|
Post by freejoy on Aug 29, 2013 14:45:11 GMT -5
It's pretty easy to tell whether this understanding is merely conceptual. Is there still seeking? Is life still full of problems to be solved? Well it seems like a hallmark must be a sense that it's 'easy to tell.' Because I don't seem to have reached that point yet. It's not easy for me to see if my questions and explorations are a form of seeking or just manifestations of curiosity and appreciation for precision in articulation and understanding. I don't see life as full of problems to be solved. That said there are conundrums here and there which are part of life -- do I go for a gas boiler or a pellet stove? What's a good way of wording a diplomatic email to family? These are small problems really, but I wouldn't say life is without problems. Also on the 'easy to tell' front, from my standpoint here on this forum, it seems like their is endless conversation between various members who apparently find it 'easy to tell' that another member is claiming to have come full circle but is still harboring an identity, howsoever perhaps more 'expanded' depending on the case. And so there is great back and forth about how it is so easy to tell who has come full circle and who has not, examples given up the wazoo. From my perspective, I really have no clue who is what. Certain styles of posting and contents appeal to me, but I take that as a tomato/tomahto thing and is ultimately just another subjective taste thingy. It's not about problems for me but responsibility and duty to actually do things in this world that we know would make it more tolerable for everyone. I think Jesus injunction "on earth as in heaven" a pretty good one. I think it is completely possible.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 29, 2013 15:06:17 GMT -5
Yeah.....I use the words 'allowing/accepting' more to describe a way of being, than 'doings.' And I also understand the idea of 'further' or 'deepening' as I prefer to call it. & While there is no sense here of 'seeking' or 'trying/striving' for deepening, it does seem to be happening, nevertheless. Yup. That's it...I'd say though that the 'deepening' surrounding that seeing eventually moves towards actually loving/embracing 'what is.' Not in the way where we say, "Oh wow...kids dying, isn't that marvelous" or anything like that, but more just an overall love of life/experience itself. I see the difference between a need and a preference as; when a need is present, we will rail against 'what is' if it does not conform to our idea of how we'd like things to be. Needs result in emotional suffering. A preference on the other hand is how we'd 'like to see things,' but there's no need/attachment involved. Even though unwanted things may be going on in our midst, (children dying, etc.), there is still a sense of abiding Peace. Years ago, I used to go nights without sleeping due to thoughts of other people and animals suffering. My sense of Peace was disturbed by the thoughts I entertained about the suffering of others. I was observing the experience of others and layering on my own elaborate stories about them....and then, I was suffering for that. I started to release that resistance through writing songs about those things....and really after the fact, it was pretty clear that "I" had not written them at all....but rather they came through me...as though they were being channeled. The content of those songs was not about how horrific this world and it's suffering was, but rather the words offered a far more expansive perspective, absent the contracted perspective I'd previously been entertaining. I'd usually end up weeping with Joy & wonder by the end of the process, undoubtedly, seeing things from a much different, more expansive vantage point. These days, there is still compassion and an ability to empathize, but now it's without getting caught up in my own sense of grief over these things, which really only adds fuel to the fire anyway. I act where a clear opportunity to act presents itself, and in cases where I'm not in a position to 'help' I simply offer love. Interestingly enough though, in the past when I spent oodles of time focused upon 'the horrors of this world,' these types of things were constantly making their way into my awareness...presenting through stories others would tell me, the news I'd encounter when perusing a newspaper or turning on the TV, or even overhearing strangers talking. Now that the focus has shifted, it's very rare that such information ever presents....and if it does, it always seems to present with a clear avenue for extending action that can actually 'help' the situation, attached to it. Well this particular issue is a koan of sorts for me. It seems to me that someone in the zone, so to speak, full-circly, is the most likely one to stand up and scream STOP! when atrocities are being committed. That sort of action, a constant striking while the hammer is hot, is a more telling indicator for me than whether they seem at peace or not. Rage and fury might just be the best response in certain situations. They can be effective wrappings for certain messages. Whether that person is in tune with an internal peace or not is really something they can only know, as you've noted. Mahakala, a wrathful deity, is considered to be the fierce and powerful emanation of Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of compassion.Hey max ... got not interest here in discussing what is or isn't an atrocity and how that relates to perfection but wanted to suggest an opportunity for turning away from the conceptual. Your insightful expression teed this-up quite well sir. These next two questions aren't something that I'm asking for any type of analysis or discussion on, instead, they're just an attempt to frame the koan-like inquiry you've referenced: How can an internal state of indifference to the suffering of people be anything other than on indication of taking separation for actuality? Isn't the bottom line on expecting on objection to that suffering from the context of seeing through that separation is that it's just an expectation? Now to be crystal clear on this -- I'm not trying to discourage you or anyone else from discussing this in general or any specific instances that might be applicable ... but it's the underlying itch for some sort of a resolution to this scenario that's a great opportunity to treat it the way I've heard the rumor of how koans are treated. Don't suppress it, don't try to banish thought of it. Rather, just recognize the opportunity to turn away from the impulse to think about it, to analyze it or try to come up with some sort of answer to rest on expressed as an idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2013 15:27:50 GMT -5
