No it's not self-Realization, it's Self-Realization. Is there Self, for one? And can it be Realized? And does that matter with respect to equanimity/TNS?
Max: Little children live in TNS, but as their intellect develops, they quickly start making distinctions, learn the symbology for those distinctions, and gradually develop a stronger and stronger sense of separateness as they shift from direct experience (looking, listening, feeling, etc) to thoughts ABOUT what they see, hear, feel, etc. They begin talking to themselves (the internal dialogue), and their distinctions, reflections, and ideas about the world soon create a kind of imaginary verbal interface through which they interact with the world. Little children live in the NOW, but as they grow up, they spend more and more time thinking about an imaginary future and an imaginary past. By the time humans become adults, they spend most of their time interacting with the verbal meta-reality in their heads rather than with the real world. They don't interact with "what is;" they interact with their thoughts ABOUT "what is."
IMO, to attain THS, as an adult, one must first attain SR, because it is only after SR that the mind becomes pacified (informed) by seeing the big picture. Until that happens one will continue to interact with the world through lots of unconscious self-referential thought patterns that are based on a false sense of selfhood. As I've noted in the past, one can intellectually understand that selfhood is an illusion, but until the conventional sense of "me" vanishes, and one realizes the infinite unified intelligence behind all phenomena, I don't think that true freedom is possible.
I've been questioning various ND people (who appear to be free) about this issue, and I've discovered that they fall into at least three categories. The first category are people who will say something like this, "Five years ago, on a particular day, I looked inside and the 'me' was no longer there; it had totally disappeared. There was no longer an inside or an outside. I then realized that the Infinite is all there is, and I realized that my past sense of being a separate volitional entity had been a monumental illusion. I then knew what I truly am, and my spiritual search came to an end." I have no doubts whatsoever about these people because they all seem to "walk the talk." These people all seem relaxed, down to earth, full of humor and joy, self deprecating, and totally at peace.
The second category seem to be people who realize at some point that the whole intellectual quest for understanding is a mind-game, and this realization causes them to give it up. They simply stop thinking about the existential questions that once bothered them. If you ask them questions about self versus Self, or other similar issues, they refuse to engage because they no longer see any point in thinking about such issues. I can understand where people in this category are coming from, but from my POV they seem to have stopped before encountering the Infinite. It's like they didn't go all the way and see what lies "behind the curtain" so to speak.
The third category are people who claim to have had a CC experience or attained SR, accept what is as it is, and consider themselves enlightened, but who say or do things that seem incompatible with true freedom or lasting equanimity. I was recently surprised when a ND teacher sanctioned in a well-known ND tradition told me that for him suffering is just part of human life and that it never really ends. That kind of statement makes me have serious doubts about their clarity or level of attainment.
That idea is at the crux of some of the high-velocity, high-volume past dialogs on this forum. It's obviously wrapped-up in a form of the existential question. In my opinion there's just no way to engage "What is suffering?" without at least some TMT. From those dialogs I also surmise that it can also be an interpersonal land-mine for people who believe they're free of it.
Culturally, it seems to me that the possibility of the end of suffering while we're still alive is both what defines the idea of the natural state and is one of the few irreconcilable points between Christianity and Buddhism. At this point, I would definitely allow for the possibility that someone who states the idea that "suffering is just a part of life" is SR, but just doesn't have the same cultural way points that I've encountered. But it is an eyebrow raiser.
Last Edit: Jul 20, 2017 6:17:20 GMT -5 by laughter
This natural state can be directly related to the discussions about "alignment"/"purification". Alignment is about a material manifestation of inner-peace. This inner-peace is what I take ZD to refer to most often with the term "equanimity". While alignment can happen either before or after SR, the natural state describes what happens post-SR.
Since alignment is a relative quality of an individual, there is no absolute statement that can be made about it. This flies in the face of thousands of years of culture that describe the enlightened individual as saint-like. But it is possible to identify tendencies. This is just simple empiricism -- what are some commonalities between individuals that are widely recognized as having realized the existential truth?
