On 1/02/03 10:58 am texasbg2000 wrote: That is a great example, it cuts through the mud. However it seems to
Message 1 of 1
, Jan 2, 2003
On 1/02/03 10:58 am "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@...>" <Bigbobgraham@...> wrote:
That is a great example, it cuts through the mud. However it seems
to me the word understand can mean either an experience or not.
You're right, in normal parlance, "understanding" certainly is something experiential. To understand algebra, or home mortgages, or how to drive from Chicago to Detroit is an experiential thing.
But the kind of understanding we're talking about here is not experiential. If it were, then it would just be a kind of non-dual mumbo-jumbo - a way of looking at things or a way to talk about things. But it's more than that -- and less too. Maybe the event that people point to as "IT HAPPENED RIGHT THEN!!" -- maybe that is experiential. But that's just a point in time - the understanding is not that.
Of course, where one is evaluating things seeking an end to suffering - then the goal will be conceived of as some kind of experience. It can't be helped. But it also doesn't hurt to be open to the possibility that this understanding is not an experience...
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.