The intellect is powerless, now what?

[tatsumaru]

During my trip in India last year I had the realization that the intellect is incapable of certainty.
Its job seems to be to browse the past, but it doesn't possess the capacity for certainty.

As I let go of beliefs, faith, religion and hopes I arrive at a very bizarre place, a place of complete uncertainty.
All kinds of fears that I suppressed through wishful thinking and hopes begin to resurface here.
It's not nice. In this situation one quickly becomes aware of the reason why everyone clings to their beliefs so hard.

So now what? I am here completely clueless. Logic is no longer helpful for I have realized that even logic is based on beliefs.
Some beliefs on which logic is based on are: "cause precedes effect", "empirical data is meaningful", "insights are meaningful", "reality obeys logic", "logic accurately describes reality", etc...

One of my first spiritual inspirations was a guy called Jed McKenna. He started his journey based on the assumption that there's truth and that truth is the simplest thing possible. In other words he believed that if something could not be further simplified then it's fundamental...
Although I have listened to all of his audio books multiple times, he never really explained how he confirmed that there's truth.
Anyone with enough imagination can come up with a version of the universe where reductionism is futile.
Example:


I've heard people say - "Well if there's no truth then the truth is that there's no truth.". Wrong.
If there's no truth, then there's no truth. It's easy to see why you can't generate certainty via mental gymnastics
and that any statement can be questioned as long as you have sufficient imagination.

Probably that's why Carneades exclaimed "Nothing can be known not even this."
This is a very interesting statement as it's not simply the nihilistic "Nothing can be known".
First it tells us that nothing can be known and then it takes away that as well. What's left is not a statement
but a very peculiar state of mind - a type of emptiness. The thought process collapses for a moment...

It is my understanding that zen koans such as "what is the sound of one hand clapping?" were designed
to help us collapse all logic and mental gymnastics and focus our awareness on this emptiness.

The heart sutra states - "...no ignorance, and no termination of ignorance..., no attainment, and no non-attainment..."
At this point the logical mind is like "wtf, pick one...", but my understanding is that the logical mind is missing the point.
The point is again to become aware of this empty place which isn't something and isn't nothing either, for nothing is also a concept.

Although this is quite profound it doesn't answer any questions and it doesn't solve a lot of suffering.
It didn't produce any samadhis for me (maybe I don't spend enough time meditating on this emptiness) and it didn't make me realize that form is emptiness and emptiness is also form either.

You see philosophy for me is part of the problem for as Richard Feynman stated "To answer any WHY question, one must begin with an assumption" - otherwise there's no basis to start from. But do you really want to start from a belief like Jed McKenna? Do you really want to assume? I certainly don't.
And to be honest these assumptions seem equally worthless to me as religion or any other belief system.

Here's what I intuit (I could be wrong): You don't surrender to understand, because if you have an expectation you can't surrender. If you are hoping to get something out of your surrender you don't really surrender. The desire to surrender arises out of the realization that the senses cannot grasp reality. In other words instead of asking why should I surrender, it's better to ask, why should I not surrender. Most people feel that by surrendering they will be trading one real thing for another. That there's some sort of sacrifice or loss involved. Is that really the case?

Here's another good one:
"Without the past, there would be nothing to think about, let alone someone to think it." - From the TV show Sens8

The Zen Masters call this journey The Gateless Gate, because what you are surrendering never really existed in the first place. From Ego's point of view there is a journey to wake up. From the point of view of someone who is awake there is no journey, because you were just dreaming.

So why am I writing all of this? Because I desperately want to go further. I have been stuck here for a while...

So where's Trinity? How do I get out of here? What's next?
Did you enjoy this humble revelation of mine? I am looking forward to your comments.

 

Edited December 30, 2017 by tatsumaru

[AleksM]

@tatsumaru

Quote

the ultimate truth is that all truths are true ~Bashar

 

Quote

 All truths are true, all paths are valid - Your life is a Symbol but are you looking for the meaning? - Bashar

 

Intellect is a passive. Love is an active force.

The mind can stick only to one side of the coin.

There is no why.

