|
Post by mamza on Jun 7, 2011 21:54:32 GMT -5
Imagination is fun stuff. Now we all know that we get caught up in our thoughts and all that meta-reality stuff being discussed in other threads, but how many of you have noticed that imagination can cause wonderful things even while 'looking from that place'?
What I mean is difficult to describe, so I'll give a little imagery:
Driving down the road is very clear-headed for me most of the time. I turn on some tunes or roll down the windows and passively listen and look at the same time. Overload those senses. So anyway, the whole subject-object relationship breaks down a bit and for whatever reason, I started imagining I was in a spaceship. It wasn't normal imagining, though. I was completely present, but part of that presence included the imagining of the car as a spaceship.
The only thing I was aware of was what I was directly seeing, hearing, and feeling--the windshield (and the supports holding it in place), the radio, and the seat/driver's wheel. But there was also an unbelievably fantastic adventure feel to it. I seriously thought I was blasting through space which just happened to look like earth. I knew I wasn't, but I thought I was. The two sort of fused together to make awesome.
I guess the point is that imagination is part of the oneness dealio. I don't know what it is about this stuff, but I can't shake that awesome adventury feel off when isness becomes clear.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jun 9, 2011 12:38:03 GMT -5
Some say that what you think of as ‘your’ imagination really isn’t yours. That it is the imagination of the ultimate mind, and that you are the one being imagined all the time, along with everything else. Kind of like imagining someone in a dream and the dream person believes that they are real. Like you're imagining your flying your rocket ship and that it’s real. Not realizing that you’re actually the one being 'imagined', imagining… Which makes me laugh thinking that I'm being imagined, talking about imagination... Anyway that’s what some say…
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 9, 2011 14:31:24 GMT -5
It has become very apparent that my imagination does not belong to me, is not caused by me, and so on and so forth. But I like to say things the way I say them because it makes more sense that way.
My point is that imagination is cool beans once it's seen that it is only imagination. I got into ATA right away when I first came to this board and ZD suggested it to me--but even to this day I still try to fight imagination occasionally to clear my mind.
While I understand that it isn't my imagination, there's still that idea that it IS my imagination, and I have to control it so that I can have a clear mind so that I can get enlightened or whatever.
But now I'm starting to realize that it isn't necessary to fight imagination at all. I'm not sure why I got it in my head that I needed to in the first place, but hey, shit happens. It's shifted from being awesome to being a terrible mind fuck and now it's starting to turn into an almost magical thing. There's this idea that imagination is somehow separate from reality, but it's not. Just because what I'm thinking is happening isn't actually happening doesn't mean that the thought and its effects on me aren't part of what is.
And for the sake of discussion, since 'what is' is what we're all about here, there's no reason to fight any of it. There's no reason to try and prevent or cause anything whatsoever. We still do, and that's fine because it's part of what is too. What is is what it is, regardless of whether you're enlightened or not (or thinking / not thinking).
Holy cow I better shut up now.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jun 9, 2011 17:41:36 GMT -5
If you're unconscious of 'what is', is it still 'what is'?
;D
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 9, 2011 18:51:10 GMT -5
So we've managed to derive the mental conclusion that unconsciousness, delusion, struggle and suffering are great because they're also part of what is? Nice work. Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jun 9, 2011 19:23:58 GMT -5
So we've managed to derive the mental conclusion that unconsciousness, delusion, struggle and suffering are great because they're also part of what is? Nice work. Hehe. Hehehe, not exactly... One can be aware of delusion, aware of struggle and aware of suffering... But can one be aware of 'unconsciousness'?... 'What is' must then be dependent on total consciousness and total awareness... And although it's obvious, it's simplicity seems to have been missed.
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Jun 9, 2011 19:24:42 GMT -5
enigma,
unconsciuosness, delusion, struggle and suffering are what IS in spite of.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 9, 2011 21:10:30 GMT -5
I am so confused. What are you guys saying? Sorry for being dumb all the time.
But as far as I can tell, conscious and unconscious appear within what is. Both are fine. You can't be aware that you're unconscious WHILE you're unconscious, but when you wake up you can be very aware of the fact that unconsciousness(eseses???) happened.
