acceptance leads to transcendence?

[NEW]

Hi all,

I have met this strange, peculiar thing in my personal experiments/brainstorms.
But I'm not sure if it's just with me, or can someone relate to this?

Some time ago, I realized man was not there as was advertised , and figured out that we indeed are not separated a lot from the monkey (1.3-1.6-7% dna to be more exact?).

Ok, nothing new, I reckon,


But after that statement got pretty much confirmed over and over, a curious mind tends to wander around the question:

so is there nothing else, beyond it?

And you start exploring this.

And partly trough meditation, and more importantly embracing/acceptance processes from the previous,
I entered, with moments, some transcendence levels I never experienced before.

Like you are jumping up and down a trampoline really, going back and forth from acceptance towards transcendence.
The two are intertwined, and needed to achieve the very moments of transcendence.



It felt like new ground, ready to be explored indeed.



ps

This shows great parallels with

- Camus his question around transcending the absurdity of life, trough embracing the absurd condition and give life a meaning nevertheless

- more profound religious experiences,

- neurologic patterns, very similar with the function of the brain, with the reptile part, and entering the broader, altruistic part.



I personally call it the all inclusive term: "G-spot",
the G standing ao for:

- the obvious, since it's very pleasurable place, to explore, to be in
- God (towards the more religious types)
- Godot (towards the more atheistic types)
- Gold
- ...

[surreptitious57]

For me it is not acceptance leading to transcendence but detachment leading to acceptance
Because the more detached I am the more accepting I am of my own existence and mortality
I know I am merely passing through and so I am slowly letting go the closer that I get to death
And that does not bother me because to be dead is to be free from suffering in all of its forms

[Dontaskme]

Some time ago, I realized man was not there as was advertised , and figured out that we indeed are not separated a lot from the monkey (1.3-1.6-7% dna to be more exact?).

Ok, nothing new, I reckon,

Thanks for another great and interesting thread topic, nice to see you are giving it all you got.

My thoughts on this ape/monkey thingy goes something like... when did the ape / monkey stop ...and the human being start. At what point did the actual transistion from monkey to human take place, or happen... and does a monkey stop being a monkey because it's now a human being...this realisation came to me, showing me the seamlessness of all things, and that change is just a conceptual divide that doesn't exist...in that consciousness is a 1D seamless reality arising as a 2D reality within a 3D space... and this is all happening simultaneously now.

Where is the divide of any thing except as a concept, and what the heck is a concept where or why does a concept happen?

And this for me is the absurdity of conceptual knowledge...in that knowledge can only point to the illusory nature of reality.

Not sure if this makes any sense to anyone, but conceptual descriptions and explanations fall short of what is actually going on or happening here.

.

[Dontaskme]

I personally call it the all inclusive term: "G-spot",
the G standing ao for:

- the obvious, since it's very pleasurable place, to explore, to be in
- God (towards the more religious types)
- Godot (towards the more atheistic types)
- Gold
- ...

What do you think about this ''good spot'' as being a design trick that is just part of the magic factored in by nature or God itself - and it's purpose is to make life worth living and more bearable, in that there would be no knowledge of pleasure without pain, and that maybe pain and pleasure are the same thing, except they differ in their sensational appearance, in that there is either a feeling of pleasure or pain, but never both at the same time. And that these sensations do not have any lasting effect on who you are essentially, which is also what makes this whole conscious reality work so well in the way it does...It's almost like life was specifically built to bare and endure all it's pains and sufferings.....so,just my thoughts about rewards and punishment theories

[NEW]

I personally call it the all inclusive term: "G-spot",
the G standing ao for:

- the obvious, since it's very pleasurable place, to explore, to be in
- God (towards the more religious types)
- Godot (towards the more atheistic types)
- Gold
- ...

What do you think about this ''good spot'' as being a design trick that is just part of the magic factored in by nature or God itself - and it's purpose is to make life worth living and more bearable, in that there would be no knowledge of pleasure without pain, and that maybe pain and pleasure are the same thing, except they differ in their sensational appearance, in that there is either a feeling of pleasure or pain, but never both at the same time. And that these sensations do not have any lasting effect on who you are essentially, which is also what makes this whole conscious reality work so well in the way it does...It's almost like life was specifically built to bare and endure all it's pains and sufferings.....so,just my thoughts about rewards and punishment theories

You may have a point there.

Do you know the sweet and sour speech? (from the movie vanilla sky)

And I know sour, which allows me to appreciate the sweet.

Being privileged to have experienced a lot of the spectrum of moods,
from depressions, and worse, upto feeling just swell ...
the quote certainly covers it.

But I know one thing for sure now; if one is able to choose between seeing, and being in a mist,
it's way better to see a mist, generated out of endless points of possibilities,
then to be in the mist of a swamping depression, that is dragging one down, limiting one's vision.

Why this reference? You should check out this one from Uri Alon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1U26PLiXjM

[NEW]

For me it is not acceptance leading to transcendence but detachment leading to acceptance
Because the more detached I am the more accepting I am of my own existence and mortality
I know I am merely passing through and so I am slowly letting go the closer that I get to death
And that does not bother me because to be dead is to be free from suffering in all of its forms

Many thanks for this feedback.

So your process is more focused on detachment? (meaning some form of seperation?)

But at the same time this detachment, results also in acceptance?

If you are willing to try and explain this further, be my guest.

--
ooh btw, since you lay the emphasis on suffering, do you suffer much?
And is it perhaps the reason towards your focus on detachment?