While the natural state is ultimately independent of alignment, the clarity with regard to appearances after SR lends a certain natural gravity toward alignment. Events that used to cause suffering will still cause substantial pain, but that pain is no longer internalized. This means that the effect of pain in the present loses it's hold over the future. Also, the suffering of others isn't ignored. In fact, the natural state is one in which the patterns of denial that would normally obscure noticing the suffering of others have no center on which to grasp. But in the natural state, the suffering of others doesn't result in suffering of our own. Compassion can flow freely, with no risk to love.
So while alignment is conditional, and dependent on the conditions the individual finds themselves in and a part of at the moment of SR, the clarity of the natural state reveals those conditions for what they are in the movement of life that follows. But how that happens for any one "SR peep" will never play out exactly the same way twice. If you want a clue as to whether a given speaker/writer is SR based on your evaluation of their alignment, it's best to compare what they do and how they react over time going forward, rather than apply your subjective bias to what you feel about them as you first encounter them. As always, the absolute is a constant source of the unexpected. If you're honest with yourself that you have yet something left to realize, it's best to first check your personal opinions of other peeps at the door. The alternative is to let your mind deceive you into mistaking the truth for a lie, and vice-versa.
I agree with this although I have to confess that I don't really understand or relate to the alignment/purification thingy. I'm open-minded about it, but it just doesn't have much meaning for me. If I learned tomorrow that the body has a terminal illness, I don't think that it would bother me in the least, but I wouldn't think that the illness was caused by a lack of alignment. I do recognize that certain people have what are obviously psycho-somatic repetitive illnesses, but it's hard for me to believe that Ramana's cancer was caused by a lack of alignment. Cancer seems to be a disease associated with aging, certain specific environmental factors, and obesity. I once heard a doctor state that if we live long enough, almost everyone will get some form of cancer.
That specific facet of the alignment discussion about the cause of disease wasn't really all that much on my mind when I wrote that post. Rather, I was thinking about how the natural state relates generally to conditions that most people would say are negative and unwanted. The natural state isn't one free of pain, but it is free of suffering.
I'm not closed off to the possibility that there are non-physical but causal factors that current conventional medical science would reject. The way I think of it is that the body and mind aren't really two separate things. Practically speaking in those conventional terms, living in a constant state of dread, no matter how muted, is tough on the body. The primary symptom being all sorts of unnecessary muscle tension, especially around the neck, lower back and digestive system. With enough time, frequency, and intensity, the symptoms become the cause of an even greater decline in health.
That said, I think it's important to notice the mind-trap of thinking in mechanistic terms, and the dichotomy between pain and suffering can offer a specific example of that. It's easy to understand the intellectual idea that suffering is secondary, and after the fact of pain, but to dismiss suffering as only psychological is to misconceive of the human being as a machine. The Christians are fond of backing the intellect away from points of confusion like this by embracing them as a mystery.
I agree with this although I have to confess that I don't really understand or relate to the alignment/purification thingy. I'm open-minded about it, but it just doesn't have much meaning for me. If I learned tomorrow that the body has a terminal illness, I don't think that it would bother me in the least, but I wouldn't think that the illness was caused by a lack of alignment. I do recognize that certain people have what are obviously psycho-somatic repetitive illnesses, but it's hard for me to believe that Ramana's cancer was caused by a lack of alignment. Cancer seems to be a disease associated with aging, certain specific environmental factors, and obesity. I once heard a doctor state that if we live long enough, almost everyone will get some form of cancer.
Mostly, the simplest facets of eating clean, sleeping well, and undertaking healthy physical activity are far more relevant than anything else in that regard.
The devil's advocate would pose the question: what's the cause, and what's the effect? Is the cause a good attitude and the effect good habits, or vice-versa? Obviously, the question is loaded.
Last Edit: Jul 20, 2017 6:48:16 GMT -5 by laughter
I agree with this although I have to confess that I don't really understand or relate to the alignment/purification thingy. I'm open-minded about it, but it just doesn't have much meaning for me. If I learned tomorrow that the body has a terminal illness, I don't think that it would bother me in the least, but I wouldn't think that the illness was caused by a lack of alignment. I do recognize that certain people have what are obviously psycho-somatic repetitive illnesses, but it's hard for me to believe that Ramana's cancer was caused by a lack of alignment. Cancer seems to be a disease associated with aging, certain specific environmental factors, and obesity. I once heard a doctor state that if we live long enough, almost everyone will get some form of cancer.
