Karl

Something I meant to address earlier -

 

 

So does physics

 

 

 

Is light a wave or particle?

Or is physics not logical?

 

The answer is - both and neither:

 

 

 

 

 

If you simply use John's poem to prove your point, you are missing a great opportunity.

He is asking us to embrace contradiction and see what that can teach us.

He is not asking us to resolve the contradiction.

Physics: if the light wave is considered both wave and particle, then, the physicists are wrong and must check their premises because they have missed something.

The poem is asking you to discover where the contradictions are and remove them (ask what they are trying to tell you). It is the beginnings of analytical discriminatory thought. I did not realise the depth and quantity of contradictions are I had been holding until I studied logic. It's an ongoing process.

The thing I cannot know, is, had I not learned to hear my thoughts and moods, would that have made a difference ? I think possibly that it wouldn't. That I would have sorted myself out if I had found the Trivium first-but then I suspect it would not have remotely attracted me in the way that esoteric practices did.

I agree somewhat with what you say here that there is a continual process of false ego recreation which is very tricky and that many practices can hinder rather than help. But I don't think you have gone far enough in your enquiry if your conclusion is that all you have and can trust is the intellect. Even on the simple level it isnt the intellect which beats your heart and breathes the air. The intellect is a constantly fluctuating ever changing thing blown this way and that by whatever wind comes your way. What is the only thing which is not changing and reliable?

 

As Ramana Maharshi says the essence of the spiritual enquiry is to "Let what comes come; let what goes go. Find out what remains."

 

What remains certainly isnt the intellect, the intellect isn't there during the gaps between thoughts, isn't there during the deepest stages of sleep, or during the deepest stages of meditation and what it arises within obviously can't be defined by it. So how can the intellect be what you are if you don't dissappear when the intellect isn't there?

The intellect has to be trained. It is not good enough to simply state that the intellect alone is good enough. An untrained intellect is a loose canon and is swayed by all manner of falsities and experiences. However, the intellect is all you have and it is more than sufficient for the task. It is unbelievably powerful once trained, far more than you can conceive. If you don't attend it, or make the mistake of thinking that it is unnecessary, then you give up the most precious gift.

The intellect is only brought into play when new experiences are encountered and when it is necessary to make deductive/inductive operations and in order to sift the wheat from the chaff. Once the new insights/concepts are gained, then they can be tucked into memory. The more those concepts are used, then the less conscious access is required and things become second nature.

water was merely an analogy, a literary device, surely what should be being examined was the meaning of the analogy, not water itself.

Agreed. It was certainly a meaningless analogy.

I'm glad you like the poem.

Each of us creates our reality... or not, as you wish.

Peace

_/\_

reality is reality we do not create it. Our job is to determine what it is not to create a simulacrum.

Deflecting again.In truth Samadhi like TI is saying takes a second.How far can you let go is what he is asking.Can you observe your thoughts? Can you observe them without noticing them, labeling them.. grasping after them?Where are you at in your practice?

....takes a second....is exactly what I said in the previous post. I can do it at will and stay in that state for as long as I wish. It's a dead end. It was TI that insisted I must do it his way.

I have been able to observe thoughts and more subtle nuances that I suspect you are not yet even aware of as yet for a long while. I was an advanced practitioner, a very diligent and conscientious student. Of course TI won't accept that because he thought Yogani was wrong and he-TI-was right. However, Yogani was not my master.

If you are not focusing on the sensation of the breath as it enters and exits the nostril then you are not doing what I asked you about.

I did not ask you if you could enter what you perceive to be samadhi.

There is great benefit to mastering the mind, to train in concentration.

It has taken me over a year to gain some success with that technique. I know the steps and components that have to come together very well.

Are you saying that you can maintain one pointed concentration on the sensation at the nostril for 3 hours? That that is child's play?

I don't want to hear a dismissal that samadhi is pointless, a dead end. For if you have not mastered your mind your claim is just hearsay.

