GENIUS FORUMS

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:It is personal, only in how far each individual has gotten, how many breakthroughs, how deep the understandings goes.

Words are no indication in this except for recognizing the truth in the basic descriptions of what one understands, the honest descriptions. For example Alex indicated depth in understand by stating one of his simple and honest opinions on our experiences:

"I think that we control our life and our destiny from an invisible center inside ourselves and that we somehow choose a great deal of what happens to us."

He didn't logically deduce this belief, he felt it, as you feel things and know, all wisdom is sourced from your sensual experiences and your understanding of them, language only refers to other peoples direct experiences, for different people, it refers to different direct experiences and different understandings. Language and language-based thought is inconsistent when communicating, it is unreal, it is not a real or consistent depiction, it can't be used in the way most have been using it, at least not if we want real conversation.

If we can forget the detail, and start talking based on how we "feel about things"(the source of all wisdom), you will find our philosophical discussions to be much more realistic, which will allow us to find deeper understandings.

Sounds like something any other religious priest would say.

When you say that something inside us exists, that we can only feel, and not talk about, your falling into the same trap most people are already steeped in; feelings over reason. It is the love that religious people feel from their personal God when they pray. It is the companionship that women indulge in with little dogs. It's the hopefulness and excitement children have when they write Santa a letter. The substance of these "feelings" is just a mixture of imagination and chemical reactions produced by our bodies.

Regarding your hive mind idea, from your language it sounds similar to modern occultist groups, like the freemasons. Occultist groups use their "insight" and "wisdom" to help their fellow club members achieve worldly desires (like women or money, hypothetical goals you've mentioned). Perhaps they have what you are looking for?

"The substance of these "feelings" is just a mixture of imagination and chemical reactions produced by our bodies."

You can have sense experience without a body or a brain, my belief... already we can see our beliefs are so fundamentally opposing that we shouldn't converse, as I don't see the need for an external world we are interpreting and you do.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:You can have sense experience without a body or a brain, my belief...

You cannot ponder such a thing or draw conclusions about this belief without your body or brain though.. you're making an assumption based on feelings.

already we can see our beliefs are so fundamentally opposing that we shouldn't converse, as I don't see the need for an external world we are interpreting and you do.

False. I'm not implying any separated-ness between our experiences and our bodies/brains, the external world is an integral part of experiencing the seamlessness of reality.

It seems like you're arguing for the oneness of reality, which is fine, but you're contradicting yourself in pleading the case for an "eternal, internal sensory center" that has little to nothing to do with the external physical reality that we otherwise experience.

Again bluerap, I don't believe my sense experiences to be real in the same sense that you do, I don't see the need for the "external physical reality that we otherwise experience.". In other words I am under the impression life is closer to a dream world than a physical place, I don't believe it would exist without the observer.

All reason is based on your direct experiences, all logical deductions are derived from these "feelings" that we are subject to.

Anyway I have already talked about this kind of thing in length with other posters on this thread and another "also anti-atheism" thread, so I don't want to be repeating all of that again, you can take a look at some posts if you want to have a more detailed explanation of where I am coming from, otherwise it really isn't in me to start this same conversation again :p

You've got some insights, but you're really just scratching the surface of deeper knowledge. Keep your eyes open, you're drawing conclusions far too quickly.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:In other words I am under the impression life is closer to a dream world than a physical place, I don't believe it would exist without the observer.

I agree with this much. Things exist only in observation.

All reason is based on your direct experiences, all logical deductions are derived from these "feelings" that we are subject to.

Yes but nothing can be said or understood of these experiences without the use of reason/logic. Reason/logic is what separates us from animals/unconsciousness.

Otherwise, how do you differentiate these "feelings" you speak of from simple common impulses like excitement or rage? Do you categorize such feelings/impulses as as acts of consciousness? If so, how does that definition of consciousness benefit us in regards to wisdom, if reason/logic plays no role? It would seem to me, by that definition, that everyone is already perfectly conscious. And furthermore, in order to gain wisdom, all one has to do is feel wise, or feel extraordinarily right about their impulses/thoughts. No other means of qualification is possible. Is this what you believe?

I agree one must use reason and logic, in almost every moment we are using reason and logic, to write this.

I think if you agree that things exist only in observation you'll find we have very similar beliefs. ( I just like to be blatant about it and call it the stuff of dream, which has massive implications on the ordinary use of logic)

What I am referring to is making faulty logical deductions, not being able to distinguish between what is real and what has been illogically assumed.

