What Is, Is

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Beingist

This is a good question, actually, and I've given thought to starting a thread along these very lines.

Some mention has been made by some folks around here, about what Angela calls "operative beliefs"--to inri, I think they're called "preferences". I'd like to explore those. I've got a hunch that something along those lines is what follows acceptance.

Otherwise, I sincerely don't know.

Can you, would you care to define Angela's 'operative beliefs'/'preferences for me??

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

Can you, would you care to define Angela's 'operative beliefs'/'preferences for me??

Well, I'd rather let them explain it, if they can/will, but I'll fill you in on my perspective of it.

Acceptance, though necessary, means the end of beliefs as absolutes, but, yet, although we may accept What Is as already perfect, we may still be able to apply beliefs, per se, to our daily lives (inri calls these 'preferences,' I think). An example, as Angela and I were discussing earlier, is the belief that "everyone is doing the best they can with the resources available to them." This is not an absolute belief, but can still suffice as an operative belief, (these are my terms, btw) yet still within the bounds of having accepted What Is.

Otherwise, I'm still trying to understand this, and may start a new thread on it.

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Beingist

If they want. If they don't want to conceive of anything, that's fine, too.

When you conceive of "persons", is that not forcing "what is" into a filter of your own creation? Are you then seeing "what is" anymore, or your idea of what is, as "persons" conceiving of "things"?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

When you conceive of "persons", is that not forcing "what is" into a filter of your own creation? Are you then seeing "what is" anymore, or your idea of what is, as "persons" conceiving of "things"?

'What is' is basically your own creation, anyway. Or, rather, your own perception of what you understand is.

That's not to say that 'what is' isn't an objective thing. If it's objective to you, then it's objective. I know that such is really subjective, but, well, there you have it.

The ultimate point is that you accept 'what is', whatever you conceive 'what is' to be.

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Beingist

'What is' is basically your own creation, anyway. Or, rather, your own perception of what you understand is.

That's not to say that 'what is' isn't an objective thing. If it's objective to you, then it's objective. I know that such is really subjective, but, well, there you have it.

The ultimate point is that you accept 'what is', whatever you conceive 'what is' to be.

How can what is be your creation? Is what is prior to you, or are you prior to what is?

If it is your creation, why do you need to accept it? Why cannot you just change what you are creating?

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Not to say that I can't be cryptic, but this is an example of yours and Arc's cryptology.

I haven't the foggiest idea what this even means. "Starting at wall good!" Is there missing punctuation somewhere? Where's the indefinite article? Is this caveman-speak? Are you saying this with a Russian accent (Russian uses no articles)?

I meant staring, not starting. Somehow every typo I make becomes an issue lol. There wasn't any profound meaning behind the comment, heh. It was actually a joke about how what we're saying is usually perceived as saying the mind is the enemy and thinking is a problem.

edit:haha I wrote starting again. I'm still waiting for this cold to go away.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Thanks for this, inri. This actually clarifies things (and also addresses what Arcanum and CG have been discussing between them).

See, I can't relate to what they've been discussing, because I'm in the way of being mode (as would be implied by the username

Something else I might point out is that I'm merely having a discussion about the subject matter. Everything I'm saying isn't about anyone in particular or direct advice to you. There's an interest in discussing it and if someone finds value from the words that flow, that's fantastic.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Apologies. You asked, "Do YOU understand you?" I took that literally.

Oh, no, there was a misunderstanding. I Added the second part as a clarification of the first part:

(Do you understand what 'what is, is' means?)

You said that of course you understand it, but it seemed to me there was a lot of confusion, and the definition contradicted and morphed and expanded as we went along.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Okay, I have a question for you here, Arc--
What are "illusions," Arc, but that which one thinks is, beyond what is?

How does one rid themselves of "illusions", without accepting what is (i.e., what is real)?

I can't answer that because I never figured out what 'what is' is to you, and I wouldn't begin to guess what 'real' is to you.

What is there to you other than illusion?

