jelly fish

[paco]

I am going crazy just reading these posts! I want to know 'what is ulitmate reality?'

[Cahoot]

Hello paco.

Reality can be relative or absolute (ultimate).

Relative reality is impermanent. Ultimate reality is permanent.

Impermanent is subject to change. Ultimate reality does not change.

Thoughts, emotions, your body, perceptions, craziness, the weather, the world, stars, and so on ... all change.

Some take this a step further and say that what changes is unreal, and what does not change is real.

Know what does not change and you know ultimate reality. But, you have to know it for yourself, because words also change.

[paco]

Hello, Cahoot...

[Steven Coyle]

the moon in a puddle reflects.
SPLASH!

[Carl G]

Rather than read, think. Rather than want, do.

[paco]

I don't always think, but I know who I am.

[paco]

I had it, but I lost it, Steven!

[paco]

the moon in a puddle reflects.
SPLASH!

Thus, the sun melts.

Hurray!

[jackswift]

i am not a scholar by any means, I only hope that in the years too come people will realize that we as a race can not be broken down into groups. We are one race all headed for the same end. It is your choice as a person to decide how you live , how you die is only the result of all choices made by men no different than ourselves.

[skipair]

I want to know 'what is ulitmate reality?'

Ultimate = objective, which doesn't exist except through assumption, and except for this goat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06CvUjLg ... re=related

[Tomas]

I want to know 'what is ulitmate reality?'

Ultimate = objective, which doesn't exist except through assumption, and except for this goat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06CvUjLg ... re=related

Growing up, we had some neighbors that raised goats for their milk, meat etc. Leashing them is a speedier way to domesticate them, also the goats (by their very nature) will change their vocals to get attention to their predicament .. being leashed, tethered ain't no fun. But it's a splendid way to keep the grass manicured, weeds in check and the soil well-fertilized, to boot.

Spare the rod - spoil the child, Animal Husbandry 101.

[skipair]

Tomas, interesting the different strategies animals and humans have for attention in one form or another. Maybe different tones of voice they've learned works...I have a theory that people who are extra spastic sometimes but not others, or people who trip a lot (...as in stumble), or spill food on themselves a lot, are habits from childhood that gave them parental attention.

Anyway, I'm assuming that when paco says 'jelly fish' he actually means 'goat'. I like to season my burgers with garlic/onion powder, salt, pepper, packed with goat cheese and worchester (sp) sause.

[Nick]

I want to know 'what is ulitmate reality?'

Ultimate = objective, which doesn't exist except through assumption

Skip,

Being that you made an objective statement here, how can he take you seriously?

[skipair]

Hi Nick,

Being that you made an objective statement here, how can he take you seriously?

Yeah, he shouldn't. As I see it there's nothing really to say about reality, except for stating objectively that objective statements about it are false...including this one. Reality is a nothing.

[Nick]

I take it you don't adhere to the law of non-contradiction, but ignoring that for the moment; on the contrary, Ultimate Reality is everything, not nothing. The moment we exclude any single entity from reality, we are now just talking about a piece of reality. Also, when you say reality is nothing; what exactly do you mean? If I take that statement as you meaning that reality is non-existent, it would be impossible for us to be conscious and for things to arise, but we are and they do, so how can you go about denying this? Wouldn't this kind of denial be the ideal definition of insanity?

[Tomas]

Tomas, interesting the different strategies animals and humans have for attention in one form or another. Maybe different tones of voice they've learned works...I have a theory that people who are extra spastic sometimes but not others, or people who trip a lot (...as in stumble), or spill food on themselves a lot, are habits from childhood that gave them parental attention.

Human beings ain't only just humans, you know. They got animals living inside of them, too.