Mostly, the simplest facets of eating clean, sleeping well, and undertaking healthy physical activity are far more relevant than anything else in that regard.
I agree, and I was fascinated by a recent article in TIME Magazine. Apparently mindfulness, meditation, yoga, physical exercise, and similar activities "can actually reverse stress-related changes in genes linked to poor health and depression. According to recent research,
"Inherited genes are not static, and DNA activity can depend upon things within people's control. 'By choosing healthy habits every day, we can create a gene activity pattern that is more beneficial for our health,' says the study's lead author, Ivana Buric of Coventry University in England. 'Even just fifteen minutes of practicing mindfulness seems to do the trick.'"
Max: Little children live in TNS, but as their intellect develops, they quickly start making distinctions, learn the symbology for those distinctions, and gradually develop a stronger and stronger sense of separateness as they shift from direct experience (looking, listening, feeling, etc) to thoughts ABOUT what they see, hear, feel, etc. They begin talking to themselves (the internal dialogue), and their distinctions, reflections, and ideas about the world soon create a kind of imaginary verbal interface through which they interact with the world. Little children live in the NOW, but as they grow up, they spend more and more time thinking about an imaginary future and an imaginary past. By the time humans become adults, they spend most of their time interacting with the verbal meta-reality in their heads rather than with the real world. They don't interact with "what is;" they interact with their thoughts ABOUT "what is."
IMO, to attain THS, as an adult, one must first attain SR, because it is only after SR that the mind becomes pacified (informed) by seeing the big picture. Until that happens one will continue to interact with the world through lots of unconscious self-referential thought patterns that are based on a false sense of selfhood. As I've noted in the past, one can intellectually understand that selfhood is an illusion, but until the conventional sense of "me" vanishes, and one realizes the infinite unified intelligence behind all phenomena, I don't think that true freedom is possible.
I've been questioning various ND people (who appear to be free) about this issue, and I've discovered that they fall into at least three categories. The first category are people who will say something like this, "Five years ago, on a particular day, I looked inside and the 'me' was no longer there; it had totally disappeared. There was no longer an inside or an outside. I then realized that the Infinite is all there is, and I realized that my past sense of being a separate volitional entity had been a monumental illusion. I then knew what I truly am, and my spiritual search came to an end." I have no doubts whatsoever about these people because they all seem to "walk the talk." These people all seem relaxed, down to earth, full of humor and joy, self deprecating, and totally at peace.
The second category seem to be people who realize at some point that the whole intellectual quest for understanding is a mind-game, and this realization causes them to give it up. They simply stop thinking about the existential questions that once bothered them. If you ask them questions about self versus Self, or other similar issues, they refuse to engage because they no longer see any point in thinking about such issues. I can understand where people in this category are coming from, but from my POV they seem to have stopped before encountering the Infinite. It's like they didn't go all the way and see what lies "behind the curtain" so to speak.
The third category are people who claim to have had a CC experience or attained SR, accept what is as it is, and consider themselves enlightened, but who say or do things that seem incompatible with true freedom or lasting equanimity. I was recently surprised when a ND teacher sanctioned in a well-known ND tradition told me that for him suffering is just part of human life and that it never really ends. That kind of statement makes me have serious doubts about their clarity or level of attainment.
That idea is at the crux of some of the high-velocity, high-volume past dialogs on this forum. It's obviously wrapped-up in a form of the existential question. In my opinion there's just no way to engage "What is suffering?" without at least some TMT. From those dialogs I also surmise that it can also be an interpersonal land-mine for people who believe they're free of it.
Culturally, it seems to me that the possibility of the end of suffering while we're still alive is both what defines the idea of the natural state and is one of the few irreconcilable points between Christianity and Buddhism. At this point, I would definitely allow for the possibility that someone who states the idea that "suffering is just a part of life" is SR, but just doesn't have the same cultural way points that I've encountered. But it is an eyebrow raiser.
Agreed, and I'll post a quote today or tomorrow that illustrates this issue rather clearly.
