|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 6, 2013 5:18:42 GMT -5
How can you know if a teacher's model/approach/teaching/whatever is flawed? Just cos it doesn't meet your expectations?? Because of the glaring logical inconsistencies in their "teachings" and because of those who do follow their advice only extremely few actually get anywhere. Anyone who knows a bit about statistics will agree that their success is close to random. I've said that I've tried it and it didn't work for me. You yourself admitted that you got lucky. Nothing. But it's probably my fault, right?
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jul 6, 2013 5:37:50 GMT -5
Ah James,.. I counted/experienced 11 little shenpas arising when I read your post. No one triggers me quite like you do... and I can really see the value in that these days. I did think of you from time to time after you originally left, and I don't know if I'll miss you when you leave again, but I do genuinely wish you all the best in wherever you end up. What a great link that was, Earnest. Pema sure has a way of getting to the heart of things. 'Attachments' is almost an overused word in spiritual circles - it starts to lose its meaning. Or we can see the obvious attachments, and maybe they're not there anymore, but we may not see the subtle shenpas. I certainly recognize the whole process she describes: the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief. A cigarette, a drink, a mean retort or criticism, complaining. Noticing these, and relaxing into the noticing rather than turning away. I think that's the 'brutal honesty' that's talked about here, but Pema is all about metta - loving kindness. So, yes, it's unflinching honesty that's approached with kindness for ourselves. If we can manage that! She also talks about practice as undoing habituation. That about sums it up for me as to why practice can be valuable.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Jul 6, 2013 5:49:56 GMT -5
How can you know if a teacher's model/approach/teaching/whatever is flawed? Just cos it doesn't meet your expectations?? Because of the glaring logical inconsistencies in their "teachings" and because of those who do follow their advice only extremely few actually get anywhere. Anyone who knows a bit about statistics will agree that their success is close to random. Maybe I guess,.. I'd have to know which inconsistency you were referring to. One apparent inconsistency is the idea that seeking reinforces the concept of a non-existent seeker so quit your seeking, against the idea that you need to go at it like your hair is on fire, maybe even follow a spiritual practice (heaven forbid). They seem inconsistent on the surface, but I think both are true. I haven't read all your posts but you seem to think ATA was either flawed or wrong, which (in the spirit of the unmoderated discussion, and not as a personal attack) seems pretty naive.. I've said that I've tried it and it didn't work for me. You yourself admitted that you got lucky. I'm going to back track a bit. It felt like I got lucky, but I can't know that for sure. I think I saw you explored this a bit with Top in another thread so its probably not helpful for me to investigate this further. Maybe its "working" was the trying to get somewhere/something burning itself out to some extent, and then I was just interested in what was happening and not so interested in the meaning I was attaching to it (and not saying that attaching meaning was a problem, just that it got boring) What have you found that does work? Nothing. But it's probably my fault, right? I wouldn't say it's your fault at all. How would that be of any help? Who knows what will work for you? Or if/when it will. For me, it took over 15+ years of futzing around in all manner of stuff for things to even faintly make sense. And I was pretty sh!tty at the non-dual stuff for a long time (just seemed like stupid word games being endlessly played out). I wasn't interested in any of the hypothetical/theoretical explorations (which I didn't understand anyway) I just wanted to know what was going on, and a way to do that was there in the teachings.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Jul 6, 2013 6:03:39 GMT -5
Ah James,.. I counted/experienced 11 little shenpas arising when I read your post. No one triggers me quite like you do... and I can really see the value in that these days. I did think of you from time to time after you originally left, and I don't know if I'll miss you when you leave again, but I do genuinely wish you all the best in wherever you end up. What a great link that was, Earnest. Pema sure has a way of getting to the heart of things. 'Attachments' is almost an overused word in spiritual circles - it starts to lose its meaning. Or we can see the obvious attachments, and maybe they're not there anymore, but we may not see the subtle shenpas. I certainly recognize the whole process she describes: the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief. A cigarette, a drink, a mean retort or criticism, complaining. Noticing these, and relaxing into the noticing rather than turning away. I think that's the 'brutal honesty' that's talked about here, but Pema is all about metta - loving kindness. So, yes, it's unflinching honesty that's approached with kindness for ourselves. If we can manage that! She also talks about practice as undoing habituation. That about sums it up for me as to why practice can be valuable. Thanks Quinn. Pema has been quite helpful for me over the years. I love the wording you/she uses when describing shenpa - "the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief". Totally my experience. I'm also into practice for the reason you mentioned - undoing habituation. I certainly found that I needed that structure. Practicing when I don't want to is perfect for bringing those lovely little shenpas out into the light. Metta still feels a bit forced to me, but I found Jack Kornfield's forgiveness practice melted the ice quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jul 6, 2013 6:52:37 GMT -5
