|
Post by laughter on Feb 20, 2015 15:35:29 GMT -5
If you have a concept of reality, then you also have a concept of yourself, because there's no way to have one without the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2015 19:43:41 GMT -5
If you have a concept of reality, then you also have a concept of yourself, because there's no way to have one without the other. laughter, in other words, the concept of Reality as such is the concept of Consciousness. I need it realized through direct experience though rather than a concept of mind. Got any tips?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 20, 2015 21:16:05 GMT -5
If you have a concept of reality, then you also have a concept of yourself, because there's no way to have one without the other. laughter, in other words, the concept of Reality as such is the concept of Consciousness. I need it realized through direct experience though rather than a concept of mind. Got any tips? In my experience, the key is attention, and some of this advice is likely going to sound really simple ... it's 'cause it's all no-brainer. Attention sometimes seems to direct outward to the physical world that appears to you as external to your body. If you're fortunate enough to be doing something physically active, then notice and let fall away any thoughts, and just attend to that activity fully. Keep a reminder in the back of your mind when you notice a thought that isn't related to the activity "oh, ok, that's not what I'm doing right now...". This is how I'd describe what ZD used to advise as "Attend the Actual" .... but notice that any thought about what "actual" means or who or what is attending is completely counter to the prescription. Another word that describes this, roughly speaking, is mindfulness. You can also do this when you're not active, if you're at rest, you can attend your physical surroundings to the exclusion of any thoughts that will come up, and really, any focal point of attention works, but in instances like that I prefer to be outdoors. This, very generally, is the basis for what's referred to as tantra. Sports like skiing, swimming, biking, skating, walking/hiking or running all afford the opportunity to combine these first two practices. When speaking with someone, anyone, in any situation, you can notice when you're distracted, when your mind is only partly on the interaction with that person. When that happens, it's an opportunity to focus attention more fully on the person you're interacting with. Sex is the obvious way to combine these first three practices. Then there's the other direction that attention can seem to land, and that's on our internal state. My experience with this is that thoughts used to manifest as an internal verbal dialog. Is that the way it is for you? For instance, does it seem as though a thought will free-associate with your current situation and mood with an old memory or as a sort of reminder of some goal you have? Do you find opinions of people and situations sort of spontaneously manifesting in response to what's going on around you in the form of that sort of narrative? Regardless of how that goes for you, it's possible for anyone at any time to simply ask "how do I feel?". Conditions constantly change around us and this results in sensations and thoughts and interactions that all combine in the aggregate to effect our mood. Internal resistance manifests in lots of little ways like a scowl, muscular tension and higher blood pressure, and negative reactions are great opportunities to notice: "what pattern or thought and emotion led to that reaction? what did I find important enough in what presented to cause that reaction?". I've found a sitting meditation practice to be helpful with interior attention, and there are lots of different techniques. If you're interested I'll detail what I do. The interior practice is a direct process of becoming conscious of our thoughts and feelings, and any concepts we have of ourselves or the world are bound to surface. As they do, it's important to be gentle with yourself, to not judge yourself, but just to see the conditioned patterns for what they are as they become clear. In my experience, the two types of practice -- interior and exterior attention -- are complimentary, and the noticing that happens is the same in either instance, and the result of that noticing can be succinctly described as a moment of clarity. In those moments is the absence of obfuscation of all the knowledge you could ever imagine, want or need with regard to spirituality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2015 21:42:48 GMT -5
laughter, in other words, the concept of Reality as such is the concept of Consciousness. I need it realized through direct experience though rather than a concept of mind. Got any tips? In my experience, the key is attention, and some of this advice is likely going to sound really simple ... it's 'cause it's all no-brainer. Attention sometimes seems to direct outward to the physical world that appears to you as external to your body. If you're fortunate enough to be doing something physically active, then notice and let fall away any thoughts, and just attend to that activity fully. Keep a reminder in the back of your mind when you notice a thought that isn't related to the activity "oh, ok, that's not what I'm doing right now...". This is how I'd describe what ZD used to advise as "Attend the Actual" .... but notice that any thought about what "actual" means or who or what is attending is completely counter to the prescription. Another