A Binary Situation

[Guest guest]

Teacher: to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.Doubt is the heart of belief; just as belief is the heart of doubt.In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.Meditation on true opposites with no middle ground throws the mind into suchness and that ineffable half smile.Ring those bells, exult in their dissonances or detest them, it's still the song. They don't care.May you be filled with loving kindnessMay you be peaceful and at easeMay you be happyMay you be well.....To live is so startling it leaves little time for anything else."— DickinsonPause, Center, and Shift--Brugh Joy

all,If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health situation over the last four months, nevertheless this caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the context or of what the details of our group's discussion up to this point has been.

Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following presentation. > How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?> There is something very very very wrong here!

> If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know! > Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!> What the heck?From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to address the same, that are both formally, and, generally, given in this basic form; the form given above.

Thus:"If [A], then (just) "Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely, 'not being in the know.'

This is simple and may be processed from many perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the psychological conception of psyche situated between or betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.

There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with 'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B follows always.Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?

This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent to the ripening student, etc..I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching instruments for around 25 years, and some address the so-called "binary thinking problem."

My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi, and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly."What is essential, is not important,what is important is not essential."In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B, and then, well, "get out alive!"

The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it wonderfully, when he remarked,"My beliefs are unbelievable!"And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder Krassner's formulation,

"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)

***It would be my experience that this problem of approach, has evoked in almost any discipline some means of addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the real places of overlap between the most esoteric mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's" kind of conundrum. Or not.

As for science,How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?simply needs a revision:What is understood to be true is at once also understood to be subject to not being true.

Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective. This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood to be subject to not being true.***What I find thrilling is this:Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

because it really stands alone. I could script the challenge myself:Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: _________________________________ *

See what you come up with.***For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of process, and any estimation of what is true or real or 'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car is red.)

So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate; premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect, for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like, for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the actuality of Process makes possible something rather altogether different.

About the same thing, but now it goes: understanding with great certainty the A to some degree leading to B to some other degree, or, understanding to some degree the A apparently surely leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it (last) do so! ...at least.

(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)Yet, the kicker for me is elegant. "There is something very very very wrong here!"Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.' Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong! <|;-}=

Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness, the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under a tree. Flowers began to fall about him.

"We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the gods whispered to him."But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti."You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true emptiness."

highest regards to all, in Clepheland*Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

[Guest guest]

all,

If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover

preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health

situation over the last four months, nevertheless this

caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the

context or of what the details of our group's discussion

up to this point has been.

Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following

presentation.

> How can anyone believe something to be true and yet

say it may be not true?

> There is something very very very wrong here!

> If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know!

> Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it

also!

> What the heck?

From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately

acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to

address the same, that are both formally, and, generally,

given in this basic form; the form given above.

Thus:

"If [A], then (just) "

Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the

know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely,

'not being in the know.'

This is simple and may be processed from many

perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one

perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the

truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and

yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the

psychological conception of psyche situated between or

betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.

There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with

'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B

follows always.

Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of

this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?

This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the

paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent

to the ripening student, etc..

I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching

instruments for around 25 years, and some address the

so-called "binary thinking problem."

My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi,

and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly.

"What is essential, is not important,

what is important is not essential."

In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B,

and then, well, "get out alive!"

The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it

wonderfully, when he remarked,

"My beliefs are unbelievable!"

And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder

Krassner's formulation,

"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."

(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on

itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For

sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of

having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)

***

It would be my experience that this problem of approach,

has evoked in almost any discipline some means of

addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the

real places of overlap between the most esoteric

mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting

this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of

mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's"

kind of conundrum. Or not.

As for science,

How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it

may be not true?

simply needs a revision:

What is understood to be true is at once also

understood to be subject to not being true.

Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective.

This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood

to be subject to not being true.

***

What I find thrilling is this:

Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

because it really stands alone. I could script the

challenge myself:

Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if

you doubt it also!

Teacher: _________________________________ *

See what you come up with.

***

For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that

between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such

psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of

process, and any estimation of what is true or real or

'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I

believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car

is red.)

So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute

feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or

negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate;

premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect,

for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like,

for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the

actuality of Process makes possible something rather

altogether different.

About the same thing, but now it goes:

understanding with great certainty the A to some degree

leading to B to some other degree,

or,

understanding to some degree the A apparently surely

leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it

(last) do so! ...at least.