 

[Dodo]

@tatsumaru I think assuming that there is a truth and that it's the simplest thing is pretty good thing to have on your radar - I certainly started like that too.

For me personally, I've dealt with Mathematics in the past, and I just love clear and simple solutions to problems, not long winded 'smart looking' ones. That's the kind of truth I am looking for. Clear and simple, because complexity is shit basically  

Truth like : If it's not here now always, then it's not truth, cause it can be forgotten. I like the here and now to remind me what the truth is... In any situation... Because basically Im too dumb to remember! 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Dodo

[Dodo]

@tatsumaru Oh btw, to answer your question. Yeah it's not intellect, it's feeling-knowing that we should use here. 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Dodo

[Nahm]

39 minutes ago, tatsumaru said:

During my trip in India last year I had the realization that the intellect is incapable of certainty.
Its job seems to be to browse the past, but it doesn't possess the capacity for certainty.

As I let go of beliefs, faith, religion and hopes I arrive at a very bizarre place, a place of complete uncertainty. that stuff was baggage. Weighing you down. There were never any answers in it, never any actual help.

All kinds of fears that I suppressed through wishful thinking and hopes begin to resurface here.
It's not nice. In this situation one quickly becomes aware of the reason why everyone clings to their beliefs so hard. Ignorance. You’re not anymore. Congrats. Love the Matrix pictures btw. 

You’re not clueless. You’re wakin up. You were clueless.

 

So where's Trinity? Inside of you, same place everything else is. 

How do I get out of here? There really is no here. You’re where you think you are, internally, existentially. 

What's next? Changing everything about you, your diet, your thinking, your relationships, your rituals & practices, your perception, and your universe. Breathing is really important. 
Did you enjoy this humble revelation of mine? Thank you! 

I think you realized you’re Thomas Anderson, and you’re thinking about takin the red pill, but wondering if it’s real. If it’s safe, even.  That it’s not real, is real af. You’re logic is sound. Great. That’s Thomas stuff. Consciousness, that’s Neo stuff. Meditation, self inquiry, breath awareness, letting go, all Thomas-to-Neo practices. Psychedelics, that’s visiting the oracle, where spoons bend, cause there really is no spoon. Like the oracle, they’ll mindfuck you with the truth, with what you need, not what you expect or want. It really is you that bends, not the truth. That’s the immense value of psychedelics, and that’s what filters out the Neo’s. You’ll see ‘behind the curtain’. And probably start wondering, who the architect is. Have some Advil handy. I think you’re on the verge of one hell of a ride. 

Uncertainty, is the gift. 
 

 

[tatsumaru]

3 hours ago, Nahm said:

I think you realized you’re Thomas Anderson, and you’re thinking about takin the red pill, but wondering if it’s real. If it’s safe, even.  That it’s not real, is real af.

What do you mean by real?
 

Quote

real
adjective

1. actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.

So how do you know that something is actually existing and is not a hallucination? And also what does it mean to exist?

These kind of questions are really problematic because there really is no intellectual answer.

There is a mental gymnastics exercise in Buddhism called dependent origination and it tries to prove that nothing really exists because for something to exist as a separate thing it must arise in and of itself otherwise it wouldn't be separate, but then if it had some inherent nature then it wouldn't be able to change because it's only that thing, but since we know things change then they don't exist.

I don't value it that much. It's still based on assumptions so it can never satisfy me.

Edited December 30, 2017 by tatsumaru

[Nahm]

@tatsumaru imo, it applies to anything & everything really.       I mean real as in the world appears to be real. Pretty much what the definition you posted says.   Nothing exists. It’s not inherently problematic, we make it problematic (imo). I like the dependent origination reference. Nice.  It’s like you, made of atoms, eating atoms which become your atoms. And then what atoms are made of is really a doozy.   Have fun man. Great post!

[tatsumaru]

IMO REAL is something that does not and can not change, otherwise what are you even referring to?
Seneca said “Do not regard as valuable anything that can be taken away”.
Whether there's anything eternal like that is not clear to me.

