Can direct experience be trusted?

[Nahm]

19 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

but I am finite

So where do you end? Where do you begin?

[Truth Addict]

1 minute ago, Nahm said:

So where do you end? Where do you begin?

I don't know. I am here and not there. I don't know where here is, I can't pinpoint it.

You'd say, there's no there. And I know, but I'm speaking metaphorically.

Again, my lack of ability to pinpoint myself does not necessarily mean infinity. Why do you think it must?

[Nahm]

@Truth Addict It’s obvious. Sans thinking. I do not think it is, that’s what you’re missing. 

[Truth Addict]

@Nahm It's not obvious that it's infinite. You just imagine it to be. You are not me, and I am not you. How's that for an objection? You are limited to your perception, which is you. And I am limited to my perception, which is me.

Plus, all the stories about reincarnation, blah blah blah, are added on top of that fantasy of infinity.

[Nahm]

@Truth Addict I do imagine it to Be. 

[Truth Addict]

1 minute ago, Nahm said:

@Truth Addict I do imagine it to Be. 

Hmmm.

I'll consider that a wordplay.

You're distorting the discussion.

[Nahm]

@Truth Addict I’m not trying to convince you of anything. My aim is to be helpful in your awakening. It’s clear I am not. Love you! ♥️

[mandyjw]

Why all the hate on word play and poetry and sandcastles here lately? @Truth Addict

Reflections on water are always distorted but it's still a beautiful phenomena. 

[tsuki]

19 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

And I am limited to my perception, which is me.

That implies that you are identified as your perception.
Pardon my neo-advaita, but what is the thing that is perceiving 'your' perceptions?
How is it different from the thing that perceives through Nahm?

Edited May 24, 2019 by tsuki

[Truth Addict]

@Nahm

It's true, I started the discussion. I was trying to answer some questions about the claims I hear.

You are helping me, that's for sure. You always did.

I disagree with you, but I love you too ❤️ regardless of the fact that you are one of the best people on here.

@mandyjw Hate is a thought in your mind, not the actual thing that is going on with me. You think I hate all those things, yes, you think.

I have nothing but love.

@tsuki See? That's what I'm disagreeing about. They say it doesn't require a thought. Yet, you say it does.

Do you realise that you are aware of your perceptions, and your perceptions only?

The thought that there's some other entity with perceptions is itself a thought-story.

Anyway, even if that story was true, and we were conscious through the same thing. That does not mean we're one, it means our substance is one. But our perceptions are different. Therefore, we're different.

No infinity needed.

Edited May 24, 2019 by Truth Addict

[tsuki]

17 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

See? That's what I'm disagreeing about. They say it doesn't require a thought. Yet, you say it does.

I'm asking you to try to locate the thing that is perceiving. It does not matter what you call that thing, I used to call it "I don't know". Are there many Idon'tknows? What is Idon'tknow made of? Does the Idon'tknow have any structure? The Idon'tknow you're looking for is not a thought.

17 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

Do you realise that you are aware of your perceptions, and your perceptions only?

Again, "my" perceptions? Please locate the thing that these perceptions belong to.
Even if you were able to find it, what would that thing be other than a perception? What perceives that?

17 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

The thought that there's some other entity with perceptions is itself a thought-story.

There is not even one thing that is Idon'tknow. Idon'tknow has no qualities, no shape, no size, no color, no pitch. Null, zero, none.

17 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

Anyway, even if that story was true, and we were conscious through the same thing. That does not mean we're one, it means our substance is one. But our perceptions are different. Therefore, we're different.

Only if the mind identifies as perceptions .

Edited May 24, 2019 by tsuki

[Truth Addict]

@tsuki

The perception is me of course. It cannot be located. It doesn't have attributes.

But where is infinity?

24 minutes ago, tsuki said:

Only if the mind identifies as perceptions .

The mind is a fabrication. You're making the same mistake that you're pointing out to me.

Edited May 24, 2019 by Truth Addict

[tsuki]

24 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

The perception is me of course. It cannot be located. It doesn't have attributes.

Oh gosh, I refuse to believe that you're dense. It's like you want it to continue .
How is it that there is something, a 'me' that is perception itself, that cannot be located and does not have any attributes? 

