A New way of Seeing and Being w/ Johannes Niederhauser & Daniel Zuruba Part 1- Voice with Vervaeke

[@johnvervaeke]

I fear i was too enthusiastic and did not let Johannes and Daniel speak enough. I will be more careful next time.

[@The_Quota_Official]

Hi John, As a viewer, I did not find that this was the case. I think that you guided the conversation with gravitas and it seems as though your companions enjoyed it.

[@movewithseth]

I struggle with the same thing when I’m excited by ideas and my interlocutors. I imagine we all do. But I believe it is precisely your care for your partners in dialogue that is drawing people to your work even well before they can understand many of the terms you use or references you make. That was certainly the case for me.

[@rachelhayden2586]

This brings a lot of new light to my morning practice of saying, "Arising together with all beings, I vow to realize all things, and attain the ten directions." I've struggled with this gatha (from Soto Zen) not feeling meaningful, but now I can see it in a framework of eidetic eduction.

[@alxsmac733]

I absolutely loved Daniel's Nishitani course. It was a beautiful experience.

[@O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel]

Zaruba is awesome: I suggest everything on his channel!

[@2b-coeur]

"im making this as problematic as i can, not because we're not making progress, but precisely because we are" god to me every day

[@leedufour]

Thanks Johannes, Daniel and John!

[@johnvervaeke]

Thanks Lee

[@user-uo3vn7tv4b]

Thanks guys for a beautiful , educational, and stimulating dialogue! Somewhat over my head because of lack of deep training in Philosophy, I read a lot on my own & love Sophia. I have a thought about how to stimulate human interest in “turning their heads”. I became a self employed studio potter at age 22 or so (72 now). Being immersed in a dialog with the clay & thoughts of form every day resulted for me in experiences of intuitions of what steps to take next as I spun the wheel. Like , wow, where did that idea come from? Being a liberal spiritual person, I was excited to feel connected to the Muse. I very much was inspired by Japanese pottery & aesthetic. Anyway, if our educational system would expose students to more crafts, gardening, etc. , that might open more hearts & minds to beauty, goodness & truth.

[@projectmalus]

The relevance realization leading to beauty around 57 minutes, I see as three sets of give and take. The first two are similar in that it's a give and take of the person and a corresponding give and take from their environment. The plastic gives and takes less, so for the person this is less than say touching tree bark or a wooden cup. The template repeated exactly is a diminished complexity of form, and the materials and colours are homogenized. It's efficient without being in context, it asserts a diminished context, the value is removed. A fullness to these sets means being in context, and the third set of awareness give and take is novel, an understanding which is an opening of a space and a balancing. The flower opens, it matches in form but is unique and fresh.

[@psynergy1756]

I am delighted to hear you will make more to this dialogos. And thank you all three for this time. Some, important separated pieces within my own imagination/thinking/understanding cohered as I watched and listened.

[@82472tclt]

“What is it that is turning in the metanoia?”. Now that’s a question one can live a whole life in…

[@zappzapp00]

Yes...

[@lizellevanwyk5927]

I’m currently struggling quite profusely with the idea of the forms; I’m not quite able to ‘see’ it, to ‘get’ it, it feels. The finger-pointing in this conversation was really helpful, though. Thank you to all three gentlemen!

[@JiminiCrikkit]

Terrific stuff. Very exciting. Much Love.

[@meinking22]

These conversations are awesome! Thank you for sharing

[@williamjmccartan8879]

Great conversation, looking forward to the next one.

[@projectmalus]

Exciting stuff, thanks for the video.

[@MarcosBetancort]

1:08:45 ok John read Jonathan Edwards, religious affections, nature of true virtue and sermons that speak to the matter of faith and knowledge. He gives more of a philosophical explanation to the theology of say Calvin. Also, if you read a Calvin and he is doing theology is normal not to expect philosophy or something else that would please all our queries. Coming to faith is not at all fatalistic, even when there is predestination.

[@Matterful]

This is going to help. Thank you all so much for your effort.

[@aaronmichaelseckman]

Turning in Deep trust and resignation to knowing the limits of interest.

[@movewithseth]

In my experience, when you are in those wordless moments of love with your beloved, that’s when you get the sense that you are seeing things the way they really are. In other words, there is at least some dropping away of the feeling of confusion or anxiety about whether you are bullshitting yourself everywhere you go. Perhaps it is simply that the critical voice shuts up temporarily. If I understood right, part of this conversation was about trying on the idea that that moment is similar to the moment of insight you get in learning, the moment you love Socrates instead of wanting to kill him - Or, maybe it’s even the same as the moment of solving the 9-dot problem… Am I on the right track here?

