Seeing the Actuality of Morality

[Scholar]

Morality is not subjective, it is not relative, it is not objective. The way you think about morality is naive and unconscious, and I will attempt to make you actually See what Morality truly is. This is not an intellectual exercise, this is an exercise of consciousness. I want you to see, not to understand.

Modern and ancient philosophy is completely misguided and ignorant of the true nature of Morality, because the framework they are using is not based on observation, but rather on already present and misguided intuitions.

 

Some people attempt to describe Goodness, to find what Goodness truly means. Does it mean that which is desirable? Does it mean that which you would want to have done upon yourself? What exactly does Goodness mean?

This very question is evidence for the unconsciousness and blindness of the mind questioning Goodness, because the question implies that Goodness is something other than Goodness. To demonstrate how delusional this is, I want you to picture this.

You experience color, you see redness, and now you ask yourself "What is redness?" or "What does redness mean?". This is obviously absurd, there can be no description of redness, there can be no meaning to redness, unless you have decoupled the word redness from what it was pointing at, and now actively attribute new meaning to that pointer.  When you look at Red and you say "This is redness", and you then continue to ask yourself "But what does redness mean?", it allows your mind to connect Red to any other experience and dimension of Existence you come into contact with. It can say "Redness is warm", and suddenly, Red is connected to Warmth. This is what a concept is. It connects different aspects of existence and creates the Illusion of Identity, that one thing is another. It is a miracle, yet it is one of the fundamental ways our mind fabricate delusions. Delusion, not Illusion. A conflation of two things being one.

 

How is this relevant to Morality? There is a deep confusion in all of our minds as to how we connect different aspects of our Experience with each other. We are so confused, that we cannot even recognize anymore what these words are pointing to in the first place. Our minds are so unconscious and dull, that they cannot see the difference between Red and Blue, in the sense of Morality. A sharp and conscious mind will be able to recognize the distinction between more and more colors, not conflate two completely different colors to be one.

 

Some say Goodness is Pleasure, some say Badness is Suffering. But this is not true, it is delusional. It is a connection of two different aspects of experience and conflating them to be one. And you can recognize that for yourself, you can not just understand this, but clearly see how your mind is doing it. You can see the Actuality of Morality.

 

Goodness is different from Pleasure, Pleasure is different from Meaning, Meaning is different from Beauty, Beauty is different from Joy, Joy is different from Desire, etc.

Pain is different from Sadness, Sadness is different from Anger, Anger is different from Hatred, Hatred is different from Jealousy, Jealousy is different from Loneliness.

 

Now here comes the mind blowing part about all of this. All the terms above and what they point to are part of one singular Spectrum of Existence. A spectrum of Existence is something like a Dimension of Reality, like Color, Sound, and Feeling. Colors can intermix, and even if we can identify clearly what each color is, there is infinite subtlety between them. There are infinite shades between Redness and Blueness.

The same is true from All the terms above. You can actually realize this if you start to truly observe your Emotions.

 

Morality is not Goodness, Morality is how our mind creates different Connections between different Aspects of Emotions. Goodness is a very particular Experience within the human mind, and it is distinct from any idea, any other emotion. It actually does exist, if you do not realize this, you will be confused and deny  the presence of an aspect of Existence that is actually there, that is part of Actuality.

 

 

Do the labelling excercise. Stop connecting different aspects of Isness, and just look at each of them for what they are. Notice how each of them are distinct and different, yet they can flow into each other and become more and more similar.

If you come to see this, you will realize how absurdly delusional people are. They are so confused, so lost in their own delusions. This applies even to people who do consciousness work. Don't just know that this is the case, see how it is actually happening, and become sensitive to the entire spectrum of your Being again.

[SoonHei]

 

Wisdom contained.

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, Scholar said:

Stop connecting different aspects of Isness, and just look at each of them for what they are. Notice how each of them are distinct and different, yet they can flow into each other and become more and more similar.

We create these distinctions, aspects and ‘want they are’.  Nothing wrong with that. It’s an amazing exploration and we gotta do something in life. Yet, Form = Formless. ISness = ISness. 

[Scholar]

15 hours ago, Forestluv said:

We create these distinctions, aspects and ‘want they are’.  Nothing wrong with that. It’s an amazing exploration and we gotta do something in life. Yet, Form = Formless. ISness = ISness. 

