Intellectualism is for wimps

[Horus]

Or at least remember that when you are staring into the abyss that the abyss is staring back at you.

You are the abyss and the observer - who better to stare at than yourself?

[Horus]

Don't think too hard else you will miss the point.

hmmm, yes, another point to think long and hard about - (head scratch... )

[ralis]

Keep in mind, the OP made a statement about "intellectualism" which is not the same as the "intellect". Intellectualism implies clinging to the intellect. Clinging to the intellect as a defense against fear, as a limitation.

 

So if you look past the superficial, you see that the comment about it being for "wimps" simply means it's a defense against not facing fear (as a kind of challenge to those who cling to intellectualism).

 

Sure, the intellect has it's place in our daily life. But the intellect does not provide us with answers, only more questions. Direct perception of reality, realization, is where we find answers.

 

There is no implication of clinging as to how intellectualism is defined. By definition intellectualism, according to Merriam Webster is, "devotion to the exercise of intellect or to intellectual pursuits.

Edited March 26, 2014 by ralis

[GrandmasterP]

"Essence must be dealt with directly without intermediary for one to assume its enlightening function.

 

Evidently, these intellectualists are much too selfish to allow that."

 

Looked at logically that seems a fair enough point the OP makes.

 

' Unmediated essence = enlightenment'

 

Sounds good, but the devil's in the detail.

Who, for example is perceiving 'unmediated essence' and at which stage of said perception does enlightenment 'happen' , how; and to whom?

Presumably someone would have to 'report back' from such an experience in order to inspire for others, less fortunate; to strive to achieve enlightenment by similar means.

What would they be describing and why would they feel the need to?

 

Tricky one aint it?

Edited March 26, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[steve]

A certain mega-poster, insisting that the inability to see reality is a survival skill …is therefore somehow an acceptable status quo~ hahahhahhahahhahahahhaaaa!!!

 

Ones such as this haven't been properly naked and/or scared (and loving it) in far too long a time~ something I recommend highly!!

 

This from a thread on the subject of the nature of awareness in the taoist section that has been in a state of occupation for some time.

 

It is simply (and none other than) using the essence directly with no intermediary. There is no way to work with essence unless one has activated the nonpsychological, which is not within the perveance of relativistic perception.

 

It is direct perception of reality as is. This is nothing other than immortalism in the taoist sense, and the Great Vehicle in the buddhist sense.

 

Unless one is willing to let go of self-reflective (selfish is the word, without any emotionalist values) attachment to a speculative relationship with phenomena, one simply lacks the basic qualification to enter into the inconceivability of the Way.

 

The same mentality which abhors stripping itself of an ego-reinforcing intellectualism in the face of phenomena also cannot face the prospect of a selfless quality that also strips phenomena of its speculative potential.

 

In order to acknowledge and assume the function of enlightening unity, one must oneself already have no ulterior motives or conceptual notions pending to create separation where there is none to begin with.

 

Most people would rather die than give up their imaginary concepts and also positively fear that they might just miss out on something— something they don't yet know.

 

When one relinquishes this conceptual fear, they are admitting that there is, in fact, nothing to know— therefore nothing to miss out on. And that, evidently, is too much to bear/bare. This is being totally vulnerable to what is.

 

Intellectualism is basically the dishonest way to hide from reality as is while attempting to observe it /appear to understand (unsuccessfully) otherwise.

 

Another thing the recreational intellectuals fear is realizing anything, which would then disambiguate them from any further speculative pastimes and require the INDIVUAL to assume the totality of his experience without the veil of what passes for (in the sport of recreational speculation) an inconsequential objectivity.

 

Essence must be dealt with directly without intermediary for one to assume its enlightening function.

 

Evidently, these intellectualists are much too selfish to allow that… heehee!!

 

These are people who have never abandoned themselves en total~ not even to the present. And that is missing out on something …without beginning, the present is the most exquisite, terrifying, wonderous, erotically freeing moment there will ever be.

