At the end of the day all this is, the theory that I and many other spiritual people have witnessed, is no more than words on a screen. I’m no longer interested in the semantics and I admit that some of my outlook may not be 100% accurate but it’s what I experience.This is the expression of his ideas as a mystery. He tells you he is not going to explain himself.
It’s so bizarre. He says he doesn’t care about explaining it, yet he insists on having us explain it to him, then he tells us we don’t understand what he doesn’t understand, and then asks us another (or, more often, the very same) question.
There’s no doubt he’s confused about his place and purpose in the universe. And I can honestly empathize with him regarding questions of ultimate meaning (I was there at one time). But when I was reading and listening to other points of view and arguments, I listened and thought long and hard on what I heard. I had a belief that contradicted what I heard, so I had to either reconcile them or toss one of them. In the end, after years of thought and more reading/listening, I had the confidence to toss my old beliefs and embrace a more thoughtful and reasonable way of looking at the world.
Xian is facing a wall with graffiti on it, thinking that if he can decipher the graffiti, he’ll find a way through the wall. Unfortunately, there’s no meaning in it so he’ll stand there forever until he realizes that he merely needs to turn around and start walking. We’re all yelling at him to turn, but he’s so convinced there’s meaning in front of him, he’s shushing us and asking for help.
I swing between caring (because I actually do), and writing him off (because it’s really annoying to care but be ignored).
I didn’t specifically mention this thread, but my thread on the book “Sapiens” is directly related to this. What sites and gurus like this do is take Buddhism, which says we live an illusion, and Westernizes it. In Buddhism, the focus is on accepting who you are and knowing who you are, which is a being on a planet with feelings. We will always have desires and many of them are not healthy to pursue, so just accept what you are, you will experience pain and sadness, but you can be at peace with that. The Westernization occurs when we turn it into a goal. We make the pursuit of inner peace a holy grail type quest, and if you achieve “it” then you receive ultimate wisdom and release yourself completely from earthly problems. Except of course that doesn’t work. Ironically, we know more about the mind today and could actually update Buddhist philosophy and use the practices to increase our sense of flourishing as humans.
Lausten asked for the reasoning behind the “you are the universe” and things similar to that and hasn’t responded to it. Your response is more like to call it nonsense, but not say why or even show why it is so. You aren’t really helpful here.I would like to be done with this stuff so I can sleep at night and not be haunted. But the fact that you see people who claim to have experiences a truth that can’t be put into words (like the block text says) and it shows in their behavior, you can’t help but give pause to just writing them off.
I did respond. I showed a flaw in the reasoning. If you say there is science behind the idea that matter comes form consciousness, show me that science. If you can’t, then you are making untrue claims.
And there’s another claim you just made. What behaviors are they showing that you see as evidence that they have some knowledge that you think is important, so they can see “balance” and view reality and know that which can’t explained. What behaviors would demonstrate that?
[quote]Lausten said,
I did respond. I showed a flaw in the reasoning. If you say there is science behind the idea that matter comes form consciousness, show me that science. If you can’t, then you are making untrue claims.[/quote]
IMO, matter comes from the mathematical self-assembly of physical values and functions.
People seem to forget that mathematical values and functions behave in a quasi-intelligent manner, without actually being intelligent.
A snowflakes is perfect example of a spontaneous self-assembly of an apparently intelligent design. But we all know the simple environmental conditions that are causal to the formation of a snowflake. No intent is necessary.
David Bohm addressed this seemingly intelligent motivation as deterministic mathematical “Implicate” the logical prediction of a future explication in reality
How I see it, is that awareness and consciousness are brain-centralized behaviors that we have by virtue of also developing complex verbal behavior. “I” and “you” are concepts or stories of a fashion that are also possible due to our complex verbal behavior. When the vehicle (body and brain) for these behaviors is gone (dead) then the consciousness (the “I” or “you”) is also gone. The matter that made up your physical self will remain and transform (decay etc.) But the unique “I” or “you” is no more. Sorry about that.
Getting all complex and philosophical about it is just a defense mechanism.
I know that Buddhism gets warped in translation to English. Dukkha (I think that’s right) is translated to “suffering” but that’s not really what it means. The same where another word is translated to “love” but that again isn’t really it. Of course it makes things confusing.
But it I think you might be stopping short of what it really is. I mean you get claims saying that there are no “objects in the real world): - YouTube
What I gather is that when you think you only in about thoughts and are living in a world of symbols rather than reality. Not sure what that means, or what they mean when you stop talking to yourself all the time. But it seems relevant to the OP post that started this.