(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)

Yet, the kicker for me is elegant.

"There is something very very very wrong here!"

Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.'

Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the

distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong!

<|;-}=

Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness,

the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its

relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day

Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under

a tree. Flowers began to fall about him.

"We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the

gods whispered to him.

"But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti.

"You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard

emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true

emptiness."

highest regards to all,

in Clepheland

*

Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if

you doubt it also!

Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

Teacher: "Belief is not knowledge. You can't believe something if

you *don't* doubt it also. If there is no room for doubt, then you

are talking about knowledge - it is no longer, then, a question of

belief."

Good to hear from you - hope the health situation turns out OK.

regards,

Dan

[Guest guest]



Greetings,

> to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.

Then one neither believes nor doubts. This would be the case

of the ardent atheist who spends his entire life proving the

none existence of God because he wants to be sure that God

really does not exist. In fact, this is the process of Science and

its method of study. But what of Psychology, The subjective

inner state that can be ruled by archetypal energies.

>In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.

But in the present now, in the moment, is it yes or no ?

Many lives have changed the world because they acted

upon their conviction at the moment and made an instant

decision to act upon a belief and confidence in the assertions

of a truth. At that time there was no opposition. I agree that

yin in time becomes yang and vise versa, this is nature, for

there is a little of yin always in yang and vice versa. But at the

moment, now, is it yes or is it no. In the moment it can't

be both.

If a man loves his wife or child so much at the moment

that he gives up his life for them so that they may live,

I do not believe that there was then room there for hate.

There was but Love. Yes of course lovers have divorced

before and as was said the seeds of change can be planted.

Now we can also say as has been said that when one knows,

he no longer has to believe or doubt. But then the argument

will arise that in knowing, there is always arises unknowing.

"The more I know the less I know". This is philosophical,

because if we want to understand this to the letter, then

we might as well say that we always know less and less.

To know in the moment however, is Knowledge, as intuition,

a hunch, an inspiration, a conviction, a sense of feeling, a satory

moment ect. At such a moment there is only knowing, no

opposition, but a true reconciliation of them to form One Thing

only, Light and consciousness.

Please accept this as my humble opinion.

Steve Kalec

Re: A Binary Situation

Teacher: to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.

Doubt is the heart of belief; just as belief is the heart of doubt.

In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.

Meditation on true opposites with no middle ground throws the mind into suchness and that ineffable half smile.

Ring those bells, exult in their dissonances or detest them, it's still the song. They don't care.

May you be filled with loving kindness

May you be peaceful and at ease

May you be happy

May you be well.....

To live is so startling it leaves little time for anything else."

— Dickinson

Pause, Center, and Shift--Brugh Joy

all,If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health situation over the last four months, nevertheless this caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the context or of what the details of our group's discussion up to this point has been.Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following presentation. > How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?> There is something very very very wrong here! > If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know! > Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!> What the heck?From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to address the same, that are both formally, and, generally, given in this basic form; the form given above.Thus:"If [A], then (just) "Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely, 'not being in the know.'This is simple and may be processed from many perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the psychological conception of psyche situated between or betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with 'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B follows always.Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent to the ripening student, etc..I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching instruments for around 25 years, and some address the so-called "binary thinking problem."My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi, and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly."What is essential, is not important,what is important is not essential."In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B, and then, well, "get out alive!" The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it wonderfully, when he remarked,"My beliefs are unbelievable!"And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder Krassner's formulation,"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)***It would be my experience that this problem of approach, has evoked in almost any discipline some means of addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the real places of overlap between the most esoteric mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's" kind of conundrum. Or not.As for science,How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?simply needs a revision:What is understood to be true is at once also understood to be subject to not being true.Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective. This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood to be subject to not being true.***What I find thrilling is this:Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!because it really stands alone. I could script the challenge myself:Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: _________________________________ *See what you come up with.***For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of process, and any estimation of what is true or real or 'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car is red.) So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate; premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect, for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like, for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the actuality of Process makes possible something rather altogether different.About the same thing, but now it goes: understanding with great certainty the A to some degree leading to B to some other degree, or, understanding to some degree the A apparently surely leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it (last) do so! ...at least.(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)Yet, the kicker for me is elegant. "There is something very very very wrong here!"Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.' Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong! <|;-}=Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness, the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under a tree. Flowers began to fall about him."We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the gods whispered to him."But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti."You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true emptiness." highest regards to all, in Clepheland*Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4164 - Release Date: 01/24/12 19:34:00

[Guest guest]

*

Hi Stephan,All, Thanks Stephan, :-)

Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

Teacher: It seems dear student, that you believe that if through one's processing the experience of A then surely B, which then again requires processing?