[skipair]

I take it you don't adhere to the law of non-contradiction, but ignoring that for the moment; on the contrary, Ultimate Reality is everything, not nothing. The moment we exclude any single entity from reality, we are now just talking about a piece of reality. Also, when you say reality is nothing; what exactly do you mean? If I take that statement as you meaning that reality is non-existent, it would be impossible for us to be conscious and for things to arise, but we are and they do, so how can you go about denying this? Wouldn't this kind of denial be the ideal definition of insanity?

The way you're defining Ultimate Reality (as everything, as experience), I agree that saying it's also nothing makes no sense.

Above I defined ultimate reality as objective reality, because I think that's what most people read it as: THE perspective on what reality really is...which I think is a bullshit concept because it invariable involves exclusion, assumption, or attitude/feeling, none of which get to the root...which is the realization that it's intellectually rootless, meaningless, without ultimate context.

In other words, reality is something that goes without saying, which is why I say it's a nothing.

[Nick]

Above I defined ultimate reality as objective reality, because I think that's what most people read it as: THE perspective on what reality really is...which I think is a bullshit concept because it invariable involves exclusion, assumption, or attitude/feeling, none of which get to the root...which is the realization that it's intellectually rootless, meaningless, without ultimate context.

You mean like trying to picture reality as something you can see and feel? I agree that when people initially try to come up with some concept of reality they try to picture it like they would picture any other finite thing because that's what they're used to, it's the only thing they can wrap their mind around. Is that what you're getting at?

In other words, reality is something that goes without saying, which is why I say it's a nothing.

Reality is, but it is formless. Is that what you're saying?

[skipair]

You mean like trying to picture reality as something you can see and feel? I agree that when people initially try to come up with some concept of reality they try to picture it like they would picture any other finite thing because that's what they're used to, it's the only thing they can wrap their mind around. Is that what you're getting at?

In other words, reality is something that goes without saying, which is why I say it's a nothing.

Nick: Reality is, but it is formless. Is that what you're saying?

Pretty much. I'm saying that through understanding formlessness you arrive back to an unintellectual beginning where the question of reality is redundant and meaningless because it's none other than whatever is already happening. Saying anything about it as if from a removed or objective stance is primetime mental masturbation...or IOW a nothing.

Using "ultimate reality" as an objective destination is problematic because people seem to find a way to make something more out of it than it is...something greater and beyond...they don't understand the definition. It has the tendency to give people hope in answering questions like why are we here, why are things existing, and when many people talk about Truth there is the same vibe as when the religious talk about God.

It shouldn't have to be like that, but that's what I see, and think it's more useful to challenge, stimulate, and foster curiosity for clarity and understanding by never saying what is and only what isn't. Taking away where necessary and never adding.

There is no Truth!

[Nick]

Pretty much. I'm saying that through understanding formlessness you arrive back to an unintellectual beginning where the question of reality is redundant and meaningless because it's none other than whatever is already happening.

Being that this statement itself an intellectual understanding of some kind, why do you use the word unintellectual to describe it?

Saying anything about it as if from a removed or objective stance is primetime mental masturbation...or IOW a nothing.

Give me an example of a statement about reality you consider mental masturbation. Would you consider the statement that reality is infinite, unbound, and formless to be mental masturbation? Also could you define what you mean by mental masturbation? I get a bad feeling that whenever me and you discuss something we're never on the same page as far as definitions go!

Using "ultimate reality" as an objective destination is problematic because people seem to find a way to make something more out of it than it is...something greater and beyond...they don't understand the definition.

I'm not sure who's using ultimate reality as a destination of some sort. Either way I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing if one conceives of reality as a destination of some sort. In fact, this kind of pursuit can serve as the platform by which many philosophers begin their path to understanding. Of course if they're lucky enough to uncover what is absolutely true, it will be far removed from what they initially conceived. The early stages of practicing philosophy are always a bit sloppy.

It has the tendency to give people hope in answering questions like why are we here, why are things existing, and when many people talk about Truth there is the same vibe as when the religious talk about God.

What about understanding the nature causality and A=A? These things do answer those questions and are part of what one will uncover if they're lucky enough to gain an intellectual understanding of reality.

