|
Post by zendancer on Dec 5, 2017 7:44:14 GMT -5
I screwed up the quote function..is that which sees same as innermost self,true self or essential nature?..i'm a member of alcoholics anonymous and in our literature we use these terms. spiritual awakening,etc...freedom from the bondage of self..so freedom from the bondage of self just means that who I thought I was,was rubbish created by the mind?..and the awakening is the realization,or waking up is to be aware of the bs?..the bondage of self being the sense of separation?..or as tolle says the egoic mind? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 5, 2017 16:49:52 GMT -5
thanks zendancer. learned everything from tolle and this lets the one that sees know that true self is on the right path. still amazed that who and what I thought I was was total bs..i have read about half of all yer posts on this board. been a tremendous help.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2017 17:20:02 GMT -5
I screwed up the quote function..is that which sees same as innermost self,true self or essential nature?..i'm a member of alcoholics anonymous and in our literature we use these terms. spiritual awakening,etc...freedom from the bondage of self..so freedom from the bondage of self just means that who I thought I was,was rubbish created by the mind?..and the awakening is the realization,or waking up is to be aware of the bs?..the bondage of self being the sense of separation?..or as tolle says the egoic mind? Here's another way to understand mike's distinction between "realization itself" and "realizing through intellect": it's not really all that hard for people to understand that they've lived their lives identified with an image of themselves that is the product of what they were conditioned to believe and the process of their thinking/feeling mind. But for many this understanding isn't all that satisfying. One of the reasons it's "not enough" is because the simple intellectual understanding of this situation doesn't change it. At least, not permanently.
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 5, 2017 17:40:23 GMT -5
I screwed up the quote function..is that which sees same as innermost self,true self or essential nature?..i'm a member of alcoholics anonymous and in our literature we use these terms. spiritual awakening,etc...freedom from the bondage of self..so freedom from the bondage of self just means that who I thought I was,was rubbish created by the mind?..and the awakening is the realization,or waking up is to be aware of the bs?..the bondage of self being the sense of separation?..or as tolle says the egoic mind? Here's another way to understand mike's distinction between "realization itself" and "realizing through intellect": it's not really all that hard for people to understand that they've lived their lives identified with an image of themselves that is the product of what they were conditioned to believe and the process of their thinking/feeling mind. But for many this understanding isn't all that satisfying. One of the reasons it's "not enough" is because the simple intellectual understanding of this situation doesn't change it. At least, not permanently. are you saying that dis identification with the conditioned mind is not awakening?...isn't the one that sees the false self as an illusion the true self?..the intellectual understanding of this I cant even describe to you. total freedom from the bondage of self..aa what I mean is the simple intellectual understanding of this has has had a profound impact on life as whatever I am knew it. iow,goin from unconscious to conscious..from in my head to living in the present,moment to moment and responding to life as it happens rather than reacting to the conditioned,programmed mind.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2017 18:30:21 GMT -5
Here's another way to understand mike's distinction between "realization itself" and "realizing through intellect": it's not really all that hard for people to understand that they've lived their lives identified with an image of themselves that is the product of what they were conditioned to believe and the process of their thinking/feeling mind. But for many this understanding isn't all that satisfying. One of the reasons it's "not enough" is because the simple intellectual understanding of this situation doesn't change it. At least, not permanently. are you saying that dis identification with the conditioned mind is not awakening?...isn't the one that sees the false self as an illusion the true self?.. the intellectual understanding of this I cant even describe to you. total freedom from the bondage of self..aa what I mean is the simple intellectual understanding of this has has had a profound impact on life as whatever I am knew it. iow,goin from unconscious to conscious..from in my head to living in the present,moment to moment and responding to life as it happens rather than reacting to the conditioned,programmed mind. What I perceive as the sentiment behind what you've written here is precisely what I take Mike to have meant by his distinction between "the realization itself" and "realizing through the mind", the one you had the question about. Let's take Tolle's work as an example. People are all very different, although similar enough that we can compare experiences. So we all have the potential to be effected by something like "The Power of Now" quite differently. Seems to me that some folks read it with an open attention to his pointing that he wasn't offering a philosophy, and that his words weren't ultimately meant for the conditioned mind, but instead for that "true self", as you've put it here. Other's, not so much. So for some, this intellectual understanding about identity can have a profound impact on experience. For some of those, it might be the start of something, the start of a process of conscious seeking. For others, it might even lead directly and immediately to the "realization itself". In contrast, some folks might not be able to relate to what he wrote and find it a nonsense. For yet a different type of person the idea of a "false self" based on misidentification with form might be just another interesting idea about the world and human nature -- they might understand and agree with it to one degree or another, but it won't really change their lives in any way. And the final folks that come to mind are the ones that I feel for the most, as for them, Tolle's ideas about identity can even turn into a source of inner conflict as they try to confront what he pointed to directly, but with the same egoic mind that he tried to clue them in to in the first place. Despite his explicit warning about doing that.
