|
Post by justlikeyou on Sept 2, 2014 15:35:57 GMT -5
Niz: "Sex is an acquired habit. Go beyond. As long as your focus is on the body, you will remain in the clutches of food and sex, fear and death. Find yourself and be free."
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 2, 2014 16:19:04 GMT -5
Niz: "Whenever there is a sense of individuality, personality, or a separateness, you have so many wants. You want to see a movie, you want to hear music, you want to play, you want to have sex, you want to eat fancy foods, you want to consume intoxicant, but when that sense of separateness is not there, when you are one with the totality, these things are not desired. And spirituality or what you call "religion" is mainly to understand this: that you don't require anything, you are a part of the totality, or reality. When you grasp that, you don't have any of these needs. But so long as you are separate from things, you need everything." (from The Ultimate Medicine) sex happens, as does music.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 2, 2014 16:20:21 GMT -5
Niz: "Sex is an acquired habit. Go beyond. As long as your focus is on the body, you will remain in the clutches of food and sex, fear and death. Find yourself and be free." The "focus on the body" is the crux of his point there. Do you think that once one has found themselves and is free that they'll never eat or have sex again?
|
|
|
Post by runstill on Sept 2, 2014 16:23:16 GMT -5
"Between the remembered and the actual there is a basic difference which can be observed from moment to moment. At no point of time is the actual the remembered. A moment back the remembered was actual, in a moment the actual will be the remembered. What makes the actual unique? Obviously it is your sense of being present. In memory and anticipation there is a clear feeling that it is a mental state under observation, while in the actual the feeling is primarily of being present and aware." That's really a good way of putting it, I've been noticing lately a back and forth between the actual and the observed mental state its subtle but noticeable , its seems as if the personal self almost hijacks the actual.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2014 17:07:25 GMT -5
Niz: "Whenever there is a sense of individuality, personality, or a separateness, you have so many wants. You want to see a movie, you want to hear music, you want to play, you want to have sex, you want to eat fancy foods, you want to consume intoxicant, but when that sense of separateness is not there, when you are one with the totality, these things are not desired. And spirituality or what you call "religion" is mainly to understand this: that you don't require anything, you are a part of the totality, or reality. When you grasp that, you don't have any of these needs. But so long as you are separate from things, you need everything." (from The Ultimate Medicine) sex happens, as does music. The sense of being separate automagically brings a sense of lack; a fear of not having or being enough in order to sustain that separate entity physically and psychologically. Because the individual is not separate, it's not up to the individual alone to free himself from the consequences of that sense, and so the individuation is still subject to the fears of the 'collective consciousness' of mankind to a degree. Although, the circumstances of one's life may change radically with the release of that struggle to get and have and be more.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2014 17:11:00 GMT -5
Niz: "Sex is an acquired habit. Go beyond. As long as your focus is on the body, you will remain in the clutches of food and sex, fear and death. Find yourself and be free." The "focus on the body" is the crux of his point there. Do you think that once one has found themselves and is free that they'll never eat or have sex again? There's a distinct difference between engaging in sex and eating, and being "in the clutches" of them. In that distinction is where psychological suffering comes in.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 2, 2014 17:29:08 GMT -5
"Between the remembered and the actual there is a basic difference which can be observed from moment to moment. At no point of time is the actual the remembered. A moment back the remembered was actual, in a moment the actual will be the remembered. What makes the actual unique? Obviously it is your sense of being present. In memory and anticipation there is a clear feeling that it is a mental state under observation, while in the actual the feeling is primarily of being present and aware." That's really a good way of putting it, I've been noticing lately a back and forth between the actual and the observed mental state its subtle but noticeable , its seems as if the personal self almost hijacks the actual. Yeah, I agree, that quote captures the moment of "noticing" or "ATA" or "coming into the present" really well.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 2, 2014 17:39:43 GMT -5
