Experience is never direct

[Fran11]

11 minutes ago, purerogue said:

Thanks, it actually is irrelevant to my first question as it makes assumption that if I experience now, then there is no way that it did not happen ,so  I simply used time as other way to make it plausible. 

It is relevant actually.

It did not happen because that notion implies past (time).

But it exists timlessly as an apsect of the absolute, which is why it seems you are experiencing it/have experienced it 

Edited September 2, 2020 by Fran11

[purerogue]

2 minutes ago, Fran11 said:

It is relevant actually.

It did not happen because that implies past (time).

But it exists timlessly as an apsect of the absolute, which is why you are experiencing it 

What if it is not because of time? 

[Fran11]

2 minutes ago, purerogue said:

What if it is not because of time? 

It isn't, that's the point.

Each "moment" exists beyond time from the absolute perspective.

[purerogue]

1 minute ago, Fran11 said:

It isn't, that's the point.

Each "moment" exists beyond time from the absolute perspective.

Ehh I mean what if it is not because of absence of time.Absence of time does not make event non existent, it is still there, just not in time. 

[Someone here]

@purerogue there is a place completely beyond knowledge and the mind and all kinds of concepts.

[Fran11]

12 minutes ago, purerogue said:

Ehh I mean what if it is not because of absence of time.Absence of time does not make event non existent, it is still there, just not in time. 

We're on the same page then.

Edited September 2, 2020 by Fran11

[Gesundheit]

4 hours ago, Johnny5 said:

Just the reification of appearances, which is what the mind does. That's the duality, and that's what I'm negating.

What if there never was a mind?

[Johnny5]

@Gesundheit So, what?

[Gesundheit]

2 minutes ago, Johnny5 said:

@Gesundheit So, what?

Nothing 

[Johnny5]

@Gesundheit   ? 

[raphaelbaumann]

I've done further research on the topic how yogis for example can have direct consciousness how it is to be an orchid, an atom etc. 

One could make this distinction between experiencing what we call "the visual appearance of an orchid" and  “being the orchid itself" although that

doesn't make one more direct than another. 

Read the book "Samadhi - by Santata Gamana" if you are interested in how yogis can experience what it's like to be an orchid etc.

However, not sure if Peter means this when he says "as itself" in his teachings. 

@Leo Gura  @Dodo

[Display_Name]

12 hours ago, Johnny5 said:

Just the reification of appearances, which is what the mind does. That's the duality, and that's what I'm negating.

You're the one reifying Brahman boyo

Gotta love it, coming in hot with the self-assured "careful not to.." when really you just got stuck on a stage, trying to school boys who've moved past it.

[Johnny5]

 ? 

 

[purerogue]

15 hours ago, Someone here said:

@purerogue there is a place completely beyond knowledge and the mind and all kinds of concepts.

There are all kind of places, what I am trying to say here is that people are making assumptions about  Source from concepts, you think that you have gone beyond science and relative because you use thous concepts differently, but the thing is that you are just using them differently, you assume that these concepts have connection to how Source works, when they might as well be just imagination that has nothing to do with how things actually work, or what they actually are.

That is my opinion from what I have gone trough, you can disagree, I am just putting forward my experience. 

Edited September 3, 2020 by purerogue

[Kshantivadin]

22 hours ago, Johnny5 said:

Just the reification of appearances, which is what the mind does. That's the duality, and that's what I'm negating.

 

Never said I was.

 

No, that's you reifying it.

Johnny, just go meditate more. Direct experience is the key to wisdom. Then come back and reread what you said about The Godfather, and we can all have a hearty laugh together

Conceptualizing anything at this point might do more harm than good. Just go and open yourself to the astounding, baffling experience that is happening right now.

[Kshantivadin]

@Johnny5 My teacher likes to say :

When shit and chocolate start to taste the same, that's when you know you're enlightened 

[Johnny5]

@Kshantivadin I'll stick with chocolate thank you  ? 

Must be the wisdom of my direct experience...

[Kshantivadin]

9 minutes ago, Johnny5 said:

@Kshantivadin I'll stick with chocolate thank you  ? 

Must be the wisdom of my direct experience...

Get ready for shitloads of shit in your life then, until you learn to love the shit. Loving just chocolate doesn't work. Getting both chocolate and shit is the state of affairs here. So might as well expand your gustative pallete otherwise you're going to suffer incredibly. As long as you "stick with chocolate" the duality of shit-chocolate persists, and you suffer. Until when are you going to torture yourself?! (talking partly to myself haha )

The dung is amazing too!  You just gotta surrender first.

[Johnny5]

@Kshantivadin  ?  ? 

[RedLine]

On 1/9/2020 at 1:12 AM, Leo Gura said:

To make it really simple, there is no perceiver. There is only the RED perceiving itself.

Everything is self-perceiving. The chair perceives itself. Ego takes credit for it.

What I don´t get is that you created RED at some point where you were a child and learned to separate colors. I mean, there are objects out there because at some point you labeled those objects with words.

 

So even when you are seeing RED, it is not pure Being, because you are still filtering reality through languaje. You are still "seeing reality from your ego". 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2020 by RedLine