Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 17:27:36 GMT -5
I would say what I say to everyone: "Simply find the thought-free state as often as you are able, and abide in/as it for as long as you are able." How's that for a pointer? Obvious? Only if actualized. How about if we stop blah blah blahing? I'm game if you are. Is that what you'd say to someone at one of your Satsangs? That's what I am saying to you, now. Can you stop? Why does how I teach or what I do matter to you? Instead of replying to this post, hows about using that time and energy to abide in the thought-free state? Wouldn't that be more beneficial? Don't you see? This is about you. It's always about you. There is no other purpose besides Realization. Every you that is reading this. Your world is about your Realization. There is nothing else. Practice as if you were being held under water. Play time is over.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 4, 2015 17:32:53 GMT -5
I think y'all are being nitpicky with RoyDop. He has one point: put awareness on that which is aware. The bits about effort and choice are all distractions. Chumps like me appreciate the simplicity. That's why ATA-T is nice too. Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? Yes, and that's what the word "flow" points to. All imagined levels disappear into whatever is happening in this moment. If thinking comes, thinking; if silence comes, silence; if strenuous work comes, strenuous work; if income tax time come, income tax time. It's what advaita sages call "sahaja samadhi," and what the Buddha called "non-attained attainment." It's what Adya is pointing to when he says, "Relax and be as you are." It's like putting away the paddles on a rowboat and just going wherever the stream of isness flows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 17:35:46 GMT -5
I think y'all are being nitpicky with RoyDop. He has one point: put awareness on that which is aware. The bits about effort and choice are all distractions. Chumps like me appreciate the simplicity. That's why ATA-T is nice too. Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? Legit for sure. For me, Advaita Vedenta is exactly the final step of the path, taking one back to the Absolute (yes, I know one never left). So if a teaching deals with levels or progressive steps then to me it isn't really non-dual. I'm really just interested in the final step. Not saying there is anything wrong with any and all methods... it's all good, but one must and does align with what resonates.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 4, 2015 19:08:09 GMT -5
Is that what you'd say to someone at one of your Satsangs? That's what I am saying to you, now. Can you stop? Why does how I teach or what I do matter to you? Relax Roy, just curious is all, of course I can stop. Instead of replying to this post, hows about using that time and energy to abide in the thought-free state? Wouldn't that be more beneficial? Don't you see? This is about you. It's always about you. There is no other purpose besides Realization. Every you that is reading this. Your world is about your Realization. There is nothing else. Practice as if you were being held under water. Play time is over. Quiet down and then you'll know no intermission to the show the movement it goes on and on and all around you feel a sound stand in light and taste the rain God her humor is insane collapse the distance it ain't there let the wind muss up your hair.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:17:18 GMT -5
That's the thing, efforting is a distinct mind game feature. Only mind games require repeated effort. Yes, and I wonder who it is that needs to make a special effort each time he realizes that he's fallen back into delusion? I think the one who imagines falling into and out of delusion might be a worthy subject for some serious contemplation. What Roy says sounds all so Steve-like, that's why I said "Put it all out front!" He has it exactly backwards. The way he describes it, that's how things look from the vantage point of separation. Since you already are where you want to be, it takes exactly zero effort to be self-realized, there's no path/practice to get you from here to here, i.e. from where you are to where you already are. Dunno how folks always tend to miss the simplicity of this. Floating downstream takes no effort at all, only paddling upstream takes sustained effort. Just let go of the oars and everything will fall into place naturally.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:24:22 GMT -5
Yes, and I wonder who it is that needs to make a special effort each time he realizes that he's fallen back into delusion? I think the one who imagines falling into and out of delusion might be a worthy subject for some serious contemplation. I think y'all are being nitpicky with RoyDop. He has one point: put awareness on that which is aware. The bits about effort and choice are all distractions. Chumps like me appreciate the simplicity. That's why ATA-T is nice too. To put awareness on that which is aware, you have to objectify it. If you are lucky, you lose interest in that mind game and suddenly slide back into the natural state the moment you lose interest and stop applying yourself. If you are not lucky, you could spend decades in meditation without getting anywhere - as most do.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:27:30 GMT -5
I think y'all are being nitpicky with RoyDop. He has one point: put awareness on that which is aware. The bits about effort and choice are all distractions. Chumps like me appreciate the simplicity. That's why ATA-T is nice too. Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? Yeah, there's no need for escapism. However, all paths and practices have their place and time. It just should be clear that efforting isn't going to net the desired result because realization is acausal and not an experience. I think that's what the seeker has to understand fully. Non-duality is not pointing to nice experiences. Which doesn't mean, of course, that non-duality is anti-experiences. The pointers are just pointing prior to that.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:35:27 GMT -5
Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? I agree source, but we're in the minority here......... I think the problemo is that a lot of folks here have neither an actual nor conceptual understanding of what non-duality is pointing to. If you want to point prior to experiences, then talking about samadhi and all kinds of other nice states is just a distraction. So some here falsely conclude that non-duality is anti-experience and for sterile heartless robots only. Which is a hilarious conclusion, of course. As Adya says, it's about something so extremely simple and totally unadorned, that no seeker would ever be interested in it. So I can understand that kind of reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:38:42 GMT -5
Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? Yes, and that's what the word "flow" points to. All imagined levels disappear into whatever is happening in this moment. If thinking comes, thinking; if silence comes, silence; if strenuous work comes, strenuous work; if income tax time come, income tax time. It's what advaita sages call "sahaja samadhi," and what the Buddha called "non-attained attainment." It's what Adya is pointing to when he says, "Relax and be as you are." It's like putting away the paddles on a rowboat and just going wherever the stream of isness flows. Bingo, which doesn't mean that you won't ever use your monkey mind again either. It just means that you clearly know which witch is which, hehe.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 20:42:23 GMT -5
Hi again, I'd say for me, putting my awareness on awareness is just one level of Reality, the Absolute. Nothing wrong with that. It seems like a good place to start, I guess that's why it's called the direct path. To me though, it just doesn't seem to reconcile the lower levels of Reality, like the physical level for example, to which I am also one with. Or the energetic level of Reality, where I am one with the energy in the Universe. Or the mental level of Reality, where I am one with the Universal Mind. Or the intellectual level of Reality, where I am one with the intelligence of the cosmos. I mean, shouldn't the lower levels of Reality get at least some recognition along the path to the Absolute? Legit for sure. For me, Advaita Vedenta is exactly the final step of the path, taking one back to the Absolute (yes, I know one never left). So if a teaching deals with levels or progressive steps then to me it isn't really non-dual. I'm really just interested in the final step. Not saying there is anything wrong with any and all methods... it's all good, but one must and does align with what resonates. Yeah, I'd say Advaita is more for the no-nonsense folks or those who are done with all the other paths. It's a dangerous teaching though.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 4, 2015 20:59:49 GMT -5
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but whether one shifts attention or not is also not a choice. It either happens, or it doesn't, and there isn't a someone who does it. And yet people sit zazen and engage in koan. Odd behavior indeed. How so?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 21:00:29 GMT -5
I think y'all are being nitpicky with RoyDop. He has one point: put awareness on that which is aware. The bits about effort and choice are all distractions. Chumps like me appreciate the simplicity. That's why ATA-T is nice too. To put awareness on that which is aware, you have to objectify it. If you are lucky, you lose interest in that mind game and suddenly slide back into the natural state the moment you lose interest and stop applying yourself. If you are not lucky, you could spend decades in meditation without getting anywhere - as most do. Although the phrase Roy uses about putting awareness on that which moves awareness is a little confusing, I don't think he is objectifying it. When you talk of losing interest in the mind game your starting point is exactly the same. There is an intention or effort in what you are both saying. But it is the natural tendency of mind to settle that becomes that which is effortless. If you dive into a pool it is only necessary to assume the correct position, but gravity does the rest. You cannot put yourself in the position of questioning someone because they are apparently doing something and you are not thereby creating the impression you are more authentic in your non doing because you speak of not applying yourself. You are also applying yourself. This is just wordplay.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 21:07:40 GMT -5
To put awareness on that which is aware, you have to objectify it. If you are lucky, you lose interest in that mind game and suddenly slide back into the natural state the moment you lose interest and stop applying yourself. If you are not lucky, you could spend decades in meditation without getting anywhere - as most do. Although the phrase Roy uses about putting awareness on that which is aware is a little confusing, I don't think he is objectifying it. When you talk of losing interest in the mind game your starting point is exactly the same. There is an intention or effort in what you are both saying. But it is the natural tendency of mind to settle that becomes that which is effortless. If you dive into a pool it is only necessary to assume the correct position, but gravity does the rest. You cannot put yourself in the position of questioning someone because they are apparently doing something and you are not thereby creating the impression you are more authentic in your non doing because you speak of not applying yourself. You are also applying yourself. This is just wordplay. It's tricky business, for sure. I understand that every seeker tries to take everything a teacher says literally and then turns it into a practice, a doing. But losing interest is not a doing, it's a happening. You cannot do 3 hours of losing interest per day. That's ridiculous. But you can do 3 hours of shifting awareness per day. That's why what Roy describes is clearly a doing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2015 21:11:18 GMT -5
Although the phrase Roy uses about putting awareness on that which is aware is a little confusing, I don't think he is objectifying it. When you talk of losing interest in the mind game your starting point is exactly the same. There is an intention or effort in what you are both saying. But it is the natural tendency of mind to settle that becomes that which is effortless. If you dive into a pool it is only necessary to assume the correct position, but gravity does the rest. You cannot put yourself in the position of questioning someone because they are apparently doing something and you are not thereby creating the impression you are more authentic in your non doing because you speak of not applying yourself. You are also applying yourself. This is just wordplay. It's tricky business, for sure. I understand that every seeker tries to take everything a teacher says literally and then turns it into a practice, a doing. But losing interest is not a doing, it's a happening. You cannot do 3 hours of losing interest per day. That's ridiculous. But you can do 3 hours of shifting awareness per day. That's why what Roy describes is clearly a doing. And how do you do your not doing. Who is not doing it?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 4, 2015 21:19:34 GMT -5
It's tricky business, for sure. I understand that every seeker tries to take everything a teacher says literally and then turns it into a practice, a doing. But losing interest is not a doing, it's a happening. You cannot do 3 hours of losing interest per day. That's ridiculous. But you can do 3 hours of shifting awareness per day. That's why what Roy describes is clearly a doing. And how do you do your not doing. Who is not doing it? I'm talking about self-realization, not about moving thru maya. Of course there's a lot of doing and thinking happening right now. But what does that have to do with self-realizion? Self-realization is a happening, acausal and therefore never the result of a doing. Self-realization is always just a breath away, no matter who you are or what you are doing or what you've done. Your spiritual resume and spiritual brownie points are totally irrelevant. So, as a way to still the mind, shifting awareness can be useful. But as a means to self-realization, that's a misconception of what self-realization is.
|
|