|
Post by figgles on Jan 26, 2015 22:45:15 GMT -5
Much of what you wrote resonates, i highlighted portions i understand differently.. i don't understand why nonduality advocates assume that those not in agreement with nonduality beliefs have the usual habit of fantasizing and reflecting.. i find that when i listen with an open mind, most folks have decent intervals of stillness and clarity in their daily experiences, they just don't understand what it is or how to let go of the conditioning that distorts the potential.. Thinking is part of the flow, yes.. so are you and i, and each self-aware localized part of the whole, like whirlpools in a stream.. so is the stram, the rocks, the fish, all of it, but.. there's this theme among advocates of nonduality, that they get it and others don't, a subtle form of elitist self-imagery, like: "the usual habit of fantasizing and reflecting", or "not the kind of self-referential thinking, or "checking," that occupies the minds of most people"..
I resonate deeply with so much of what you write, and i sense a genuine authenticity.. unless someone brings it up, i'm hardly aware of 'me', though it's clear that the sum of the experiences i have are not the same sum of experiences others are having, i.e.: i don't live in the same house you do, or i don't wake-up in the Peruvian Andes each morning.. and, i don't get too cerebral about if/then explanations that might create an illusion that those ideas could be valid, 'if'.. I don't get too concerned with what i think others think, until others try to impose their understandings onto me and others.. i'm genuinely curious about the Great Mystery, though not especially moved to speculate about it.. i've had experiences, which i've described, that reveal more than the traditional physical senses can explain, and when integrating that information into the happening, experiencing transrational results.. i suspect that this happens to most people, but conditioning isolates them into contrasting groups of categorized by how they describe those happenings.. I sense there is too little seeking of common ground, too much attachment to the conditioning.. too little willingness to say, 'i don't know'.. Excellent post Tzu....I agree with all you've said there, but in particular the bolded bits stood out. Yes, this seems to be a common theme in non-dual circles....& What seems to consistently get missed, is that the belief that "I think and experience in a way that is very, very different and far removed from 'most others', is one that hinges upon a great deal of self referential thought and imagining. to be in the present moment, of still mind, empty of belief and expectation, is to take each & every 'other' as they present, in the moment they present. So long as there are those kinds of rigid beliefs in play about 'most others', every encounter with 'other' is to some extent, already tainted before it even happens.
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Jan 26, 2015 23:06:10 GMT -5
I'm not seeing it. Care to elaborate? Desiring binds the illusory self to itself, helping perpetuate this unnatural state. Now some would say to desire is part of the human condition and I would say it's caused by the conditioning of the human.. I'd say both. Not all desires are equal though. There are desires that are based upon emotional need, and there are those that are absent need, more of the preference variety...the latter is not problematic. Desire only becomes problematic when Peace depends upon it's fulfillment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 3:44:56 GMT -5
So it's not true that "I don't know if what i'm saying is original". Stay focused, similar/unique/original... So, you have language issues, that explains a great deal of things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 5:41:35 GMT -5
Oh what a kind and generous man you are. I do wish you were my dad. So, you have daddy issues, that explains a few things.. Wait.. was that sarcasm?? Yeah. I wanted to see what you would do with some fictional beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 27, 2015 6:07:59 GMT -5
So, you have daddy issues, that explains a few things.. Wait.. was that sarcasm?? Yeah. I wanted to see what you would do with some fictional beliefs. LOL.. you've already seen it, that's all you offer.. you should try substantive discussion, without all the emotion..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 27, 2015 6:15:08 GMT -5
I'm not seeing it. Care to elaborate? Desiring binds the illusory self to itself, helping perpetuate this unnatural state. Now some would say to desire is part of the human condition and I would say it's caused by the conditioning of the human.. Desire is a natural function of the human experience, i desire that pain be reduced, i desire peace over conflict, i desire an end to suffering, etc.. the conditioning of the human concerns 'what' is desired, which new smart phone, which new computer, which trendy brand, which guru, etc..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 27, 2015 6:23:38 GMT -5
That it comes down to the absence of separation from what one isn't is a very satisfying paradox to the individual who insists on their objective existence, and furthermore insists that this objective existence isn't limited. The both/and scenario is very ego satisfying. Both/and is just the 'way it is', satisfaction of ego is your interpretation of the way it is.. both/and is inclusive, a comprehensive understanding of what is happening.. nonduality/oneness is exclusive, you routinely exclude those that don't agree with you by yours and the club's abrasive demeanor..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 27, 2015 8:27:33 GMT -5
Can a projection ever become more clear than a sentence that embodies what it describes?? And it shows a conceptual understanding of a process he's not conscious of engaging. The mind is an amazing thang. Do you mean the process of projection?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 27, 2015 8:29:31 GMT -5