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 5, 2017 19:01:18 GMT -5
are you saying that dis identification with the conditioned mind is not awakening?...isn't the one that sees the false self as an illusion the true self?.. the intellectual understanding of this I cant even describe to you. total freedom from the bondage of self..aa what I mean is the simple intellectual understanding of this has has had a profound impact on life as whatever I am knew it. iow,goin from unconscious to conscious..from in my head to living in the present,moment to moment and responding to life as it happens rather than reacting to the conditioned,programmed mind. What I perceive as the sentiment behind what you've written here is precisely what I take Mike to have meant by his distinction between "the realization itself" and "realizing through the mind", the one you had the question about. Let's take Tolle's work as an example. People are all very different, although similar enough that we can compare experiences. So we all have the potential to be effected by something like "The Power of Now" quite differently. Seems to me that some folks read it with an open attention to his pointing that he wasn't offering a philosophy, and that his words weren't ultimately meant for the conditioned mind, but instead for that "true self", as you've put it here. Other's, not so much. So for some, this intellectual understanding about identity can have a profound impact on experience. For some of those, it might be the start of something, the start of a process of conscious seeking. For others, it might even lead directly and immediately to the "realization itself". In contrast, some folks might not be able to relate to what he wrote and find it a nonsense. For yet a different type of person the idea of a "false self" based on misidentification with form might be just another interesting idea about the world and human nature -- they might understand and agree with it to one degree or another, but it won't really change their lives in any way. And the final folks that come to mind are the ones that I feel for the most, as for them, Tolle's ideas about identity can even turn into a source of inner conflict as they try to confront what he pointed to directly, but with the same egoic mind that he tried to clue them in to in the first place. Despite his explicit warning about doing that.. what you perceive to be another persons sentiment is an idea,thought in yer head....i'm talkin about direct experience..right here right now!..no imagination involved...maybe zendancer can speak for himself... realizing through the mind is not awakening..
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 5, 2017 19:14:43 GMT -5
are you saying that dis identification with the conditioned mind is not awakening?...isn't the one that sees the false self as an illusion the true self?.. the intellectual understanding of this I cant even describe to you. total freedom from the bondage of self..aa what I mean is the simple intellectual understanding of this has has had a profound impact on life as whatever I am knew it. iow,goin from unconscious to conscious..from in my head to living in the present,moment to moment and responding to life as it happens rather than reacting to the conditioned,programmed mind. What I perceive as the sentiment behind what you've written here is precisely what I take Mike to have meant by his distinction between "the realization itself" and "realizing through the mind", the one you had the question about. Let's take Tolle's work as an example. People are all very different, although similar enough that we can compare experiences. So we all have the potential to be effected by something like "The Power of Now" quite differently. Seems to me that some folks read it with an open attention to his pointing that he wasn't offering a philosophy, and that his words weren't ultimately meant for the conditioned mind, but instead for that "true self", as you've put it here. Other's, not so much. So for some, this intellectual understanding about identity can have a profound impact on experience. For some of those, it might be the start of something, the start of a process of conscious seeking. For others, it might even lead directly and immediately to the "realization itself". In contrast, some folks might not be able to relate to what he wrote and find it a nonsense. For yet a different type of person the idea of a "false self" based on misidentification with form might be just another interesting idea about the world and human nature -- they might understand and agree with it to one degree or another, but it won't really change their lives in any way. And the final folks that come to mind are the ones that I feel for the most, as for them, Tolle's ideas about identity can even turn into a source of inner conflict as they try to confront what he pointed to directly, but with the same egoic mind that he tried to clue them in to in the first place. Despite his explicit warning about doing that. L: What you wrote here reminded me of something that Xlkander/Jay wrote a few days ago. He pointed out that some people have very powerful conversion experiences from one belief system to another. I think the technical word for that sort of conversion is "metanoia" or something like that. I've had that sort of conversion experience in the past, and it can be extremely powerful. His belief is that non-duality is a belief system just like other belief systems, and although it can be a belief system, what it points to is not. If conversion is from one belief system to another, it remains within the realm of the intellect, and