Understanding what we do not know?

[lemex]

Originally Posted by Papa Bear

Is it possible to understand something you do not know? Most areas of Spiritual development are evolved based upon interpretations attempting a form of understanding, which often does not have foundation based knowledge? In normal circumstance we gather the knowledge, attempt to abridge it into our experience to then be able to combine both to hopefully, form an understanding.

So if there is no knowledge based on experience, are we just reflecting a belief, and calling it an understanding? Or can we become aware of an understanding before we have the foundation of the knowledge required? For if we can it may be confirmed, if at a later stage we find the experience and or knowledge, which confirms we did understand something before we had the knowledge or experience to justify that understanding.

And if this occurs what processes create that understanding? Have you ever experienced understanding something you did not know or have experience of?

Papa, I understand what you're saying. I'd like to ask do you include people like Jesus, or say Buddha in not knowing. It's not about what I or someone believes. Just because I may not understand I cannot say they did not. I choose not to and I know why I do or do not, depending what is important. I have to be honest here.

But whole heatedly agree if at a later stage. The essence of seeing the object properly. Experience in so relevant. Experience and experience are not the same thing but are the same end I think. Let's us hope it is not only one life time or we're all in trouble. Never ever will enough proof exist because there is conflict and separation. Even if we don't understand I wouldn't consider it hopeless if one understands the essence the thing does not exist.

Wondering upon leaving this plane would anyone want me as a spirit guide. The thing is I observe we don't communicate spiritually well enough certainly pointed to the human communication process. I hope you are wrong.

[no1wakesup]

Originally Posted by Alternate Carpark

There's a scene from Monkey season 1.

Buddha, or whatever that giant god thingy is with the pointy hat, I can't recall exactly who it was, but i assume it was a representation of buddhahood.
Anyways...Monkey is bragging to Buddha that he is so amazing and he is like a god himself.
Buddha then challenges Monkey to show how great he is by going to the end of the world and writing his name on one of the five pillars that mark the end of the world.

So off goes Monkey on his cloud and finally comes to the end of the world and writes his name on one of the pillars.
He then goes back to Buddha, again to brag about how godlike he is.
Buddha raises his hand and oh dear, there's Monkey's signature, not on a pillar at the end of the world, but on one of Buddhas fingers.

Monkey thought he traveled far, but in reality had not.

Everything you have said in your posts is not beyond the intellectual, they too are all concepts.
All this talk about being\exisitng beyond the intellect are constructs of the intellect.

Its understood why you said that.

Yes you can see these aspects and recognize those qualities deeply within. But if it just becomes more content, more biography or something i have acquired so now i "know" more, you have missed the mark.


The the one who believes an intellectual perspective anchored in individuality can see the totality of what this consciousness is will continue to keep itself busy in trying to find a comfortable way to approach the infinite while sitting firmly in the vehicle of the finite. Surely, more concepts will be added in that endeavor, that is until something else unfolds which is without effort

Just because we pick up a curious and shiny rock and tuck it away in our pocket does not mean we now own it. There was never anyone there in separation to claim anything for or of itself.

We are simply sharing a few words, no intention in having you believe in them or take them as a new truth on any level.

To some, whatever is seen, heard or read, there is more transparancy, a more palpable quality of inner knowing is reached than with others. To those who find a simple transparency just underneath the surface complexities of conceptual thinking and all of its baggage... no further organization is necessary. In that quality, awareness expands. For those who are almost hell bent in having to "understand" everything through the known, common yet conceptual filter, then organization will build many more sky scrapers in many more cities.

blessings brother

Greetings..

Originally Posted by no1wakesup

Its understood why you said that.

Yes you can see these aspects and recognize those qualities deeply within. But if it just becomes more content, more biography or something i have acquired so now i "know" more, you have missed the mark.


The the one who believes an intellectual perspective anchored in individuality can see the totality of what this consciousness is will continue to keep itself busy in trying to find a comfortable way to approach the infinite while sitting firmly in the vehicle of the finite. Surely, more concepts will be added in that endeavor, that is until something else unfolds which is without effort

Just because we pick up a curious and shiny rock and tuck it away in our pocket does not mean we now own it. There was never anyone there in separation to claim anything for or of itself.

We are simply sharing a few words, no intention in having you believe in them or take them as a new truth on any level.

To some, whatever is seen, heard or read, there is more transparancy, a more palpable quality of inner knowing is reached than with others. To those who find a simple transparency just underneath the surface complexities of conceptual thinking and all of its baggage... no further organization is necessary. In that quality, awareness expands. For those who are almost hell bent in having to "understand" everything through the known, common yet conceptual filter, then organization will build many more sky scrapers in many more cities.

blessings brother

'Whose' mark is missed, whose concepts and complexities lead them to this belief? there is someone there, experiencing the relationship is the central issue, not pretending there isn't one..

Be well..

[no1wakesup]

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..


'Whose' mark is missed, whose concepts and complexities lead them to this belief? there is someone there, experiencing the relationship is the central issue, not pretending there isn't one..

Be well..

The idividual ( the conceptual "who") can not miss the mark or grasp it...that perspective can only think more about it. Intellectualizing "missing the mark" does not help one see it anymore clearer. instead it will help maintain and sustain the belieft that individuality is there as a tangible reality in the first place

Awareness, (not as in the collective and common view most have determined as consciousness, aka enlightenment or liberation ) as a quality in the process of being aware in a relationship between subject and object is that which allows that initial recognition to momentarily unfold.

Yes, direct experience is primary. But does the experience belong to anyone. Is it claimed and processed away as more knowledge?.

There is a very line here, using the limitation of words, as we are, can become slippery.