I don’t like to live in mystery, I want to know things. The trouble is that Buddhism and spirituality are rough because it seems more rooted in the experiences of those who talk about it, which presents a problem if you follow their practice and nothing happens. I still haven’t got an answer about the Broward Meditation center and “who you really are”, but it sounds similar to the Alan Watts video (I know he has a book on it too). Personally I think the “no objects bit” is more about language. But even then there are still “objects” in the world and reality, even if we don’t label them. We aren’t infinite even if we remove labels. All that gives is a feeling, that’s it.
Or I would like to say, but I still can’t help but defer to the “mystic” because their behavior and reasoning seems sage and above my own.
If you are compelled to believe a fiction as “knowledge”, you could find worse religious/spiritual fictions than the Buddhist stuff. Nom Myoho Renge Kyo.
Also Lausten you are wrong about Buddhism. It’s not saying you are a being on a planet, for that is “duality”. There isn’t a you but a collection of parts the same way that a pair of headphones is a collection of parts. The claim is that if you pick apart enough you won’t find a “you” just a collection of pieces and smaller pieces, etc. there is no separate, atomized “you” just like there is no atomized headphones (just a collection of pieces). Hence the “you are the universe.
How is it fiction? Did you even see the video?
I think watts also mentioned there being no hands or neck in the real world, just arbitrary cutoff points humans make.
Not sure what vid u r referencing. I have seen “What the Bleep do We Know?” Most vids are fictional narratives, e.g. “Ancient Astronaut” documentaries, sitcoms, History channel series on “The Vikings” (I like that one). Even “reality TV” is fictional narrative (I hate all of those.). I have heard of some ignorant Americans who think the Game of Thrones series is based on our ancient (or maybe not even all that ancient) history.
I went thru a phase, in my 20’s, when I liked Allan Watts. But trust me, odds are that you have hands and a neck.
Well I think what he is referring to is that what we call hands and neck are just arbitrary cutoffs. How what we call objects don’t exist in reality and that we just live in a world of symbols of our own creation and not true reality. But something seems off about it. I mean do we fabricate or recognize this stuff?
By video I mean the YouTube link I posted on this page.
Watts says, "When dancing we are not aiming to arrive at a certain point on the floor…
The journey itself is the point…
The point is always arrived at in the immediate moment…"
Sounds like what we’ve been saying. Congratulations Xian, I think you have arrived. You’re there and not there. You’re where you wanted to be which is where you always were. You’re everything and nothing.
When asked why he practiced zen, the student said, “Because I intend to become a Buddha.”
His teacher picked up a brick and started polishing it. The student asked “What are you doing?” The teacher replied, “I am trying to make a mirror.”
“How can you make a mirror by polishing a brick?”
“How can you become Buddha by doing zazen? If you understand sitting Zen, you will know that Zen is not about sitting or lying down. If you want to learn sitting Buddha, know that sitting Buddha is without any fixed form. Do not use discrimination in the non-abiding dharma. If you practice sitting as Buddha, you must kill Buddha. If you are attached to the sitting form, you are not yet mastering the essential principle.”
The student heard this admonition and felt as if he had tasted sweet nectar.
— Dōgen Zenji
If you believe that we fabricate our reality, you could test it out by strolling about on a busy freeway. You, and the cars and trucks whizzing by, are either real or not. And when one hits you, you will know, at least for a split second.
That answers none of my questions. All I was saying was that what you said about Buddhism wasn’t true .
It doesn’t address the video.
It doesn’t address what was said about there being no objects.
It doesn’t address the part where they mention that emotions are based on our thoughts about reality and not reality to us.
That quote is just an example of how people can get sucked into Buddhism because they mistake such vague “nonsense” as wisdom when it’s not. We know that the “insights” of meditation boil down to the brain and how meditation rewires it, that’s about it. They didn’t know that then so it explains the philosophy behind it all. A story.
You also never addresses the OP about who you really are and what they said about it.
Also Watts is wrong about dancing. If you don’t aim to arrive at a certain point then you fall down or can’t dance at all. The moves are calculated, but the process is effortless with practice. Like how gamers say they get in the zone. The calculations being made are effortless. But there is an aim.
TimB: It’s not a literal fabrication like a god, more like a “story”. The video showcases what I mean by that. It’s not matter reshaping.
That quote is just an example of how people can get sucked into Buddhism because they mistake such vague “nonsense” as wisdom when it’s not.If you are talking the Zen Koan, then that's exactly what I wanted to express. It's exactly what you are doing.
The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao;
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.
Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
These two spring from the same source but differ in name;
this appears as darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gate to all mystery.