PDA

View Full Version : All Is Beyond Expression



sushil soni
27th October 2013, 10:12
A man of knowledge, a rare soul, a great sage, lives in a reality which is different from the others. He experiences the world from a totally different perspective. It is not that the rare soul does not live on this planet or is in mindful delusion but that his views of things are apart from others. He may look crazy, he may talk like an insane person, but he is actually resting in peace and knows.

He is perpetually sensing reality. He has awakened from his dream experiences and realizes that whatever happened or is happening is nothing but appearances in his mind. For him, there is neither an outer reality nor an inner, subjective world. The truth is neither “out there” nor “in here”. There is neither the ultimate reality nor the relative reality. The false “seeing” has become perfect seeing, now. The three-dimensional objects of the world are the same, only the sage’s way of looking at them has changed.

He knows that this reality or truth is not confined within the realm of words, sentences, language. Visual objects and experiences can only be known through language. But language does not possess the liberating power. A person who is addicted knows that it takes much more than just knowing its hazardous nature to quit.

A sage knows that truth or reality can be perceived from two perspectives – from the standpoint of the world and from the standpoint of liberation. He is aware that the dividing line between these two perspectives is thin, brittle and unstable. So, he gives up both the standpoints.

By definition, then, there is no real, no ultimate, no seeming, no false reality; in fact, no reality at all. There is not even illusion. Yet, Existence IS. Existence is neither real nor an illusion. No definitions can bind it. Nothing is arising in front of a rare soul, and nothing is subsiding in front of a rare soul. There is no phenomenon that is either existent or non-existent since the great soul is beyond language, beyond definitions, beyond ignorance. This noble soul is in a meditative equipoise, and engages in helping others so that they too may become rare souls.

sirdipswitch
27th October 2013, 13:04
yep...:wizard::wizard::wizard:

greybeard
27th October 2013, 13:31
That's the Truth.
Some are ready to hear it Sushil.
Its always worthwhile sharing what you know.
More guests than members read these kind of threads but its a very worthwhile endeavour to post them.

One of the challenges is that Truth recognised is not really a debating matter--it just is.

Namaste.

Shezbeth
27th October 2013, 19:27
Would that such topics could be discussed without such laden and ephemeral terms as 'rare/noble soul', 'man of knowledge', 'great sage'.

To refer to a 'rare' soul is to say that there are 'common' souls. To speak of a 'great' sage is to differentiate between 'not-great' sages. Both assume a commonality of concept that is inconsistent with an individual's expression of spoken language, all the while speaking of an entity which at the beginning and end of the day resides in a corporeal form. One could refer to both as a 'Dude' (or better yet, an idiot) and achieve the same effect; Idiot - except in certain circles - is not a term most would find agreeable, nor would many hearken to 'Truth' if it were described as 'Foolishness'.

There is much here expressed that is agreeable, more still that is inconsistent. To describe something is to apply a definition which by it's nature is a limitation; a theoretical boundary. Still, I suggest that there is no limitation to what can be expressed by language, only to that which can be conceived by the person expressing it.


and engages in helping others so that they too may become [idiots].

Inasmuch as those others are seeking to be [idiots], I find consistency.


One of the challenges is that [Foolishness] recognised is not really a debating matter--it just is.

But only to an [idiot]. To all others it is [Truth].

greybeard
27th October 2013, 19:35
Would that such topics could be discussed without such laden and ephemeral terms as 'rare/noble soul', 'man of knowledge', 'great sage'.

To refer to a 'rare' soul is to say that there are 'common' souls. To speak of a 'great' sage is to differentiate between 'not-great' sages. Both assume a commonality of concept that is inconsistent with an individual's expression of spoken language, all the while speaking of an entity which at the beginning and end of the day resides in a corporeal form. One could refer to both as a 'Dude' (or better yet, an idiot) and achieve the same effect; Idiot - except in certain circles - is not a term most would find agreeable, nor would many hearken to 'Truth' if it were described as 'Foolishness'.

There is much here expressed that is agreeable, more still that is inconsistent. To describe something is to apply a definition which by it's nature is a limitation; a theoretical boundary. Still, I suggest that there is no limitation to what can be expressed by language, only to that which can be conceived by the person expressing it.


and engages in helping others so that they too may become [idiots].

Inasmuch as those others are seeking to be [idiots], I find consistency.


One of the challenges is that [Foolishness] recognised is not really a debating matter--it just is.

But only to an [idiot]. To all others it is [Truth].


Such topics are discussed without any more than respect for the other.
See here.
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?860-Enlightenment-The-Ego-what-is-it-How-to-transcend-it.&p=7764&viewfull=1#post7764

Enlightenment is our natural state.


