Questions that no guru will ever answer

[Webwanderer]

There is a conscious reality where it makes perfect sense and serves an ultimate good.

Forgive me WW, I would tend more to say -
There is a conscious reality where it makes perfect sense.

The rest is unnecessary.

It is what it is by the factors contributing to it.

To suggest it serves anything except what it is, is .. a perspective, based on whatever nuance of judgement one seeks to define or explain it by.

It just is, because it is.

That it can be noticed as such within conscious awareness can be done right here, right now, by perspective of awareness as a direct natural consequence of choices made globally and yet attributed relatively in that expression of experience 'locally'.

There need be no hoo haa of some starving while others gorge themselves, of some fossicking through the 'rubbish' that others have thrown away for a different 'valuing' of food and resources.

Such notions of 'greater good' resolves the very real, physical response ability (ability to respond) of other human beings in carving up the resources of this world, that in truth are enough to feed all those who walk upon it.

I stand by my comment. Sorry if it hurt some very human sensibilities. It's understandable.

WW

[karmarider]

If you know very little about it how can you know it's a belief system?

It requires knowing.

And in my experience, awakening does not require believing.

How can you know it's not just an awakening experience for some?

Who can know what triggers awakening in some people? I can't be sure that standing on your head isn't an awakening experience for some. But I feel very reasonable in saying that you don't have to stand on your head to awaken. In the same way, I feel very reasonable in saying that you don't have to believe in the loa to awaken.

That's not a terrible thing.
It's a bit dangerous in that it can be misleading.

Is misleading a terrible thing? Is dangerous a terrible thing?

Do you understand 'terrible' is an arising flow of energy interpreted in judgement of a thing that causes one to feel terror physically and psychologically through interpretation of stimuli, and that terror is an extreme response of fear, and fear is a response of judgement of a thing.
- that in itself is merely a naturally occurring consequence of the judging something outside of oneself without all of the information of the first person perspective.
In a sense, what you emit you attract as a natural consequence (hmm.... )

Jen, that's quite a bunch of spiritual somersaults. Let's talk real. I don't think misleading is a terrible thing because I attracted terrible or because I don't know the spiritual depth of terrible arising energies (actually I happily don't know). I think misleading is a terrible thing because it's a terrible thing.

But then there are beliefs systems which are much more misleading-
Maybe even the belief that beliefs are a 'bad' thing.

Well, I haven't said that. Not yet anyway. Though a case can be made for that. Hitler's belief that certain kinds of people must be exterminated was a bad belief. There's no shortage of historical examples. It doesn't take a lot of living to experience that beliefs in our personal lives can be misleading or limiting. On the other hand, beliefs do sometimes bring focus. And so far as I can tell, we can't really get away from beliefs. So they are what they are. We can notice. It's intelligent to understand what motivates beliefs. Often it's fear. Sometimes curiosity. It's intelligent to understand that the motivations are not always easily discerned.

But here, all I said was that belief systems can be misleading and awakeneing does not require believing or unbelieving.

If the starving five year old in Darfur knew that you were spending your energy on resisting either the loa or your emotional reaction to the fact that they are still starving...

I'm not resisting the emotional reaction. I experienced it and expressed it.

I'm not resisting a belief in loa. Is a belief in loa mandatory? Does it keep pushing at you until it you let it in, hehe? Are you resisting the understanding a belief in loa is limiting? Why restrict yourself to those ideas? Would you believe in the loa if someone had not told you about the loa?

Is it awakened consciousness to blame 'spiritual beliefs' or unmanifested energies, or our beliefs or not in things based on our perceptions of validity for our ACTUAL choices in life?

No.

[karmarider]

There is a conscious reality where it makes perfect sense and serves an ultimate good.

WW

That's already clear. It is so because that already happens to be the case. Not the ulitmate good part though. It just happens to be the case.

Does that clarity require the spiritual perspective of loa?

[smiileyjen101]

Why restrict yourself to those ideas? Would you believe in the loa if someone had not told you about the loa?

I don't 'believe in the loa' because anyone told me about loa.
I 'noticed' energy in action and natural consequences to things and then one day saw that someone had termed this with a collection of words.

Probably no different to walking upright and not needing to hold onto things and figuring that was normal and natural and then hearing that some people call this the law of gravity.

Natural consequences don't need explaining, or 'belief' it just is, but yes if we want to discuss nuances we need a common language.

Its also not 'spiritual' notions but understanding the development of language in my personal and professional experience, that adjectives of judgement that we apply to nuances of experience in self or others creates the energy of its own resonance by re-cognition eg: painful, horrible, terrible, joyous, loving etc

As a 'sender' we 'know' which adjective to apply to match the 'feeling/experience' by agreement on words.

