|
Post by therealfake on Jan 15, 2011 11:21:39 GMT -5
it seems like maybe the only healthy use for the mind, while it still spins, is to engage the curiosity, to rather live there as much as you can, if your mind is doing its dance. letting yourself not-know alleviates a lot of suffering, and keeps the space open to just be what is. Yes, of course, your absolutely right... The inquiry always collapses down to that, which is unknowable and believe it or not, I have resigned myself to that reality. But, also along the way, there must be some way of communicating to the masses, the beauty, the love, the peace and joy, when a person learns to simply be and flow with life, which just is. I don't have to tell you the mess the world and human existence is in. Yes, it's a better place, if a few people, can reach a place of self realization, but for any significant change, we need a critical mass. Love can only be realized, if it is extended outward and not hoarded or feared. The more curiosity engages people and there are educated beings, who can answer all inquiries, the sooner the expansion of a greater consciousness, will take place... TRF
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 15, 2011 12:37:28 GMT -5
it seems like maybe the only healthy use for the mind, while it still spins, is to engage the curiosity, to rather live there as much as you can, if your mind is doing its dance. letting yourself not-know alleviates a lot of suffering, and keeps the space open to just be what is. Yes, of course, your absolutely right... The inquiry always collapses down to that, which is unknowable and believe it or not, I have resigned myself to that reality. But, also along the way, there must be some way of communicating to the masses, the beauty, the love, the peace and joy, when a person learns to simply be and flow with life, which just is. I don't have to tell you the mess the world and human existence is in. Yes, it's a better place, if a few people, can reach a place of self realization, but for any significant change, we need a critical mass. Love can only be realized, if it is extended outward and not hoarded or feared. The more curiosity engages people and there are educated beings, who can answer all inquiries, the sooner the expansion of a greater consciousness, will take place... TRF TRF: Well, there's nothing wrong with having these kinds of thoughts, but they are, after all, just thoughts. From my perspective the world is always perfect just as it is. Do more people need to wake up? Not really. The perfect number of people are always waking up perfectly on time, whether that is three people or a thousand people. When fruit gets ripe, it falls from the tree precisely on schedule. Is the world in a mess? I don't know because that's a bit too abstract for me. My focus is always here and now doing what I have to do, and whatever I do is always brilliantly, sublimely, and numinously empty. I see people around me consumed with imaginary problems, and I do what I can to help or teach, but I leave the effects of those efforts, which are not really efforts, up to Source. The whole thing is not unlike children playing in a sandbox and doing what they do for no reason whatsoever other than its fun. Would the world be a better place if it reached some sort of spiritual critical mass and everyone woke up? Maybe, but maybe not. Source might find that situation a bit too boring and have to start the play all over again (is this what precipitated the Big Bang?). In any case it is really hard to imagine anything better than what is happening now, except when what is happening now isn't better. LOL Should we try to find some way of communicating with the masses about the love, joy, wonder, peace, etc. that can be attained by simply living life and going with the flow? Again, "the masses" strikes me as pretty abstract, but maybe the first step toward reaching masses of people is to communicate with the few people who seem genuinely interested in this subject, and this seems to be exactly what we're doing on this forum right this very minute. Ha ha. (Talk about self-reference in action! Wouldn't Godel and Escher get a kick out of this!) FWIW, over the years I have spoken to thousands of people about non-duality in churches, Sunday-school classes, and university classes and I've written hundreds of newspaper articles about this subject, but only one in a thousand people (and that may be way too generous an estimation--LOL) have expressed anything more than a passing interest or idle curiosity about this. This is perfect! I do what I have to do, and they do what they have to do. I know my role, and although they don't know their roles, they still play them perfectly. This is very funny. Doing what I do keeps me happy as a clam, but the only time I come out of my shell and get really excited is when one person has an insight, or sees-through a mind-generated illusion, or wakes up. Now, that is something to celebrate in a big big way! I'll definitely break out the champaigne for that. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by stepvhen on Jan 15, 2011 12:58:24 GMT -5
Here is my take on this. I'd love to discuss it with you.
It is as it is. It can only be that way and so the way it is, is perfect. Do more people need to wake up? No.
No-one needs to do anything.
They don't need to stay asleep either. It doesn't really matter what they do.
However what they do will change their experience. They don't need to wake up there is nothing to be gained. Waking up will however alter the experience.
From the point of view of wakefulness it doesn't matter either way. From the point of view of non wakefulness the awakened state is preferred.
From this then I would conclude that wakefulness of as many people as possible is preferable overall to both awakened and unawakened individuals, simply because the mass of people are unawakened and as such the majority of people in their current state would find the awakened state preferable.
