|
Post by enigma on Apr 18, 2014 21:07:39 GMT -5
Yes, I know what you mean. Being under the illusion of a separate doer is common to everyone who begins following this path. It can't be helped. ATA-MT is simply a methodology that helps "what is" see through the illusion of selfhood. Who/what we are is the whole shebang manifesting momentarily through a particular body/mind. Whatever the body does feels as if "I" (small self) am doing it. If the body/mind pursues ATA-MT, it means that the real doer--"what is"--is doing it because the imaginary self is imaginary and can't do anything. Thus, if you are driving a car to work, this is how "what is" manifests, and if you are doing ATA-MT, this is how "what is" manifests. When attention is repeatedly shifted away from thoughts to what can be seen, heard, felt, etc,, this activity interrupts ALL thinking, but most importantly it interrupts self-referential thinking. Instead of thinking "I" "my" "me" "mine" all day long, and repeating self-referential stories, the body looks, listens, feels, tastes, smells, etc. and interacts with the world through direct sensory perception. This is how babies and very young children interact with the world. If Weber and his brain studies are correct concerning how direct perception interrupts the circuit of self-referentiality, then two things happen. First, the personal narrative and the internal dialogue slow down because less time is being devoted to self-reflexive thinking and constant mental commentary, and second, the body responds more and more directly to whatever is happening. Eventually, the illusion of selfhood suddenly collapses or is seen through. In Weber's case, he was doing a yoga pose that he had done hundreds of times in the past, and in the midst of the pose the personal narrative simply ceased, and he realized that he was not who he had thought he was. In his case, the narrative did not re-start. In another case, a psychiatrist had practiced meditation for many years, but had never lost the sense of selfhood. He had gone as far as he could go and simply accepted that life was okay as it was. He ceased his active seeking, and did not think anything was happening (no more obvious psychological "progress" was occurring), but fourteen years later, while waiting for a client, selfhood suddenly disappeared, and he realized that his idea of who he had thought he was was only an idea/story that had now disappeared. In each of these cases the individuals felt like separate doers up to a certain specific point in time, and then the illusion vanished. They then realized in a direct embodied way that "what is"--the entire cosmos--is a unified whole, and the separate doer is an illusion. Yes, I understand all that. I guess what I'm getting at is that the one who tells someone who believes they are a separate doer to do ATA or to look with a clear/still mind must also believe they are a separate doer. What they are doing is perpetuating the belief of separate doers. Because those 2 practices cannot actually be initiated by an illusion. It can only be done by awareness itself. If we know ourselves not to be separate doers then why tell people there is something they can do? It's a contradiction, but perhaps a necessary one. Maybe Max is right I am engaging in TMT. Non-volition obviously doesn't mean one will not be able to respond to the suggestions of another. Whether you have volition or not, when I ask you to pass the salt, it's likely that you will.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 18, 2014 21:14:35 GMT -5
It's a reference to Enigma, Laughter, and Reefs, and their consistent and well-practiced alignment in the manipulation and misrepresentation of actuality in an effort to create the illusion that their beliefs are superior to any challenge or question of them.. I think it was Silver that first coined the phrase 'The too cool for school Club', it stuck for a while.. now, it's just a convenient reference for their 'secret club' model, with its special initiation and words, and leader (E), complete with a club enforcer (Laffy).. Wow, I did? I think anybody's memory is bound to be better than mine...so I'll take your word for it. I decided to work around their shenanigans and see what I can glean, in any event. Hi Silver: That's my recollection, but the '60s were very very good to me, so... anyway, if i hadn't already been to the bottom of that dead-end rabbit-hole i might be inclined to wonder if there were realizations to 'glean', too.. but, the rabbit-hole collapses on those that linger thinking they've found answers or truths..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Apr 18, 2014 21:17:52 GMT -5
Yes, I understand all that. I guess what I'm getting at is that the one who tells someone who believes they are a separate doer to do ATA or to look with a clear/still mind must also believe they are a separate doer. What they are doing is perpetuating the belief of separate doers. Because those 2 practices cannot actually be initiated by an illusion. It can only be done by awareness itself. If we know ourselves not to be separate doers then why tell people there is something they can do? It's a contradiction, but perhaps a necessary one. Maybe Max is right I am engaging in TMT. Non-volition obviously doesn't mean one will not be able to respond to the suggestions of another. Whether you have volition or not, when I ask you to pass the salt, it's likely that you will. Volition/freewill means that the experiencer has the ability to choose the the way they experience their existence..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 21:19:26 GMT -5
It's examples like this that sends me running for the hills, this talk of "multiple levels" of mind with contradictory understandings. But I would agree that I am emulating a fallacy within the advaita teachings. Being that I the separate self knows there's nothing for me to do, there's nobody here, there's no where to go. I still think and feel like a separate self, but I also know that there's nothing for me to do. It's a total contradiction. I'm curious. What does "nobody here" actually mean to you? I feel another interrogation coming on. It has no meaning for me. It's jargon that I've picked up along the way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 21:27:55 GMT -5
Yes, I understand all that. I guess what I'm getting at is that the one who tells someone who believes they are a separate doer to do ATA or to look with a clear/still mind must also believe they are a separate doer. What they are doing is perpetuating the belief of separate doers. Because those 2 practices cannot actually be initiated by an illusion. It can only be done by awareness itself. If we know ourselves not to be separate doers then why tell people there is something they can do? It's a contradiction, but perhaps a necessary one. Maybe Max is right I am engaging in TMT. Non-volition obviously doesn't mean one will not be able to respond to the suggestions of another. Whether you have volition or not, when I ask you to pass the salt, it's likely that you will. Yes, I'm discovering that. It's also likely that if you told me that I had no choice in passing you the salt, you probably wouldn't get it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 18, 2014 21:28:08 GMT -5
