UnbornTao

That sounds like a solid definition to start us with. An additional definition of balance, and its etymology, by GPT: --- Balance, Noun A state of equilibrium or parity, especially between opposing forces or influences. The distribution of weight that allows someone or something to remain upright and steady. A mental or emotional steadiness. A condition in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions. Balance, Verb To bring into or maintain in a state of equilibrium. To offset or counteract something with an equal force or amount. To assess or weigh different elements to reach harmony or fairness. Etymology of balance: From Middle English balaunce, From Old French balance meaning “balance, scales for weighing,” From Latin bilanx, bilancem (nominative: bilanx): bi- = “two” lanx = “plate” or “dish” (of a scale) Originally, the term referred to a pair of scale pans (two plates) used for weighing—hence the notion of weighing opposing things to achieve equilibrium. --- Can you provide examples of the interplay of polar opposites in life? How do you view multiplicity? What is the principle regardless of how it might affect us? It seems balance occurs as a relationship. For example, say you prepare a dish. What would a "balanced" meal be about? Obviously, adding a pound of salt to the dish is inconsistent with balance, unless the other ingredients call for it (maybe you're cooking a huge meal). How do the ingredients relate to each other such that "balance" shows up?

It seems to me that not everything that exists is, or can be, perceived. For example, you are aware, and this isn't a perception. What is that about? The act of perceiving is hard to deny; in that sense, it could be said to exist. Even though I view it as a process mediated by the body (and thus relative), what it is is up for grabs. It's not that the hardware is perceived, but rather that it is responsible for the perceiving in the first place. You can close your eyes and experience this personally. If you didn’t have eyes, you obviously wouldn’t enjoy the sense of sight--that’s what the claim refers to. I’d like to get clear on what you consider perception to be, so we can contemplate this better. As for me, I’m not conscious of what perception is--its nature--just making observations on the fly. For what it's worth, I’ll say that perception is a meaningless phenomenon. Encountering something through the senses, which is done indirectly, is useless sensory input until we relate what's encountered to ourselves by interpreting it, assigning meaning, etc.

Stop thinking all the time and just relax, calm down, exercise, meditate.

@Growly Feel the body, allow it to be there completely, practice deep and slow breaths from the belly, relax your body. Dedicate half an hour to this practice and it should help.

I'd say both

Vernon Howard

Hey, finally some position that may not be entirely fantasy-based.

The ultimate enlightenment:

Yep.

@Breakingthewall Okey doke

@Breakingthewall Just an observation.

Sorry, I just meant you could open up in general.

Yeah, that's a good example.

"Santa" is not in the same domain as the availability of a perceptive organ, hence the comparison between humans and earthworms. If your argument is that perception is infinite, it clearly is a relative, biological function, just like a computer needs some sort of hardware to exist. I don't see how distinction relates to this discussion. Perception seems to occur as an activity, that's the claim. How do you see perception?

@Breakingthewall You could do some contemplation.

I like that one.

What's the truth of our own dysfunctional patterns? Are we our behavior? Maybe there's also something more than that to be found.

True.

Perceive what? You just wouldn't know what you are not perceiving, it seems to me. For example humans can't hear sounds outside a certain frequency range. A blind person simply doesn't have the faculty of sight -- it's not that she perceives the absence of this perceptive faculty. In her mind, there's no context in which to accurately represent or conceive of the existence of sight.

It does seem like perceptive organs, or some such, are a prerequisite for perception to occur. I wouldn't call it infinite. (I'm trying to appear humble).

We don't even know whether we, as selves, exist or not, or what our nature is.

Why doesn't the self want to look at itself? What is the nature of the entity doing the avoiding?