I agree with the first point. If the sky is green to you, then it is green. It can't be blue if you're seeing it as green, can it? This is why i consider dreams and OBEs to be realities. They are different realities to this reailty, but they are still real.
My thougths:
I disagree with the first point, for it discredits the value of objective truth.
Perception is the reality in which one lives, but it's a filtered reality... revealing not truth, but a complicated illusion that fluctuates constantly, evolving as the individual evolves.
On an abstract note, perception is like our individual map of reality... overloaded with errors and missing pieces, gradually restructuring itself to reflect more accuracy as we evolve. "The map is not the territory" -(Bill Harris)
I see 'truth' as the pure, objective 'actuality' -beyond subjection, beyond the comprehension of anyone who is not enlightened. On a lower level I see it simply as that which is objective.
One could perceive their hand as being a chocolate filled cookie, however biting into it would reveal the objective fact that it is instead blood, flesh and bone.
I really like the way you put that Sahlyn, and I agree, my hand didn't taste quite as good as it looked.[:P]
I see reality as a subjective concept, and truth as objective.
So when we percieve reality we are witnessing our own thoughts manifest. This is why some people can bend spoons with their mind, or why magic works, because thought manifests reality.
I believe that when we can understand our own capacity to create reality, we will see the ultimate truth behind it.
I also need to take into account group consciousness and the 100 monkey theory.
I'm still pondering on this philosophy, I hope it makes sense.
I guess to answer your question: 1. Perception = reality, but 2. there is an ultimate truth to be discovered.
I think that the world is what you think it is. It is not becouse the world will change acording to your thouths. Its becouse you will act acordingly to what you think. The input that you get threw you sences is only a part of your reality, your truth. If you see the sky as green and you accept that as being true it will be true to you and you will act acordingly. You will see a leaf and you will say "hey this green is a little darker then the sky"
And if you realize that the sky is blue no matter what color you think it is then you will see past threw what you got from you eyes.
So bought points are true depending on what you believe to be true.
I do not think that spoons bend becouse you think they are bent. This is not the MATRIX. The spoon exists and its solidity is real but you can bend it if you know how. But to know how you need to precive reality for what it realy is.
OBE and LD are real but only if your actions in the "real world" will be changed becouse of what you experiance there. If you act the same way as you did before OBE and LD will be just a "virtual reality" which you use like a game.
Just lookin around and came across this post that I started some time ago. My posts have never had much lasting power, but I had forgotten this one was even there, and it just sparked some interest. Any new comments on this topic?
Words are not good for defining truth. They're relative to many things.
Black could have all his original pieces in a chess game while white only has a king and a bishop, so black must be winning. But positions exist where that bishop could defeat the black king, mostly trapped by his own pieces.
Perception Vs Truth ?
Imagine we are all moths circling the same bright light, each moth has a unique view of that bright light. This individual view is each moth's perception. While each moth see's the same bright light, each may interpret it differently. But this doesn't make the Truth of the bright light LESS truthful because of the different perceptions and interpretations.
What makes us humans different to the Moths is that we attach ourselves to Belief-Systems, as a way to intepret the bright light we are all seeing. And therein lies the real problem !
This attachment to a set of beliefs will have fundamental effects on how we perceive.. as we do filter our experiences through our Beliefs. So not only are we creating our own realities through our beliefs, we are also manipulating Truth Perceptions through it. Hence all the different, and apparent, truths being put forward by all the different Belief systems.
This is the same as choosing to wear blinkers that reduce our ability to perceive the wider realities.
We generally accept the sky must be blue because we are told the scientific reason for it to be Blue. But what if Science has an obscured view of the bright light, and the sky really is Green ? Those who perceive the greeness of sky would then be seeing Truth as it is, while the other moths would be seeing Blue because that is the belief they have been Indoctrinated into accepting as Truth.
Until each Moth decides to rise up and look at the whole bright light, without any obscuring beliefs, things will always be separated into different versions of Reality and Truth.
Not only does this hint at what each needs to do in order to perceive clearly, it also allows us understanding of other moth's realities. Thereby making it okay to let them have their perceptions of Truth until they begin to seek a view of the whole bright light, at which point those moths who have made the journey to see the whole bright light can be truly helpfull to those who seek it.
