What is reality?

buddhist philosophy

hi seaway

i think you are asking one big question, and for me at any rate, this question has lead me to a great deal of struggle until i studied buddhist philosphy. this philosophy has a lot in common with existentialist philosophy, a postmodern view and quantum models.

the simple answer is that the perciever and percieved; subject, action and object are indivisible. not one thing we can identify has a separate self existence other than in the act of naming it; and naming it is only part of convention for the purpose of communication.

often regarded as the purest approach to buddhist philosphy, is the approach using reductio ad abserdam to show that any statement based on asserting the separate self existence of any substance is flawed logically. for example; if we assert the existence of matter and explain everthing in terms of material interactions, we aslo assert that matter is somehow different from mind: we are, in essence asserting matter is "not-mind". we have now set up a duality of separate self existing substances: matter (self existing substance) and mind (not-matter). this is illogical because the whole point of arguing that matter is the essentially existing substance was to try to establish some kind of certainty that we could rely on that all things could be explained in terms of the category matter. to do this we have inadvertently set up a category of substance that is "unexplainable" or is "subject to exceptions" to our category of self existing substance, matter.

when one thoroughly convices oneself that all assertions of self existence are flawed, one is then left in the realisation that all things exist in a constant flux or interconnectedness... that a separate i and a separate you are only conventions of language and that in "reality" we exist only in interellationship... and the only primary causal energy of interellationship is love.

in terms of controlling our experience... our environment... we then realise that training the mind to see interconnectedness and the heart to experience love is the key. all spiritual traditions tell us this and this is becomming more and more understood by science as it begins to look at how the body functions to produce health and happiness.

peace and love

norbu

I think norbu has stated a good answer along the same lines as myself, but I was preparing my answer so I shall give it anyway. 😉

I am interested in the relationship between a person and reality.

a.k.a. The search for what is our purpose in life. 😉

What I mean by this is do we change reality or does reality change us?

Does reality make us what we are? In this we can relate to the concepts of fate, destiny etc.

Or do we make reality what it is? In this we can relate to the concept of self responsibility for everything that happens in one's life.

Cause and effect, law of attraction etc. etc. All long discussed topics and no proof either way.

Trying to understand this, we eventually come to the question of what reality is.

Exactly. Without defining the terms of reference you don't have a starting point or context into which you can specify your answer. Defining what you mean by reality is a great place to start.

We can only understand reality through the relation that it has to a person. The easiest way, it seems to me is to understand and explain reality scientifically. People have always tried to do this and it seems to me that the underlying reason for this desire is that people want to find out what it is in order to be able to control it.

I can see what you are saying that once we understand something we want to take control of it, but any respectable scientist (or any person for that matter) should realise that just because you gain understanding of something in one paradigm does not mean that you understand how to control it, or understand the implications of making changes to that thing though attempts to control it.
When it comes to "reality" it is clear that reality encompasses the whole of everything which includes the person themselves so to try and understand reality requires more than an understanding of the self, and to try and take control of reality would require at least complete control over the self.
Unfortunately for science, understanding things is only defined in terms of being able to model it using mathematics. Now, although mathematics is very versatile, and although new mathematical notation is created to cater for new unexplainable things, it does have it's boundaries that, IMHO, create a boundary around the understanding of things; "if it doesn't fit in the box, it can't be real".

It seems to me that this matches the concept that we ourselves try to make reality what it is (change reality). How does this science make a person succesfull and attuned to spirituality in this matter?

On the other hand, we can try to explain and understand oneself and try to change reality through oneself. For example, learning to take in everything in reality means that changing something in oneself allows one to take these things which one was not able to take in before changing something in oneself. This means that one has to positively take in everything that occurs. On one hand, we can say that a person does nothing to change reality (person that believes in fate), on the other hand, when one changes onself, their fate also changes because certain fates come to certain people.

Thus it seems that changing nothing in reality is more evolved spiritually than not. What do you think?

The concept that reality and the self are distinct entities and that our self is on the outside looking in on reality is, IMHO, a false belief that prevents true understanding of the self. I believe this stems from (and no negative reflection on yourself intended) the ego of the self considering that it is in a position where it could control reality.

Through recognition that reality and the self are one and the same thing, or to put it another way, reality is a perception of the self, we can learn to realise that the only control we take is over our own self and thus this will alter our reality accordingly.

Physically, things exist in the universe, but our perceptions of them differ. If we take an object, for example, I may find the object to be ugly whereas you find the object to be beautiful. The object itself is neither ugly or beautiful, it is just an object, it is only the perception in our self that creates the reality for us of ugly or beautiful. Thus, and we're treading into Buddhism territory now, when you feel anger at a person, it is not that the person is 'anger' but that the 'anger' is your perception of them; it is an attachment of emotion you have to that person. Changing that person will not free you of the anger, whereas changing your self (your perception of reality) will free you of that anger.

