|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 7, 2021 6:17:31 GMT
Then you asked me to change the condition to change the world, yes? Or are you saying something else? You can only change some condition according to your conditioning. It would be silly for me to ask you to do that. However, lucky for you, I am part of your conditioning.   |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 7, 2021 6:19:02 GMT
I am agreeing with you that creating something in our experience expresses the SVP. So argue with Enigma that he should not be using visualization because he is expressing the SVP. What E described is not what you think he described. An experiential sense of involvement in creation is nothing more than the experience of involvement in the sequential story that unfolds. It's part and parcel of life. Just because cause/effect has been seen through does not mean there's no longer thoughts about how the story will unfold and actions taken towards that imagined future. You are describing experience only. No, not 'actually.' That's just mind's interpretation. You've taken your presently arising memory/thought of feeling something in a past moment, and are positing it as 'attracting' your current circumstance.
What the hell! |
|
|
|
Post by muttley on Jan 7, 2021 21:50:09 GMT
I liked mines betterer.  |
|
|
|
Post by muttley on Jan 7, 2021 21:51:49 GMT
I mean, there is nothing that causes "Consciousness".  IOW, Consciousness has no cause??  You gonna' bill for that one? |
|
|
|
Post by muttley on Jan 7, 2021 21:55:58 GMT
It's similar to saying that "Consciousness", which never appears, is the source of all appearances. It's different from relative cause/effect, because it's not referring to a time-bound act of creation like in Genesis or the Big Bang. It's a pointer because although it might sound as though it's referring to appearances and the way they appear in some mechanistic way, it's not meant to evoke that.
And, we can talk about these sorts of creation events, and it's all valid, in a relative sense, but, "Consciousness" is transcendent of any creation, either the act of creation or the artifacts that are created.
That's what I am saying Consciousness is the cause or consciousnesses creates!
That's okay. That's not the way I meant as well.
Consciousness can't cause Consciousness. Consciousness is indivisible. "Source" doesn't mean a source machine that you push a button and something happens. Source isn't a vending machine.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 8, 2021 3:23:57 GMT
That's what I am saying Consciousness is the cause or consciousnesses creates!
That's okay. That's not the way I meant as well.
Consciousness can't cause Consciousness. Consciousness is indivisible. "Source" doesn't mean a source machine that you push a button and something happens. Source isn't a vending machine. I did not say consciousness causes anything. You said "I mean, there is nothing that causes "Consciousness". " I said Consciousness is creating the reality so it's the cause of all the appearances. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 8, 2021 5:05:01 GMT
What I mean is that a particular appearance can evoke different responses/feelings...there is no one particular feeling tied to a particular appearing condition. The situation of being cut off in traffic for example, might evoke anger or it might evoke an a raised eyebrow and shrug. It wouldn't evoke a different response, At that time, that's the only response that you can have. Other responses are not possible. Clarity may bring some other responses and as result you may calm down and the situation changes too. You're still not grasping my point.
Yes, of course, in a given moment where a particular response is arising, that's the response that is arising and in that moment, it is what it is.
But in the general sense, there's a whole myriad of feelings/emotions that may arise in tandem with a particular appearing condition. That's all I've been trying to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 8, 2021 5:07:39 GMT
Consciousness can't cause Consciousness. Consciousness is indivisible. "Source" doesn't mean a source machine that you push a button and something happens. Source isn't a vending machine. You said "I mean, there is nothing that causes "Consciousness". " I said Consciousness is creating the reality so it's the cause of all the appearances. What the hell?  |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 8, 2021 14:20:12 GMT
It wouldn't evoke a different response, At that time, that's the only response that you can have. Other responses are not possible. Clarity may bring some other responses and as result you may calm down and the situation changes too. You're still not grasping my point.
Yes, of course, in a given moment where a particular response is arising, that's the response that is arising and in that moment, it is what it is.
But in the general sense, there's a whole myriad of feelings/emotions that may arise in tandem with a particular appearing condition. That's all I've been trying to say.
You are not only watching a movie, you are watching while you are creating. |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 8, 2021 14:20:28 GMT
I did not say consciousness causes anything. You said "I mean, there is nothing that causes "Consciousness". " I said Consciousness is creating the reality so it's the cause of all the appearances. What the hell? |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 8, 2021 18:30:17 GMT
You're still not grasping my point.
Yes, of course, in a given moment where a particular response is arising, that's the response that is arising and in that moment, it is what it is.
But in the general sense, there's a whole myriad of feelings/emotions that may arise in tandem with a particular appearing condition. That's all I've been trying to say.
You are not only watching a movie, you are watching while you are creating. There is no some-one/some-thing who/that watches or creates.
|
|
|
|
Post by muttley on Jan 8, 2021 23:12:59 GMT
I did not say consciousness causes anything. You said "I mean, there is nothing that causes "Consciousness". " I said Consciousness is creating the reality so it's the cause of all the appearances. What the hell?  |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 9, 2021 7:27:29 GMT
You are not only watching a movie, you are watching while you are creating. There is no some-one/some-thing who/that watches or creates.
Perceiver is derived out of the watching process. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 9, 2021 19:24:50 GMT
There is no some-one/some-thing who/that watches or creates.
Perceiver is derived out of the watching process. A perceiver does not actually appear. If there is clarity, it will be seen that there actually is no perceiver...the perceiver is imagined into 'watching.' & Fwiw, in clarity, any 'process' involved there, will also be seen through. |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Jan 10, 2021 9:45:25 GMT
Perceiver is derived out of the watching process. A perceiver does not actually appear. If there is clarity, it will be seen that there actually is no perceiver...the perceiver is imagined into 'watching.' & Fwiw, in clarity, any 'process' involved there, will also be seen through. I am not actually saying perceiver is appearing. I am saying Perceiving is happening and we are assuming the perceiver and perceived from the perceiving! both can't be separated. |
|