What happened to the 10 minutes ? Now doesn't count unless it's 3 hours ? I'd probably get hungry and my wife would hit me with a stick for not doing the housework. :-) I'm liking this Samahdi stuff less and less as you move the goalposts. Your practices would end with a divorce.

And if I can therefore define "humans" then they also become homogenous?

I edited my reply before you posted.

 

It is?

Its a compound of the elements hydrogen and oxygen, but that's semantics as far as the discussion is concerned. Human beings do not merge like droplets of water.

That you are your own master would be wonderful if it were true.  But your need to 'be right' on every thread, to contend as you do, doesn't bear that out at all.  the only thing that will remove this tendency is inner discovery.

 

Start with the big ones.  Most of us have the big ones of Arrogance and the Need to be Right, until we do something about it.  Try to figure out where the need to be right all of the time started, and why your ego is so hung up on this.  In my particular case it was being pushed by my folks to not only be the one in class with the right answer, but to be the First to have the answer!  This is so contrary to the Sage - to the uncarved wood - to 'never be the First' - to the personality which no longer contains rough edges, which fits in seamlessly regardless of the situation because he is beyond judgment.

 

Yes, I know your response.  I am judging and  I am projecting my own shortcoming onto you.  Yes, this is true.  But the difference is that I am in Awareness of my Arrogance, my Need to be Right.  I do my best not to engage them, so they will shrivel and die.  I've been at this for a long time.   If given no food, they cannot live.  Without our character deficiencies, clarity is possible.  

 

But not a moment sooner.  You are loved here, and this is a great place to grow.

You can judge if you want, but then you have to prove that what I say isn't true. If everything I say is true, then where is the arrogance ? If I am saying something is true, but I believe otherwise, or doubt what I say, then that wouldn't be arrogance, it would be a lie. As that lie would only damage me-bearing in mind that you do not believe what I say to be correct-then no arrogance is apparent either.

I go back to the analogy with the Apple. The taste is not in the Apple. You cannot blame the Apple for being arrogant about its taste, or always being right about its flavour. if you say X is Y then I will notice and comment on it. I can only notice the conflict in the argument. That is all I can do.

I'm not denying existence, I'm noticing the airy quality of it.  Can you see it?  Have you ever read the Daodejing and noticed that the function of the Dao is reversion?  Reversion to itself, through the One to the void?  I like aligning myself with the Dao, that's all. When we do that, there's no need for argument at all.  Discussion and observation, yes.  Argumentation, no.  We are not separate from each other, we are the One Life that is manifesting on this planet, which is also part of the One Life.  We need to build each other up, not tear each other down for egoic gratification.

 

'Look inwards and discover a point of contradiction within yourself', as Steve's quote above said.  When someone has done this for a long time, searched their inner reactions and found the source for the unwanted reaction, then the love shines between the words because the ego has been tamped down and mastered.   There is no ego that gets in the way between the people talking.  There are those on this forum - CT, Steve, and others - you can see the love shining between their words because they've gone through the process of inner examination and continue to do so with every encounter.

 

Maybe if you read some other masters you would get this concept more clearly?

I see existence directly Manitou. I choose to see it. You are seeing it how you wish to see it-as airy, or light. I approve of it, just as it is and do not add to it.

There is no 'tearing each other down'. This is in your mind, it isn't real. That there are bad operators in the world is just reality. They have to be resisted-not just by a passivity which wishes them away and hopes for a life of death, before death even takes the body.

The young have egoic gratification, the old have no time left for it ;-)

I am my own master.

In your conclusion here, you will invariably come into conflict with all of those other beings...

This is the very source of conflict in our world in my view.

Krishnamurti calls this the source of violence.

The Buddhists refer to this as the source of all suffering - ignorance (I don't mean to be insulting).

 

We'll simply have to disagree.

Being is not restricted to logic, logic is the limited realm of the thinker, the 'me'

 

I'll close on this topic with a quote from a wonderful poet and spiritual being named John O'Donohue.

