Some questions about the search for answers

[Nahm]

@WindInTheLeaf Were you born?

[WindInTheLeaf]

@Nahm How would I know? 

[Nahm]

@WindInTheLeaf You would have experienced it. 

[WindInTheLeaf]

@Nahm But even if that experience was lingering now as a memory, how would I know that I experienced what I believe I experienced? How can I know that I know what I believe to know? And how do I know, that I did not in fact experience birth and just have no recollection of experiencing it? Perhaps it was such a traumatic experience that it got repressed. Perhaps it was such a dull experience that it didn't quite stick as something of significance. 

[Forestluv]

29 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

@Nahm But even if that experience was lingering now as a memory, how would I know that I experienced what I believe I experienced? How can I know that I know what I believe to know? And how do I know, that I did not in fact experience birth and just have no recollection of experiencing it? Perhaps it was such a traumatic experience that it got repressed. Perhaps it was such a dull experience that it didn't quite stick as something of significance. 

For me, when a sense of knowing arises, the types of questions you are asking dissolve.

My “breakthrough” with the whole “were you born thing” came in a sensory deprivation tank.

[Nahm]

2 hours ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

Look for the distinction between direct experience (actuality), and a thought or belief about it (illusion) This is seeing through the illusion. 

But even if that experience was lingering now as a memory (it isn’t though, so that’s a thought), how would I know that I experienced what I believe I experienced (You don’t though, that’s another thought)? How can I know that I know what I believe to know (You don’t though, another thought)? And how do I know, that I did not in fact experience birth and just have no recollection of experiencing it (You don’t know though, that’s another thought)? Perhaps it was such a traumatic experience that it got repressed(You don’t know this, it’s another thought). Perhaps it was such a dull experience that it didn't quite stick as something of significance. That’s also a thought. 

The distinction between what you have, and have not directly experienced liberates and ends these kind of questions. There’s a million other ways too I’m sure. ?? Nothing is hidden!

 

[WindInTheLeaf]

@Serotoninluv how do you know that you experienced what you now believe you experienced back then?

@Nahm well, I believe you were the one talking about 'things of past', but I'm glad we sort of agree. My question still stands. How do you know, that what you believe to have directly experienced, and what you believe to be mere illusion, is in fact so? How do you know, that whatever distinction you now hold of what is true and what is not, based on 'what you have and have not directly experienced' is not illusion? If, as you say, anything outside of the actual is mere illusion, how can you be sure of anything? 

Now, I am a tad perplexed at the way in which this thread took a weird turn, ending up in some kind of mental masturbation. My head hurts from writing out this reply, but I believe it was necessary. I am kind of tired so it might just be some grumpiness so don't take it too harshly, but it seems to me that you attempted to derail a thread that poses some questions that might make some re-evaluate whether or not a forum such as this is the right place to look for answers. 

As I see it, you posed a question within the duality of time and space, and as soon as I answered you turned around and started talking about non-duality, although I merely attempted to point out the absurdity of your question and answer. If this is merely us talking past each other, as we all often(if not always?) tend to do, or a direct attempt to undermine the validity of the original questions and answers, I do not know, and I hope this doesn't seem too much of an accusation. No one is to blame for anything. 

 Either way, thank you for the dance. 

 

[Forestluv]

4 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

@Serotoninluv how do you know that you experienced what you now believe you experienced back then?

It depends on your definition of “know”.

If you want to go the “it’s all a dream route”, then I don’t know. Yet that leaves me sitting all day in silence in a nondual state - just being. I kinda like communicating with others and making human connections - which involves sharing memories.

[Jack River]

Knowing, a state being regulated and determined by memory/experience/experiencer. This tends to go undetected often dudes. 

Its pretty important to question this fosho

 

[Jack River]

Direct experience is an overused explanation and can be really deceptive. I think its a great thing to question. 

Edited October 26, 2018 by Jack River

[njuufa]

What is beyond ? Contemplate "beyond" and egos mechanism reveals itself - Thats whats true.

[njuufa]

Why need to hide it if you know ? Its your experience.

or

isnt it ? Maybe you are just believing it ? Lying to yourself. For what reason ?  

 

[Mu_]

2 hours ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

@Serotoninluv how do you know that you experienced what you now believe you experienced back then?

@Nahm well, I believe you were the one talking about 'things of past', but I'm glad we sort of agree. My question still stands. How do you know, that what you believe to have directly experienced, and what you believe to be mere illusion, is in fact so? How do you know, that whatever distinction you now hold of what is true and what is not, based on 'what you have and have not directly experienced' is not illusion? If, as you say, anything outside of the actual is mere illusion, how can you be sure of anything? 

Now, I am a tad perplexed at the way in which this thread took a weird turn, ending up in some kind of mental masturbation. My head hurts from writing out this reply, but I believe it was necessary. I am kind of tired so it might just be some grumpiness so don't take it too harshly, but it seems to me that you attempted to derail a thread that poses some questions that might make some re-evaluate whether or not a forum such as this is the right place to look for answers. 