word that describes this, roughly speaking, is mindfulness. You can also do this when you're not active, if you're at rest, you can attend your physical surroundings to the exclusion of any thoughts that will come up, and really, any focal point of attention works, but in instances like that I prefer to be outdoors. This, very generally, is the basis for what's referred to as tantra. Sports like skiing, swimming, biking, skating, walking/hiking or running all afford the opportunity to combine these first two practices. When speaking with someone, anyone, in any situation, you can notice when you're distracted, when your mind is only partly on the interaction with that person. When that happens, it's an opportunity to focus attention more fully on the person you're interacting with. Sex is the obvious way to combine these first three practices. Then there's the other direction that attention can seem to land, and that's on our internal state. My experience with this is that thoughts used to manifest as an internal verbal dialog. Is that the way it is for you? For instance, does it seem as though a thought will free-associate with your current situation and mood with an old memory or as a sort of reminder of some goal you have? Do you find opinions of people and situations sort of spontaneously manifesting in response to what's going on around you in the form of that sort of narrative? Regardless of how that goes for you, it's possible for anyone at any time to simply ask "how do I feel?". Conditions constantly change around us and this results in sensations and thoughts and interactions that all combine in the aggregate to effect our mood. Internal resistance manifests in lots of little ways like a scowl, muscular tension and higher blood pressure, and negative reactions are great opportunities to notice: "what pattern or thought and emotion led to that reaction? what did I find important enough in what presented to cause that reaction?". I've found a sitting meditation practice to be helpful with interior attention, and there are lots of different techniques. If you're interested I'll detail what I do. The interior practice is a direct process of becoming conscious of our thoughts and feelings, and any concepts we have of ourselves or the world are bound to surface. As they do, it's important to be gentle with yourself, to not judge yourself, but just to see the conditioned patterns for what they are as they become clear. In my experience, the two types of practice -- interior and exterior attention -- are complimentary, and the noticing that happens is the same in either instance, and the result of that noticing can be succinctly described as a moment of clarity. In those moments is the absence of obfuscation of all the knowledge you could ever imagine, want or need with regard to spirituality. Hi laughter, thanks, I resonate with everything that you are relating. So through the manipulation of attention, realizations will come on their own? Or can I consciously manifest them?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 21, 2015 0:57:39 GMT -5
Hi laughter, thanks, I resonate with everything that you are relating. So through the manipulation of attention, realizations will come on their own? Or can I consciously manifest them? Well there's not so much manipulation involved as there is what might be described as the will to focus. As far as realizations are concerned, that seems to me to be different for everyone, but it is commonly reported that nonconceptual attention often appears to lead to an informing of mind. In my experience and some of the experiences of others that I've corresponded with, the entire process can result in a profound transformation of world view.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 21, 2015 6:24:39 GMT -5
laughter, in other words, the concept of Reality as such is the concept of Consciousness. I need it realized through direct experience though rather than a concept of mind. Got any tips? (...) I've found a sitting meditation practice to be helpful with interior attention, and there are lots of different techniques. If you're interested I'll detail what I do. The interior practice is a direct process of becoming conscious of our thoughts and feelings, and any concepts we have of ourselves or the world are bound to surface. As they do, it's important to be gentle with yourself, to not judge yourself, but just to see the conditioned patterns for what they are as they become clear. (...) Thanks for that post, and I am interested in the underlined.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 21, 2015 11:27:37 GMT -5
(...) I've found a sitting meditation practice to be helpful with interior attention, and there are lots of different techniques. If you're interested I'll detail what I do. The interior practice is a direct process of becoming conscious of our thoughts and feelings, and any concepts we have of ourselves or the world are bound to surface. As they do, it's important to be gentle with yourself, to not judge yourself, but just to see the conditioned patterns for what they are as they become clear. (...) Thanks for that post, and I am interested in the underlined. For me it started quite accidentally almost as a sort of a trick! From Tolle's "The Power of Now": Try a little experiment. Close your eyes and say to yourself: "I wonder what my next thought is going to be." Then become very alert and wait for the next thought. Be like a cat watching a mouse hole. What thought is going to come out of the mousehole? Try it now.