other conversions to other belief systems may follow. SR is different because it is freedom from ALL belief systems, and is a direct apprehension of what cannot be apprehended through the intellect. It is therefore permanent. From that point forward, one never forgets that whatever appears to be happening is not happening to a "person" in any conventional sense because one knows, concretely, and without any doubt, that all separation is a cognitive illusion. I suspect that people who attain and then lose an enlightened state of mind do so because they never attain SR. Flora Courtois comes to mind (as do a few others). She had a huge cosmic consciousness experience which freed her to live an enlightened life for many years, but she eventually lost that enlightened state of being because she thought that what had happened had happened to the person who she thought she was. She never realized that the CC experience had not happened to WHAT SHE REALLY WAS. In Flora's case, after losing her sense of freedom, she began to reflect a great deal about herself--about who she thought she was--and she concluded that she had somehow squandered the great gift that she had received as a young woman. She ultimately got back into Zen, and after talking with Zen people, she concluded that her big failure was a failure to practice regular meditation. Of course, nothing could have been further from the truth, but she never realized it. She continued meditating until the end of her life but never regained her enlightened state of mind.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Dec 5, 2017 19:47:13 GMT -5
His belief is that non-duality is a belief system just like other belief systems, and although it can be a belief system, what it points to is not. Yes, and were it not for a moment of unexpected Grace - direct contact with my own inner Silence - I would likely still be hypnotically attached to a belief system while thinking I definitely was not :-)
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 5, 2017 19:48:57 GMT -5
you explained that in a way that even I understand it. from what you said I have freedom from thinkin that life is happening to a me about 75% of the time. once in a while I still get in my head for 5 or 10 seconds before I catch it.. always aroubd people who I have emotional connection to.( grown kids
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 5, 2017 19:51:39 GMT -5
His belief is that non-duality is a belief system just like other belief systems, and although it can be a belief system, what it points to is not. Yes, and were it not for a moment of unexpected Grace - direct contact with my own inner Silence - I would likely still be hypnotically attached to a belief system while thinking I definitely was not :-) when you say unexpected grace,what exactly do you mean?..how long does direct contact with inner silence last?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2017 21:28:08 GMT -5
What I perceive as the sentiment behind what you've written here is precisely what I take Mike to have meant by his distinction between "the realization itself" and "realizing through the mind", the one you had the question about. Let's take Tolle's work as an example. People are all very different, although similar enough that we can compare experiences. So we all have the potential to be effected by something like "The Power of Now" quite differently. Seems to me that some folks read it with an open attention to his pointing that he wasn't offering a philosophy, and that his words weren't ultimately meant for the conditioned mind, but instead for that "true self", as you've put it here. Other's, not so much. So for some, this intellectual understanding about identity can have a profound impact on experience. For some of those, it might be the start of something, the start of a process of conscious seeking. For others, it might even lead directly and immediately to the "realization itself". In contrast, some folks might not be able to relate to what he wrote and find it a nonsense. For yet a different type of person the idea of a "false self" based on misidentification with form might be just another interesting idea about the world and human nature -- they might understand and agree with it to one degree or another, but it won't really change their lives in any way. And the final folks that come to mind are the ones that I feel for the most, as for them, Tolle's ideas about identity can even turn into a source of inner conflict as they try to confront what he pointed to directly, but with the same egoic mind that he tried to clue them in to in the first place. Despite his explicit warning about doing that. L: What you wrote here reminded me of something that Xlkander/Jay wrote a few days ago. He pointed out that some people have very powerful conversion experiences from one belief system to another. I think the technical word for that sort of conversion is "metanoia" or something like that. I've had that sort of conversion experience in the past, and it can be extremely powerful. His belief is that non-duality is a belief system just like other belief systems, and although it can be a belief system, what it points to is not. If conversion is from one belief system to another, it remains within the realm of the intellect, and other conversions to other belief systems may follow. SR is different because it is freedom from ALL belief systems, and is a direct apprehension of what cannot be apprehended through the intellect. It is therefore permanent. From that point forward, one never forgets that whatever appears to be happening is not happening to a "person" in any conventional