Know Thyself?

[Subjectivity9]

TT Man,

I too am enjoying this conversation.

“Yes grasshopper.” You are right Spirit, or how our minds try to explain it, doesn’t really exist. I spent multiple years trying to capture Spirit in a net of words, and it simply doesn’t work. And yet…

Why do your think so many ‘masters of wisdom’ agreed that it (Spirit) couldn’t be said, and yet continued to write about it (Spirit)? I don’t imagine it was just because they were fools.

And why do you think these books of theirs have such longevity?

I believe it is because these books/tools serve a purpose that is much needed. I believe these books/words are the “finger pointing.” But what are they pointing at? That is exactly what cannot adequately be said. Words cannot contain it. We must simply look where “the finger is pointing.” (Zen) It isn’t contained within the mind.

Words are such an unwieldy tool in the best of circumstances (more so in speaking of these things,)

I believe to some extent we are speaking past each other, you and I, and getting all tangled up in connotations. And yet from what you are saying, I get not only a strong feeling that we are basically looking at the same thing, but in fact that you are very keen in this area.

Let us get one thing clear from the get/go. I don’t want you to accept anything just because I am saying it. I want you to accept only what you yourself can see.

I am trying to be a Spiritual friend to you, not a dictator.

When you say that time is being “immediate,” in a way you have changed how most people think of time. Time is, usually thought to be, made up of the past, the present, and the future. This is a rather lineal thing, wouldn’t you say?

So when you say time is “immediate,” you have cut out one part of time, the present, and designated it as time. But that is not the 'all' of conceptual time, is it? The present in conceptual time practically doesn’t exist at/all, when you try to grab onto it and hold it. Where exactly do you draw the line between the past, and the present?

“Hold still darn it time, I’m trying to cut you.” Look very closely, if you will. Don’t past and present seem to bleeding back and forth into each other, like the tides of the ocean? The same can be said of the future and the present. Where exactly in the present does the future begin?

So what we actually have here is the Immediate Present simultaneous to time, and not trapped in it. Sometimes Mystics call this Presence so as not to mix up the two. But Presence also contains the connotation of Awareness within It. Some have called this the ”Witness,”

And yes, the ‘Immediate’ is present to nature. Rich would call this very force the Tao. I would call this force Spirit or “Self.” (Incidentally I don’t see Spirit as God, I am not a Theist.)

It is said that concepts live in the past. When the wasp stung your thumb, that was the living experience, BAM, only afterwards did you think about it.

The observer of the mind is the mind. Earthly life is like a dream that contains both action and events, right along with the doer and observer of it all, ego self. Finitude is self-contained.

The observer of Spirit is the Spirit AKA the Self.

These two go on simultaneously to each other. It is a bit like my body cells are being aware of themselves, while my mind doesn’t really attend to them consciously, at least not that I am aware of.

“Who is being conscious?” is a very good question though. Don’t take my word for it. Investigate deeply. The intension to know this answer will pay dividends.

Meditation is not necessary to understanding, even though they get a lot of good press. The mind cannot stop thinking. If you think really well, or deeply, thoughts might even help you. This is what a Jnana does. He uses his mind as his path. (Meditation is the path of Dhyana.)

Name of a book by Jon Kabat-Zinn: Wherever You Go, There You Are. (Probably been said many times. But thank you for trying to help me. Maybe your guy said it first.)

But that is certainly true of Awareness or Presence. No matter how fast you run, you can’t outrun it. : ^ )

So your paradigm isn’t shifting. Ha!

I could say that, “I can only plant the seed, all smugly.” But then you would probably want to punch me, and we can’t have that, can we? : ^ )

Subjectivity9

[Absolution]

I hope I'm not butting in on what has already been discussed. From my experience there seems to be a something which is beyond words. From my studies of skepticism, there are countless pieces why consistency in various forums (truth and etc.) is inconsistent for logic. At first instinct, one may thing consistency is what is at fault, but it could very well be logic that is at fault. Many philosophers in the past have considered pure mathematics as the ultimate form of logic, but as Godel's theorem shows, there is no complete set of axioms that describes all of mathematics, while being consistent with each other. So there appears to be a desire of many to have something that establishes consistency but logic fails them in this case, and thus their eyes are set beyond logic which could be grouped as "spirit". And Godel was this way, he spent a lifetime, before going crazy, trying to establish the existence of god (and thus possibly establishing the necessity of spirit).

