Perception and Reality

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Caused by what? Remember we cannot speak of consciousness like it's a definite thing, it's a word referring to impermanent appearances, (sensations, thoughts, etc) the words "mind" and "consciousness" have no meaning if they're spoken of as fixed things.

All you keep saying is causation, causation, causation, not recognizing you've only ever got those impermanent appearances, and any causation is only seen or known therein. You couldn't possibly be talking about anything else. So, caused by what?
By something other than consciousness. It's that simple. The Infinite is a pool of phenomena, some of which is designed to perceive some of the other phenomena. The phenomena that is perceived is what we refer to as "things", i.e., parts of the Infinite cut into individual pieces. All else phenomena, not being perceived, is by definition, inconceivable. So again, what causes consciousness is an inconceivable something, inconceivable because it precedes consciousness.

It's impossible to know in exact detail how it all works, as consciousness is finite, meaning it is able to perceive only finite bits of the Infinite at any given time. For all intents and purposes, however, it is logical to conclude that the brain is the seat of consciousness. Again, impossible to say for sure, but it looks to be about 99.9% likely.

The first paragraph contains absolute truths. The 2nd refers to the empirical, more easily relatable side of the matter.

There you have it, take it or leave it.

That answers Being's questions too, but he'll never understand it as far as I can tell. He clings far too much to his beliefs.

I'm curious to see you and him duke it out on his outrageous claims though, since you both agree on at least one thing.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

Russell: The Infinite is a pool of phenomena, some of which is designed to perceive some of the other phenomena. The phenomena that is perceived is what we refer to as "things", i.e., parts of the Infinite cut into individual pieces. All else phenomena, not being perceived, is by definition, inconceivable. So again, what causes consciousness is an inconceivable something, inconceivable because it precedes consciousness.
It is not logical to view anything as preceding anything else. Did you not agree with me that causality is not a linear concept, but rather, an intuitive, philosophical one? This is why I have trouble with the view that logic is "of the Mind of God" (metaphor intended) because the use of logic immediately causes consciousness to shift into linear mode, to hunt for cause and effect in a way that it can "see" it and if necessary, use and even manipulate it (as per Langan's brave new world of "benign eugenics"). As you acknowledge below, consciousness can only perceive things in a finite way.
It's impossible to know in exact detail how it all works, as consciousness is finite, meaning it is able to perceive only finite bits of the Infinite at any given time. For all intents and purposes, however, it is logical to conclude that the brain is the seat of consciousness. Again, impossible to say for sure, but it looks to be about 99.9% likely.
This is a perfect example of the limitations of logic and another reason why it is problematic to give it absolute status such as you seem to be doing with your assertion "logic always works." Clearly since you prefaced your thought above with "for all intents and purposes" and leave a .01% chance that the brain is not the seat of consciousness, logic doesn't always work.

So if logic doesn't always work, is there anything that always works? As I see it, what always works to keep us sane and still and balanced and true is the one absolute truth we do have, which is the truth of emptiness. That although our conscious minds have no choice but to see form and make distinctions, be they logical or be they emotional, we know that ultimately these forms and distinctions are temporary illusions. The beauty of the one absolute truth (that we know of thus far) is that it applies to all forms, logic included. So once absorbed, we can go about our daily business and not get caught up in any one thing, experiencing, even enjoying or loving, the things that appear in our consciousness.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

Quote:
movingalways: Ultimately it doesn't matter if there are causes or things outside of consciousness because we wouldn't be conscious of them anyway.
Beingof1: Unless of course you one day realize you are omniscient, omnipotent and are the cause of all effect.ace as a wh perhaps that seems to far fetched for you right now and because that very well may be the case - it all really does not matter.
Been there, done that, with the only difference between us being that I woke up and realized that all that was happening was that I was thinking I was causing things.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