Non-volition obviously doesn't mean one will not be able to respond to the suggestions of another. Whether you have volition or not, when I ask you to pass the salt, it's likely that you will. Volition/freewill means that the experiencer has the ability to choose the the way they experience their existence.. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Apr 18, 2014 21:29:57 GMT -5
Wow, I did? I think anybody's memory is bound to be better than mine...so I'll take your word for it. I decided to work around their shenanigans and see what I can glean, in any event. Hi Silver: That's my recollection, but the '60s were very very good to me, so... anyway, if i hadn't already been to the bottom of that dead-end rabbit-hole i might be inclined to wonder if there were realizations to 'glean', too.. but, the rabbit-hole collapses on those that linger thinking they've found answers or truths.. Thanks...I hear you.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 18, 2014 21:30:40 GMT -5
I'm curious. What does "nobody here" actually mean to you? I feel another interrogation coming on. It has no meaning for me. It's jargon that I've picked up along the way. Okay. It doesn't matter anyhoo. I've gleaned your understanding from the intervening posts.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 18, 2014 21:34:06 GMT -5
Non-volition obviously doesn't mean one will not be able to respond to the suggestions of another. Whether you have volition or not, when I ask you to pass the salt, it's likely that you will. Yes, I'm discovering that. It's also likely that if you told me that I had no choice in passing you the salt, you probably wouldn't get it. You mean if you felt like you were involuntarily forced to pass it, you likely would rebel? Yes, you likely wouldn't have a choice in the matter.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 18, 2014 21:37:36 GMT -5
How can that be possible if he has the monopoly on clarity here? Are you that desperate, to try to build your illusion on the misrepresentation you are conjuring? here's the context from which you took the quoted line to misrepresent its message: The message is that there is a concerted effort by many to discredit the individual 'Tzu', who is acting a the 'singular proponent of clarity' in contrast to those with overwhelming time and resources that attack Tzu's message: "look, with a still mind's awareness", because Tzu's message doesn't use the club's approved/preferred words/descriptions.. there is absolutely no claim by me that i have exclusively acquired clarity or a monopoly on it, that is the illusion you want others to believe.. i am revealing the actuality of the futility when dealing with those with overwhelming resources that insist on specialized linguistics and beliefs, rather than let that go in favor of a more expansive openness.. There's no misinterpretation. You see yourself as a proponent of clarity. It follows that the one who disagrees with you is lacking clarity. Therefore you have the monopoly on clarity.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 18, 2014 21:42:32 GMT -5
"Look with a still mind" is something that anyone that you name a member of the club would likely be comfortable writing, and the straight-up meaning of those words is something that we accept and embrace. That's been pointed out repeatedly. What is the club? A figment of imagination that is used to justify the nastiness and belligerence of an angry old man who doesn't understand what's been talked about here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 21:43:51 GMT -5
Yes, I'm discovering that. It's also likely that if you told me that I had no choice in passing you the salt, you probably wouldn't get it. You mean if you felt like you were involuntarily forced to pass it, you likely would rebel? Yes, you likely wouldn't have a choice in the matter. Yes, so either way your chances of getting the salt is 50/50.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 22:05:03 GMT -5
A figment of imagination that is used to justify the nastiness and belligerence of an angry old man who doesn't understand what's been talked about here. So that's one fiction of the mind and one figment of imagination. We just need one more fiction or figment of the mind and we got ourselves a club.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 18, 2014 22:16:28 GMT -5
There is no contradiction, because the two practices are not something the illusory self can do. The illusory self just thinks, thinks, thinks. You have said it yourself, "those two practices cannot actually be initiated by an illusion". IOW, if you are ATA-MT, you are (temporarily) out of the illusion. And from Weber and zd, if you live there for hours on end, thousands and thousands of hours, the illusory self eventually just falls away. (This fits nicely into my view, essence/true self = ATA-MT and illusory self = personality/ego/false self/persona. And eventually you move from persona/illusory self as default setting to essence as default). sdp Yes, those practices aren't something an illusory self can do. So if the illusory self has fallen away in someone, why do they advise people who believe they are a separate self to do those practices? Perhaps it's just a cosmic joke. That I would get.That's a healthy attitude, but that would still be missing the point.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 18, 2014 22:16:36 GMT -5
Are you that desperate, to try to build your illusion on the misrepresentation you are conjuring? here's the context from which you took the quoted line to misrepresent its message: The message is that there is a concerted effort by many to discredit the individual 'Tzu', who is acting a the 'singular proponent of clarity' in contrast to those with overwhelming time and resources that attack Tzu's message: "look, with a still mind's awareness", because Tzu's message doesn't use the club's approved/preferred words/descriptions.. there is absolutely no claim by me that i have exclusively acquired clarity or a monopoly on it, that is the illusion you want others to believe.. i am revealing the actuality of the futility when dealing with those with overwhelming resources that insist on specialized linguistics and beliefs, rather than let that go in favor of a more expansive openness.. There's no misinterpretation. You see yourself as a proponent of clarity. It follows that the one who disagrees with you is lacking clarity. Therefore you have the monopoly on clarity. He's saying he's the only one speaking out in favor of clarity, which is an absurd statement. Folks are talking about clarity, looking, seeing, realizing, noticing what in blazes is going on, and in a multitude of other ways, pointing to that clarity. Somehow, he misses 90% of the discussion here and concludes he's the only one talking about it.
|
|