Love and Reiki Hugs

mutual appreciation society

lovely clear stuff energylz... thanks!

Physically, things exist in the universe, but our perceptions of them differ. If we take an object, for example, I may find the object to be ugly whereas you find the object to be beautiful. The object itself is neither ugly or beautiful, it is just an object, it is only the perception in our self that creates the reality for us of ugly or beautiful. Thus, and we're treading into Buddhism territory now, when you feel anger at a person, it is not that the person is 'anger' but that the 'anger' is your perception of them; it is an attachment of emotion you have to that person. Changing that person will not free you of the anger, whereas changing your self (your perception of reality) will free you of that anger.

i'd like to take this one step further:

if we are all interconnected: subject, object and action (perciever and object of perception) are just our way of describing different aspects of the interconnectedness of all things then; when we change our perception, we change the interconnectness of what actually IS.

when the healing practitioner shows understanding and compassion to the patient with a treatment that shows the patient a path to health (as opposed to a depersonalised definition of the diseased state with an interventional treatment) the practitioner is using the principle of interconnectedness to boost the internal healing systems of the patient.

so, training the mind not only changes experience, training the mind also changes reality.

peace and love

norbu

Reading these posts reminds me of this incidence. I thought of it in connection with the thread “Our wonderful diverse society” on the Current Affairs pages, but as it’s a spiritual answer, I didn’t feel it would be welcome there.

Anyway. One night after the theatre, I was on the London Underground with my husband when a group of about 6 drunken Australians boarded and sat right opposite us. They all had cans of lager that they were swigging from and making a lot of noise, with some pretty obscene language. One chap in particular was quite offensive.

Immediately I realised that I had a choice. I could either accept this “reality” that my senses were informing me of, (and suffer from it) or I could go higher and see them through the lens of the divine Mind (or God). I reckoned that as each one was the perfect image and likeness of this one perfect blueprint and that each one in spiritual reality could only express the one divine Mind, then I too could see them as Mind, the perfect Principle, was knowing itself – as innocent, pure, gentle, honest, good, obedient, etc.

A few seconds later, the noisiest one suddenly got even more agitated and started pointing at me and shouting “You’re my guardian angel! Did you know that?” (Curious choice of words, but it shows he was touched by my prayer) His friend beside him told him to calm down and then, they all did. The lager cans went under the seats, most of them took out newspapers and started reading and our friend fell asleep. It was like the alcohol had no more effect. There was peace and quiet and good behaviour.

Just this afternoon I was listening to a talk about violence in our cities and how we can help change it. The speaker mentioned a time when she saw a wino (as she described him) hide a bottle of liquor under his shirt in a shop. She wondered whether to report him, but decided to pray instead and prayed on similar lines to mine above. She claimed his divine identity, separated the wrong-doing from the real identity of the person and joyfully watched the man remove the hidden bottle, put it back on the shelf and leave the shop with a big smile and a light step.

So which is the reality? The picture our mortal senses paint or a much higher view?

Love and peace,

Judy

Reality

Hi,

This is a very interesting subject that comes from the forms that reality is a based prospect of the what it is we are this is a seamingly projected process of mechinizing the parts of the individual to the real parts of life that are based in the projected aspects of the self this is a form of individual wants and needs that protray the prospects of making the realities that we actually produce in a daily life this is a time that we can make or brake the producing efforts of the ways of lifes aparrent forms of divisions in you or the world around you creating a real daul aspect of the missions to bring about the changing of the other ways we look at things this is a time to bring about the real you....or your reality in the world as you no it....Gypsee

So which is the reality? The picture our mortal senses paint or a much higher view?

hi judy

is it just a question of choice? how do we learn to make this choice?

i suppose i don't think that there is any reality outside understanding and understanding is just that: understanding is as it is understood. does this make it real?

i suppose i would ask the same question (your question above) in a different way: "what is there to understand?"

i think it is clear that we agree that what appears is far less substantial than it appears to be, and that we can have a powerful effect on what appears to be by seeing things differently.

if we are both on the right track, the big question must be: "how can we do "see" things differently?"

peace and love

norbu

When we close our eyes and meditate..... When our mind is relaxed, and still..when we are one with the ' Divine ' and our minds are pure

That is the reality of life.

When we emerge from our meditations...we step into the world of our own personal mythologies. We construct our own reality. IMO.

Oakapple xx

is it just a question of choice? how do we learn to make this choice?

....the big question must be: "how can we do "see" things differently?"

Hi Norbu,

I find the only way we can do this is by training our thinking to stay with the divine, the spiritual and the eternal. That whenever it starts to stray into criticism, prejudice, fear, hatred etc, I try to remember to ask myself "Is this what God knows of HisHer perfect creation?" I need to separate the lie (whether it is disguised as evil or disease) from the individual.