I am not saying to stop altogether, I am saying to stop it to gain insight into the nature of what it is. It is hard to truly come into contact with the Being if you are unconsciously immersed in delusion. You could say Ego = Selflessness, because it is in the absolute sense, but this is seperate from our relative quest of attempting to gain insight into Selflessness in it's other, relative form.

I do not want you to keep doing the determining of what is what, and what is amazing, what is useful, what needs to be done in life. That's all beside the Actuality of that which is you saying that something is amazing. See the Amazingness for what it truly is, and see what the mind is doing with Amazingness.

What is it when you say "Nothing wrong with that.", what is the mind doing? Stop answering the question and starting looking at the Isness of what is happening. What is wrong, and how could anything but wrong be wrong? Would it make sense to have answered my post with "Nothing red with that", or "Nothing warm with that"? What you said is not different from that at all.

 

This isn't about finding answers, this is about Seeing. What irony that you are victim to the very process I am trying for you to See through, as you come here attempting to moralize what I say. If you cannot see that what you just did is moralization, then that is precisely the unconsciousness I speak of, that needs to be seen through.

 

Once you can See, you can still come back here and tell me all about what is and isn't amazing, what is and isn't a distinction, what is and isn't created, what is and isnt wrong, what is and isn't exploration. I just want you to clearly See.

 

13 hours ago, neutralempty said:

So, goodness exists in itself and then mind connects goodness with emotions and events?

Yes, but be careful with how you label it, because the label already is connected to many other aspects of mind, like the word "goodness" is. Do not find an answer, because the answer is seperate from the Isness of goodness. See, the answer you have given me is different from Seeing, it is the same process which you need to look past, to see the Isness of goodness as itself.

Edited September 14, 2020 by Scholar

[StephenK]

@Scholar Consciousness has a way of fooling us into perceiving something that is utterly 1-dimensional as multidimensional and infinitely complex. A good example of this is the feeling of self -- when the mind latches onto a feeling/sensation within consciousness it deems to be 'self', you can directly observe how that sensation of 'self' is nothing more than a raw, 1-dimensional experience (possibly in the body or behind the eyes). That is, the experience is utterly simple, obvious, clear, actual. However, the mind has to aggregate other conscious experiences on top of it (the feeling of self) to create the illusion of depth/complexity/ego. In fact, what is consciousness other than a series of 1 dimensional experiences arising one after another in rapid succession? Advanced Vipassana meditation practitioners are able to observe through the apparent fluidity of consciousness and observe on after another the distinct 'atoms' of experience that make up thoughts. A movie seems fluid and real until we slow down the frames per second enough that we see the illusion for what it is: a series of pictures on a screen. 

[StephenK]

5 minutes ago, neutralempty said:

I would have thought it is 0-dimensional.

Sure. Whatever word/words we choose to point to the simplicity/actuality of our our current experience works for me.

7 minutes ago, neutralempty said:

I apologize if this came off as a argumentative.

No need to apologize. I didn't interpret your words as argumentative.

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, Scholar said:

What is wrong, and how could anything but wrong be wrong? Would it make sense to have answered my post with "Nothing red with that", or "Nothing warm with that"? What you said is not different from that at all.

What irony that you are victim to the very process I am trying for you to See through, as you come here attempting to moralize what I say. If you cannot see that what you just did is moralization, then that is precisely the unconsciousness I speak of, that needs to be seen through.

Sure, we can create that too. It is right within it’s creation. There are other creations we can create, yet you don’t seem interested in that. 

[seeking_brilliance]

Morality is a bitch lol. Trust me, I have come from nothing, to a childhood of ultra-moral protestant Christianity. From a family and missionaries, we believed every word of God and couldn't wait to join Him in heaven, after living a long healthy and moral life, of course. And after saving as many lost souls as possible. 

I left religion cold turkey when I turned 20, although it took a few more years to really stop believing in God, as the christian's view it.  In  fact I only recently started referring to "God" as it instead of he, because that's how deeply ingrained the personhood of God is for us.  At least at this point I can say I have no idea what "God" is.  But I've been on a path of self-discovery, and it turns out I'm pretty awesome, so I'm pretty content with that. 

Slowly, over time my morals have unraveled a bit. I still know what it takes to navigate this physical realm, and the cultural idea of morals is ABSOLUTELY necessary if you want to to be afforded any luxury of personal work.  I don't have to believe in them to use them to my advantage.  

[Scholar]

6 hours ago, Forestluv said:

Sure, we can create that too. It is right within it’s creation. There are other creations we can create, yet you don’t seem interested in that. 

I don't understand what you mean.

[Loving Radiance]