Does the universe need intelligence to order it?

[Rick O'Shez]

Yes I don't disagree with you but the alternative is silence.

Ironically the answers are much more likely to be found in silence than in this endless proliferation of opinions and beliefs.

 

[savagewind]

For sure, it's possible to make simple statements when you deeply understand something, but that is not what I'm seeing here. What I'm seeing is a succession of beliefs masquerading as insights.

OK and it is beliefs which he/she (we are betting on it - if we bet, but we don't) is campaigning against, which if you are right it wouldn't be fair play.

 

[savagewind]

Ironically the answers are much more likely to be found in silence than in this endless proliferation of opinions and beliefs.

Right! That is what I said. But silence doesn't talk. We like to talk. I am talking in an east of Boston accent. What do YOU sound like? Haha I mean west. East is funny. Isn't it? It is only if you know geography. East means I am a fish. Haha

Or a whale. Could be a bird too. Or it means I live on a boat.

1. Or, if you consider Greenland to be part of Europe, since it's controlled by Denmark, then North America's easternmost point is Cape Spear at the tip of Newfoundland. The easternmost point of the U.S. is Sail Rock, off West Quoddy Head, Maine.

From google

 

[Rick O'Shez]

OK and it is beliefs which he/she (we are betting on it - if we bet, but we don't) is campaigning against, which if you are right it wouldn't be fair play.

It's fine to argue that beliefs are a hindrance to insight, I agree, but see how reluctant people are in this thread to talk about their personal experience of insight. It mostly seems to be a succession of generalisations, beliefs and assumptions.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

We like to talk.

Oh sure! But it seems to me that anyone who is serious about finding answers to the kind of questions we've been discussing here would have a regular meditation practice, or an equivalent method of developing non-conceptual insight.
I wonder how many here actually do?

 

[savagewind]

Oh sure! But it seems to me that anyone who is serious about finding answers to the kind of questions we've been discussing here would have a regular meditation practice, or an equivalent method of developing non-conceptual insight.
I wonder how many here actually do?

A good question. Ideally meditation should occur after each input and before each response. But that is not fun and I hear we much reach playfullness before we can honestly say "I have been enlightened". I don't not believe that. It is against the rules to believe it so I do not not believe it which is language being playful. Maybe the ogre Satan (pardon the S please) invented contraction to ruin our fun and who spelled ogre first anyway? Oh! Gree. No, its o (a long one) ger (a hard g).

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Consciousness is seeing without discrimination;

So have you seen without discrimination? And if so what was it actually like?

 

[savagewind]

So have you seen without discrimination? And if so what was it actually like?

I'll try. Most humans see black or white, good or bad looking at anything. But I have seen what looks bad is good but what looks good is bad. I think the tendency of the subconscious to rule a person's own opinion and it knows that it might be so that good is bad but bad is good allows many people to be able to say "Hitler be forgiven". Decision is power. Give the power back to whom it belongs and then the view will become impartial or seeing without discrimination.

It belongs to what we are trying to describe. I am a believer in God's son so to me it is who it belongs to (not what it belongs to). It's God.

It may seem like I am discriminating against people like Hitler and I might be but there is a sound limit a person can do. It is written sinning against the holy spirit is unforgiveable. It is good not bad reality really has limits. I think the world as we know it tends toward breaking limits. Most breaking is bad. Breaking bread is good. Is it really good or is it one of those things that seems good but is bad?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Again you are merely projecting your own arrogance. .

That is unfair... and he isn't. I don't see arrogance there.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't see arrogance there.

That might be because you are sympathetic to his point of view?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Could you say what you mean by "ultimate one"? There seems to be a proliferation of these jargony terms, and it would be useful to have some clear definitions. You've previously talked about the "divine" and "one consciousness" and "God", do these all mean the same thing to you? And if so, what is that meaning? And how have you experienced it?

As I previously observed, using capitals at the beginning of words like this doesn't make them any more credible, and using jargon isn't helpful if you are unwilling to define it. It's like when people talk about the "Truth" - yeah, whatever.

The Ultimate One is as one might expect. It is the Source the Origin, the Existence of all existence. If you don't put a capital on it, then it is nothing. It has to have a capital to define it, whether you believe in it or not.

And you keep asking about experience. I can't give any. If I have had them, and I must, it would be a major effort for me to sit here and try and recall them and then explain them to you, who, I think, has no interest in it at all. You might ask questions, but I think you do it in order to dismiss it not to learn from it.

Here, I will give you a smiley Don't waste it!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Most humans see black or white, good or bad looking at anything. But I have seen what looks bad is good but what looks good is bad.

I think we often see what we expect to see based on our preconceptions, and sometimes what we want to see based on wishful thinking.
Something I've learned from Buddhist practice is making time to look at things properly. Not just at the obvious level of looking properly at things and people, but also looking carefully at thoughts, feelings, opinions and so on. I live by the sea and sometimes will just sit and watch waves breaking for half an hour - after a while you can really see them for what they are.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That might be because you are sympathetic to his point of view?

