What Is, Is

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Beingist

WHAT IS, IS.

What are you talking about? What is isn't. That's perfectly obvious.

I bet there's an Alice in Wonderland quote about this..

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You didn't answer my question about what actually is. If you're not okay with it, does that mean it still IS, or it's being misperceived?

Sorry, I missed the question (too much on my plate, presently). I see now that you asked--

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Seems like 'what is, is' is a lot like saying 'black is black' in that it doesn't actually say anything. The only distinction may be that 'black' at least defines what it is, whereas 'what is' doesn't.

So, what is? Is 'what is' what you perceive it to be, or could it be something else? Is the idea to accept what actually is, or to accept what I perceive?

Whatever has happened in our conversations, Arc, know this--I very much appreciate how you can really cut to the chase.

What is, (for lack of a better way of describing it), is what is. This can be what we perceive (i.e., appearances), or what is, I suppose one could say, behind the appearances (i.e., cause). I guess you could say it's simply everything. All. I mean, you name it, and, well, that's what "is"--events or existence; Truth or Falsehood; thoughts or emotions, whatever.

An example: let's say a plane crashes, and kills 200 people. Now, you could say it's a "bad" thing, for many reasons, or you could even say it was a good thing, since, perhaps, it resulted in some regulation that prevented it from happening again. But, whatever you say or think about it, it doesn't remove from the fact that a plane crashed, killing 200 people. The plane crash, with all it's causes and consequences and meanings, is What Is, in this case. Of course, it's but one event in an infinite universe of events, and it may have affected a number of people (more than 200, I would expect, if you include the friends and family of those who died) in an entire universe of creatures. But it's only an example of What Is.

For me, What Is, is Reality (as opposed to the "actuality" of the perceived plane crash, which is perceived subjectively). You could call it "Isness" or (as one friend called it) "Beingness". It's what is so about .. well, everything. It's along the lines of Reject's "Objectivity", I think.

But, then, that's my understanding. You might understand it as something different, I don't know, and I'm not going to argue with how you understand it, because I can accept What Is, and in some cases, What Is is understood by different peeps differently.

Beyond that, I really can't explain it, anymore than LoAers can explain how the LoA works. There are a lot of things that simply can't be described, as you know, I'm sure.

What does it mean to you?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by VinceG

You're catching glimpses of nondualism, which is full of these sorts of self-affirming statements and circular reasonings. Linear thought runs in one direction, it aims to get somewhere. Non-linear thought simply describes, observes. It has no subject nor object, neither beginning nor end.

The more you deal with paradoxical, self-reifying logic without having your logical brain spit it out as meaningless, the more consciousness, which is one of the purest things that exists in the universe, will become tangible and concrete. You'll see how it's really the only thing that actually exists.

You will get to a point where all of your normal, linear thoughts, which have a start and an endpoint, will end in these rapidly expansive circular truths. The more you let this process work, the more your regular, monkey mind will become still, not having to dictate and define existence anymore.

This is one of the entry points to enlightenment.

Precisely! I can really resonate with this one, Vince. Thanks.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

What are you talking about? What is isn't. That's perfectly obvious.

I bet there's an Alice in Wonderland quote about this..

I'll give you a rep point, if you can find it, Cris!

[James81]

I'm not so much interested in deconstructing your belief (you know as well as I do that YOU are the only one that can prove that wrong to yourself and that everybody else's attempts at making it wrong will fall flat unless you give someone permission to make you wrong about it).

I'm more interested in why you are trying to rid yourself of all (or most) beliefs in the first place.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Sorry, I missed the question (too much on my plate, presently). I see now that you asked--
Whatever has happened in our conversations, Arc, know this--I very much appreciate how you can really cut to the chase.

What is, (for lack of a better way of describing it), is what is. This can be what we perceive (i.e., appearances), or what is, I suppose one could say, behind the appearances (i.e., cause). I guess you could say it's simply everything. All. I mean, you name it, and, well, that's what "is"--events or existence; Truth or Falsehood; thoughts or emotions, whatever.

An example: let's say a plane crashes, and kills 200 people. Now, you could say it's a "bad" thing, for many reasons, or you could even say it was a good thing, since, perhaps, it resulted in some regulation that prevented it from happening again. But, whatever you say or think about it, it doesn't remove from the fact that a plane crashed, killing 200 people. The plane crash, with all it's causes and consequences and meanings, is What Is, in this case. Of course, it's but one event in an infinite universe of events, and it may have affected a number of people (more than 200, I would expect, if you include the friends and family of those who died) in an entire universe of creatures. But it's only an example of What Is.

