Don't worry be happy?

[stirling]

3 hours ago, Bindi said:

How do you ascertain the truth? 

 

Look inwardly and find that which is not impermanent. 

[Bindi]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

Look inwardly and find that which is not impermanent. 

What is not impermanent within? 

[justjoseph]

4 hours ago, oak said:

 

Many are, many aren't. If you start a dream journal you will realize that. You can deny your true feelings to yourself and your unconscious will show you otherwise, just like you can deny your attraction or aversion towards someone and your body will show you otherwise.

Both of your examples would still be subjective truth and therefore not absolute and not objective. Bindi said "dreams are as close as i've come to objective reality" which is incorrect as it's his subjective reality. I don't deny that you can experience subjective truth in dreams. I'm unsure if one can experience absolute truth in dreams, would it still be a dream if they did ? What an interesting thought.

[justjoseph]

5 hours ago, Tommy said:

If Truth is the bulwark against delusion then who decides what is the truth? Is it or isn't it someone else who agrees with you or your beliefs?? I just find that when one denies other's beliefs publicly that it creates a dangerous precedent. Personally, I agree that people should not be seeing vertical white light coming out of people. But, I only put it that in question and not deny that is what the person believes.

It depends on what truth you're talking about. Absolute truth is not decided upon, it is there regardless of you. Subjective truth is true for you but not necessarily for others, but it is not decided upon by you otherwise it couldn't be true. 

I haven't denied anyone's belief, not sure why you said that. 

I never said anything about white light coming out of people. 

My first comments to lairg were intended to address the problems i felt were with his approach, in no way was i denying his beliefs or methods.  

[oak]

24 minutes ago, justjoseph said:

Both of your examples would still be subjective truth and therefore not absolute and not objective. Bindi said "dreams are as close as i've come to objective reality" which is incorrect as it's his subjective reality. I don't deny that you can experience subjective truth in dreams. I'm unsure if one can experience absolute truth in dreams, would it still be a dream if they did ? What an interesting thought.

 

My comment was about your comment about dreams not about absolute truth. Dreams are a good tool for self-development because they mirror a deeper truth than the bs we tell ourselves.

Regarding absolute truth I just don't believe in that anymore or concern about it. It is my experience that what we believe to be true rooted in deep material or spiritual experience can vanish in a moment. Truth doesn't settle anywhere, ever.

[justjoseph]

5 hours ago, Bindi said:

dreams will use your symbols, but they’ll use them to make an objective snapshot of you. Here’s  a challenge, share a dream here and we can analyse it, see if it holds any objective value for you. 

Thank you for the offer but i don't feel quite comfortable sharing any dreams just yet.

 

5 hours ago, Bindi said:

How do you ascertain the truth? 

This question is difficult to answer. 
First we would have to ask ourselves "what is truth ?" the response would be "truth is what is". Then we must figure out the difference between what is true for us and what is true for everyone always. The way to do this is by understanding that anything that we can interact with must be subjective as it runs through our senses, consciousness, awareness etc. which means it can't be absolute as absolute is free from us because it depends on nothing. 

A more practical way of ascertaining truth would be to be as honest as you possibly can to yourself and others, i have found that the more i did this, the more i was able to see things as they are. 

I am unhappy with my response here....

[justjoseph]

6 minutes ago, oak said:

 

My comment was about your comment about dreams not about absolute truth. Dreams are a good tool for self-development because they mirror a deeper truth than the bs we tell ourselves.

Regarding absolute truth I just don't believe in that anymore or concern about it. It is my experience that what we believe to be true rooted in deep material or spiritual experience can vanish in a moment. Truth doesn't settle anywhere, ever.

I'm sorry Oak, i don't understand what you object to in my comment: "dreams are tainted by you. Dreams are thoughts in a sleeping state."

"Dreams are a good tool for self development" Yes i agree. 
"because they mirror a deeper truth than the bs we tell ourselves." Not necessarily, not anymore than a thought or emotion can do, because that's all dreams are. 

If you lie to yourself during waking life then dreams will have an artificially higher value to you as your consciousness is no longer getting in the way, but they can't tell you anything you couldn't get in waking life.

They are still "tainted by you" as they are subjective.
They are still "thoughts in a sleeping state".