Before we move forward...how do you see experience?

Greetings..

Originally Posted by no1wakesup

The idividual ( the conceptual "who") can not miss the mark or grasp it...that perspective can only think more about it. Intellectualizing "missing the mark" does not help one see it anymore clearer. instead it will help maintain and sustain the belieft that individuality is there as a tangible reality in the first place

Awareness, (not as in the collective and common view most have determined as consciousness, aka enlightenment or liberation ) as a quality in the process of being aware in a relationship between subject and object is that which allows that initial recognition to momentarily unfold.

Yes, direct experience is primary. But does the experience belong to anyone. Is it claimed and processed away as more knowledge?.

There is a very line here, using the limitation of words, as we are, can become slippery.

Before we move forward...how do you see experience?

Please do not assume we are 'moving forward'.. i sense your use of language to be entangled in your beliefs and self-imagery..

Individuality is an observable and experience-able certainty, just as is Wholeness, and.. this is made known by direct experience. If you are proposing another game of words to create the illusion that individuality doesn't exist, this individual will take its leave..

The experience perceived through the unique mindscape of an individual does not 'belong' to that individual, but its understanding comprises the scenery of the individual's private mindscape.. we/us/Life exist as One and Many simultaneously, and the experience of existence is defined by where we place our attention..

Be well..

[no1wakesup]

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..


Please do not assume we are 'moving forward'.. i sense your use of language to be entangled in your beliefs and self-imagery..

Individuality is an observable and experience-able certainty, just as is Wholeness, and.. this is made known by direct experience. If you are proposing another game of words to create the illusion that individuality doesn't exist, this individual will take its leave..

The experience perceived through the unique mindscape of an individual does not 'belong' to that individual, but its understanding comprises the scenery of the individual's private mindscape.. we/us/Life exist as One and Many simultaneously, and the experience of existence is defined by where we place our attention..

Be well..

No assumption friend..we are simply sharing at best.

We are on two different pages. Yours is respected.

The validity or need to sustain a personal individuality is part of the dream...no more real than the idea that all is separate around you at this moment and that you, as subjective solid someone, is now reading these words.

The misinterpretation i believe you have taken is with the question of identification.

Yes..the experience of existence is defined by where that attention is placed. Most on this planet have it unconsciously placed within the process of thought. Others reason because of newly "acquired spiritual knowledge", they now know the infinite but still hold firmly to there need to maintain their individuality..so it is really no more than a punch line and experience is best demonstrated as a credibility piece in proving "my experience".

Certainty is no different than absolutes whereby either side of the coin will reflect the personal agenda (and safe buffer)of individuality to continue in its story.

I am not attempting to convince you of anything. Your need to keep what is familiar, in line and acceptable to your experience as you see it is how it is...and thats fine.

We dont have to continue...but perhaps another question will make more sense...

At a subjective level, are you identified with the idividual? Do you sense yourself as the one there in separation that is seeing?

[Gem]

Understanding is a deeper grasp of subtler nuances, and it allows individuals to allay their conflicts as their respective values are recognised to have similarities to the same degree as their differences.

[no1wakesup]

Originally Posted by Gem

Understanding is a deeper grasp of subtler nuances, and it allows individuals to allay their conflicts as their respective values are recognised to have similarities to the same degree as their differences.

Yes,, well said...

Deeper insights to recognize a common similarity. As that evolves and one has a deeper sense in a quality awareness beyond their conceptual gaze, that reference is then mirrored against a more conditioned aspect of duality.

That precipice, if it endures, can then expand then having the potential for liberation to unfold.

Yet before all of that can be reached, the question of indentification as a separate persona even beyond what we collectively percieve as awareness is the last confrontation. It is no different then coming face to face with a thief in your home.

Greetings..

Originally Posted by no1wakesup

We dont have to continue...but perhaps another question will make more sense...

At a subjective level, are you identified with the idividual? Do you sense yourself as the one there in separation that is seeing?

The question makes no more sense than the other.. you entertain separation for your game of words, to have a discussion where you demonstrate your beliefs about the absence of separation..

I identify myself as individual and separate, and.. it is myself, the undifferentiated whole, that is doing the identifying.. this is the issue.

Be well..

[no1wakesup]

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..


The question makes no more sense than the other.. you entertain separation for your game of words, to have a discussion where you demonstrate your beliefs about the absence of separation..

I identify myself as individual and separate, and.. it is myself, the undifferentiated whole, that is doing the identifying.. this is the issue.

Be well..

This is not a game and not a war of wits. A victor is not the goal here and is as redundant a destination as trying to keep from becoming the loser. Not happening.

If one has a belief that he or she will turn x yrs old on a specific day of the year, its not really a belief. Its more like an assumption. Something that individual knows will happen. Its deeply seeded and reflects a much more unobvious relationship at play

The belief which raises an issue is the underlying belief, the rooted belief that i am the one which thinks. When that relationship is no longer there, individuality is no longer an issue. This is not a further or grander belief to add to the aersenal of conditioning. And no one can give this transparency to you. Within you, it is already present.

Belief helps sustain the sense of individuality and overall separateness as the thinking process forms fundamental absolutes to agree with a convinient, overall and evolving view of the world. It does this perpetually and unconsciously

The original question was about experience or how you see it. It is fine that you did not answer. Ironically, the belief that you are the experiencer having an experience prevents one from seeing without eyes that are too busy looking for the "next" experience. Individuality demands that process and without it, from that perspective, would most lickely conclude something terrible is about to happen. Not having or even concluding with yet another belief that experience as "no more" allows the idea of individuality to retreat and continue on its make up and play of me and my life.

In the end, it is the idea of experience and its counter part of no experience that is transcended