Thanks Quinn. Pema has been quite helpful for me over the years. I love the wording you/she uses when describing shenpa - "the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief". Totally my experience. I just discovered something yesterday I'll share with you (fwiw). My 'mountain to climb', so to speak, for this is smoking. I know there are others, but this one is pressing. I've been diagnosed with beginning emphysema and have to quit. It's quite a struggle. So I was looking at the sensation that comes up before that overwhelming feeling of I HAVE TO SMOKE. I know that nicotine addiction is part of it - that it creates the sensation of anxiety that can only be alleviated by another cigarette. But I was able to break that apart this time and look at just the anxiety (or restlessness) itself. What I realized was that the anxiety does not automatically translate into having a cigarette. That connection is only made by a thought. The content of that thought could, technically, be anything. It could be bite my nails or have a drink or even (gasp!) just be anxious. IOW, I am habituated to make the connection that anxiety = smoke. Also, boredom = smoke, annoyance = smoke, hunger = smoke, etc. (non-nicotine stickies). So your link couldn't have come at a better time. What I had seen was the erroneous thought that turning to a cigarette would solve the restlessness. Well it does, but for a very short time and has the added benefit of actually creating more restlessness at the same time. What I hadn't seen was Part 2 in the 3-part series above - looking for relief. Is that necessary? Can I just be with the restlessness? Metta has always felt forced to me. One of the problems I have with some Buddhist teachings is what seems to me to be "fake it till you make it" teachings. Maybe it kind of 'works', sometimes. But it seems backwards. I've found metta valuable only in showing that there's another way of looking at things. Maybe that's the point - just to loosen up habituated ways of thinking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 10:02:06 GMT -5
Ah James,.. I counted/experienced 11 little shenpas arising when I read your post. No one triggers me quite like you do... and I can really see the value in that these days. I did think of you from time to time after you originally left, and I don't know if I'll miss you when you leave again, but I do genuinely wish you all the best in wherever you end up. What a great link that was, Earnest. Pema sure has a way of getting to the heart of things. 'Attachments' is almost an overused word in spiritual circles - it starts to lose its meaning. Or we can see the obvious attachments, and maybe they're not there anymore, but we may not see the subtle shenpas. I certainly recognize the whole process she describes: the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief. A cigarette, a drink, a mean retort or criticism, complaining. Noticing these, and relaxing into the noticing rather than turning away. I think that's the 'brutal honesty' that's talked about here, but Pema is all about metta - loving kindness. So, yes, it's unflinching honesty that's approached with kindness for ourselves. If we can manage that! She also talks about practice as undoing habituation. That about sums it up for me as to why practice can be valuable. thanks for link recco Quinn, I likely wouldn't have seen it otherwise good stuff in there ;-)
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 6, 2013 11:32:45 GMT -5
Running from that one would do no good anyway ... here, tell the Silencer that he can borrow one of mine! That's generous of you, I see that these designs are available as well? Oh, that top hat is pretty classy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 12:38:44 GMT -5
The rectangle one is easy: just use the edge of the paper for one of the sides ... my guess on the rope one is that it involves some sort of trick on perspective. The rectangle one goes like this: Draw a regular rectangle, then draw three straight lines in it. Thus you have drawn a rectangle with three straight lines The rope one goes like this, of which i could not find on the internets, so i will recount the story from an Osho book i read many moons ago. There is an Eastern story of a king who had a puzzle to solve. The puzzle was to make a piece of rope longer without doing anything to it. He summoned all the wise people of his kingdom and not one could make the rope longer. A zen monk or sufi master was traveling through his country. Word got back to the king, so the monk\master was summoned. Upon hearing the puzzle, the monk\master peacefully asked for another length of rope and that the original one be placed stretched out on the ground. He then took the new piece of rope which he made shorter than the original and placed it alongside the original. He then looked at the king and simply said," The rope is now longer." It seems to me that nondualists think as much as anyone else and constantly engage others at the intellectual level when they communicate their ideas, concepts, theories and beliefs of nonduality. But instead of considering the errors others see in their statements might be actual errors, they constantly state that there are no errors, it's just the mind and thinking can't understand what is being said. Me, i take the simple approach in that if it looks to me that someone is talking nonsense, there's a high probability it is, especially when they cannot provide verifiable evidence to support their claims. I see no reason to doubt your sincerity laughter, however it seems to me the evidence does not support your statement, based on my as.sumption that "we" signifies 'others' at ST.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 13:05:13 GMT -5