[justjoseph]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Look inwardly and find that which is not impermanent. 

All things within a human are impermanent. 

[Mark Foote]

16 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

I am my body, I am my subtle energy body, and I am the consciousness in my body, but this consciousness is currently more limited than its potential. 
 

I see us as evolving beings, taking who knows how many thousands of years, to step into our consciousness potential, which is not emptiness or the absolute or pure beingness but a biologically based extension of perception capacity. 
 

A multitude of different peoples efforts will lead us to our next evolutionary step, with many missteps on the way. But the people who step in the right direction will slowly create a surer path for those that follow. We’re all part of the great evolutionary experiment. 

 

 

I agree our consciousness can be our only object of attention, but what we attend to within this pursuit can make all the difference.  If you’re looking for zest and ease you might find it, but that doesn’t make zest and ease the actual evolutionary step. 
 

 

I agree entirely. 

About the "zest and ease":

 

There can also come a moment when the feelings of zest and ease cease, yet “one-pointedness” and the conscious experience of “reflex movement” in inhalation and exhalation remain. At such a time, said Gautama:
 

… seated, (one) suffuses (one’s) body with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind.
 

(AN 5.28, tr. PTS vol. III pp 18-19, parentheticals paraphrase original)

 

The “pureness of mind” that Gautama referred to is the pureness of the mind without any will or intention to act in the body.
 

There is a feeling of freedom, when the activity of inhalation and exhalation is “reflex movement” regardless of where “one-pointedness” takes place.
 

Zen teachers demonstrate the relinquishment of “voluntary control” of the body in favor of the free location of “one-pointedness of mind”, and they do so constantly. Reb Anderson observed such demonstrations in the actions of Shunryu Suzuki:
 

… I remember (Suzuki’s) dharma talks and I remember him in the zendo—that was wonderful teaching. I remember him moving rocks—wonderful teaching. I remember seeing him eat—that was wonderful teaching. He was teaching all the time in every situation. But when he couldn’t sit anymore and couldn’t walk anymore, he still taught right from there.
 

(Reb Anderson, from a 1995 recording)

 

 

About the freedom:

 

So, when you practice zazen, your mind should be concentrated in your breathing and this kind of activity is the fundamental activity of the universal being. If so, how you should use your mind is quite clear. Without this experience, or this practice, it is impossible to attain the absolute freedom.

 

(Breathing; Shunryu Suzuki; November 4th 1965, Los Altos; emphasis added)

 

 

What will be the difference? You have freedom, you know, from everything. That is, you know, the main point.

 

(Sesshin Lecture, Shunryu Suzuki; Day 5 Wednesday, June 9, 1971 San Francisco)

 

 

In Gautama’s parlance:

 

And what… is the ceasing of action? That ceasing of action by body, speech, and mind, by which one contacts freedom,–that is called ‘the ceasing of action’.

 

(SN 35.146, tr. Pali Text Society vol IV p 85)

 

 

 

[oak]

3 minutes ago, justjoseph said:

I'm sorry Oak, i don't understand what you object to in my comment: "dreams are tainted by you. Dreams are thoughts in a sleeping state."

"Dreams are a good tool for self development" Yes i agree. 
"because they mirror a deeper truth than the bs we tell ourselves." Not necessarily, not anymore than a thought or emotion can do, because that's all dreams are. 

If you lie to yourself during waking life then dreams will have an artificially higher value to you as your consciousness is no longer getting in the way, but they can't tell you anything you couldn't get in waking life.

They are still "tainted by you" as they are subjective.
They are still "thoughts in a sleeping state".

 

We do have dreams bigger than our egoic thought bubble, again if you start paying more attention to them you will find that for yourself. What you would find out as well and for example is that a big percentage of our dreams are premonitory. That goes way beyond our hopes and fears.

As I'm not selling any dream programs for self- inprovement this will end my comments on this thread. Best of luck to you.

[old3bob]

8 minutes ago, justjoseph said:

All things within a human are impermanent. 

 

"things" is the catch, for there is that which is not an impermanet thing, the human mind is a thing (with computer like aspects) that can not know no-thing no mater how hard it trys per every which way.  Btw very few of us are ready or willing to give up our particualr mind which is  our particualr identity.  (which would entail dangers if not done via Spirit)

[stirling]

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

What is not impermanent within? 