Well this particular issue is a koan of sorts for me. It seems to me that someone in the zone, so to speak, full-circly, is the most likely one to stand up and scream STOP! when atrocities are being committed. That sort of action, a constant striking while the hammer is hot, is a more telling indicator for me than whether they seem at peace or not. I don't see standing up to scream STOP, or taking swift, direct action to necessarily be in opposition at all to being at Peace with what is. But the very idea of 'atrocities' being committed, itself, requires a certain focus. And no doubt, you could likely pull something up and offer me 'proof' that there are in fact horrific things happening in the world, and you'd likely have me nodding along, saying 'yes....that is rather atrocious.' It may be just the way I perceive the meaning of those words, but in my estimation, rage and fury are rather 'blinding' emotions that arise in response to a very contracted perspective rather than an expanded one. Seems to me, "Rage" requires a certain amount of attachment to a personal story. Then again, there's 'rage' that arises and then dissipates when there is no further heaping on of a story to that,and that propels the urge to act, and there's the kind that arises and as a story gets told about the 'rightness' of that rage, it gathers momentum and becomes a more permanent thing. I dunno...guess I'm having difficulty relating to those words as rage and fury have not arisen for some time.....Yes, hehe....even in spite of my interactions here with Reefs. Is it really 'rage' or 'fury' though if the underlying foundation is actually Peace? I know, I know...we're getting into that dicey territory of defining emotions and feelings and I'm bettin' you're no more interested in going deep into that than I am. I'd say there can be a strong impulse to act immediately, absent a strong sense of something being horribly wrong. (in the more expansive sense).
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 29, 2013 17:01:46 GMT -5
Greetings.. All forms of identity are ultimately false. To explore what you are not is simply to question everywhere you find solid ground. You clearly 'are' and so how do you truly embody what you are other than to stop pretending. Like water circling a drain, the exploration leads you into silence and your own innate authority. Hi Silence: Very nicely communicated, impressive clarity.. if i may, and our history suggests i may not, but.. the final sentence tends to contradict the clarity.. "the exploration" leads nowhere that the explorer doesn't choose to be led, hence "your own innate authority", and that 'authority' is not transferable to others.. Be well.. I don't have a problem with talking about choices being made and people exploring what they want to explore because that's actually what's happening. There's no vengeful god or universe not willing to allow you to have a realization or forcing you to look in dark corners. From my perspective, most if not all spiritual seeking is the direct result of not actually perceiving a choice in the matter. There's just this tool called thought to understand things and what the hell else am I going to use to resolve all these matters at hand?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2013 17:02:20 GMT -5
Well this particular issue is a koan of sorts for me. It seems to me that someone in the zone, so to speak, full-circly, is the most likely one to stand up and scream STOP! when atrocities are being committed. That sort of action, a constant striking while the hammer is hot, is a more telling indicator for me than whether they seem at peace or not. I don't see standing up to scream STOP, or taking swift, direct action to necessarily be in opposition at all to being at Peace with what is. But the very idea of 'atrocities' being committed, itself, requires a certain focus. And no doubt, you could likely pull something up and offer me 'proof' that there are in fact horrific things happening in the world, and you'd likely have me nodding along, saying 'yes....that is rather atrocious.' It may be just the way I perceive the meaning of those words, but in my estimation, rage and fury are rather 'blinding' emotions that arise in response to a very contracted perspective rather than an expanded one. Seems to me, "Rage" requires a certain amount of attachment to a personal story. Then again, there's 'rage' that arises and then dissipates when there is no further heaping on of a story to that,and that propels the urge to act, and there's the kind that arises and as a story gets told about the 'rightness' of that rage, it gathers momentum and becomes a more permanent thing. I dunno...guess I'm having difficulty relating to those words as rage and fury have not arisen for some time.....Yes, hehe....even in spite of my interactions here with Reefs. Is it really 'rage' or 'fury' though if the underlying foundation is actually Peace? I know, I know...we're getting into that dicey territory of defining emotions and feelings and I'm bettin' you're no more interested in going deep into that than I am. I'd say there can be a strong impulse to act immediately, absent a strong sense of something being horribly wrong. (in the more expansive sense). Yea, I know it's problematic. I'm thinking more of what it appears like. It may appear raging or furious. But it would absolutely appropriate. Laughter's hitting it, just a body response really. 