I've posted this before and hope it could be helpful here for some, it has been for me:

 

"And if you want a point of departure for this new journey of soul, don't choose an intention, don't choose a prayer, don't choose a therapy, and don't choose a spiritual method. Look inwards and discover a point of contradiction within yourself. Stay faithful to the aura and presence of the contradiction. Hold it gently in your embrace and ask it what it wants to teach you."

Of course I come into conflict with other objects, just so as I don't come into conflict with my own thoughts.

This is what you don't understand and a performing mental somersaults to try and create harmony.

The sweetness of the Apple is not in the Apple. It is our thoughts which are conflicting and not the objects outside of thought. What you are trying to do is to make the real world conform to your conflicted thinking.

It is no surprise to me that we disagree, but for you this is in direct conflict with your beliefs, because you have, yourself, come into conflict with an object-me.

That poem is wonderful by the way. It points out exactly what I have been saying. That the contradictions are internal disputes, or disputes between existence and the minds experience of existence. If you hold two contradicting concepts then one must go. That is what logic is about and that is what your poem reflects.

The taste of the Apple is not in the Apple. That was the clue that was left in Buddhist philosophy. If you think that means that you should dispute the seperate existence of the Apple, or yourself, then you got it wrong.

That reminds me of a couple wonderful things.

 

First of all, that we are 99.9% space - that only one tenth of a percent of our mass is what we would call 'solid', if you factor in the relative size of the atomic particles with the full active dimension of the atom.  I think that's just incredible.  It's like we're not even here at all.  Nothing else is either.  We're a bunch of hungry ghosts.

 

The other wonderful thing is that the only thing that differentiates what determines whether a cell is going to be a bone cell, or a hair cell, or a skin cell, or any cell in the human body - is how it aligns at the time the fetus is formed!  There is initially no difference between a bone cell or a blood cell - only the initial alignment of the cells in the womb.

 

For some reason, these two things assure me of the illusory nature of life.  In fact, because we are so un-dense in reality, who's to say there isn't another 'world full of people' taking up this very space at this very time?  Only we just don't have the particular configuration of rods and cones to see that reality?

But we are here Manitou. No matter how much you try to intellectually dismiss your existence. There is no illusion except the one you are creating for yourself.

There is nothing to stop there being a 'world full of people', but you don't believe there is anything anyway, that it's all illusion, so why are you thinking about perception of senses, or the world of physics ?

Karl, so that now you have the general instruction, are you going to see if you can reach samadhi?

Consider it an exercise in concencentration, an intellectual challenge to test the theory.

Can you focus on the sensation of the breath as it touches your nostrils for one consecutive minute with absolutely no distraction? How about two minutes?

Childs play. I can do that at any time without any need for nostril breathing, it's a pointless dead end, but enjoy.

 

 

 

 

 

And I've come to a very different conclusion than yours - that we're not alone in this world, we are rich with the support of other beings, be they people, animals, natural spirits, our environment, whatever our frame of reference contains. And sometimes they can provide us with challenges rather than support but even those challenges can be taken as our path and can support our growth. And those others are all very meaningful to me, in fact they are infinitely more important than the 'me' that continually tries to exert its importance in my thoughts.

 

You see, the fear you are referring to comes from the very presence of 'me' that sees itself as alone, as separate, as a self. 

That 'me' is the fundamental error and a very powerful method for correcting that error (letting go of the identification with 'me', and transcending that fear) is in feeling and cultivating the depth of our connection with others.

 

 

Except you haven't come to one conclusion. As shown by your conflicting conclusions.

Either you are alone and have independent identity (as has everything else), or you believe you are alone because there is anything apart from you (letting go of identification).

You cannot logically be both alone and not alone.

I am alone, self identified and interacting with other beings and objects that have identity. No conflict occurs.