For me, What Is, is Reality (as opposed to the "actuality" of the perceived plane crash, which is perceived subjectively). You could call it "Isness" or (as one friend called it) "Beingness". It's what is so about .. well, everything. It's along the lines of Reject's "Objectivity", I think.

But, then, that's my understanding. You might understand it as something different, I don't know, and I'm not going to argue with how you understand it, because I can accept What Is, and in some cases, What Is is understood by different peeps differently.

Beyond that, I really can't explain it, anymore than LoAers can explain how the LoA works. There are a lot of things that simply can't be described, as you know, I'm sure.

What does it mean to you?

So what You're trying to say is that 'what is' is the objective facts?

It doesn't mean anything to me, as I've been trying to say. Perhaps it's a reminder about acceptance, but beyond that, just a statement of the obvious.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

So what You're trying to say is that 'what is' is the objective facts?

Not entirely objective facts, but also what is behind the facts. The facts, the figures, the objective, the subjective, whatever. The Truth. The Cause. The Beginning, the End. Everything conceivable.

In then end, What Is is whatever you understand it to be.

It doesn't mean anything to me, as I've been trying to say. Perhaps it's a reminder about acceptance, but beyond that, just a statement of the obvious.

Then that's what it is to you.

Knowing you as I do from your posts, I frankly wouldn't expect you to see it as anything but a statement of the obvious. And that's cool. You already have a good grasp of this kind of thing, anyway, imo.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Beingist

In then end, What Is is whatever you understand it to be.

...or experience it as being, which may have nothing at all to do with understanding.

[ChrisGinsburg]

'What Is, Is' is extremely vague and open for a full range of interpretation which is almost always interpreted in a way that best serves the person and not actually see 'what is'. While in a certain context and interpretation the statement could be said to be true, it doesn't really serve any purpose in the process of awakening itself or otherwise. I'd say it rather sets up a recipe for dissonance when the person is still perceiving problems while trying desperately to accept an unprovable belief of 'What Is, Is' and simultaneously believe that all belief systems are errant and somehow in opposition to 'What Is, Is'.

'What Is, Is' may give some temporary relief from a process of mind that has been desperately trying to figure things out but it is a temporary stop gap to honestly looking and seeing if one is still searching for something that will make them complete, whole or free of suffering. There inevitably ends up being no substitute to holding ones own projections that color, alter and distort what 'already Is' to the light and seeing them for what they are. This process either culminates with seeing the belief of a separate volitional person and belief systems themselves for what they are or it goes on endlessly giving varying levels of relief.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Not entirely objective facts, but also what is behind the facts. The facts, the figures, the objective, the subjective, whatever. The Truth. The Cause. The Beginning, the End. Everything conceivable.

In then end, What Is is whatever you understand it to be.

Okay, "whatever you understand it to be" is actually subjective experience only, so is it that, or is it "everything conceivable"?.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by James81

I'm not so much interested in deconstructing your belief (you know as well as I do that YOU are the only one that can prove that wrong to yourself and that everybody else's attempts at making it wrong will fall flat unless you give someone permission to make you wrong about it).

Yeah, that's an interesting observation. Never thought of that, but good to know.

I'm more interested in why you are trying to rid yourself of all (or most) beliefs in the first place.

I don't suppose I'm trying to rid myself of beliefs, per se, but rather belief systems. Otherwise, as is most often the case around here, we'd probably need to agree on the definition of the term, "belief".

My definition of "belief" closely resembles a religious definition, which is probably why you're asking the question.

Otherwise, I guess the short answer is that I don't want to believe anything. I'd rather know everything. I can know that I am. I can know What Is. And that's really all I can know.

That said, what's the benefit of believing anything?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Okay, "whatever you understand it to be" is actually subjective experience only, so is it that, or is it "everything conceivable"?.

How about "subjectively conceivable?"



Sorry, Arc, but as I say, What Is is, is whatever it is to you. If it's nothing to you, then it's nothing.

[RonSouther]

It is what it is??

[Angela]

Depends on what "is" is.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Angela

...or experience it as being, which may have nothing at all to do with understanding.

Yeah, that'll work, too.

