|
Post by andrew on Jul 14, 2013 8:00:00 GMT -5
My interpretation is basically the opposite.
Its because 'my' mind totally collapsed that there is no gap here between mind and whatever might or might not be prior to mind. So there can be a lot of minding here but no 'mind-er'. ALL fixed barriers came down with the collapse of 'my' mind. To a Truth seeker that is seeking to be 'free from mind', I am not going to...appeal very much because I seem on the surface embody everything that they are trying to get away from.
I didn't hesitate about saying that I am That, what I would not say with certainty is that 'I am realized'. But at least I answered without recourse to 'the question is misconceived'.
I don't have a focus on 'mental flexibility', if I am 'mentally flexible', it would only be because I am flexible. And what I mean by this, is that there is no sense here of some kind of 'essential person' with specific characteristics, so I am free to behave flexibly, and think flexibly i.e. I respond directly to the present moment.
Probably best if I don't comment on how I see Enigma and Silence.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 14, 2013 8:06:40 GMT -5
My interpretation is basically the opposite. Its because 'my' mind totally collapsed that there is no gap here between mind and whatever might or might not be prior to mind. So there can be a lot of minding here but no 'mind-er'. ALL fixed barriers came down with the collapse of 'my' mind. To a Truth seeker that is seeking to be 'free from mind', I am not going to...appeal very much because I seem on the surface embody everything that they are trying to get away from. I didn't hesitate about saying that I am That, what I would not say with certainty is that 'I am realized'. But at least I answered without recourse to 'the question is misconceived'. I don't have a focus on 'mental flexibility', if I am 'mentally flexible', it would only be because I am flexible. And what I mean by this, is that there is no sense here of some kind of 'essential person' with specific characteristics, so I am free to behave flexibly, and think flexibly i.e. I respond directly to the present moment. Probably best if I don't comment on how I see Enigma and Silence. yeah! and it's deep too!
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 14, 2013 8:11:46 GMT -5
But what I will also say is this. I would be very wary of any 'teacher' that cannot see that the goal of personal growth type paths is, at heart, exactly the same as what the non-dual pathless path is pointing to.
This is also a main reason why this forum is a bit of a mess. There are some decent non-dual pointers here, and these pointers definitely have their place, but personal growth type paths are usually rejected as being fundamentally different. It creates a separation on the forum, and this separation can be clearly seen in the different 'camps'. If non-duality EXCLUDES spirituality and personal growth then it is fuc.ked up non-duality. So something simple like EFT, which very usefully releases limiting conditioned beliefs and shifts our energy is likely to be seen on the forum as being based in a delusion. Which is absurd exclusionary pretentious nonsense.
And then what we have is a kind of non-dual idiocy that on one hand rejects personal growth and on the other hand is happy to indulge in an cringey form of armchair psychiatry.
::Getting down from soap box::
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 14, 2013 8:26:28 GMT -5
My interpretation is basically the opposite. Its because 'my' mind totally collapsed that there is no gap here between mind and whatever might or might not be prior to mind. So there can be a lot of minding here but no 'mind-er'. ALL fixed barriers came down with the collapse of 'my' mind. To a Truth seeker that is seeking to be 'free from mind', I am not going to...appeal very much because I seem on the surface embody everything that they are trying to get away from. I didn't hesitate about saying that I am That, what I would not say with certainty is that 'I am realized'. But at least I answered without recourse to 'the question is misconceived'. I don't have a focus on 'mental flexibility', if I am 'mentally flexible', it would only be because I am flexible. And what I mean by this, is that there is no sense here of some kind of 'essential person' with specific characteristics, so I am free to behave flexibly, and think flexibly i.e. I respond directly to the present moment.Probably best if I don't comment on how I see Enigma and Silence. Comment away. No need to hold back from how you see things, no moderation, remember? So feel free to share how ugly they appear to you. And thank you for such a wonderful example of the point I was making. All the underlined and bolded are examples of how you define yourself as finalized and examples of how your mind diffuses threats. Your mind is like the liquid terminator from Terminator 2. It repairs itself effortlessly. Nothing can cause it to stop dead in its tracks. When your mind stops repairing itself, we'll all know it as clear as day.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 14, 2013 8:37:45 GMT -5
My interpretation is basically the opposite. Its because 'my' mind totally collapsed that there is no gap here between mind and whatever might or might not be prior to mind. So there can be a lot of minding here but no 'mind-er'. ALL fixed barriers came down with the collapse of 'my' mind. To a Truth seeker that is seeking to be 'free from mind', I am not going to...appeal very much because I seem on the surface embody everything that they are trying to get away from. I didn't hesitate about saying that I am That, what I would not say with certainty is that 'I am realized'. But at least I answered without recourse to 'the question is misconceived'. I don't have a focus on 'mental flexibility', if I am 'mentally flexible', it would only be because I am flexible. And what I mean by this, is that there is no sense here of some kind of 'essential person' with specific characteristics, so I am free to behave flexibly, and think flexibly i.e. I respond directly to the present moment.Probably best if I don't comment on how I see Enigma and Silence. Comment away. No need to hold back from how you see things, no moderation, remember? So feel free to share how ugly they appear to you. And thank you for such a wonderful example of the point I was making. All the underlined and bolded are examples of how you define yourself as finalized and examples of how your mind diffuses threats. Your mind is like the liquid terminator from Terminator 2. It repairs itself effortlessly. Nothing can cause it to stop dead in its tracks. When your mind stops repairing itself, we'll all know it as clear as day. I'm not going to comment on them because I can't see the point in another back and forward debate. To repeat, I do not see myself as 'finalized', but its true that my mind does repair itself effortlesly (though actually there is never any 'harm' done to start with). I can shift into mind silence at the snap of a finger, but because 'my' mind isn't experienced as a problem, and I have no need to divide up my experience, there is often no good reason to. I find it interesting that you are almost enticing me not to hold back.