'Wrongness' isn't really what I'm talking about -- that implies lots of headiness. Mahakala acts compassionately always, even if it involves fire and skulls.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 29, 2013 17:13:16 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi Silence: Very nicely communicated, impressive clarity.. if i may, and our history suggests i may not, but.. the final sentence tends to contradict the clarity.. "the exploration" leads nowhere that the explorer doesn't choose to be led, hence "your own innate authority", and that 'authority' is not transferable to others.. Be well.. I doubt that our friend silence is bound by history in who he converses with. I found his last sentence to make sense as it is. The 'exploration' does seem inevitable to me, and I'm okay with that. I don't think it matters much whether you apply choice or agency to that direction or not. Authority in the sense he was using it does not imply authority over others. I think of it more like groundedness. Is one's expression originating naturally from within, unique and authentic? Or is it couched in theories and concepts, founded on thinking? Not unlike how I understand your use of 'still mind.' Yes, are you moving from imagination or not. The term awakening is not an exaggeration. One's authority is literally the life force that comes alive and needs no confirmation from anyone including your own thoughts to know what's true. What is left when this trance of imagination ends is something so powerful and awe inspiring that it defies words and brings tears.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 29, 2013 17:17:06 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi Silence: Very nicely communicated, impressive clarity.. if i may, and our history suggests i may not, but.. the final sentence tends to contradict the clarity.. "the exploration" leads nowhere that the explorer doesn't choose to be led, hence "your own innate authority", and that 'authority' is not transferable to others.. Be well.. I don't have a problem with talking about choices being made and people exploring what they want to explore because that's actually what's happening. There's no vengeful god or universe not willing to allow you to have a realization or forcing you to look in dark corners. From my perspective, most if not all spiritual seeking is the direct result of not actually perceiving a choice in the matter. There's just this tool called thought to understand things and what the hell else am I going to use to resolve all these matters at hand? Perhaps there's also some value also in referring back to the opening point? All forms of identity are ultimately false. which of course implies that, in any event, what we are is neither the explorer nor the choice nor the one making the choice. This doesn't foreclose discussion of choice, authority and exploration, it just casts it in a different light.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 29, 2013 17:26:11 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with talking about choices being made and people exploring what they want to explore because that's actually what's happening. There's no vengeful god or universe not willing to allow you to have a realization or forcing you to look in dark corners. From my perspective, most if not all spiritual seeking is the direct result of not actually perceiving a choice in the matter. There's just this tool called thought to understand things and what the hell else am I going to use to resolve all these matters at hand? Perhaps there's also some value also in referring back to the opening point? All forms of identity are ultimately false. which of course implies that, in any event, what we are is neither the explorer nor the choice nor the one making the choice. This doesn't foreclose discussion of choice, authority and exploration, it just casts it in a different light. Yes, there's choices being made and interesting explorations happening just as there's blood pumping and sun shining.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2013 17:41:26 GMT -5
Yup...I'm with you....appearances can be deceiving...... A manifestation of compassion might not always look exactly how we think it 'should' look.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 29, 2013 21:42:10 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Hi Silence: Very nicely communicated, impressive clarity.. if i may, and our history suggests i may not, but.. the final sentence tends to contradict the clarity.. "the exploration" leads nowhere that the explorer doesn't choose to be led, hence "your own innate authority", and that 'authority' is not transferable to others.. Be well.. I don't have a problem with talking about choices being made and people exploring what they want to explore because that's actually what's happening. There's no vengeful god or universe not willing to allow you to have a realization or forcing you to look in dark corners. From my perspective, most if not all spiritual seeking is the direct result of not actually perceiving a choice in the matter. There's just this tool called thought to understand things and what the hell else am I going to use to resolve all these matters at hand?As i choose, i take counsel from what is actually happening, allowing balance to reveal the wisdom in these translated words from thousands of years ago: " For everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven".. "thought" is balanced by stillness and silence, each relevant to the understanding of 'what we are'.. the awareness that stillness and silence presents clear undistorted information with which thought can understand its relevance seems self-evident, yes? Be well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 29, 2013 22:12:28 GMT -5