For example, your faulty logical deduction that I am "really just scratching the surface of deeper knowledge", which is something that is assumed, not known. You could not judge such a thing by reading a few posts on here, you have not considered that I am not attempting to properly explain or detail my understandings, I am stating them simply using language, which is inconsistent and contradictory very often in itself, it cannot be used to represent real descriptions of our experiences, it can only be used to refer to direct experiences in the other, you would have to look through my eyes.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:I agree one must use reason and logic, in almost every moment we are using reason and logic, to write this.

I think if you agree that things exist only in observation you'll find we have very similar beliefs. ( I just like to be blatant about it and call it the stuff of dream, which has massive implications on the ordinary use of logic)

Yes, we have similar beliefs as far as that goes. But just as you are able to discern the errors in logic that scientists make, those with deeper philosophical knowledge than you are able to discern that you still have a ways to go, even in just a couple hundred forum posts.

I should point out that you get quite defensive quickly when I or others are merely pointing out your own illogical statements, because of your stubbornness:

For example, your faulty logical deduction that I am "really just scratching the surface of deeper knowledge", which is something that is assumed, not known. You could not judge such a thing by reading a few posts on here, you have not considered that I am not attempting to properly explain or detail my understandings, I am stating them simply using language, which is inconsistent and contradictory very often in itself, it cannot be used to represent real descriptions of our experiences, it can only be used to refer to direct experiences in the other, you would have to look through my eyes.

First, the blaring error with this statement is that it can turned around and used right back at you by anybody. It's meaningless.

Second, you give off a few red flags that signify egotism, namely this desire of yours to create a hive mind. Enlightenment is the epitome of individualism. It is a complete and thorough understanding of nature, and our place in it, not "what can we do with it." Women and money have much less of a role in the lives of the wise than you seem to think it does. I'm pretty sure Lao Tzu wasn't part a member of a hive mind, much less one that pursued women and money.

You speak much of "taking action" rather than wasting time, posting on forums. What do you make of Wu wei?

Wu wei (無爲), literally "non-action" or "not acting", is a central concept of the Daodejing. The concept of wu wei is multifaceted, and reflected in the words' multiple meanings, even in English translation; it can mean "not doing anything", "not forcing", "not acting" in the theatrical sense, "creating nothingness", "acting spontaneously", and "flowing with the moment."

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lao_tzu#Tao_Te_Ching

John:

I want a group to avoid all the problems that arise on here, all the traps. A collaborative group of action rather than a non-collaborative and slow group of non-action and arguments.

For example, kunga here, comes on to insult and make unfounded comments, this is the kind of thing I want to avoid, there can only be progression if there is unwavering cooperation.
At the time being there is no such cooperation and no agenda, it seems to me there is only discussion and time passing.

So far, no one has shown interest in your idea of progression, collaboration and action and yet, you continue to try and sollicit these things. Could it be that the posters on this forum have some wisdom about progression, collaboration and action that you do not? And that it is your lack of wisdom that causes you to interpret what you see here as being signs of a "slow group of non-action and arguments?"

Mostly it is because forum communication is very slow. I've already started an open chat on skype with a few smart members so far, anyone who agrees to discuss/act for the benefit of themselves and the group is allowed to join, even you kunga, not that you want too.

If collaboration with the collective hive mind was the formula for the ending of suffering, suffering would have ended centuries ago.

"I know I do not know the cause of my witnessing."

I agree completely. I know I do not know the cause of my witnessing, although still I think there is a cause, and, because I don't know its real name or anything about it, I call this "cause of all things I've ever witnessed" God.

You acknowledge that you do not know the cause of your witnessing, the cause of God, and yet you believe you can end suffering by thinking about the cause. If you would invest some time thinking about what I have put forward here, you might catch a glimpse of the formula to end suffering.

"A being separate from the totality of ones awareness"

My awareness is looking directly into this beings consciousness, there is no separation from it, only oneness with it.

Dennis pointed out correctly that enlighenment is not the realization of oneness, but of emptiness. I [the witness] and the Father [the moving spirit] are One. Emptiness of form does not mean a vaccuum of things being caused, which would be the nilhilist's viewpoint, rather, emptness of form means all things are being caused now. Which means your idea of a progression of causes is an illusion. Do you want to live in an illusion? Why not drop the illusory idea of progression and action of causes and simply be the truth of the infinite causing that you are, right here, right now?

bluerap wrote:

SeekerOfWisdom wrote: Second, you give off a few red flags that signify egotism, namely this desire of yours to create a hive mind.

