You are hereForums / Non-Duality / Wisdom versus the Point
Wisdom versus the Point
I am opening a new thread with one of those terse, concise, beautiful and inspiring comments of Marcus, to consolidate an understanding, that is otherwise chopping up other threads. Instead of discussing this same understanding under each new topic, which chops the actual topic to pieces, we can now discuss it under its own topic. For more context, please refer to the thread 'Non-duality and Reflection' posts #16 and 17.
Marcus:
" Philosophia, Aletheia, Time, Divine vs Human, Wisdom.
1) Philo-sophia? Man loves his mind and not wisdom.
2) A-letheia? To take the meanings of the mind for real is what conceals truth. Mind is just sound. Truth is not a thought.
3) Time? "People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." Albert Einstein
4) Divine vs Human? Man is not separate from nature!
5) Wisdompoint: “I know that I am not answering any of your questions. That is the point of wisdom.“ Response: Understanding questions and answers as illusory is wisdom, not to admit that questions couldn‘t be answered!"
1) Philo-sophia? Man loves his mind and not wisdom.
Response:
Philo-sophia means that the mind loves wisdom beyond what wo/man loves. Both is not thinking yet, it is the sacrifice of the mind.
2) A-letheia? To take the meanings of the mind for real is what conceals truth. Mind is just sound. Truth is not a thought.
Response:
A-letheia means un-concealment. That is Logos. It is only logos that can conceal and un-conceal what is. There is no Absolute Understanding outside of logos. Thought is not thinking, but something thinking has created. The ONE engages as time.
3) Time? "People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." Albert Einstein
Response:
That is the most banal and flat understanding of time being propagated as wisdom in New Age bookstores: 'past-present-future'. That is why even a physicist can dismiss it. It is convenient for the bias of "illusion" to limit the understanding of time to the concrete mind of reification.
4) Divine vs Human? Man is not separate from nature!
Response:
Neither is Illusion separate from Reality, or sound separate from light - we still have not faced the real possibility of 'reflection' at all. We just assume it under the bias of "illusion". What is 'reflection'? Sound and Light could "co-exist" without reflection? Why 'reflection' in all of this?
5) Wisdompoint: “I know that I am not answering any of your questions. That is the point of wisdom.“
Marcus: Understanding questions and answers as illusory is wisdom, not to admit that questions couldn‘t be answered!
Response: Wisdompoint makes a difference between discursive 'questions and answers' of the mind of reification, and the imperative 'Question'(opening) of Logos - which is an opening to light, intelligence, being.
- 662 reads
-
Nothing is "illusion", except if someone THINKS it so, at this very moment.
'I' is the nexus of such thinking. 'I' is everything, because of that.
What is 'reflection'?
Andreas: Nothing is "illusion", except if someone THINKS it so, at this very moment.
Response: In a moment all that happens is a movement of light and sound and not meaning, thought, action or word.
Marcus: In a moment all that happens is a movement of light and sound and not meaning, thought, action or word.
Andreas: Good.
Yet there is meaning, thought, action and word, mysterious it may be.
It is not only physis, but physis (movement of light and sound), logos (meaning. thought, action, and word) and ethos (value, love, and good).
Wo/man lives in different circles, and on different levels at the same moment - cosmos.
Andreas: "Good.
Yet there is meaning, thought, action and word, mysterious it may be.
It is not only physis, but physis (movement of light and sound), logos (meaning. thought, action, and word) and ethos (value, love, and good)."
Response: Better: If a moment which is eternal is a movement of light and sound, albeit illusory, physis, logos would be light and sound, albeit illusory.
Marcus: Better: If a moment which is eternal is a movement of light and sound, albeit illusory, physis, logos would be light and sound, albeit illusory.
Response: Good. [There is of course the light that travels through space and meets our eyes made of light, perception made of light, and buddhi made of light]
What is the understanding of "illusory" and "reflection" supposed to be and say except that it is "illusory" versus what is real?
Marcus says it as if it was the final conclusion of everything? On what assumption or premise is realizing this the end? Why does everything stop there?
Marcus understand all too well that "illusion" does not stop when we stop taking it for "real"? It is an ongoing process, and it is integral and cosmic, mysterious it may be.
Andreas: Good. [There is of course the light that travels through space and meets our eyes made of light, perception made of light, and buddhi made of light]
Response: Where could be the space in first place? Light appears as space to the mind.
Andreas: What is the understanding of "illusory" and "reflection" supposed to be and say except that it is "illusory" versus what is real?
Response: The ego takes thoughts to be real entities in life. The witness understands thoughts as sound and illusory. The real is not versus the illusory. The illusory is the reflection of the real.
Andreas: Marcus says it as if it was the final conclusion of everything? On what assumption or premise is realizing this the end?
Response: Understanding as knowledge is based on conclusions and assumptions. Understanding as wisdom is free of conclusions and assumptions.
Andreas: Why does everything stop there?
Response: Life does not stop, for life is begin-less and end-less. The dream stops to be believed as real and begins to be enjoyed as illusory.
Andreas: Marcus understand all too well that "illusion" does not stop when we stop taking it for "real"? It is an ongoing process, and it is integral and cosmic, mysterious it may be.
Response: After years of studies in mystery-schools man's conditioned mind still prevents an understanding as wisdom. In a reflection there is no real integration for separation is illusory.
Marcus: After years of studies in mystery-schools man's conditioned mind still prevents an understanding as wisdom. In a reflection there is no real integration for separation is illusory.
Response: As if Marcus knew or understood anything about the Mystery Teachings, and for that matter of - wisdom?
The claim to wisdom by Marcus is mired in the concept of "illusion", and - "illusory it may be". This is a indication that the mystery has not been understood at all.