Love Always. [:)]
Thanks for that, Tayesin. [:D]
Kerri
Who said the sky isn't green?
I have seen a green sky thick with storm. I have watched green ball lightning dance. I have seen the sky light green from lightning flashes at 2 AM.
Bad analogy you say? Or perhaps the right analogy?
"The Sky is Green". Sometimes, yes! To everyone all the time, no. So to with reality. Many people only see shadows. Why are you wrong if you can see more than shadow? Still holding to the analogy. How about this: Are you wrong because in your construct, you interpretation of something you percieve it differently than others?
But the moth may care less about seeing and knowing the whole flame. It may simple care about being in the presence of the flame and enjoying it. In that we may well learn something.
Number 1, truth is within perception.
Now what about if there only is one truth one faith that is true. This is not all together uncommon in nature or life in general. 2+2is only 4 it is never 6 9 or so on. There are many answers to every question, but not nessesarily all answers are right. This notion or this possibility is generally frowned on by most NewAgers and that would mean most folks here.....however just becourse most who post here does not agree is unimportant.....truth is not decided on democratically, right! Popular opinion is just that popular opinion. Now before you get all riled up and scream heresy (yes I do believe that many of you would call this heresy) consider this.
The belief that "there is no absolute truth", that "God is a mountain that can be scaled from many sides" and "we are all moths[;)]" etc the idea that Tay so eloquently put forth as....truth, is nothing more than a belief. It is put forth as TRUTH and by many accepted as truth but it is only Tays opinion and even though it is shared my lots of likeminded it is only based on.......FAITH. He /they believe this to be true so hence it is a belief not an absolute. Welcome one and all to the "Belief System Territories" they are being enlarged day by day. [:P]
It is my FAITH and I BELIEVE that there is a absolute TRUTH and that there are such a thing as falsehoods and false religions and people who believe in lies becourse they are more conveniant and apeal more, require less sacrefice and are easier to live.
Regards Mustardseed
Quote by Mustardeseed.
"The belief that "there is no absolute truth", that "God is a mountain that can be scaled from many sides" and "we are all moths" etc the idea that Tay so eloquently put forth as....truth, is nothing more than a belief. It is put forth as TRUTH and by many accepted as truth but it is only Tays opinion and even though it is shared my lots of likeminded it is only based on.......FAITH. He /they believe this to be true so hence it is a belief not an absolute. Welcome one and all to the "Belief System Territories" they are being enlarged day by day."
Hi Mustard, What I put forward was an Illustration.... a tool to help explain how we humans perceive differently. Nothing more and nothing less.
You may have noticed the importance I stressed about not attaching to Belief-Systems.... quoting me, "What makes us humans different to the Moths is that we attach ourselves to Belief-Systems, as a way to intepret the bright light we are all seeing. And therein lies the real problem !"
Because of this I fail to see your point as per what I said being a Belief. This next statement is my post in a nutshell, "...this doesn't make the Truth of the bright light LESS truthful because of the different perceptions and interpretations."
Perhaps Mustard, you mis-interpreted my words. Maybe the reaction to what you read is more important than mere words ?
I'm the first person to tell anyone to not adhere to conventionality, the old belief-systems, everyone else's belief choices etc, and go out to find the answers for themselves... which I have done my friend, so I write from the heart of Experience without Beliefs.[:P]
Love Always. [:)]
Tayesin said it better than I can I think. If I look at a tree, and a dog looks at the same tree, we'll see it differently but it's still the same tree. It has the same base energy or whatever you want to call it.
But, here we are using physical examples to explain something non-physical.. so it's hard to put into words. I also agree that beliefs alter and distort your perception. Clarity is needed to see things for what they truly are...
Also, if you believe that perception = truth.... try this example.
Let's say a man is in a mental hospital in a straight jacket, round room with rubber walls, etc... but, in his own mind, he is living a normal life with a wife and kids, and a job.
So what is real? Is he really in the mental hospital, or is his perception of reality the truth?
