|
Post by zendancer on Jan 28, 2013 15:50:40 GMT -5
Adyashanti has a nice quote in his new book. It goes something like, "Good teachers do not answer your questions; they question your answers."
|
|
|
Post by james on Jan 28, 2013 16:04:21 GMT -5
(in response to ZD)
He also told me in that book to do this clarity of purpose exercise! ;D
I.e. this bit minding business. I apologize for somehow slipping off the ATA road. Like I say, I don't know how it happened.
How many ATA-ers have you seen go the 'whole 9 yards' (as I believe is an expression in America for 'all the way')?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jan 28, 2013 16:29:50 GMT -5
I can't help what it sounds like to you. True. So you are not suggesting that Peace has reality? You are not proposing it to be a quale are you? A non-quale can have reality. The absence of chaos. The absence of the red-quale. Can this not be queried within your present moment experience? The presence of absence.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jan 28, 2013 16:35:25 GMT -5
He also told me in that book to do this clarity of purpose exercise! ;D I.e. this bit minding business. I apologize for somehow slipping off the ATA road. Like I say, I don't know how it happened. How many ATA-ers have you seen go the 'whole 9 yards' (as I believe is an expression in America for 'all the way')? Your interest goes to what you're interested in (imagine that! ;D). Life doesn't necessarily unfold by all of a sudden you staring at rocks and listening to birds until your whole thought structure collapses. It may have unfolded that way for ZD but it's important to understand that there is no "the way". ATA, meditation and simply sitting down and shutting up are all things that you can't force. In other words, they aren't things you buckle down and do with the commitment of an iron fist.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 28, 2013 16:36:03 GMT -5
True. So you are not suggesting that Peace has reality? You are not proposing it to be a quale are you? A non-quale can have reality. The absence of chaos. The absence of the red-quale. Can this not be queried within your present moment experience? The presence of absence. I understand what you mean by 'non-quale' but from what I learned from Q, there is no room for that in the qualia model, because quale are directly experienced. A non-quale would not be directly experienced because it is prior to experiencing. I think that to speak of a non-quale is really just a way of getting round being hijacked by intuition. The 'Peace' pointer has no reality, its not directly experienced, and so it cannot be considered a quale. It's just a pointer away from some stuff. Now good old fashioned 'peace'...that would be a quale. The limitation of the q.m as I see it, is that it leaves no space for pointers like 'Peace'. I think the pointer does have use, and I think that being hijacked by intuition is no bad thing, but the pointer needs to be seen for what it is.
|
|
|
Post by james on Jan 28, 2013 16:58:48 GMT -5
He also told me in that book to do this clarity of purpose exercise! ;D I.e. this bit minding business. I apologize for somehow slipping off the ATA road. Like I say, I don't know how it happened. How many ATA-ers have you seen go the 'whole 9 yards' (as I believe is an expression in America for 'all the way')? Your interest goes to what you're interested in (imagine that! ;D). Life doesn't necessarily unfold by all of a sudden you staring at rocks and listening to birds until your whole thought structure collapses. It may have unfolded that way for ZD but it's important to understand that there is no "the way". ATA, meditation and simply sitting down and shutting up are all things that you can't force. In other words, they aren't things you buckle down and do with the commitment of an iron fist. Possibly not entirely related, but a thought struck me of how weird it must be for a Self-realized being to see itself running around pretending to be "persons", claiming to not be the Self, and twisting themselves up in all sorts of crazy ways. Guru: "Just be. Attend the actual. Allow everything to be as it is" Me: "Right! I will definitely think about that" Guru: "Er..." Me: "No? OK, minding is bad is it? Then I will stop thoughts entirely, then everything can be as it is" Guru: "Errr.." Me: "No? OK, well skip that idea then. I'll just make good and sure to force myself to let everything be as it is for two hours a day" Guru: <slaps forehead> (a short while later) Me: "Oh darn. I didn't remember let things be as much they should have been. Things are definitely as they shouldn't be. I am a failure" Guru: <stifles laugh> Me: "Oh, by the way, is moving my leg when it is in pain from sitting in the lotus position allowing everything to be as it is or not? Which is the best allowing - to move or not to move?" Guru: "My compassion is wearing thin." (a short time later) Me: "I've found this great new technique" Guru: "Saywhat?" Me: "Yeah, it's allowing everything to be as it is in a different, new, and easier way. This way will be better than the old way that I didn't do so good at" Guru: "Good luck with that" ...ad nauseum... Surely there could be a decent sitcom made about the stupidity (said in a kind way) of seekers.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jan 28, 2013 17:02:20 GMT -5
