Not Seeing The Forest For The Trees
This is exactly our problem.
Not seeing the forest for the trees is not seeing or acknowledging that consciousness comes first, before our thoughts in the mind. It’s valuing what’s written over what we actually experience spontaneously. Our perception is misled by words.
When we become fixated on our thoughts—which are merely words in the mind—we ignore that which sees the thoughts. Believing that thoughts are more real than conscious observation leads to a deluded, make-believe existence.
This is why the world is in the state it’s in, as everything is based on ideas, beliefs and interpretations. The one thing that beings have in common is plain, simple consciousness, but precisely because this is common and plain, we ignore it for superficialities and opinions. Basically, we like stories, and adding to them makes them even more believable.
.
.
.
An example from Carl Sagan:
“A Fire-Breathing Dragon Lives In My Garage”.
Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you’d want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!
“Show me,” you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle — but no dragon.
“Where’s the dragon?” you ask.
“Oh, she’s right here,” I reply, waving vaguely. “I neglected to mention that she’s an invisible dragon.”
You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon’s footprints.
“Good idea,” I say, “but this dragon floats in the air.”
Then you’ll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.
“Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.”
You’ll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.
“Good idea, but she’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.”
And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won’t work.
Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists?
Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested—assertions immune to disproof—are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, my say-so.
BUDDHA IN THE MUD is a blog - a living book based on the Dzogchen teachings. Our teacher is life, and life is karma. We are all Buddhas in the mud of concepts. 