Just  a remainder - let us not to be derailed by  personalities who are yet to mature in mind.   Ego filled mind is  intent on having the last word,  rather than being intent on learning and being open to the idea that it maybe wrong.  This thread went off topic once before  with primitive application of logic/reasoning.  Ignoring wisdom of human experience happened to me too, when i was younger.   Hopefully participation in this forum will bring about needed change and happiness.....

The irony is strong here.

the song that made the universe of galaxies and various energies also made human beings, granted certain specializations and some independent aspects and possibilities are in effect for humans but bottom line separation is not.

What are these 'certain specialisations, independent aspects and possibilities' then ? ;-)

You are holding two conflicting concepts.

ultimately (and obviously) we are connected in the world, from the most subtle Source that can't be pinned down to the most thick as a brick element

 

a molecule of water is not alone in an ocean of water, also the nature of water will continue on while a particular stone only lasts so long in a river.

Water, is an element and therefore homogenous. Humans and not.

The trick is not to label something as good or bad.

Or negative and positive.

Yep.  That's old age.  Physically and mentally.  We've gotta let the child out to play if we want him to stay young and healthy.

I find pop music ever more mundane. If you really wanted to go back to the inner child I would be embracing teething rings, pacifiers and goo goo eyes. Move on is my motto. Leave all that stuff behind like manure on a garden. I appreciate age as the price of wisdom and the decline of endless desire.

Funnily enough, when I think back, I was never enamoured with my childhood playmates. I preferred to seek adult company and learning to sand pits and toy cars. I don't wish to revisit it :-)

Wow, a true music fan right there. I'm a supposed musician and I don't think my collection is even 10% of that.

Then again, you've been around a lot longer And I don't think I'm all that into music any more. That too.

I found the same thing. I've got several hundred or maybe more than a couple of thousand records and CDs but I listen to a tiny fraction and hardly listen to anything new. Last time that happened I had a 5 year hiatus before hearing Nirvana, RATM and Metallica which got me going.

I seem to be sliding slowly towards classical music and have been listening to a lot of Bach for organ. I hear a lot more than I once did. Old age eh.

So what me feeling "as if" I have billion dollars and women throwing themselves at me  ain't going to work then

Damn you LOA for the false hope

 

On a serious note, for me it feels like I am not meant to have a good life, I'm not talking about a depressive feeling but a normal feeling, even when I feel more positive this feeling of not meant to be is there as normal.

If you had a billion dollars would you go to work ? In the end you can only do what you think you can do.

You have a life, therefore you already have the greatest gift possible. How you utilise it and what grace you can muster to realise his truth is down to you and no one else.

Steve's posts are good example of balanced reasoning. (among there other aspects)  Whereas for you Karl, you can not be reached with balanced reasoning when it comes to certain subjects - for instance in an agnostic like sense in relating to same - even though you harp about the ultimate place that reason and intellect hold for you yet don't same apply in that way?   Hmm, I guess we could call your variation Voodoo reasoning - not unlike the idea of or forms of "Vodoo economics" which the world is largely running on.

You don't know 'balanced reasoning' because, like Neo in the Matrix, you have never actually used it. When and if you begin, it will feel like muscles that have never been used, or eyes that have never been opened.

If you can see voodoo economics then there is a comparison. Indeed there is a comparison to be made in every single thing, from a grain of sand to the universe. Any serious, methodical and reasoned approach will bear fruit, but you have to be aware of your own bias and vulnerability to propaganda. How thoughts run in deep strata, subtle flows, moods as fleeting as a moth on a summers night, or the kiss of a mayfly on the surface of a pond. Question everything, unlearn, go back to being a child. What, what, what, where, where, where, when, when, when ? Be aware that you have stopped asking and have assumed that you know and that the information you have is correct. Begin the process again.

I just noticed this

 

 

Why do I need to provide evidence to support my description of my path?

You are welcome to look at spirituality as transcending only the physical.

I choose to focus on the mental as well.

 

 

Thanks for sharing your presumptions and opinions regarding my path. 

 

It seems like you are trying to paint learning from others as a weakness, I see it as a strength.