sense because one knows, concretely, and without any doubt, that all separation is a cognitive illusion. I suspect that people who attain and then lose an enlightened state of mind do so because they never attain SR. Flora Courtois comes to mind (as do a few others). She had a huge cosmic consciousness experience which freed her to live an enlightened life for many years, but she eventually lost that enlightened state of being because she thought that what had happened had happened to the person who she thought she was. She never realized that the CC experience had not happened to WHAT SHE REALLY WAS. In Flora's case, after losing her sense of freedom, she began to reflect a great deal about herself--about who she thought she was--and she concluded that she had somehow squandered the great gift that she had received as a young woman. She ultimately got back into Zen, and after talking with Zen people, she concluded that her big failure was a failure to practice regular meditation. Of course, nothing could have been further from the truth, but she never realized it. She continued meditating until the end of her life but never regained her enlightened state of mind. Too bad Flora went through that in the days before the internet. Perhaps she might have made contact with someone who could have suggested to her that she was perfect, just as she was. Most of what I've read about spirituality has been over the past few years on these forums. I've read more than one account to the effect of "todays profound spiritual epiphany is tomorrow's mildly interesting memory". So I see what you mean about how a particular realization is necessary for the "conversion" to be permanent. But it seems to me that there's another way these types of experiences can spin out that's different from that. One that involves a sort of inevitability. Perhaps sometimes an experience can be so moving that freedom becomes only a matter of time. In that sort of case, teasing out where the experience ended and the realization began might just not be possible. Doesn't Zen have an aphorism about "swallowing the red hot iron ball?" I seem to recall it written about with respect to the koan of Mu. The references to that seem to convey what I'm getting at with this potential of an experience that leads to an inevitable realization. This is an interesting word, "metanoia", that I haven't encountered before. It's definitely related to this point that I have interest in that scientific thought and critical thinking can only ever lead to a perfection of belief system rather than the absence of one. The overactive mind creates a self-referential "paradox" (similar to the "liar's paradox") out of the idea of the potential for an absence of belief system. Conversely, the fact that skeptical thought and empirical action applied to the material world can only ever lead to replacing one belief with another is ultimately quite obvious. Any belief system, either rational or otherwise, requires some sort of objective component for it to have any meaning. Isn't there another term that applies to a belief system that no other human being shares? A term that isn't very flattering? From my experience, and from reading those of others, one does have to pass through a sort of madness in order to face in the direction of those pointers to existential truth. But that's the only place where any meaning of the word "sanity" worthy of that word might be found.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2017 21:30:14 GMT -5
What I perceive as the sentiment behind what you've written here is precisely what I take Mike to have meant by his distinction between "the realization itself" and "realizing through the mind", the one you had the question about. Let's take Tolle's work as an example. People are all very different, although similar enough that we can compare experiences. So we all have the potential to be effected by something like "The Power of Now" quite differently. Seems to me that some folks read it with an open attention to his pointing that he wasn't offering a philosophy, and that his words weren't ultimately meant for the conditioned mind, but instead for that "true self", as you've put it here. Other's, not so much. So for some, this intellectual understanding about identity can have a profound impact on experience. For some of those, it might be the start of something, the start of a process of conscious seeking. For others, it might even lead directly and immediately to the "realization itself". In contrast, some folks might not be able to relate to what he wrote and find it a nonsense. For yet a different type of person the idea of a "false self" based on misidentification with form might be just another interesting idea about the world and human nature -- they might understand and agree with it to one degree or another, but it won't really change their lives in any way. And the final folks that come to mind are the ones that I feel for the most, as for them, Tolle's ideas about identity can even turn into a source of inner conflict as they try to confront what he pointed to directly, but with the same egoic mind that he tried to clue them in to in the first place. Despite his explicit warning about doing that.. what you perceive to be another persons sentiment is an idea,thought in yer head....i'm talkin about direct experience..right here right now!..no imagination involved...maybe zendancer can speak for himself... realizing through the mind is not awakening.. Yes. That's the bottom line answer to the question you put in response to Mike's distinction between "the realization itself" and "realization of the mind".
