|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 14:17:01 GMT -5
...and do people believe / follow / see / understand 'X' the way the next person does?
What I'm trying to say / ask is about the nonduality thing and are there more than one way of looking at it, just as there are many Christians or Buddhists or what-have you in the world, people who claim to be Christian have many different viewpoints. For some Christians, for example, dancing is wrong and for other Christians it is acceptable.
In spite of the fact that I think I've 'gotten' some of the nonduality tenets for lack of a better word, I know that those here who are the most long time non dual types would say I don't understand any of it.
I'm just trying to come to understand it well enough to be given even a modicum of credit.
I think I started a somewhat similar thread, but don't want to hunt for it.
Thoughts anybody?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 23, 2013 14:31:02 GMT -5
...and do people believe / follow / see / understand 'X' the way the next person does? What I'm trying to say / ask is about the nonduality thing and are there more than one way of looking at it, just as there are many Christians or Buddhists or what-have you in the world, people who claim to be Christian have many different viewpoints. For some Christians, for example, dancing is wrong and for other Christians it is acceptable. In spite of the fact that I think I've 'gotten' some of the nonduality tenets for lack of a better word, I know that those here who are the most long time non dual types would say I don't understand any of it. I'm just trying to come to understand it well enough to be given even a modicum of credit. I think I started a somewhat similar thread, but don't want to hunt for it. Thoughts anybody? Well, since you're open to engaging and you are wanting to make sure that you understand and you feel like you understand some tenets, let's start there. Give a nonduality tenet in your perception and we'll dig into what you understand, and more specifically how you are coming to understand it.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 14:37:16 GMT -5
...and do people believe / follow / see / understand 'X' the way the next person does? What I'm trying to say / ask is about the nonduality thing and are there more than one way of looking at it, just as there are many Christians or Buddhists or what-have you in the world, people who claim to be Christian have many different viewpoints. For some Christians, for example, dancing is wrong and for other Christians it is acceptable. In spite of the fact that I think I've 'gotten' some of the nonduality tenets for lack of a better word, I know that those here who are the most long time non dual types would say I don't understand any of it. I'm just trying to come to understand it well enough to be given even a modicum of credit. I think I started a somewhat similar thread, but don't want to hunt for it. Thoughts anybody? Well, since you're open to engaging and you are wanting to make sure that you understand and you feel like you understand some tenets, let's start there. Give a nonduality tenet in your perception and we'll dig into what you understand, and more specifically how you are coming to understand it. Okay. I understand (figuratively, I guess?) that we are 'not our bodies/minds' and close behind that understanding/knowing from what may be a flashback to an oobe/nde and in any event a 'sense' of that (it seems to be the same thing as believing in spirit or soul in non-nondual terms) and some of the implications that impact on everyday mundane life. The thing is there's just soo much talk about it, I've had doubts about my own 'feel' for what I do and don't understand about it.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 23, 2013 14:45:02 GMT -5
Well, since you're open to engaging and you are wanting to make sure that you understand and you feel like you understand some tenets, let's start there. Give a nonduality tenet in your perception and we'll dig into what you understand, and more specifically how you are coming to understand it. Okay. I understand (figuratively, I guess?) that we are 'not our bodies/minds' and close behind that understanding/knowing from what may be a flashback to an oobe/nde and in any event a 'sense' of that (it seems to be the same thing as believing in spirit or soul in non-nondual terms) and some of the implications that impact on everyday mundane life. The thing is there's just soo much talk about it, I've had doubts about my own 'feel' for what I do and don't understand about it. Having an OBE or NDE can definitely hit home with understanding that you're not the body and you're not the mind or persona... But if you start developing a belief-system around the event then you're missing the mark again. Does that make sense, do you understand why that is, why there is such a focus on no-belief?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 14:48:41 GMT -5
Okay. I understand (figuratively, I guess?) that we are 'not our bodies/minds' and close behind that understanding/knowing from what may be a flashback to an oobe/nde and in any event a 'sense' of that (it seems to be the same thing as believing in spirit or soul in non-nondual terms) and some of the implications that impact on everyday mundane life. The thing is there's just soo much talk about it, I've had doubts about my own 'feel' for what I do and don't understand about it. Having an OBE or NDE can definitely hit home with understanding that you're not the body and you're not the mind or persona... But if you start developing a belief-system around the event then you're missing the mark again. Does that make sense, do you understand why that is, why there is such a focus on no-belief? The thing is, I didn't have the flashback about obe/nde until my son was a youngster - throughout my life, only partly because I attended church, did I have within myself a sense of the spiritual the otherworldly stuff - how or why I wouldn't know. I did not start developing a belief system around that, fyi. Using the word belief is for me right now, a short cut to make it feasible to talk about it in a way that we don't have to explain with many words - which is what i just did, oops.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 23, 2013 15:18:31 GMT -5
...and do people believe / follow / see / understand 'X' the way the next person does? What I'm trying to say / ask is about the nonduality thing and are there more than one way of looking at it, just as there are many Christians or Buddhists or what-have you in the world, people who claim to be Christian have many different viewpoints. For some Christians, for example, dancing is wrong and for other Christians it is acceptable. In spite of the fact that I think I've 'gotten' some of the nonduality tenets for lack of a better word, I know that those here who are the most long time non dual types would say I don't understand any of it. I'm just trying to come to understand it well enough to be given even a modicum of credit. I think I started a somewhat similar thread, but don't want to hunt for it. Thoughts anybody? You're looking for credit?! From people here?! Ag, you're looking in the wrong place for that. Besides that, such a question is indicative of belief in personhood (i.e., belief in a person who wants credit). It's actually kind of bad for you to receive any credit, anyway, as it just strokes the ego. As strange as it sounds, the more you are really loved here, the less credit you'll likely be given. Like, for anything. It's a weird dynamic, I know.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 15:23:13 GMT -5
