? If I insulted you, where in your experience would you find anger? (As if.) In any case, you can see that these, by themselves, don't demand a response. I bet you've experienced this at least once: being angry, and then suddenly not. So what's up with that?

There is slop, and then there's whatever this thing is.

Countless explanations can be given, but what is your actual experience of the emotion?

Let's keep the proselytizing going:

😁 Why won't you let me proselytize to you already? 😡

Charles Wazowski. Bukowski. You generate the anger.

See an object, then close your eyes. Visualize it in your mind. Is your experience of that thing the same as before? In the experience that you shared, there would be no encounter with "grass" to not think about if you had your eyes closed. Just pointing out some basic mechanisms of perception, if you will. Good, no need for artificial fireworks. Thanks. Even prior to or independent of thinking and labeling, you likely still differentiated between one thing and another. The relationship with this or that particular thing would've mostly stayed the same. You might not have 'thought of' grass but in the background you knew that it wasn't a cat, or a cloud, or cancer. Trying to ground this a bit. I guess one of the goals here is recognizing that we don't know what anything is for real. Lots of "distractions" that make it seem as though we do but deep down we likely remain apprehensive that these are adopted and artificial in a deep sense.

Slopifier

Pick a simple activity - say, doing jumping jacks or washing the dishes. Now, stop calling it that. Stop thinking of the activity in those terms. Come up with a fancier, more beautiful name that evokes religious connotations. Pick one that you love and that makes you feel good - like a 'knower' in an uncertain world. Assign the new term - and its mental associations - a philosophy. Perhaps something Hindu-based, with a particular way of looking at the world. Make it sound spiritual, and make sure it is specific. You might take an existing one as a template for this. Now generate new goals and a purpose for the practice. Design the practice in your mind such that the purported goals and purpose are something other than cleaning kitchen appliances or whatever. Pretend this purpose and goals are real and are what the practice is directed at. Define the intensity, duration, frequency, and any other relevant details. Create stages of progress within the practice. --- Now, what do you have? What does that leave you with? What did you come up with?

It's about how they're presented, the disparity between what actually goes on and the world that's sold along with what is, in the end, commonly a set of simple conceptual-emotional and physical activities, and the tendency of people to fantasize. Do you think that playing football can enlighten you? Why not? What about stretching your body? How does your perception of the matter change when, instead of stretching the body and following a breathing routine, it's presented as an ancient Hindu system for achieving enlightenment called Yoga, for example?

Genetic mutation, duh.

A couple of examples of AI getting it wrong: https://www.reddit.com/r/DelusionsOfAdequacy/comments/1tr4k70/i_guess_ive_been_fluent_in_spanish_this_whole/ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BBJa32lCaaY

what the fuck are you talking about Jesse?

Pretend like you didn't do or hear the above, and work forward from the following description.

Don't overlook the depth of this. Look at the endless amount of fantasy you already operate from without knowing it. The entire field of spirituality is a clear example. Consider: Do you think that breathing a certain way will, say, 'awaken' you? Or meditating? Or having a certain experience or state change? Or stretching the body, following a certain diet, taking a chemical, or being convinced of a doctrine? Another example: You might assume that soccer doesn't make you enlightened, but "Kriya Yoga" does. Why? Remove the wishful thinking and all you're left with is a set of simple physical actions that's thought to produce this mysterious result- one lacking any clear sense of what the end result is going to be. If you did the exercise it may have given you a hint of what fantasy land is in this context.

Is it possible that all of us do the same when it comes to perceiving any given object? In other words, do we assume our perception is reality or the same as what exists? (Not as a philosophy but as a factual happening?) How can we even recognize this as such, if it is true? Based on this assumption, it's virtually impossible to see any contrast by which to gauge what reality is, other than our perception of it - except as an intellectual possibility that neither touches nor alters what is experienced, or assumed to be.

1. Get enlightened 2. Profit!

Feel free to think that.

Ahhhh

Welcome to the Actualized.org forum. It can get tricky because the performance and the impressions made by the person can be deceptive, too. People lie to themselves even about this awakening business, presuming that a state change is the same as a direct consciousness. You can certainly pay attention and recognize in some way when someone has some sort of awakening, something authentic. At the very least you can smell it if you learn to be sensitive - beyond the terminology and experience being presented. This is the same with someone like Ramana, or Buddha.