As I see it, you posed a question within the duality of time and space, and as soon as I answered you turned around and started talking about non-duality, although I merely attempted to point out the absurdity of your question and answer. If this is merely us talking past each other, as we all often(if not always?) tend to do, or a direct attempt to undermine the validity of the original questions and answers, I do not know, and I hope this doesn't seem too much of an accusation. No one is to blame for anything. 

 Either way, thank you for the dance. 

 

Hey WindinTheLeaf,

In regards to your question to Nahm.  I wrote a piece, actually my first post on this forum.  My head was spinning with these same exact questions and loops, doubts and perhaps some anxiety that can go with this kinda stuff sometimes.  Maybe it will help you see or find balance in letting it be a mystery.

 

[WindInTheLeaf]

13 hours ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

@Serotoninluv I should perhaps have put it differently: is truth beyond thoughts-of-truth? Can truth be grasped by thought if thoughts arise as expressions of truth? 

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

It depends on your definition of “know”.

If you want to go the “it’s all a dream route”, then I don’t know. Yet that leaves me sitting all day in silence in a nondual state - just being. I kinda like communicating with others and making human connections - which involves sharing memories.

What I attempt to point out, is not that thoughts, ideas, words, lie outside of truth. On the contrary, I believe that everyone is already - no matter who they are and what they may believe - expressions of the absolute truth. And i agree with you, that thoughts arise within truth. But when we become attached to thought, and start believing that we know what we cannot know, we suffer a great deal. If we wish to attain a complete grounded-ness in the actual, we must relieve ourselves of our false beliefs standing in the way of attaining such a thing. Observing so many seekers following the words of those having gone further along the path, I believe it is crucial for those trying to offer guidance by words to question whether or not this is actually a possibility. Also, here lies a seeming contradiction: If everyone is already expressions of the absolute truth in relative form, then how can we judge one human being to be closer to truth than another?

If thoughts arise as expressions of truth, can truth ever be grasped by thought or is thought always a step behind, truth always evading the grasp of anyone trying to catch it? If this seems to be the case, if there is just a reasonable probability of this being the case, then should we not abstain from talking about truth? Don't we risk spinning a web for ourselves and those who may, by their own interpretation of our words, find some new theory to cling to?

I do not advice you or anyone to abstain from talking altogether. Just because talking is a step away from the non-dual state, does not mean it is a step away from truth. Being human is, i believe, most of all about human connection. But when we wish to be part of the progression towards a deeper sense of human connection, love, acceptance and togetherness, we should abstain from creating more confusion and separation.

If anything we may experience, any memory, thought or word, lies within the relative domain of 'reality'/'dream'/whatever as an expression of the absolute truth, then how can we by any of these means ever grasp the absolute truth? Why should we? If we are already the absolutely amazing mystery that is, what more is there to be? Is there more to be? Or is the search for more what separates us from the feeling of completeness, of needing and wanting nothing else than what already is. And don't we all love mystery above certainty? Perhaps the mystery is what gets us going on our quest to discover, as it kind of drags us in, but at one point the mystery starts fading and the world becomes dull and boring and cold as we are now apart from it, and all those different people having started out as children just like we did, have gone a different route and have attained a different nuance of truth and now we start clashing with them, as we take our own truth too seriously. I do this all the time as well, just now i have spend so much time trying to be all serious making a clever sounding post for you to read. Looking at it now, it seems kinda silly, but it would be a shame to delete it, and what would be the reason for that anyway? 

[WindInTheLeaf]

1 hour ago, njuufa said:

Why need to hide it if you know ? Its your experience.

or

isnt it ? Maybe you are just believing it ? Lying to yourself. For what reason ?  

 

Sharing it with someone over a cup of tea as part of a joyful conversation for the sake of conversation is one thing. Or perhaps in the right setting with the right person needing that angle to get further in their own thinking. Posting it as some kind of certain knowledge on an online forum dedicated to getting rid of attachments is a whole other thing.

[Jack River]

@WindInTheLeaf pursuing the mystery by projecting thought as a means to reach certainty destroys the mystery. 

[Jack River]

It’s tragic dudes. 

[WindInTheLeaf]

@Jack River yeah, like either side comes with the price of the loss of the other. But maybe by going on a journey out and back again can return us to mystery but without the urge to know it anymore

[WindInTheLeaf]

@Jack River urge/need. maybe depending on where we start, our first expressions, we either set out to know for the sake of stilling our anxiety of the unknown, or for exploring by our love of the mystery. hmmm i wonder how it all began in the first place? ahhhh here we go again

[Jack River]

13 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

@Jack River urge/need. maybe depending on where we start, our first expressions, we either set out to know for the sake of stilling our anxiety of the unknown

Yeah Lol. Or because we fear impermanence. That what we know is coming to an end. And what lies beyond. Thought anticipates what will be. Defense mechanism fosho. 

13 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

or for exploring by our love of the mystery. hmmm i wonder how it all began in the first place? 

 

I think the mystery was/is sensed but we hadn’t/don’t understood that thought was itself no means of exploring the mystery. The mystery is a mystery because it is whole. It would take somthing whole to explore that. But thought ain’t that. 

13 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

ahhhh here we go again

  I feel ya

 

Edited October 26, 2018 by Jack River