A non-quale can have reality. The absence of chaos. The absence of the red-quale. Can this not be queried within your present moment experience? The presence of absence. I understand what you mean by 'non-quale' but from what I learned from Q, there is no room for that in the qualia model, because quale are directly experienced. A non-quale would not be directly experienced because it is prior to experiencing. I think that to speak of a non-quale is really just a way of getting round being hijacked by intuition. The 'Peace' pointer has no reality, its not directly experienced, and so it cannot be considered a quale. It's just a pointer away from some stuff. Now good old fashioned 'peace'...that would be a quale. The limitation of the q.m as I see it, is that it leaves no space for pointers like 'Peace'. I think the pointer does have use, but it needs to be seen for what it is. Q doesn't own the qualia model. He has a particular take and slant on it. I would say there are two peaces. 1) The absence of turbulence. 2) similar to a sense of continuity
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 28, 2013 17:16:56 GMT -5
I understand what you mean by 'non-quale' but from what I learned from Q, there is no room for that in the qualia model, because quale are directly experienced. A non-quale would not be directly experienced because it is prior to experiencing. I think that to speak of a non-quale is really just a way of getting round being hijacked by intuition. The 'Peace' pointer has no reality, its not directly experienced, and so it cannot be considered a quale. It's just a pointer away from some stuff. Now good old fashioned 'peace'...that would be a quale. The limitation of the q.m as I see it, is that it leaves no space for pointers like 'Peace'. I think the pointer does have use, but it needs to be seen for what it is. Q doesn't own the qualia model. He has a particular take and slant on it. I would say there are two peaces. 1) The absence of turbulence. 2) similar to a sense of continuity I know he doesn't own it, but I did resonate with his take on it. It made sense to me. Just about. I only see one peace (absence of turbulence/conflict), though I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between peace, and prior to conditions peace, in the same way I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between Becoming and Being. As I see it, prior to conditions peace has no place on the qualia model, except perhaps as an experience that arises out of a particular 'patterning'. In its own way, prior to conditions peace is considerably more imaginary than peace, because peace has nothing to do with patterning. Editing: Sorry I'm having to think about this and edit a bit because I am not fluent in qualia speak.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jan 28, 2013 17:45:37 GMT -5
He also told me in that book to do this clarity of purpose exercise! ;D I.e. this bit minding business. I apologize for somehow slipping off the ATA road. Like I say, I don't know how it happened. How many ATA-ers have you seen go the 'whole 9 yards' (as I believe is an expression in America for 'all the way')? Your interest goes to what you're interested in (imagine that! ;D). Life doesn't necessarily unfold by all of a sudden you staring at rocks and listening to birds until your whole thought structure collapses. It may have unfolded that way for ZD but it's important to understand that there is no "the way". ATA, meditation and simply sitting down and shutting up are all things that you can't force. In other words, they aren't things you buckle down and do with the commitment of an iron fist. I disagree. When I was working on the 'who am I' question it was entirely a matter of saying 'fuck off' to my normal routine and following it 100%. Even when I went to hang out with friends and we'd have a fire going or something I would seriously stare at the fire for hours asking myself "Who am I?" As ZD often says, persistence is key. What you can't fake is interest. Maybe that's what you were referring to (I don't know because I don't read much these days), but I thought that was worth clarifying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2013 17:54:16 GMT -5
That there is a 'One that must stop believing what is not so", or that which is not One, is also a 'belief'. If it's Truth we're after, it can't start with any preconceived thoughts, including the most spiritually intriguing ones. Well, but it has to. Where it begins is with a passel of preconceived thoughts. And not so oddly, they talk about ideas in hopes of getting you to look and see beyond the ideas for yourself. Nobody here is 'teaching doctrines, faith or belief'. Yes, when it's time. There are some who can't read the words in a post no matter how many times it's read, and to ask this person to approach Reality in that way is completely unreasonable and futile. It's necessary to begin at the beginning rather than the end. Most can't tell the difference. How has that talking about a passel of preconceived thoughts, in hoping for someone to see Reality, worked with Andrew, or Silver or anyone from this forum for that matter? Perhaps if folks learned to trust that they 'can' tell the difference between thought and seeing, they'd realize that they can't get that seeing from teachers, or anyone, or anything. Especially from the teachers who believe that they can't tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jan 28, 2013 18:56:22 GMT -5
