Liberation Unleashed Forum The Gate
https://liberationunleashed.com:443/nation/
https://liberationunleashed.com:443/nation/viewtopic.php?t=943
How will you recognise this undeniable fact ?
I will know the self is non existent
Undeniable is also a particular thought, no ?
Yes, it is a thought.
Only if you Do see it there will it be a fact ? (a fact that is absent, is a lack of fact)
Yes, the fact that the self is not running this life. (I don't understand this)
Perhaps.Can even the existence of a self be a fact ?
Something that is true.If you say yes, then define a fact.
Of course.. what else can I come up with?Bet you can only come up with thoughts about something.
There is experience of this human being.Tell me anything that is true.
There is experiencing (now) and experience (memory)There is experience of this human being.
It does seem such an obvious statement, doesn't it. "Things exist...", but this too is a presumption. You presume it exists because of thoughts that arise as a result of sensory input. Take a mirage, for example. You see something that your brain interprets as water. There is no doubt that what you are seeing is water out there. If you are thirsty then your body will (as a result of thought) crave drinking more intensely, thus reinforcing the accuracy of what you (think you) are seeing.There are all of these things around it that exist, ...
Do they exist (for us) when we are not interacting with them ?... and the human being is the central point of the experience.
Yes, thoughts arise About, what is now a memory. This is a new and different experiencing.There are senses in the human being that experience everything and thoughts that talk about things experienced.
I don't think this resonates with me very well.So yes, things exist, but not in the way we imagine them to.
Elaborate a little more on this please.So let's replace "human being" with organism, and let's replace "central point of the experience" with an indivisible (with the so called object) involvement of experiencing (a verb)?
So is it that you see things as they actually are and that there is no distortion because of the image you hold because of your past experience ?I don't think this resonates with me very well.
Thinking that you understand is certainly a stepping stone to actually SEEing that the self part is imagined. Seeing how the story is created then believed, and that it is all done by thought, is the final step in being able to differentiate between reality and fantasy.I think I can understand that the organism is real but the self part is imagined.
Using the example of hearing sound, it should be clear that for a sound to exist it takes both vibrating air and ear/brain involvement. So there is not an actual "central point of experience". There is only experiencing.Elaborate a little more on this please.
Is there anything wrong with, as in your example, thinking a tree is beautiful?So is it that you see things as they actually are and that there is no distortion because of the image you hold because of your past experience ?I don't think this resonates with me very well.
The usage of the word "I" is so intertwined it's difficult to comprehend I can't be anything. It doesn't make any sense, because something has to be the essence of me.Thinking that you understand is certainly a stepping stone to actually SEEing that the self part is imagined. Seeing how the story is created then believed, and that it is all done by thought, is the final step in being able to differentiate between reality and fantasy.
Yes, they work together but they are also separate. If I plug my ears there is no sound, so for me this organism is the central point of experience.Using the example of hearing sound, it should be clear that for a sound to exist it takes both vibrating air and ear/brain involvement. So there is not an actual "central point of experience". There is only experiencing.
Wrong is like beautiful. Both are opinions conditioned by culture and past experience. Both are the product of thought and NOT primary reality. (The reaction to them is Reality)Is there anything wrong with, as in your example, thinking a tree is beautiful?
Yes, our language (every language ?) is predicated on the assumption that there is an actual I. The great swindle, except that the language creators were not liberated, so it was/is unintentional. Does that make it right. The whole world believed that earth was flat once. Was that right ?The usage of the word "I" is so intertwined
Only mind separates them. Can you show me how they are separate in experience ?Yes, they work together but they are also separate.
That's right. For you the sound doesn't exist. It takes your organisms ears and brain for it to come into existence.If I plug my ears there is no sound
No.Your question is an avoidance of my question. Let's try again; Do you think that you see things as they actually are ?
I guess so.. without opinion there is just ever-present reality.Can you see that to apply opinion is to create distortion of the actuality ? That Reality gets changed ?
Somewhat.Can you see how the story is created by thought then believed by thought ?
My essential being(whatever it is) must be labelled "I." Gee, I am confused.Yes, our language (every language ?) is predicated on the assumption that there is an actual I. The great swindle, except that the language creators were not liberated, so it was/is unintentional. Does that make it right. The whole world believed that earth was flat once. Was that right ?
Yes, some ways to know they are separate is by plugging the ears/nose, covering the eyes, etc.Can you show me how they are separate in experience ?
But it does exist, it's just not heard.That's right. For you the sound doesn't exist. It takes your organisms ears and brain for it to come into existence.
All of the sense organs are in the organism, therefore it is the central point of experiencing.i don't see how this actually makes you a "central point of experiencing". It certainly highlights that experiencing is all there is.
You only assume that this exists. There is no indication that this exists except in thought. Do you experience another ?My essential being(whatever it is)
No, the sound only exists when you unplug, otherwise there is just vibrating air.Yes, some ways to know they are separate is by plugging the ears/nose, covering the eyes, etc.
No, once again you assume. Without ears and brain there is no sound. Just vibrating air. The sound only comes into existence with a receiving/interpreting apparatus. Even if this apparatus is a microphone and recorder, there is no sound until it is listened to. Don't believe me, examine this yourself.But it does exist, it's just not heard.
Yes, the existence is in thought.You only assume that this exists. There is no indication that this exists except in thought. Do you experience another ?
Yes, so there is vibrating air + ear/brain involvement. They are two separate things. The vibrating air has to go through the ear which is in the organism to interpret sound, so it is the central point of experience.No, once again you assume. Without ears and brain there is no sound. Just vibrating air. The sound only comes into existence with a receiving/interpreting apparatus. Even if this apparatus is a microphone and recorder, there is no sound until it is listened to. Don't believe me, examine this yourself.
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here. There is sound(or vibrating air, whatever) everywhere, and it requires a separate organism to experience the sound.there is no sound until it is listened to
Vibrating air is not sound. It only becomes sound when ALL elements are involved.I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here.
Yes.Do you experience a sound from a dog whistle ?