No Beliefs vs. Big Picture Understanding, Clarity and Truth

[benny]

I'm having some trouble reconciling the seeming paradox between releasing all of your beliefs, whilst simultaneously searching for truth and understanding.

The way my thinking has evolved so far, in a rough sense, is as follows:

Initially I'd hear something that I liked the sound of, at which point I would unquestioningly adopt as a belief of mine, and then I'd regurgitate it as if it was something I actually knew and hadn't just heard.

Over time I learned that I had to go and verify these things for myself - taking action and putting these notions to the test. Now when I hear something, I consciously put what I heard in the back of my mind, without adopting it as a belief, and I go and test it out in the real world. 

If the information produces favorable results, I now say to myself, "OK, there's strong support to suggest that this may be true."

This is where I'm stuck. At what point can I confirm that a notion is in alignment with how reality works, and then adopt that notion as a belief? But at the same time aren't we supposed to be spiritually purifying ourselves, ridding ourselves of our beliefs? 

 

Any insight into the matter would be greatly appreciated.

Edited October 28, 2018 by benny

[Rebec]

Read; Letting Go by Hawkins

[Nahm]

 

2 hours ago, Shiva said:

There's no need to search for Truth.

When all your beliefs are stripped away to a point that you're not even sure if you're alive or not, Truth can no longer be hidden from you. In fact, it's not hiding, we're just blind to it.

@benny

I second that. Any belief is not true, obvious in that it needs to be believed. The truth could never be believed.  And like Shiva said, the real mindf, the deepest holy oh my actual wtf God is that it is not hidden at all - never was! How could it be!?

There is literally no such thing as consistency. It doesn’t really exist. Now think for a second, how infinitely intelligent life & reality is, all around you (and you) right now. How consistent does it all appear?  

Also, you’ll have to let that “favorable results” thinking go. If you want to realize the truth, any opinion or preference is a belief based on an -  “ I “ - which is the foundation of the illusion / delusion (preference = finite mind), just like the appearance of “consistency” (“finite world / stuff”). Try to appreciate the illusion at play right now, that after you read this, you’ll continue to believe you are a living thing. 

[Leo Gura]

This is where the distinction between relative and absolute truth becomes handy.

Absolute Truth is not a belief, it is actuality (as pointed to in my What Is Actuality episode.) Absolute Truth is non-conceptual.

Relative truth is conceptual. It's all the useful concepts you learn doing personal development and it explains how to practically navigate the world. For example, "don't eat bad food or you will feel bad." Spiral Dyanmics and all of science is relative truth. These relative truths are very important, but you want to hold them loosely and hear many perspectives so you don't get stuck.

Absolute Truth can only be accessed through direct mystical experience. You cannot learn it.

[Acche]

@benny at about the same place. a note perhaps, you're the only one on your particular path - how far you've come, route to this point, where you're headed, how you plan to 'arrive' there - your way of inquiry/ self development - replacing old beliefs with ones - could be exactly what you need right now

[benny]

@Rebec Thanks! Will check it out.

@Leo Gura Would you mind elaborating on what it means to loosely hold a belief? Thanks Leo.

[Leo Gura]

@benny Use Google to search for an old blog post of mine called "scaffolding". It's explained there.

[Joseph Maynor]

I dislike the notion and term "relative truth" because I don't like the adjective 'relative' and I don't like the conflation between conceptual truth and actual truth.  Any truth and can be put into language is conceptual truth.  Actual truth is really the only kind of truth proper.  Conceptual truth is a totally different animal than actual truth is.  So, I agree that it might be useful to use "relative truth", but I think it also causes people to misuse relative truth as well, especially at Stage Green where the adjective 'relative' is taken rather literally.  So, you'll never hear me use the words 'relative truth'.  I use the words "conceptual truth" instead.  There's conceptual truth and actual truth.  Calling conceptual truth and actual truth both "truth" is like pointing to a person and a mountain and calling them both "things".  You could do that but you'd better not take that too seriously because it glosses over the huge difference between people and mountains.  

Edited October 28, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Leo Gura]

@Joseph Maynor You're still missing something. Relative is a very accurate and good word.

Relative is precisely what conventional understanding, science, and awareness is. Relative as in: Einstein's General Relativity. Relative as in: one thing is understood in relation or by contrast to another. In other words, dualistic understanding.

Sure, it's not absolute, but we mostly live and survive in the relative domain. So don't reject it too much.

Relative and conceptual are not identical. The size of objects is relative for example.

[Moreira]

In my opinion its a sin the fact that we are gifted with intelligence to develop a big picture understanding and dont use it. And instead remain "no-beliefs" ignorant like a low consciousness organism.