[@MarcosBetancort]

Now imagine if we are thinking not of Socrates but of the Son of Man, not of wanting but of doing it, the realisation of it all, what it means.

[@movewithseth]

@@MarcosBetancort I’m not sure if I understand all of the connection between my comment and yours, but if I had to make a connection it would be that romantic love it is sometimes a portal into understanding a more universal kind of love, such as one might feel for God, or that general idea of agape, the selflessness in love that supports the growth of another. And, if I understand you right, learning to put our intentions towards that beyond-place - and living there - could indeed be a beautiful way to be.

[@MarcosBetancort]

Why would one want to kill Socrates as meant by your statement?

[@movewithseth]

@@MarcosBetancort That's a reference to part of the conversation. John describes how Socrates was always asking people questions that challenged their assumptions. It aggravated some people because they didn't like being challenged that way - and, at least as John explains it, is what led to the execution of Socrates. But others realized in these moments of "aporia" (sp?) that Socrates was showing them a new way of seeing. Even if they didn't want to be around them, they wanted their sons to be with Socrates. So to "kill Socrates" or "love Socrates" isn't meant literally (I think John used those phrases, although it's been some time now since I watched this video), but it's about that moment when you are confronted with the limits of what you know - what do you do then? Do you defend your ego and resist new knowledge or open yourself to be curious about what you don't know, potentially expanding your world?

[@MarcosBetancort]

@@movewithseth exactly, is this not also what happened in the narrative of the gospel when Jesus spoke to the Pharisees? If you have read them. But here is literal because the jews and gentiles killed him! And spiritually each one of us killed him. As for example John 3, “Whoever believes in him isn’t judged; whoever doesn’t believe in him is already judged, because they don’t believe in the name of God’s only Son. 19 “This is the basis for judgment: The light came into the world, and people loved darkness more than the light, for their actions are evil. 20 All who do wicked things hate the light and don’t come to the light for fear that their actions will be exposed to the light.”

[@tommeakin1732]

I feel compelled to share this: when listening to one of John's conversations while doing some chores I experienced a spontaneous thought (dare I say "vision") when the conversation veared across platos forms and jungian archetypes. I believe John mentioned these things/one of these things being "attractors" just before it came to me. I was in a black void that was dotted in golden star-like globes. The scene "shifted a dimension" and suddenly I was looking at an immense golden orb that resembled a stereotypical virus (unfortunate, I know lol) with its hundreds of "spines". At the end of each spine was a globe that I had originally seen in that void, I was just now seeing the object that they were all connected to in this higher "dimension". I don't think I need to say what that huge structure would represent. This probably doesn't sound as profound as it felt, but it gave me chills

[@driver_4151]

So all the stars or astral bodies that populated the black sky were secretly connected to the same golden source? In any case, you should ask yourself what is your relationship to this object, and what does that mean for the way you act/see the world. A vision only fulfills its aim when it impacts the way you behave, being embodied in such a way, that's the way I see it at least.

[@tommeakin1732]

@@driver_4151 I'm interpreting it as though our reality is dotted with things of "meaning and value that draw you in" amidst a relative void; and then there's this implication that all of these things are connected to the same "source". I'm inclined to say this source would be a "core of humanity", or even life more broadly. You can see how that would relate to the archetypes - but I'm also inclined to say that was a representation of "god" (or an image of what that could be like to an agnostic like myself) As for attempting to embody anything in that and have it change my behaviours, I'm admittedly struggling. My interpretations are seeming to be very amoral. What does someone do with the message that "god lies at the root of every thing that draws man towards it"?

[@driver_4151]

@@tommeakin1732 I see what you mean. Reality is indeed dotted with these "things of meaning and value that draw you in," but how do we know if the things that draw us in have meaning? We are certainly drawn in by icons of popular culture, movies and so on, but are these things part of the stars? So a goal you could have then is to be better attuned to the "things which are of meaning and value", that is, to try and steer your ship according to the stars above. And then, perhaps you could say that some of these stars shine more brightly for you than others, you have to discover what these things are, and then act in accordance with them. If you do that, then, you could say your life is affected and vivified by the golden orb that is the core of life. So you can take your actions more seriously that way, and they might have more meaning as well. Sorry for getting a little Peterson-lite there, but maybe you can see what I mean. I don't think this stops at mere observation, or points to a relativism of all our actions being justified for they are inherently done for that which draws us in, your mileage may vary.

