is Consciousness an Absolute Only in this Dream?

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Consciousness is that which is known. But how can you know that which is unknown?

"bro you are just dreaming the unknown" (not begging the question at all, thanks God)

[UnbornTao]

18 hours ago, zurew said:

The best move is to chill the fuck down and to not  chase after 100% epistemic certainty

You're saying: we don't know. But can it be "known"? That's what the pursuit is about. Beware of conflating failing to grasp one's nature with thinking or concluding that it is impossible. After all, it is you already.

Also, better not to confuse this work with an exercise in speculation and self-conviction. It is tempting for the mind to keep it in the domain of abstraction and intellect where it is safe, whereas honestly confronting oneself and one's experience isn't necessarily comfortable.

Throwing some things around.  

Edited June 8 by UnbornTao

[Loveeee]

 

12 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Oh come now...I was just posing what ifs haha.. in any reality you would ultimately come to the same conclusion.  Its fun to think about though 🤔

 

[zurew]

18 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Also, better not to confuse this work with an exercise in speculation and self-conviction. It is tempting for the mind to keep it in the domain of abstraction and intellect where it is safe, whereas honestly confronting oneself and one's experience isn't necessarily comfortable

It does involve assumptions, just you guys don't want to admit it, because thats much more comfortable than holding everything probabilistically and constantly having an existential crisis 

Edited June 7 by zurew

[Davino]

2 hours ago, integral said:

I am aware of this what I’m asking is consciousness is an absolute yet it can imagine absolutes. This creates a circular paradox. Do you know what I mean how is this possible?

How can one seed make a tree that makes thousands of seeds?

[UnbornTao]

18 hours ago, zurew said:

It does involve assumptions, just you guys don't want to admit it, because thats the much more comfortable than holding everything probabilistically and constantly having an existential crisis 

Sure, and it's also possible to grasp it directly, as in the case of Ramana Maharshi, for example. This breakthrough allegedly doesn't pertain to the domain of relativity or mind. It is consciousness of what is. The legend of Gotama exemplifies this possibility. Even though it remains hearsay for us, the moment one has a kensho or first glimpse, one's relationship to the matter changes. 

Edited June 8 by UnbornTao

[zurew]

28 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Sure, but also it's possible that someone grasps it directly such 

Sure, people can think or assume that they grasp it "directly". How do you know that you grasped it directly? Well, you trust fully your memory about it and also completely trust your ability to self-reflect correctly 

 

Btw we don't need to do this, if we would start with "yeah theis set of assumptions are taken for granted out of necessity and we build up from here", I would have 0 issue with it.

Edited June 7 by zurew

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, gettoefl said:

you can bring illusion to truth but you cant bring truth to illusion

truth will have nothing to do with non-truth

of course

Everything is truth, and God certainly appreciates insanity as a higher consciousness than anything humans comprehend.

Edited June 7 by Leo Gura

[Someone here]

@Leo Gura

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything is truth, and God certainly appreciates insanity as a higher consciousness than anything humans comprehend.

true that ! 

Sometimes I wonder how is sanity even POSSIBLE?!🤣

[UnbornTao]

On 6/7/2024 at 8:08 PM, zurew said:

Sure, people can think or assume that they grasp it "directly". How do you know that you grasped it directly? Well, you trust fully your memory about it and also completely trust your ability to self-reflect correctly 

 

Btw we don't need to do this, if we would start with "yeah theis set of assumptions are taken for granted out of necessity and we build up from here", I would have 0 issue with it.

We often start (and continue) this work with mental constructions in the way, like assumptions and fantasies.

However, I would have admitted it if what you said about "direct" were the case. Maybe Ramana was being authentic. This isn't a process or dependent on the mind. Look up the terms kensho and satori. They aren't about "figuring things out" or convincing oneself of one's beliefs. Direct means prior to intellect, perception and experience. Only a breakthrough will do, which is, in itself, self-validating, though the potential for self-deception is abundant.

If someone hasn't grasped it directly, it is difficult to convey what that word represents. In the meantime, it could be held as a possibility in one's mind. In any case, if you don't think of direct consciousness as possible, then we might as well go have a beer.

Edited June 8 by UnbornTao

[gettoefl]

45 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything is truth, and God certainly appreciates insanity as a higher consciousness than anything humans comprehend.

the god i encounter is flawless uncontaminated and perfect and couldn't corrupt itself with the unholy or limited in any capacity

defectiveness is impossible

unless someone is dreaming

Edited June 7 by gettoefl

[zurew]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

I'd have said that if it were the case. It isn't neither relative nor a process, I hear tell. If someone hasn't grasped it directly, it is difficult to convey what that word represents, but in the meantime, it could be held as a possibility in one's mind. I don't claim to know my nature, btw.