The enlightened see all as enlightened as spoken of here.
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?43027-Enlightenment-A-direct-succinct-account-of-what-occurs...&p=456904&viewfull=1#post456904


There is a wealth of information in the spiritual section--- sometimes new member have not found that section as yet.

Chris

Shezbeth
27th October 2013, 20:07
Enlightenment is our natural state.

Could you elaborate this statement beyond an opinion?


The enlightened see all as enlightened as spoken of here.

Again, conjecture.


There is a wealth of information in the spiritual section--- sometimes new member have not found that section as yet.

And I wish them luck with it, though it seems the use of the term 'wealth' is a bit pretentious.

Is there a person who is capable of being authoritative without (implicitly or directly) presenting themselves as an unverifiable authority? Is there an authority to enlightenment? Is enlightenment something that can be qualified beyond another's perception?

Enlighten-ed/ment/ing are evanescent terms used to laud that which they feel are laudable but without sufficient qualification.

greybeard
27th October 2013, 20:16
Enlightenment is our natural state.

Could you elaborate this statement beyond an opinion?


The enlightened see all as enlightened as spoken of here.

Again, conjecture.


There is a wealth of information in the spiritual section--- sometimes new member have not found that section as yet.

And I wish them luck with it, though it seems the use of the term 'wealth' is a bit pretentious.

Is there a person who is capable of being authoritative without (implicitly or directly) presenting themselves as an unverifiable authority? Is there an authority to enlightenment? Is enlightenment something that can be qualified beyond another's perception?

Enlighten-ed/ment/ing are evanescent terms used to laud that which they feel are laudable but without sufficient qualification.

Check Tim's thread Shezbeth on the link given.
Any questions on this best directed to him.
My knowledge is not direct but is based on years of study of past and present sages.
They say that there is no individual-- only one consciousness. No We--no Me.
Wealth is just a word.
I am selling information for free-- laughing-- so if I said, ordinary, normal or similar the thread would not be visited.
That's the world I live in, for the moment anyway.

Chris

Shezbeth
27th October 2013, 21:05
Yes, I read Tim's thread at length before I replied. My question stands, though I would ammend it to say "... beyond an opinion - yours or otherwise?"

I appreciate the admission that your experience is both indirect and subjective. What 'they' say is of no concern to me beyond it's applicability which is tenuous at best.

I suggest that any 'truth' which might exist needs neither proponence (the act produced by a proponent), nor validation/reverence by a group or mass. Any 'true' gurus then, are those who are not talking about it.

I recognize my opinions are A. naught BUT subjective opinion, B. contrary to many other opinions, and C. likely applicable only to this (my) experience. This is why I do not attempt to pass my subjective impressions off as objective/un-debatable 'truth'.

Crazy Louie
28th October 2013, 06:38
the true sage or sojourner or mystic does not give himself a title - he has no need to speak any wisdom to anyone - actually he has no need to speak. their soul would be naked because they have annihilated the tin god deity of self, using any words are useless in the company of god who cares little about which way man's tongue wags. this person would reject all visions, illumination and the things others would call gifts of the spirit because to his soul such things are barriers to the true nature of the divine - their goal is to enter into emptiness and darkness beyond the limited comprehension of man - and can only do so when they have left the identity of what words bring - behind. Strange that once blind to everything that makes a man - a man - their eyes are open to all the other realities of spirit so few have any concept of.

with that being said - it seems to me all people have different paths and different understandings and if they are seeking honestly playing bumper car with them is all part of their path - when a person realizes they have no answer for someone smarter and quicker mentally than they are - they have no other option than to give up on their own understanding and open their mouth or move their fingers and let the spirit respond. its a universal truth that smart people are often harsh with others who are moving too slow or acting within the realm of a pet peeve - however god does not waste energy and on some level every exchange is for the growth or shrinkage of elements involved. - however lets face it some people are just natural born azz holes. (well not you of course) - but others - I like this Shezbeth person because they give good articulation and debates fairly to express their point - I like grey too - but since you two have been sloshing your drinks of perception back and forth and hijacked the thread I don't have a clue as to who the original poster might be and what he is trying to say through his cryptic verse. I would like a chance to understand him more once he finds his way through the lofty spiritual realms because I think theres a good chance he has a kindness in his heart worth learning about.

and please you two intellectual sailors please don't start in with me. you have enough on your plate already with each other. lol

sushil soni
28th October 2013, 06:41
That's the Truth.
Some are ready to hear it Sushil.
Its always worthwhile sharing what you know.
More guests than members read these kind of threads but its a very worthwhile endeavour to post them.

One of the challenges is that Truth recognised is not really a debating matter--it just is.

Namaste.

Yes, Truth is not a debating matter and we are still trying to give expression to IT.

sushil soni
28th October 2013, 06:53
Enlightenment is our natural state.