In II Cor 10, Paul writes

For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

And from the J B Phillips New Testament (I just love the deep spiritual understanding in his translation)

The truth is that, although of course we lead normal human lives, the battle we are fighting is on the spiritual level. The very weapons we use are not those of human warfare but powerful in God's warfare for the destruction of the enemy's strongholds. Our battle is to bring down every deceptive fantasy and every imposing defence that men erect against the true knowledge of God. We even fight to capture every thought until it acknowledges the authority of Christ.

"..bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" to me, that is the key. Mary Baker Eddy said it this way:

Jesus beheld in Science (in Reality) the perfect man, who appeared to him where sinning mortal man appears to mortals. In this perfect man the Saviour saw God's own likeness, and this correct view of man healed the sick. Thus Jesus taught that the kingdom of God is intact, universal, and that man is pure and holy. (Science and Health p 476)

One woman describes how she did this in a young offenders prison:

To deal with gang violence: let's be part of the solution

At this camp, which was described as the toughest in Los Angeles County, I came face to face with gang kingpins serving time for murder, drug dealing, grand larceny, vandalism, rape, and the like.

These boys were no exception. They responded to my conviction that they had a right to see their true selfhood as sons of God. I found them polite, kind, and eager to know more about God and their own true nature. I’m not saying that there weren’t any challenges, but my conviction that God loved them just as He loves everyone else guided and uplifted these sessions.

You would call it their Buddha nature Norbu, but these are just words to describe the same spiritual truths.

Love and peace,

Judy

hi oakapple and judy

this is interesting!

When we close our eyes and meditate..... When our mind is relaxed, and still..when we are one with the ' Divine ' and our minds are pure

That is the reality of life.

When we emerge from our meditations...we step into the world of our own personal mythologies. We construct our own reality.

I agree... but isn't the point of our meditation or prayer or ritual not just to get to be one with the divine for a moment but to bring this "reality" into the the "reality" we construct when we step back into the world?

and judy wrote:

I find the only way we can do this is by training our thinking to stay with the divine, the spiritual and the eternal. That whenever it starts to stray into criticism, prejudice, fear, hatred etc, I try to remember to ask myself "Is this what God knows of HisHer perfect creation?" I need to separate the lie (whether it is disguised as evil or disease) from the individual.

this has to be really important, but i'd guess i'd use slightly different language 😉

for me: if we are mindful of what it is like to feel when we are critical etc... it hurts! if we are kind or express understanding, it feels good inside. but learning not to be critical etc can be quite hard work... we really have to want and desire to change to be able to leave the old "me"; the "me" that defined itself with "i don't like that.. i think that people shouldn't... i think they should... bmw drivers really wind me up when they tailgait me and i'm doing 85 while overtaking on the outside lane... etc"

this is exactly where mindfulness meditation comes in: it helps us to look more mindfully at how we feel when think or experience certain prejudices... we are slowing things down in this kind of meditation so we can see how our thoughts and feelings go together... and letting them pass so we get used to letting them go.

but what do you put in their place? how do you bring a new reality into experience when you are back in the world?

i think your quote, judy, from mary baker eddy is very beautiful and i certainly find it much more sypathetic than the images of battles and warfare against the "carnal" from your other quotes.

surely, when we learn not be prejudiced, we do not judge the person we see... all we see is a person who is struggling with their own "demons", we do not see a "sinner" but there is still more to this than just not making critical judgements isn't there?

this is where you would be using your idea that the person you saw was acting in a way that could be harmful to themselves or others was "in reality" not like this but was "pure and holy".

this is a very interesting point: to consciously use the will to project a "model of reality" that is contradictory to the perception of "reality". it seems you empower this new model or reality with divine authority and i think you are explaining that this is a fundamentally important point. so your new model of reality is not just your personal desire it is also divine will.

from a (mahayana) buddhist point of view all practices should be carried out for the benefit of all beings and i feel that this is a very similar empowerment to aligning your will with the divine will. the only difference is there is no "war against the carnal" or rejection of the "false" perception; all the buddhist does is to train his or her mind and heart to be more enlightened... to see that all forms are transient... and to see that everyone is on this path towards gaining a deeper understanding of experience... seeing this clearly helps to bring an unflinching kindness and it is with this view that the buddhist would understand the change can take place because of the interconnection of those sharing the experience from diffierent standpoints.

love and peace

norbu

Hi Norbu,

Oh I love warfare! :014: But it’s always warfare with ourselves. Whatever comes to us that is not Godlike, whether it is disturbing images on the evening news, disturbing images on our (or others’) bodies, disturbing images from the weather, they all come to us at the point of our consciousness and that is where we should deal with them – but not getting overwhelmed by what the material senses are screaming, but by lifting up our thought to Reality and seeing out from perfection and wholeness. I feel we're talking about the same thing, but sometimes, one has to be very firm. There's a delightful healing from a little girl in this week's Christian Science Sentinel
where the practitioner gave her these words to hold to, and I've found them really helpful. "Error error, just get out. I have God to think about!" (In fact, I've been caught muttering them all day long!) :p