...and do people believe / follow / see / understand 'X' the way the next person does? What I'm trying to say / ask is about the nonduality thing and are there more than one way of looking at it, just as there are many Christians or Buddhists or what-have you in the world, people who claim to be Christian have many different viewpoints. For some Christians, for example, dancing is wrong and for other Christians it is acceptable. In spite of the fact that I think I've 'gotten' some of the nonduality tenets for lack of a better word, I know that those here who are the most long time non dual types would say I don't understand any of it. I'm just trying to come to understand it well enough to be given even a modicum of credit. I think I started a somewhat similar thread, but don't want to hunt for it. Thoughts anybody? You're looking for credit?! From people here?! Ag, you're looking in the wrong place for that. Besides that, such a question is indicative of belief in personhood (i.e., belief in a person who wants credit). It's actually kind of bad for you to receive any credit, anyway, as it just strokes the ego. As strange as it sounds, the more you are really loved here, the less credit you'll likely be given. Like, for anything. It's a weird dynamic, I know. Ahh that gave me a laugh, B. Well, maybe I didn't mean it exactly like that - credit as in just someone saying something like 'she's got it' or 'she understands' - not as in 'goodie goodie' or trying to get some applause or something.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 23, 2013 15:39:31 GMT -5
Having an OBE or NDE can definitely hit home with understanding that you're not the body and you're not the mind or persona... But if you start developing a belief-system around the event then you're missing the mark again. Does that make sense, do you understand why that is, why there is such a focus on no-belief? The thing is, I didn't have the flashback about obe/nde until my son was a youngster - throughout my life, only partly because I attended church, did I have within myself a sense of the spiritual the otherworldly stuff - how or why I wouldn't know. I did not start developing a belief system around that, fyi. Using the word belief is for me right now, a short cut to make it feasible to talk about it in a way that we don't have to explain with many words - which is what i just did, oops. Here's the way I look at things with respect to non-ordinary experiences (NOEs). If I've accumulated a lot of belief and investment about being a particular person with a certain personality or what kind of world I live in with history and a lot of story, and then I get hit with an OBE or NDE, it traumatizes the story and beliefs. Having the non-ordinary experience may penetrate deeply and shatter the old belief-system. Or it may just impact it temporarily and the belief system goes into repair mode to account for the NOE occurring. How that NOE gets processed determines what happens when the next NOE hits. The mind can be oriented to repairing and building a flexible belief system which survives various waves of NOEs, or the mind can be oriented towards not having a belief system that needs repairing and just ride the experience as it happens and essentially "forget" about it after the NOE passes and not fixate on it. The ND perspective is more the latter than the former. There's no need to create a taxonomy of NOEs and to create a belief system which accounts for all of them and organizes them into a Hierarchy and places a cherry on top of the taxonomy. Now if you're going to take on a "Healer" role and help people acclimate to the NOEs they are having, then having the taxonomy can be useful. But to the experiencer, the taxonomy is not really needed. What is called for by the experiencer is the intuitive ability to "go with the flow" of the NOE that is coming in and not resist it, but to allow it to inform you about the nature of the experiencer. To be clear: the ND perspective does not try to create a conceptual understanding of past experiences or try to fit the experiences into a prior belief system about God or the character of the universe. Reviewing memories of NOEs can be informative to integrate the experience that was had, but once the understanding of the nature of the experiencer is acquired, there is nothing further to be gained from reviewing memories of NOEs. In essence, when the experiencer knows itself fully, having an NOE becomes ordinary and it has little impact on how the experiencer understands and relates to themselves and the experience. I know what I wrote was a little heady, so I will try to make it something you might grok better. You, the experiencer, are common between all your experiences. What having an NOE does is show you what is non-essential to being the experiencer. When the body, mind and persona fall away, those were non-essential to being the experiencer. When the experiencer knows who they are completely, no matter what the experience is, no matter how strange or woo-woo or non-ordinary the experience gets, the experiencer never loses itself or gets lost in the experience. Doing LSD or DMT has no significant lasting impact. It might change the experience, but it doesn't change the experiencer and doesn't change how the experiencer understands themselves. The reason your memory of the OBE/NDE came back was to inform you about the nature of the experiencer during the experience. The memory is trying to adjust how you understand yourself right now. When you understand yourself properly, those memories will not carry any significance for you and they will not come back to you to be chewed on and digested.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 23, 2013 15:54:01 GMT -5
You're looking for credit?! From people here?! Ag, you're looking in the wrong place for that. Besides that, such a question is indicative of belief in personhood (i.e., belief in a person who wants credit). It's actually kind of bad for you to receive any credit, anyway, as it just strokes the ego. As strange as it sounds, the more you are really loved here, the less credit you'll likely be given. Like, for anything. It's a weird dynamic, I know. Ahh that gave me a laugh, B. Well, maybe I didn't mean it exactly like that - credit as in just someone saying something like 'she's got it' or 'she understands' - not as in 'goodie goodie' or trying to get some applause or something. You're looking for confirmation, then? In my own experience, Ag, when you really DO 'get it,' (e.g., through realization), there's no need for anyone's confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 23, 2013 15:58:48 GMT -5
Ahh that gave me a laugh, B. Well, maybe I didn't mean it exactly like that - credit as in just someone saying something like 'she's got it' or 'she understands' - not as in 'goodie goodie' or trying to get some applause or something. You're looking for confirmation, then? In my own experience, Ag, when you really DO 'get it,' (e.g., through realization), there's no need for anyone's confirmation. yes. But you have to get to a point where you do "get it". until then, asking for confirmation is useful as a "Am I looking in the right direction?" question towards someone you trust as seeing clearly and has already "got it".