Mostly, the simplest facets of eating clean, sleeping well, and undertaking healthy physical activity are far more relevant than anything else in that regard.
I agree, and I was fascinated by a recent article in TIME Magazine. Apparently mindfulness, meditation, yoga, physical exercise, and similar activities "can actually reverse stress-related changes in genes linked to poor health and depression. According to recent research,
"Inherited genes are not static, and DNA activity can depend upon things within people's control. 'By choosing healthy habits every day, we can create a gene activity pattern that is more beneficial for our health,' says the study's lead author, Ivana Buric of Coventry University in England. 'Even just fifteen minutes of practicing mindfulness seems to do the trick.'"
Have you heard of Bruce Lipton? You can youtube him, he did some interesting Stem Cell experimentation that showed how the environment having an impact the cells...worth a look. Could be related to the TIME article.
Mostly, the simplest facets of eating clean, sleeping well, and undertaking healthy physical activity are far more relevant than anything else in that regard.
The devil's advocate would pose the question: what's the cause, and what's the effect? Is the cause a good attitude and the effect good habits, or vice-versa? Obviously, the question is loaded.
As a loaded question its a fair comment, and in my experience I spent many years sedentary, taking no particular diet care and indulging in things detrimental to well-being, and came to a pont where I thought, I gotta do something, so I joined a gym and started moving, which led to a lot of reading up on sports nutrition, and within tree months I was lifting and eating like an athlete. The practice, reps, with a mind muscle connection, began to embed in my psyche the psychological profile of an athlete, and changed my psychological identity. The cause, so to speak, is a strength that already exists, a strength of character that can put their mind to something, dedicate to it, commit to it, and persevere with it, and when such strengths are applied to the body, the body must adapt to them and in turn become stronger... but then... the habit of practice of the body becomes the shape of the mind, as it were, and the whole attitude comes to settle on the whole lifestyle of it. I have just completed my first week undertaking a college course in fitness, which will qualify me as a personal trainer, so indeed, my imagined persona, my future vision is entirely transformed from what it was but a year ago. I will probably die of cancer anyway, as I have had already had several excisions skin cancers including a melanoma, maybe that's the result of my past kamma, or maybe it's just a fair freckly person who spent a long time in the sun is statistically prone to dancing with jack dancer, but for now I have heavy a$$ sh!t to lift - indoors.
“God is, as it were, the sewer into which all contradictions flow.” ~ Hegel
This natural state can be directly related to the discussions about "alignment"/"purification". Alignment is about a material manifestation of inner-peace. This inner-peace is what I take ZD to refer to most often with the term "equanimity". While alignment can happen either before or after SR, the natural state describes what happens post-SR.
Since alignment is a relative quality of an individual, there is no absolute statement that can be made about it. This flies in the face of thousands of years of culture that describe the enlightened individual as saint-like. But it is possible to identify tendencies. This is just simple empiricism -- what are some commonalities between individuals that are widely recognized as having realized the existential truth?
While the natural state is ultimately independent of alignment, the clarity with regard to appearances after SR lends a certain natural gravity toward alignment. Events that used to cause suffering will still cause substantial pain, but that pain is no longer internalized. This means that the effect of pain in the present loses it's hold over the future. Also, the suffering of others isn't ignored. In fact, the natural state is one in which the patterns of denial that would normally obscure noticing the suffering of others have no center on which to grasp. But in the natural state, the suffering of others doesn't result in suffering of our own. Compassion can flow freely, with no risk to love.
So while alignment is conditional, and dependent on the conditions the individual finds themselves in and a part of at the moment of SR, the clarity of the natural state reveals those conditions for what they are in the movement of life that follows. But how that happens for any one "SR peep" will never play out exactly the same way twice. If you want a clue as to whether a given speaker/writer is SR based on your evaluation of their alignment, it's best to compare what they do and how they react over time going forward, rather than apply your subjective bias to what you feel about them as you first encounter them. As always, the absolute is a constant source of the unexpected. If you're honest with yourself that you have yet something left to realize, it's best to first check your personal opinions of other peeps at the door. The alternative is to let your mind deceive you into mistaking the truth for a lie, and vice-versa.