|
|
|
Post by james on Jul 14, 2013 9:54:41 GMT -5
I'm new here and still getting to know the characters. (waves to zendancer). I am also certain that I am everything and everybody, the totality. Thanks for clarifying.
there's a pretty common assumption that consciousness requires a complex brain; I've seen discussions (elsewhere) in which it's debated whether your pet dog or cat is conscious. When I've thrown out the possibility that rocks and non-living entities are also conscious, I've been told that is silly or crazy. Discussions with on spiritual forums, or with non-seekers, out of interest? I personally have no idea about whether rocks are conscious, and so I couldn't rule it out. On the flip side I also don't seem to be able to rule out that this instance of consciousness would end if my brain was destroyed. If pressed, I don't think I could be sure that I actually have a brain.
But in this world, I do seem to go around assuming that consciousness has something to do with the brain, and I'd be flat out lying if I said I didn't. It seems a reasonable assumption to make, since there are correlations. If I get a really nasty hit on the head I 'lose consciousness', for example.
I'm often not sure I'm sane. I may, indeed, be crazy. So, you can see, that was more about me than about you. And I knew that while I was writing it. I keep a lot of observations to myself, or to a very close, trusted circle of friends. It would be nice to hear "no you are not crazy; I have made similar observations and have a similar experience of the world." Thanks for explaining. I don't see what you say as crazy in the slightest. I don't know of anybody who knows these things one way or another for sure, so all we have is speculation. Your speculation is as good as anyone else's, I'd say.
Interestingly enough, for last 24 hours, I have been mulling over the question "what does an enlightened person look like?" I came up with two criteria; maybe I will add "clarity" as the third. What other criteria would you add? Identifying what an enlightened (IMO) person looks like is an intuitive/resonation thing really for me, but clarity is an easy 'attribute' to name. I'm honestly a bit stumped by what else I could put on that list. Out of interest, what else did you put?
I hope I figured out this "quote within a quote" thingie... I'd say this forum's quoting functions are quite poorly designed. I've not seen or imagined a better alternative though, so maybe this is as good as it gets!
|
|
|
Post by james on Jul 14, 2013 10:52:10 GMT -5
My proposal is that Enigma prefers Silence's description because it reflects Silence's experiential understanding with what happens when the mind is faced with becoming silent. Anybody can read the testimony of the people that have gone silent internally and take their descriptions of their understanding and turn it into an idealized state to achieve, i.e. Enlightenment or Self-Realization. Anybody can play the game of "How do I pass myself off as being at that final state?". Yes, I've seen it happen on occasion to some degree in myself. I think it probably happens a lot in seekers.
That usually comes along in the form of claiming identity with an idealization stated by a Guru or authority. Niz's "I am That", Ramana's realization that he is the supreme Self, many talk about being the sum total of everything, or being consciousness or Awareness itself. These descriptions of what "I Am" are ways for the mind to attach to the idea of achievement, to the idea of being or becoming enlightened. They become anchor points for the mind to stabilize on as it tries to rebuild the house of cards that were knocked down during existential crisis. I think that's one of things I intuit is 'off' with a seeker who claims 'I am that', or otherwise borrows heavily from another's lexicon/phraseology. I find that very often in (IMO) genuine enlightenment cases the expression of enlightenment is different - exhibiting a clear aspect of uniqueness - because of the pre-enlightenment conditioning. And despite that diversity, the core message is always fully consistent and crystal clear.