Q doesn't own the qualia model. He has a particular take and slant on it. I would say there are two peaces. 1) The absence of turbulence. 2) similar to a sense of continuity I know he doesn't own it, but I did resonate with his take on it. It made sense to me. Just about. I only see one peace (absence of turbulence/conflict), though I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between peace, and prior to conditions peace, in the same way I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between Becoming and Being. As I see it, prior to conditions peace has no place on the qualia model, except perhaps as an experience that arises out of a particular 'patterning'. In its own way, prior to conditions peace is considerably more imaginary than peace, because peace has nothing to do with patterning. Editing: Sorry I'm having to think about this and edit a bit because I am not fluent in qualia speak. I have no idea what you mean by conditional peace or prior-to-conditions peace. Are you talking situational/contextual? I'm only "at peace" when I have my pacifier in my mouth? The absence of the pacifier qualia necessitates turbulence quale? This would be modeling causality over time as opposed to looking at the qualia present in a single instant. let me motivate the second kind of peace: The peace of a calm placid lake in the mountains on a cool crisp morning. There is a felt quality to this peace and the effects of its presence is that it is calming and bringing about the non-turbulant version of peace. Analogy: Cold is the absence of warmth. An ice-cube feels cold because it is "sucking" the warmth away. 2 different definitions of cold. similarly 2 different peaces.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 28, 2013 19:40:18 GMT -5
I know he doesn't own it, but I did resonate with his take on it. It made sense to me. Just about. I only see one peace (absence of turbulence/conflict), though I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between peace, and prior to conditions peace, in the same way I think it can be helpful and relevant to create a distinction between Becoming and Being. As I see it, prior to conditions peace has no place on the qualia model, except perhaps as an experience that arises out of a particular 'patterning'. In its own way, prior to conditions peace is considerably more imaginary than peace, because peace has nothing to do with patterning. Editing: Sorry I'm having to think about this and edit a bit because I am not fluent in qualia speak. I have no idea what you mean by conditional peace or prior-to-conditions peace. Are you talking situational/contextual? I'm only "at peace" when I have my pacifier in my mouth? The absence of the pacifier qualia necessitates turbulence quale? This would be modeling causality over time as opposed to looking at the qualia present in a single instant. let me motivate the second kind of peace: The peace of a calm placid lake in the mountains on a cool crisp morning. There is a felt quality to this peace and the effects of its presence is that it is calming and bringing about the non-turbulant version of peace. Analogy: Cold is the absence of warmth. An ice-cube feels cold because it is "sucking" the warmth away. 2 different definitions of cold. similarly 2 different peaces. I'm not following you here, but its kinda late so that might be part of it. For me, peace would be best represented as a particular tone (maybe a G above middle C), which I can't convey on here obviously. But then I am happy in some contexts to speak of a prior to conditions peace, which in qualia model terms, is being highjacked by intuition. On the other hand, in conceptualizing it as prior to conditions, this particular patterning does create the experience of something. I might possibly represent this as a slightly deeper tone.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 28, 2013 20:26:35 GMT -5
Adyashanti has a nice quote in his new book. It goes something like, "Good teachers do not answer your questions; they question your answers." HA!.....Wait....what does that mean?.....No, wait....I know.....No, wait, I don't really.....unless I do....nevermind.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 28, 2013 20:28:57 GMT -5
He also told me in that book to do this clarity of purpose exercise! ;D I.e. this bit minding business. I apologize for somehow slipping off the ATA road. Like I say, I don't know how it happened. How many ATA-ers have you seen go the 'whole 9 yards' (as I believe is an expression in America for 'all the way')? Adya told you to follow your dreams?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 28, 2013 20:34:42 GMT -5
Your interest goes to what you're interested in (imagine that! ;D). Life doesn't necessarily unfold by all of a sudden you staring at rocks and listening to birds until your whole thought structure collapses. It may have unfolded that way for ZD but it's important to understand that there is no "the way". ATA, meditation and simply sitting down and shutting up are all things that you can't force. In other words, they aren't things you buckle down and do with the commitment of an iron fist. Possibly not entirely related, but a thought struck me of how weird it must be for a Self-realized being to see itself running around pretending to be "persons", claiming to not be the Self, and twisting themselves up in all sorts of crazy ways. Guru: "Just be. Attend the actual. Allow everything to be as it is" Me: "Right! I will definitely think about that" Guru: "Er..." Me: "No? OK, minding is bad is it? Then I will stop thoughts entirely, then everything can be as it is" Guru: "Errr.." Me: "No? OK, well skip that idea then. I'll just make good and sure to force myself to let everything be as it is for two hours a day" Guru: <slaps forehead> (a short while later) Me: "Oh darn. I didn't remember let things be as much they should have been. Things are definitely as they shouldn't be. I am a failure" Guru: <stifles laugh> Me: "Oh, by the way, is moving my leg when it is in pain from sitting in the lotus position allowing everything to be as it is or not? Which is the best allowing - to move or not to move?" Guru: "My compassion is wearing thin." (a short time later) Me: "I've found this great new technique" Guru: "Saywhat?" Me: "Yeah, it's allowing everything to be as it is in a different, new, and easier way. This way will be better than the old way that I didn't do so good at" Guru: "Good luck with that" ...ad nauseum... Surely there could be a decent sitcom made about the stupidity (said in a kind way) of seekers. ;D
|
|