chapter 5 paragraph 3 One day after a run I sat down on a bench at the side of a trail with the vague idea of wanting to recapture a really sweet feeling of inner calm free of thought, and I repeated this. Over time I embellished it into a more elaborate visualization (that I described here as snowheight). In watching thoughts, the orientation toward each thought is the key to a meditative state. Gentleness is the most important aspect of that orientation. When it comes to thought, attention and energy are essentially the same thing. Now, you can try to ignore a given thought that arises, but that's just the thinker repressing thought, which is just another thought. This will result inevitably in more mental noise. Instead, as each thought arises, deprive it of either truth or falsity. Starve it of importance and just let it be as it is. Let it hang there suspended in the mind, and as sure as the sun, it'll just evaporate. It will dissipate like a cloud. The opposite of judgement is acceptance, and this orientation is a loosening, an allowing, an opening. Eventually the mental landscape becomes trim and orderly enough that it results in a perception of a sort of inner horizon where attention meets interest. That's the threshold where what we are unconscious of enters the light of day. Watching thought is head-centric though, and the mind and the body aren't actually two separate objects. It seemed like an accident at the time that I fell into this after a run, but in the final analysis, meditation is really all about integration. The idea, which is a good one, is that if the body is still the mind will also quiesce as well. The most common advice that's been given for thousands of years about that integration has to do with the breath. The most simple technique involved is to count each exhalation. Say you count from 1 to 10 ... what some folks find is that they've lost themselves in thought somewhere in the count. Even if they don't, the most common experience of all in sitting meditation is to find oneself lost in a stream of thought, and that in and of itself reveals something fundamental about the nature of the process of thinking: that it's recursive. Each successive thought is based on the last, so I notice the snow, think of vanilla ice cream, remember that in March, McDonalds will serve up a green milkshake, and in less than a minute I've gone from experiencing the snow in front of me to being lost in the memory of a St. Patrick's parade past. This is natural, this is what the mind does. It's a machine that the Earth has encoded with the environment over billions of years to serve the function of survival. Restlessness serves the hungry hunter well. But in the stillness that can be found in a meditative state is a sublime peace, a spaciousness that reinforces itself in a similar way. Finding oneself lost in thought during meditation is a sort of a gift that is best accepted gratefully, without self-recrimination.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 9:06:35 GMT -5
Thanks for that post, and I am interested in the underlined. For me it started quite accidentally almost as a sort of a trick! From Tolle's "The Power of Now": Try a little experiment. Close your eyes and say to yourself: "I wonder what my next thought is going to be." Then become very alert and wait for the next thought. Be like a cat watching a mouse hole. What thought is going to come out of the mousehole? Try it now.
chapter 5 paragraph 3 One day after a run I sat down on a bench at the side of a trail with the vague idea of wanting to recapture a really sweet feeling of inner calm free of thought, and I repeated this. Over time I embellished it into a more elaborate visualization (that I described here as snowheight). In watching thoughts, the orientation toward each thought is the key to a meditative state. Gentleness is the most important aspect of that orientation. When it comes to thought, attention and energy are essentially the same thing. Now, you can try to ignore a given thought that arises, but that's just the thinker repressing thought, which is just another thought. This will result inevitably in more mental noise. Instead, as each thought arises, deprive it of either truth or falsity. Starve it of importance and just let it be as it is. Let it hang there suspended in the mind, and as sure as the sun, it'll just evaporate. It will dissipate like a cloud. The opposite of judgement is acceptance, and this orientation is a loosening, an allowing, an opening. Eventually the mental landscape becomes trim and orderly enough that it results in a perception of a sort of inner horizon where attention meets interest. That's the threshold where what we are unconscious of enters the light of day. Watching thought is head-centric though, and the mind and the body aren't actually two separate objects. It seemed like an accident at the time that I fell into this after a run, but in the final analysis, meditation is really all about integration. The idea, which is a good one, is that if the body is still the mind will also quiesce as well. The most common advice that's been given for thousands of years about that integration has to do with the breath. The most simple technique involved is to count each exhalation. Say you count from 1 to 10 ... what some folks find is that they've lost themselves in thought somewhere in the count. Even if they don't, the most common experience of all in sitting meditation is to find oneself lost in a stream of thought, and that in and of itself reveals something fundamental about the nature of the process of thinking: that it's recursive. Each successive thought is based on the last, so I notice the snow, think of vanilla ice cream, remember that in March, McDonalds will serve up a green milkshake, and in less than a minute I've gone from experiencing the snow in front of me to being lost in the memory of a St. Patrick's parade past. This is natural, this is what the mind does. It's a machine that the Earth has encoded with the environment over billions of years to serve the function of survival. Restlessness serves the hungry hunter well. But in the stillness that can be found in a meditative state is a sublime peace, a spaciousness that reinforces itself in a similar way. Finding oneself lost in thought during meditation is a sort of a gift that is best accepted gratefully, without self-recrimination. Thanks again! I especially found "When it comes to thought, attention and energy are essentially the same thing." very helpful. And 'snowheight': nice nickname
