|
|
Post by quinn on Sept 23, 2016 11:37:39 GMT -5
Ooh. Ouch.  So you already distrust thinking so much that you distrust the distrust because you don't actually believe the distrust (on a deep level)? Haha, that could be one way of putting it. I would perhaps say that my thinking seems to be a bit disconnected from body knowledge/emotions/etc, so thought-based inquiry doesn't seem to sink very deep. So basically whether I question thoughts or not or mistrust thoughts/thinking or not seems to usually stay on the level of mental kungfu. This means in practice that, say, questioning the validity of a recurring thought (or a type of thought) doesn't seem to have much effect on the recurrence of the thought. I think ATA etc works better for me at the moment than thought-based inquiry into the thoughts... Yea, I understand. Sounds good. "#13 - Trust yourself".  |
|
|
|
Post by japhy on Sept 23, 2016 12:44:29 GMT -5
Haha well I appreciate you poking at this in case I have overlooked something - it's true that one can get attached to all kinds of labels and beliefs, some of them quite subtle. But I wasn't really trying to make any point that I'm completely devoid of non-intellectual insight - more just a small caveat that not only am I still a seeker (rather than a "finder"), but moreover I've only been serious in my seeking for a pretty short time, and so there might be some freshman's naivety in what I might suggest.  Hey, I know you never wanted to make it a point. There is just a paradox in a lot of "spiritual talk". If one is a bit smart (like you) avoiding ones weak points is pretty easy. That's why I never focused one the points you wanted to make. |
|
|
|
Post by wei sa on Sept 24, 2016 0:14:54 GMT -5
Haha well I appreciate you poking at this in case I have overlooked something - it's true that one can get attached to all kinds of labels and beliefs, some of them quite subtle. But I wasn't really trying to make any point that I'm completely devoid of non-intellectual insight - more just a small caveat that not only am I still a seeker (rather than a "finder"), but moreover I've only been serious in my seeking for a pretty short time, and so there might be some freshman's naivety in what I might suggest. Hey, I know you never wanted to make it a point. There is just a paradox in a lot of "spiritual talk". If one is a bit smart (like you) avoiding ones weak points is pretty easy. That's why I never focused one the points you wanted to make. With the paradox of spiritual talk, do you mean that one is somehow engaging intellect / thought in order to point away from and beyond intellect/thought? Maybe that could be seen as a paradox, although teachers like Gary Weber are of the opinion that it's possible to do all kinds of things that normally people assume require thinking - like talking, writing, doing complex problem solving etc - without thinking. (I suppose in that view "thinking" is defined as mental chatter, the kind of thoughts that we can consciously observe as they appear to the "mind's eye".) On the other hand ZD's contemplation-story from earlier in the thread was a good example on what kind of role thinking can play in a process that ultimately happens outside of thought. Maybe thinking played a part in him even realizing that contemplating on the perception of a toddler would be a useful project - the importance of discrimination is sometimes talked about - but other faculties surely factored in as well, like intuition. As for weak points - many different kinds of things could be perceived as weaknesses and so how they would be avoided or worked upon would vary a lot. I would not necessarily call my habitual over-reliance on intellect and over-abidance in thoughts/mind as a weak point, but rather a conditioned tendency or a bad habit (or possibly even an addiction), and so I'm gradually correcting what I see as a habitual imbalance. I suppose one aspect of the whole path is a movement from abidance in the mind to non-abidance in the mind. But even if we forget about the whole waking up -thing, I noticed that this constant thinking was getting pretty tedious/tiring (and IMO was actually taxing my health), and so I'd like to reduce it even if I would never wake up... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2016 3:04:32 GMT -5
If what we are is awareness then it's essential to connect with it and to do it means transcending that which is an obstacle to revealing what is already there, which is mind. That means meditation practice of some kind is required to enable the experience of a still mind. I came across this interesting article from someone who tried many different practices. It's worth a read. liveanddare.com/meditation-experiments/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2016 3:17:03 GMT -5
The difference between intellectual understanding and direct knowledge.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2016 3:33:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 24, 2016 4:15:01 GMT -5
Artists routinely enter states of body/mind that would blow other peeps away. That's not to say that there's no potential socks-knockin' woo-woo in your future ..  Maybe you have a slightly idealised view of contemporary artists - in my experience most of them have buried themselves as deep into their heads as anyone while they're engaging with art as a career or other means to an end, and so have left the shamanistic tendencies they might have had to atrophy... Yes, well, after an unusual body/mind state the tendency is to renormalize one's world view to take it into account. This is true of artists, spiritual yogi's and mystics of all stripes, extreme athletes, peeps who've been in accidents or have lost someone suddenly, yuppies at a meditation retreat or even American hillbillies who might speak in tongues at a snake-charmers Sunday revival. So the culture one is exposed to both leading up to and after the experience will inform one's mind as to the nature of that experience. One commonality I've noticed among the life descriptions of educated seekers with strong intellects is an impetus and willingness to expose themselves to a wide variety of locales, cultures and situations and an interest in learning about different spiritual traditions. Eventually, if the body/mind has been exposed to enough disorientation it can learn to find the rush in the simple emptiness of one good deep breath, no matter where, when or the circumstances of it. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 27, 2016 18:39:56 GMT -5
If possible, spend some time alone in nature simply looking at the world in silence. Many people report that this activity has a deeply unifying effect, psychologically, and many people have reported having significant realizations and spiritual experiences that seemed to be correlated with that activity.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 28, 2016 11:54:21 GMT -5
Some sports both challenge us physically and require concentration. Examples are skiing, climbing, rafting, surfing, etc.