I was originally only going to give the “bring every thought into captivity of Christ” but felt that it worked better in context (especially if you read it as warfare with ourselves as Mrs Eddy explains below)

Self-ignorance, self-will, self-righteousness, lust, covetousness, envy, revenge, are foes to grace, peace, and progress; they must be met manfully and overcome, or they will uproot all happiness. Be of good cheer; the warfare with one's self is grand; it gives one plenty of employment....... (Miscellaneous Writings p 118)

Of course, there are many people whose thought is so close to the divine that they don’t need to go through the human steps of rooting up the seeds of negative thinking etc – that is always the better way, it’s just that most of us are not yet at that level of understanding.

This woman illustrates what can happen when we claim our present spiritual reality here and now:

During WWII a woman received a call from a military hospital. Her brother was serving in the Merchant Marine. She was told that her brother had sustained a crushing fall from the highest point of his ship but they wouldn’t say anymore but requested that she come immediately to the hospital.

She was a very new student of Science & Health and had only read through half of the book. As she felt panic rising inside she thought "What does the book say I should do?" The answer that came from her simple understanding of what she had read so far was: "What you don’t take in (into consciousness), you don’t have to get out!"

During the hour’s drive to the hospital, she just held to this thought. She refused admission to fear, which she understood was not an exercise of human will, but held instead to a prayerful acceptance of the allness of God’s perfection.

When she saw her brother it was a dreadful picture. He was unconscious, he’d fallen feet first and his legs and lower spine were crushed. He was not expected to live. This is the point at which we have a choice to make. We can either accept the human verdict and suffer its consequences, or we can turn to the divine Mind for our information and insist on the truth of the Allness of God, good, and the inseparability of our relationship to God as HisHer image and likeness, spiritual and perfect.

This woman chose the latter. As her husband drove her to a nearby hotel she just was determined not to dwell on what she had seen that evening. She refused to give evil any power. She didn’t go to bed as she was afraid of being assaulted by the memory and mental picture she’d seen at the hospital, so stayed up all night reading Science & Health "steadfastly keeping her thought centered on Truth and her brother’s infinite status as a child of the ever-present, infinitely caring Father-Mother God. Regardless of what she had seen and heard, she instinctively knew that man, as the spiritual creation of this all-powerful, loving God, has total exemption from harm of any kind."

She held to these truths all night and in the morning when she returned to the hospital, she found several doctors arguing in her brother’s room and heard one of them say "Who in the world let this man in here, when there’s absolutely nothing wrong with him?" (The hospital was overcrowded and short of beds) Her brother told her that he had to get back to his ship immediately

"To this day, the thing she remembers most about this incident is watching her brother running to meet his ship and jumping up and down to wave goodbye to her on those VERY SAME LEGS that had been crushed the day before." Needless to say, this woman then became a Christian Science practitioner and devoted the rest of her life to helping others understand and be healed by the Truth that had restored her brother. (From "A grain of Christian Science does wonders" Nov 15th 1993 Christian Science Sentinel)

Love and peace,

Judy

where is the enemy?

hi judy

well that certainly is a very remarkable story of how your approach to understanding "reality" works!

i think you would agree that your approach aligns the "human will" with "god's will" and it is "gods will" that is the real "power" in this kind of example of how "reality" seems to be effected in such a striking way.

firstly let me just clarify my position: i am not challenging your evidence and i am not challenging your approach; what i am doing, however, is trying to analyse it a little, for my own understanding as much as anything else. (i also hope that this process carried out in this arena may also be useful to others that have the patience to read this "nonsense".)

1. for me, the idea that evil is an enemy to be vanquised in a righteous war with allies of god on one side and allies of the devil on the other is a little ridiculous. it is a dualistic picture and i feel that a dualistic picture is rationally inconsitent and therefore false. the advantage of this position is that it rallies the will to take part in the "good fight"... but does it create the enemy it seeks to destroy?

2. at least the strictly judeo-christian monotheist traditions look at the war against evil as a war against "the self" that is tempted by the figure of satan, as in islam, the angel of light that would not humble himself before the "human" creation of god. again this has the flavour of a dualistic position, but i can accept it in terms of a metaphore. the advantage of this position is that it enables the practitioner to stuggle to free him/herself from selfishness... but again does it create the enemy it seeks to vanquish?

