What am I?

[tsuki]

@now is forever My arrogance is your projection.
I am not going to argue about what I experience.
I am also not denying that senses are interconnected.

Now, get out.

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

I was wondering how could I describe all of the categories of experience and I came up with the following idea:

What if a paradox is the description of a sense that is missing from my account of experience?
For example, philosophy had always tried to explain why things are, as if there was no sense of being.
It tried to explain things in terms of other things and created chains of reasoning with cause and effect.
This had always led to arguments about whether some things are primary and others are secondary.
They even argued things out of existence (postmodernism) and created them (religion?).

Yes, there is a short-circuit between sense of being and inner hearing and things can go in and out of existence.
But, without the ability to perceive consistency I wouldn't be what I am now.

The sense of being seems to be connected to recontextualization.

[tsuki]

What would the sense of being look like if I partitioned it into inner and outer sphere in the social perspective?

[tsuki]

TODO: Use the 5-simplex to describe the framework of separate senses.
Vertices are sense-spaces, connections are short-circuits.

I don't like the name framework of separate senses.
I'll call it nondual perception from now on.

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

I wonder if nondual perception is a category?
All senses seem to have singularities, which are the points between inner and outer spheres:

• inner sight / darkness / outer sight
• inner hearing / silence / outer hearing
• inner taste / ??? / outer taste
• inner smell / ??? / outer smell
• inner movement / touch / outer movement
• inner being / nothingness / outer being

??? - there seems to be no obvious word for these singularities. They are like the taste of saliva and the smell of air.

I'm still having difficulty talking about the sense of being. I can only describe its short-circuits with other senses.
From the point of view of short-circuits, it is the ability to recognize entities out of sensations.

When the phone rings, I move in such a way that I can see the phone.
Sense of being is what 'glues' the sound of ringing, motion of the head and shape of the phone into what I perceive to be the entity called phone.

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

All of the senses contain paradoxes. What is the 'paradoxical experience'?

• Darkness
• Silence
• Saliva (?)
• Air (?)
• Touch
• Nothingness

Isn't that basically the experience of death? The total sensory deprivation?

[tsuki]

Boom, progress.

I was wondering about this question right here:

6 hours ago, tsuki said:

What would the sense of being look like if I partitioned it into inner and outer sphere in the social perspective?

and it got me curious and a little bit depressed. That is because everything that is obvious is unitary. There is nothing inner and outer about it. In fact, innerness and outerness are beings themselves so they have to somehow point back into the sense of being.

This got me depressed because it ruins all of the beautiful dual symmetry of the 5-simplex.
(Or maybe it doesn't? I just figured something out).

Anyways, here's another clue:

3 hours ago, tsuki said:

All of the senses contain paradoxes. What is the 'paradoxical experience'?

• Darkness
• Silence
• Saliva (?)
• Air (?)
• Touch
• Nothingness

Isn't that basically the experience of death? The total sensory deprivation?

1. That thing right here is the Ego's wet dream.
2. Paradoxes in the gross senses seem like manifestations of nothingness.

[tsuki]

Hahaha, isn't that a fucking coincidence?
I was researching the properties of a 5-simplex and look what projection I found:

Now we're talking. Ego, Satan, etc...
The middle one has got to be the sense of being.

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

Since my not-punching bag is getting upset, I'll publicly admit that the limit of movement is stillness, not touch.
Touch is an inner movement that is confused for stillness.

The Ego's wet dream therefore is:

• Darkness
• Silence
• Saliva (tastelessness?)
• Air (smelllessness?)
• Stillness
• Nothingness (non-existence)

The inner and outer spheres of the gross senses are what I call the inner and outer world. Subjective and objective.
The boundary between subjective and objective is the "-lessness" : the paradox.

The sense of being is, however, problematic. I can approach it in two ways:

1. Treat it as a gross sense and claim that there are 'private' and 'public' beings.
   That I can agree and disagree about the existence of things with other people and treat it as the basis for experience.
2. Observe that the very partitioning of senses into inner and outer is grounded in the sense of being.
   Subjective and objective worlds themselves are entities that form relationships with other senses.
   This way, I can see that the sense of being itself cannot be partitioned into inner and outer, because the possibility of partitioning is grounded in it.