I agree with this although I have to confess that I don't really understand or relate to the alignment/purification thingy. I'm open-minded about it, but it just doesn't have much meaning for me. If I learned tomorrow that the body has a terminal illness, I don't think that it would bother me in the least, but I wouldn't think that the illness was caused by a lack of alignment. I do recognize that certain people have what are obviously psycho-somatic repetitive illnesses, but it's hard for me to believe that Ramana's cancer was caused by a lack of alignment. Cancer seems to be a disease associated with aging, certain specific environmental factors, and obesity. I once heard a doctor state that if we live long enough, almost everyone will get some form of cancer.
Yes, I understand this. That's why I asked Reefs if he means by SR what you mean by SR. He said yes. (But) If there is no sense of self, then how can one be interested in altering (by alignment/purification) a self that doesn't exist? Reefs seems to think he has answered me satisfactorily, but...
And you seem to consider that any movement of ZD doesn't come from "ZD", but comes as/(from) a movement of the Whole. But it seems that alignment/purification necessarily involves a "center" that is somehow acting.
And you don't make a distinction between the "inside" and the "outside". If there is a seeming-self seeming-acting, it's not acting from outside the everything.
The rope is real, the snake is illusory. The snake can't see itself, that it's illusory.
A man is unable to explain what he himself really is. Gurdjieff
Your being attracts your life. You can't see above your own level of being. Gurdjieff
Not that long ago I was working in a school teaching a variety of subjects to various groups. One class was actually already set up to learn about 'the collective identity', likely more for a sense of developing national pride flowing from the already existing syllabus. I decided to throw in some stuff about the collective identification complex, and so the night before planned a moderately keeled lesson that incorporated things I thought were interesting.
Anyway, my morning class prior to that class was an intense class. We were talking about hypnosis and the law. The discussion was lively and it was shaping up to be a great day. After my morning class, I headed over to the library, when I noticed something curious.
The identity class was on deck in about an hour, and about 45 minutes prior to that class, I smelled something. Is that someone's a** I wondered? A funk began permeating the library environment, and after a few minutes, I couldn't help but wonder if I was the source of that smell?
Welp, I made a quick run through of my day's grooming habits. I showered. My clothes are clean. Could this be feet, I pondered? Have my socks or shoes turned on me? The smell was so putrid, I walked to the bathroom to check my feet. Relieved that it was not my feet, I figured it must have been something in the library, and that I was in the clear. I grabbed my stuff, headed up to the room, when something interesting happened.
I entered a classroom that didn't have the AC on. The temp got up to around 95 that day my friends, closer to 100 if you ask me. Well anyway, I start the class, and everything is going great. I was in the honeymoon phase during this time, where the kids really enjoyed their new teacher and I was enjoying getting to know all my kids. What more could a guy ask for? Then suddenly, whiteboard marker in hand, it hits me. It's back! And worse than ever. I catalogued what in God's name is the smell, when a flashback occurred. 6 weeks prior I was in a hotel room, and Yadira decided to use my wife beater, or under shirt tank top, to wipe my son's a**. We were out of baby wipes, and soft cotton is a forgiving fabric for a cooley. Through a bizarre chain of events, that shirt made its way into my luggage unwashed and onto my body on the hottest day of the year. 2 month old digested strained peaches and carrots began to combine with perspiration and body heat through a form of fusion, releasing a toxic nerve gas that could no doubt have been used to take out a village of people.
Feeling like Charlie Brown's friend with the dirt circling around him, I continued with the lesson! I had a 5 foot buffer zone that led to some feelings of comfort, when with 5 minutes to go, a decision had to be made. End the class early because I had said everything and the kids were good, or blather on for 5 minutes about nothing, disallowing the chance of the end of the class desk huddle students sometimes gravitate toward. What to do?
Welp, I ended the class, and sure enough, a young lady comes up to ask me this or that, and got hit with the nerve gas. She goes back and tells her friend, who then comes up, and she likewise gets pummeled. Oh, the horror! While I wanted to stand up and alert my class I'd been bathing in feces and sweat for the last hour, I decided to take the ego blow. The class ended, I quickly and shamefully headed out, made my way back to the apartment for a quick change up, and back in time for the afternoon class without a scratch.
hahaha
I think you meant this for the Astral Projection thread?