 

The same thing that is not impermanent everywhere. It's just the easiest place for most people to look. What is present when all contriving of reality drops away? 

[stirling]

1 hour ago, justjoseph said:

All things within a human are impermanent. 

 

Not within, inward. All THINGS wherever they are constructed are impermanent, yes. 

[stirling]

55 minutes ago, old3bob said:

"things" is the catch, for there is that which is not an impermanet thing, the human mind is a thing (with computer like aspects) that can not know no-thing no mater how hard it trys per every which way.  Btw very few of us are ready or willing to give up our particualr mind which is  our particualr identity. 

 

_/\_

 

55 minutes ago, old3bob said:

(which would entail dangers if not done via Spirit)

 

 

You think so? Isn't "Spirit" also a mind construct?

[Cobie]

 

5 minutes ago, stirling said:

The same thing that is impermanent everywhere. It's just the easiest place for most people to look. What is present when all contriving of reality drops away? 

Sorry, I do not understand. Thinking possibly it’s a typo? Did you mean: The same thing that is not impermanent everywhere.

 

 

 

[stirling]

27 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Sorry, I do not understand. Thinking possibly it’s a typo? Did you mean: The same thing that is not impermanent everywhere.

 

Indeed I did! Thanks Cobie! _/\_

[Lairg]

Is it worth pointing out that "truth" is a reification?

 

The quality of being true to a context/relationship is turned into a noun that requires no context.

 

https://grokipedia.com/page/Reification_(fallacy)

[justjoseph]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

Not within, inward. All THINGS wherever they are constructed are impermanent, yes. 

How would one be able to find a no thing then ?

[justjoseph]

56 minutes ago, Lairg said:

Is it worth pointing out that "truth" is a reification?

 

The quality of being true to a context/relationship is turned into a noun that requires no context.

 

https://grokipedia.com/page/Reification_(fallacy)

You'll have to dumb it down for me Lairg

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, oak said:

 

My comment was about your comment about dreams not about absolute truth. Dreams are a good tool for self-development because they mirror a deeper truth than the bs we tell ourselves.

 

Absolutely. 

 

3 hours ago, oak said:

Regarding absolute truth I just don't believe in that anymore or concern about it. It is my experience that what we believe to be true rooted in deep material or spiritual experience can vanish in a moment. Truth doesn't settle anywhere, ever.

Same, I’m not looking for absolute truth, but I am interested in exploring my inner potential in both mind and subtle energy body. In the absence of direct perception dreams are my best way of doing that. 

[Bindi]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

The same thing that is not impermanent everywhere. It's just the easiest place for most people to look. What is present when all contriving of reality drops away? 

What is “contriving of reality”? 

[old3bob]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

_/\_

You think so? Isn't "Spirit" also a mind construct?

 

 

I'd say thoughts about Spirit are constucts,  unconditoned pure and free Spirit is not...

The Great Tao can see the ten thousand but the ten thousand can not see the Tao through ten thousand layers.

(or something along those lines)

Edited 14 hours ago by old3bob

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

"things" is the catch, for there is that which is not an impermanet thing, the human mind is a thing (with computer like aspects) that can not know no-thing no mater how hard it trys per every which way.

 

 

The human mind can know more than it does, but it needs extra parts of our system to be developed. 

 

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

  Btw very few of us are ready or willing to give up our particualr mind which is  our particualr identity.  (which would entail dangers if not done via Spirit)

I agree, it’s both hard, maybe even impossible, and if one could do it I think it could be dangerous. Following my trajectory, a higher consciousness is installed before the mental/emotional level is let go of. 

 

 

[old3bob]

 

"mind" can not cross the barrier and remain, my parapharse of Chapter 43 of the Tao Teh Ching.

 

soul develops for who knows how long or for how far but in the end merges or returns to the ocean and is no longer identified as a separate wave. 

 

[stirling]

35 minutes ago, Bindi said:

What is “contriving of reality”? 

 

The story you tell about how reality is. Religion, philosophy, scientific theories, myths, systems, etc.