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 22, 2015 13:06:39 GMT -5
Thanks again! I especially found "When it comes to thought, attention and energy are essentially the same thing." very helpful. And 'snowheight': nice nickname Sure my pleasure zindy.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 22, 2015 17:50:43 GMT -5
Well, I've never met any of them in real life except my wife, but I'd take the nearly continual debate about free will on the two spiritual forums I've participated on as a version of that kind of examination. You say "if there's movement, there's always will", and you said on the other thread "there is what might be described as the will to focus"; what I am interested in is not exactly whether man has free will or not. My opinion is it is a limited will, but there is something anyway. So what I am interested in is how it gets particularized. ok, let me take this out of Earnie's thread 'cause I don't want to preach that dialog up any more than I've already done. The particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself. One action follows another, sometimes involving thought, sometimes not. In either instance, there were a set of prior conditions, and those conditions form the context for the confluence of interest and attention. Now, this "set of prior conditions" idea is as much as a mouthful as the "confluence of interest and attention". There's an awful lot going on with those notions, and the fact is that all of this is the mind providing my best take on an after-the-fact description of what appears to us in/as what is commonly referred to in spiritual circles as "form" -- as opposed to "emptiness". Are you familiar with the Buddhist Heart Sutra? But in specific examples the ideas are very simple. You woke up sometime today and those conditions include your body's need for food so at one point the condition of hunger drew your attention to your interest in food. If you think back to when you met your daughter's father, a similar process was involved. Same same when it occurred to you that you wanted to read what other peeps had to say about Mooji. Conditioning is a very tricky topic for lots of reasons, but three in particular. Firstly, our life situation -- what most people commonly mistake as "their life" -- is, in the final analysis, just the end result of one thing after another that got set in motion back at the Big Bang. Secondly, while the conditions of hunger, love, and curiosity might appear to be separable from our genes, not related to our recent extended family history, nothing to do with our childhood experiences, irrelevant with respect to our back account balances and our wardrobe, that appearance is the core deception underlying the mistake that most people make for taking their life situation to be their life. Thirdly, and most importantly, all of our thoughts and feelings about what appears to us are inextricably bound up with that conditioning to the extent that, while we can become more and more conscious of what it is over time, that very process only takes place relative to the various aspects of the conditioning itself. One way to put that is that we can never get behind and witness our own subjectivity. Movement only happens relative to perspective, and every perspective is unique, and uniquely conditioned, so to say that particularization is a function of movement is really just stating the obvious that particularization is a function of perspective.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Feb 22, 2015 18:06:39 GMT -5
You say "if there's movement, there's always will", and you said on the other thread "there is what might be described as the will to focus"; what I am interested in is not exactly whether man has free will or not. My opinion is it is a limited will, but there is something anyway. So what I am interested in is how it gets particularized. ok, let me take this out of Earnie's thread 'cause I don't want to preach that dialog up any more than I've already done. The particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself. One action follows another, sometimes involving thought, sometimes not. In either instance, there were a set of prior conditions, and those conditions form the context for the confluence of interest and attention. Now, this "set of prior conditions" idea is as much as a mouthful as the "confluence of interest and attention". There's an awful lot going on with those notions, and the fact is that all of this is the mind providing my best take on an after-the-fact description of what appears to us in/as what is commonly referred to in spiritual circles as "form" -- as opposed to "emptiness". Are you familiar with the Buddhist Heart Sutra? But in specific examples the ideas are very simple. You woke up sometime today and those conditions include your body's need for food so at one point the condition of hunger drew your attention to your interest in food. If you think back to when you met your daughter's father, a similar process was involved. Same same when it occurred to you that you wanted to read what other peeps had to say about Mooji. Conditioning is a very tricky topic for lots of reasons, but three in particular. Firstly, our life situation -- what most