[Subjectivity9]

Glad 2 see you back, Absolution,

I just love skeptics, they are such a breath of fresh air. : ^ )

Plato was obviously a great mind in his own right. But so often it makes me sad that people like Socrates didn’t put pin to paper, or that we have to rely on translators of persons like Ramana or Nisargadatta even though they were alive in our own times.

Plato’s Skeptical Middle Academy sounds quite interesting. Pyrrho sounds intriguing as well. I must admit to not knowing much about either one. However I certainly would appreciate your telling us a little about them, esp. as it pertains to this conversation. (Part of the reason I came to this forum was to learn and to motivate myself to widen my horizons esp. in philosophy.) Off I go running to Google again. ; ^ )

I am highly influenced or lean towards mainly the Advaitist. But I find that the Vedantists have a good understanding in the more psychological.

“Suspension of judgment” is a fine way to say it. That is what receptivity is all about. The more naked you can be the better.

I have a very wise friend who said, “Throw everything away. When you are done, what you have, throw that away too.” What you find that you cannot possibly throw away is ‘Pure Self’ or ‘Knowing Thyself.’ Expansion, contraction, or even progress, throw them away too. Remember the story about passing through the eye of a needle.

I am not sure most people know that this was a place/entrance to an ancient town, this eye of the needle. It seems that you had to remove everything you were carrying off your camel back in order to fit through and enter that town. We too must throw off all of our baggage.

Ultimate Truth isn’t the best ‘subjective truth’ or opinion like a cosmic contest. Ultimate Truth is this Naked Truth.

Oh yes you will certainly recognize it. (Naked Ultimate Truth.) Up until ‘Perfect Self Realization,’ which is also perfectly obvious, I would suggest to everyone they keep ‘Doubt” as their constant companion. Doubt should not include however a refusal to look and to remain open to what you are looking at.

Could you tell us a little bit about what you have been looking at lately as it pertains? I for one would be grateful. : ^ )

Subjectivity9

---------- Post added 09-29-2009 at 02:20 PM ----------

Absolution,

I would never think that you were butting into any conversation that I am on. :^ )

These are not e-mails or PM. The more the merrier is my opinion, just makes a richer soup.

I'll be back to you on the rest of what you have writing. It looks like I am going to have to put on my thinking cap with you. LOL

Subjectivity9

[richrf]

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

If you want to see the Tao dance, watch the Stock market. My friend also told me this.

Subjectivity9

Yes. This is my experience. With the stock market, there is no right or wrong, correct or incorrect, or rules that can be applied. One just plays it - from the gut - if one wants to. Otherwise, there are other, less stressful things to do in life.

Cya,

Rich

[TickTockMan]

Since we can, let's go back in time to one of my initial posts on this particular thread and, just for grins, approach the idea of Spirit from a different angle:

Originally Posted by TickTockMan

I did my time in the metaphysical ring starting some 30 years ago or so when someone loaned me Casteneda's "Teachings of Don Juan." Since then I've read many volumes of quaint and curious lore and found most of them to be somewhat lacking in physical usefulness, as far as my actual day-to-day activities are concerned.

The question I would ask, then, is "of what practical use is all this Spirit business? From a physical, utilitarian standpoint . . . what good is it? Why should I be bothered with it? This is less a question of "what is it," than of "so what?"

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

Why do your think so many ‘masters of wisdom’ agreed that it (Spirit) couldn’t be said, and yet continued to write about it (Spirit)? I don’t imagine it was just because they were fools.

And why do you think these books of theirs have such longevity?

I believe it is because these books/tools serve a purpose that is much needed. I believe these books/words are the “finger pointing.” But what are they pointing at? That is exactly what cannot adequately be said. Words cannot contain it. We must simply look where “the finger is pointing.” (Zen) It isn’t contained within the mind.

I believe it is because most humans have a desperate need to believe that there has just got to be more than just this temporary existence. Even the fire and torment of a physical Hell might seem preferable, to some, than the utter obliteration of self in the void of infinite nothingness.