[NEW]

Some time ago, I realized man was not there as was advertised , and figured out that we indeed are not separated a lot from the monkey (1.3-1.6-7% dna to be more exact?).

Ok, nothing new, I reckon,

Thanks for another great and interesting thread topic, nice to see you are giving it all you got.

My thoughts on this ape/monkey thingy goes something like... when did the ape / monkey stop ...and the human being start. At what point did the actual transistion from monkey to human take place, or happen... and does a monkey stop being a monkey because it's now a human being...this realisation came to me, showing me the seamlessness of all things, and that change is just a conceptual divide that doesn't exist...in that consciousness is a 1D seamless reality arising as a 2D reality within a 3D space... and this is all happening simultaneously now.

Where is the divide of any thing except as a concept, and what the heck is a concept where or why does a concept happen?

And this for me is the absurdity of conceptual knowledge...in that knowledge can only point to the illusory nature of reality.

Not sure if this makes any sense to anyone, but conceptual descriptions and explanations fall short of what is actually going on or happening here.

.

when did the ape / monkey stop?

I have a possible explanation towards this, again thanks to Watts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylqPkuCJPBs)

covered in this movie, is a possible explanation of mankind going generating it's own story, and generating a division within it's environment,
with crude points of reference/definitions. (for instance 3 points can generate a mountain)
This generally became the norm and new reality of man,
and this is partly why we are in this mess of continuously trying to solve issues, we ourselves created, trough our narrow visioning, and reality creation of those crude reference points, without the "unknown factor" being taken into consideration.

in that consciousness is a 1D seamless reality arising as a 2D reality within a 3D space

You should look into it, this goes even beyond it, but always with the same results.
Imagine a 2d world, where a 3d object comes to visit: what would you see?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvUX6uHqbm0

And this goes on and on, like a fractal upon itself,
leaving the option open towards being already within a multiverse, with humans being the bubbles/seperate entities, and
with "gods", being more entities in other dimensions, and therefore not visible within our 3d realm

and what the heck is a concept

as earlier mentioned, this is a reference point, or combinations of reference points, but never complete due to it's very nature of being incomplete.

It indeed falls short of what is actually going on or happening here.

[Dontaskme]

I have a possible explanation towards this, again thanks to Watts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylqPkuCJPBs)

covered in this movie, is a possible explanation of mankind going generating it's own story, and generating a division within it's environment,

Exactly, we are on the page here...was thinking the exact same thing, but wanted to see if you'd see it too...and you did.

Our language has caused the division, the duality of being...and yet all language is deep down no thing more than just sound heard as words, and sound is generated by just two surfaces rubbing together that have miraculously turned a species into a purveyor of knowledge, which is just a fiction believed to be real, it's really astounding, yet at the same time, it's caused so much mental pain and suffering as words became meaning that would trick the mind into all sorts of negative belief structures. , in that humans believed that they were the thinkers and the knowers, they believed to be the original source of knowledge, not realising that knowledge was just empty sound heard as words with meaning...

That Alan Watts video was mint, thanks for that, really needed to hear that one...I have seen many, but not all of Alan Watts videos.

He maybe dead, but the information is eternal, can't kill info once it's out there, and we are that knowledge.

with crude points of reference/definitions. (for instance 3 points can generate a mountain)
This generally became the norm and new reality of man,
and this is partly why we are in this mess of continuously trying to solve issues, we ourselves created, trough our narrow visioning, and reality creation of those crude reference points, without the "unknown factor" being taken into consideration.

I get this, so agree.

in that consciousness is a 1D seamless reality arising as a 2D reality within a 3D space

You should look into it, this goes even beyond it, but always with the same results.
Imagine a 2d world, where a 3d object comes to visit: what would you see?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvUX6uHqbm0

And this goes on and on, like a fractal upon itself,
leaving the option open towards being already within a multiverse, with humans being the bubbles/seperate entities, and
with "gods", being more entities in other dimensions, and therefore not visible within our 3d realm

and what the heck is a concept

as earlier mentioned, this is a reference point, or combinations of reference points, but never complete due to it's very nature of being incomplete.

It indeed falls short of what is actually going on or happening here.

I see it this way too, so I Agree.

[surreptitious57]

For me it is not acceptance leading to transcendence but detachment leading to acceptance
Because the more detached I am the more accepting I am of my own existence and mortality
I know I am merely passing through and so I am slowly letting go the closer that I get to death
And that does not bother me because to be dead is to be free from suffering in all of its forms

So your process is more focused on detachment ? [ meaning some form of seperation ? ]

But at the same time this detachment results also in acceptance ?

Detachment allows for greater objectivity and less subjective / emotional interpretation
This leads to a greater acceptance of the world as it is as opposed to how I want it to be

I try to only focus my mental energies on things that affect me or things that I can change
Focusing it on anything else merely leads to frustration so I avoid that as much as possible

[NEW]

For me it is not acceptance leading to transcendence but detachment leading to acceptance
Because the more detached I am the more accepting I am of my own existence and mortality
I know I am merely passing through and so I am slowly letting go the closer that I get to death
And that does not bother me because to be dead is to be free from suffering in all of its forms

So your process is more focused on detachment ? [ meaning some form of seperation ? ]

But at the same time this detachment results also in acceptance ?

Detachment allows for greater objectivity and less subjective / emotional interpretation
This leads to a greater acceptance of the world as it is as opposed to how I want it to be

I try to only focus my mental energies on things that affect me or things that I can change
Focusing it on anything else merely leads to frustration so I avoid that as much as possible

Many thanks for this feedback

For what it's worth, I can concur pretty much of this.