Since the point of wisdom realizes the actual work of the Academy of Absolute Understanding, it exposes this indication of absolute ignorance of the cultural advaita bias of so called "illusion".
In this form advaita is outdated even if we "support" it with "scientific" reasoning. However, Marcus is free to think and create his understanding of "illusion" as part of the mystery.
The one engages as time. The concept of "illusion" is just used as a human excuse and escape, in the opening of self-awareness, from the innate account-ability of this engagement of the one.
Andreas: As if Marcus knew or understood anything about the Mystery Teachings, and for that matter of - wisdom?
Response: "Mystery Teachings" are illusory, for it is the mind which gets teached, in an illusory manner. Knowledge prevents wisdom, if not understood to be illusory. Knowledge reveals wisdom, if understood to be illusory.
Andreas: The claim to wisdom by Marcus is mired in the concept of "illusion", and - "illusory it may be". This is a indication that the mystery has not been understood at all.
Response: Andreas, wisdom or the mystery could never be understood by the mind! It reveals itself through a clear understanding that the mind is illusory and not real.
Andreas: Since the point of wisdom realizes the actual work of the Academy of Absolute Understanding,...
Response: Andreas only listens to his own mind and not to the Academy of Absolute Understanding. AAU offers the understanding that all known is illusory and man is not the thinker, speaker or doer.
Andreas: ...it exposes this indication of absolute ignorance of the cultural advaita bias of so called "illusion".
Response: Ignorance is knowledge too. Understanding as wisdom is independent of knowledge, knowing and ignorance.
Andreas: In this form advaita is outdated even if we "support" it with "scientific" reasoning.
Response: Wisdom is not a "form of advaita", which would be just knowledge. Wisdom is timeless and not outdated. Only knowledge could be outdated!
Andreas: However, Marcus is free to think and create his understanding of "illusion" as part of the mystery.
Response: If man were free to think, he would never have unhappy thoughts. Be honest: Do you always have happy thoughts in your daily life: with your wife, your children, at work, Andreas?
Andreas: The one engages as time. The concept of "illusion" is just used as a human excuse and escape, in the opening of self-awareness, from the innate account-ability of this engagement of the one.
Response: If you really were account-able, would you allow something to happen, which you would have to "un-think" later as you call it, Andreas?
After years of studies in mystery-schools man's conditioned mind still prevents an understanding as wisdom!!!
Marcus: Where could be the space in first place? Light appears as space to the mind.
Response: Marcus does not assume "space" in this statement, but he does assume "light", "appearance" and "mind". Such is the trickery of reasoning.
A little bit of thinking instead will make clear that 'mind' does not come out of nowhere, but is light too, and the idea that something can "appear" to something else is light too.
Thus, Light "appears" as mind - space and time. Thinking is the key. However the word and concept of "appearance" needs to be absolutely clarified in this context, instead of just assuming that appearance is "illusion".
Andreas: Thus, Light "appears" as mind - space and time. Thinking is the key. However the word and concept of "appearance" needs to be absolutely clarified in this context, instead of just assuming that appearance is "illusion".
Response: Because mind is an illusory reflection/appearance of light, "you" cannot think! Is it clear now?
Andreas: I ...
Response: Who are you? “I“ is just sound.
Andreas: ... am opening ...
Response: What is an action? An action is an auditary and optical illusion of light and sound.
Andreas: ... a new ...
Response: Does life repeat itself so that something could be old or new?
Andreas: Philo-sophia means that the mind loves...
Response: What is love? Could the mind love?
Andreas: ...wisdom...
Response: How could wisdom ever be an object, an object of love for example?
Andreas: Both is not thinking yet, it is the sacrifice of the mind.
Response: What could a sacrifice of the mind be? Does the mind sacrifice itself? Mind is sound and not a doer.
Andreas: A-letheia means un-concealment. That is Logos. It is only logos that can conceal and un-conceal what is. There is no Absolute Understanding outside of logos. Thought is not thinking, but something thinking has created. The ONE engages as time.
Response: What is called “thinking“ here is the vague feeling of being the doer, nothing else. This is the intellegence of life to maintain the illusory world as real to the ego.
Andreas: That is the most banal and flat understanding of time being propagated as wisdom in New Age bookstores: 'past-present-future'. That is why even a physicist can dismiss it. It is convenient for the bias of "illusion" to limit the understanding of time to the concrete mind of reification.
Response: What else could time be, if not past, present and future, duration, beginnings and ends - which is all illusory and not real as Albert Einstein also has understood and Einstein was not a Hindu (nor is Dr. Shankar or Marcus)!
Andreas: Neither is Illusion separate from Reality, or sound separate from light...
Response: So far so good!
Andreas: ... we still have not faced the real possibility of 'reflection' at all. We just assume it under the bias of "illusion". What is 'reflection'? Sound and Light could "co-exist" without reflection? Why 'reflection' in all of this?
Response: Who is “we“? “We“ is sound. Sound is light at a lesser speed. Life is pure light reflecting itself as reflected, illusory light which also appears as sound, sometimes appearing as words with meanings to the mind.
Andreas: Wisdompoint makes a difference...
Response: All differences are illusory, for they are sound and not a real entity in life!
Andreas: ...between discursive 'questions and answers' of the mind of reification, and the imperative 'Question'(opening) of Logos - which is an opening to light, intelligence, being.
Response: Light, intelligence, being is all there is. Opening is illusory. Understand the mind (intellect, logos) as illusory - if it happens - and light (intelligence, understanding) reveals itself spontaneously, uncontrollably and unpredictably.
www.acadun.com
www.evolutionofmind.org
Marcus Stegmaier