As a 'receiver' we know which resonance of energy to apply to match the adjective used - by nuance of our agreement of what that word means.

It's just like music to me - you learn to apply a resonance of energy inflow and outflow to meet a required note and pitch to 'share' the desired sound generated by energy flows.

How is that spiritual? It just is what it is as you learn to apply it.

[karmarider]

I don't 'believe in the loa' because anyone told me about loa.
I 'noticed' energy in action and natural consequences to things and then one day saw that someone had termed this with a collection of words.

So to have a satisfying experience of life all we need is to allow our natural intelligence to work? We don't need to take on beliefs? Is it possible that beliefs can actually get in the way of natural intelligence?

Probably no different to walking upright and not needing to hold onto things and figuring that was normal and natural and then hearing that some people call this the law of gravity.

Well, gravity is observable, repeatable, predictable, and common experience. It doesn't take belief or faith or axioms to experience gravity.

[ashley72]

Natural consequences don't need explaining, or 'belief' it just is, but yes if we want to discuss nuances we need a common language.

Are you sure natural consequences don't need explaining?

What about the phenomena where the conscious perception can change even when the objective stimulus has not changed? Which is the case of a Necker Cube: An object which presents two competing conscious perceptions.



Scientist have also discovered the opposite to this phenomena called "Change Blindness". This is where the objective stimulus has changed, but the conscious perception does not.

Change Blindness Example - 75% cases the subject doesn't notice a thing

The varying phenomena around conscious perception sure does require a scientific explanation. One scientific explanation is that consciousness isn't some unitary function.... and even the common belief - that we can be "fully" conscious of an entire scene, when "fully" alert may be an illusion. Furthermore, if we can't be "fully" conscious of a scene, what makes one conclude that our true nature is consciousness itself?

[smiileyjen101]

Well, gravity is observable, repeatable, predictable, and common experience. It doesn't take belief or faith or axioms to experience gravity.

Can we get agreement that thoughts, words and actions are energy in motion and that energy in motion can be observed, repeated, predicted and commonly experienced?

How else do you think people learn things?
Oh wait I forgot, it can be assumed they wait for the Gods of Science to say that it's okay for them to.

[rideforever]

Wow, an intelligent and thoughtful reply!
In this forum!
You don't belong here my friend - you clearly can think for yourself.

Yes an answer that matches your prejudices.

Why are you asking questions ? Did you ever stop to ask yourself that ? Here you are with a bunch of nobodys on the internet asking them to sort your life out !!! How lazy you are !!

0800-DIAL-A-LIFE

You call different pizza companies to deliver you a new life, and sulk if the toppings aren't right. And if the toppings are right you are very happy !!

Ha !

[rideforever]

There is a conscious reality where it makes perfect sense and serves an ultimate good.

Forgive me WW, I would tend more to say -
There is a conscious reality where it makes perfect sense.
The rest is unnecessary.
It is what it is by the factors contributing to it.

From facing our negativity and seeing how it releases into our greater wakefulness, we can know at least that it serves a purpose. It is with the "suffering" that we transform ourselves, and that that is good.

[karmarider]

Well, gravity is observable, repeatable, predictable, and common experience. It doesn't take belief or faith or axioms to experience gravity.

Can we get agreement that thoughts, words and actions are energy in motion and that energy in motion can be observed, repeated, predicted and commonly experienced?

Of course. The above doesn't require faith. The experience of gravity does not requrie faith. The belief and application of the loa does require faith.

How else do you think people learn things?

One way is by saying "I don't know" when I don't know.

Another way is to fill in "I don't know" with beliefs the mind wants to believe.

Oh wait I forgot, it can be assumed they wait for the Gods of Science to say that it's okay for them to.

Hehe, what happened to "no choice is wrong" and not "making an enemy.." and all that?

I think the scientific method is a very good one. There's no question that science too makes assumptions, and it is incomplete, and it has some catching up to do.

I think of awakening as similar to the personal application of the scientific method. You rely on you, you rely on direct experience, you observe with curiosity and intuition and take your next step, and you take what others say only as a hypothesis, you get comfortable with "I don't know" and you don't fill in mystery with faith.

[rideforever]

It doesn't take belief or faith or axioms to experience gravity.

Doesn't it ?

We imitate others who say it is "gravity" ... and they imitated those before.

We imitate others who talk about their "I" ... and so now we have an "I".

Countless billion apples have fallen to the ground, is that a guarantee that the next will not rise upwards ?

We are taught that time flows forward, is that a guarantee that time won't flow backwards starting now ?