Seeker, I was going to use that very same example. I do not believe that the patients idea about the world he lives in qualifies as truth simply because he is living it. Some would say that as long as it's true to someone, even just one person, then it is true. I would disagree. I believe that perception can be wrong and if a man is living in a world that doesn't really exist then he is not living in truth, only in perception. "If a dog and a man see the same tree from a different angle they are still seeing the same tree". What if the man sees the tree and the dog sees a giant milk bone? Is it both a tree and a milkbone because it's seen as such? Not so. For if the dog takes a bite out of what he believed was a milkbone he will taste the bark and sap, not the milkbone. Therefor his perception was a lie.
I am interested to know what people think of this concept. Basically the ideas are these...
1. Perception equals truth. If you see the sky as green instead of blue, then "the sky is green" is a true statement because it is true TO YOU, even if not to others. Reality lies in what you yourself percieve. Everyone else has a different reality because they see it differently. But all perceptions are true, because they are at the least true to one person.
2. Perception is not truth. If you see the sky green, does that make the sky green? The sky remains blue, even if you see it as green. The green sky is not your reality, but your illusion. Reality is that the sky is blue, and there is no way out of it. There is only one truth concerning everything, and any other scenerio is your incorrect perception that needs adjusting to what is true.
Thoughts???
The "Truth" has (IMO) a funny way of shifting, depending if you view a situation from one side or the other... or from above or beneith... or from close in, or from far away :-) ....
And about the color of the sky ? ... Well, there actually IS no color :-) .... there are energy with different wavelengths, but colors? ... That is a perception :-) ...The same with Music, that is nothing more than Waves of air in different wavelengths :-) ...
Cheers from Denmark,
You see the truth for what it is when everything happens in your imediate space , whether or not that is actualy the hard evidence is questionable, but to you it looked the way it did , i guess everyone sees things differently in all senses , what i percieve might be different everytime to someone else, or maybe the same to a certain amount , but to each individual its their own way of dealing with it and acknoldeging it to be what it is .
Experimental
The answer to all of your view points is yes and no.
Our body is made up of cells.
If you can imagine a circle with a dot in the center of it, what does that look like, a cell?
A cross section of the Earth, looks like a circle with a dot, solar system, sun in center, planets orbiting around dot, circle, look at the galaxy similar shape?
This is one way I like to explain truth, or Reality.
the dot in the middle is truth and all or the 360 degrees represent the different viewpoints of the people.
The dot creates the circle, and the circle creates the dot.
We create the truth and the truth creates us.
One persons Perception is their own slice of reality. :wink: :)
To quote the Tao Te Ching,
Those who speak do not know.
Those who know do not speak.
The spoken word is a representation, nothing more. The word "truth" is a designation. designations only have integrity through a globally unified agreement to a REFERENCE of meaning, or predetermined illusion. If the meaning that is referenced by the word is different for different people then the word has no integrity because it does not designate similarly for everyone. Since the word: "Truth" seems to be one of the least likely candidates for having universal agreement of meaning conferred by us then I must assume that this word itself is worth even less than general descriptive words, which aren't worth anything in themselves either, unless SOMEONE ASSIGNS THEM worth/meaning.
Think about this, without the sensual world to discuss, there would be no need of division between nouns and verbs or subjects and objects. There would be no need for language because its paradigm would be gone. Sensual reality, as both father and mother to words, gave rise to the need for words and a way to create them. Since sensual reality is constantly changing, how can a word derived from a constantly changing system have unchanging meaning? It cannot because it needs to be interpreted as all words do, by a changing system.
If you were standing at the Grand Canyon, taking in all the beauty of a magnifiscent sunrise, and someone pulled in front of your view with a big jeep that said "GRAND CANYON" on the side facing you, you wouldn't stare at the words would you? Personally, I'd move to the point where I could see without obstruction again. Words obstruct obscure and confuse.
Language is a human construct, a human defined tool. Tools do not decide the form of art, the wielder of the tool alone is wholly responsible for meaning.
Those who speak do not know.
Those who know do not speak.
Now I go to knowing again! hehe
MysticNote, I don't think I've ever read a post like that one, that so politely and yet so completely dismisses the usefulness of this forum, all while simultaneously dismissing itself.