It would seem to help, and of course he has not been addressing me with those comments. But he has explained an awful lot, far more than I would bother. And I think, as he seems to do, that you are not quite open enough in your thinking. It is, as they say, Like flogging a dead horse...haha

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You might ask questions, but I think you do it in order to dismiss it not to learn from it.

No, I do it because I am more interested in what people have experienced, not particularly in what they believe. Beliefs are just beliefs.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I think we often see what we expect to see based on our preconceptions, and sometimes what we want to see based on wishful thinking.
Something I've learned from Buddhist practice is making time to look at things properly. Not just at the obvious level of looking properly at things and people, but also looking carefully at thoughts, feelings, opinions and so on. I live by the sea and sometimes will just sit and watch waves breaking for half an hour - after a while you can really see them for what they are.

We think depending on who we are and what we are. We are following are own Self, the higher version of us. We are the play to the script. Everything follows an earlier divine-print. We can do nothing except follow what we are.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

And I think, as he seems to do, that you are not quite open enough in your thinking.

Because I challenge easy assumptions and cliched statements? It is a discussion forum, after all.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

We are following are own Self, the higher version of us.

Oh no, more jargon!
But seriously, what do you mean by "Self" here? Like a soul or something? Again it sounds rather like Hinduism, the union of atman and Brahman. But then I'm not a Hindu, so you would find out more by browsing the Hinduism DIR.

 

[Nakosis]

It is all in my head, my consciousness.

Ironically the answers are much more likely to be found in silence than in this endless proliferation of opinions and beliefs.

Yes, but here we? are, with opinions and beliefs. What answers do you hope to find? There is here and now and our experience of it.

It all seems entertainment to me. Seeking answers, spouting opinions and beliefs.

Our beliefs affect our experience. Or do our experiences affect our belief.

The answer is...

There is no difference between silence and non-silence. No answers or questions except what we create for entertainment.

I'm not trying to be profound, just accepting the only thing I can be certain of is that of conscious experience.

Sometimes the universe seems to cater to me, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes I can create the moment, sometimes I am the effect of the moment.

I know I can create order in my experience of now and disorder. Can order exist without consciousness? I don't know. I'm here and I have to deal with that reality. One can certainly consciously imagine a ordered universe which exists without consciousness but that's not the reality.

 

[YmirGF]

Oh sure! But it seems to me that anyone who is serious about finding answers to the kind of questions we've been discussing here would have a regular meditation practice, or an equivalent method of developing non-conceptual insight.
I wonder how many here actually do?

Well, some of us do and have been doing our regular practice for many decades. It is so incredibly amusing to hear that my personal insights are little more than blips of the infinite.

Perhaps, as it is a filter through which you are experiencing the Infinite. But where you are in error is that being one with the universe does not mean you know all the details of the universe in all places. That is still your filter interpreting the experience, because it is used to focusing on the foreground of life, which is the phenomenal world of forms. Being at one with the universe simply means that your true nature is exactly the same as the nature of the universe. IOW, the nature of Reality is the same everywhere. What is true of it internally to you, is also true of everywhere externally in the universe, which obliterates the boundaries between 'inside' and 'outside'. That is Cosmic Consciousness.

Thank you, oh Perfect Adept of the Master Game. Now, if you actually knew what you were talking about, I might be inclined to meet you part way, but there is so much disinformation and distortion in your above comment that I, quite seriously, don't know quite where to begin. For example, little quibbles like saying, "the nature of Reality is the same everywhere". Um, how could you possibly know? That is merely an assumption you are making because it conforms with your preconceived notions of how reality ought to behave.

No, your individual perception does not encapsulate all of Reality; Reality encapsulates your individual perception. In reality, though, what you only think to be your personal consciousness is in actuality a universal consciousness. IOW, your personal view is an illusion. It's merely a conditioned sculpting of non-local consciousness in such a way as to appear to be local and personal. That conditioning is what is known as Identification.

Let's pretend for a moment that what you are saying is correct. Taking into account that you accept that I have had "glimpses into the infiinite" would you not expect that I should sense some deep meaning in your words? Instead, I outright reject your preconceived notions as being somewhat ossified and often outright primitive. Again, I should, in theory, be one of your warmest supporters -- waiting breathlessly for your latest pronouncements from on high -- but I'm not. The reason for that is what you are saying doesn't actually make a lot of sense to anyone who is steeped in this alternate view of reality. It's like listening to a three year old's summation on Market trends.

You've experienced a glimpse into the Infinite, but it's only a blip on the radar screen. For some, these experiences are rationalized away as permutations of their personal view, while for others becomes a game changer.

What you don't know (because I don't recall ever talking about it on RF) is that I have written extensively on that very topic, exploring many reasons and probably outcomes. I'd suggest it is a game-changer for everyone and that human animals simply deal with it in a host of different ways.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

It all seems entertainment to me. Seeking answers, spouting opinions and beliefs.

Yeah, a lot of it is.