It has been suggested by some that the real Present is not even a part of time and that within the dimension of the absolute Present nothing ever changes. In high-level Buddhism it has been proposed that the 6 senses (5 senses + intellect) cannot even observe the present, only the past. Apparently there are some meta-senses which can observe the Present.

That's going further than the Zen "carry water, chop wood" thing. The Buddha didn't carry water or chop wood, nor did Tilopa or Naropa.
While the idea sounds nice I haven't confirmed it myself so I am only sharing it as food for thought - maybe its true, maybe its not.

[Monkey-man]

Jed is cool writer and probs enlightened, but he is dogmatic, he interprets his realization in the way that makes his worldview comfy, it is still leftovers of his ego that talking. For him all reality is just fake entertainment show that doesn't exist and never ever happened. But I think he is just overwhelmed with existence of divinity.

He might have lost his mind, because reaching rock bottom truly requires some extraordinary capabilities to handle its aftermath, it goes beyond any enlightenment, it goes straight to annihilation of gross matter into pure god. Ancient mystics used to prepare the hell out of themselves to reach there 'safely'.

As Jed says himself, rock bottom truth can make u insane if you are not ready

so he just became insane himself. he might be in pure non-dual awareness but he just couldn't handle it.

 

Not to be hopeful but Truth exists, truth is that you are one eternal god. Truth is that everything is true. Coz you are everything once you know it. And untruth doesn't exist because it won't be there, so it cannot be. No why, truth is, because you are.

I'm no expert in Buddhism, but theravada has one view - emptiness or Sunyata is absence of separate existence, but existence is one and interdependent. everything exist as a whole. while mahayana has another view saying that its all non-existence. 

Some people says its beyond that dichotomy. But I do not see any dichotomy frankly. Why eternal cannot be one or another? If I am and I am really Truth, and world is still happening even in timeless eternity and appearances are there although recognized as emptiness and if 'picture' of the world is still happening', then everything exist. But if I realize truth and world disappear literally, then its non-existence. Since Jed is still in this world...

Its existence for me. Call it dream, magic, reality, hologram , hallucination, information but its existence if it is truth and truth speaks for itself. Its structure and complexity speaks for itself, non-existence would create chaos. If it is not truth then it is not, but then this posting wouldn't happen, and Buddha wouldn't care and Jesus wouldn't care and Muhammad wouldn't care and Jed wouldn't care, but they all do.. 

Truth-seeking is what makes any human-being to hustle, knowingly or unknowingly, and no one can stop hustle and live in peace and focus on being until one is not in its true nature. 

religions (regardless of how misleading) originally were made as a method for ppl to get one with god, to realize true nature, its another thing that ego corrupts it

and mysticism too plus it is for hardcore mystics who wanted to go beyond and reach rock bottom divinity or perform miracles or to know more

 

As for logic and thinking, there is great allegory of that in fall of man:

Quote

 

At first, Adam and Eve lived with God in the Garden of Eden being holy, but the serpent tempted them into eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which God had forbidden. After doing so, they became ashamed of their nakedness and God expelled them from the Garden to prevent them from eating from the tree of life and becoming immortal.

 

 

 

Once humanity lost their whole (holy) non-dual subconscious nature through becoming self-aware and thus dual (tree of knowledge of good and evil) they started to identify themselves with their bodies (ashamed of nakedness), therefore it caused original sin (suffering) because now they are not in their true god's nature.

Its all about becoming whole again, one with reality, that's just how it all works, its nothing personal from absolute point, just perpetuum mobile. 

From kabbala

Quote

The reason is that knowing the purpose of his creation - to get all the pleasure for him for the sake of the Creator, Adam immediately wanted to do it. But beginning to receive this pleasure, he suddenly felt that he began to enjoy it for himself, not for the sake of the Creator, but from receiving pleasure only for himself.

Quote

In Judaism, Man, created in the image of God, being the crown of creation, is endowed with will and power to decide what is good and what is evil. It is believed that the restriction on eating fruits from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was effective until Saturday - if Adam and Eve had waited and tasted from the tree on the Sabbath, they would have had the power to discern between good and evil even within themselves.