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

When you say that time is being “immediate,” in a way you have changed how most people think of time. Time is, usually thought to be, made up of the past, the present, and the future. This is a rather lineal thing, wouldn’t you say?

Subjectivity9

I'll have to get back to you later on some of these other ideas. Sadly, I'm at work and my boss has given me a pile of new projects to deal with. The nerve!

[ValueRanger]

It can be argued that knowing yourself is directly proportional to transformational software/hardware relationships, that correlate with the latest, greatest, tool advancements.

If knowledge is an evolutionary feedback process, then thought/software processes, tempered by balancing/proportional emotions, empowers genetic hardware toward the most adaptable, reproducible set.

You may have interacted with people that believe that evolution and justified splits in the species, are solely predicated upon major leaps in technological tool sets. And since accelerated returns maps consistently with said dynamics, seeking proportional software to obvious advancements in genetic hardware, is apropos.

[Subjectivity9]

Well TT Man,

‘Situational Ethic” Wiki, (It basically states that sometimes other moral principles can be cast aside in certain situations if love is best served.
The type of love he is specifically referring to is 'Agape' love. Agapē is a term, which comes from Greek, which means absolute, universal, unchanging and unconditional love. This means that all the other laws are only guidelines to how to achieve this love, and thus they may be broken if the other course of action would result in more love.)

Paul Tillich once put it: "Love is the ultimate law.”

I interpret this love, in my way of seeing it, as a basic good will.

The book, ‘Gift of Fear’ sounds very interesting. Got anything from this book that you particularly liked and could share?

Very often you can see an event coming before it happens. This is because there is a confluence of things/events in the present moment actually pointing towards it happening. If you are attentive and alert enough you can see these multiple reasons for the event coming about.

It is said that people who are Spiritual advanced often have different kinds of ESP. But I wonder sometimes how much of that can be attributed directly to their observant attitude of living? So this more practical ability may not magic at/all. If you are particularly sensitive, you may even pick up signs in the environment that other people simply overlook, a little like "the calm b/4 the storm."

Subjectivity9

---------- Post added 09-29-2009 at 08:39 PM ----------

I agree Absolution,

There is most certainly something, which is beyond words.

Because logic starts with an original premise it could never have the flexibility of starting from the point of “Not knowing.” This is a real drawback when dealing with anything that is entirely new. Spiritual experience comes at us from “out of left field” refusing to be caged by previous knowledge.

I am not conversant in how pure mathematics works. A friend told me once, that math can be elegant at times. But it is my personal feeling that all of nature, when studied closely enough and in vivid detail can strike one with AWE and admiration. Even the human mind is certainly a marvelous machine not easily duplicated.

I think that the need or desire of many persons to establishes consistency may have multiple reasons. One reason is most likely the fear that grows out of a lack of control. But another must surely be the wish to understand. I think too, there is a general fear of chaos.

Subjectivity9

---------- Post added 09-29-2009 at 09:25 PM ----------

TT Man,

Practically speaking:

I can’t speak for everyone, but “Knowing Myself” or what some have called “Self Realization” has made my daily life more smoothly running. I used to be plague by dissatisfaction at my very center. I couldn’t find any way to erase this.

I used to ask too much of everything in my life. I would ask my mate figuratively to fill me up, and to make me happy. I would ask my daily tasks and amusements to fill the emptiness within me and take away the pain of pure existence. I would ask my thoughts to take away my fears and longings. And so on.

Now my life is as smooth as a baby’s bottom. I see who I am, and in so doing I see who I am not. I don’t expect my animal life to be more than what it is, and because of this it is more like playing.

Emotionally I am more in charge as well. It used to be that emotional thoughts could torment me. It could say things to me like, “Your mate is going to die,” and scare the ‘b-jesus’ out of me. Now I am enough. I don’t lean so heavily on others.

Summing up, I would say that my life is no longer a burden.

How do you see your life? Speak of what comforts you, and how and why,if you will. Thanx : ^ )

Subjectivity9

[Absolution]

Yes all of the earliest fore runners of skepticism wrote nothing. To me it kind of feels if they were forced to write something all they would write was "I don't know." Luckily all of them tended to have followers during their times who would write down what they say, unfortunately that is lost in history, although the works of Sextus Empiricus provides a great account of it.