Me too. I suspect that the issue is not that nonduality is a riddle, but rather that even if the nondualists' experience is genuine, their intellect can't catch up with their experience and that's why they are talking nonsense most of the time. It is a bit of a conundrum. In order to excel at this nonduality game one apparently has to shut down mind, and this means that the intellect has no opportunity to grow to be refined enough to form a precise enough model, and as a result we get spiritual teachers who can't articulate themselves well enough to be understood by others. I theorise that all experiences are genuine and that potential error comes into play when a person mentally processes what they have experienced as they try to make sense of it\figure it out. One huge problem i see in the metaphysical\spiritual community is claiming XYZ is true without verification. Too engaged at the sensual level, tripping out on the experience not bothering to deeply analyse it. Many things can appear true when you hear someone's articulate description of it. it seems there are no errors in the theory, until you dig a little deeper. Yet time and time again, when a non believer explores nodualism and finds errors, the response usually is, "Oh that's not an error, that just your (insert derogatory term) mind being unable to comprehend that which is beyond mind." So reminds me of ol' timey religious folk who utter, "Oh ye of little faith." Seems to me to be the age old problem of lack of self examination. Well, when the spiritual teachers of nonduality get to the point when they can articulate themselves in such a way as to not sound like nutjobs, or i stop seeing flaws in their reasoning, or their behavior does not contradict what they preach\proclaim, they will have my full attention.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 6, 2013 13:08:33 GMT -5
The rectangle one is easy: just use the edge of the paper for one of the sides ... my guess on the rope one is that it involves some sort of trick on perspective. The rectangle one goes like this: Draw a regular rectangle, then draw three straight lines in it. Thus you have drawn a rectangle with three straight lines The rope one gos like this, of which i could not find on the internets, so i will recount the story from an Osho book i read many moons ago. There is an Eastern story of a king who had a puzzle to solve. The puzzle was to make a piece of rope longer without doing anything to it. He summoned all the wise people of his kingdom and not one could make the rope longer. A zen monk or sufi master was travelling through his country. Word got back to the king, so the monk\master was summoned. Upon hearing the puzzle, the monk\master peacefully asked for another length of rope and that the original one be placed stretched out on the ground. He then took the new piece of rope which he made shorter than the original and placed it alongside the original. He then looked at the king and simply said," The rope is now longer." It seems to me that nondualists think as much as anyone else and constantly engage others at the intellectual level when they communicate their ideas, concepts, theories and beliefs of nonduality. But instead of considering the errors others see in their statements might be actual errors, they constantly state that there are no errors, it's just the mind and thinking can't understand what is being said. Me, i take the simple approach in that if it looks to me that someone is talking nonsense, there's a high probability it is, especially when they cannot provide verifiable evidence to support their claims. I see no reason to doubt your sincerity laughter, however it seems to me the evidence does not support your statement, based on I disagreeumption that "we" signifies 'others' at ST. There are two things I would like to address. The first is that there are many ways to interpret things. Your perception of nonsense may simply be your one way of interpreting things and it is not non-sense in another way of interpreting things. If anything the "non-dualist" fixates on alternate interpretations to irritate any attachment to a particular interpretation. The second is that you seem to have interpreted the absence of welcome to be an implicit rejection. I for one want you to stay, post and interact. I also appreciate your contributions. But I saw no need to say such. You will go and be where you want to go and be. If your wanting to be here is contingent on having people say that they want you to be here... Then do you really want to be here? Go where thou wilt. You are always welcome here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 14:01:18 GMT -5
Ah James,.. I counted/experienced 11 little shenpas arising when I read your post. No one triggers me quite like you do... and I can really see the value in that these days. I did think of you from time to time after you originally left, and I don't know if I'll miss you when you leave again, but I do genuinely wish you all the best in wherever you end up. Thanks earnest. As i said right at the beginning, ST is a forum about nonduality. It is not a place for me because there is only so much i can discusss about it. Sure i could spend years debating and arguing or trying to get adherents to answer my exploratory questions so i can make sense of things that seem nonsensical to me. But that seems unproductive for me and the other. However, i do enjoy journeying with people, so i stayed for the experience only to come to the conclusion that i cannot walk with nondualists for long as all they want to talk about is nonduality. And my experiences have shown me that my explorative nature does not sit well with people who are strongly attached to a stationary position. Many here have found their spiritual home of nondualism and for reasons i do not fully understand, do not appreciate examination. I did not know what a shenpa is so thanks for the link It seems that my journey, even during my christian phase, one main focus was freeing myself from them. I have had much success over the years of which i can summarise as, increase of self awareness equates to an increase of understanding which equates to self control, freedom, peace and joy. This allows me to move about in reality with effortless effort, not being affected\influenced\controlled by external forces. I can be one with things. 