 

I have a very different perspective regarding the value of "instruction books," particularly those developed by a lineage of accomplished masters over a period of centuries or millennia. For me, there is profound value there and I feel blessed to have connected with such wisdom. 

 

I do agree that we need to take responsibility for ourselves but that doesn't exclude making use of what we learn along the way. Plagiarism means to take someone else's ideas and pass them off as your own. Learning is to integrate what we encounter and synthesize it into something unique in a process of growth. Self-doubt is quite valuable when that self is the root of ignorance. 

 

From the perspective of the absolute, self and other is delusion so from that perspective it is equally true to say that all learning is independent and no learning is independent. In the tradition I'm working with there are three classes of teacher: 1) one's personal teacher, 2) all appearances and experience, all of which we can learn from if we are open, and 3) the nature of mind, the ultimate teacher. The practice of guru yoga is ultimately a union of all three of these with awareness. 

I'm not at all painting learning from others as a weakness. That's your false egoic perception cooking off. Instead of trying to see the truth you are switching to defence and trying to win because you think that this is a competition. A contest. You are fighting a war with yourself, see it, know it.

A baby relies on its parents to feed and care for it. There is a point at which the baby is no longer a baby and will switch on its own caring skills. I also have many thousands of books that I have learned from and I don't know of any another way to absorb concentrated mental nutrition-but not all of it is good. Eventually we walk on our own and can hopefully discriminate good mind food, from bad. This can be frightening. Like a bird thrown out of the nest, someone genuinely searching will reach the only conclusion possible. That, ultimately, there is only ourselves and we are alone in the world. No one can show us the way, there is no red pill we can take other than the decision to simply wake up and see what we have been so afraid to know-that for us, there are no 'others' that, in a sense, everybody else is an illusion. The only good mind food is that which we grow and tend for ourselves, otherwise we live by another's mantra. That's a decision we have to make.

I could say 'it's all good' and therefore just keep going, if that satisfies you, but you have specifically asked me to comment. Do I ignore you ? tell you only what you wish to hear ? Agree wholeheartedly ? Lie ? If you want honesty that is what I'm giving, if you do not wish to know, then do not ask and that will save us both a lot of time.

Nuclear? Fukushima is a disaster and will be for decades. 

Or longer. However, it remains as the cleanest, most consistently reliable form of power to date. Germany went back to the only real alternative-coal. In the UK we are trying to broker a deal to get China/France to build nuclear power plants as we are looking increasingly vulnerable to outages because we have not updated our coal fired plant.

So called 'green alternatives' are not feasible. We are simply filling investors/land owners pockets with tax payer money to fund a the kind of intermittent power supply that will always require back up, short term gas plants by the thousand. These short term plants are highly inefficient and have a very limited lifespan compared with long term power plants. The grid system is currently unsuitable for carrying such varying, spasmodic loads and would require an enormous upgrade which no one is prepared to fund, or tolerate.

Despite the ideology behind wind and solar being a good one, it is totally impractical and uneconomical except when used in areas where no advanced power generation is either feasible, or technologically possible.

Again, this comes down to the best way to allocate resources and that is the free market. It is the free market which has the best chance of finding safe alternative power and not governments trying to pick winners.

I probably like the idea of nuclear power even less than you do. I've been mildly irradiated once in my lifetime and have seen how state owned nuclear facilities merrily pollute the environment whilst claiming everything is under careful scrutiny. However, if we wish to move from dirty coal and expensive oil/gas that is the only option. Whilst renewables can make a small contribution, it will be at a very high cost and likely to produce more pollution in the long run due to the nature of the back up generation required.

As yet we haven't solved anything, but a free market with enforced private ownership of land/sea/air would produce a proper cost for the use of fossil fuels by pushing the cost onto polluters. As costs rise it will bring greater opportunity for inventors to create things we cannot even conceive of. What steam and the diesel did were done by privateers and not state decree. That's how we will move forward.