FUN! Distinguish Truth from Words (Reality from Labels, the Logos from Interpretations, Holy Spirit)

http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com

this content is an introduction to the content of this post:
http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/an-introduction-to-language/

as well as:
http://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2011/12/30/the-secret-of-society/

zen, transformation, Distinguishing, Truth, Words, the living word, Reality, Labels, Logos, Interpretations, actuality, symbols, advaita

Category:

Education

Tags:

• zen
• transformation
• Distinguishing
• Truth
• Words
• the living word
• Reality
• Holy Spirit
• Labels
• Logos
• Interpretations
• actuality
• symbols
• advaita
• truth is a pathless land
• krishnamurti
• enlightenment

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

I question the reference to "information." Details of information may be true or false or some of both, but so what? Perception may be accurate or at least shared or validated or given approval and agreement from others, but so what? You are truth. You cannot be perceived. So, truth cannot be perceived. You are it. However, perception is also truth and so is each perception, but they are only true perceptions. You are not a perception. The ego can be perceived. You are not the ego.

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

You are welcome and thank you as well. So, you are not a concept. Only concepts are concepts. Any self-concept is a concept. You are not a self-concept. You may have a self-concept, but you are not that concept or that conceiving. Conceiving is creating. You do the activity of conceiving or creating. What do you conceive or create? To the extent that there is no linguistic identifying of an isolated me and an isolated not me, you are everything and you create everything.

[Uberlaser]

@144jr144 I concur. In Buddhism, the saying 'With our thoughts, we make the world'. I have been in the process of crytically examining my own thoughts over the past month or so, and I am intruiged by the lies I tell myself. This mainly from the perceived information I take in that I hold as truth, which on reflection cannot be the truth (or at least I have no way of knowing if it truly is or not).

[Uberlaser]

@144jr144 Thank you once more for your explanation. In honesty, what you speak of is beyond my current comprehension. I will re-read and contemplate your comments over the next few days. Perhaps it is the specific choice of words. I am familiar with the concept that we are essentially 'points of conciousness'. Is that what you are alluding to here?

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

Forget mind. Forget labeling. Perceive visually these shapes. Focus on the shape inside of this letter "O" and see how easy it is. Always, you are the presence independent of language which is eternally here like the shape inside of the letter O which you have been focusing away from while instead focusing on the perimeter of the circle of the O. You are also the space between your eyes & this computer screen, tho you can focus away from that aspect of yourself or call it "Not I."

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

So, you face this screen with your eyes open. You can focus on these little shapes or gaze several inches over the line of sight of these shapes. These shapes would still be in your peripheral visual range, but it is like with a microscopic or telescopic lens: we have much more precision (typically) available the center of our visual field. Our brains are trained to identify motion and sort "friend" or "foe" or "prey" or "predator." The reptilian brain works prior to words though.

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

It is useful to contrast that seeing with the seeing during a dream. That visual stimulation is still a real neurological firing pattern, but not from immediate external stimuli. So, that leads to the following intriguing point: even when I "see" while I am awake, there could still be "dreaming" going on as in triggered memories and filtering out of information and selecting of some data and interpreting it, THEN labeling it. Sometimes, this is trivial and sometimes not.

[144jr144]

@Uberlaser

"Seeing" is a word for labeling the process of biochemical responses to exposure to certain wavelengths of light. I specifically meant the seeing by humans (and in particular by me). It could also be the sonar of bats or dolphins, though. It could be the photosynthesis of a plant's chlorophyll or the warming of a rock when exposed to sunlight. So, I did not mean identifying specific isolated visual perceptions, but the sensory function of perceiving through sight organs.

[Uberlaser]

@144jr144 I concur. To go into this more deeply perhaps for my own understanding, to perceive without the use of the mind only leaves the perception of the actuality of perception? There is nothing else left. Thank you again for your comments. At the moment, I find this area of study incredibly fascinating.

[Uberlaser]

@144jr144 After re-reading this a few times, I believe I was mistaken and now agree with your first sentence. Please correct me if I misunderstand, but the term 'Seeing' by definition means visually labelling forms. Therefore, seeing is in terms of the mind. Hearing similarly. Language is such a handicap :-)