2008 I became unoffendable, having a similar experience as Buddha as described in his village story. It's been and continues to be a wonderous transformative\healing\growth journey, of which "i do not exist" does not need to be a part of. I theorise why people gravitate towards nondualism as to me the concept is, remove self from one's problems results in no more problems in one's life. I simply don't rez with that process as i had long ago embarked on a journey to remove problems from myself which would result in a problem free self. My process is opposite to nonduality. Anyways, i hope you do well with your shenpas, and it seems to me that one does not need specific things or people in their life to bring them to the surface. One simply needs to be openly connected with everything and instead of waiting for things to come to the surface, go inside to find them. That way every moment can become an opportunity to transform\heal\grow.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 6, 2013 15:31:40 GMT -5
Thanks laughter, though i shall not be staying long. Just began looking for a new online home, realized i left something here so i've popped in to collect it and to say hi and while i was doing so, i noticed the two things that i mentioned in the OP. Interestingly, 77 views and only one person offers a warm greeting. I stand by my decision as to why i previously left. Though totally understandable because you all know i do not believe the nonduality theory is sound. As i said previously, to me the only use it has is to strain spaghetti or any other pasta variants. That makes me an enemy of the state (of being) for some. So anyways, keeping on topic, discussions. i was at the spiritual shop in lonnie(launceston) on friday, continuing to get to know the wonderful people behind the counter. Typical tasmanians, compared to mainlanders, that even though i have found most people involved in spiritual shops to be open and friendly, tasmanians seem to have a natural higher level of these attributes. Even though tasmanian businesses are operating so they can make money\earn a living, their main focus in on the people they meet in their shops. Anyways, so were were talking about various spiritual\metaphsycial\inner realm things, when the subject of nonduality came up. I expressed my view that i am all for oneness, wholeness, unity, the interconnectivity of all things in reality, but what i do not agree with are the unverified theories of illusion that seem to me to be attached to the aforementioned concepts, and the seemingly obsessive dislike of mind and thinking. It was then that another customer politely joined into our conversation with these comments. He considers that a lot of these nonduality beliefs/concepts/theories remind him of these puzzles... - Draw a rectangle with three straight lines. - Make a piece of rope longer without doing anything to it. We agreed with him. Ah James,.. I counted/experienced 11 little shenpas arising when I read your post. No one triggers me quite like you do... and I can really see the value in that these days. I did think of you from time to time after you originally left, and I don't know if I'll miss you when you leave again, but I do genuinely wish you all the best in wherever you end up. Thanks for the link earnest.
|
|
|
Post by runstill on Jul 7, 2013 2:03:10 GMT -5
Thanks Quinn. Pema has been quite helpful for me over the years. I love the wording you/she uses when describing shenpa - "the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief". Totally my experience. I just discovered something yesterday I'll share with you (fwiw). My 'mountain to climb', so to speak, for this is smoking. I know there are others, but this one is pressing. I've been diagnosed with beginning emphysema and have to quit. It's quite a struggle. So I was looking at the sensation that comes up before that overwhelming feeling of I HAVE TO SMOKE. I know that nicotine addiction is part of it - that it creates the sensation of anxiety that can only be alleviated by another cigarette. But I was able to break that apart this time and look at just the anxiety (or restlessness) itself. What I realized was that the anxiety does not automatically translate into having a cigarette. That connection is only made by a thought. The content of that thought could, technically, be anything. It could be bite my nails or have a drink or even (gasp!) just be anxious. IOW, I am habituated to make the connection that anxiety = smoke. Also, boredom = smoke, annoyance = smoke, hunger = smoke, etc. (non-nicotine stickies). So your link couldn't have come at a better time. What I had seen was the erroneous thought that turning to a cigarette would solve the restlessness. Well it does, but for a very short time and has the added benefit of actually creating more restlessness at the same time. What I hadn't seen was Part 2 in the 3-part series above - looking for relief. Is that necessary? Can I just be with the restlessness? Metta has always felt forced to me. One of the problems I have with some Buddhist teachings is what seems to me to be "fake it till you make it" teachings. Maybe it kind of 'works', sometimes. But it seems backwards. I've found metta valuable only in showing that there's another way of looking at things. Maybe that's the point - just to loosen up habituated ways of thinking.