SDP: You wrote, ZD, I chased the walking off a cliff back to page 28. enigma said it's not possible to take a wrong path (1-23 7:20PM). source said I'd like to discuss that possibility. Essentially, so it's impossible to choose a wrong path yet end up falling off a cliff? (1-23 9:21 PM). .......And then you made the statement you did. I think if you state something, you then own it regardless of where it originated. You essentially told source, That's right, it's impossible to choose a wrong path, even if you end up falling off a cliff by doing so. And you have said it again here, "he cannot go wrong because the cosmos does not go wrong". Yes, but I didn't start that line of thought. I simply responded to it, and in your following statement you seem to agree with it. You wrote, "I agree, like I said before, that when something actually happens, it happens in the only way it can happen." Okay, no problem. We're in agreement up to this point. You then wrote, "But the universe is growing and evolving. So there are two movements, two flows. There are two rivers, and we have the capacity, the possibility, to move from one river to the other. This is the movement from involution to evolution. But this move from one river to the other requires volition. As I've said previously many times, in the beginning this volition concerns only the use of attention and awareness, one cannot do from the standpoint of thinking or acting, but one can attend to what one thinks, feels and does." Up to the point of Self-realization this is what most people think. They think they are entities making choices. After Self-realization, they realize that there was never a separate entity doing anything. The separate entity thing was an illusion. One could then say that the cosmos made all the "choices," which would be true if we wanted to imagine that the cosmos makes choices, but that isn't how the process is seen or understood. Unity is what one sees manifesting however it manifests. The flavor of it is better captured by the word "unfoldment" because unfoldment is fluid rather than something composed of static interacting parts. You then wrote, "I presume you consider it the case that nobody has ever gotten further than you have, that it is in fact impossible to go beyond where you have." Nothing could be further from the truth. Why? Because I am not a person who has gotten anywhere, and because there is nowhere to get to. As Silence stated, "This. Is. It!" The cosmos simply used this body/mind to discover its inherent unity and isness. What I am is what you are, and it isn't what you imagine. What we are cannot be imagined; it can only be lived. How a body/mind teaches ABOUT oneness, or points to oneness, varies. Gangaji tells people that they have a choice in what they do, whereas other teachers say there is no choice, and BOTH POINTERS ARE POINTING TO THE SAME NO THING. I have no idea why the issue of volition is such a big deal for people, but it is one subject that really fires people up. Someone once asked Tolle about this, and his response was very funny. He began by saying that, yes, people have a choice in shifting their attention to the NOW, but he ended by saying, "well...of course there really isn't any choice," and he did his little giggle. Bottom line? Discover who you are beyond thought, and then decide for yourself how to point to THAT. Well, non-volition means no free will, and no self respecting self identified person wants to be left with no free will. Rastaphant say to da' peep hey! smoke a blunt and chill out mon' ..
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 27, 2015 8:45:20 GMT -5
Sekida writes in "Zen Training" about how many if not most people experience what can be described as positive samadhi -- non-self-reflective presence in the experience of the now. In the doing of anything from washing the car on a sunny day to a morning run or shoveling snow or even balancing a checking account, most people lose themselves in the moment several times a day.
The difference between that and being free of self-referential thought -- relatively or totally -- is one of whether one is conscious during those intervals or not. More importantly, is whether one is conscious of what's happening when they're not in positive samadhi.
There's nothing special about the here and now, not at all. What is extraordinary, in terms of the Universe overall, is how deep the common sense of deluded identity of most people runs. What is unusual, is the distorted nature of reality as seen from the lens of false identification with form.
There are no elitists in the present moment. In order for there to be an elite, there must be a sense of heirarchy that is premised on an illusory sense of separation.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 27, 2015 8:50:28 GMT -5
So, you have daddy issues, that explains a few things.. Wait.. was that sarcasm?? Yeah. I wanted to see what you would do with some fictional beliefs. didn't need Nostradamus ta' see that comin'
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 27, 2015 8:59:52 GMT -5
I'm not seeing it. Care to elaborate? Desiring binds the illusory self to itself, helping perpetuate this unnatural state. Now some would say to desire is part of the human condition and I would say it's caused by the conditioning of the human.. Looks like you need a word lawyer here dude.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2015 9:48:01 GMT -5
Stay focused, similar/unique/original... So, you have language issues, that explains a great deal of things. Only when he's trying to dodge his own inconsistencies.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2015 9:57:12 GMT -5
And it shows a conceptual understanding of a process he's not conscious of engaging. The mind is an amazing thang. Do you mean the process of projection? He's aware he tries to convince others he's right because he has no evidence, or he wouldn't be able to project it.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 27, 2015 10:06:21 GMT -5
Sekida writes in "Zen Training" about how many if not most people experience what can be described as positive samadhi -- non-self-reflective presence in the experience of the now. In the doing of anything from washing the car on a sunny day to a morning run or shoveling snow or even balancing a checking account, most people lose themselves in the moment several times a day. The difference between that and being free of self-referential thought -- relatively or totally -- is one of whether one is conscious during those intervals or not. More importantly, is whether one is conscious of what's happening when they're not in positive samadhi. There's nothing special about the here and now, not at all. What is extraordinary, in terms of the Universe overall, is how deep the common sense of deluded identity of most people runs. What is unusual, is the distorted nature of reality as seen from the lens of false identification with form. There are no elitists in the present moment. In order for there to be an elite, there must be a sense of heirarchy that is premised on an illusory sense of separation. L: I agree with all of this post except the second paragraph. It doesn't really matter whether one is daydreaming or not while anything is happening. It also doesn't matter whether one is free of self-referential thought, but IF one is free of it, then one's life is a lot less encumbered because worries, fears, etc. that are usually self-referential in nature are not present. IOW, it's a lot easier to be "in the flow of life" if self-reflectiveness isn't there. The "effort" to be conscious and present (a la Tolle) is a self-referential split-mind activity, so the importance of that activity also drops away when self-reflectiveness drops away.
|
|