movingalways wrote:
Russell: The Infinite is a pool of phenomena, some of which is designed to perceive some of the other phenomena. The phenomena that is perceived is what we refer to as "things", i.e., parts of the Infinite cut into individual pieces. All else phenomena, not being perceived, is by definition, inconceivable. So again, what causes consciousness is an inconceivable something, inconceivable because it precedes consciousness.
It is not logical to view anything as preceding anything else. Did you not agree with me that causality is not a linear concept, but rather, an intuitive, philosophical one? This is why I have trouble with the view that logic is "of the Mind of God" (metaphor intended) because the use of logic immediately causes consciousness to shift into linear mode, to hunt for cause and effect in a way that it can "see" it and if necessary, use and even manipulate it (as per Langan's brave new world of "benign eugenics"). As you acknowledge below, consciousness can only perceive things in a finite way.
Logic is absolutely fundamental to any sort of knowledge whatsoever. It is the basis of all identifications (A=A), and the connections and conclusions made thereafter. It is the "if this is this, then that must mean that", and so on. Don't be put off by those who use logic in selfish ways. The freedom of the wise is in their ability to use logic in without any egotistical clinging involved.
It's impossible to know in exact detail how it all works, as consciousness is finite, meaning it is able to perceive only finite bits of the Infinite at any given time. For all intents and purposes, however, it is logical to conclude that the brain is the seat of consciousness. Again, impossible to say for sure, but it looks to be about 99.9% likely.
This is a perfect example of the limitations of logic and another reason why it is problematic to give it absolute status such as you seem to be doing with your assertion "logic always works." Clearly since you prefaced your thought above with "for all intents and purposes" and leave a .01% chance that the brain is not the seat of consciousness, logic doesn't always work.
No, it is a perfect example of how logic always works. Logic tells me that consciousness is finite, it tells me that empiricism necessarily carries a degree of uncertainty, and tells me therefore that conclusions thereof must account for this uncertainty. I used logic in every step of the way.
So if logic doesn't always work, is there anything that always works? As I see it, what always works to keep us sane and still and balanced and true is the one absolute truth we do have, which is the truth of emptiness. That although our conscious minds have no choice but to see form and make distinctions, be they logical or be they emotional, we know that ultimately these forms and distinctions are temporary illusions. The beauty of the one absolute truth (that we know of thus far) is that it applies to all forms, logic included. So once absorbed, we can go about our daily business and not get caught up in any one thing, experiencing, even enjoying or loving, the things that appear in our consciousness.
The Truth that all things are appearances is only part of the equation. Without the addition of a deep understanding of causality, which necessitates the use of logic, one is left with a very mundane form of insight. If emptiness is truly all there is, then one is left with an empty mind.

True wisdom is the ability to navigate within and beyond, linear and nonlinear, from right in front of you to the farthest reaches of the universe, all aspects of reality with perfect logical clarity, untethered by the ego.

Don't throw this marvelous tool away!
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

Russell: The Truth that all things are appearances is only part of the equation. Without the addition of a deep understanding of causality, which necessitates the use of logic, one is left with a very mundane form of insight. If emptiness is truly all there is, then one is left with an empty mind.
For you to equate emptiness with a vacuity suggests to me you have no idea to what I am referring. There is nothing mundane about the realization of emptiness.

An understanding of the cause of one's lacking the truth of the nondual nature of reality is absolutely essential to waking up to attaining this wisdom and unless this is the one and only cause that is sought at the expense of all others, this most personal and total wisdom will remain undiscovered. I suggest that "a deep understanding of causality necessitating the use of logic" is a preparation for this most critical of all quests. Perhaps it is not yours. Does "nondual" ring any bells?
True wisdom is the ability to navigate within and beyond, linear and nonlinear, from right in front of you to the farthest reaches of the universe, all aspects of reality with perfect logical clarity, untethered by the ego.
Russell, do you not realize yet that there is no beyond, there is no right in front of you, that there is no farthest reaches? Perhaps the very first stop your logic should make is right here.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Beingof1 »

Bobo:
Somewhere in the brain? The distinctions we would have to make are between counscious , unconscious and not even conscious as parts of what we experience as events and other people's consciousness.
There is a difference between mind, thought and consciousness.