Illusions are something appearing to be other than it actually is. On one level, a rope appearing to be a snake is an illusion, but revealing the illusion doesn't make the rope disappear. In the largest context, we could say everything is an appearance only, but knowing that doesn't stop appearances from happening. Life goes on without illusions, in case that was your implication. It's okay for a rope to actually appear as a rope, or a post to appear as an attempt to calmly discuss, rather than a button pushed rant.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Indeed. Which is why I cannot prescribe "what is, is" to anyone, nor try to convince them of anything, unless they're ready to accept, ready to grasp it.

(Actually, an old friend once suggested that one shouldn't even mention it, until it's "asked for," in a way, or otherwise revealing that one is ready to hear it).

Why would one need to be ready to hear a tautology, as you agreed to call it?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

How can what is be your creation? Is what is prior to you, or are you prior to what is?

If it is your creation, why do you need to accept it? Why cannot you just change what you are creating?

Allow me to rephrase ...

Or, rather, your own perception of what you understand is.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

edit:haha I wrote starting again. I'm still waiting for this cold to go away.

Fair enough.

Fluids and rest, fluids and rest, fluids and rest. Your cold will go away soon enough.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Something else I might point out is that I'm merely having a discussion about the subject matter. Everything I'm saying isn't about anyone in particular or direct advice to you. There's an interest in discussing it and if someone finds value from the words that flow, that's fantastic.

Thanks for this, CG. I'll try to keep this in mind (what's left of it LOL).

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Oh, no, there was a misunderstanding. I Added the second part as a clarification of the first part:

(Do you understand what 'what is, is' means?)

You said that of course you understand it, but it seemed to me there was a lot of confusion, and the definition contradicted and morphed and expanded as we went along.

Okay, I get it, now.

To be clear, from my perspective, it's really impossible to verbally define 'what is'. To me, it's just ... 'what is'. So, I took it upon myself to get humorous with various supposedly objective definitions, when it's really one's own subjective definition, anyway.

Sorry for the confusion.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by inri

I very much agree with Chris.

Holy cow! Must be cause you noticed how sweet I am.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

See, I can't relate to what they've been discussing, because I'm in the way of being mode (as would be implied by the username

What does this actually mean to you to be in the 'way of being mode'?

[Beingist]

Okay, I have a question for you here, Arc--
What are "illusions," Arc, but that which one thinks is, beyond what is?

How does one rid themselves of "illusions", without accepting what is (i.e., what is real)?

Originally Posted by Arcanum

I can't answer that because I never figured out what 'what is' is to you, and I wouldn't begin to guess what 'real' is to you.

No, Arc, I was asking you YOUR definition of "illusion". If you don't want to reveal too much of yourself, Arcane one, that's okay, but in fact, you added,

Illusions are something appearing to be other than it actually is.[...]

And there you have it--whatever YOU think of (or know, or perceive, or sense, or whatever) when YOU say what "it actually is", is 'what is.'

(That's actually harder to write than it looks )

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Why would one need to be ready to hear a tautology, as you agreed to call it?

Heh, it reminds me of needing to be ready to open a fortune cookie. 'What Is, Is! Now eat more Chinese food!'

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Okay, I get it, now.

To be clear, from my perspective, it's really impossible to verbally define 'what is'. To me, it's just ... 'what is'. So, I took it upon myself to get humorous with various supposedly objective definitions, when it's really one's own subjective definition, anyway.

Sorry for the confusion.

Seems like it would only get impossible to define if what we're talking about is Beingness itself, rather than what appears. As such, there really isn't anything to accept.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Why would one need to be ready to hear a tautology, as you agreed to call it?

It's not that anyone needs to be ready to "hear a tautology", but rather that one needs to be ready to accept 'what is'.

I, myself, would never have been able to accept 'what is', unless I was ready for it. And even then, I only realized the need for acceptance after pondering the syllogism for a couple of weeks (the syllogism is what led to the tautology). Hence, the realization for the need to accept can take any number of forms or circumstances. Neither the syllogism nor the tautology is likely to be understood by everyone.

[inri]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Holy cow! Must be cause you noticed how sweet I am.

hehe...well.... yeah, of course THAT.... and the fact that we're likely resonating in harmony due to us both being snotty mucous machines at present. (yes, not an hour after commenting to you about your cold, I started stuffing up!)