Teacher: What if the processing of A is incomplete/incorrect? Is A true? Possibly.Is B likely to be true ? Maybe.

Student: Let me see if I understand. If the processing is incomplete/incorrect,there is a possibility A could still be false and yet a possibility it could be true ? And therefore if A could be false or true then surely B could be false or true?

Teacher: That's a distinct possibility...

Student: So dear teacher,I can believe in something and also doubt it ?

Teacher: That is indeed possible...

Student: However Dear teacher, if one asserts that A is possibly true then surely B is a possibility, is this then a belief in possibilities ?

Teacher: Hmm...indeed,it is certainly possible that this may indeed be a belief in possibilities...

Student, So...to clarify, if one has a belief that A is possibly true and then surely B is a possibility, then this may indicate a possible belief of possibilites, and this possible belief of possibilities, may only be possibly true?

Teacher, Hmm... yes indeed,quite right dear student,that is indeed a distinct possibility....

Gail

*

Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

A Binary Situation

all,

If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health situation over the last four months, nevertheless this caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the context or of what the details of our group's discussion up to this point has been.

Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following presentation.

> How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

> There is something very very very wrong here!

> If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know!

> Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

> What the heck?

From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to address the same, that are both formally, and, generally, given in this basic form; the form given above.

Thus:

"If [A], then (just) "

Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely, 'not being in the know.'

This is simple and may be processed from many perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the psychological conception of psyche situated between or betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.

There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with 'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B follows always.

Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?

This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent to the ripening student, etc..

I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching instruments for around 25 years, and some address the so-called "binary thinking problem."

My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi, and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly.

"What is essential, is not important,

what is important is not essential."

In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B, and then, well, "get out alive!"

The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it wonderfully, when he remarked,

"My beliefs are unbelievable!"

And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder Krassner's formulation,

"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."

(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)

***

It would be my experience that this problem of approach, has evoked in almost any discipline some means of addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the real places of overlap between the most esoteric mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's" kind of conundrum. Or not.

As for science,

How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

simply needs a revision:

What is understood to be true is at once also understood to be subject to not being true.

Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective. This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood to be subject to not being true.

***

What I find thrilling is this:

Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

because it really stands alone. I could script the challenge myself:

Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: _________________________________ *

See what you come up with.

***

For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of process, and any estimation of what is true or real or 'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car is red.)

So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate; premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect, for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like, for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the actuality of Process makes possible something rather altogether different.

About the same thing, but now it goes:

understanding with great certainty the A to some degree leading to B to some other degree,

or,

understanding to some degree the A apparently surely leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it (last) do so! ...at least.

(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)

Yet, the kicker for me is elegant.

"There is something very very very wrong here!"

Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.' Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong! <|;-}=

Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness, the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under a tree. Flowers began to fall about him.

"We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the gods whispered to him.

"But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti.

"You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true emptiness."

highest regards to all,

in Clepheland

*

Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

[Guest guest]

But at the moment, now, is it yes or is it no. In the moment it can't be both.

Hi Steve,

Is there a "moment" in time ?

Best,

Gail

Re: A Binary Situation

 Greetings,

> to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.

Then one neither believes nor doubts. This would be the case

of the ardent atheist who spends his entire life proving the

none existence of God because he wants to be sure that God

really does not exist. In fact, this is the process of Science and

its method of study. But what of Psychology, The subjective

inner state that can be ruled by archetypal energies.

>In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.

But in the present now, in the moment, is it yes or no ?

Many lives have changed the world because they acted

upon their conviction at the moment and made an instant

decision to act upon a belief and confidence in the assertions

of a truth. At that time there was no opposition. I agree that

yin in time becomes yang and vise versa, this is nature, for

there is a little of yin always in yang and vice versa. But at the

moment, now, is it yes or is it no. In the moment it can't

be both.

If a man loves his wife or child so much at the moment

that he gives up his life for them so that they may live,

I do not believe that there was then room there for hate.

There was but Love. Yes of course lovers have divorced

before and as was said the seeds of change can be planted.