The hierarchy:
Consciousness is the full set and has an infinite membrane for memory. It is why the laws of physics work.
Mind is a subset of consciousness and is equal to the universe as it requires perception.
Awareness is a subset of mind as it requires object or thing.
Thought is a subset of awareness and may only focus on one finite thing at a time.

The logical syllogism that proves we eventually experience a state of omniscience. In order to be omniscient, we must have experienced both Heaven and Hell and all points in between.

1. All things are finite as they are clearly identified by what they are *not* (~).
2. All things have a boundary or limit.
3. All things are contained by what they are *not* (~).
4. All things can be measured by empirical or conceptual means.
5. The Container of all things is beyond measurement as there is not a correlate.
6. All things are contained by an infinite set.
7. An Infinite set is beyond all limits, boundaries and measurement.
8. There can only be one infinity else it is limited by what it is not.
9. All things contained by the infinite are caused by the infinite.
10.All things contained in the infinite are in motion through cause and effect.
11.There is an infinite amount of energy propelling all things.
12.All possible worlds are true.

The Three Thought Experiments:

1) Throw a ball at the edge of your awareness. If it bounces back - it is finite.
If it keeps going at the edge of your awareness - it is infinite.
Therefore; all things are contained by your consciousness as nothing exists outside of the field of awareness.
Physics uses this experiment to determine the bounds on the universe.

Does the mind exist within the brain or does the brain exist within the mind?

2) Count the objects where you are and you will quickly see you cannot count them all. Yet; you are aware of the 'total' amount of objects in your illuminated field of perception.
You are performing the hyper-task of an infinite amount of individual tasks of perceptual awareness and all done in a finite amount of time.

Your consciousness is therefore infinite in its field of awareness.Your body releases heat and effects and sends signals out and back to you. Your brain and central nervous system just released a stream of electrons by thinking about this and most assuredly impacted and effect all objects in your field of awareness (electrons are not subject to gravity but only effected).
It is also what you are (infinite consciousness), created in his image and likeness. It has always been you observing and experiencing the universe from every memory.

Truth is acknowledgement of what is factual. There can be no facts without the 'you' present in experience. Every single particle of your physical body is in communication with every other particle in the cosmos.

3)"Can I conduct an experiment to 'pause or freeze' my experience of reality"? Has my experience always been a steady stream and how much energy is required for infinite change?
Ask yourself; "Has my experience ever paused"?
"Have I ever repeated an experience of any kind"?
"Is my life of experience of the universe in a constant momentum, flux, or rush"?

Your consciousness is always experiencing an infinite state of flow or momentum of energy even if time were on pause. You would still be the observer of this dynamic.

Your consciousness is in a state of constant transcendence as it can never exhaust itself in thought, awareness, and experience. Therefore; consciousness is in a state of infinite energy.

You are the writer, director, and main character of your life movie. Every story in the history of mankind has a conflict within the telling of the tale. The conflict resolution is necessary for comparisons and to establish a level of transcendence of limitation, as in seeing the smile of a child that we help.
The universe exists and it certainly had you in mind at its creation. You are no accident as that would mean the universe in and of itself is an accident.

Let C stand for consciousness (velocity of light).
Let d stand for the derivative or perceptual awareness.
Let A stand for an infinite state of change or flux (cause and effect).

C = dA + A ^A

Consciousness transcends and contains the universe.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Beingof1 »

seeker
You didn't change all of physics. Who cares if you've seen non-ordinary events? There's no meta-mind of the universe, just some wondrous experiences during meditation you took too seriously.
So you were there?

I see; now you are the one who can transcend time and space, peer into the portals of the universe into the past, are omniscient, is able to spread your mind to infinity and are telepathic but I am delusional?

If I throw a zen koan, will you go and fetch it?


Russell:
That answers Being's questions too, but he'll never understand it as far as I can tell. He clings far too much to his beliefs.
I stand by what I said - and now you show yourself to be a punk back smack talker - in essence - a coward.