QuoteNow I go to knowing again! hehe
Feel free to come back if the vacuous black hole of Tao is too deafening! ;)
That's the Tao for you!
2.
People who see the green sky are insane, and will lose their grip and die. I will not be one of them, though I would allow them as they are entertaining... in a perfect world such entertainment would be allowed.
perception is not truth. but id like to take another example, not the sky being a certain color. lets say someone goes to buy groceries, and the cashier gives them back more money than they should have. the person takes them without saying anything. now, one could argue wether he did the "wrong" or "right" thing. its all perecption. one could say it was wrong, he should have given it back, another could say, it was right, it was a gift from the universe (or whatever). so neither of these two perceptions are wrong or right, they just are. and the event itself isnt wrong or right it just is. so i guess its a mix of the two.
Telos,
Ahh, this forum is just as fun and theraputic for me as anyone else! That's why I'm here, so, I do not mean to dismiss the forum, per se, because I greatly appreciate it, and also all of Robert's Work. It has much
meaning for me.
My previous post originated in the realm of the suggesting to use the right brain more (feeling) and the left brain less (logic). I think that Aristotle caused a misstep in human evolution by inadvertently causing the left brain and frontal cortex to operate pseudo-independently from the rest of the brain by separating empirical evidence from 'everything else' and declaring that only 'measurables' to have worth i.e.
actual reality. That's an interesting and useful viewpoint, but it became the canon and viewpoint on reality for the entire western world, which is finally, thank God, being reevaluated by the Quantum Sciences (in my opinion, the pinnacle and hopefully the end of this strictly left brained evolution). Basically what he meant is, 'If you can't say anything meaningful about it then it has no meaning'.
The eastern philosophical mind never split itself with such a philosophy so, literature like the Tao and I Ching is a very useful antidote to our... restriction.
Besides, Reading the Tao helped me to fathom and understand the uselessness of reading the Tao so, therein, somehow, usefulness is still present! Somehow, usefulness is still present in this forum also, in the same way. You see, this forum has a special purpose, like the writing of the Tao had a special purpose. This forum is about MORE than words. Therein lies the meaning. Besides, words may carry the vibrational imprint of their writer and more, who knows; just one possibility I did not consider in my last post.
Ah words... Do you still have that which you have not lost? "Yes," I imagine you saying. Have you lost a set of horns off your head? No? Then you have horns on your head! Hahaha!
Words are toys. Only toys that are conducive to satisfaction are worth their salt. Tayesin hit the nail right on the head:
QuoteWhat makes us humans different to the Moths is that we attach ourselves to Belief-Systems, as a way to intepret the bright light we are all seeing. And therein lies the real problem !
(//)
Truth is absolute existence. No matter what Truth might be, whether or not we can comprehend it, a truth cannot contradict the Truth. The sky may be green to one person, it may be blue to an other (at a given moment). All this means is the people's perceptions are subjective, and thus, any perception, by nature, cannot be universal. There is no contradiction here. In fact, there are no objective contradictions at all, only conflicting perceptions of the objective.
i like the phrase, "those who know do not speak, and those who speak do not know" but i think that applies more to enlightenment/nirvana then language itself. I was just thinking about this subject earlier today. Its the nature of enlightenment to be free of ego, and in turn, be free of suffering. This stills the waters of the mind allowing a person to exist in utter tranquility. Any agenda is a desired outcome; Any desire is a product of an ego, thus by deduction, any agenda is a product of ego. All voluntary actions are executed because of one or multiple agendas, speech included. This also includes eating and drinking as the agenda is satisfying ones hunger/thirst and in turn, preserving one's life. Those who have studied enlightenment/nirvana know that reflection stops when you are in a zen-type mind set, and so to does reaction. In the end, those who are enlightened desire nothing, and in turn, have no agendas...not even survival. They would not speak of enlightenment because they have no desire to, no desires at all in fact.
So how do i know this since I'm obviously not enlightened? Because i have been there, i just cant stay Zen for more than 10 seconds or so at a time. But not only that, i have discovered a logical equation that deductively concludes all voluntary action as a product of ego/reaction/reflection...none of which are an aspect of enlightenment.
That is unless enlightenment isn't freeing oneself of all desires?