people commonly mistake as "their life" -- is, in the final analysis, just the end result of one thing after another that got set in motion back at the Big Bang. Secondly, while the conditions of hunger, love, and curiosity might appear to be separable from our genes, not related to our recent extended family history, nothing to do with our childhood experiences, irrelevant with respect to our back account balances and our wardrobe, that appearance is the core deception underlying the mistake that most people make for taking their life situation to be their life. Thirdly, and most importantly, all of our thoughts and feelings about what appears to us are inextricably bound up with that conditioning to the extent that, while we can become more and more conscious of what it is over time, that very process only takes place relative to the various aspects of the conditioning itself. One way to put that is that we can never get behind and witness our own subjectivity. Movement only happens relative to perspective, and every perspective is unique, and uniquely conditioned, so to say that particularization is a function of movement is really just stating the obvious that particularization is a function of perspective. Huh?! This is too long I will ask just one thing for now.. You had said "particularization of that will" but now you are saying "particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself"... Does this mean 'movement' comes from will? I was thinking not much so.. But I might've mixed things.. My issue with will is not about movement (what I choose to do, etc). An example, it is more like, "I want to live", preservation of life thing. Is this also called conditioning? If I understand it better I will ask again, thanks. (ps. no familiarity with that sutra).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 22, 2015 18:14:59 GMT -5
Huh?! This is too long I will ask just one thing for now.. You had said "particularization of that will" but now you are saying "particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself"... Does this mean 'movement' comes from will? I was thinking not much so.. But I might've mixed things.. My issue with will is not about movement (what I choose to do, etc). An example, it is more like, "I want to live", preservation of life thing. Is this also called conditioning? If I understand it better I will ask again, thanks. (ps. no familiarity with that sutra). Yes, it's a text wall. How will becomes particularized can be commonly understood in terms of the laws of nature, but there is a not so subtle mistake in that idea. What particularizes is a question that is self-inquiry in disguise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2015 18:32:11 GMT -5
ok, let me take this out of Earnie's thread 'cause I don't want to preach that dialog up any more than I've already done. The particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself. One action follows another, sometimes involving thought, sometimes not. In either instance, there were a set of prior conditions, and those conditions form the context for the confluence of interest and attention. Now, this "set of prior conditions" idea is as much as a mouthful as the "confluence of interest and attention". There's an awful lot going on with those notions, and the fact is that all of this is the mind providing my best take on an after-the-fact description of what appears to us in/as what is commonly referred to in spiritual circles as "form" -- as opposed to "emptiness". Are you familiar with the Buddhist Heart Sutra? But in specific examples the ideas are very simple. You woke up sometime today and those conditions include your body's need for food so at one point the condition of hunger drew your attention to your interest in food. If you think back to when you met your daughter's father, a similar process was involved. Same same when it occurred to you that you wanted to read what other peeps had to say about Mooji. Conditioning is a very tricky topic for lots of reasons, but three in particular. Firstly, our life situation -- what most people commonly mistake as "their life" -- is, in the final analysis, just the end result of one thing after another that got set in motion back at the Big Bang. Secondly, while the conditions of hunger, love, and curiosity might appear to be separable from our genes, not related to our recent extended family history, nothing to do with our childhood experiences, irrelevant with respect to our back account balances and our wardrobe, that appearance is the core deception underlying the mistake that most people make for taking their life situation to be their life. Thirdly, and most importantly, all of our thoughts and feelings about what appears to us are inextricably bound up with that conditioning to the extent that, while we can become more and more conscious of what it is over time, that very process only takes place relative to the various aspects of the conditioning itself. One way to put that is that we can never get behind and witness our own subjectivity. Movement only happens relative to perspective, and every perspective is unique, and uniquely conditioned, so to say that particularization is a function of movement is really just stating the obvious that particularization is a function of perspective. Huh?! This is too long I will ask just one thing for now.. You had said "particularization of that will" but now you are saying " particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself"... Does this mean 'movement' comes from will? I was thinking not much so.. But I might've mixed things.. My issue with will is not about movement (what I choose to do, etc). An example, it is more like, "I want to live", preservation of life thing. Is this also called conditioning? If I understand it better I will ask again, thanks. (ps. no familiarity with that sutra). Hi zindarud, to me, I think laughter was saying that movement can be willy nilly, chaotic action, running in all directions, or like the wind that blows. I think by particularization laughter is referencing the movement that is the human personality, which is not a tangled mixture of turmoil. It is not a windy storm that blows in any direction as it wills. But rather it is a well organized purposive unique movement of conditioning. Of course that's just my interpretation and could be erroneous to laughters actual meaning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2015 4:05:06 GMT -5
