06-17-2010, 12:00 AM
Tiff wrote:...it is the perception that is being questioned...is such a perception free? A perception that perceives forms with essences "inside" them?
The perception was what it was - a perception. Was it free? I have no way of knowing. What was perceived was two things: first, I had reached the end of my rope in terms of ever freeing myself of the psychological place I found myself: second, I had somehow managed to encounter someone who could be of assistance.
Tiff wrote:...this is a discussion we are entered into and so the questions are to examine the perspectives being made to support a view. I don't need to ask myself because I already have. Though, if you are not interested in such questioning, that's cool.
You questioned who was making connections (etc) - my response "the one thinking". Perhaps this could be the topic of another thread in which I would enjoy continuing the discussion. I chose not to continue in this thread on the basis it was irrelevant to the current topic.
In re don Juan's comment to "stop the world":
Tiff wrote:Right, I'm not talking about literally. But not simply stopping interpretation either. I feel it's a more exerted effort than that. Because interpretation is sort of a natural occurrence. Its not like we should be able to look at a rock and not know it as a rock. Of course we know its a rock. That is an interpretation and it doesn't necessarily have to be stopped...so what does?
First, nothing NEED be stopped, however, the energetic essence of phenomena perhaps may not be rightly perceived if not. There are several instances in the teachings of don Juan where he had Castaneda stare fixedly at various objects, and in due time, what Carlos thought he was looking at was not what he originally perceived. In at least one instance one of those objects was a "rock".
In re dualism v non-dualism:
Tiff wrote:...how can you be so sure about dualism then? That dualism is an absolute you seem to think...that nothing can be perceived beyond it. This is really a zen discussion topic...or at least, it has turned into one.
I cannot be sure, nor absolute, about dualism. I said merely I disagree with the theory of non-dualism. My reason for preferring the theory of dualism is as stated, that it appears the perceiver and the perceived are two distinct entities. This in no way ignores the apparant fact that all phenomena are expressions of the same basic element: energy - and that it is possible to perceive that energy in a primal way despite its manifestation. That does not mean we are all the same...it DOES mean we are all made of the same stuff.
The perception was what it was - a perception. Was it free? I have no way of knowing. What was perceived was two things: first, I had reached the end of my rope in terms of ever freeing myself of the psychological place I found myself: second, I had somehow managed to encounter someone who could be of assistance.
Tiff wrote:...this is a discussion we are entered into and so the questions are to examine the perspectives being made to support a view. I don't need to ask myself because I already have. Though, if you are not interested in such questioning, that's cool.
You questioned who was making connections (etc) - my response "the one thinking". Perhaps this could be the topic of another thread in which I would enjoy continuing the discussion. I chose not to continue in this thread on the basis it was irrelevant to the current topic.
In re don Juan's comment to "stop the world":
Tiff wrote:Right, I'm not talking about literally. But not simply stopping interpretation either. I feel it's a more exerted effort than that. Because interpretation is sort of a natural occurrence. Its not like we should be able to look at a rock and not know it as a rock. Of course we know its a rock. That is an interpretation and it doesn't necessarily have to be stopped...so what does?
First, nothing NEED be stopped, however, the energetic essence of phenomena perhaps may not be rightly perceived if not. There are several instances in the teachings of don Juan where he had Castaneda stare fixedly at various objects, and in due time, what Carlos thought he was looking at was not what he originally perceived. In at least one instance one of those objects was a "rock".
In re dualism v non-dualism:
Tiff wrote:...how can you be so sure about dualism then? That dualism is an absolute you seem to think...that nothing can be perceived beyond it. This is really a zen discussion topic...or at least, it has turned into one.
I cannot be sure, nor absolute, about dualism. I said merely I disagree with the theory of non-dualism. My reason for preferring the theory of dualism is as stated, that it appears the perceiver and the perceived are two distinct entities. This in no way ignores the apparant fact that all phenomena are expressions of the same basic element: energy - and that it is possible to perceive that energy in a primal way despite its manifestation. That does not mean we are all the same...it DOES mean we are all made of the same stuff.