I know, why don`t you man up and challenge me to a debate and prove - you all that and a bag of Frito`s?
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Beingof1 »

Moving:
Been there, done that, with the only difference between us being that I woke up and realized that all that was happening was that I was thinking I was causing things.
Did you write this post?
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Edited Out
Last edited by SeekerOfWisdom on Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Edited Out
Last edited by SeekerOfWisdom on Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Bobo »

Hello bo1, I'm not so sure what you mean by 'all things', are they unique or there are things that repeat within the set? If, for example, someone had a box with 8 white balls numbered from 1 to 8 and if a ball is picked from the box, by looking at the numbers one could know which balls are inside and which are outside the box, if they weren't numbered it wouldn't be so.

In relation to your thoughts experiments on the first case I think you let out one possible outcome, that the ball may hit the thrower back in the head. The issue with a thing communicating with the rest of things lies with instantaneous communication, if someone were to throw a ball at a wall the wall would hit the ball back at the same instant the thrower throws the ball.

If C and A are taken as constants we would have, speed of light - infinity = dA which doesn't look much promising.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by ardy »

Russell wrote:
Absolute facts are based on pure logic, and can never be falsified. Using the above example, it is absolutely true that what appears to be a snake has entered into one's awareness. Further absolute inferences include that the appearance was caused, 1) - that something other than the observer must exist, that change/motion is occurring, etc..

2) -The art of spiritual wisdom is to decipher and dwell on what is known to be of 100% certainty about Reality, and disregard the rest as superfluous. God is to be found in purely logical truths, for God is the Absolute. Spirituality and purely logical wisdom go hand in hand.


Also, the enlightened don't necessarily have a grip on every absolute truth under the sun. They are predominantly characterized by their lack of delusions about reality.
OK I got your empirical 'truth' your absolute has me scratching my head.

Bold 1) How can you be sure there is something other than the observer? If all is an illusion as stated by Buddha and several other enlightened beings, isn't it the case therefore that the observer is the absolute and is the only thing in existence as far as we can assume? The observer looks out through the senses and observes the outside world as if it is watching a movie. The movie is assumed to be real but we can't prove it.

Bold 2) In my world there is NO 100% reality and there never will be. What I think and act on is empirical, rational or emotional and most enlightened people I have read about do the same EXCEPT they observe the world through calm, rational and compassionate glasses. They are not swayed by their emotions (but they take them into account), dreams of how the world could be, sexual delusions, greed and vanity (could be a couple more).

So they eclipse the world we live in by their constantly refreshing, untrammelled and unscreened mind that takes control of the 5 senses and observes through them and acts on them without a screening mess that deludes the rest of us.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by ardy »

SeekerOfWisdom wrote: It's a never-ending cycle, the same pattern over and over: believers, believers, believers.
In the end SOW you have to believe in something. If you deny everything where does that leave you? Standing as a rock in the middle of the ocean of life? If you don't have the guts to believe in something it leaves you as a non-entity with nothing to offer anyone.

You can try to deny the herd but you are still part of it - SOW! G.O.Y.A. and start experimenting with life and stop this nihilism nonsense.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

ardy wrote:How can you be sure there is something other than the observer? If all is an illusion as stated by Buddha and several other enlightened beings, isn't it the case therefore that the observer is the absolute and is the only thing in existence as far as we can assume? The observer looks out through the senses and observes the outside world as if it is watching a movie. The movie is assumed to be real but we can't prove it.
Are you suggesting that an observer only observes itself?
In my world there is NO 100% reality and there never will be.
How certain are you of this?
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Bobo »

Let me chime in this discussion for a moment, if part of it where someone's else views on the matter and it may help on the resolution or may benefit other people, from the link Russell provided for the PFTH I gather that:
  • What makes all things? The senses make all things.

    What is consciousness? Thoughts

    But I tell you consciousness is material and therefore dies with the body . . . inasmuch as a body can die.