Which means that, it is OK to get pleasures and to discover knowledge. But first you have to come back in your true nature (become christ who's called as second adam), (on Saturday, god's day, the day of reunification with god=enlightenment), and then you will be whole god again, being experience, having pleasures of this life and seek knowledge as well because now this seeking will be out of love (philosophy - love of wisdom) and not for selfish self-survival desires (there is no one to survive after your ego 'dies' at cross). U still do surviving though just as any animal.

Once you are in your true nature - you can discern between good and evil because now you are whole and god is doing it, and you won't suffer from seeing evil anymore. You will see good (god), because its all you, so you can judge out of compassion.

If we are not supposed to seek knowledge we wouldn't have left-brain at all. God wants to know himself from different perspectives, from physics, chemistry...

So nothing wrong with thinking per se but it is huge obstacle until you realize your true nature, after you do it - thinking will be for love and joy because everything become certain, certainty is orderliness, and order is wholeness and wholeness of three (consciousness, body, mind(soul) = father,son,spirit) is Trinity, and Trinity is love of Neo in the movie coz what else wholeness can feel like other than love n peace.

Also nothing wrong with believing or imagining bout all sorts of things, you believe then you create. But again you must do so only after becoming true, until so it is distraction because anything you believe with mind can only be a part and not the whole, devil games will also be there. 

But Faith is a bit different, it is believing with heart. I see life of human as unsettled questioning of own existence, and outcome is quite dependent on whether one is going to have faith in what is truth=god.

Quote

Faith means being sure of the things we hope for and knowing that something is real even if we do not see it.

You cannot see no-thing-ness, only to have faith = surrender = knowing truth with no guarantees, having no reservations, let it be. Difficult but necessary. Religions are full of sacrifice and faith, because its a necessary staff. Its not the end in itself but it will push ya through. 

Neo has sacrificed himself in the end, coz Neo is spiritual ego (clinging), once he did all Agents died (Agents are multiple perceptions, Smith is questioning all the time: what is it for mr anderson?). And he made his choice which in the same time was pre-destined. In a sense, he sacrificed everything or his life for everything which is not him. So he sacrificed everything for nothing but blind (he was blind in the end) faith in what is true. 

Edited December 31, 2017 by Monkey-man

[tatsumaru]

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

Jed is cool writer and probs enlightened.

Well Jed said that there's no-self so he sounds more like he's at the level of advaita fake-enlightenment. (no-self, union with God, Brahman etc.)
If we can trust the sutras (which Jed apparently did) then the no-self level of awareness is an illusion:

Quote

Tathāgata a subject that the majority of Buddhists stay far away from, and non-Buddhists, with the exception of some Taoists, ever farther. Tathāgata was the term that Sakyamuni referred to himself as, instead of the pronouns me, I or myself.   Tathāgata is the Buddha that most Buddhists, those on the Long Paths, don’t want to discuss.

“Those who cannot accept that the Tathāgata is eternal, cause misery” - Mahaparinirvana Sutra.

What? How can Buddha say that; didn’t he say everything is impermanent?

The Buddha said the Self is “indestructible like a diamond” -Mahaparinirvana Sutra.

No way! The Buddha said there was no self.

“I will now show you the nature which is not produced and not extinguished” -Shurangama Sutra.

Buddha said that “Buddha Nature [the Tathāgata] is the True Self and like a diamond, for example, it cannot be destroyed” Dharmaksema.

Yes, Buddha taught impermanence, suffering, Emptiness, non-self for child-like students; yet on the day of Parinirvana, the Tathāgata taught eternity, happiness, and the Self, saying , “now, when his students have overcome the sickness of false views and possess a healthy, more mature appetite, he can teach them the Tathāgatagarbha.”

“Those who hold the theory of non-self are injurers of the Buddhist doctrines, they are given up to the dualistic views of being and non-being; they are to be ejected by the convocation of the Bhikshus and are never to be spoken to” - Lankavatara Sutra 765.

So why did Sakyamuni Buddha speak of non-being?