It shouldn't have to be like that, but that's what I see, and think it's more useful to challenge, stimulate, and foster curiosity for clarity and understanding by never saying what is and only what isn't. Taking away where necessary and never adding.

If one is not destined to uncover the true nature of reality, it doesn't matter what you say or don't say. They'll project their false thinking on to whatever is placed in front of them.

There is no Truth!

Then how do you explain all the ignorance and lies to be found?

[skipair]

Being that this statement itself an intellectual understanding of some kind, why do you use the word unintellectual to describe it?

Unintellectual in the sense that "reality" is seen to be an irrelevant topic, and abstract analysis of any kind is useless except for amusement and worldy ends.

Give me an example of a statement about reality you consider mental masturbation. Would you consider the statement that reality is infinite, unbound, and formless to be mental masturbation? Also could you define what you mean by mental masturbation? I get a bad feeling that whenever me and you discuss something we're never on the same page as far as definitions go!

I consider all statements about reality to be mental masturbation unless they say, "it's not that, and here's why". And mental masturbation is any analysis or conclusions from a premise that a person has basically made up.

Definitions, communications, words....arghhhh, meh. :)

Using "ultimate reality" as an objective destination is problematic because people seem to find a way to make something more out of it than it is...something greater and beyond...they don't understand the definition.

Nick: I'm not sure who's using ultimate reality as a destination of some sort. Either way I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing if one conceives of reality as a destination of some sort. In fact, this kind of pursuit can serve as the platform by which many philosophers begin their path to understanding.

I'm all for wanting to answer fundamental questions, and if conclusively answering them, or concusively finding they are unanswerable means ultimate reality, great. But the focus should be in the baby steps and not the end, ESPECIALLY not as the end presenting an experience of some sort. Knowing the truth is advisable, not special. It doesn't make you happy, healthy, or wealthy. It's just knowledge, and its application to life is just as messy as anything that came before it.

Of course if they're lucky enough to uncover what is absolutely true, it will be far removed from what they initially conceived. The early stages of practicing philosophy are always a bit sloppy.

I think there are many absolute truths, not one overriding one.

Nick: What about understanding the nature causality and A=A? These things do answer those questions and are part of what one will uncover if they're lucky enough to gain an intellectual understanding of reality.

what are your answers for those?

There is no Truth!

Nick: Then how do you explain all the ignorance and lies to be found?

That's an unfounded connection that assumes its existence. I can't explain it, not really.

[Nick]

Unintellectual in the sense that "reality" is seen to be an irrelevant topic, and abstract analysis of any kind is useless except for amusement and worldy ends.

The only reason you view reality through the dualistic prism of amusement and non-amusement, or meaning and non-meaning, is because it provided your life with the latter. The intellect is not limited by the way you choose to see things.

I consider all statements about reality to be mental masturbation unless they say, "it's not that, and here's why". And mental masturbation is any analysis or conclusions from a premise that a person has basically made up.

Definitions, communications, words....arghhhh, meh. :)

Since you continue to ignore the contradictory nature of your statements about reality, it's no wonder your philosophy boils down to argh and meh! :)

I'm all for wanting to answer fundamental questions, and if conclusively answering them, or concusively finding they are unanswerable means ultimate reality, great.

You could have fooled me!

But the focus should be in the baby steps and not the end

This is bullshit. There's nothing wrong with taking careful baby steps, but where's the rule that says one can't focus on all aspects of their goal, both the steps and the end?

ESPECIALLY not as the end presenting an experience of some sort.

If one has unrealistic expectations about what they'll experience upon achieving their goals, it's not going to make any difference as to whether they achieve it or not. And if they're not satisfied with what they find, then I guess they should have choose a different goal.

Knowing the truth is advisable, not special. It doesn't make you happy, healthy, or wealthy.

That depends on how you're defining these things. Either way, who gives a shit?