 

 

 

 

 

ed note: italicize "inconsequential" in 12th paragraph

 

Nice to have you back to proper form.

I haven't been able to follow you much lately, I know I'm a bit dense and impatient.

I haven't read the other thread you reference and now I'm not going to, nor any more of this one.

To do so would simply be too intellectual and I'd just as soon point the finger at myself.

I got a new cushion today and will go sit on it for a while.

Thank you, dear.

Genuinely

[Bearded Dragon]

Intellectualism is the act of using intellect. No one said anything about clinging to it. Intellect is use to negate unknown fears, not as a support for fear. We fear what we do not understand. Intelligence offers us understanding and this removes fear.

 

It's the veil of understanding. Not direct perception. You can read in a book that you have a hand but unless you see it and feel it then for all intents and purposes you don't have a hand. What deci keeps trying to do by banging her head against the wall it to take it further than that by pointing towards the inconceivable. I understand your issue with that, since it pretty much goes against everything we're taught in life.

 

I have heard one person on this forum mention a process of starving the conscious mind and feeding the unconscious mind. Perhaps that would resonate with logical thinking. It's a different kind of intellect, and I think that upon observation it should be clear that the subconscious mind can do all its functions autonomously without the normal thinking process. Upon observation it should also become clear that a lot of our thought is superfluous as the subconscious process of many day-to-day functions does not require it. For example you will notice that uncomplicated decision making is not a conscious thought process. You will probably also notice that even though you know that you can do things subconsciously your conscious mind will still try and hold control. This is an important observation.

[Boy]

...

Edited April 6, 2014 by Boy

[Marblehead]

It's the veil of understanding. Not direct perception.

Some of you folks are not listening to me. I am speaking of to intellectualize after having had direct perception. What is wrong with trying to understand what one has just experienced?

[dawei]

Some of you folks are not listening to me.

 

 

P.S. I've waited a long time for a moment like this

[Marblehead]

 

P.S. I've waited a long time for a moment like this

Belly laughs.

[Nungali]

Isnt the unconscious part of the intellect ? ( I am not saying that is all it is. )

 

To me 'evolution' seems to have an 'intellect' behind it and that isnt even sentient (or maybe it is ) ?

