Mason Riggle

Member
  • Content count

    1,469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mason Riggle

  1. @WokeBloke it's ALL there is for me. There 'seems to be' other people who have experiences, but I can't be sure... I can be sure, however, that 'there seems to be'... The 'seeming' I'm sure of.. but 'what seems to be', I can always be mistaken about. It seems like I'm here writing to you.. but I could be dreaming, or hallucinating, or in some sort of simulation.. but 'the experience of me writing to you' is undeniable.
  2. why is 'seeing' what you equate with 'the only way to experience'? Is this conversation not a way for me to experience you? My logic states that 'whatever I experience' is 'what there IS', and I can't know if there's anything more.. and the only way for me to 'know', would be to experience it some way.
  3. @WokeBloke try thinking more about it this way---> If you can not experience something, does that something exist [for you]? Can you think of anything that you know 'exists' but you have never experienced in some way, directly or otherwise?
  4. I think for him, this just strengthens the notion of an 'experiencer' and an 'experience' which are separate from each other, rather than having the opposite effect, of showing that 'subject/object' are not two things, but one. This can be a tricky notion to dispel, because it's not always apparent how connected 'experience' and 'experiencer' really are. @WokeBloke insists that my coffee cup has an inside, and an outside.. and we are telling him, well.. there's really just 'the whole cup', and the difference between 'inside' and 'outside' is arbitrary, imaginary, and relative. Inside/Outside exist together, or not at all.. you can't have 'just the outside' of a cup.. same with 'seer' and 'seeing'. They are, in reality, one thing, 'appearing' as two. It's like trying to separate 'a tree' from 'what a tree is doing'... but these are the same thing. 'what a tree does' is 'what a tree is'. There is no 'tree' that 'grows leaves'.. because 'growing leaves' IS what a tree is.
  5. @WokeBloke I'm saying 'what is happening' is the 1 thing there IS.
  6. Maybe let me put it this way... Seeing is happening the same way trees are happening.. I could ask.. who is happening the trees? This is actually a reframing of the classic philosophical 'tree falling in the woods with no one to hear it' question. What is really being asked is, without a subject 'for whom' existence exists, does anything objectively exist? Without a 'seer' is anything seen? This duality of subject/object is transcended by recognizing the duality as a duality.. two sides of the same coin. It's direct. No 'experiencer' in addition to experience.
  7. Are trees 'treeing'? Is there a difference between 'a tree' and 'treeing'? Are clouds 'clouding'? Is there a difference between 'clouds' and 'clouding'? There is no 'seer' in addition to 'seeing'. No 'tree' in addition to 'treeing'.. no 'cloud' in addition to 'clouding'. Who or what is 'clouding the clouds'? Who or what is 'treeing the trees'?
  8. Can't it be both? I take my fun very seriously.
  9. Its all so clear to me now. I'm the keeper of the cheese... and you're the lemon merchant ...
  10. @Alfonsoo perhaps begin to notice the arbitrary/relative/dual nature of distinctions.. For examples... (arbitrariness)- at what point does a knife become a sword? isn't the distinction between the two arbitrary? isn't it whatever point we decide it is? (relativity/duality)- where is the distinction between the inside of a cup, and the outside of a cup? Isn't the outside relative to the inside, and the inside relative to the outside? You can't have 'just the inside' of a cup, or 'just the outside of a cup', you just have 'the whole cup', where 'inside/outside' are only relative distinctions. Inside is just 'not the outside' and Outside is just 'not the inside'. Then do this with your 'self'. Where is the line between 'you' and 'that which is not you'? isn't it arbitrary? Am I 'inside my body somewhere', and my body belongs 'to me'? Am I just my brain? I could cut off my arms and 'I' would remain... Am I just a thought an organism is having? Am I identical to 'my body'? Am I 'my hair'? When my skin cells flake off.. is that dandruff on my coat still 'me'? Am I the same me I was when I was 6? Where is the me from 5 minutes ago? 1 second ago? Am I 'the totality of my experience?' Why is it so hard to 'locate' my 'self'? You may begin to feel that 'you' do not exist 'separate' from everything that is 'not you', but rather, 'you' are defined relative to what you arbitrarily decide is 'not you', the same way that a whirlpool does not exist 'separate' from the river that contains it, but rather, the whirlpools is arbitrarily defined by (is a function of) the river (everything which isn't the whirlpool)... but you can't show me the edges of the whirlpool.. where does the river end and the whirlpool begin? Can you take a whirlpool out of a river and show it to me? Similarly, you can't really find (show yourself) the boundary of 'yourself', because it's only an arbitrary distinction. When I am sitting here at my desk, looking at a monitor, reading this forum.. I feel like all of that is 'what I am' in this moment. I am literally 'the experience of a body sitting at a desk, looking at a monitor, reading this forum' and NOT something separate from all that who is somewhere 'within' all of that, experiencing all of that.. it's all me. 'experiencing my desk' is no different than 'experiencing my hand', in that both are 'my experience', which is all I ever really am.
  11. @StarStruck @Medhansh what the girls are attracted to is not 'you being a dick'.. it's just that they mistakenly perceive you being a dick as 'authenticity', which involves not allowing what others think of you affect you emotionally, and this often looks like 'being a dick'. When they discover that you are not authentic, and just 'acting like a dick', they are no longer attracted to you. The qualities you need to cultivate have nothing to do with 'being a dick', but rather, knowing yourself, knowing your boundaries and how to stand up for them, knowing your values and how to live them, etc..
  12. @Sine ask yourself if you are your entire body, or just part of it. For example, are you 'your hair'? When you cut off your hair, and it falls to the floor.. is that you on the floor? What would happen to 'you', if you cut off your hand, would your hand still be 'you' also? Would there be two of you at that point? Are you 'your blood'.. or is 'your blood' inside of 'you'? If your blood leaks out a little.. have 'you' leaked out?
  13. Notice that 'ceasing to exist' is not possible ('not experiencing' is not something that can be experienced). 'Not being' can never 'be'. You have never experienced 'no experience'. It Is Always Now.
  14. @Rilles there is nothing you have to do which you're not already doing. 'Just be' is paradoxical advice, because you can't 'not be'. You're already 'being', and there's nothing else for you to do, because 'not being' isn't something you can 'do'. 🙏🏼
  15. @Fearless_Bum no need to apologize. As defined by Wikipedia- Solipsism (/ˈsɒlɪpsɪzəm/ (listen); from Latin solus 'alone', and ipse 'self')[1] is the philosophical idea that only one's mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind. The only distinction that I am making, is between dual solipsism (mind/contents of mind) and non-dual Solipsism (Mind is all there is). I'm not asking you to believe Solipsism to be the case.
  16. solipsism - there is only me, and everything else is a figment of my imagination. Solipsism - There is only me, there is no 'everything else'. Everything there IS, is 'what I am'.
  17. @roopepa this is perhaps one of the simplest/most profound truths there is.. nothing to do, no one to do it. You couldn't 'not be who you are' even if you tried, because this would obviously just be more 'you being who you are', which you are always already effortlessly doing.
  18. The discovery that there's nothing to do that isn't already 'being done'.
  19. @mandyjw everywhere I go.. there I am.
  20. @roopepa hide and seek.. What do you do when you find who's hiding? Hide and play again!
  21. Perhaps the opposite is true... you've never met a plant or non-human animal that was so confused about what it was as humans sometimes are.