It seems from this that thoughts are material things made by the senses that are going to end in some way.


It also seems that Seeker is proposing that there's a realization that all things are impermanent while Russell is saying that the realization is that all things are one, to me it seems that Seeker has a more implicit proposal of permanency while Russel's is more explicit.

Now if the theme is also rebirth I would favor Seeker's view as it seems more active than Russell's view in the sense of having a 'realization' (while the distinction of a ultimate cause may be important).The next step is considering what the views of rebirth may be in buddhism to see if either interpretation is more compatible than the other? Philosophically I think the issue is also with permanency.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Beingof1 »

Seeker:
^Being, clinging, belief.

Russell's statements about the inconceivable causes and 99% attachment to transient empirical appearances = clinging, belief.
I know. If you actually tried to understand instead of you clinging to the belief you already do understand, we could avoid you talking to the little guy in your head.

Its a very obvious pattern:
It is like talking to a merri go round.
Believers in a personal god : clinging, belief.
Do you believe you are real? Do you believe this is reality you are experiencing? Could that be termed a personal experience? If not, what is it, clinging belief?
Believers in reincarnation and a self-substance :
You just assume this is what I said without ever having read what I actually did say. Belief in the hopes that is what I said without me ever having said it could be categorized as a clinging belief.
Believers in a soul, or eternal awareness -behind-thought: clinging, belief.
Not if it is all you have ever experienced or could that be you posting an experience of thought in the clinging belief that you are actually having awareness?

Could you tell me an experience you have had outside of your consciousness?
Believers in absolutely anything transient: clinging, belief.
There is only one constant, the one you seem to be unaware of - your consciousness - that you believe is clinging belief that you yourself are experiencing.
Buddha says: stop clinging, to atoms, to a creator, to a universe, to a self, to discriminations, instead realize the truth of impermanence and suffering born of clinging.

It is not clinging or belief to point out impermanence. I believe nothing else, and nor should you, for there is nothing enduring. Not the idea of a beginning, not the idea of an end, not the idea of unknowable causes, not the idea that there must be a foundation or explanation. Impermanence is what it is, stop clinging and you transcend the belief in a self and a world.
I would say; stop clinging to the belief you understand what I said without actually understanding what I said. I suggest you read what I wrote and without clinging, understand what it means without a belief that you already understand without understanding otherwise that is a clinging belief.

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
-- Aristotle

You didn't change all of physics. Who cares if you've seen non-ordinary events? There's no meta-mind of the universe, just some wondrous experiences during meditation you took too seriously.


So you were there?

I see; now you are the one who can transcend time and space, peer into the portals of the universe into the past, are omniscient, is able to spread your mind to infinity and are telepathic but I am delusional?

If I throw a zen koan, will you go and fetch it?

I didn't claim any of that shit genius. You claimed all that. I said you're delusional for believing all that. I don't need to have been there, or have witnessed your stoopid conversation with the so called meta-mind.
Er um - let me look again. Yup, you claimed all that I said and more. Just because you cannot understand what you yourself write does not mean I cannot.
Beingof1
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:10 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Beingof1 »

Bobo:
Hello bo1, I'm not so sure what you mean by 'all things', are they unique or there are things that repeat within the set? If, for example, someone had a box with 8 white balls numbered from 1 to 8 and if a ball is picked from the box, by looking at the numbers one could know which balls are inside and which are outside the box, if they weren't numbered it wouldn't be so.
Hello Bobo,
1) The universe is simple in that it works in two modes, information and energy. Cause and effect is true and so, all things are not clearly defined except by you. The reason; all things are in a state of flux and therefore in process. The defining of any thing is arbitrary. We may come to a collective agreement on the definition but all things, without exception are in process and we agree on certain function and characteristics for information transfer.

2) There are many levels of reality just like there are many spectrums of light. For example: if you are in a room and it is pitch black - you turn on the lights, do you lose consciousness of the room or does the room take on differing chracteristics because of sight?
In relation to your thoughts experiments on the first case I think you let out one possible outcome, that the ball may hit the thrower back in the head.
This is a very, very wise answer and is truth. Your answer is a koan that carries with it understanding.