[@tommeakin1732]

@@driver_4151 Well it depends on where you think meaning comes from. I certainly don't think we decide what is meaningful. When we experience meaning, it is something that is almost imposed on you Please don't apologise haha; it's nice being able to bounce some of these thoughts off someone and to dare to use language like this. Personally I worry about potentially sounding pretentious when I dip into metaphor and "poetic" language - but a lot of this language is, in itself, a source of meaning when dealing with this kind of subject. You saying "try and steer your ship according to the stars above" just worked with what I'd described. I think you are picking up the metaphors my unconscious was putting down.

[@driver_4151]

@@tommeakin1732 I wholeheartedly agree that meaning is not something we make, as for it being forced upon us, I would posit that we do also have a say by participating in it, so I would use John's language of it being transjective. I appreciate you saying that I'm picking up on unconscious metaphors, since I am a jungian at heart, which is also why you need not worry about using fancy language and sounding pretentious in the process. The vision is nothing else that a product of your unconscious, which came at a time it needed to come, and seeks to orient you, therefore whatever language you want to use for it will likely be the best. But I also wouldn't say my metaphor was "intended", so to speak. This is an archetypal vision (I've seen many like it) and it speaks using symbols, which are used due to their high degree of applicability, I just expanded on it from a certain angle seeing as I was trying to take it as making a prescriptive statement. The element that makes it unique is what you choose to do with it, since that's what your essence can bring to the table.

[@domenicmolinaro6580]

I see connections here with Krishnamurti's observations: Images are created within experience which live on in thought as knowledge (though it's a dead, past knowledge since it's knowledge created and sustained from an image...a shadow). This is analagous to technological reproduction of forms, while attention to thoughts and feelings brings oneself in sync with the "world already there" and thus greater contact with reality, love, anagoge and inexhaustability since it is ever-changing and ungraspable (like art, or the crane). You have to climb out of the world of dead past knowledge into learned ignorance, which paradoxically brings wisdom from where you can then traverse the world of shadows at leisure, or simply see them flitting across

[@surfism]

At 19:50, you mention “the way things are singing their name”. Might this be a memory of our own ancestors’ experiences? This would ground the “through lines” in the love (or at least recognition) of those things, as opposed to an external state of affairs, independent of human experience. I wonder if the characterisation of 'things singing their name' is motivated by the tendency of our very distant ancestors to attribute agency to shadows and eventually consciousness to God.

[@crakhaed]

👀 this is awesome

[@brbenji]

Hello! Is there a place in the Discord where people chat about these live discussions?

[@kuwapa]

Thanks for sharing! Maybe part the answer about ones affinity to Socrates is rooted in authenticity & self knowledge & trauma that blocks it. To understand ones fear responses is to intimately confront their own traumatic past. I guess in the cave maybe they're all similarly traumatized by their captivity - but that process is one of finding courage to accept that they may have been living life blindly which is traumatic in itself too.

[@alxsmac733]

What's the title of the book on Merleau-Ponty?

[@muroecardo2262]

Great stuff! Anybody knows the name of the book on the Visible and the Invisble which John is reading?

[@MarcosBetancort]

51:00 In the christian understanding, Jesus was set as a dividing line, this is seen most clearly on the cross. In Luke 2 the prophet Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, ‘You see this child: he is destined for the fall and for the rising of many in Israel, destined to be a sign that is rejected - and a sword will pierce your own soul too - so that the secret thoughts of many may be laid bare.’ In the christian psychological theology, the pathless that cannot see beyond death at the cross because is the expression of hatred and nothing else, does not necessarily include the path to see that in the cross love is shown and a new path is opened up, unless this hatred is first transformed into brokenness for having killed Jesus with our thoughts, and this can only happen by divine revelation, if not, we would continue being lost in hatred or rejection. But the brokenness of realising there is no path to life by the cross that reflects our condition and Logos took up himself to be the representative, opens up the path to resurrection in Jesus by the Spirit. Because in the experience of brokenness we are united to the cross and so will also be in his resurrected life, while in mere pathlessness with hatred does not lead us but drives us further away.

[@andrewternet8370]

Why aren't the forms like a blueprint?

