|
Post by Reefs on Sept 30, 2013 22:46:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 30, 2013 23:07:24 GMT -5
Good question there. I have never been able to identify the mind, but I do identify things like thought concentration attention perception etc.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 1, 2013 7:02:23 GMT -5
(______________________________________________________________________________)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 7:23:33 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 1, 2013 7:44:40 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up (shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 7:56:11 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up (shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. Funnily, I get this exactly. I also understand the concept of why some folks mention freefall, centerlessness. When I contemplate "Eternal Existence" my, perhaps, overt love affair with doubt serves up 'Eternal' as opposed to 'Existence.' Existence is laughably acceptable whereas eternal, like foundationless and centerlessness, is certainly an apt description based on experience, but ultimately unknowable. There is so much that is unknowable. Except for existence. There is silence and there is noise. (BTW, no judgement with 'noise.' Could have said 'music' but for some reason I think of noise as encompassing the latter more than the other way around.)
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 1, 2013 9:52:42 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. It's a pointer. Besides, who do you think he was talking to? The seeker that doesn't actually exist? That's the thing when reading talks with guys like Ramana, Niz or Papaji. Who the heck are they talking to?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 1, 2013 10:18:21 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. It's a pointer. Besides, who do you think he was talking to? The seeker that doesn't actually exist? That's the thing when reading talks with guys like Ramana, Niz or Papaji. Who the heck are they talking to? Precisely! (Hint: it isn't a person)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 11:39:04 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up (shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. There's a real risk of greater mental health problems occurring when peeps are led to believe that they are figments of imagination, not observers of the observed, that time, space, causation, volition and in particular, death, are all illusions... I mean folks who have turned to spirituality in the first place are already struggling to cope mentally with reality. The confusion in turning from one description of reality to another, can lead to anxiety disorders, phobias and neuroses, having eating disorders and drug problems. In addition, spiritualists are more likely than others to be already taking medication for mental health problems. There's nothing wrong with quieting the mind, it's the acceptance of what the spiritual salesman are selling that's the real problem...
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 1, 2013 11:44:02 GMT -5
Keeping quiet is a practice as well. And just shutting up doesn't necessarily lead to a realization that you are Eternal Existence. There is foundationless space, deafeningly quiet, and in it is noise and everything else. Bare existence is both, in my estimation. Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up ( shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. The question is: Who is shifting attention? (Hint: one can see it in the results of the attention shift 'who' that actually was)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 12:02:57 GMT -5
Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up ( shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. The question is: Who is shifting attention? (Hint: one can see it in the results of the attention shift 'who' that actually was) Shifting attention, two things are noticed: (1)A cornucopia of sensations including a lingering questioning state; and (2) somesortof presence, being, exisiting (?), knowingness. The question 'who is shifting attention?' presupposes a who doing the shifting. To answer the question requires a temporary adornment of a who to say who.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 12:06:28 GMT -5
Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up (shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. There's a real risk of greater mental health problems occurring when peeps are led to believe that they are figments of imagination, not observers of the observed, that time, space, causation, volition and in particular, death, are all illusions... I mean folks who have turned to spirituality in the first place are already struggling to cope mentally with reality. The confusion in turning from one description of reality to another, can lead to anxiety disorders, phobias and neuroses, having eating disorders and drug problems. In addition, spiritualists are more likely than others to be already taking medication for mental health problems. There's nothing wrong with quieting the mind, it's the acceptance of what the spiritual salesman are selling that's the real problem... trf -- when you say that bit about "there's a real risk" are you referring to peeps doing self inquiry or some sort of practice or are you referring to joe on the street who mayhaps has never known about any of this junk in the first place?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2013 12:28:45 GMT -5
There's a real risk of greater mental health problems occurring when peeps are led to believe that they are figments of imagination, not observers of the observed, that time, space, causation, volition and in particular, death, are all illusions... I mean folks who have turned to spirituality in the first place are already struggling to cope mentally with reality. The confusion in turning from one description of reality to another, can lead to anxiety disorders, phobias and neuroses, having eating disorders and drug problems. In addition, spiritualists are more likely than others to be already taking medication for mental health problems. There's nothing wrong with quieting the mind, it's the acceptance of what the spiritual salesman are selling that's the real problem... trf -- when you say that bit about "there's a real risk" are you referring to peeps doing self inquiry or some sort of practice or are you referring to joe on the street who mayhaps has never known about any of this junk in the first place? What I'm referring to is the psyche of that percentage of the population who claim to have spiritual beliefs outside of the orthodox religions. Self inquiry or practices in themselves are fine, they don't cause mental health issues... It seems though that the ones who hold spiritual beliefs are 77 per cent more likely than others to be dependent on drugs, 72 per cent more likely to suffer from a phobia, and 50 per cent more likely to have a generalised anxiety disorder. If someone is already suffering from mental health issues, telling them that don't have self hood can only exasperate the problem... What hasn't been determined is if peeps already have pre-existing mental health issues before adopting spiritual beliefs or if the beliefs cause the problem...