Could you elaborate this statement beyond an opinion?


The enlightened see all as enlightened as spoken of here.

Again, conjecture.


There is a wealth of information in the spiritual section--- sometimes new member have not found that section as yet.

And I wish them luck with it, though it seems the use of the term 'wealth' is a bit pretentious.

Is there a person who is capable of being authoritative without (implicitly or directly) presenting themselves as an unverifiable authority? Is there an authority to enlightenment? Is enlightenment something that can be qualified beyond another's perception?

Enlighten-ed/ment/ing are evanescent terms used to laud that which they feel are laudable but without sufficient qualification.

We are all already enlightened. Only that we are not aware of our enlightenment. Once we become aware, a great transformation happens in our minds - we become what we truly are. This becoming shifts our perspective, our thinking, and we start living in the now and here. Notice that everything is happening in the mind - nowhere else. The person sitting next to you will never know that you have become aware - but you know that you are aware. Your awareness is in your mind.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Yes, I read Tim's thread at length before I replied. My question stands, though I would ammend it to say "... beyond an opinion - yours or otherwise?"

I appreciate the admission that your experience is both indirect and subjective. What 'they' say is of no concern to me beyond it's applicability which is tenuous at best.

I suggest that any 'truth' which might exist needs neither proponence (the act produced by a proponent), nor validation/reverence by a group or mass. Any 'true' gurus then, are those who are not talking about it.

I recognize my opinions are A. naught BUT subjective opinion, B. contrary to many other opinions, and C. likely applicable only to this (my) experience. This is why I do not attempt to pass my subjective impressions off as objective/un-debatable 'truth'.


Shall we first find out what "Truth" is before we subject IT to any judgements?

skippy
28th October 2013, 08:15
Truth Is, so let Truth be. Don't stand in IT's way.

ps. Greybeard can you please stop hyjacking this thread please :)

Shezbeth
28th October 2013, 16:19
This becoming shifts our perspective, our thinking, and we start living in the now and here. Notice that everything is happening in the mind - nowhere else.

I am not aware of any other way of being than 'here and now' though - as evidenced by individual behavior - there are those who have a different method I do not prescribe to.


Shall we first find out what "Truth" is before we subject IT to any judgements?

You are welcome to opine as to your perception of truth. If I find it contestable AND perceive my contest to be of use to others, I am welcome to contest. ^_^


Truth Is, so let Truth be. Don't stand in IT's way.

Sorry friend I am inclined to disagree; That sounds like authoritarian thinking. Everything is subject-able to scrutiny, whether or not an individual is willing to.

In my - somewhere between nascent and exhaustive - experience, enlightenment is a term used by individuals not cognizant of the fundamental circumstances surrounding the following subject to describe an observable change in state ("person" became enlightened) or state of being of a person they do not understand ("person" is enlightened).

In particular, the term is most often thrown about amongst adherents to an individual or group, and is used to glorify/justify the reverence/worship bestowed on the person(s) when the said is otherwise unjustifiable. Additionally, it is often used by less-committed adherents as a crutch/buffer/excuse by which to justify the inability/unwillingness to comply with a code/doctrine/rule-set.

It is far easier to label a person as enlightened than to seek the same intellectual, spiritual, metaphysical, et al. development/growth/understanding displayed by the person.

Some who have been described as enlightened will tell you they are nothing special, or they are the product of years of discipline, or a variety of other explanations. With the exception of a willingness to establish a hierarchy amidst/amongst their followers/teachings, the consistency of behavior/disposition/doctrine between said 'enlightened' individuals is transient.

In summary, enlightenment is a term used predominantly (but not exclusively) by those in the wake of a good salesman, often before critical analysis (buyers remorse?) takes place.

In my opinion. ^_~

As for -

We are all already enlightened. Only that we are not aware of our enlightenment.

I am looking forward to this explanation.
Big thanks Skippy, I loved the 2nd quote of your signature.

ROMANWKT
28th October 2013, 18:27
The truth is known, you all sound like a bunch of SOLIPSISTS, and skippy you have no right telling anybody to back off with their opinion my friend, this discussion is open to all.

warmest regards

roman

Crazy Louie
28th October 2013, 21:33
Now Skippy you better listen to Roman who is Telling You not to tell someone else what to do!

and now for my take on the human condition regarding the intricate axioms associated with the caricatures of our wisdom in their flacid impotence. (:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FI3p79Jq-k

Roman, sir - I believe Skippy was joking with Grey in response to me joking with Grey earlier about hijacking the thread - however I guess since my comment was buried deep in my post the truth remained unknown - I don't see how you can say I am solipsistic when I clearly acknowledge that often times the only destiny of my own futility is getting out the way and letting the holy spirit run the show.