3. i believe the nearest we can come to a rationally consistent position (free of the duality of good and evil) is to say that all is just varying levels of enlightenment. there is not judment in this position, however, with no judgement, we are perhaps left in a position of accepting the ill winds of fate. the advantage of this position is that it facilitates understanding and compassion in all circumstances. (if 1. and 2. are analogous to montheistic traditions 3. is analagous to the buddhist position.)

in a nutshell you are holding position 1. and 2. above and i am holding position 3. (2. is really a more enlightenened version of 1.; a position that enterprets 1. in terms of psychological/spiritual metaphore.)

in my view there is no real problem with using both (or all three) positions so long as we are aware of their weaknesses and strengths. in some ways we can look at the dualistic position of 1. and 2. as about action and having a male aspect of "god" and some ways we can look at 3. as an all embracing and accepting feminine aspect of the "divine".

my personal view is that problems come when we are too addicted to the "certainty" of the "reality" of postions 1. and 2. because we then may make a war when there is no enemy other than our own imagination. this happens if we see good and evil as truths of existence as opposed to metaphores. and on the other hand, i believe that position 3. has the potential problem of being too diffuse and devoid of action and individuality.

so... to use a buddhist slight of hand, i will take the "middle way" and use each view when if feel it is appropriate 😉

love and peace

norbu

Hi Norbu,

I am rather loathe to answer these as I feel it is all slightly off-topic and also others will get bored, but here goes:

i think you would agree that your approach aligns the "human will" with "god's will" and it is "gods will" that is the real "power" in this kind of example of how "reality" seems to be effected in such a striking way.

Actually no Norbu, I don’t agree with your premise at all! :confused: It’s when we yield up (or exchange) our human will, human thoughts, human beliefs to the divine Reality which is always present, complete, whole and perfect (nothing to do with will) then what appears as being discordant simply vanishes, like sunlight burns off the fog which has changed the look of the landscape, though the fog has never become PART of the landscape. Or like when we wake from a dream. To my understanding, God (another word for good) is the only power and Reality – there is nothing else. There is no evil! It is only a false human belief, an illusion, a dream.

firstly let me just clarify my position: i am not challenging your evidence and i am not challenging your approach; what i am doing, however, is trying to analyse it a little, for my own understanding as much as anything else.

Careful you don’t get “paralysis by analysis!” :011:

in a nutshell you are holding position 1. and 2.

No I am flippin’ well not – and most certainly NOT no 1, thank you very much! 🙁 You clearly haven’t understood what I have written and that’s obviously my fault for not explaining it well enough, but there are some things that are a deep intuitive knowing that can’t be described in words. Intellectualism will always try to pigeonhole the infinite, the eternal – sorry, but it doesn’t work!

If I HAVE to be given a “position”, then this is nearest where I am (which is neither your 1 nor 2):

This Science of God and man………is the kingdom of heaven, the ever-present reign of harmony, already with us. Hence the need that human consciousness should become divine, in the coincidence of God and man, in contradistinction to the false consciousness of both good and evil, God and devil,--of man separated from his Maker.
(Unity of Good p 52 by Mary Baker Eddy)

i am holding position 3.

3. i believe the nearest we can come to a rationally consistent position (free of the duality of good and evil) is to say that all is just varying levels of enlightenment. there is not judment in this position, however, with no judgement, we are perhaps left in a position of accepting the ill winds of fate. the advantage of this position is that it facilitates understanding and compassion in all circumstances. (if 1. and 2. are analogous to montheistic traditions 3. is analagous to the buddhist position.)

Well, if you’re happy to pigeonhole yourself Norbu, fine. However, I would point out that even you admit the failing with this choice:

however, with no judgement, we are perhaps left in a position of accepting the ill winds of fate

After the tsunami, I listened to an interfaith discussion where one spiritual leader, from an Eastern religion said “It doesn’t matter what happens here. It will all be better when we die. This is all an illusion.” Well, I’m sorry, but to me, it flippin’ well DOES matter what happens here! Many third world countries have a strong belief in “the ill winds of fate” – that is compliance with the belief of evil, rather than rejection of it and they suffer the sad consequences of their capitulation to suffering as a result.

To use a simple analogy. Universal acceptance of “what is, is” would surely have kept back mankind’s progress. Men once did not know that the world was round and it limited them in many, many ways. It is the real nature of man to discover, to search, to question, to reject anything that limits and constrains. If a mistake is made, how are you ever going to discover what is real and replace it with that unless you rise up in rebellion and question, then uncover and destroy what is unreal? That is my idea of spiritual warfare.

Jesus understood the unreality of suffering and limitation better than perhaps anyone. He destroyed it through knowing the ALL-ness of God, Spirit, not by a bland denial, some abstract theory, shutting his eyes and his ears to it. He didn’t say to the suffering masses “Don’t worry, this is all an illusion – it’ll get better when you die.” When the people were suffering from bodily ills, he healed them, when they needed food, he fed them, when they were in danger, he stilled the storm!

the advantage of this position is that it facilitates understanding and compassion in all circumstances

So, in other words, Jesus showed no understanding or compassion? Come on! His was 100% practical compassion and understanding. He certainly didn’t believe in duality either – and neither do I!

my personal view is that problems come when we are too addicted to the "certainty" of the "reality" of postions 1. and 2. because we then may make a war when there is no enemy other than our own imagination. this happens if we see good and evil as truths of existence as opposed to metaphores.