Now we can also say as has been said that when one knows,

he no longer has to believe or doubt. But then the argument

will arise that in knowing, there is always arises unknowing.

"The more I know the less I know". This is philosophical,

because if we want to understand this to the letter, then

we might as well say that we always know less and less.

To know in the moment however, is Knowledge, as intuition,

a hunch, an inspiration, a conviction, a sense of feeling, a satory

moment ect. At such a moment there is only knowing, no

opposition, but a true reconciliation of them to form One Thing

only, Light and consciousness.

Please accept this as my humble opinion.

Steve Kalec

Re: A Binary Situation

Teacher: to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.

Doubt is the heart of belief; just as belief is the heart of doubt.

In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.

Meditation on true opposites with no middle ground throws the mind into suchness and that ineffable half smile.

Ring those bells, exult in their dissonances or detest them, it's still the song. They don't care.

May you be filled with loving kindness May you be peaceful and at ease

May you be happy

May you be well.....

To live is so startling it leaves little time for anything else."

— Dickinson

Pause, Center, and Shift--Brugh Joy

all,

If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health situation over the last four months, nevertheless this caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the context or of what the details of our group's discussion up to this point has been.

Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following presentation.

> How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

> There is something very very very wrong here!

> If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know!

> Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

> What the heck?

From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to address the same, that are both formally, and, generally, given in this basic form; the form given above.

Thus:

"If [A], then (just) "

Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely, 'not being in the know.'

This is simple and may be processed from many perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the psychological conception of psyche situated between or betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.

There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with 'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B follows always.

Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?

This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent to the ripening student, etc..

I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching instruments for around 25 years, and some address the so-called "binary thinking problem."

My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi, and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly.

"What is essential, is not important,

what is important is not essential."

In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B, and then, well, "get out alive!"

The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it wonderfully, when he remarked,

"My beliefs are unbelievable!"

And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder Krassner's formulation,

"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."

(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)

***

It would be my experience that this problem of approach, has evoked in almost any discipline some means of addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the real places of overlap between the most esoteric mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's" kind of conundrum. Or not.

As for science,

How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

simply needs a revision:

What is understood to be true is at once also understood to be subject to not being true.

Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective. This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood to be subject to not being true.

***

What I find thrilling is this:

Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

because it really stands alone. I could script the challenge myself:

Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: _________________________________ *

See what you come up with.

***

For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of process, and any estimation of what is true or real or 'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car is red.)

So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate; premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect, for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like, for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the actuality of Process makes possible something rather altogether different.

About the same thing, but now it goes:

understanding with great certainty the A to some degree leading to B to some other degree,

or,

understanding to some degree the A apparently surely leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it (last) do so! ...at least.

(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)

Yet, the kicker for me is elegant.

"There is something very very very wrong here!"

Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.' Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong! <|;-}=

Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness, the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under a tree. Flowers began to fall about him.

"We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the gods whispered to him.

"But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti.

"You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true emptiness."

highest regards to all,

in Clepheland

*

Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!

Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4164 - Release Date: 01/24/12 19:34:00

[Guest guest]



Hi Gail,

>Is there a "moment" in time ?

Well first, time is an illusion as it is subject to relativity.

It is always now. In the past we only have our memories of it.

In the future our imagination of it. It is always in the present

moment when we experience all things, ourselves and the world.

Yes there is always the ever present now. Who cares what I might

believe tomorrow. What I believe at this very moment is my reality.

Yes it is the opposites that allow for consciousness, since one manifests

the other. However there also exists a "Oneness" in Mind, or that Mind is One.

"all is in THE ALL, and THE ALL is in all."

To see a World in a Grain of SandAnd a Heaven in a Wild Flower,Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour.

__ Blake__

IMHO,

All Best,

Steve Kalec

Re: A Binary Situation

Teacher: to believe something truly, is to doubt its truth with equal ardor.

Doubt is the heart of belief; just as belief is the heart of doubt.

In the deepest part of yes is no--in the deepest part of no, yes waits, like the seed, for spring.

Meditation on true opposites with no middle ground throws the mind into suchness and that ineffable half smile.

Ring those bells, exult in their dissonances or detest them, it's still the song. They don't care.

May you be filled with loving kindness May you be peaceful and at ease

May you be happy

May you be well.....

To live is so startling it leaves little time for anything else."

