Re: 04 - [MoFPP: 223] Re: Virtual reality
Rajasekhar Goteti
| Ref:Verbatim is super imposed over real for certainty. Don't really know what this means Name -its picture -interpretation- concluded idea - feeling- Is not this human movement? Interaction between those above said elements we call consciousness.This consciousness made of seer and seen,observer and observed,thinker and thought,experiencer and experience etc. So called mind,consciousness,inwardness, etc are functioning as a mirror of relation in language.Weights and measures is the principle of language but no relation with the real. Real -----Apple not the name but the fruit as it is. Imposed --- weight,name,value,health concept,vendor,seller,purchaser etc. Which world is cruel, sinful, is to be seen. Seeing is what is but not the seer or seen. Hope I could convey some thing because verbal communication is partial all by itself. thank you sir sekhar sekhar --- On Wed, 4/11/09, mec...@sbcglobal.net <mec...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
|
Connect more, do more and share more with Yahoo! India Mail. Learn more.
mec...@sbcglobal.net
|
Ref:Verbatim is super imposed over real for certainty. Don't really know what this means Name -its picture -interpretation- concluded idea - feeling- Is not this human movement? Interaction between those above said elements we call consciousness.This consciousness made of seer and seen,observer and observed,thinker and thought,experiencer and experience etc. So called mind,consciousness,inwardness, etc are functioning as a mirror of relation in language.Weights and measures is the principle of language but no relation with the real. Real -----Apple not the name but the fruit as it is. Imposed --- weight,name,value,health concept,vendor,seller,purchaser etc. Which world is cruel, sinful, is to be seen. Seeing is what is but not the seer or seen. Hope I could convey some thing because verbal communication is partial all by itself.
|
Sorry, but all of this suggests to me merely being ensnared in the duality of thought, language, illusion and ignorance in the first place.
Introducing more and more names and terminology to describe the twisting of the snake of duality does not appear to me to be able to resolve that duality.
It is being hypnotized by that duality.
Considerations of the partiality of word, language, etc. are all distractions pursued by a dualistic 'thinker' for the purpose of preserving the duality; which is the origin of conflict and violence.
But it is the duality itself which is the PROBLEM; something which more 'thinking' will not, to my understanding, resolve.
Thanks for the clarification.
Michael Cecil
|
sekhar goteti
But it is the duality itself which is the PROBLEM; something which more 'thinking' will not, to my understanding, resolve.
Thanks for the clarification.
Michael Cecil
sekhar
mec...@sbcglobal.net
Who resolves what?
Certainly an important question.
There is no "who" anymore with the resolution of the duality.
As I see it, the 3-dimensional curved-space consciousness of the "self"/"not self"
collapses completely into the non-dualistic 2-dimensional flat space "observing
consciousness"
I begin with the approach of Krishnamurti and take it one step further:
There is no 'mind'.
Mere non dualistic idealism is of no use since it is also Dualism.
Nonononononono.
This is not what I am talking about here. Non-dualistic idealism is merely another thought,
and thought itself is dualistic.
Thus, that will not help at all.
To see what dualism without the seer may resolve trouble of dualism by itself.
Precisely what I am saying. The seer collapses into the seen and vice versa; but, also,
the "self" collapses into the "not-self", which is somewhat more difficult.
There can not be non dualism in verbatim or word to word or word and its meaning.
Not jumping on the moving train of thought here. That is the problem. (In any case,
can't run that fast anyway. In other words, I have no idea what you are talking about.)
Feeling is non dual by its very principle but when named becomes dual and also become mere emotion.
Hmmmmm....
Not sure.
From my perspective it appears that feeling cannot be non-dual because it describes a spatially localized
"self" (within a "not self") which reflects upon itself to determine what it is feeling. This is all prior to word;
it is merely at the level of the "self"/"not self" itself.
That appears to me to be dualistic.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
thank you sir
sekhar
Michael Cecil