It's just knowledge, and its application to life is just as messy as anything that came before it.

What's your point? If and how one applies knowledge to their life says little about the knowledge itself. The ego's great at avoiding responsibility.

Of course if they're lucky enough to uncover what is absolutely true, it will be far removed from what they initially conceived. The early stages of practicing philosophy are always a bit sloppy.

I think there are many absolute truths, not one overriding one.

Ok?

Nick: What about understanding the nature causality and A=A? These things do answer those questions and are part of what one will uncover if they're lucky enough to gain an intellectual understanding of reality.

what are your answers for those?

They are the answers. What these answers do for you and how they affect you isn't something I'm really concerned about.

There is no Truth!

Nick: Then how do you explain all the ignorance and lies to be found?

That's an unfounded connection that assumes its existence. I can't explain it, not really.

What meaning do ignorance and lies have if there is no truth? Ignorance of what? Lies about what? Seriously, do you have any intention of taking responsibility for all the contradictions in your statements?

[skipair]

The only reason you view reality through the dualistic prism of amusement and non-amusement, or meaning and non-meaning, is because it provided your life with the latter.

No, I view things dualistically because non-dual reality doesn't exist. When things are seen to exist only by conceptual definition, we don't experience some formless reality, we just experience a thing's impermenance.

Have I used this to my own advantage and amusement? Fuck yeah.

This is bullshit. There's nothing wrong with taking careful baby steps, but where's the rule that says one can't focus on all aspects of their goal, both the steps and the end?

I hear you man, I just can't relate. My goal was never REALLY "figure out reality". That doesn't really mean anything to me. It was always, "figure out particular things that I'm not clear about."

What meaning do ignorance and lies have if there is no truth? Ignorance of what? Lies about what? Seriously, do you have any intention of taking responsibility for all the contradictions in your statements?

As I see it there are tons of mini-truths and lies. Like, if A is = to A and only A and someone says it's also equal to B, then it's a lie. Or if a person make an assumption to draw a conclusion, it's at the least unfounded. I guess I would call those relative truths and lies, and I agree there is nothing more important than to distinguish them.

My qualm is with the idea that after all that is done there is a one absolute truth, one ultimate reality. There isn't. A label slapped on WHAT? Meaning applied to WHAT? There is only understanding how the mini-truths/lies work.

[divine focus]

But the focus should be in the baby steps and not the end

This is bullshit. There's nothing wrong with taking careful baby steps, but where's the rule that says one can't focus on all aspects of their goal, both the steps and the end?

There is no end. The 'baby step' is the end! Why speculate about or anticipate what's after that?

[Nick]

No, I view things dualistically because non-dual reality doesn't exist. When things are seen to exist only by conceptual definition, we don't experience some formless reality, we just experience a thing's impermenance.

There's many different ways to view things dualistically, I was speaking specifically of the way you view reality through the dualistic prism of amusement/boredom. This is your choice, and it need not be viewed this way.

Have I used this to my own advantage and amusement? Fuck yeah.

Who else's advantage would you use it for?

I hear you man, I just can't relate. My goal was never REALLY "figure out reality". That doesn't really mean anything to me. It was always, "figure out particular things that I'm not clear about."

Why are you getting so defensive? I'm not questioning or attacking your goals, just your reasoning.

My qualm is with the idea that after all that is done there is a one absolute truth, one ultimate reality. There isn't. A label slapped on WHAT? Meaning applied to WHAT?

I agree, there are many absolute truths to be uncovered; but multiple realties? That's an impossibility the way I define reality: every thing, every when, imaginable or unimaginable (no entity excluded). If you are defining reality as anything less than this, it's irrelevant to anything I'm talking about.

There is only understanding how the mini-truths/lies work.

It seems like you're shadow boxing here. Understanding leads to enlightenment, simple as that. Try not to project any preconceived notions on to the term enlightenment and just understand it for what it is.