Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The Question of what is Real?

Expand Messages
  • Dick.
    The Question of what is Real? [ Perhaps the question of what is real has become a more pressing issue since the discovery of the sub atomic forces. If the
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 19, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      The Question of what is Real?

      [ Perhaps the question of what is real has become a more pressing issue
      since the discovery of the sub atomic forces. If the physical world is
      not really as we experience it then it brings experience itself into
      question. How real is it? ]

      Not for me it doesn't, for my field and interest IS human experience.
      What exists for a human being to experience? What you are living is what
      you experience isn't it? I cannot study dog or chicken life experience,
      I can only experience what I get to experience. If for half an hour you
      are sitting on a river bank with your feet in the water is that not REAL
      experience? I don't know about you but I don't live a life in among
      quarks and electrons, nor among gods and demons, but I do live in a
      world of constructed things. Would you rather sit among a trillion
      quarks or among a forest of trees? If some physical object only lasts
      for one day then was it not real while it lasted? Same too with a
      physical object which lasts for ten thousand years. Was it not real for
      at least your lifetime? Let me put it this way, what makes real
      experience for you? And what is your definition of real? Here I am and
      here is that thing and I am living with it. How real do you want real to
      get? Is something only real if it lasts forever? Was your last
      toothache real enough? How about your last meal?

      When people talk about a `spiritual experience' then what the heck are
      they talking about? All life experience is life experience. It makes NO
      difference if it is considered to be a mystical experience in the
      transcendent domain or a rainy day here in the lane, it is still ALL
      life experience. You exist and experience is what you get. And that is
      the `food' of your life. Is life here on earth any more or any less real
      experience than existing in that transcendent experience? Not for me it
      isn't, for it is ALL experience. Experience is what I get every moment
      of my waking life. How about you?

      When studying human experience one cannot just take one's own private
      experience into account. I wonder if our recent Hindu/Buddhist person
      has ever studied many thousands of others peoples stories of their
      documented experiences. I sure did, and I found so many correlations. I
      also found differences. But I cannot LIVE their life and they cannot
      live mine. But both the differences and the similarities I found
      interesting. I wonder how much life experience many of these `experts'
      on life have actually lived through and also studied of others reports.
      In order to get a bigger picture on it one must take others accounts
      into consideration, and albeit that we have to take what they tell us,
      for we cannot experience their own private inner experience. So, for
      each of us we can justifiably ask; What is being experienced and what is
      experiencing it. So is the experience not real or is the observer of it
      not real? Why do some folks want one or the other to be NOT REAL? I
      find it to be a silly question. I get what I get and I have to live with
      it. Well, at least for that moment. Moments come and moments go, but
      that too is all a part of life experience is it not? Some things excite
      you and some things don't, and too is all a part of life experience.
      So if any guru or any physicist or any religionists or any
      mathematician, tells me that what I am living through is NOT REAL it
      does not alter the fact that I am living it. And life is not a word
      game. It was also around long before words.

      Dick Richardson







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • devindersingh
      Life is real.But there is a pre-existing reality. Dick,These are not my words. They are Sri Aurobindo s.The Idea is not a reflection of the external fact which
      Message 2 of 2 , Jan 20, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Life is real.But there is a pre-existing reality.
        Dick,These are not my words. They are Sri Aurobindo's.The Idea is not a
        reflection of the external fact which it so much exceeds; rather the
        fact is only a partial reflection of the Idea which has created it. God
        pre-exists before the world can come into being, but to our experience
        in which the senses act first and only then the finer workings of
        consciousness, the world seems to come first and God to emerge out of
        it, so much so that it costs us an effort to rise out of the mechanical,
        pluralistic and pantheistic conceptions of Him to a truer and higher
        idea of the Divine Reality. That which to us is the ultimate is in truth
        the primary reality. So, too, the Idea which seems to us to rise out of
        the fact, really precedes it and out of it the fact has arisen. Our
        vulgar contrast of the ideal and the real is therefore a sensuous error,
        for that which we call real is only a phenomenon of force working out
        something that stands behind the phenomenon and that is pre-existent and
        greater than it. The Real, the Idea, the phenomenon, this is the true
        order of the creative Divinity.
        This is indeed the order of evolution. It begins with a material working
        in which the Prakriti, the executive Power, is veiled by its works, by
        the facts it produces, and itself veils the consciousness which
        originates and supports all its workings. In Life the force emerges and
        becomes vibrant in the very surface of its works, last, in Mind the
        underlying consciousness reveals itself. The animal is executive, not
        creative; a passive tool of Matter and Life he does not seek in his
        thought and will to react upon and use them: the human being too in his
        less developed state is executive rather than creative; he limits his
        view to the present and to his environment, works so as to live from day
        to day, accepts what he is without reaching forward in the thought to
        what he may be, has no ideals. In proportion as he goes beyond the fact
        and seeks to anticipate Nature, to catch the ideas and principles behind
        her workings and finally to seize the idea that is not yet realized in
        fact and himself preside over its execution, he becomes originative and
        creative and no longer merely executive. He begins thus his passage from
        subjection to mastery.
        http://www.odinring.de/eng/ideals.htm