24 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

But where is infinity?

Try describing infinity. Can you do that?
Try describing nothingness. Can you do that?
Try describing a 'me' that cannot be located and does not have any attributes. Can you do that?

24 minutes ago, Truth Addict said:

The mind is a fabrication. You're making the same mistake that you're pointing out to me.

Do you know the nature of that mistake? It's not about factual incorrectness, it's about seeing.
You read a book, a detective story, that has a plot twist at the end and where the whole thing gets recontextualized. All bits fall into their right places, it's not the maid - it's the butler! What is that moment, the illumination? Can it be perceived? No - it's the footprint of mental scaffolding crumbling, revealing the truth.

You do not add thoughts in this work, you remove them.
You may have removed many things, but identification is still there. You don't see infinity, you treat it as a concept.
What triggers you about Leo is your own concept that you're trying to overcome and you're blaming him for it.

Edited May 24, 2019 by tsuki

[Truth Addict]

@tsuki

If you think that I'm dumb, then keep that thought for yourself or fuck off. I don't need you, nobody asked for your help.

You're talking nonduality metaphysical oneness and shit, but you don't embody it. That's hypocrisy.

You don't tell the people you love they're dense, do you?

Notice that you didn't criticise me, you offended my person. This is not cool.

[tsuki]

14 minutes ago, tsuki said:

Oh gosh, I refuse to believe that you're dense. It's like you want it to continue .

@Truth Addict Alright, I still refuse to believe that you're dense. If you want it to continue, then go ahead.

[Truth Addict]

1 minute ago, tsuki said:

@Truth Addict Alright, I still refuse to believe that you're dense. If you want it to continue, then go ahead.

Whatever. Fuck off.

[Beeman]

@Leo Gura

On 23/05/2019 at 3:58 AM, Leo Gura said:

@Beeman Your very question it itself a direct experience. So you're begging the question. You're using direct experience to ask whether you can trust direct experience.

Name one thing which is not a direct experience. You can't.

Direct experience is actually prior to trust.

Does everything has to be first or prior in order to be true or trusted? Who set that model?

[Bill W]

On 5/22/2019 at 6:48 PM, Beeman said:

How your direct experience be trusted? 

My thoughts on direct experience are most likely open to modification. I don't believe my thoughts on this topic are set in stone.

However, saying that..... where I stand today on it right now......

I think a lot of direct experience, probably the vast majority of it, still involves the mind making an interpretation of this direct experience. I (we?) then decide what the direct experience means, or might mean. I (we) decide. So, as far as I can see, this makes the direct experience a belief. 

In terms of trusting my direct experience......

If I burn my hand because of boiling hot water, I trust my experience. This is pain. There are not many different reasons behind this experience. Not so much interpretation that happens (if any).

If I get into a heated debate with my father or sister. This is a direct experience. I might feel resentful and angry. I might feel hurt. I might feel lost. Perhaps I can trust the direct experience, but I know for sure, I can't trust my immediate interpretation of the experience. My immediate interpretation is that they are assholes and this is false. 

Perhaps even an awakening could be described as a belief in terms of what the direct experience meant.

We might be able to trust the direct experience, but can we trust the meaning we bring to it?

How does one remove personal bias from coming to a conclusion that a certain experience means one has awakened? If one is doing lots of work on themselves and yearns for an awakening, how does one look at their direct experience objectively? 

Does one bring their own meaning to each experience? 

I could get shot down here, I don't mind. I have no real position to defend. I am curious about everyone's experiences and interpretations. But, right now where I am in my development, I see that Leo has a lot of beliefs about what his experiences mean. They mean something to him for sure. I believe he is being honest and genuine. 

My gut feeling is that a lot of people don't want to consider their experiences as a belief or interpretation. I am here to see where the land lies and how I can help myself through others experience and knowledge which does (I admit) often exceed mine from what I can see on the forum.

 

[Norbert Lennartz]

What's the direct experience for begging for "good government"?

[Beeman]

@Bill W

"Perhaps even an awakening could be described as a belief in terms of what the direct experience meant.

We might be able to trust the direct experience, but can we trust the meaning we bring to it?"

That's what I talking about.