What Is, Is
 

Okay. Some of us, including me, have been hijacking enough of others' threads to compel me to start my own, for the purposes of it being hijacked.

:d

In another thread, a few have been prodding me to admit that I have "beliefs". It has been, for some time, my endeavor to rid myself of my own "beliefs", which is to say, I see all belief systems as errant, in that they only serve the ego, in the sense that the ego uses it to say "'this' or 'that' is unquestionably 'true', and so I 'believe' it, and since the belief systems of others aren't the same as mine, they are unquestionably false."

To be clear, this is not to say that I no longer harbor any 'beliefs' whatsoever, since the ego can be quite subtle, but as I understand it, ridding oneself of beliefs is a process, and suffice it to say that I thankfully have enough humility to admit that I'm "in the process" of ridding myself of beliefs.

However, if in my self-inquiry, I ask myself "what do I believe, if anything," I currently must answer myself that I do believe, (I suppose one could say), that What Is, is, and that anything beyond that, that if I harbor any "belief" about What Is, is errant, as my ego makes the attempt to form a belief.

And so I put it to anyone and everyone to either challenge this "belief" (or idea, or concept, or whatever you want to call it), or accept it:

WHAT IS, IS.

I'm not gonna argue with ya pal.....all I would do is to drop one of those 'is's'.... that'd do me.....I'm too much of a spiritual coward to go out on the 'is' limb:)

What about your view that all belief systems are errant, in that they only serve the ego? Is that true?

LOL :d

Can't say I blame you. I'm starting to get a headache from all this cogitation, myself. :(

Not exactly sure what you mean by "is that true?"

To be perfectly honest, that view can change, as my ... understanding has changed in the past. I used to see things much, much differently (ex-converted Roman Catholic, here). So, if you're asking if I think it's absolutely and unquestionably true that all belief systems are errant, I'd have to say no, because, well, that would be a belief.

I suppose it would be more precise to say that through practical application and self-observation, as well as through observation of others and their belief systems, it is errant for me to adopt a belief system. I'm infinitely happier when I just accept What Is.

Ok. By that standard -- if a thought must be absolutely and unquestionably true -- then I don't have any beliefs left to get rid of, not even "what is, is."

I had a fun time a few years ago here on these forums seeking out a belief that is the absolute truth. Couldn't find any!

But I've found lots of operating beliefs -- that is, beliefs that I experience as supporting me and working really well, even though they're not absolutely or unquestionably true. I don't feel any need or desire to rid myself of those.

Be...... we are all like kids in the way we pull things apart to understand em... stick the doll's head on the leg joint etc. I have witnessed the falling away of beliefs as a kinda byproduct of God forbid... 'self realization'.
Has this been a more conscious process for you?

Cool. I intend to get to the point (if I'm not there, yet) where even "what is, is" is an operative thing.

But, then, it sounds as though you've simply accepted What Is. Is that the case?

Otherwise, I find the term, "operative" now in play--"operative" beliefs vs. "absolute" beliefs, and since "what is, is" is operative and not absolute for me, then am I not there, also?

Hard to say, really. I've always been a seeker, and my experience with "self-realization" seems to show me that there's really nothing to seek. I simply am. What is, is. Nothing I can do about it, anyway, so I might as well accept it. If that can be called a "conscious process," then so be it. If not, I'm just as content.

Yeah, maybe. (I wish there was an emoticon that sang the little "maybe" song, so that the inflection goes up at the end, you know? Because without it, the word "maybe" just lies there flat and sounds like "yeah, right, maybe. maybe NOT, buddy." :p I mean it the maybe-song way.) (An emoticon would have taken less time to type than that just did.)

I think a good test is: how would you feel if it suddenly didn't work anymore? And a more real-world test is: how do you feel when someone makes you wrong about it?

So, anything you argue about (where there's stress and struggle in the argument, rather than fun and possibility) is a great place to look, I think. What am I making someone wrong about? What am I feeling bad because they're making me wrong about? Or any area of life where you're experiencing struggle rather than possibility -- arguments are just great because they make attachment to belief vivid and easy to see, like diamonds on black velvet.

I hear ya... don't mind me I just gets curious as to how folks go about this stuff... I try and keep flexible ..... or at least I don't seem to have much choice of late as I have been living groundless for quite a while now .... you also seem to hold this stuff fairly 'loosly' which I like a lot....

.............

What is, most definitely is not. :D

Kidding. How could what is, not be? Your "belief" seems to be the end of all beliefs.

LOL. :d
Well, no one has been able to "make me wrong" about "What is, is". Most that could ever happen, I imagine, is that someone tries to prove me wrong, which would mean they would have to say, "What is, isn't", or, "What isn't, is," both of which are simply absurd. I suppose that makes it an Absolute, and if that's the case, I'm okay with that, too. :d
Indeed, I do this already, which is why I relate very well with the Subjective Reality Consciousness thing (or, rather, what I understand of it).