But most people in this world who suffer with problems don't know anything at all about your "Position 1 or 2"!! They just know that they are poor, or ill, or homeless or without a job, or are intimidated and beaten up by their husbands, fathers, brothers, or the bullies at school or have suffered the effects of violent weather or natural catastrophies, or have been bombed or injured in an accident, etc etc etc. In the human realm, it is callous to dismiss people's very real suffering as merely figments of their imagination or as something that they have somehow created themselves. Millions of people, based on their own stark human reality, believe they are the helpless victims of chance or fate and therefore have no control over their lives or their bodies. That to me is the greatest unreality, the greatest illusion (evil) that needs to be exposed and destroyed so that everyone may know the freedom from limitation and suffering that is their divine right.

Yes, I agree that I have certainty in my beliefs (which are neither 1 nor 2) There is one reason for that and it is because it works! Nothing to do with being "addicted" to it. I have proved it in my own life, as have millions of others. It's as simple as that.

and on the other hand, i believe that position 3. has the potential problem of being too diffuse and devoid of action and individuality.

Ummm yes, I was trying to say that above!

so... to use a buddhist slight of hand, i will take the "middle way" and use each view when if feel it is appropriate 😉

That's your choice, but to return to the battle wording again - some wise words from Eddy:

One cannot scatter his fire, and at the same time hit the mark. (Science and Health p 457)

I came across this poem written by a friend again today and to me, it describes perfectly what real spiritual warfare is. If you’d rather choose suffering as that which just is, (sometimes, but then sometimes not?) that is your choice! Me, I feel the world is calling out for help and it doesn't get cured by the three monkeys approach "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." I'd rather be a spiritual warrior than an ostrich!

[url]How many Guernicas?[/url]

Love and peace,

Judy

' People should think less about what they ought to do '
' And more about what they ought to be '

Meister Eckhart
Christian Mystic.

My reality is.......I just live life....This life...walking my own spiritual path.

That is reality for me.

Oakapple xx

My reality is.......I just live life....This life...walking my own spiritual path.

That is reality for me.

you are very lucky! but you don't need me to tell you that do you? i also think that few of us find what you have found without the blinding reality of your valid experience. but this blinding reality of experience comes to each of us in different ways and this is, perhaps, the only thing that makes us different at all.

...thank you so much for your elaboration of your views judy and, if you will excuse me from sounding patronising, for that is not my intention, i think i do understand where you are coming from; but we all have to find our own language forms that allow us each to express the certainty that you clearly have; a cirtainty that is very much like oakapples certainty.

in no way do i wish to challenge your cirtainty or oakapple's cirtainty for they are a kind of knowlege that you both have and only you both can know in yourselves. i also have a cirtainty like this and none can see that apart from me and maybe, i can only recognise your personal cirtainty as i have a personal cirtainty as a reference(even, if perhaps, it is not so developed as yours)... and it IS the most precious thing in the world.

i suppose i have a difference in the way that i express my cirtainty than you and very much part of this string (and quite a few other strings) is about trying to put this knowledge, that is beyond words, into words.

so: i am not trying to suggest that your cirtainty is insufficient, i am saying that your words are insufficient for me. i am also saying that my words are insufficient for me as well as you. clearly knowing that words are insufficient is for me, the midwife to liberation; and within liberation is the seed of cirtainty: this knowleged of the limitations of the language of the rational mind is, for me, the acorn cup that feeds the acorn that drops to the ground and then, one day, grows into the great oak tree.

in time this knowledge then; with this experience of cirtainty gives the oak tree branches and these branches are like the power of action that can bring great benefit; like the accounts you share with us judy.

however, for me and many others, the basis of this cirtainty requires logical consistency, even if logical constency is a language based artifact and that no language can ever be adequate.

the point here is that you can carry on trying to explain forever and you will not be able to expalain if the reader doesn't have the tools that are needed to see through the logical inconsistencies of the language that is being used. this is why the messenger has to learn a new language to express her knowledge if it is not to be rejected.

the rejection of the message is not so much the fault of of the reader, it is the fault of the messenger to communicate this knowledge. like you and many others, i sincerely hope that the message i am trying to express is expressed; for the benefit of those wishing to understand the deep message of cirtainty. to express the knowledge of this cirtainty is not easy and it helps if we understand this clearly.

importantly; the reason for many of the ills of the world is that the followers of a particular message cannot see the limitations of the language that express the message: they cannot separate the form the message takes in words, from the truth of the message of cirtainty itself. this is both the source of fundamentalism and the source of doubt... for what kind of message is expressed by the cirtainty of the fundamentalist?

perhaps the evolution of consciousness, and the whole of what is reality, is no more than the evolution of the language of the message of being... and evolution ever requires renewal.

love and peace

norbu

Yes Good the reality expreriance meriting the process of the life that you are living creating a space were you are able to project what it is you can accomplish to make a part that comes through the process of a realistic view..Gypsee

Reality is what I perceive it to be 🙂

Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol

I agree with Oakapple and Flash.

