The Confusion of Terence

[gibran2]

When I had this experience (where I got to the Center), I followed a thread of understandings. Each understanding was built upon the previous one and these were depending on each other (I could only understand the next truth if I could understand the previous one). To symbolize this process, a spiral would be the best choice.

With these steps of understanding, the area of the world (the complexity of the mandala) decreased. It was like going down the tree towards the root. Each time the branches join with each other, the world becomes simpler, but it is still complete, it's just that what in the previous step was contained in N symbols/elements, was "reduced" to half (?) of them - at the same time showing me how level N got "created" from level N-1. The last steps of this process are 2, 1 and 0.

When I got to the 2, then only the Creator and the Creature remained and we together constituted the mandala (all that is was "packaged" back to this basic duality). When this duality was united (1), then I was gone, therefore I can't remember this (for me it was like an instant, when I disappeared in It and then reappeared in my new life). The existence of the 0 is later speculation on my part.

This is why I dare to think of the existence of absolute truth.

Well, the problem for me with believing that the “Center” or the “Creator” or “God” can be reached and realized is that this puts limitations on God. It makes God a finite “being”, much greater than us, but nevertheless limited in scope.

I believe that there is something eternal, something without limits – infinite. This something can be approached, but never reached. No beginning, no end, infinite in scope. We are a part of that something, and we seek out that something, but we will never find it. We are on an eternal journey to bring us closer to that “something”.

I don’t dismiss your experience, but I interpret it differently. While you may see it as getting to “The” Center, I see it as getting to “A” Center: An awareness of the eternal journey.

 

[jamie]

This thread is hilarious..like playing ping pong.

 

[cellux]

No, no limitations here. Unfortunately I cannot transmit the experience...

The idea is that all of existence - everything that is and can be experienced by any conscious entity in any of the created universes - can be "traced back" to one single Source, which contains all of this. The process of creation - the way all the created things are born, multiplying outwards from this Source - can be seen and understood. This is the most rewarding intellectual experience in the world.

 

[cellux]

This thread is hilarious.

Why?

Oh I see. Ping-pong. Well, that's the nature of reality.

 

[jamie]

Source in infinite. If there was such a thing as "ultimate reality" instead of "infinte reality" than there would be no paradox..and thats no fun. When was there ever a point to end-points?..and if so what then?..do we pack it all up?.."sorry kids, game over!"..

 

[cellux]

Think of the number line. It's an ultimate reality (in the world of numbers). It's also infinite. Does it have a Source?

 

[cellux]

and if so what then?..do we pack it all up?

If there is a Source, then there is a hierarchy, then there is order, then we have a place in our universe and this gives meaning to our existence.

 

[jamie]

nonono..sure we have a place in it all..but the concept of an "ultimate reality" is just that, a concept. Can you tell me if there is life on other plantes? and if so, describe them, and tell me how many different planets are inhabited?..can you tell me if humans will ever leave this galaxy? can you tell me what a "black hole" really is?..I doubt it. I doubt anyone can..

IF you cant explain every single little dman thing in all of existance than what you call "ultimate reality" is just a funny little metaphore..a concept..nothing more. I agree..there is an ultimate reality..and its infinite..the heirarchy only exists from one angle..with no beginning and no end, there is no centre..so how do you judge the order of the heirarchy?

It's never going to be as simple as the funny little metaphores humans put forth. They are useful yes..but in the end I just see them as funny little metaphores.

If reality is infinte(like the number system you used as anlogy seems to be) than how can you ever arrive at a fully complete description of the cosmos that encompasses infinity? How do you encompass infinity? Like I said there is always paradox. Think about that. Think about paradox..that seems to be the only thing keeping this whole thing going..paradox in a funny little metaphorical way seems to be the one idea that makes infinity possable..but still the idea of paradox the way we can concieve it is limited to our limited perview of the cosmos.

We can have those experiences yes, where we are essentially boundless..egoless, spead out through infinity(or seem to be anyway)..but can you really come back from that and then explain to me every single detail of even THIS universe, let alone the entire cosmos? No..anyone who says they can I think is full of shit, plain and simple. So, how can anyone then say they have the "ultimate truth"..what they have is the "ultimate metaphore"..at least the "highest"(if you are nto heirarchy) metaphore we can bring back so far.

I am not saying I dont think everything is connected at some point. I think I have made it quite clear that Ive been there and do believe that, as do mnay here..but I just dont think that that experience sends one back here with the knowledge of everything that goes on in all times and all places of the cosmos.