[soaring crane]

~~~ admin statement ~~~

 

Icedude has been banned.

 

- Trunk

 

That seems to have been his goal from the outset.

[Yascra]

That is because you are not me. The entire post was an attempt at discrediting me and my understandings.

 

Hm, the only thing I understood from the OP was that it was discrediting someone. Wasn't aware which someone this might be. You're not such a bad guy, are you? oO

[Marblehead]

Isnt the unconscious part of the intellect ? ( I am not saying that is all it is. )

 

To me 'evolution' seems to have an 'intellect' behind it and that isnt even sentient (or maybe it is ) ?

I like that question. (I have never had it.)

 

Shit! I don't have any answers either. Oh well.

 

Evolution is a different horse. It is random (no intelligent designer). One mutation may lead to extinction while another may lead to the plant or animal that become the dominant species.

[Marblehead]

You're not such a bad guy, are you? oO

No, I'm really not a bad guy at all. The problem is that I disagreed with her once and that really pissed her off and I still haven't been forgiven.

[Yascra]

Evolution is a different horse. It is random (no intelligent designer). One mutation may lead to extinction while another may lead to the plant or animal that become the dominant species.

 

No, it's not really that stupid. Usually one mutation alone brings SMALL differences. Small benefits, but also small disadvantages.

 

In most cases it's the unseen differences that suddenly make a change WHEN the environment changes.

So you could say, what makes the differences are the unseen potentials (or lack thereof) to adapt to a certain kind of change.

My conclusion from this is that the best kind of evolution might happen on a sphere/level that's not completely physical, for most physical bodies will lack the properties to adjust to EVERY environment.

 

Bacteria are not so successful as individuals, but only in masses, as there are good chances that in a big mass there will be few who'll manage to adapt. So extinction of the unfit is a large factor on the whole scale. The other approach is to take what you find in your environment to make it more comfortable for your properties, which is something most beings do, but humans do to an extremely high degree. In many cases there remains the disadvantage that these changes in environment require loss or damage to somee degree, and tend to disturb something like natural balance, if they're not done extremely carefully.

 

Finally, the (or one) big problem about it is that running around with a physical form tends to be an impediment to realizing that in the end everything is consciousness. Karmic inheritage and all that.

[Yascra]

No, I'm really not a bad guy at all. The problem is that I disagreed with her once and that really pissed her off and I still haven't been forgiven.

 

Ouh.

Hm, I'm afraid you won't be able to force her to do anything. Maybe just don't feed it?

To be honest, I don't go on reading something which is written in an offensive or aggressive style. Tells enough about the author.

 

As mentioned, it's a pity, but you won't change it, or change others. And it's not so important as long as it's one thread and not twenty, though still not nice

[johndoe2012]

.

Edited May 15, 2014 by chris d

[Marblehead]

Ouh.

Hm, I'm afraid you won't be able to force her to do anything. Maybe just don't feed it?

To be honest, I don't go on reading something which is written in an offensive or aggressive style. Tells enough about the author.

 

As mentioned, it's a pity, but you won't change it, or change others. And it's not so important as long as it's one thread and not twenty, though still not nice

Believe me, I have tried. But this thread was unacceptable because not only was it a cut on me but on everyone who uses logic and reason in their life. I will stand up against such tactics.

[Marblehead]

Emptiness of self, emptiness of other.

 

Then we are done.

But that's not the way life works Chris. I am not emptiness and therefore I cannot imagine emptiness in others.

 

I can't even allow my mind to remain empty for very long because there is always some kind of living to do. We have to think about what we are doing else our life would be filled with more troubles than we could handle.

[Yascra]

Believe me, I have tried. But this thread was unacceptable because not only was it a cut on me but on everyone who uses logic and reason in their life. I will stand up against such tactics.

 

I'd say the appropriate way to stand up against offenses, sorry, is to make a report if it clearly insults anyone.

Decibelle to me seems like someone who doesn't discuss anything anyway, so what's the point? She puts in some stuff, or thoughts, and then disappears, leaving the debate, fight, or whatever it is to those who care in some way. Care to take some of her points or "arguments", or care to "stand up" against it. I would say that standing up against persons who offend others is to not debate on the level where they want you to.

You're done with that sort of as soon as you leave out your own pride, and just act, I'd say.

But of course I just say that out of my own limited experience.

 

Have a nice day

Edited March 27, 2014 by Yascra

[GrandmasterP]

The inability to see reality can be a survival skill and here's one example of how....

I work until 9 pm three evenings a week so driving home in winter is in darkness, roads close to home are country ' B' roads and unlit.

So I round a bend going about thirty miles an hour and two sets of headlights on both sides of the road are coming at me fast then on top of me.

No way can I avoid a crash. It is curtains time until, next thing I am pulled up safe on the grass verge hard against the hedge and what presumably were two boy racers tail lights are long gone.

Had I thought about my actions logically I'd have been dead.

I do not know to this day how I got from being toast in one split second to being safe but shaken the next.

Pure instinct and maybe a friendly 'guardian angel' ( thanks if you exist buddy).

So, whoever that 'mega poster' referred to in the OP is....IMO said 'mega poster' is 100% right if s/he said what the OP claimed s/he said.

[johndoe2012]

.

Edited May 15, 2014 by chris d

[GrandmasterP]

You got that right Chris D.

'Monkey Mind' here, no matter how mindful I strive to be when cultivating those old thoughts just pile up.

Seems like, sometimes; there are thoughts and memories just waiting for when I start cultivating so that they can pop up.

What I've learnt is to just let them be , observe them be aware of them non- judgementally and return to my cultivating.

That is a constant.

There's never one cultivation without attendant 'monkey mind' thoughts for me.

Ever, but that said; I only have a beginner's mind.

Edited March 27, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Boy]

...

Edited April 6, 2014 by Boy