— Dickinson

Pause, Center, and Shift--Brugh Joy

all,If I may wade in the water here. Busy and moreover preoccupied by the need to attend to a family health situation over the last four months, nevertheless this caught my eye. Forgive me too for not being aware of the context or of what the details of our group's discussion up to this point has been.Still, I very much enjoy the directness of the following presentation. > How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?> There is something very very very wrong here! > If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know! > Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!> What the heck?From my limited perspective, nevertheless, I am intimately acquainted with a modest range of problems and means to address the same, that are both formally, and, generally, given in this basic form; the form given above.Thus:"If [A], then (just) "Or: following from 'not being sure,' 'not being in the know.' To be more precise: not being sure, then surely, 'not being in the know.'This is simple and may be processed from many perspectives. Aristotle comes to mind, for one perspective. With Dr. Jung, one perspective considers the truth of: "How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?" and we know this from the psychological conception of psyche situated between or betwixt two pressured opposites--torn between truths.There are many perspectives, each variously dealing with 'if A then just (or surely) B;' alternately: if A, B follows always.Also, and of most interest to me, is the imposition of this 'structure' as a problem--how to resolve it?This lands in the territory of the Koan, of the paradoxical fable, of the teacher's fruity aphorism lent to the ripening student, etc..I've been collecting, (or gathering,) these teaching instruments for around 25 years, and some address the so-called "binary thinking problem."My favorite is the Sufi aphorism, perhaps by way of Rumi, and/or Shams, versioned by Barks, or maybe Bly."What is essential, is not important,what is important is not essential."In this, one would have to work into the A, then into B, and then, well, "get out alive!" The scientist and mental cosmonaut Lilly, put it wonderfully, when he remarked,"My beliefs are unbelievable!"And, finally, I've always resonated with the hippie elder Krassner's formulation,"My only sacred cow is that I have no sacred cows."(Really gives the flavor of the formula spiraling in on itself; hmmm, a possible solution wound up in this. For sure, man, my only sacred cow is the groovy certainty of having no such cow. And, man, don't have a cow!)***It would be my experience that this problem of approach, has evoked in almost any discipline some means of addressing it. This has always struck me as one of the real places of overlap between the most esoteric mysticism, and, the scientific method. Although, in noting this, the problem expressed as a sort of generic aspect of mysticism, is itself a very practical, basic, "beginner's" kind of conundrum. Or not.As for science,How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?simply needs a revision:What is understood to be true is at once also understood to be subject to not being true.Belief--maybe not much entering into this perspective. This is fine too: what is certainly true is understood to be subject to not being true.***What I find thrilling is this:Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!because it really stands alone. I could script the challenge myself:Student asserts to Teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: _________________________________ *See what you come up with.***For me, one helpful distinction (in all this) is that between Condition and Process. Belief (and all such psychological/behavioral modes,) being an aspect of process, and any estimation of what is true or real or 'the case' constituting the condition(al). (Example: I believe the car is surely red = I surely believe the car is red.) So it would be that our wholehearted even absolute feeling, sense, belief, in the wholly positive (or negative) condition, or: 'what is true;' postulate; premise; experience; observation; reflects, may reflect, for example, understanding A leads ineluctably to B--like, for sure, man--and yet, at the very same time the actuality of Process makes possible something rather altogether different.About the same thing, but now it goes: understanding with great certainty the A to some degree leading to B to some other degree, or, understanding to some degree the A apparently surely leading to B, like it does so every darn time I saw it (last) do so! ...at least.(Enter here, Hume's Problem of Induction.)Yet, the kicker for me is elegant. "There is something very very very wrong here!"Hey, wait, one doesn't need any of the three 'verys.' Verily, if it's wrong, just say so, or, offer the distinction between very wrong and very very very wrong! <|;-}=Subhuti was able to understand the potency of emptiness, the viewpoint that nothing exists except in its relationship of subjectivity and objectivity. One day Subhuti, in a mood of sublime emptiness, was sitting under a tree. Flowers began to fall about him."We are praising you for your discourse on emptiness," the gods whispered to him."But I have not spoken of emptiness," said Subhuti."You have not spoken of emptiness, we have not heard emptiness," responded the gods. "This is the true emptiness." highest regards to all, in Clepheland*Student says to teacher: You can't believe something if you doubt it also!Teacher: well, yes...and...no!

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4164 - Release Date: 01/24/12 19:34:00

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4164 - Release Date: 01/24/12 19:34:00