Thanks, Ang. :)

Yes, and this is precisely the way look at it. Seems to be the case in my experience, anyway.

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?

Well, it's a good way to never be wrong, I'll give it that much.

Yeah, I was talking more about other beliefs, because this one is not something people tend to argue about. But this is PDSP! Someone will eventually get around to making you wrong about it, somehow or other! :D

"What is, is," though, I think is not a belief so much as description of a way of standing: just being present to what is being -- just Being. (I think that's the way you use it, too, isn't it?)

:d

Actually, when it first dawned on me, I tried with every ounce of energy I had to disprove it, though the conclusion was in a slightly different form. That was really a purging of a lot of formerly and strongly held religious beliefs, and it actually took a number of years to let those go. It was hell, I tell ya.

But I will say, that my mind is open enough to accept anything that might shatter it, which tells me that I don't hold it for the purposes of never being wrong.

I was just in the shower thinking about how would I know "what is, is" wasn't? How would I know if it weren't true? (This was one trancey shower, let me tell you.) What if someone demonstrated to me that it was not a valid concept? What if that person were me -- what if became aware suddenly that "what is, is" didn't work? Would I feel threatened? Curious? Adrift? It was a great "get to nothing" question for me. I'm very clean now.

:)

"Trancey shower"... LOL :d Yeah, kinda missed your word thingy there, Ang.

Otherwise, I think I get the "get to nothing" thing. And yes, it does indeed wash away the dirt, don't it?

Again, it's like saying black is black. Nobody is gonna prove you wrong cause it's a self confirming statement. It doesn't mean anything.

'What is' might be very dirty. It could be full of delusions, and it would still be 'is'.

What's PDSP?

As far as someone "making me wrong," that's rather why I started the thread (that, and I figured I'd create another thread to hijack :d)

Indeed, I do, and why I changed the username--I finally found a username that fit. ;) (I've never been a solipsist, but friends of mine have often called me that, and it was all I had when I originally signed up for this place).

Alan Watts called Zen a "way of liberation," and frankly, that's how I see my own ... adopted philosophy of "What is, is"--a way of liberation. I also see other "ways of liberation" around here: IM/LoA can be a way; Subject Reality Consciousness can be a way; Advaitism, etc., and I've snatched some gold nuggets from just about every philosophy and even some religions (like the Enzo in my avatar, graciously modified by James). There's a lot of threads of truth out there, and those threads seem to lead to the same place. Hence, I'm willing to listen to just about anything, if only to find the thread that will likely and ultimately lead the ____ist to Peace, Joy, and Love.

Now, Ang, if I might ask you a question--you mentioned that you still hold some "operative" beliefs that work for you, and I'm wondering how that's possible, and, basically, how that works. I ask this, because, it seems that I might also harbor some "operative" beliefs, and now that I'm ... more okay with stuff, I'm wondering how and why those would be applied. What purpose do those operative beliefs serve?

:confused:

Yes, that's true, which is why my friends' eyes roll whenever I say it. But it's really more an ultimate conclusion, without preceding premises. Without the premises, as you say, it means nothing.

This conclusion, if you will, is the end result of a syllogism:

Truth is that which is so.
That which is not Truth, is not so.
Therefore, Truth is all there is.

I brought this to the attention of a former co-worker, and he actually summed it up, saying, "What is, is." Ever since then, I've been using that.

I challenge anyone to disprove the syllogism, even now. But no matter what you take from it, what I get from it, after pondering as long as I did, the ultimate conclusion is that, whatever happens, if you're not okay with it, you create your own problem. So, whatever else you do, you may as well become okay with whatever happens, or What Is.

Personal Development for Smart People forums!

Well, a very basic one would be my beliefs that protect me and keep me alive and well -- for instance, if I were to fall off a very tall building, I believe it's likely that I'd croak. It's not absolutely and unquestionably true that I would croak if I fell off a very tall building, but it's a belief that has me taking certain steps to prevent myself from falling, when I'm very high up.

Other operating beliefs are things like the presuppositions I use -- like the one you mentioned earlier, that everyone's doing the best they can with the resources they have available. That's not absolutely and unquestionably true, but it's a belief that, when I use it, it supports me in having access to things I like to have access to, like forgiveness and flexibility in conversation. Like that.

And of course, there are VERY basic beliefs, like the belief that there is food in my refrigerator and I will be able to walk over and prepare some of it for dinner, easily and effortlessly. That I have a bed to sleep in tonight. That the sun will come up tomorrow morning.

And pretty much everything I ever say in the forums is an operating belief -- something I've noticed works well and I'd like to share it with others, if they'd like to access it.

The purpose of these operating beliefs is to support what's important to me.

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?

Oh, right. Duh. :o
Okay, cool. I'll no doubt be chewing on this in days to come.

Otherwise, FYI, the "everyone's doing the best they can..." thing is something that I fall back on regularly. Since it was something of yours I really resonated with some time ago, I have you to thank for that.

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.

You're welcome -- I like that one a lot, too. :)