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

What does this actually mean to you to be in the 'way of being mode'?

Wow. This is a question that's p'rt near impossible to answer, as it's rather like trying to explain the color blue to a person blind since birth (I'm not suggesting anything with that, btw).

Nisargadatta Maharaj talked a lot about staying focused, as much as possible on the "sense I am". I got that, and basically, as long as I do that very thing, more of Who I am (as opposed to what I think myself to be) emerges. Ramana Maharshi stressed asking yourself perpetually, "who am I?" It boils down the same thing--Being, just being Who You are (again, as opposed to what you think yourself to be).

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

No, Arc, I was asking you YOUR definition of "illusion". If you don't want to reveal too much of yourself, Arcane one, that's okay,

You asked me about illusion in relation to 'what is' and 'real', and I told you I couldn't answer because I don't understand what you mean by those words. The idea that I don't want to reveal too much of myself was your giraffe spotting that occurred while you were being and accepting 'what is'.

but in fact, you added, And there you have it--whatever YOU think of (or know, or perceive, or sense, or whatever) when YOU say what "it actually is", is 'what is.'

(That's actually harder to write than it looks )

I don't understand why that would be hard to say in words at all. Nor do I see why anyone would resist hearing it. Nor do I see why it would be hard to grasp. Nor do I understand what significance it could possibly have.

I do understand the value of actually accepting what seems to happen, including your misperceptions, but I don't see you actually doing that, nor do I believe it's even possible.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Heh, it reminds me of needing to be ready to open a fortune cookie. 'What Is, Is! Now eat more Chinese food!'

Rolling On the Floor Laughing

I mentioned "what is, is" while playing poker with some friends of mine, and one of them said, "sounds like a fortune cookie".

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Heh, it reminds me of needing to be ready to open a fortune cookie. 'What Is, Is! Now eat more Chinese food!'

Marie and I were joking about this thread yesterday. We run a couple of small businesses, and a customer was telling us she didn't receive her order. I told to tell her "What is, is".

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by inri

hehe...well.... yeah, of course THAT.... and the fact that we're likely resonating in harmony due to us both being snotty mucous machines at present. (yes, not an hour after commenting to you about your cold, I started stuffing up!)

Seems the same happened to ChristsLight. Telling people about your cold is kind of like yawning around other people I guess.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You asked me about illusion in relation to 'what is' and 'real', and I told you I couldn't answer because I don't understand what you mean by those words. The idea that I don't want to reveal too much of myself was your giraffe spotting that occurred while you were being and accepting 'what is'.

I don't understand why that would be hard to say in words at all. Nor do I see why anyone would resist hearing it. Nor do I see why it would be hard to grasp. Nor do I understand what significance it could possibly have.

I do understand the value of actually accepting what seems to happen, including your misperceptions, but I don't see you actually doing that, nor do I believe it's even possible.

Well, Arcane one, if you can put aside your 'who said whats' and your 'giraffes' for minute, and answer a question, we might be able to have a productive dialogue.

Is everything (meaning, everything) illusion to you? Is there nothing (meaning nothing) real to you?

[ChristsLight]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Allow me to rephrase ...

If you see a rope as a snake, is "what is" a snake or is it a rope?

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Wow. This is a question that's p'rt near impossible to answer, as it's rather like trying to explain the color blue to a person blind since birth (I'm not suggesting anything with that, btw).

Nisargadatta Maharaj talked a lot about staying focused, as much as possible on the "sense I am". I got that, and basically, as long as I do that very thing, more of Who I am (as opposed to what I think myself to be) emerges. Ramana Maharshi stressed asking yourself perpetually, "who am I?" It boils down the same thing--Being, just being Who You are (again, as opposed to what you think yourself to be).

Okay, why is it difficult for you to relate to what we're saying when you're in this mode?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Seems the same happened to ChristsLight. Telling people about your cold is kind of like yawning around other people I guess.

No colds, here

(But I did yawn, after I read that. Weird, huh?)