He told a story of a woman with an ailing infant. The sickness of that child requires that it temporarily desist from drinking its mother’s milk while the medicine which has been administered to it is assimilated. To facilitate this, the mother smears her breasts with a bitter substance, and this deters the infant from suckling at his mother’s breasts. But after the medicine has been absorbed, the child can drink the health-bestowing mother’s milk to his heart’s content – although at first he is hesitant and fearful of doing so. This relates to the doctrine of non-Self, Emptiness (which many commentators on Buddhism equate with “non-substantialism” or “non-essentialism”) and Self: when his students are still spiritually “sick”, the Buddha gives them the bitter medicine of “non-Self” and Emptiness; but when they have progressed into greater health and maturity, he teaches them the reality of the Tathagatagarbha. 

A commentator mentions how early in this sutra the Buddha has to reprimand his enthusiastic “non-Self”-championing monks who “repeatedly meditate upon the idea that there is no Self” for being perverse in their understanding of Dharma and wrong-headedly applying the teaching of non-Self where its writ does not run – to the real Self.

“As when a garment is cleansed of its dirt, or when gold is removed from its impurities, they are not destroyed but remain as they are; so is the skandha self freed from its defilements” - Lankavatara Sutra 756.

 

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

truth is that you are one eternal god.

I don't like the word God because people use it to mean whatever they want and the word like any other word was created to refer to a specific idea (don't disrespect language by having your own definitions for every word because then communication becomes pointless, it's better to create your own word or language if the current one doesn't fit your goal):

Quote

Definition of God (Oxford Dictionary):
noun

1(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.

2(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.

‘a moon god’

‘the Hindu god Vishnu’

2.1 An image, animal, or other object worshipped as divine or symbolizing a god.

‘wooden gods from the Congo’

2.2 Used as a conventional personification of fate.

‘he dialled the number and, the gods relenting, got through at once’

3A greatly admired or influential person.

‘he has little time for the fashion victims for whom he is a god’

3.1 A thing accorded the supreme importance appropriate to a god.

‘don't make money your god’

As you can see it's about a divine being having power over and controlling other beings. Thus we can see why it's not very spiritual to want to be an eternal God or any other God for that matter. God is the ultimate Ego and is super-red on the Spiral Dynamics scale.

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

I'm no expert in Buddhism, but theravada has one view - emptiness or Sunyata is absence of separate existence, but existence is one and interdependent. everything exist as a whole. while mahayana has another view saying that its all non-existence. 

Yeah it's a little bit like the pendulum in Spiral Dynamics swinging between Ego and Other. At first Hinayana (Theravada) says Life's suffering but we can escape in Nirvana. That's designed to detach you from materialism.
Then when you are ready comes Mahayana which says there's actually nowhere to run and there's no-self. That's designed to detach you from your idea of what the self is.
When you are ready comes Vajrayana which says you are now sufficiently liberated from falsity to hear the truth - there is a real self and there's eternal happiness, and the idea of no-self belongs to the dualistic world of being and non-being.

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

Some people says its beyond that dichotomy. But I do not see any dichotomy frankly. Why eternal cannot be one or another? If I am and I am really Truth, and world is still happening even in timeless eternity and appearances are there although recognized as emptiness and if 'picture' of the world is still happening', then everything exist. But if I realize truth and world disappear literally, then its non-existence. Since Jed is still in this world...

Yeah we don't really know what enlightenment is, but it probably has something to do with light (enLIGHTenment). As you can see each spiritual school calls their highest experience enlightenment. Enlightenment is one thing in advaita and an entirely different thing in Vajrayana Buddhism. This is what happens when everyone starts attaching their own meaning to a word. IMO Jed is likely not-enlightened, just a little bit crazy, and maybe he did stumble upon some gems. The Buddha and Lao Tzu also did not disappear when they became enlightened (although these are just stories).

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

Its all about becoming whole again, one with reality, that's just how it all works, its nothing personal from absolute point,

Yes whole, but union with reality is unlikely the goal. How are you going to unite something unreal with reality? Whatever is real is already real (unless the world is completely fucked up and you can turn real into false and false into real etc.). Oneness is also religious - If there's One then there are many for One is a unit and a unit implies separation and separation isn't union after all.