The way Andrew talks indicates his mind hasn't collapsed fully. When asked, Andrew hesitantly said that he was "That", whatever Niz was talking about in "I am That". Andrew has a focus on mental flexibility. He gets so much flack from Reefigmalence (WOD?) because everything he says feels like his mind hasn't collapsed, but he thinks it has. The focus on Ease, Peace, Mental Flexibility, attainment of Happiness, that is all the mind's agenda. When faced with confrontation he has to place his confronters in a "less enlightened state" than he is in in order to diffuse the threat to his mind. Andrew's mind is like a baloon. You squeeze one end and it pops out even bigger on the other end. I definitely pick up your general point, but I've become a bit lost in it being written about Enigma and Andrew. Is this *actually* about something between Enigma and Andrew, or about something between me and Enigma, or me and you, or..?The mind that has not collapsed fully will focus on descriptions others have said about a finalized state and try to pass itself off as being there to diffuse the threat. The mind that has collapsed fully has no real words for that, so they will focus on where minds get stuck or resist collapsing. Well that's certainly one way of looking at it. Another way might be that the mind is just trying its best to 'help out', but unfortunately getting in the way. I'm not saying I adhere to one or the other, only that interpretations are only interpretations.
PS I feel that somewhere along the line here, things have digressed sufficiently such that I don't really remember what line of enquiry I was originally following, or what I was trying to get clear from you. Ho hum.
PPS Some personal comments about 'Andrew vs Enigma', since they were named here. Most of Andrew's posts I either can't make out what is being said because it seems very complex or contradictory, or I don't resonate with it, but there are 'moments' where I recognize something he says. With Enigma, most of what he says seems very clear and useful/insightful but there are 'moments'. For example when I think he's 'exceeded his authority' by stating things as if they are facts when he can only talk from his own experience, which is subjective.
Of course a logician (in my imagination) might argue that this point is deeply flawed, because it is only MY subjective experience that I cannot experience others' experiences, and so I should not assume his subjective experience has the same limits, haha. Just for kicks.
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Jul 14, 2013 10:52:16 GMT -5
Other than the two posts that got me banned, the warning, and then the ban quote, can you help me identify any of my posts that are "deeply" unpleasant? So apart from just those 4 things eh? You only re-registered 5 weeks ago! SOG, you started a crusade to get other members kicked off the board. John 8:7Luke 6:42Deeply unpleasant isn't quite the phrase I'd use in this particular case. Maybe something more like: doesn't add to the "Pros" column of whether or not I want to continue living on this planet.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 14, 2013 11:00:12 GMT -5
But what I will also say is this. I would be very wary of any 'teacher' that cannot see that the goal of personal growth type paths is, at heart, exactly the same as what the non-dual pathless path is pointing to. This is also a main reason why this forum is a bit of a mess. There are some decent non-dual pointers here, and these pointers definitely have their place, but personal growth type paths are usually rejected as being fundamentally different. It creates a separation on the forum, and this separation can be clearly seen in the different 'camps'. If non-duality EXCLUDES spirituality and personal growth then it is fuc.ked up non-duality. So something simple like EFT, which very usefully releases limiting conditioned beliefs and shifts our energy is likely to be seen on the forum as being based in a delusion. Which is absurd exclusionary pretentious nonsense. And then what we have is a kind of non-dual idiocy that on one hand rejects personal growth and on the other hand is happy to indulge in an cringey form of armchair psychiatry. ::Getting down from soap box:: The endless nature of personal growth can be pointed out as well as it's necessity if one is not going to be pulled back into their own aversions again and again. Neither of which deny growth. What is denied is your distortion of personal growth and the way it seems to fuel your identity of superiority.
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Jul 14, 2013 11:02:24 GMT -5
If you start of treating other people badly, then move to an impersonal perspective and STILL treat other people badly, then what's actually changed other than a perspective? What use is that? Just sort out your own crap and be done with it once and for all. It's the only way you'll even have a remote chance of discovering what your true personality may be. Whether it's one of a total ass or the sweetest gentle person you ever met. Behavior modification is a realm much better suited for hypnosis and other treatments. Hmm, I was/am of the opinion that it's the "crap" which causes one to act like a total ass. Is that not the case, you say? Incidentally, I am putting myself back in for some "crap sorting" this summer with several weeks of intensive Core Process Psychotherapy. Got that gaping black pit of need and abandonment firmly by the horns, and we'll see what can be done about that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2013 11:08:39 GMT -5
Deeply unpleasant isn't quite the phrase I'd use in this particular case. Maybe something more like: doesn't add to the "Pros" column of whether or not I want to continue living on this planet. Are you at some kind of real estate seminar right now?