Take a look at what terms such as Kensho and Satori may be pointing towards. They aren't about "figuring things out" or convincing oneself of one's beliefs. Only a genuine insight will do, which is in itself self-validating, but the potential for self-deception is of course abundant. Hey, not knowing what this "direct" business means is OK. If you don't hold direct consciousness as possible, then we might as well go have a beer or coffee, which is in fact what I'm going to do now.  

You need some Zen in your life. Tell me what I need.  

Here is what im willing to give: There is a set of things, that we can have epistemic access to (given some foundational assumptions), and there is probably a way to max out on that set (maybe). Lets grant that there is a way to max out on it. -  That sounds like a really fucking cool thing.

Now, lets start with  an opposite assumption, namely, that there is a set of truths about yourself and about the world that  you have 0 epistemic access to and you will never have any epistemic acces to . Now ,the issue comes when we start to make knowledge claims about that set - and thats what I have problem with here (mostly).

When someone says "consciousness is all there is" -  thats a claim that seem to be touching on that set, and it shouldn't be touching on it. If the sentence would be "Consciousness is all there is, given what I have epistemic access to" - then I would be much more accepting of that statement.

So by definition, everyone has to admit, that there is 0 way for you to rule out the possibility or the existence of that set, and because of that, we should only ever make claims about things, that we have epistemic access to and leave alone all the rest.

Btw, just to be clear, no hard feelings here, this is just my writing style , sorry

Edited June 7 by zurew

[Breakingthewall]

18 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

the god i encounter is flawless uncontaminated and perfect and couldn't corrupt itself with the unholy or limited in any capacity

defectiveness is impossible

unless someone is dreaming

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

 

Exactly. Any opinion that things are not exactly as they should be is just an opinion that means nothing, it is simply something else that happens and that is also perfect, it is exactly what it is, and that's it. If you realize that it is extremely liberating. You don't have to try to understand reality with the mind, you have to perceive it. Mental understanding buries you in the mud, perceiving opens you to heaven. 

Edited June 7 by Breakingthewall

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, zurew said:

"bro you are just dreaming the unknown" (not begging the question at all, thanks God)

Hehe. Trying your best to answer that question honestly is a good exercise in epistemic humility and actually an accurate test of whether you're coming at the "direct experience" doctrine from a place of authentic experience or ironically from a place of intellectualized dogma. I remember Rupert Spira saying something like this once when starting a presentation of his worldview: "you firstly have to concede that you only care about what is known". That is a honest statement of the limits of his position and a sign that he knows what he is talking about

Edited June 7 by Carl-Richard

[gettoefl]

17 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Exactly. Any opinion that things are not exactly as they should be is just an opinion that means nothing, it is simply something else that happens and that is also perfect, it is exactly what it is, and that's it. If you realize that it is extremely liberating. You don't have to try to understand reality with the mind, you have to perceive it. Mental understanding buries you in the mud, perceiving opens you to heaven. 

for real, mind is limitation and not that smart, god can do much better than we can imagine

[Leo Gura]

40 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

the god i encounter is flawless uncontaminated and perfect and couldn't corrupt itself with the unholy or limited in any capacity

Insanity is as holy as shit.

[zurew]

17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Rupert Spira saying something like this once when starting a presentation of his worldview: "you firstly have to concede that you only care about what is known". That is a honest statement of the limits of his position and a sign that he knows what he is talking about

Thats perfect and incredibly refreshing to hear.

[Breakingthewall]

15 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

for real, mind is limitation and not that smart, god can do much better than we can imagine

The mind is a  tool and should have the objective of opening the being that is happening as much as is possible in depth. Knowing is superficial . The true perception is in depth . The use of the mind is see the obstacles, like fear, sadness, hate, narcissism, shame, desire of control, projection to the past or the future, and see them directly, to understand them and deactivate it's power.

About the understanding of the infinity, the mind isn't infinite intelligent, then is zero intelligent in that sense, but its like an addiction to try

Edited June 7 by Breakingthewall

[Someone here]

When i think of insanity i think of the idea of being stuck inside a room with no doors.. Just four walls.. You stuck between four walls.. For eternity 

What about the idea of these four walls starting to get tighter and tighter untill they crush your body into pieces? 

But then you will die.. That might be a refuge.. How about the four walls getting so tight just enough to make you almost crushed.. But not fully yet.. Such that you can't move and will be stuck like that... Forever? 

Sorry for making some insane ideas explicit. 

Sweet dreams everyone! 

[gettoefl]

2 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

The mind is a  tool and should have the objective of opening the being that is happening as much as is possible in depth. Knowing is swallow, is just in the surface. The true perception is in depth . The use of the mind is see the obstacles, like fear, sadness, hate, narcissism, shame, desire of control, and see them directly, to understand them and deactivate it's power.

About the understanding of the infinity, the mind isn't infinite intelligent, then is zero intelligent in that sense, but its like an addiction to try

we have the same understanding although we took different roads ... you are my amazing teacher brother