So the middle academy of Plato were pretty much debaters. That is all they did is debate everything, and what ended up happening is they debated issues to the point each side appeared equally convincing, and they suspended judgment on which side was correct. And they figured they could do this for everything. The funny thing is all of the leaders of this academy never wrote anything either! But these days philosophers in epistemology tend to come up with reasons why debates seem irresolvable in the academic skeptic fashion, and it is the form of skepticism that is most debated in current philosophy journals. But Pyrrho and Socrates, .... it think ... , where the type who simply said they don't know and don't really need a justification for it besides lack of experience, so modern philosophers pretty much don't disagree with that. I think I might post a paper I found on the forum one of these days that looks at the irresolvability of debates and everyone can discuss it. It had a bit of impact on me when I was formulating assents to skepticism.

Most people who work with math can find it elegant or beautiful at times. Especially if a complicated problem turns into a simple solution, then they proclaim it is beauty. Mathematicians really do find beauty in simplicity.

[TickTockMan]

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

Well TT Man,

‘Situational Ethic” Wiki, (It basically states that sometimes other moral principles can be cast aside in certain situations if love is best served.

Are there conditions where love could be best served by killing?

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

The book, ‘Gift of Fear’ sounds very interesting. Got anything from this book that you particularly liked and could share?

Interestingly enough, your next quote could have been taken directly from de Becker's book.

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

Very often you can see an event coming before it happens. This is because there is a confluence of things/events in the present moment actually pointing towards it happening. If you are attentive and alert enough you can see these multiple reasons for the event coming about.

In The Gift of Fear, de Becker discusses such things pre-incident indicators for violent acts, and strategies for recognizing unwarranted paranoia versus actual danger signs that our brains are picking up. In the self-defense classes I help teach, these are the primary aspects of the book that I use . . . environmental awareness and the recognition of danger signals that will help one avoid having to use physical force at all. But just in case, I also teach people how to seriously damage a human body with minimal effort.

I've seriously over-simplified the book, as de Becker also discusses the psychology of criminals, from stalkers to would-be presidential assassins to societal attitudes that engender criminal/victim mentalities and etc. It's a fascinating read. It's been a few years since I read it though, so I may need to revisit it. If you're interested in what de Becker's all about, check out his website: www.gavindebecker.com.

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

It is said that people who are Spiritual advanced often have different kinds of ESP. But I wonder sometimes how much of that can be attributed directly to their observant attitude of living?

Virtually all of it, I would say, as I don't believe in ESP. And I don't think being "spiritually advanced" has much to do with it either. I've dealt with some real meatheads who are remarkably intuitive about their environment. Like animals, really.

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

So this more practical ability may not magic at/all. If you are particularly sensitive, you may even pick up signs in the environment that other people simply overlook, a little like "the calm b/4 the storm."

Yes. This can be summed up very easily: Keep your eyes open. Listen. Pay attention.

Originally Posted by Subjectivity9

How do you see your life? Speak of what comforts you, and how and why,if you will. Thanx : ^ )
Subjectivity9

I find the fact that I'm going to die one day very comforting. Liberating, really. This knowledge of mortality is what makes each moment something to be appreciated. Notice that I did not say "enjoyed," for attempting to enjoy every moment of life is a fool's errand. Absolute acceptance of death has not made me fearless, but it has certainly put fear in its place. I'm willing to try a lot more things now with far less hesitance, which is not to say I am impulsive and foolhardy. I still wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle.

Also, I really like Hayou Miyazaki's Spirited Away.

[richrf]

Originally Posted by TickTockMan

I find the fact that I'm going to die one day very comforting. Liberating, really. This knowledge of mortality is what makes each moment something to be appreciated.

TT,

As you can see, your faith that there is no transcendental existence (there is no way of knowing one way or another) has given you purpose. We all create beliefs in order to suit our own way of viewing life. Some people believe in transcendental lives and this gives purpose. Others believe otherwise, and this gives purpose. I don't think it is possible to escape beliefs so best to respect each other's.

Rich