Simple yet effective comments.

Adding my thoughts on the subject:

First off I like to believe that everyone is entitled to believe what they want to believe. Therefore the reality of the individual is due to their own beliefs.

I believe that reality is everything I can comprehend, however I believe that reality is also that which I can't yet comprehend.

Thus reality is everything, we are part of everything therefore we are reality.

We create reality because we decide. (Being indecisive is also a decision)

Deciding is a thought process and part of everything therefore reality.

I think I am confusing myself here. But this is what is working for me at the moment.

To put it simply, I believe that reality is that which is.

Hello
Reality is a concept of the internal and external conditions of the process of the ways that enough experiances will build concepts of the what it is your about to put into nature with this in mind it is always a good idea to refrane from exposing the negitive and expand on the realities of good parts of the lifes patterns this is a conditional process of the willingness to create a space to adjust to the humaness that is internal to expand the what is.....Gypsy

Hi,

Wow there is some pretty extensive replies on this thread, and as such i will keep mine short - to help us all 🙂 !

When we speak of reality, it should ultimately be understood as a word that defines the individually subjective world that each of us perceives. No one view is ever exactly 100% the same.

However, to entertain the question even more, i looked up the definition of the word 'reality' on a on-line dictionary, and this is what it said: the state of being actual or real; "the reality of his situation slowly dawned on him". This is rather general though, and so here is another one: all of your experiences that determine how things appear to you; "his world was shattered"; "we live in different worlds"; "for them demons were as much a part of reality as trees were". While another contradicts the latter: the state of the world as it really is rather than as you might want it to be; "businessmen have to face harsh realities". However, the latter is one of greater debate than the former. As how can we, beings who subjectively form our own realities, truly conceive what may be a universal reality of the objective world!?!? In other words, the second definition it easier to expect than the third.

Any way, this is not worth talking about/taking any further, in my eyes. As what we derive from this question eventually is the question 'what is the meaning of realty/life' and the simple answer is that the meaning is in the doing, not in the end result. For example, you may being studying a for a degree, but when you get that degree you don't feel that the end result is more satisfying than the processes of getting that slip of paper, do you!?!?. And so the meaning is ultimately gained in the doing, as without this nothing can occur. You need the means to get to the end. And so the meaning has to be in the doing, and so this is the meaning. I love paradoxes!

Dam, it turned out to be longer than i anticipated. Oh well philosophy is fun to talk about.

Cheers all, Pete :).

... i still have these thoughts..

everytime i find a thread like this one, i come back to my theory, idea or whatever you want to call it because it is (funny to say it) unfinished.
I begin to think everything "exists" because of love. I think love creates, when we come to understand things then we love those things, and we love our new idea of things, so this idea is reality, nevermind to how many of us.
yes we have our reality, might be different for each one of us as we all dont try to understand the same things. how would it be like if we all knew everything? that doesnt even fit in my head..maybe no one in no stage of their being could ever get to know everything because the everything is infinite? and anyway each one of us would still be creating even more realities.

think i remember when i was even younger and used to think, what if this life i am living is all a lie, what if i am dreaming of it,..at the end of the day, does it matter?probably you´d take it as far as you like, and thats going to be your reality, your appreciation of your own self and of this world..

I´ve seen a tv prog the other day about earth and how a lot of chatastrophes (spelling?) happened and earth always finds its way round it even if it takes thousands years...its always alive and kicking! we are just the same..after many conceptions..we are still here.

would it be because we really love to keep understanding it?

maybe i am getting too confusing and i could come back when i can explain my idea better, just thought maybe one of you could have a similar idea so its good to share!
hugs xx

I agree with Sunray. No, really............

I think "reality" is kind of a moot point in that it differs for everyone according to their experiences, spirituality, personality etc.

However, I do believe that you create your own "reality" or "destiny" at least to a point. If you take a country like Britain for example where we aren't forced to believe one thing or act a certain way and look at the different kind of people that you meet. Look at how people react to their surroundings, upbringing, adversity that life throws in their path etc. A few examples of the point I am making:

I used to know a guy (used to, I have no time for him at all) who came from very hard working parents. He is a qualified chef but couldn't hold a job down for more than a fortnight. He is now a single dad with 5 kids living on the social and dealing drugs to make up the difference.