The "focus on the body" is the crux of his point there. Do you think that once one has found themselves and is free that they'll never eat or have sex again? There's a distinct difference between engaging in sex and eating, and being "in the clutches" of them. In that distinction is where psychological suffering comes in. Yes, desire that drives action based on resistance. Food is a natural part of every peeps life and sex is a natural part of lots of peeps lives and while both involve pleasure ... pleasure can happen absent the dramatic lead-up pushed by desire . Knocked a pillar back into place on a 100++ year old porch today and the sledge hit my left middle finger on one of the shots. It's like an episode of Fred Flintstone. ... luckily it ain't broked! I've also had several charley horses since that thread a few years back when this topic came up and not only made a point of watching them come and go but in a few instances I felt like a nondual cheater catching myself and watching the pain fade more quickly by just witnessing it. So, I can report from subjective personal experience that not only does pleasure happen, but pain happens as well, and neither one need involve the psychological baggage of suffering. I can't say I'm completely free of suffering once and for all and good but the differential of the experience of pain or pleasure in the absence/presence of suffering and desire is really really obvious at this point.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 2, 2014 17:53:28 GMT -5
sex happens, as does music. The sense of being separate automagically brings a sense of lack; a fear of not having or being enough in order to sustain that separate entity physically and psychologically. Because the individual is not separate, it's not up to the individual alone to free himself from the consequences of that sense, With you 100% up to there ... and so the individuation is still subject to the fears of the 'collective consciousness' of mankind to a degree. Although, the circumstances of one's life may change radically with the release of that struggle to get and have and be more. .. as well as that last sentence. This idea of the individual as subject to a collective consciousness -- which I assume is in the context of an individual still taking themselves as an individual -- is an interesting one and I guess now that I think of it, the idea sort of reconciles the objections that lots of peeps make to pointers like "nothing is wrong". As long as one thinks of themselves as a separate peep, it's gonna seem like somethings wrong! D@mn that Carl Jung!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2014 18:11:50 GMT -5
There's a distinct difference between engaging in sex and eating, and being "in the clutches" of them. In that distinction is where psychological suffering comes in. Yes, desire that drives action based on resistance. Food is a natural part of every peeps life and sex is a natural part of lots of peeps lives and while both involve pleasure ... pleasure can happen absent the dramatic lead-up pushed by desire . Knocked a pillar back into place on a 100++ year old porch today and the sledge hit my left middle finger on one of the shots. It's like an episode of Fred Flintstone. ... luckily it ain't broked! I've also had several charley horses since that thread a few years back when this topic came up and not only made a point of watching them come and go but in a few instances I felt like a nondual cheater catching myself and watching the pain fade more quickly by just witnessing it. So, I can report from subjective personal experience that not only does pleasure happen, but pain happens as well, and neither one need involve the psychological baggage of suffering. I can't say I'm completely free of suffering once and for all and good but the differential of the experience of pain or pleasure in the absence/presence of suffering and desire is really really obvious at this point. Yeah, it's at least worthwhile for folks to experiment with being present with their pain or fear, if for no other reason than to notice what mind does with it to create suffering. It's actually this sort of noticing that makes mind stand down.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2014 18:25:29 GMT -5
The sense of being separate automagically brings a sense of lack; a fear of not having or being enough in order to sustain that separate entity physically and psychologically. Because the individual is not separate, it's not up to the individual alone to free himself from the consequences of that sense, With you 100% up to there ... and so the individuation is still subject to the fears of the 'collective consciousness' of mankind to a degree. Although, the circumstances of one's life may change radically with the release of that struggle to get and have and be more. .. as well as that last sentence. This idea of the individual as subject to a collective consciousness -- which I assume is in the context of an individual still taking themselves as an individual -- is an interesting one and I guess now that I think of it, the idea sort of reconciles the objections that lots of peeps make to pointers like "nothing is wrong". As long as one thinks of themselves as a separate peep, it's gonna seem like somethings wrong! D@mn that Carl Jung! I guess what I was trying to talk about is the impersonal nature of individuated experience. The experience is never entirely driven from within the individuation, as this would require separation as an actuality. Ultimately, this means that 'bad' things can happen to the individual no matter how absent the individual is of an identifying overlay. We can argue that, absent this overlay, there is no psychological suffering but there may still be pain and hardship that can look like suffering to an observer. I'm not prepared to call that suffering, though, because suffering is in the subjective interpretation of that experience.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2014 4:01:26 GMT -5