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 23, 2013 16:12:36 GMT -5
You're looking for confirmation, then? In my own experience, Ag, when you really DO 'get it,' (e.g., through realization), there's no need for anyone's confirmation. Yes. But you have to get to a point where you do "get it". Until then, asking for confirmation is useful as a "Am I looking in the right direction?" question towards someone you trust as seeing clearly and has already "got it". Ah, okay. Good point, top. Only problem is that most of us are pointing in different directions. E does the 'noticing' thing; ZD's got the ATA going; I, myself, go the Niz route with the 'sense I am' (but then, I also follow Adya's 'allowance' method). It would then depend on whom you trust, and would need to get the confirmation from them. Otherwise, I can say no more. I only trust the 'inner guru'.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 20:15:30 GMT -5
Yes. But you have to get to a point where you do "get it". Until then, asking for confirmation is useful as a "Am I looking in the right direction?" question towards someone you trust as seeing clearly and has already "got it". Ah, okay. Good point, top. Only problem is that most of us are pointing in different directions. E does the 'noticing' thing; ZD's got the ATA going; I, myself, go the Niz route with the 'sense I am' (but then, I also follow Adya's 'allowance' method). It would then depend on whom you trust, and would need to get the confirmation from them. Otherwise, I can say no more. I only trust the 'inner guru'. What you both are saying is valid - when one is unsure, they need a safety net and reassurances until such time as they realize they CAN comfortably trust their 'inner guru' - the fact remains we need one another - and even though it's a challenge to 'see' that we not only reflect one another as being part of the whole enchilada, we are each other (which I still find a bit unbelievable). It's because to me, it is merely an ideal that will remain just another nice idea. I'd like to hear if what I just said makes any sense at all.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 23, 2013 20:44:34 GMT -5
Ah, okay. Good point, top. Only problem is that most of us are pointing in different directions. E does the 'noticing' thing; ZD's got the ATA going; I, myself, go the Niz route with the 'sense I am' (but then, I also follow Adya's 'allowance' method). It would then depend on whom you trust, and would need to get the confirmation from them. Otherwise, I can say no more. I only trust the 'inner guru'. What you both are saying is valid - when one is unsure, they need a safety net and reassurances until such time as they realize they CAN comfortably trust their 'inner guru' - the fact remains we need one another - and even though it's a challenge to 'see' that we not only reflect one another as being part of the whole enchilada, we are each other (which I still find a bit unbelievable). It's because to me, it is merely an ideal that will remain just another nice idea. I'd like to hear if what I just said makes any sense at all. Doesn't matter what you like to hear, you'll hear what you're gonna hear. What matters is what you do with what you hear.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 23, 2013 21:33:28 GMT -5
Ah, okay. Good point, top. Only problem is that most of us are pointing in different directions. E does the 'noticing' thing; ZD's got the ATA going; I, myself, go the Niz route with the 'sense I am' (but then, I also follow Adya's 'allowance' method). It would then depend on whom you trust, and would need to get the confirmation from them. Otherwise, I can say no more. I only trust the 'inner guru'. What you both are saying is valid - when one is unsure, they need a safety net and reassurances until such time as they realize they CAN comfortably trust their 'inner guru' - the fact remains we need one another - and even though it's a challenge to 'see' that we not only reflect one another as being part of the whole enchilada, we are each other (which I still find a bit unbelievable). It's because to me, it is merely an ideal that will remain just another nice idea. I'd like to hear if what I just said makes any sense at all. Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 23, 2013 22:17:33 GMT -5
Tanks for the feedback, B and E.
|
|