Science is not what it pretends to be. It is just the next blindness. Do more research and you will verify it yourself ... but being disconnected from the divine you cling to hollow trophies.

In all this the problem is your search is limited by your beliefs. We are born into a lie, and we seek to explore the edges of the lie and open up another 10%.

But the reality seems to be of unlimited scope.

And the crushing of our hearts and life that we travel through in culture is immense ... we have forgotten the scale of the universe.

[karmarider]

It doesn't take belief or faith or axioms to experience gravity.

Doesn't it ?

No.

We imitate others who say it is "gravity" ... and they imitated those before.

We imitate others who talk about their "I" ... and so now we have an "I".

So you're saying the human mind tends to assume things, it tends to believe through imitation, it tends to take on unexamined beliefs, it tends to fill in mystery with faith?

Yes it does. That was point.

Countless billion apples have fallen to the ground, is that a guarantee that the next will not rise upwards ?

We are taught that time flows forward, is that a guarantee that time won't flow backwards starting now ?

Actually these are not good examples against science because science is completely consistent with this. Science often informs us things are not as they seem. Science tells us that quantum mechanics allows for the apple to rise upwards or to disappear. Science tells us the arrow of time is asymmetric.

Science is not what it pretends to be...

You're enthusiastically trying to make the point that science is incomplete.

I don't disagree with that. I find science interesting, informative, useful. The scientific method is sound. And, yes, it is incomplete.

We don't need to depend on science to know the truth about being human. We don't need the loa either. We don't need any spiritual theory. We don't have to fill in mystery with faith.

[rideforever]

My point is that Science doesn't know anything.

And Science does not exist. It is all labelling.

What is labelling ?

I call something "Gravity", I hope it will be true ... and this relieves me of the suffering. Soon I am surrounded by people who want to buy my book, and encouraging me to continue - I am relieving their suffering by promising them they can "know" something as well.

This is only possible with the erection of temporary partitions in your mind : "buffers" as Gurdjieff calls them. Also known as splits, dissociations, fantasies ... lack of sharpness. In one little box you play this game ... but you have to seal off the rest of existence for this game to work.

You say that there is no need to replace Mystery with Faith.

I agree. Except there is no Mystery. Just a lack of contact with what is.

When you are in delusion your experience is swinging from clinging to false securities (lke Science) or "Mystery".

But when you make contact with reality ... it is just being.

The Path leads to the concrete.

[karmarider]

Well, it's hard to follow this--it's a bit too spiritual, but if I understand what you're saying, I generally agree.

My point is that Science doesn't know anything.

And Science does not exist. It is all labelling.

I don't see it that way. Science is about hypothesis and observation. Labelling does happen.

What is labelling ?

I call something "Gravity", I hope it will be true ... and this relieves me of the suffering. Soon I am surrounded by people who want to buy my book, and encouraging me to continue - I am relieving their suffering by promising them they can "know" something as well.

This is only possible with the erection of temporary partitions in your mind : "buffers" as Gurdjieff calls them. Also known as splits, dissociations, fantasies ... lack of sharpness. In one little box you play this game ... but you have to seal off the rest of existence for this game to work.

It's ironic that to explain labelling you had to resort to labels like splits, dissociations and fantasies. Though I don't disagree. Labelling happens. But clearly it happens in spirituality as well as science.

You say that there is no need to replace Mystery with Faith.

I agree. Except there is no Mystery. Just a lack of contact with what is.

When you are in delusion your experience is swinging from clinging to false securities (lke Science) or "Mystery".

Is a stand against science a false security? How about a belief in the loa? Is that a false security? How about your spiritual understanding right now? Why do you think that it is not a false security? How do you know that your spiritual understanding of labeling is not driven by a clinging to false security? Why do you think your spriitual understanding is not delusional? How do you know it is not driven by fear?

You don't know just as I wouldn't really know if I depended on spiritual theories.

I agree that the basic problem is a delusion. In which case, faith and theory and beliefs--even the our favorite spiritual beliefs--are all uncertain.

But when you make contact with reality ... it is just being.

The Path leads to the concrete.

What "Path"?

[rideforever]

Is a stand against science a false security? How about a belief in the loa? Is that a false security? How about your spiritual understanding right now? Why do you think that it is not a false security? How do you know that your spiritual understanding of labeling is not driven by a clinging to false security? Why do you think you spriitual understanding is not delusional? How do you know it is not driven by fear.

Yes they are all false because they represent the identification with thought.

When you contact the real there is confirmation that it is Real. This is how you know.

Real is not something like a thought. There is no judgement, no right or wrong. No decision. It is just Real.