Ultimately, this is the case but never the less, there is no demarcation line between our consciousness and reality since awareness has no edge. If consciousness is a physical property it must be able to be measured. What are the dimensions of consciousness?
The issue with a thing communicating with the rest of things lies with instantaneous communication, if someone were to throw a ball at a wall the wall would hit the ball back at the same instant the thrower throws the ball.
Not if the field of energy is reduced in its velocity. Atomic fission and structure is an example.

There is strong difference between a zero-dimensional and one-dimensional entity and geometry establishes what is 0D and what is 1D. Is a zero dimensional point infinitely small or large? All this talk about small and big particles is not about the size or density.


Look:
When an electron is a particle it produces a finite number - they may be real or imaginary numbers but conceivable non the less. It functions as energy.

When an electron is a wavelength it is circular(spin) and the function pi - the infinite spin as in a circle and has an infinite amount of points otherwise known as zero point. Its function is information.

A square has four points - a circle has an infinite amount of points.

0/1 = consciousness
1/0 = universe

A ball could pass through the double slit experiment with the right velocity.The equation relates momentum p to the wavelength lambda through an inverse relation that also includes the Planck's constant h, that is:
p = h / lambda. Momentum p is a product of mass m and velocity v. So, the equation m • v = h / lambda deals not only with mass (or density) but also includes the particle's velocity. This remains a subset of the zero dimension no matter how many separate balls you end up with. There seems to be no other way the math explains what is happening in relation of the potential field to the actual.

Once a photon is absorbed back into the field it is transformed from the potential virtual field and into the real actual energy and the original photon is undetectable. Photon's energy lives on in another form through an infinite circular process or A^A.

The Photon cycle; addition or subtraction is about the superposition of the wavefunction - zero works for the superposition of the wavefunction. A Photon, once created, has the same and fixed amount of energy in absolute terms for the life cycle of the photon. Photon can be passed through slits resulting in self-superposition (self-interference) and its frequencies may change significantly but its energy stays the same irrespective of the speed of the source or its polarities.

If C and A are taken as constants we would have, speed of light - infinity = dA which doesn't look much promising.
It as promising if not more so than E+MC2. It is describing the finite thought process - that is what dA stands for. Look at the syllogism again as that is a fleshed out version of this equation which proves we already experience omniscience but perception reduced to thought is finite.

Thank you for your honest questions and statements.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

ardy: In the end SOW you have to believe in something. If you deny everything where does that leave you? Standing as a rock in the middle of the ocean of life? If you don't have the guts to believe in something it leaves you as a non-entity with nothing to offer anyone.
At some point, one must choose between a life of believing or a life of truth. Finding truth is not denying everything, it is the finding of everything. If you don't have the guts for truth, then continue believing in something.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by ardy »

Are you suggesting that an observer only observes itself?
NO! I am suggesting that the silent observer, takes input from the senses and makes decisions based on them. These decisions are clear and clean (for want of a better idea), these are described as first nen and then the mind puts its twist on them described as second, third, forth nen etc and therefore all thought falls into comparison and the dualities arise from nen two onwards.
How certain are you of this?
Reality or truth is impossible to describe, so how the hell am I supposed to explain it to you? What you are debating are the foundation stones of life, you can believe what the hell you like but this reality which you want confirmation of does not exist in a form that we can point to or describe.

If you think you have a strong understanding of truth or reality, then I claim you are deluded. To speak of something that is formless is beyond even the geniuses enclosed in this fair land.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by ardy »

movingalways wrote:
ardy: In the end SOW you have to believe in something. If you deny everything where does that leave you? Standing as a rock in the middle of the ocean of life? If you don't have the guts to believe in something it leaves you as a non-entity with nothing to offer anyone.
At some point, one must choose between a life of believing or a life of truth. Finding truth is not denying everything, it is the finding of everything. If you don't have the guts for truth, then continue believing in something.
Movingalways: I agree with your statement completely if you substitute "understanding +/or yourself" for "truth". You could stick in 'original face', 'who you were before father and mother' or any of the thousand words to describe the same thing....It takes real guts to find out who the hell you are....