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

If we are not supposed to seek knowledge we wouldn't have left-brain at all. God wants to know himself from different perspectives, from physics, chemistry...

I don't buy this. Those are the kind of made up explanations of what's going on which the advaita guys like to come up with. Why does reality need to know anything? If it exists it's already working, it doesn't need to study anything, especially perspectives. I think the left brain is mostly survival - to remember not to touch the hot stove during your journey in this dimension.

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

Faith means being sure of the things we hope for and knowing that something is real even if we do not see it.

Lol! Why would one hope for what is certain, that's nonsense? Hope and Faith are based in memory/intellect. You can only hope for something that's in your past. As long as you are hoping, praying, faithing you are just coming up with stuff. Tilopa said:

Quote

In the transcending of mind's dualities is Supreme vision;
In a still and silent mind is Supreme Meditation;
In spontaneity is Supreme Activity;
And when all hopes and fears have died, the Goal is reached.

 

5 hours ago, Monkey-man said:

You cannot see no-thing-ness, only to have faith = surrender = knowing truth with no guarantees, having no reservations, let it be. Difficult but necessary. Religions are full of sacrifice and faith, because its a necessary staff. Its not the end in itself but it will push ya through. 

How are you going to surrender if you have faith? Faith that you will get what you want? Faith that it will be good? Those are all expectations and expectations are not surrender. To really surrender the price is everything - all your faith included. That's what Jed said no? That which hopes for things has no place in reality.

Edited December 31, 2017 by tatsumaru

[Monkey-man]

I mean if u wanna Truth you might feel dark night of the soul and u might feel like u gonna die

so there u’ll need to have faith which means letting it be and surrendering for what’s happening and to see

[tatsumaru]

1 minute ago, Monkey-man said:

I mean if u wanna Truth you might feel dark night of the soul and u might feel like u gonna die

so there u’ll need to have faith which means letting it be and surrendering for what’s happening and to see

I know what you mean, but I don't think you will reach the end of the darkness by faith. Courage is probably what you need.
Faith is rooted in the idea that you will eventually make it if you keep going, but there's no guarantee that at the end the You that you think you are will survive, what's the point of faith at that point. You are facing your ultimate fear and if you are hoping that something will protect you that's flawed.

I think eventually you surrender the Ego because you are tired of resisting the flow and you just go to whatever's next.

[tatsumaru]

Seems like I am stuck here:

 

 

[Nahm]

@tatsumaru

Buddhism & Hinduism are the same as Christianity, Mormonism and Scientology, and other dogmas. Only experience matters. 

Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Mormonism and Scientology are all very different. Your experience doesn’t matter. 

Who is the architect?

[tatsumaru]

1 minute ago, Nahm said:

@tatsumaru

Buddhism & Hinduism are the same as Christianity, Mormonism and Scientology, and other dogmas. Only experience matters. 

Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Mormonism and Scientology are all very different. Your experience doesn’t matter. 

Who is the architect?

That's probably the best answer. It's not what you expect - check it out.

 

[snowleopard]

The intellect tends to get a bum rap being lumped in with the conditioned auto-pilot thinking of the egoic mind-set, but I feel a valid distinction can be made between that and the intellect as a tool for inquiring into the integral nature of the psyche, which, like any tool, can be used with fine-tuned precision, or clumsily, depending upon the amount of deliberate practice dedicated to it, as pointed to in this chat about the subtle difference between the expression/exploration of concepts vs ideas ...

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG7QAEAZYlk

 

[tatsumaru]

3 hours ago, snowleopard said:

The intellect tends to get a bum rap being lumped in with the conditioned auto-pilot thinking of the egoic mind-set, but I feel a valid distinction can be made between that and the intellect as a tool for inquiring into the integral nature of the psyche, which, like any tool, can be used with fine-tuned precision, or clumsily, depending upon the amount of deliberate practice dedicated to it, as pointed to in this chat about the subtle difference between the expression/exploration of concepts vs ideas ...

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG7QAEAZYlk

 

That video was really good.