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Dec 6, 2017 1:46:59 GMT -5
How Narada Muni, the great sage was awakened. “After that, under the shadow of a banyan tree in a forest without any human habitation, I began to meditate upon the supersoul situated within myself, using my intelligence as I learned by hearing from liberated souls. With my mind transformed into transcendental love I began to meditate upon the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead. Tears rolled down from my eyes, and immediately the Personality of Godhead, Lord Sri Krsna, appeared on the lotus of my heart.” Narada describes the form of the absolute truth as he saw Him: “The transcendental form of the Lord, as it is, is perfectly apt to the desire of the mind.” Narada did not experience the Lord as formless, but His form is not like anything in this material world. It is described that all the differently cut and shaped forms that we are seeing all through our life do not banish all our mental disparity and dissatisfaction. But the special feature of the transcendental form of the Lord is that once it is seen, one is satisfied forever, and no material form holds any more attraction for the seer. So the Lord’s form is like nothing we see now in matter . Narada saw the form of God, he was completely satisfied in his being, and then the same form was no longer present to his vision. “Not seeing that form again, I suddenly got up, being perturbed in mind, as it happens when one loses that which is desirable.” Desiring more than anything to see again the form of the Lord, Narada tried to concentrate his mind on his heart, but he could not see Him anymore, and so became grief-stricken. Not at Narada’s command, but by that same causeless mercy, the transcendental Supreme Personality of Godhead, seeing Narada’s attempt in a lonely place, spoke unto him, just to mitigate his grief. “O Narada, I regret very much that during this lifetime, you will no longer be able to see Me. Those who are incomplete in service or still immature in being freed from all material dirt can hardly see Me. O virtuous one, you have only once seen My Person. This is just to increase your hankering for Me, because the more you desire Me, the more you will be freed from material desire. By service of the absolute truth even for a short time, a devotee’s intelligence becomes fixed firmly on Me." There is no difficulty on His part in coming to us when He wills. It may be very difficult for an ordinary subject to get an audience with the king; but if the king desires to see any citizen, what is the difficulty in his coming?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2017 4:58:31 GMT -5
L: What you wrote here reminded me of something that Xlkander/Jay wrote a few days ago. He pointed out that some people have very powerful conversion experiences from one belief system to another. I think the technical word for that sort of conversion is "metanoia" or something like that. I've had that sort of conversion experience in the past, and it can be extremely powerful. His belief is that non-duality is a belief system just like other belief systems, and although it can be a belief system, what it points to is not. If conversion is from one belief system to another, it remains within the realm of the intellect, and other conversions to other belief systems may follow. SR is different because it is freedom from ALL belief systems, and is a direct apprehension of what cannot be apprehended through the intellect. It is therefore permanent. From that point forward, one never forgets that whatever appears to be happening is not happening to a "person" in any conventional sense because one knows, concretely, and without any doubt, that all separation is a cognitive illusion. I suspect that people who attain and then lose an enlightened state of mind do so because they never attain SR. Flora Courtois comes to mind (as do a few others). She had a huge cosmic consciousness experience which freed her to live an enlightened life for many years, but she eventually lost that enlightened state of being because she thought that what had happened had happened to the person who she thought she was. She never realized that the CC experience had not happened to WHAT SHE REALLY WAS. In Flora's case, after losing her sense of freedom, she began to reflect a great deal about herself--about who she thought she was--and she concluded that she had somehow squandered the great gift that she had received as a young woman. She ultimately got back into Zen, and after talking with Zen people, she concluded that her big failure was a failure to practice regular meditation. Of course, nothing could have been further from the truth, but she never realized it. She continued meditating until the end of her life but never regained her enlightened state of mind. Too bad Flora went through that in the days before the internet. Perhaps she might have made contact with someone who