Can knowledge be bad if it detracts from imagination?

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


If that is true, then where did the original knowledge come from, where no prior knowledge preceeded it?

Knowledge is gained through imagination, with each new finding of truth multiple new possibilities emerge, spurring a renewed need to ponder and imagine the truths behind the new mysteries presented.

They go hand in hand and as such are intertwined and eternal, therefore the knowledge gained can only increase your ability and desire to imagine... This is the Intellect feeding itself and its always hungry...

I dont think knowledge can ever rob you of your imagination, but it may very well rob you of your fantasy...

Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

 

If that is true, then where did the original knowledge come from, where no prior knowledge preceeded it?

edit on 30-4-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)

interesting thought...

it points to a) there is untapped knowledge already locked within the mind according to it's respective yet expandable design or..b) the mind has the ability to pull in information from god or godly creations and systems beyond the usual regarded senses... such as through telepathic god energy.

??

reply to post by ChaosMagician


I believe that without this reality, without structure, without knowledge, there is only imagination. This whole universe was imagined, and with a free mind, you can simply start to spontaneously create structure from the unstructured chaos of infinity.

Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by ChaosMagician

 

I believe that without this reality, without structure, without knowledge, there is only imagination. This whole universe was imagined, and with a free mind, you can simply start to spontaneously create structure from the unstructured chaos of infinity.

edit on 30-4-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)

well, without a mind to imagine to begin with... that mind would then have to be pure energy- so then it is irrefutable that energy has consciousness... or something like that.

Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

 

If that is true, then where did the original knowledge come from, where no prior knowledge preceeded it?

edit on 30-4-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)

From observation (experience).

You observe or experience something and then you "know" of it. Right?

reply to post by LifeIsEnergy


What if you are creating that which you observe?

o yes but do not forget how real life is.
don't listen to humanity, this website should teach you that of all things

reply to post by SystemResistor


So what if it is you creating it?
What is happening is the self is seeing self.
Most don't know that all they are veiwing is the self, but the 'things' of this world are all shouting 'wake up'.
Life is not a puzzle, it is a beautiful work of art.
You paint it and veiw it.

Originally posted by SystemResistor
reply to post by LifeIsEnergy

 

What if you are creating that which you observe?

edit on 30-4-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)

Creating it, as in how?

I think many people confuse some rather simple teachings because the words used to describe them can mean many things. You create what you observe, inside of your mind, subjectively, not physically in objective terms.

reply to post by LifeIsEnergy


Because you are consciousness, but you have forgotten.
Life is consciousness knowing consciousness.
It is called realization, liberation when consciousness recognizes itself.

reply to post by LifeIsEnergy


Everything is a subjective experience.
'You create what you observe, inside of your mind, subjectively, not physically in objective terms.' Quote.

You have said here that what is seen is created in the subjects head.
So there is only the subject. There are no physical objects.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by LifeIsEnergy

 

Because you are consciousness, but you have forgotten.
Life is consciousness knowing consciousness.
It is called realization, liberation when consciousness recognizes itself.

Ok, but what does that have to do with what we are talking about?

Anyways, the mind cannot understand or grasp this for the mind is the illusion that creates separation between "you" and the "Self". Realization is beyond mind, that is liberation.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by LifeIsEnergy

 

Everything is a subjective experience.
'You create what you observe, inside of your mind, subjectively, not physically in objective terms.' Quote.

You have said here that what is seen is created in the subjects head.
So there is only the subject. There are no physical objects.

Really? So matter is not there huh?

Who is the subject?

reply to post by LifeIsEnergy


This is what you said:
'You create what you observe, inside of your mind, subjectively, not physically in objective terms.' Quote.

Matter is an illusion, as you also said; mind is the illusion that creates separation between "you" and the "Self".

The subject is all there is. It is not a who, it does not have a name, it is the un-namable. Some call it god.

reply to post by Itisnowagain



If by "physical" you mean "ontological", i.e. truly existent, then no, it's not illusion, by definition.

If you simply mean "the world of our daily experiences" than it is illusion in the sense that it's nature is conventional, or virtual. The world of our daily experience only exists in the virtual reality of our minds.

1) Each phenomena is only such for a given observer in the given context at the given point in time. This is a major source of arguments and misunderstanding, cuz people kinda expect what they call same words to refer to the same phenomena of their subjective experiences.

2) Every perceived "object" (i.e. my wife's beautiful body, or my mom, or what I perceive as "I", "myself") is in fact a combination of many components that have only aligned temporarily and will go out of alignment pretty soon. People tend to attach to these "objects" expecting them to be permanent but they are in fact very transient and will explode back to the individual components pretty soon.

This is what Buddhists mean when they say "Form is emptiness" or "Everything is an illusion"

Anyways I think we went off topic. I agree there is no subject but Self/God on an absolute level, but to speak of this in "intellectual" or conventional terms is not possible, that requires the mind and thus a subject.

reply to post by LifeIsEnergy


All things are only there when you experience them, this is the 'very transient' nature of 'things'.
What you are is not coming and going, you are the subject.
The mind is not the subject because it is seen, we say my mind, my body. The mind is a 'thing', part of the experience, the movie. The mind can be watched, being watched by the subject.
There is the movie and the veiwer of the movie, we are the interface, the screen on which it all appears. The color and sound are apperances on the still flat screen. Is the screen ever bothered by the movie? When we are in deep sleep, it is as though the tv has been switched off. When it is switched back on (on waking) there is now somewhere for the movie to take place.