Yes. It is a mess. Of course it is. It is as it should be and due to current it's circumstances it should be a mess. Does that mean it is not perfect and as it should be? No. It is perfect it is as it should be.
Things are always as they should be.
Those are opinions I've formed myself not exposed to much outside source for scrutiny. I whole heartedly want them to be proven wrong.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 15, 2011 13:21:46 GMT -5
Sure, space is space before, during and after it's populated with objects. I was just wondering. Does this space, have an independence of it's own, or is it dependent on the physicality and perception of a human host? I don't want to assume, that the perception of space might just be another thought, subtle as it may be, that's why I'm asking. TRF I don't mean a physical space. I mean nothingness/beingness, which brings a sense of unbounded spaciousness.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 15, 2011 13:32:05 GMT -5
Wonderfully stated both of you... I just don't see how the immensity that we really are, this perfection, is inherently self-destructive and seeks annihilation, by virtue of it's current path. Would there be perfection in the universe without the human race? Of course. But it seems pointless and maybe that's the point... lol TRF
|
|
|
Post by angela on Jan 15, 2011 13:53:57 GMT -5
what a great group of posts this morning.... glad i took a few days off. it's strange how theoretical all this stuff is, until it just isn't anymore. and how strange the workings and prison of the mind, until that too, just isn't anymore. you know my biggest issue right up until the end was this little gaping fear that i had to somehow hold onto the idea that things were "wrong" somehow. right up at the edge of the abyss, that was one of the last five little treasures in my grip that got vacuumed away. (my identity as a fixer, it turns out, was inherently full of division, and boy howdy did it wound the ego to admit that one honestly) i like how jesus said that a camel would sooner fit through a head of a pin than a rich man get into heaven. where i hear that from is that's about the ideas we cloak ourselves in somehow, the whole structure of things we "know" which make up our separate self. in order to really get what's going on here, we have to be totally stripped of all that we thought we were. ideas, opinions etc. all of it. only from a space of total emptiness can the fullness of what is reveal itself. that's not to say caring doesn't happen for this whole great half-baked mad wonderland of a world! it's lovely, how spontaneous and beautiful the care-giving (even that gorgeous sort of bloody swordplay version of care-giving!!) is as this whole thing tends to itself as needed. it's quite beautiful and pure when it comes from a place of emptiness, rather than the ego's version "you're broken, i am going to help you, i am going to fix you somehow"..... it's very pure, very equal, and very not-separate. and that genuine help seemed to only spring up, spontaneously, when the idea of "the world is wrong somehow or a mess somehow" was finally pried from my bleeding little clutches.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 15, 2011 13:54:35 GMT -5
"From this then I would conclude that wakefulness of as many people as possible is preferable overall to both awakened and unawakened individuals, simply because the mass of people are unawakened and as such the majority of people in their current state would find the awakened state preferable."
Oddly, perhaps, I say the majority of the unawakened would not find the awakened state preferable, which is mostly why it doesn't happen. That which is awakened to doesn't have preferences, so we're talking about the preferences of the delusional identification here. I see folks who have 'awakening experiences'; Ahh, the Peace, the bliss, the freedom, and then PLOP! they fall off the enlightenment wagon. Why? All that was required was to surrender into this state that was so desirable instead of activating the imaginary self-center again. We might say this is conditioning or habit or blame it on mind as if mind isn't purposely engaged with, but it is. Since this person IS the conditioning, what this conditioning wants is what happens. This dualistic existence is wonderful, horrible, exciting, engaging, interesting, and that's why it's happening. That's what holds the attention 'out there' until it doesn't.
As Zen said, the overwhelming majority have no interest in such things even as possibilities. They're interested in exploring other things, and this interest has to play itself out. Present a deal to most folks in which they can have permanent Peace and freedom from suffering in exchange for everything they believe about themselves and the world around them, including the belief that they are living their own lives, and most will say, 'Well, the peace and freedom deal sounds great, but the rest is a bad deal. Thanks but no thanks'.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 15, 2011 14:27:13 GMT -5
what a great group of posts this morning.... glad i took a few days off. it's strange how theoretical all this stuff is, until it just isn't anymore. and how strange the workings and prison of the mind, until that too, just isn't anymore. you know my biggest issue right up until the end was this little gaping fear that i had to somehow hold onto the idea that things were "wrong" somehow. right up at the edge of the abyss, that was one of the last five little treasures in my grip that got vacuumed away. (my identity as a fixer, it turns out, was inherently full of division, and boy howdy did it wound the ego to admit that one honestly) i like how jesus said that a camel would sooner fit through a head of a pin than a rich man get into heaven. where i hear that from is that's about the ideas we cloak ourselves in somehow, the whole structure of things we "know" which make up our separate self. in order to really get what's going on here, we have to be totally stripped of all that we thought we were. ideas, opinions etc. all of it. only from a space of total emptiness can the fullness of what is reveal itself. that's not to say caring doesn't happen for this whole great half-baked mad wonderland of a world! it's lovely, how spontaneous and beautiful the care-giving (even that gorgeous sort of bloody swordplay version of care-giving!!) is as this whole thing tends to itself as needed. it's quite beautiful and pure when it comes from a place of emptiness, rather than the ego's version "you're broken, i am going to help you, i am going to fix you somehow"..... it's very pure, very equal, and very not-separate. and that genuine help seemed to only spring up, spontaneously, when the idea of "the world is wrong somehow or a mess somehow" was finally pried from my bleeding little clutches. Beautifully said!