So then, WTF is the point in making these half assed claims like "aliens are the projection of the ego"?..unless you want to walk around claiming that my dog is a projection of the ego, so is my brother and my sister and my best friend..and so what? oh yes yes, "all is one" we know we know..so?

Wouldn't it be nice if it were all that easy haha...pretend that because "all is one", we now know it all! We could simply set aside the fact that we are still humans at the end of the day, living on some little blue freaking dot the size of a grain of sand in a vast ocean(if that) and pretend that WE are the be all end all of it all. Well, we know it all anyway, since "all is one"!

Well, we also know that the ocean exists, we can put all the oceans and sea together and "all is one"..yet we still know more about the surface of the moon than we do about the depths of the ocean..and that says something.

So one sees the whole, and yet cant explain everything that comprises that whole..and yet, even so claims to hold the "ultimate truth" reguarding that whole..thats quite a fractured truth as far as I can tell..but hey.."all is one":d

 

[gibran2]

^^^ What he said.

 

[picatris]

Hi cellux,

this is getting awkward and we are seriously getting away from the OP.I would be glad to continue this discussion in another thread. However I must comment on your words and citations

Interpretations of the three marks by various schools


There is not the slightest difference
Between Samsara and Nirvana

Do not mistake the moon for the hand that points at it. Nagarjuna was not stating that Nirvana and Samsara are equivalent. No part of the Nagarjuna writings can actually mean what you are implying. Nagarjuna was using a figure of speech. What he says is that when you get There, you are everything. It is not the same as saying that the objective is everything! It's like saying the sermon of the Mount or the Revelation really mean what they are saying, or the classic Zen sayings. Nagarjuna himself says that no one should interpret his writings in a fixed way.

If you really dig on Nagarjuna, at least check the wikipedia link for his doctrines. You can also check online the difficult Mūlamadhyamakakārikā online, which is easily one of most complex Buddhist treatises with the most complex set of interpretations

Since you do not see the natural condition of the real disposition of things,
you do not know that appearances come from mind, and so you are thrust once again into Samsara.
By not seeing that your own mind is actually the Buddha, Nirvana becomes obscured.
With respect to Samsara and Nirvana, (the difference is simply due) to ignorance or to awareness respectively.
But at this single instant (of pure awareness), there is in fact no actual difference between them (in terms of their essence).

[/quote]

This is basically the same thing. It is a figure of speech aimed at bringing the spirit to Nirvana itself, and the goal is the same as expressed above. Take a look at the Dhammapada, the basis of all Buddhist texts (written by the Buddha Himself). There, there is no such equation, Nirvana, anyway you like it is a state of mind, while Samsara is the continuous flow of existence. It is dangerous to unify the two simplistically.

 

[cellux]

If reality is infinte(like the number system you used as anlogy seems to be) than how can you ever arrive at a fully complete description of the cosmos that encompasses infinity?

By going to the meta-level, and to the meta-level, and to the meta-level, right until I arrive at the Root.

The number system analogy can be also used to illuminate this point. If we start going by the number line, we will never reach the end. Therefore we may conclude that it's infinite and we have no hope to understand it ever.

But if we go up to the meta-level, we can understand the law which governs the number system. We can find a pattern by which the number system "unfolds" itself (induction). And by seeing that pattern (which is an idea of the creator in the spiritual world) we can intuitively understand, take hold of the whole number system (without actually traversing all the numbers, one by one). Do you see what I mean? Something which is infinite in its manifestation at one level can stem from a single thing, an idea, a blueprint, a law one or two or N levels upwards (or rather inwards).

 

[cellux]

It is dangerous to unify the two (samsara & nirvana) simplistically.

Sorry, I also see it was an error to bring the thread into this direction. Let's continue in PM's.

 

[jamie]

If reality is infinte(like the number system you used as anlogy seems to be) than how can you ever arrive at a fully complete description of the cosmos that encompasses infinity?

By going to the meta-level, and to the meta-level, and to the meta-level, right until I arrive at the Root.

The number system analogy can be also used to illuminate this point. If we start going by the number line, we will never reach the end. Therefore we may conclude that it's infinite and we have no hope to understand it ever.

But if we go up to the meta-level, we can understand the law which governs the number system. We can find a pattern by which the number system "unfolds" itself (induction). And by seeing that pattern (which is an idea of the creator in the spiritual world) we can intuitively understand, take hold of the whole number system (without actually traversing all the numbers, one by one). Do you see what I mean? Something which is infinite in its manifestation at one level can stem from a single thing, an idea, a blueprint, a law one or two or N levels upwards (or rather inwards).