If you want the minor road then just deal with your own issues, even that is too hard for most people. Finding themselves is a dream to many and a anathema to the majority.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Pam Seeback »

ardy wrote:
movingalways wrote:
ardy: In the end SOW you have to believe in something. If you deny everything where does that leave you? Standing as a rock in the middle of the ocean of life? If you don't have the guts to believe in something it leaves you as a non-entity with nothing to offer anyone.
At some point, one must choose between a life of believing or a life of truth. Finding truth is not denying everything, it is the finding of everything. If you don't have the guts for truth, then continue believing in something.
Movingalways: I agree with your statement completely if you substitute "understanding +/or yourself" for "truth". You could stick in 'original face', 'who you were before father and mother' or any of the thousand words to describe the same thing....It takes real guts to find out who the hell you are....

If you want the minor road then just deal with your own issues, even that is too hard for most people. Finding themselves is a dream to many and a anathema to the majority.
Quotation marks around truth? Remove them immediately and refuse to use them ever again if you want the guts to find out who the truth you are to come.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

Bobo wrote:Let me chime in this discussion for a moment, if part of it where someone's else views on the matter and it may help on the resolution or may benefit other people, from the link Russell provided for the PFTH I gather that:
  • What makes all things? The senses make all things.

    What is consciousness? Thoughts

    But I tell you consciousness is material and therefore dies with the body . . . inasmuch as a body can die.

It seems from this that thoughts are material things made by the senses that are going to end in some way.
To clarify what is meant by Kevin's passage - Consciousness is like a light being shined in a dark room. What was once a amorphous realm becomes a room filled with shapes and colors according to the design of the consciousness. Consciousness can be changed to perceive different colors and forms, such as in the case with scientific instruments. Reality is an infinite realm in which finite forms appear according to the finite designs of consciousness.

The only constant is Reality. Where consciousness exists in reality, perception and the things perceived can be said to exist. As we are conscious beings, the only reality we can perceive is that of things and forms (duality). The exact form of things are precisely what consciousness perceives them to be. But if and when consciousness ceases existence anywhere within reality, forms disappear and reality returns to its formless state (nonduality).
Last edited by Russell Parr on Tue Oct 20, 2015 1:17 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

ardy wrote:
Are you suggesting that an observer only observes itself?
NO! I am suggesting that the silent observer, takes input from the senses and makes decisions based on them. These decisions are clear and clean (for want of a better idea), these are described as first nen and then the mind puts its twist on them described as second, third, forth nen etc and therefore all thought falls into comparison and the dualities arise from nen two onwards.
Input from the senses? So the senses provides input to the observer? Isn't this just another way of saying the observer observes itself?

In my view, sensory input must come from something other than the observer. Fundamentally, as far as consciousness goes, there are always two actors at play: the observer and the observed.
Reality or truth is impossible to describe, so how the hell am I supposed to explain it to you? What you are debating are the foundation stones of life, you can believe what the hell you like but this reality which you want confirmation of does not exist in a form that we can point to or describe.
What would you call the above about the nens, if not an explanation? A guess?
If you think you have a strong understanding of truth or reality, then I claim you are deluded. To speak of something that is formless is beyond even the geniuses enclosed in this fair land.
Forgive me, but I don't see much consistency between what you say and what you actually write. You yourself seem to be quite certain of at least a few things about reality, then go on to claim that nothing can be known for sure.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Edited out
Last edited by SeekerOfWisdom on Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Russell Parr
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:44 am

Re: Perception and Reality

Post by Russell Parr »

Seeker, a couple more questions for you if you don't mind:

Are you the only consciousness there is? If not, how and why are there others?

Why do appearances always change?
Locked