You speak much of "taking action" rather than wasting time, posting on forums. What do you make of Wu wei?

Stop trying to point out your opinion of where you think others are showing ego, it is a common trait of egotism...

Lao Tzu wrote 81 parts, he was acting the whole time, while talking about non-action.

Already we have seen the sages are ok with at least taking action to write....... haha you seem to be very caught up still in what you think are rules, your terms of enlightenment, which are clearly based on the dead rather than your own understandings.



movingalways

You would have joined that group in an instant if it were your best buddies suggesting an open-topic IM group wouldn't have you? Or do you disagree?

Think it is clear your statement about wisdom isn't actually about wisdom but is about uninformed opinion, in fact, seeing as you have not participated in any chat to see if it is progressive or not, it is a fact that your statement isn't founded on wisdom but on opinion.

You are posting on a forum right now, if you somehow think an open topic IM isn't ok.... but open topic forums are... then your sense of what brings about progression and what doesn't is relative, don't judge a book by its cover, pretty old lesson.

Please don't say any more on this if you are going to reply with very irrelevant and frankly pretty stupid reasons, no one is asking you to join anymore....... unless of course you can point out how an IM is so very different and wrong for progression compared to a forum?... you can't, because you would have joined genius forum and participated in IM if it had one... another point you can't deny...?


You are living an illusion right now.... "drinking from the waters of a mirage"... why is everyone so bent on acting like they have figured out the only way to be and act? I personally believe you should stop doing this seeing as you probably don't act idealistically yourself most of the time... or if you still want too, do it to someone else please





Really, am I the only one with enough courage to still admit I have an ego?

Everyone else seems to think they have completely overcome it, yet they post out of ego, defending their claims to the death, very often...odd.

Is it possible to defend ones own claims in length without putting the ego on display?

Bluerap has thus proven egotism.

Movingalways has thus proven egotism.

dennis has thus proven egotism.

SOW has thus proven egotism.

Now, since we have all proven we still have an ego, why not get over the obvious fact?

By the way, did I ever tell you guys I'm the best person in the world?

I discovered at the age of 5 that no one living on earth could be me at anything, whether it be a physical or non-physical skill, and they haven't since!

Ya'll are saying that reason & logic is where it's at...
Well reason IS logic.

What is needed is : Wisdom & Compassion

And there is no Wisdom without Compassion


_/\_

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Everyone else seems to think they have completely overcome it, yet they post out of ego, defending their claims to the death, very often...odd. Is it possible to defend ones own claims in length without putting the ego on display?

Did they all state that they have completely overcome "it" or is that just what you "sense"? And why would defending a position in a debate be a sign of ego (a "false sense of self"). Are you saying that without ego it's impossible to disagree or assert something with conviction? That one has to yield and go along with everything in all circumstances? I try to understand what you're getting at exactly here.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:I try to understand what you're getting at exactly here.

What I'm getting at, and this is for everyone that does this.... stop pointing out signs of the ego in other people's comments, when there are signs of the ego in your own, especially when there are signs of the ego in the very same comment that is pointing out the signs of the ego in others.

Fair statement?

Kunga wrote: And there is no Wisdom without Compassion

I agree, so let's all start being a little more compassionate instead of holding on to that critical mindset, constructive criticism works fine... but constructive advice/providing alternatives works much better than just trying to point out what you think is wrong and stopping there.

Why wouldn't we strive to be a little more collaborative or compassionate, especially when we are brothers in thought and in experience.

Seeker

I think everyone here is trying their best. Most of the members here are decades older than you, so we tend to
rock a little slower, while we're knitting......

No wonder this keeps occurring then, I'm trying to race you guys on my chair. Thinking too much with too much to say, if I were to be realistic and post as many topics as I felt like discussing, this whole forum would be flooded, another reason why IM could help.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:By the way, did I ever tell you guys I'm the best person in the world?

I discovered at the age of 5 that no one living on earth could be me at anything, whether it be a physical or non-physical skill, and they haven't since!

You are an infant of your own puffery.

That puffery was sarcasm.......it wasn't really till the age of 12 that the statement became true.

Lighten up, not everything is so serious.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:What I'm getting at, and this is for everyone that does this.... stop pointing out signs of the ego in other people's comments, when there are signs of the ego in your own, especially when there are signs of the ego in the very same comment that is pointing out the signs of the ego in others.

Fair statement?

What I'm getting at: you continue to show signs of a very limited understanding of egotism and consciousness. This becomes increasingly apparent when your reaction to this criticism is to merely point the "you're egotistical" finger back at others.

