Finding Peace in Meaninglessness

[StephenK]

The idea of meaninglessness was always the thing that left me with an underlying dissatisfaction with life (existential dread, fear, etc...). However, recently I am finding tremendous relief in the meaninglessness of things. Now, whenever I get caught up in life (things getting too serious) I can look at it, see that I am creating all the meaning around it, and just let it go. Poof. Anxiety gone. Stillness remains.

Is this healthy? Does this make sense?

 

[Ether]

Meaning doesnt exist but it doesnt mean its meaningless, stop believing everything Leo says.

[StephenK]

@Ether  It's directly experienced. Things just are. Any meaning I give to things appears as clear as daylight. As you said: 'meaning does not exist', which is meaninglessness, as I am using the word. Why split hairs? Fear?

@Outer Strangely enough, I'm not inclined to impulsive pleasure at all. I've been pretty much stone cold sober for most of my life. I'm the loser at the party that constantly refuses to drink haha . That being said, your first sentence does not make sense to me at all. As for the word 'meaninglessness', what do you think of when you hear it? Genuinely curious as this might just be a semantic issue.

@Etagnwo Yes, it seems self evident in all things.

[Ether]

@StephenK No, existance and non-existance is different.

We can say this book is here! It exists. But if we say this book is not here, it doesnt exist.

If you say "reading this book is meaningless", you are taking some characteristic from it, meaning, but you are not saying it doesnt exist (the meaning), you are saying something negative about it, that its not worth reading.

No meaning and meaningless is different. One does not exist, one affirams something negative.

ITS NOT THE SAME THING.

[StephenK]

20 minutes ago, Outer said:

Your writing is not YOUR doing. It's written by itself in motor functions in the brain. You don't know what you're going to write next. You don't know what you're going to say next. Speech comes from Broca's area.

That makes sense. But how does it relate to what I said? Seems completely tangential.

23 minutes ago, Outer said:

Thinking Maya is meaningless is only partly correct as it's ignoring the axiom of validity. There's an infinite amount of interpretations but only a finite amount of valid ones.

Every time I've looked at the meaning making structures that arise within awareness, I see the same thing: A series of logical inferences made about reality that contradict the reality of what I am actually experiencing. This happens over and over, and I've yet to come across a meaning-making thought that is true, in an unconditional way. Maya just is.

38 minutes ago, Ether said:

 

If you say "reading this book is meaningless", you are taking some characteristic from it, meaning, but you are not saying it doesnt exist (the meaning), you are saying something negative about it, that its not worth reading.

Nope, that's not how I'm using the word. Meaninglessness does not imply negativity, nor does it imply you shouldn't read the book -- that's something you're inferring about the word. Meaninglessness is merely the negation of inferred meaning (assuming meaning is implied prior); it is not a value judgement. The is-ought gap is something that gets to the heart of meaninglessness as I am using it: that is, shit just is.

[Ether]

@StephenK Ok, in that way, its true but look at this:

adjective

without meaning, significance, purpose, or value; purposeless; insignificant:

 

Ok at first it seems ok but look at the examples:

"a meaningless reply; a meaningless existence."

A meaningless existence...uhm, that sounds a bit negative dont you think? In this example, the word meaningless is refered as something negative, as we so know when people with depression say they have "a meningless existence", they mean that their life is not worth living, a bad life.

So, while the definition is correct, when we use examples we see it doesnt correspond to it, so, no, meaningless doesnt mean "without meaning", it usually means something negative.

[StephenK]

@Ether I understand that most people have a negative association with the word 'meaningless', but some don't. I assumed it was used here, on this forum, in a more technical sense (as I am using it). But yeah, that's why most disagreements on this forum can come down to slight differences in the 'feelings' a word can bring up. What do you then think is a more appropriate word then for what I am describing? Genuinely curious since I cant think of one. 

[Ether]

@StephenK No meaning.

[StephenK]

@Ether Seems the same bruh . Say that to most people out there in the world, and they'll have a negative reaction to it...

[Ether]

3 minutes ago, StephenK said:

@Ether Seems the same bruh . Say that to most people out there in the world, and they'll have a negative reaction to it...

But its the right way to say it. There is no other way. If they dont understand, explain to them.

[StephenK]

@Ether The right way? I don't know about that... but whatever, I see your point of view.

[StephenK]

@Outer People might not admit that they secretly could be wrong, but their mere presence on this forum says otherwise. That being said, there are a few here that I do think consider themselves to be fully realized (whether they truly are is an open question). As for Jed McKenna, why do you assume he is truly spiritually realized? I've listened to him and he makes a lot of sense, but his writing seems a bit theatrical and really detracts from his message (at least as far as I am concerned). 

[StephenK]

@Outer Regarding saboteurs, do you believe that some people here are intentionally misleading others? Or do you think it is just a case of the blind leading the blind? The wide spectrum of views on offer here certainly makes one weary of which items to eat from this surreal buffet we call actualized.org

[Nahm]

4 hours ago, StephenK said:

The idea of meaninglessness was always the thing that left me with an underlying dissatisfaction with life (existential dread, fear, etc...). However, recently I am finding tremendous relief in the meaninglessness of things. Now, whenever I get caught up in life (things getting too serious) I can look at it, see that I am creating all the meaning around it, and just let it go. Poof. Anxiety gone. Stillness remains.

Is this healthy? Does this make sense?

 

Depends what you mean by health & sense.

[StephenK]

@Nahm Healthy, in terms of leading one towards greater peace of mind and clarity of mind (in a spiritual context). Sense, by which I mean in alignment with what is. I know that seems vague, but its the best I can do .

[stevegan928]

14 hours ago, Outer said:

Cute. Your country is a shit hole though, you should probably vote.

You seem to think votes of the people matter. You seem to assume (they) don't just choose the puppet that'll best serve the NWO agenda. 

Cute. 

[Sparkist]

Isn't it the ego arguing over what 'meaningless' means? Whether it's negative or positive? Why does it have to be one or the other?

[StephenK]

@Sparkist Well, if you define thinking about a word and describing clearly our reaction to it as ego, then sure, its ego. As for whether it's positive or negative or neutral (I find the neutral definition more reasonable) comes down to interpretation. As for it having to be one or the other, that comes down to the interpretation of person in question. The word 'Meaningless' is just a symbolic representation of an idea, or a 'feeling' in some cases. The hope is that dialogue can tease out these differences, and to some extent it has. Hooray! 

[Sparkist]

@StephenK Yes, neutral...that's the one. I often tend to be a black and white thinker, myself. But 'neutral' describes very well what I was trying to get across there. From what I gather, the loss of ego would result in neutrality. Recognition/awareness without judgement. 

[StephenK]

@Etagnwo Morality is a separate issue from direct insight into meaninglessness I agree, but that also comes down to definitions.  What is morality to you? Can you give some examples of what you consider to be an objectively moral or immoral act? My personal view is that true morality should be the system we use in order to minimize suffering. That's it. How we go about doing this is an open question imo. As for sugar always being sweet, nah, sweetness is not an innate property of sugar.