I feel as though I'm missing something Enigma is saying that's really obvious.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jun 9, 2011 21:50:10 GMT -5
Hehehe, obviously when your unconscious, you are not aware and so there is no 'what is' for you... Is there a difference in 'what is', between being lost in thought (unconscious) and being 'aware' of being lost in thought (conscious)? Is there a difference in 'what is', between being lost in an emotion (unconscious) and being 'aware' of being lost in an emotion (conscious)? Just asking...
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 9, 2011 22:34:41 GMT -5
At all your questions: No. What is is what is, nothing more and nothing less.
And when I'm unconscious, what is just doesn't include anything. What is is not a thing itself, leaving what is to be what is without any stuffs involved. Nothing doesn't disappear in the presence of nothing, there's just nothing aware of it.
|
|
|
Post by souley on Jun 10, 2011 3:35:26 GMT -5
Hehehe, obviously when your unconscious, you are not aware and so there is no 'what is' for you... Is there a difference in 'what is', between being lost in thought (unconscious) and being 'aware' of being lost in thought (conscious)? Is there a difference in 'what is', between being lost in an emotion (unconscious) and being 'aware' of being lost in an emotion (conscious)? Just asking... Yes it is, why would we go through all this spiritual stuff if it wasn't? Being identified with though sucks a lot of the time, not being identified with thought opens up some kind of downlink to "everything is-a-ok land" and the difference is subtle but fundamental. Maybe then you will say something like "but consciousness is unaffected by change", and yes that is also true and does not contradict this:D
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 10, 2011 10:43:09 GMT -5
I am so confused. What are you guys saying? Sorry for being dumb all the time. But as far as I can tell, conscious and unconscious appear within what is. Both are fine. You can't be aware that you're unconscious WHILE you're unconscious, but when you wake up you can be very aware of the fact that unconsciousness(eseses???) happened. I feel as though I'm missing something Enigma is saying that's really obvious. Well, don't listen to me cause I don't understand what you're saying. Hehe. Seems to me what TRF is saying is that being consciously aware that you are caught up in thought and creating your own imaginary thought-world is not experiencing 'what is' just because imagining a thought-world happens to be 'what is' happening. When we talk about 'what is', we're referring to the direct experience of what the senses are showing you, without any imagination or mental constructs. There is a difference between believing the thoughts, and knowing the thoughts to be pure fantasy because it's the difference between being conscious and unconscious (in the way we're using those terms), but now you're standing on the bank of the river consciously engaging with thought instead of unconsciously, and still missing 'what is'. This is the difference between being the observer of thought (with an interest in that thought), and the witness of 'what is'. In Zen's terminology, imagining you're flying a space ship is abidance in mind, while passively witnessing the body's senses is attending to the actual.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 10, 2011 12:32:19 GMT -5
All right! Now that's a lot clearer to me, haha. I guess I was thinking of what is as sort of the dealio that isn't a dealio that everything's inside of and thus includes thought as well. Then I had this internal dialogue:
"Isin't 'what is' the world before ---------------------OHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh."
But now I'm wondering whether or not that's part of what is regardless of whether or not I'm experiencing what is? You know..... here's me staring into space as I think; being part of what is because someone can walk up to me and see that I'm staring into space. But I guess that kinda sounds like crap to even me.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 10, 2011 12:58:07 GMT -5
All right! Now that's a lot clearer to me, haha. I guess I was thinking of what is as sort of the dealio that isn't a dealio that everything's inside of and thus includes thought as well. Then I had this internal dialogue: "Isin't 'what is' the world before ---------------------OHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh." But now I'm wondering whether or not that's part of what is regardless of whether or not I'm experiencing what is? You know..... here's me staring into space as I think; being part of what is because someone can walk up to me and see that I'm staring into space. But I guess that kinda sounds like crap to even me. Ha ha. Too much thinking! Put it all down.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 10, 2011 13:44:22 GMT -5
I'll do my best! It's getting easier all the time.
|
|