laughter, in other words, the concept of Reality as such is the concept of Consciousness. I need it realized through direct experience though rather than a concept of mind. Got any tips? In my experience, the key is attention, and some of this advice is likely going to sound really simple ... it's 'cause it's all no-brainer. Attention sometimes seems to direct outward to the physical world that appears to you as external to your body. If you're fortunate enough to be doing something physically active, then notice and let fall away any thoughts, and just attend to that activity fully. Keep a reminder in the back of your mind when you notice a thought that isn't related to the activity "oh, ok, that's not what I'm doing right now...". This is how I'd describe what ZD used to advise as "Attend the Actual" .... but notice that any thought about what "actual" means or who or what is attending is completely counter to the prescription. Another word that describes this, roughly speaking, is mindfulness. You can also do this when you're not active, if you're at rest, you can attend your physical surroundings to the exclusion of any thoughts that will come up, and really, any focal point of attention works, but in instances like that I prefer to be outdoors. This, very generally, is the basis for what's referred to as tantra. Sports like skiing, swimming, biking, skating, walking/hiking or running all afford the opportunity to combine these first two practices. When speaking with someone, anyone, in any situation, you can notice when you're distracted, when your mind is only partly on the interaction with that person. When that happens, it's an opportunity to focus attention more fully on the person you're interacting with. Sex is the obvious way to combine these first three practices. Then there's the other direction that attention can seem to land, and that's on our internal state. My experience with this is that thoughts used to manifest as an internal verbal dialog. Is that the way it is for you? For instance, does it seem as though a thought will free-associate with your current situation and mood with an old memory or as a sort of reminder of some goal you have? Do you find opinions of people and situations sort of spontaneously manifesting in response to what's going on around you in the form of that sort of narrative? Regardless of how that goes for you, it's possible for anyone at any time to simply ask "how do I feel?". Conditions constantly change around us and this results in sensations and thoughts and interactions that all combine in the aggregate to effect our mood. Internal resistance manifests in lots of little ways like a scowl, muscular tension and higher blood pressure, and negative reactions are great opportunities to notice: "what pattern or thought and emotion led to that reaction? what did I find important enough in what presented to cause that reaction?". I've found a sitting meditation practice to be helpful with interior attention, and there are lots of different techniques. If you're interested I'll detail what I do. The interior practice is a direct process of becoming conscious of our thoughts and feelings, and any concepts we have of ourselves or the world are bound to surface. As they do, it's important to be gentle with yourself, to not judge yourself, but just to see the conditioned patterns for what they are as they become clear. In my experience, the two types of practice -- interior and exterior attention -- are complimentary, and the noticing that happens is the same in either instance, and the result of that noticing can be succinctly described as a moment of clarity. In those moments is the absence of obfuscation of all the knowledge you could ever imagine, want or need with regard to spirituality. I am very sure none of these kind of technique would not lead you to realization, I am very sure you would still be doing these actions,right? at-least sometimes with the intent of realizing something?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 23, 2015 4:33:24 GMT -5
Huh?! This is too long I will ask just one thing for now.. You had said "particularization of that will" but now you are saying " particularization is really just an inevitable function of movement itself"... Does this mean 'movement' comes from will? I was thinking not much so.. But I might've mixed things.. My issue with will is not about movement (what I choose to do, etc). An example, it is more like, "I want to live", preservation of life thing. Is this also called conditioning? If I understand it better I will ask again, thanks. (ps. no familiarity with that sutra). Hi zindarud, to me, I think laughter was saying that movement can be willy nilly, chaotic action, running in all directions, or like the wind that blows. I think by particularization laughter is referencing the movement that is the human personality, which is not a tangled mixture of turmoil. It is not a windy storm that blows in any direction as it wills. But rather it is a well organized purposive unique movement of conditioning. Of course that's just my interpretation and could be erroneous to laughters actual meaning. I've probably written way way too much already ... but the appearance of the person is a special case of particularization, which is really just another word for multiplicity.
|
|