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 15, 2011 14:30:49 GMT -5
"From this then I would conclude that wakefulness of as many people as possible is preferable overall to both awakened and unawakened individuals, simply because the mass of people are unawakened and as such the majority of people in their current state would find the awakened state preferable." Oddly, perhaps, I say the majority of the unawakened would not find the awakened state preferable, which is mostly why it doesn't happen. That which is awakened to doesn't have preferences, so we're talking about the preferences of the delusional identification here. I see folks who have 'awakening experiences'; Ahh, the Peace, the bliss, the freedom, and then PLOP! they fall off the enlightenment wagon. Why? All that was required was to surrender into this state that was so desirable instead of activating the imaginary self-center again. We might say this is conditioning or habit or blame it on mind as if mind isn't purposely engaged with, but it is. Since this person IS the conditioning, what this conditioning wants is what happens. This dualistic existence is wonderful, horrible, exciting, engaging, interesting, and that's why it's happening. That's what holds the attention 'out there' until it doesn't. As Zen said, the overwhelming majority have no interest in such things even as possibilities. They're interested in exploring other things, and this interest has to play itself out. Present a deal to most folks in which they can have permanent Peace and freedom from suffering in exchange for everything they believe about themselves and the world around them, including the belief that they are living their own lives, and most will say, 'Well, the peace and freedom deal sounds great, but the rest is a bad deal. Thanks but no thanks'. So true, and thanks for clarifying your earlier statement about "space." I knew what you meant, but I was afraid someone else might not.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jan 15, 2011 15:10:40 GMT -5
"Sure, space is space before, during and after it's populated with objects. Attention is drawn outward to the objects and a personal world of experience is created and enjoyed and hated and so on. I would say interest is the pivot point. If there's an interest in improving and fixing the experience, the attention will continue to be drawn to the objects of experience, and so it must be seen that this is futile.
At this point, it may be useful to look at what is actually wanted. This want is usually problematic because it's not 'space' that wants something but rather the imaginary identity, and how can this want the Truth which does not include it? Mind wants a permanently happy experience, which isn't very bloody likely for a dualistic illusion generator."
For example, if it is very cold outside, an outward interest would try to 'fix' the situation by starting a fire. Now it's not bad to start the fire, but somehow attention is placed on the fire rather than the experience. Then the attention continues to be placed outward.
In a scenario like this, could I use the question, "Is this what I want, or is this just happening?" to keep things 'in check'? I think anything verbal might just become a way for the ego to validate what it does without being questioned. Is this where the dishes come in?
Sorry if someone answered this already.. I have to use a poor device for using the internet right now. I can only see replies from one page at a time to respond to.
