I wrote about
"All I know is what I experience.
I realize everything I BELIEVE may be wrong." :

>>Then, the ancient vedic religion may be sound for you.
>>..
>>Or tibetan buddism.

On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:30:14 -0700, Ken Stuart <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Neither of these statements have anything to do with either the ancient
>vedic religion or tibetan buddhism.

I refer to the (ancient vedic) variety that was described lately
in the magazine "what is enlightment" (available in US english and
german).
Basically stating "nothing exists".
I think if one "realize(s) everything I BELIEVE may be wrong"
this would be a good start into this philosophy.

In tibetan buddism, the experience of (conscious or "lucid") dreams
is an important thing.
Everything is of dream substance, also the "real" things.
Exoreal "things" are also just some believes or perceptions.
Also a good start to "realize everything I BELIEVE may be wrong"

>
>(And, by the way, "All I know is what I experience" is a tautology.)
>
Hm tautology means something like the same thing expressed doubly
or in a redundant way.
I don't think so of the above.
And its more to the opposite,like
"I have to know what i want to experience".

I do think you have to "know" what you experience,
before you can experience it.
You can only experience things you already have an internal model of
(picture, conviction).
E.g. you can only hear a "helicopter" if have internal representations
of "helicopter". From the same sound a amazonas indian might
experience
something like "waterfall" or "big angry insect" .
Up to the point, when he can join his representations "flying moveing
object
(like insect)" and "canoa (containing people)" and also a
time-description
like the frequency it can show up.
>From this point on he or she will hear "helicopter".

Philip and Michael:
>>I'd like to convert to NeanderZen, except that I don't necessarily
>>know what I experience. There is no objective truth.

>Has that been your experience?  :-)

There are only different perceptions (beliefs) which are activated
upon
certain sense experiences (this process called "consciousness").
What sense-channels serve, is almost all filtered out, leaving a
little
to reach consciousness.

This explains what I find it astonishing:
How different people experience very differently in same situations.
Everybody sees only (or dominating) what makes up his own world of
imaginations.

You may forgive such excursions of me on this nutrition list (some
philosophy interested are here i know).

It was mentally nutritious for me in some aspect. :-)

Amadeus S.