The first option creates one stable conceptual system in which there is "I" and "other".
I will call this conceptual system Egoic perception.
The second option creates another stable conceptual system in which there is "I=you=we".
I will call this conceptual system Nondual perception.

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[Zweistein]

10 minutes ago, tsuki said:

The first option creates one stable conceptual system in which there is "I" and "other".
I will call this conceptual system Egoic perception.
The second option creates another stable conceptual system in which there is "I=you=we".
I will call this conceptual system Nondual perception.

Can you experience both at the same time?

[now is forever]

@Zweistein can’t you? there are parts of us we share and parts that we better keep private/to ourselves. i must have lost the sense for the second.

Edited November 20, 2018 by now is forever

[Zweistein]

It's getting better with time, lol. 
Sorry, "we" are interrupting "your" flow again @tsuki 

P.S: Actually, let me correct myself - it was getting better with time, then I had some serious mystical experiences and then I got thrown back somehow. All in all, it felt like taking three steps forward and two back.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Zweistein

[now is forever]

@tsuki why are the senses gross? why don’t i have a sense for irony without a sound.

[tsuki]

1 hour ago, Zweistein said:

Can you experience both at the same time?

I don't know. Yes, if I introduce the sense of time somehow. The perceptions alternate, just like what you describe.
All of the mystical experiences feel equally deep in the sense of clarity, but at the same time they seem deeper and deeper.

57 minutes ago, Zweistein said:

Sorry, "we" are interrupting "your" flow again @tsuki 

It's okay. You're asking very important questions. I'm still getting ready to answering what is sense of time.
It seems to be some sort of leftover/misconception from the egoic perspective.

19 minutes ago, now is forever said:

suki why are the senses gross

I'm calling the traditional five senses gross to articulate that the sense of being can be special.
It can either be perceived as gross or not. Gross senses are partitioned into inner and outer.

Or were you joking and I'm just dense?

[now is forever]

@tsuki somehow you are getting cute.

[tsuki]

Funny how 5-simplex has two projections and I just came up with two conceptual systems of perception.
The left is egoic and the right is nondual:

Let's focus on some implication of the hierarchy of senses in the nondual perspective for now.

10 hours ago, tsuki said:

Observe that the very partitioning of senses into inner and outer is grounded in the sense of being.
Subjective and objective worlds themselves are entities that form relationships with other senses.
This way, I can see that the sense of being itself cannot be partitioned into inner and outer, because the possibility of partitioning is grounded in it.

I think that the way in which I described the nondual perspective makes it inherently unstable (like we observed it to be).
If we observe that the subjective and objective worlds are beings themselves that other senses relate to, then we have to make further observations along this line of reasoning. Because now, we can observe that each of the five categories of senses are beings themselves that group something (experience?).

If that is the case, then even the senses themselves are grounded in the sense of being. Calling sense of being a sense now feels inappropriate.
That is because senses themselves are beings that experience relates to. In the nondual perspective, there is just being and the various forms of it.

If we take being as primary and account for the existence of paradox with its limit (nonbeing), then we can relate other senses with their inner-outer partitioning as perspectives. A perspective on being is a duality of inner-outer with its associated paradox:

• Seeing: inner / darkness / outer
• Hearing: inner / silence / outer
• Movement: inner / stillness / outer
• Taste: inner / tastelessness / outer
• Smell: inner / smelllessness / outer

And, we can have much more, like:

• Time: past / now / future
• etc.

The bold paradoxes are how nonbeing is projected within this perspective on being.

What interests me now is how is this inner-outer relationship established. There seems to be an order of being, a direction.
I wonder how that is projected from being into senses. It's strange because it reminds me of the attempts to define paradox away in mathematics, such as number systems that allow division by zero. I'll have to get into that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectively_extended_real_line

Edited November 21, 2018 by tsuki

[tsuki]

OH, now I get it:

EDIT: Doesn't it look like my avatar? Hahaha!

Edited November 20, 2018 by tsuki

[now is forever]

@tsuki that would be a dual perspective in a nondual setting? if you perceive the „gross“ senses as dualities (as a neutrality)

Edited November 20, 2018 by now is forever

[now is forever]

20 minutes ago, tsuki said:

 

EDIT: Doesn't it look like my avatar? Hahaha!

oh mine as well 

[tsuki]

Guess what looks like @Zweistein's avatar?