Yes, desire that drives action based on resistance. Food is a natural part of every peeps life and sex is a natural part of lots of peeps lives and while both involve pleasure ... pleasure can happen absent the dramatic lead-up pushed by desire . Knocked a pillar back into place on a 100++ year old porch today and the sledge hit my left middle finger on one of the shots. It's like an episode of Fred Flintstone. ... luckily it ain't broked! I've also had several charley horses since that thread a few years back when this topic came up and not only made a point of watching them come and go but in a few instances I felt like a nondual cheater catching myself and watching the pain fade more quickly by just witnessing it. So, I can report from subjective personal experience that not only does pleasure happen, but pain happens as well, and neither one need involve the psychological baggage of suffering. I can't say I'm completely free of suffering once and for all and good but the differential of the experience of pain or pleasure in the absence/presence of suffering and desire is really really obvious at this point. Yeah, it's at least worthwhile for folks to experiment with being present with their pain or fear, if for no other reason than to notice what mind does with it to create suffering. It's actually this sort of noticing that makes mind stand down. And there seems to be an entire spiritual industry that revolves around using witnessing and meditation as a way to temporarily alleviate pain this way, and that winds up reinforcing the delusion related to individuation. Carrots become the entire cuisine.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2014 4:03:26 GMT -5
With you 100% up to there ... .. as well as that last sentence. This idea of the individual as subject to a collective consciousness -- which I assume is in the context of an individual still taking themselves as an individual -- is an interesting one and I guess now that I think of it, the idea sort of reconciles the objections that lots of peeps make to pointers like "nothing is wrong". As long as one thinks of themselves as a separate peep, it's gonna seem like somethings wrong! D@mn that Carl Jung! I guess what I was trying to talk about is the impersonal nature of individuated experience. The experience is never entirely driven from within the individuation, as this would require separation as an actuality. Ultimately, this means that 'bad' things can happen to the individual no matter how absent the individual is of an identifying overlay. We can argue that, absent this overlay, there is no psychological suffering but there may still be pain and hardship that can look like suffering to an observer. I'm not prepared to call that suffering, though, because suffering is in the subjective interpretation of that experience. Oddly enough, "It's a cold, hard, cruel world" and "bad things happen to good people" seem to me to also capture this idea. Said another way, where there's a peep, there's suffering.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 3, 2014 11:02:39 GMT -5
Yeah, it's at least worthwhile for folks to experiment with being present with their pain or fear, if for no other reason than to notice what mind does with it to create suffering. It's actually this sort of noticing that makes mind stand down. And there seems to be an entire spiritual industry that revolves around using witnessing and meditation as a way to temporarily alleviate pain this way, and that winds up reinforcing the delusion related to individuation. Carrots become the entire cuisine. Yes, mucho true, so lets make the distinction between witnessing with no thought and being present with pain and fear. The later can be quite painful until one sees the role that thought plays in those feelings. If there's a practice of sorts involved, it's not avoiding thought but rather inviting feeling and observing mind. This is allowing and confronting rather than escaping. Mind will stand down when it sees itself as the source of unnecessary suffering rather than the solution. In the way we're talking about this, ATA is an avoidance practice.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2014 11:15:04 GMT -5
And there seems to be an entire spiritual industry that revolves around using witnessing and meditation as a way to temporarily alleviate pain this way, and that winds up reinforcing the delusion related to individuation. Carrots become the entire cuisine. Yes, mucho true, so lets make the distinction between witnessing with no thought and being present with pain and fear. The later can be quite painful until one sees the role that thought plays in those feelings. If there's a practice of sorts involved, it's not avoiding thought but rather inviting feeling and observing mind. This is allowing and confronting rather than escaping. Mind will stand down when it sees itself as the source of unnecessary suffering rather than the solution. In the way we're talking about this, ATA is an avoidance practice. That's why there's more than one pointer that each sound different but reference the same practice. ATA and "watch the thinker" lead me to exactly the same experience, because the thinker inevitably goes silent when watched. I know ZD has defined it as "mindfulness minus thoughts", but getting to "minus thoughts" involves the same intermediary (the witness) as allowing pain or letting a recursive loop of thought run itself into mist. The Niz version involves the prescription of shifting attention to the sense of being, and that's where Tolle tells readers that they find themselves: in the space between the thoughts.
|
|