|
|
|
Post by runstill on Jul 7, 2013 2:27:42 GMT -5
Thanks Quinn. Pema has been quite helpful for me over the years. I love the wording you/she uses when describing shenpa - "the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief". Totally my experience. I just discovered something yesterday I'll share with you (fwiw). My 'mountain to climb', so to speak, for this is smoking. I know there are others, but this one is pressing. I've been diagnosed with beginning emphysema and have to quit. It's quite a struggle. So I was looking at the sensation that comes up before that overwhelming feeling of I HAVE TO SMOKE. I know that nicotine addiction is part of it - that it creates the sensation of anxiety that can only be alleviated by another cigarette. But I was able to break that apart this time and look at just the anxiety (or restlessness) itself. What I realized was that the anxiety does not automatically translate into having a cigarette. That connection is only made by a thought. The content of that thought could, technically, be anything. It could be bite my nails or have a drink or even (gasp!) just be anxious. IOW, I am habituated to make the connection that anxiety = smoke. Also, boredom = smoke, annoyance = smoke, hunger = smoke, etc. (non-nicotine stickies). So your link couldn't have come at a better time. What I had seen was the erroneous thought that turning to a cigarette would solve the restlessness. Well it does, but for a very short time and has the added benefit of actually creating more restlessness at the same time. What I hadn't seen was Part 2 in the 3-part series above - looking for relief. Is that necessary? Can I just be with the restlessness? Metta has always felt forced to me. One of the problems I have with some Buddhist teachings is what seems to me to be "fake it till you make it" teachings. Maybe it kind of 'works', sometimes. But it seems backwards. I've found metta valuable only in showing that there's another way of looking at things. Maybe that's the point - just to loosen up habituated ways of thinking. What you are trying now to help you quit is very good, when I was trying to quit (my last smoke was in 1989 ) I would watch very closely the feeling in my body as the first few puffs would take effect instead of mindlessly puffing away, I decided that the feeling wasn't pleasurable, that realization was immensely helpful in quiting. Good luck to you.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Jul 7, 2013 5:02:29 GMT -5
Thanks Quinn. Pema has been quite helpful for me over the years. I love the wording you/she uses when describing shenpa - "the background slight unease or restlessness, looking for relief, then the habitual pattern of whatever we use for that relief". Totally my experience. I just discovered something yesterday I'll share with you (fwiw). My 'mountain to climb', so to speak, for this is smoking. I know there are others, but this one is pressing. I've been diagnosed with beginning emphysema and have to quit. It's quite a struggle. So I was looking at the sensation that comes up before that overwhelming feeling of I HAVE TO SMOKE. I know that nicotine addiction is part of it - that it creates the sensation of anxiety that can only be alleviated by another cigarette. But I was able to break that apart this time and look at just the anxiety (or restlessness) itself. What I realized was that the anxiety does not automatically translate into having a cigarette. That connection is only made by a thought. The content of that thought could, technically, be anything. It could be bite my nails or have a drink or even (gasp!) just be anxious. IOW, I am habituated to make the connection that anxiety = smoke. Also, boredom = smoke, annoyance = smoke, hunger = smoke, etc. (non-nicotine stickies). So your link couldn't have come at a better time. What I had seen was the erroneous thought that turning to a cigarette would solve the restlessness. Well it does, but for a very short time and has the added benefit of actually creating more restlessness at the same time. What I hadn't seen was Part 2 in the 3-part series above - looking for relief. Is that necessary? Can I just be with the restlessness? Metta has always felt forced to me. One of the problems I have with some Buddhist teachings is what seems to me to be "fake it till you make it" teachings. Maybe it kind of 'works', sometimes. But it seems backwards. I've found metta valuable only in showing that there's another way of looking at things. Maybe that's the point - just to loosen up habituated ways of thinking. Thanks for sharing Quinn. I've found a lot of value in the question of can I just be with the uncomfortable feeling. So often (speaking from my own exp) its not the event I don't like, but the uncomfortable feelings that get evoked, and I find that really interesting. Below is an activity (which I learnt through MBSR) for working with difficult persistent thoughts that I've found helpful and I think is relevant for working with uncomfortable feelings. Repeat the steps below 3 times. - bring the thought to mind (eg I suck at my job) - write down the thought - write down the body sensations - write down the feelings - write down the knock on thoughts (eg I'm going to get fired tomorrow) - draw a line - go back to the first step I've found it to be best when its done with curiosity rather than as another strategy to get rid of discomfort. I like it because I find it gives a middle ground between doing the thing that doesn't help and getting caught up in struggling, and it can be quite interesting to see what you find after doing it a few times. Reminds me a lot of the story of Milarepa and the demons ( as told by Pema ) Best of luck with the quitting.
|
|