Another person I know...... he was kind of mental as a teenager after his father died when he was 12. He went through a bad patch from about 13-18 with many ups and downs but he learned by most of them. He is now 37, owns a 4 bedroom detached house in Berkshire and is married with one child and one step-child.

And another......... Not that gifted with intellect and very shy as a child. Now 36 years old, owns a £600,000 house in which he owns 60% equity, has a wife and two children, a boat moored on the Thames, holds down a senior management job and runs a part-time business that boosts his income by an extra £35,000 per year.

So, back to the negative............. a guy whose father bought him a Four bedroom house for his eighteenth birthday, a hotel and restaurant for his 21st birthday (these are the tip of the iceberg, the list goes on into other properties, performance cars etc).......... lives on his own, has to get his father to give him £30,000 a year to live as his businesses are unsuccessful (because he sits on his fat arse and does nothing with them), is lonely, unhappy, unfit and on the verge of being disinherited.

And finally, my favourite............... a guy who trashed an education many people would give anything for. Then became an addicted gambler at the same time as job hopping, ended up homeless on the streets but then.... learned by his mistakes........... 16 years later he is now married, owns his own home and two businesses and drives a £35,000 car.

I know this is long winded but....... the main difference between these examples is not how they started out, not even when you include the guy with the millionaire father. The main difference is what they've done with their lives. I wholeheartedly believe that you make your own "destiny", for some people that might be becoming someone like Bill Gates, for others that might be just getting by and being happy in their life.

John Wooden was a guy who came up with many quotes which I think are quite apt within this thread:

Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are.

Do not let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do.

Adversity is the state in which man mostly easily becomes acquainted with himself, being especially free of admirers then.

Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be.

If you're not making mistakes, then you're not doing anything. I'm positive that a doer makes mistakes.

Success comes from knowing that you did your best to become the best that you are capable of becoming.

choice- attitude

well, sure. you decide how you ll react after circumstances, maybe theres a bit thats put to you and then you´d decide what to do with it, if you see it.so that would be real or not to you, depending on your awareness of whats around you.
i guess maybe most people have a few different shades in a colour and then its up to them what one they want to see and go for.
but probably they wouldnt have all shades in all colours unless they dramatically change their lives, like moving countries or changing their own basements.
it would be quite obvious that we´d sort of make the colour sharper everytime , with every choice and we´d leave some choices behind, and maybe in a whole lifetime , we are not even going to consider some of those colours, they wont really "exist " for us...

I am interested in the relationship between a person and reality.

What I mean by this is do we change reality or does reality change us?

Does reality make us what we are? In this we can relate to the concepts of fate, destiny etc.

Or do we make reality what it is? In this we can relate to the concept of self responsibility for everything that happens in one's life.

Trying to understand this, we eventually come to the question of what reality is. We can only understand reality through the relation that it has to a person. The easiest way, it seems to me is to understand and explain reality scientifically. People have always tried to do this and it seems to me that the underlying reason for this desire is that people want to find out what it is in order to be able to control it. It seems to me that this matches the concept that we ourselves try to make reality what it is (change reality). How does this science make a person succesfull and attuned to spirituality in this matter?

On the other hand, we can try to explain and understand oneself and try to change reality through oneself. For example, learning to take in everything in reality means that changing something in oneself allows one to take these things which one was not able to take in before changing something in oneself. This means that one has to positively take in everything that occurs. On one hand, we can say that a person does nothing to change reality (person that believes in fate), on the other hand, when one changes onself, their fate also changes because certain fates come to certain people.

Thus it seems that changing nothing in reality is more evolved spiritually than not. What do you think?

SeaWay your question does have weight and its own depth, it's not as easy as it seems.

Let me have a chance to try to answer it.

Regarding what is reality? I want to state the words in questions and answers.

While I am posting this, there was earth quake right half an hour ago (At 7:23 AM)....did you feel that?

Yes or no?

Okay I got...No...... How no, there was... I felt it, it was quite dreadful shake.

What's your answer?

It is your fear.

Okay... it is my imagination.....hey friend, I'm still in my senses..it was real.

Okay I request the members to confirm, what reality is? (was there any shaking or not?)

Come to the second point.

Mike and Paul are brothers, they are couple with exact same faces. (its common in the world)

Mike and Paul are standing in a garden quite near. I am saying right hand side one is Mike. You say no , no left hand side person is Mike...no, no right hand side one is he, I say again..you still insist no, no I'll go with left hand side one.

Okay come on lets find out the reality.

Hi friends, will you please solve our confusion, who is real Mike?

You will see lots of such examples in real life, around.

Try to see something in courts...one party is always on reality.

You will see it in many disputes; many people will be trying to find the reality out in many contradicted ideas of political parties etc...

Hope I forwarded the discussion.