Understanding the limitations of consciousness is one thing, but understanding the fundamental reality underlying all of existence is a whole 'nother animal. You think such an understanding is impossible, but fail to recognize that you're stating what you believe to be facts about this underlying absolute reality it all the time.

You're still at an early level of awareness, and is defiantly denying that there is any deeper knowledge to gain. From there you allow your egotism to resume is residence in your consciousness, except now it is armed with your profound, yet limited insights. You feel as though you have learned enough, and the stagnation in the world is a result of not putting such knowledge into practice. (As I stated earlier though, the secret fraternal clubs such as the Freemasons do exactly what you are implying should be done with profound insights, mixed in with the usual superstitious weirdness that naturally comes with cults utilizing an egotistical use of knowledge.)

You actually remind me very much of myself when I was 18. I studied everything from business and investments (had all the Rich Dad Poor Dad books) to PUA (pick-up artist) guides to be good with women. A friend and I even came up with business plans for multi-million dollar companies that we wanted to build. I had (and still have) a little individual success with these ventures, but as I get older and can sense more and more the lack of integrity the materialistic lifestyle entails. There's no fulfillment in a lifestyle that is inconsistent with a deep knowledge of reality.

You're probably going to have to get your head bumped a few times over the next years of your life to realize your present limitations. But we are being compassionate with you.

That puffery was sarcasm.......it wasn't really till the age of 12 that the statement became true.

...Or you'll just become a hippy :P

bluerap wrote:

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:You think such an understanding is impossible, .....

You're still at an early level of awareness, and is defiantly denying that there is any deeper knowledge to gain.

Where did I state I thought it was impossible, or that there is no deeper knowledge to gain? I was previously only talking about the kind of logical deductions that give you misunderstanding rather than understanding.

I'm very much under the belief that there is no limit (observed as of yet) to the depths of knowledge, and no limit to how far one can expand his awareness and understanding of things.

I see where you are coming from as one of my earlier posts was about forming a group to get whatever members might want like money or fame...

But again, you have not looked through my eyes to see how much I am aware of, how much I can see, nor have you understood my reasons.

I do not think of external gain as any kind of real gain, I expressed those options such as "becoming real life sages" because I am overly restless due to the length of my boredom. There is very little I want or think is worth gaining, which is the reason I have had so much free time this year, such little will to do or speak of anything that is mundane, and almost always zero moneys, but after becoming so detached from the ordinarily entertaining "things of this world", I have found that non-desire can result in great boredom, like you pointed out, I do not feel I am properly applying myself, simply because I only think I would be properly applying myself If I were to make large effects on large amounts of people, otherwise I would feel as if I was not doing things to the extent of my ability and would not find it worth while.

Being free of most suffering through understanding the profundity of the moment doesn't mean you always find that moment entertaining....

"There's no fulfillment in a lifestyle that is inconsistent with a deep knowledge of reality."

That's definitely true, but both of us have decided to stay here in the world of being, and as a result, there is free time on our hands, that is why we are both on these forums... we all get bored, that is why I wanted to form a group of uncommonly smart people, to get help with ideas, to reach new limits, and to try and do something I find worthwhile with my free time, rather than just experiencing the myriad manifestations all day long, but as we know, you guys on here aren't fans of trying anything new without some kind of reasonable evidence as to why you should...

Why wouldn't we strive to be a little more collaborative or compassionate, especially when we are brothers in thought and in experience.

This is a part of the strong suit 'pleading'.

It means 'let's strike a bargain'.

As the dream rolls out 'let's strike a bargain' means a difficulty has arisen.

I find myself in bargaining mode now and then and realise underneath it lies an anger ready to explode and the move in to 'bargaining' postpones that experience.
It's a coping thing.

When I defray the situation with that move 'let's make a deal',
I feel charming and in control.

The hiccup or difficulty hasn't been handled.
It stays in the background, ready at hand for a triggering,
Keeping my end of the bargain is problematic and the difficulty is further compounded.

Your strong suit is over analyzing language and then transforming that over analysis into something bordering on incoherent, so that no one else has the chance to mimic you and point out problems in your reasoning or syntax, which is the kind of analysis you love to give but clearly avoid getting.

Accurate representation?

language appears and there's a transmission in the language that's not the language.

Exactly, which is why your tactic is an intelligent one, you know I wanted the IM to avoid this very same problem.

All I want is meaning transfer, not language debate.

Answer your million dollar idea btw