Well it seems like a hallmark must be a sense that it's 'easy to tell.' Because I don't seem to have reached that point yet. Fair enough...perhaps not as 'easy' as I said then. Guess all I can say is In my experience, when there was no more seeking, it was quite palpably felt as a falling away of a tension I did not even realize had been there....a release that went hand in hand with seeing that there was 'nothing more that needs to be done, figured out, seen or attained.' In terms of the idea of 'seeking' per se, It's really just a shift though from a sense that there is something 'more' that I'm not 'getting' or seeing, to a seeing that there is no-thing, no idea, no 'it' beyond this moment, TO get. Yes, from what I can see, all in all, you are very allowing/accepting. Sure, this stuff still presents. But nothing has the ability any more to draw attention to the point of losing sight of the inherent perfection, even in the arising of all of that stuff. (and....'perfect' does not necessarily mean that what's presenting aligns completely with preferences...preferences can co-exist alongside a foundational seeing that all is unfolding with perfection). Yes, when I said 'easy to tell' I was speaking more to a self inquiry....looking within AT self, not so much about looking outwards at others to decipher where they're at. Only YOU know for sure whether you are still seeking for something that you perceive to be still alluding you. For the record, I pretty much res wit all dat.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 29, 2013 22:40:35 GMT -5
Yup...I'm with you....appearances can be deceiving...... A manifestation of compassion might not always look exactly how we think it 'should' look. Indeed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2013 22:41:36 GMT -5
Fair enough...perhaps not as 'easy' as I said then. Guess all I can say is In my experience, when there was no more seeking, it was quite palpably felt as a falling away of a tension I did not even realize had been there....a release that went hand in hand with seeing that there was 'nothing more that needs to be done, figured out, seen or attained.' In terms of the idea of 'seeking' per se, It's really just a shift though from a sense that there is something 'more' that I'm not 'getting' or seeing, to a seeing that there is no-thing, no idea, no 'it' beyond this moment, TO get. Yes, from what I can see, all in all, you are very allowing/accepting. Sure, this stuff still presents. But nothing has the ability any more to draw attention to the point of losing sight of the inherent perfection, even in the arising of all of that stuff. (and....'perfect' does not necessarily mean that what's presenting aligns completely with preferences...preferences can co-exist alongside a foundational seeing that all is unfolding with perfection). Yes, when I said 'easy to tell' I was speaking more to a self inquiry....looking within AT self, not so much about looking outwards at others to decipher where they're at. Only YOU know for sure whether you are still seeking for something that you perceive to be still alluding you. For the record, I pretty much res wit all dat. ...Holy sh*t!! Break out the vino tinto!!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 29, 2013 22:55:37 GMT -5
I don't see standing up to scream STOP, or taking swift, direct action to necessarily be in opposition at all to being at Peace with what is. But the very idea of 'atrocities' being committed, itself, requires a certain focus. And no doubt, you could likely pull something up and offer me 'proof' that there are in fact horrific things happening in the world, and you'd likely have me nodding along, saying 'yes....that is rather atrocious.' It may be just the way I perceive the meaning of those words, but in my estimation, rage and fury are rather 'blinding' emotions that arise in response to a very contracted perspective rather than an expanded one. Seems to me, "Rage" requires a certain amount of attachment to a personal story. Then again, there's 'rage' that arises and then dissipates when there is no further heaping on of a story to that,and that propels the urge to act, and there's the kind that arises and as a story gets told about the 'rightness' of that rage, it gathers momentum and becomes a more permanent thing. I dunno...guess I'm having difficulty relating to those words as rage and fury have not arisen for some time.....Yes, hehe....even in spite of my interactions here with Reefs. Is it really 'rage' or 'fury' though if the underlying foundation is actually Peace? I know, I know...we're getting into that dicey territory of defining emotions and feelings and I'm bettin' you're no more interested in going deep into that than I am. I'd say there can be a strong impulse to act immediately, absent a strong sense of something being horribly wrong. (in the more expansive sense). Yea, I know it's problematic. I'm thinking more of what it appears like. It may appear raging or furious. But it would absolutely appropriate. Laughter's hitting it, just a body response really. 'Wrongness' isn't really what I'm talking about -- that implies lots of headiness. Mahakala acts compassionately always, even if it involves fire and skulls. The tendency is to pit perfection against compassion, as though they cannot coexist. Can there be compassion for the inevitability of the perfection of suffering? Can the movement to resolve suffering be a part of that perfection? What might 'perfect' look like from an impersonal perspective? How much of what is seen as imperfect would lose it's foundation? If one of the gears of a clock mechanism moves more slowly than the rest, is the clock imperfect? Does it need to be fixed? If time moves as it does rather than how you wish it to, has something gone wrong?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 29, 2013 22:57:41 GMT -5
For the record, I pretty much res wit all dat. ...Holy sh*t!! Break out the vino tinto!! Now we'll both have to qualify our comments once we sober up.
|
|