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 1, 2013 13:05:23 GMT -5
Keeping quiet can be considered a practice, and so can thinking. Thinking could be considered an unconscious practice whereas ATA and other meditative activities that shift attention away from thinking are conscious practices. It is like using a thorn to remove a thorn. After the first thorn is removed, both thorns can be thrown away. Shutting up (shifting attention away from thoughts) will not lead to the realization that you are Eternal Existence because "Eternal Existence" is an idea/pointer. Shutting up will simply lead to the realization that selfhood is a figment of imagination. It will lead to the realization that you are not a person "in here" looking at a world "out there." It can also lead to the realization that time, space, causation, volition, and many other ideas are ideas, only. Funnily, I get this exactly. I also understand the concept of why some folks mention freefall, centerlessness. When I contemplate "Eternal Existence" my, perhaps, overt love affair with doubt serves up 'Eternal' as opposed to 'Existence.' Existence is laughably acceptable whereas eternal, like foundationless and centerlessness, is certainly an apt description based on experience, but ultimately unknowable. There is so much that is unknowable. Except for existence.There is silence and there is noise. (BTW, no judgement with 'noise.' Could have said 'music' but for some reason I think of noise as encompassing the latter more than the other way around.) As I see it IMO from my perspective, in order to say the eternal is unknowable, non-eternal must first be conceived of and taken to be knowable. One knows of this phenomena called impermanent, temporary, mortal (whatever form the idea takes). From within that idea, one then conceives of the idea of eternal, and ultimately calls it unknowable and inconceivable. We could call this objectifying an absence, and then trying to find that absence. IOW, the idea of the temporary is an exercise in creation, forming a temporal continuity of change and objects appearing that arise, change and fall. Beginnings, endings, birth death, etc, etc. So from that perspective of change, is there something called eternal, or are we just talking about the absence of that idea of change? If we turn that absence into a concept called eternal, then we have to understand the concept and frame it in terms of the temporary that we DO understand, and somehow relate it to our experience, which IS change and temporality. We might even formulate a practice to help us understand, find or realize this condition called eternal, and yet that condition is a conceptual formulation of the opposing conceptual formulation of temporality, and not something that can actually be found. The eternal is really just no more temporary, in the same way that oneness is really just no more separation. This is what it means to say the concept is not true, or the menu is not the meal or the truth is unknowable or nothing is known, and a few other confusing pointers that point in the same direction. This is what Papaji means when he says there is nothing to do or undo. He's referring to the same mental process I described when he says "We speak about enlightenment, but first we have created bondage. Bondage does not exist. How can you remove that which does not exist?" We conceive of this concept called freedom based on the false concept of bondage, then formulate a practice to get there. To get where? It's a complicated way of talking about something very simple and obvious, but it's mind that makes it necessary.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Oct 1, 2013 13:19:20 GMT -5
Funnily, I get this exactly. I also understand the concept of why some folks mention freefall, centerlessness. When I contemplate "Eternal Existence" my, perhaps, overt love affair with doubt serves up 'Eternal' as opposed to 'Existence.' Existence is laughably acceptable whereas eternal, like foundationless and centerlessness, is certainly an apt description based on experience, but ultimately unknowable. There is so much that is unknowable. Except for existence.There is silence and there is noise. (BTW, no judgement with 'noise.' Could have said 'music' but for some reason I think of noise as encompassing the latter more than the other way around.) As I see it IMO from my perspective, in order to say the eternal is unknowable, non-eternal must first be conceived of and taken to be knowable. One knows of this phenomena called impermanent, temporary, mortal (whatever form the idea takes). From within that idea, one then conceives of the idea of eternal, and ultimately calls it unknowable and inconceivable. We could call this objectifying an absence, and then trying to find that absence. IOW, the idea of the temporary is an exercise in creation, forming a temporal continuity of change and objects appearing that arise, change and fall. Beginnings, endings, birth death, etc, etc. So from that perspective of change, is there something called eternal, or are we just talking about the absence of that idea of change? If we turn that absence into a concept called eternal, then we have to understand the concept and frame it in terms of the temporary that we DO understand, and somehow relate it to our experience, which IS change and temporality. We might even formulate a practice to help us understand, find or realize this condition called eternal, and yet that condition is a conceptual formulation of the opposing conceptual formulation of temporality, and not something that can actually be found. The eternal is really just no more temporary, in the same way that oneness is really just no more separation. This is what it means to say the concept is not true, or the menu is not the meal or the truth is unknowable or nothing is known, and a few other confusing pointers that point in the same direction. This is what Papaji means when he says there is nothing to do or undo. He's referring to the same mental process I described when he says "We speak about enlightenment, but first we have created bondage. Bondage does not exist. How can you remove that which does not exist?" We conceive of this concept called freedom based on the false concept of bondage, then formulate a practice to get there. To get where? It's a complicated way of talking about something very simple and obvious, but it's mind that makes it necessary. Whoah....tmt.. Just maybe it's your assuumptdiddly-umption - unnecessarily about others that makes you THINK that.
|
|