could have suggested to her that she was perfect, just as she was. Most of what I've read about spirituality has been over the past few years on these forums. I've read more than one account to the effect of "todays profound spiritual epiphany is tomorrow's mildly interesting memory". So I see what you mean about how a particular realization is necessary for the "conversion" to be permanent. But it seems to me that there's another way these types of experiences can spin out that's different from that. One that involves a sort of inevitability. Perhaps sometimes an experience can be so moving that freedom becomes only a matter of time. In that sort of case, teasing out where the experience ended and the realization began might just not be possible. Doesn't Zen have an aphorism about "swallowing the red hot iron ball?" I seem to recall it written about with respect to the koan of Mu. The references to that seem to convey what I'm getting at with this potential of an experience that leads to an inevitable realization. This is an interesting word, "metanoia", that I haven't encountered before. It's definitely related to this point that I have interest in that scientific thought and critical thinking can only ever lead to a perfection of belief system rather than the absence of one. The overactive mind creates a self-referential "paradox" (similar to the "liar's paradox") out of the idea of the potential for an absence of belief system. Conversely, the fact that skeptical thought and empirical action applied to the material world can only ever lead to replacing one belief with another is ultimately quite obvious. Any belief system, either rational or otherwise, requires some sort of objective component for it to have any meaning. Isn't there another term that applies to a belief system that no other human being shares? A term that isn't very flattering? From my experience, and from reading those of others, one does have to pass through a sort of madness in order to face in the direction of those pointers to existential truth. But that's the only place where any meaning of the word "sanity" worthy of that word might be found. From what I last heard Neurology is proving that the brain is creating the character along with it's many other functions.
|
|
|
Post by etolle on Dec 6, 2017 6:12:11 GMT -5
How Narada Muni, the great sage was awakened. “After that, under the shadow of a banyan tree in a forest without any human habitation, I began to meditate upon the supersoul situated within myself, using my intelligence as I learned by hearing from liberated souls. With my mind transformed into transcendental love I began to meditate upon the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead. Tears rolled down from my eyes, and immediately the Personality of Godhead, Lord Sri Krsna, appeared on the lotus of my heart.” Narada describes the form of the absolute truth as he saw Him: “The transcendental form of the Lord, as it is, is perfectly apt to the desire of the mind.” Narada did not experience the Lord as formless, but His form is not like anything in this material world. It is described that all the differently cut and shaped forms that we are seeing all through our life do not banish all our mental disparity and dissatisfaction. But the special feature of the transcendental form of the Lord is that once it is seen, one is satisfied forever, and no material form holds any more attraction for the seer. So the Lord’s form is like nothing we see now in matter . Narada saw the form of God, he was completely satisfied in his being, and then the same form was no longer present to his vision. “Not seeing that form again, I suddenly got up, being perturbed in mind, as it happens when one loses that which is desirable.” Desiring more than anything to see again the form of the Lord, Narada tried to concentrate his mind on his heart, but he could not see Him anymore, and so became grief-stricken. Not at Narada’s command, but by that same causeless mercy, the transcendental Supreme Personality of Godhead, seeing Narada’s attempt in a lonely place, spoke unto him, just to mitigate his grief. “O Narada, I regret very much that during this lifetime, you will no longer be able to see Me. Those who are incomplete in service or still immature in being freed from all material dirt can hardly see Me. O virtuous one, you have only once seen My Person. This is just to increase your hankering for Me, because the more you desire Me, the more you will be freed from material desire. By service of the absolute truth even for a short time, a devotee’s intelligence becomes fixed firmly on Me." There is no difficulty on His part in coming to us when He wills. It may be very difficult for an ordinary subject to get an audience with the king; but if the king desires to see any citizen, what is the difficulty in his coming? talkin to and seein "god"....how do we know that some this stuff is not mental illness?...illusion,delusion.
|
|