In either case, it's subjective.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

How about "subjectively conceivable?"



Sorry, Arc, but as I say, What Is is, is whatever it is to you. If it's nothing to you, then it's nothing.

Okay, so what I'm hearing is that 'what is' is subjective (whatever it is to you). And so the statement is that whatever it is to you.....is.
You find that meaningful in some way?

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Sorry, Arc, but as I say, What Is is, is whatever it is to you. If it's nothing to you, then it's nothing.

Hehe, and you say we're being cryptic!

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

'What Is, Is' is extremely vague and open for a full range of interpretation which is almost always interpreted in a way that best serves the person and not actually see 'what is'. While in a certain context and interpretation the statement could be said to be true, it doesn't really serve any purpose in the process of awakening itself or otherwise. I'd say it rather sets up a recipe for dissonance when the person is still perceiving problems while trying desperately to accept an unprovable belief of 'What Is, Is' and simultaneously believe that all belief systems are errant and somehow in opposition to 'What Is, Is'.

'What Is, Is' may give some temporary relief from a process of mind that has been desperately trying to figure things out but it is a temporary stop gap to honestly looking and seeing if one is still searching for something that will make them complete, whole or free of suffering. There inevitably ends up being no substitute to holding ones own projections that color, alter and distort what 'already Is' to the light and seeing them for what they are. This process either culminates with seeing the belief of a separate volitional person and belief systems themselves for what they are or it goes on endlessly giving varying levels of relief.

Whoa! Is this a rant? Did this push some kind of button, or something, CG?

Otherwise, I'm not, like, prescribing this to anyone, CG. It's just a point of view.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Okay, so what I'm hearing is that 'what is' is subjective (whatever it is to you). And so the statement is that whatever it is to you.....is.
You find that meaningful in some way?

Do you? That's kinda the point.

Look, it's well within your right to see it as horsepockey. I'm not going to try to convince anyone of anything. You either see what is as What Is, or you don't. In either case, it's cool. It's not like you're going to hell, or anything.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by RonSouther

It is what it is??

Originally Posted by Angela

Depends on what "is" is.

Actually, yeah. To both.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You find that meaningful in some way?

I find it meaningful in the sense that Om is meaningful.

[Angela]

Last week we had a client named Hu and when LOL-man asked me who was the scheduled as the first call that day, I had the pleasure of saying, "Hu's on first," and the pleasure of hearing him ask me "That's what I just asked you!"

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Whoa! Is this a rant? Did this push some kind of button, or something, CG?

Otherwise, I'm not, like, prescribing this to anyone, CG. It's just a point of view.

I'm merely responding to your OP and giving you my point of view. If you're seeing some sort of frustration behind the words it wasn't from me.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Hehe, and you say we're being cryptic!

It must be international cryptic day. Spongebob is doing the same thing in his thread.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Whoa! Is this a rant? Did this push some kind of button, or something, CG?

Otherwise, I'm not, like, prescribing this to anyone, CG. It's just a point of view.

Did you perceive button pushing in your subjective "what is"?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Do you? That's kinda the point.

Look, it's well within your right to see it as horsepockey. I'm not going to try to convince anyone of anything. You either see what is as What Is, or you don't. In either case, it's cool. It's not like you're going to hell, or anything.

I'm just asking how you can possibly find value in concluding that how you see it is how you see it. I'm trying to figure out what that can mean for you. I'm open to any ideas you might have on that.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Angela

I find it meaningful in the sense that Om is meaningful.

Okay, how is Om meaningful?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Hehe, and you say we're being cryptic!

Well, to be fair, and as I'm sure you'd agree, there are things ... experiences, undertandings, concepts, whatever you want to call them, that rather defy easy description. It's like trying to describe Who You are--not your physical person, or your history, but Who You are. (Reminds me of a scene from the movie, Anger Management )

Otherwise, I accept that anyone who can't or doesn't grasp abstract concepts, or is otherwise limited solely to discussing things in material terms isn't likely to grasp anything like this.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Angela

Last week we had a client named Hu and when LOL-man asked me who was the scheduled as the first call that day, I had the pleasure of saying, "Hu's on first," and the pleasure of hearing him ask me "That's what I just asked you!"

LOL Good one.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

I'm merely responding to your OP and giving you my point of view. If you're seeing some sort of frustration behind the words it wasn't from me.

Hmm. Okay.