[@alohm]

30:00. Nishitani's Buddhist background. When looking at a bottle - sure useful and practical, factory made, a dime a dozen. The Japanese see the origami as not just aesthetic for the art - but also the cognitive energy. The effort and meaning in the object is the true value. The item has value beyond the useful, but that is perspectival or positional to steal a couple phrases. The value is not intrinsic like the bottle but varied. Based not just on the art of the piece but the value placed on the effort to produce, the rarity, the meaning: personal and cultural... Like the Sakura blossom - the impermanence and the reality(aesthetic and personal meaning) breed the value and the meaning/value flows from the imparted(work/cognitive energy) and realized meaning/value. Also in answer to the question of Faith: trust. JV has lost his trust from his upbringing - like the opposite of tribe(meaning and trust shortcut in community/sangha) - they came to not trust their tribe. like the drama of the gifted child, trauma and Mal-adaptation for a child same for those in the meaning realization. Critical thinking is required so biases must be shed - like the bankrupt soul standing at the void - Jung. truth is always an accepted concept - trust is the guide and answer. Faith is trust. Trust and Faith being synonyms in Latin. Like sraddha(faith in Sanskrit): commitment and devotion and confidence in the prescription

[@brendantannam499]

There is a trope in mythology about the exhausted hero being lent a hand to get pass the last hurdle on his quest. In the Purgatorio, Dante describes his experience of the last hurdle from ante-Purgatory to St. Peter’s Gate, the point where the hero has made it to salvation. He is utterly exhausted at the point when St. Lucy takes him up in her arms to carry him up the cliff to the gate. Lucy, of course, is light. In this Christian story, aporia is resolved by the spiritual. Dante is convinced that philosophy is a wonderful endeavour but he had come to believe that a turning point was necessary and that point was spiritual. I think David Bohm turned to Krishnamurti for the same reason.

[@call_in_sick]

I’m in love with the guy wearing glasses 🤓

[@MrGroovequest]

Which one? 👯‍♂

[@jgarciajr82]

Johnny V one day you should try to talk to Rupert Spira.

[@roadsterella]

Vervaeke believes that direct paths, like the one Spira teaches, cause psychosis in an unacceptably high proportion of new practitioners. I have yet to find any evidence to justify his fear, but that may be because I’m biased in favour of Spira’s approach.

[@LoremLorem]

If love is the way of knowing the thing you love and yourself at a same time.. One can use love to find out the self as a tool, like Peterson would say. I mean, when you are in the dark night of the soul "love" is the light that guides you to brighter places. Love = that which interests, that which coughts your eye, "a shiny thing". In light (when you participate to the thing that shines) you can see yourself too (what is this? Feeling better..getting a new idea of yourself, what? ). In other words, you can use the material world to structure identity even when lacking it complitely - but this is only if you can still see light. I think Pegaue's explanation of love (9.12.2021) fits. Jesus talked about buying a pease of land where a treasure is hidden. I see that as having an earthly goal, which acts like a ladder to even better place. A shiny thing. Good talk! Important!

[@karimchaya2432]

👏👏👏👏👏

[@Wasteabuse]

"There is no being only becoming" #carlorovalli #time what say you?

[@Nonconceptuality]

So, was conclusion realized with THIS discussion? We all know there wasn't. One should be honest and determine WHY you are listening and/or engaging in these discussions. Are you actually searching for a concluding answer, or for some other reason. If you wish for actual conclusion, follow me.

[@andreasmuller5223]

I follow you. What's the actual conclusion?

[@Joeonline26]

Oh Roy, you still haven't worked it out? What you seem to be demanding is precisely not what these conversations are for. How many comments do you need to leave before you understand what the point of these conversations is?

[@Nonconceptuality]

@@andreasmuller5223 Thought free Awareness. That's it most directly. The direct path to Reality and the end of suffering is the transcendence of thought. The passing of the internal monolog.

[@Nonconceptuality]

@@Joeonline26 The purpose of these discussions is as a form of relative existence. Philosophers know they exist while they are philosophising. The question is, are they aware that is the purpose? Truth leads to conclusion. Illusion is infinite.

[@ClassPunkOnRumbleAndSubstack]

When it comes to sat-chit-ananda, I'm more of an unstable light bulb rather than one that's on all the time, and I acknowledge all this writing is meaningless from the point of view of realization-- but I wager that you and I both believe in sat-chit-ananda as some kind of speechless conclusive truth, and I think if we are honest with ourselves, we are poor teachers and poor communicators alongside other people and traditions that point to sat-chit-ananda in some way, which is why it has failed to be popular. I think the solution to this is that to teach most effectively, we probably have to have sufficient, ethical adaptation of our teaching that registers on the individual's level, at least as one form of teaching, where the most effective mystical teaching must have an ethical relational uniqueness to it, because of the complex uniqueness of each human being who wants realization but halts it-- where I think it's important to note for more effective teaching, that this halting isn't just in word-based thought, but also seemingly non-word-based thought, hidden-word-based thought, and feeling/sense-based thought-- which seem to complicate the realization process, and these are poor definitions but the best that I can come up with due to human complexity-- where all of these thoughts make up "samskaras" or impressions in consciousness halting realization; so there seems to be non-word-based impressions empowering word-based impressions which is reducing the effectiveness of mystical teaching.