No I dont see what you mean. That sounds like non-sense to me. To say that infinity can have root in one single idea goes against the very idea of infinity..you still are ignoring the paradox that lies within the concept infinity, trying to find an end point.

So what if you find a pattern behind the system..we are talking a system of infinite measures..that pattern you extrapolate is no different..it exists within infinity so there will always be another pattern of which that idea is manifest of..maybe there is some level of analogy that binds it(but even that analogy would be subject to the same paradox as infinity loops on and on through itself.

Youre ultimate truth will still be a metaphore at best..and whats wrong with that anyway? how can we be sure metaphore itself is not concrete at some level?..and this brings me to what Terence(IMO) meant by "the world is made of words"..sorry to all those who never really got his message..not his fault.

 

[cellux]

To say that infinity can have root in one single idea goes against the very idea of infinity..you still are ignoring the paradox that lies within the concept infinity, trying to find an end point.

I don't try to find an end point, I *remember* the existence of the end point. This is not analytical work I'm doing here, but an attempt to share my heart (albeit I sometimes slip into analysis, which seems to be an error when discussing such matters).

Let's take a seed and the flower that grows from it. Or our DNA and ourselves. If you were shown your DNA on one side and yourself on the other (with all of what you are), could you connect the two? Could you believe that there is a cause-effect relationship?

Don't forget that as we climb up the ladder towards God, the number of the ideas becomes smaller, but the area that is covered by them remains the same (the entire creation). Therefore the ideas that are on inner levels are much much more powerful than those that are closer to us. At the innermost levels there are the four elements for instance. The greeks were pondering about these elements, they held that the entire world was created from these. They didn't say this without reason. I literally saw that this is so.

 

[cellux]

how can we be sure metaphore itself is not concrete at some level?..and this brings me to what Terence(IMO) meant by "the world is made of words"

This is the essence of what I'm trying to say.

(And thank you for saving the day. This was a good one. :roll

 

[jamie]

"Don't forget that as we climb up the ladder towards God, the number of the ideas becomes smaller, but the area that is covered by them remains the same (the entire creation)."

So what happens then? What about when god realizes itself, looks around and sees itself within a circle of other gods? What then? That one idea that thought it was the "one" all of a sudden is just one small small idea in a sea of other ideas and so on..you cant take a reductionist path to god..god is a metaphore.

 

[cellux]

No, there is no looking around. The concept of "looking around", the space that is necessary to do that, etc. are all parts of creation.

I'm speaking about THE highest level. Really.

 

[gibran2]

...The number system analogy can be also used to illuminate this point. If we start going by the number line, we will never reach the end. Therefore we may conclude that it's infinite and we have no hope to understand it ever.

But if we go up to the meta-level, we can understand the law which governs the number system. We can find a pattern by which the number system "unfolds" itself (induction). And by seeing that pattern (which is an idea of the creator in the spiritual world) we can intuitively understand, take hold of the whole number system (without actually traversing all the numbers, one by one). Do you see what I mean? Something which is infinite in its manifestation at one level can stem from a single thing, an idea, a blueprint, a law one or two or N levels upwards (or rather inwards).

The number line is not the best analogy. It’s infinite, yes, but it is more or less the same at all points. And that’s why you can use induction, etc. to understand it. An even better analogy for infinite complexity is the Mandelbrot Set. It is a bounded set of infinite complexity, and although one region may resemble another, regions are not the same.

You cannot look at one region of the Mandelbrot set and based on that say anything about another region. You cannot look at one large part and know what the smaller parts comprising it are like. Yes, you can look at the equation that allows one to generate the set, but seeing the equation or seeing a part of the set, or seeing the whole set in finite approximation is not the same as “seeing” the infinite complexity of the set as it actually is.

In the same way, perceiving the infinite complexity of creation is an impossibility.

 

[jamie]

No, there is no looking around. The concept of "looking around", the space that is necessary to do that, etc. are all parts of creation.

I'm speaking about THE highest level. Really.

Really? THE highest level eh? so were into heirarchy and reductionism again? Well..have it your way im not going to discuss the implications of a "highest level" or "ultimate truth" again..

 

[gibran2]

...Don't forget that as we climb up the ladder towards God, the number of the ideas becomes smaller, but the area that is covered by them remains the same (the entire creation).

This statement shows you really don’t understand the concept of infinity at all. As you climb the ladder toward God (whatever that even means) there is always an infinity of ideas remaining. Climb the ladder for a billion billion years, encounter a billion billion ideas, and there’s still an infinity of ideas ahead of you.

No matter how many ideas you encounter in your eternal climb, there is always an infinite number you have yet to encounter!