|
|
|
Post by stepvhen on Jan 15, 2011 15:12:54 GMT -5
Oddly, perhaps, I say the majority of the unawakened would not find the awakened state preferable, which is mostly why it doesn't happen. I've wandered about that. Too hard. In fact it's deflating. It would seem that it points to a deep deep flaw. Yeah it is agreed. That's a problem of mine from an ethical point of view both the awakened and unawakened states should be seen as perfectly equal. Though in reality the unawakened state is illusory. Were then do you draw the line? Yeah. I've seen it. I've been there myself multiple times. The question should be, Why do they not?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 15, 2011 15:34:56 GMT -5
"Sure, space is space before, during and after it's populated with objects. Attention is drawn outward to the objects and a personal world of experience is created and enjoyed and hated and so on. I would say interest is the pivot point. If there's an interest in improving and fixing the experience, the attention will continue to be drawn to the objects of experience, and so it must be seen that this is futile. At this point, it may be useful to look at what is actually wanted. This want is usually problematic because it's not 'space' that wants something but rather the imaginary identity, and how can this want the Truth which does not include it? Mind wants a permanently happy experience, which isn't very bloody likely for a dualistic illusion generator." For example, if it is very cold outside, an outward interest would try to 'fix' the situation by starting a fire. Now it's not bad to start the fire, but somehow attention is placed on the fire rather than the experience. Then the attention continues to be placed outward. In a scenario like this, could I use the question, "Is this what I want, or is this just happening?" to keep things 'in check'? I think anything verbal might just become a way for the ego to validate what it does without being questioned. Is this where the dishes come in? Sorry if someone answered this already.. I have to use a poor device for using the internet right now. I can only see replies from one page at a time to respond to. Yeah, this may be where the dishes come in. Hehe. To clarify, what I meant by looking to see what you want is, asking yourself if you really want the Truth, since the first thing Truth will do is deny you and your delusional wants. This implies a rather abrupt collapsing of both the wanted and the wanter, the prospect of which can start all sorts of things spinning, dodging, weaving and plastering over. Truth doesn't want anything. What you actually are doesn't want. As such, perhaps the best approach to the fire scenario is to jump in. (Just kidding. hehe.) I started to say the best approach is to question the reality of the questioner. The interest in outward problem solving is predicated on the reality of the problem solver. The more clearly it's seen that this is, itself, just an idea, the less interest there is in writing stories about it and what it needs and wants.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 15, 2011 15:49:17 GMT -5
Mamza: You wrote, "In a scenario like this, could I use the question, "Is this what I want, or is this just happening?" to keep things 'in check'? I think anything verbal might just become a way for the ego to validate what it does without being questioned. Is this where the dishes come in?"
Yes, this is where the dishes come in (ha ha), but I would recommend using the question, "What must the body/mind be doing this moment?" rather than the more complicated question you posed. After asking this question, and realizing what has to be done, then do it. This question will help you realize that the body/mind has an agenda quite independent of thoughts. It will remove the past and future and help you discover the emptiness and perfection of "what is" as manifested through the body/mind you currently regard as "Mamza."
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 15, 2011 16:22:37 GMT -5
Stepvhen: You wrote, "I've wondered about that. Too hard. In fact it's deflating. It would seem that it points to a deep deep flaw."
Why is it deflating? Why would it point to a deep deep flaw? Why make any judgments? It is what it is. We can either accept the actual or psychologically resist it. I can assure you that acceptance is much easier and a lot more fun than resistance. Acceptance comes from body-knowing rather than mind-knowing.
You also wrote, "Yeah it is agreed. That's a problem of mine from an ethical point of view both the awakened and unawakened states should be seen as perfectly equal. Though in reality the unawakened state is illusory. Were then do you draw the line?"
ETHICAL point of view? SHOULD be seen as perfectly equal? What would happen if you dropped all such thoughts entirely? You would then be free of the mind and abiding in emptiness perfectly manifesting your isness. I can highly recommend freedom from such thoughts.
You also wrote, "Yeah. I've seen it (the bliss). I've been there myself multiple times."
No, that is the illusion. You are not someone who has had blissful experiences multiple times; you are the isness in which all apparent experiences occur. Who you are appears to occasionally have blissful experiences and afterwards appears to have ordinary everyday experiences. You are the wholeness and emptiness in which all of these dynamic happenings appear. There is no Stepvhen who has ever had any kind of experience.
Finally, you wrote, "The question should be, Why do they not (want awakening)?"
SHOULD? WHY? This is simply "what is." However, if you like "why" questions, then ask yourself why you enjoy asking why? Personally, I kinda like the short version, "Why why?" but only for other people. I have too much fun playing in the sunshine to want to enter the dark labyrinthe of the mind without a good reason, and I can't think of one. LOL
|
|
|
Post by stepvhen on Jan 15, 2011 16:52:15 GMT -5
Stepvhen: You wrote, "I've wondered about that. Too hard. In fact it's deflating. It would seem that it points to a deep deep flaw." Why is it deflating? Why would it point to a deep deep flaw? Why make any judgments? It is what it is. We can either accept the actual or psychologically resist it. I can assure you that acceptance is much easier and a lot more fun than resistance. Acceptance comes from body-knowing rather than mind-knowing. Yup. This is true, as in I agree. Again. Agreed. Again you're right. I was referring to the falling off the bliss train but that doesn't make what you're saying less right. One of the concepts I still entertain is the idea that the best action to take after beginning the journey, is to get as many others to begin also. Do I cling to that concept. Yes. I can see it is un-needed and everything is perfect as it is. But everything would still be perfect with a higher amount of people free. The largest possible amount in fact. It's more a working objective. I'll work towards it whole heartedly. If I get it great. If I don't great. If it means the experience of suffering a little from time to time. So what? It doesn't matter. It is what it is. It's not like I can be involved in any of this anyway. I didn't get into this to be free of suffering.
|
|