If you're seeking and have ever had an interest in those, pursue them. If you've done them in the past, make more time for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Sept 29, 2016 7:45:58 GMT -5
Two pointers to contemplate that bore fruit:
What looks through my eyes is the same as what looks through your eyes.
What looks through your eyes now is the same as what looked through your eyes when you were a child.
|
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Sept 29, 2016 7:56:02 GMT -5
Hey, I know you never wanted to make it a point. There is just a paradox in a lot of "spiritual talk". If one is a bit smart (like you) avoiding ones weak points is pretty easy. That's why I never focused one the points you wanted to make. With the paradox of spiritual talk, do you mean that one is somehow engaging intellect / thought in order to point away from and beyond intellect/thought? Maybe that could be seen as a paradox, although teachers like Gary Weber are of the opinion that it's possible to do all kinds of things that normally people assume require thinking - like talking, writing, doing complex problem solving etc - without thinking. (I suppose in that view "thinking" is defined as mental chatter, the kind of thoughts that we can consciously observe as they appear to the "mind's eye".) On the other hand ZD's contemplation-story from earlier in the thread was a good example on what kind of role thinking can play in a process that ultimately happens outside of thought. Maybe thinking played a part in him even realizing that contemplating on the perception of a toddler would be a useful project - the importance of discrimination is sometimes talked about - but other faculties surely factored in as well, like intuition. As for weak points - many different kinds of things could be perceived as weaknesses and so how they would be avoided or worked upon would vary a lot. I would not necessarily call my habitual over-reliance on intellect and over-abidance in thoughts/mind as a weak point, but rather a conditioned tendency or a bad habit (or possibly even an addiction), and so I'm gradually correcting what I see as a habitual imbalance. I suppose one aspect of the whole path is a movement from abidance in the mind to non-abidance in the mind. But even if we forget about the whole waking up -thing, I noticed that this constant thinking was getting pretty tedious/tiring (and IMO was actually taxing my health), and so I'd like to reduce it even if I would never wake up... japhy's challenge re: avoiding one's weak points is interesting. Your musings about what exactly a weak point might be is very natural. I think you're right that these are conditioned patterns of behavior. ZD and Satch advise stilling the mind in some way will break those patterns eventually. I've been at it for a while now without a whole lot of luck. But perhaps my hair isn't on fire enough or the tiger that has my head is feeling bored and not very hungry. Byron Katie's method of examining the text and veracity of underlying beliefs seems like a good tool. I really wish I had some wand that could zap the hell out of things. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 29, 2016 10:15:40 GMT -5
Two pointers to contemplate that bore fruit: 1) What looks through my eyes is the same as what looks through your eyes. 2) What looks through your eyes now is the same as what looked through your eyes when you were a child. That's interesting. Tell me about those fruits. I'd rather think that #2 is a no-brainer anyway. Everyone can relate to that no matter how enlightened. #1 is a nice thought experiment but there's no way you could ever intellectually relate to that. In fact, it's actually absurd. It has to be experienced. And when that happens, it will knock your monkey mind socks off.  |
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Sept 29, 2016 10:40:37 GMT -5
Two pointers to contemplate that bore fruit: 1) What looks through my eyes is the same as what looks through your eyes. 2) What looks through your eyes now is the same as what looked through your eyes when you were a child. That's interesting. Tell me about those fruits. I'd rather think that #2 is a no-brainer anyway. Everyone can relate to that no matter how enlightened. #1 is a nice thought experiment but there's no way you could ever intellectually relate to that. In fact, it's actually absurd. It has to be experienced. And when that happens, it will knock your monkey mind socks off. Yea both of them in combination definitely knocked me flat. It's like when you see a stereogram for the first time -- everything just comes into 3D focus. First there's noise then there isn't. On #2, it is sort of a no-brainer but I hadn't ever thought of it. The fruit is a visceral understanding of what is referred to as unchanging awareness. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 29, 2016 11:53:18 GMT -5
That's interesting. Tell me about those fruits. I'd rather think that #2 is a no-brainer anyway. Everyone can relate to that no matter how enlightened. #1 is a nice thought experiment but there's no way you could ever intellectually relate to that. In fact, it's actually absurd. It has to be experienced. And when that happens, it will knock your monkey mind socks off. Yea both of them in combination definitely knocked me flat. It's like when you see a stereogram for the first time -- everything just comes into 3D focus. First there's noise then there isn't. On #2, it is sort of a no-brainer but I hadn't ever thought of it. The fruit is a visceral understanding of what is referred to as unchanging awareness. Yes, many people are amazed when they are asked to do the thought experiment regarding #2. The first time I heard it, a teacher asked a group of people I was with to remember some vivid experience from the past. Then, he asked them if the awareness that was present during that experience was any different than the awareness of the present moment. Then, he asked them if it had changed in any way, or if it had aged. Many people in the group expressed astonishment at what was clearly a revelation. Regarding #1, I agree with Reefs. I doubt that anyone can viscerally grasp the truth of that without a major experience or realization. The intellect cannot understand it until it has been informed by a non-conceptual seeing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 8:34:00 GMT -5
That's interesting. Tell me about those fruits. I'd rather think that #2 is a no-brainer anyway. Everyone can relate to that no matter how enlightened. #1 is a nice thought experiment but there's no way you could ever intellectually relate to that. In fact, it's actually absurd. It has to be experienced. And when that happens, it will knock your monkey mind socks off. Yea both of them in combination definitely knocked me flat. It's like when you see a stereogram for the first time -- everything just comes into 3D focus. First there's noise then there isn't. On #2, it is sort of a no-brainer but I hadn't ever thought of it. The fruit is a visceral understanding of what is referred to as unchanging awareness. what does an understanding of unchanging awareness mean? and some talk about resting in it, like all of the time.. whatever that means or turning and looking back at itself.. whatever that means |
|