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 14, 2013 11:14:26 GMT -5
Just sort out your own crap and be done with it once and for all. It's the only way you'll even have a remote chance of discovering what your true personality may be. Whether it's one of a total ass or the sweetest gentle person you ever met. Behavior modification is a realm much better suited for hypnosis and other treatments. Hmm, I was/am of the opinion that it's the "crap" which causes one to act like a total ass. Is that not the case, you say? Incidentally, I am putting myself back in for some "crap sorting" this summer with several weeks of intensive Core Process Psychotherapy. Got that gaping black pit of need and abandonment firmly by the horns, and we'll see what can be done about that. I'm basically saying that if you're involved in spirituality so that you can modify your own behavior, you're wasting your time. In the same way that people looking for far out experiences would be better suited just being handed some DMT and sent into a quiet room. You know quite well when you're being an ass if it's because you're afraid or because you're seeing things that aren't there. Sort THAT out but not because there's an imperative to be nice but because it brings you suffering and you know it. Only when you're done trying to interfere with your experience from every angle will you actually know what your true personality is and I can tell you it won't be the same as anyone else's. Could you accept freedom if it meant people might still be offended by you?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 14, 2013 11:23:49 GMT -5
But what I will also say is this. I would be very wary of any 'teacher' that cannot see that the goal of personal growth type paths is, at heart, exactly the same as what the non-dual pathless path is pointing to. This is also a main reason why this forum is a bit of a mess. There are some decent non-dual pointers here, and these pointers definitely have their place, but personal growth type paths are usually rejected as being fundamentally different. It creates a separation on the forum, and this separation can be clearly seen in the different 'camps'. If non-duality EXCLUDES spirituality and personal growth then it is fuc.ked up non-duality. So something simple like EFT, which very usefully releases limiting conditioned beliefs and shifts our energy is likely to be seen on the forum as being based in a delusion. Which is absurd exclusionary pretentious nonsense. And then what we have is a kind of non-dual idiocy that on one hand rejects personal growth and on the other hand is happy to indulge in an cringey form of armchair psychiatry. ::Getting down from soap box:: The endless nature of personal growth can be pointed out as well as it's necessity if one is not going to be pulled back into their own aversions again and again. Neither of which deny growth. What is denied is your distortion of personal growth and the way it seems to fuel your identity of superiority. There are issues with 'personal growth' paths, but if followed through, theoretically those issues come out in the wash. There are also issues with the non-dual pathless path and theoretically these issues also come out in the wash. Theoretically they both arrive at the same 'point'. A clear sign of non-duality gone wrong is when personal growth is excluded.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 14, 2013 11:53:45 GMT -5
The endless nature of personal growth can be pointed out as well as it's necessity if one is not going to be pulled back into their own aversions again and again. Neither of which deny growth. What is denied is your distortion of personal growth and the way it seems to fuel your identity of superiority. There are issues with 'personal growth' paths, but if followed through, theoretically those issues come out in the wash. There are also issues with the non-dual pathless path and theoretically these issues also come out in the wash. Theoretically they both arrive at the same 'point'. A clear sign of non-duality gone wrong is when personal growth is excluded. You're just debating yourself with your own perceptions of contrasting paths and an objective non-duality thing.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 14, 2013 12:07:50 GMT -5
There are issues with 'personal growth' paths, but if followed through, theoretically those issues come out in the wash. There are also issues with the non-dual pathless path and theoretically these issues also come out in the wash. Theoretically they both arrive at the same 'point'. A clear sign of non-duality gone wrong is when personal growth is excluded. You're just debating yourself with your own perceptions of contrasting paths and an objective non-duality thing. What you said here was basically babble wasn't it. As you said above, the 'goal' of non-duality is authenticity, the goal of personal growth is authenticity. I rarely rarely encounter someone that leans towards personal growth that excludes non-duality. Tolle, Mooji, Adyashanti...they are all popular. I've even seen Niz quotes pop up on my facebook page, posted by people that aren't solely non-dual focused. And yet those on the non-dual pathless path often misunderstand what non-duality is about and exclude personal growth. Non-duality IS personal growth at the end of the day. It has to deny that for the sake of the seeker, but unfortunately what it often creates is elitism, pretentiousness and yet more separation.
|
|