        Real Ideas are the Truths the Conscious Being wills to manifest in
        creation; what the Divine conceives it wants to accomplish. Real Ideas
        are thus the ultimate blueprint of creation.
        http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/1648
        Gulatihttp://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheBecoming/message/4250---
        In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Dick." wrote:

        > The Question of what is Real?
        >
        > [ Perhaps the question of what is real has become a more pressing
        issue
        > since the discovery of the sub atomic forces. If the physical world is
        > not really as we experience it then it brings experience itself into
        > question. How real is it? ]
        >
        > Not for me it doesn't, for my field and interest IS human experience.
        > What exists for a human being to experience? What you are living is
        what
        > you experience isn't it? I cannot study dog or chicken life
        experience,
        > I can only experience what I get to experience. If for half an hour
        you
        > are sitting on a river bank with your feet in the water is that not
        REAL
        > experience? I don't know about you but I don't live a life in among
        > quarks and electrons, nor among gods and demons, but I do live in a
        > world of constructed things. Would you rather sit among a trillion
        > quarks or among a forest of trees? If some physical object only lasts
        > for one day then was it not real while it lasted? Same too with a
        > physical object which lasts for ten thousand years. Was it not real
        for
        > at least your lifetime? Let me put it this way, what makes real
        > experience for you? And what is your definition of real? Here I am
        and
        > here is that thing and I am living with it. How real do you want real
        to
        > get? Is something only real if it lasts forever? Was your last
        > toothache real enough? How about your last meal?
        >
        > When people talk about a `spiritual experience' then what the heck
        are
        > they talking about? All life experience is life experience. It makes
        NO
        > difference if it is considered to be a mystical experience in the
        > transcendent domain or a rainy day here in the lane, it is still ALL
        > life experience. You exist and experience is what you get. And that is
        > the `food' of your life. Is life here on earth any more or any less
        real
        > experience than existing in that transcendent experience? Not for me
        it
        > isn't, for it is ALL experience. Experience is what I get every moment
        > of my waking life. How about you?
        >
        > When studying human experience one cannot just take one's own private
        > experience into account. I wonder if our recent Hindu/Buddhist person
        > has ever studied many thousands of others peoples stories of their
        > documented experiences. I sure did, and I found so many correlations.
        I
        > also found differences. But I cannot LIVE their life and they cannot
        > live mine. But both the differences and the similarities I found
        > interesting. I wonder how much life experience many of these `experts'
        > on life have actually lived through and also studied of others
        reports.
        > In order to get a bigger picture on it one must take others accounts
        > into consideration, and albeit that we have to take what they tell us,
        > for we cannot experience their own private inner experience. So, for
        > each of us we can justifiably ask; What is being experienced and what
        is
        > experiencing it. So is the experience not real or is the observer of
        it
        > not real? Why do some folks want one or the other to be NOT REAL? I
        > find it to be a silly question. I get what I get and I have to live
        with
        > it. Well, at least for that moment. Moments come and moments go, but
        > that too is all a part of life experience is it not? Some things
        excite
        > you and some things don't, and too is all a part of life experience.
        > So if any guru or any physicist or any religionists or any
        > mathematician, tells me that what I am living through is NOT REAL it
        > does not alter the fact that I am living it. And life is not a word
        > game. It was also around long before words.
        >
        > Dick Richardson

        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.