Ha no just a funny example of some self referential thinking.
I agree with this although I have to confess that I don't really understand or relate to the alignment/purification thingy. I'm open-minded about it, but it just doesn't have much meaning for me. If I learned tomorrow that the body has a terminal illness, I don't think that it would bother me in the least, but I wouldn't think that the illness was caused by a lack of alignment. I do recognize that certain people have what are obviously psycho-somatic repetitive illnesses, but it's hard for me to believe that Ramana's cancer was caused by a lack of alignment. Cancer seems to be a disease associated with aging, certain specific environmental factors, and obesity. I once heard a doctor state that if we live long enough, almost everyone will get some form of cancer.
Yes, I understand this. That's why I asked Reefs if he means by SR what you mean by SR. He said yes. (But) If there is no sense of self, then how can one be interested in altering (by alignment/purification) a self that doesn't exist? Reefs seems to think he has answered me satisfactorily, but...
And you seem to consider that any movement of ZD doesn't come from "ZD", but comes as/(from) a movement of the Whole. But it seems that alignment/purification necessarily involves a "center" that is somehow acting.
And you don't make a distinction between the "inside" and the "outside". If there is a seeming-self seeming-acting, it's not acting from outside the everything.
I think that Reefs and I mean the same thing when we refer to SR. Even though there is no sense of "inside" or "outside" in the old way, there's still a recognition that there's a body that acts in the world even though all action is understood to be a movement of the Whole. Life is undoubtedly somewhat different for people whose minds are significantly silent because the usual reflective repetitive type of thinking centered upon the idea of a volitional entity is substantially absent. Nevertheless, life is not lived in some sort of woo woo state; it goes on much as before but without a lot of the self-referential thinking patterns that were once dominant.
To get some sense of what's being pointed to, imagine not having any unresolved existential questions. Next, imagine letting go of all self-referential thoughts. Next, imagine not having any ideas about how the world ought to be, or how other people ought to be, or how you ought to be. Next, imagine having no thoughts about anything that might happen in the future or anything that has happened in the past. Next, imagine not having any thoughts about higher or lower states of consciousness. As you imagine letting go of all this type of stuff that usually occupies peoples' minds, can you get a sense of how free life would feel? Can you get a sense of how empty open awareness might simply see "what is" without imagining anything about it (without "touching" it)? Can you get a sense of how living in that state of mind would eliminate virtually all of the problems that occupy most peoples' thoughts.
I'll post a quote in response to Laughter's post later today that may provide an even better flavor of what's being pointed to. The acronym "TNS" is not pointing to anything special; it's pointing to something incredibly simple, down to earth, peaceful, and free-flowing.
Last Edit: Jul 20, 2017 15:53:13 GMT -5 by zendancer
I think you meant this for the Astral Projection thread?
Ha no just a funny example of some self referential thinking.
Yes, that gave me a good laugh because of something similar that happened in my world lately. I've been building a home with a helper, and the heat and humidity have been incredible for the last few weeks( yesterday it was 96 degrees and the humidity was about 98). We start work at 6AM and by 12:30 we're exhausted. I have several workshirts that were bought for hiking--the kind that wick away sweat and dry rapidly--, but they are usually drenched with sweat after two hours work. I can almost never smell myself, but I have one shirt that for some reason stinks after I've worked in it for two hours. I told Carol that it seemed odd that I never notice any BO except when I wear that one shirt. She told me that I should run it through the washer twice using lots of detergent to eliminate the problem. I did that two days ago, but yesterday, while pouring concrete in that shirt, it, or I, began to stink like crazy after two hours. It's like something from the twilight zone! Today I gave up and threw the d*** shirt away. I swear it must have been some sort of non-local phenomena! Amazingly, the other shirts are made of exactly the same material and have no smell at all. Weird!
Yes, I understand this. That's why I asked Reefs if he means by SR what you mean by SR. He said yes. (But) If there is no sense of self, then how can one be interested in altering (by alignment/purification) a self that doesn't exist? Reefs seems to think he has answered me satisfactorily, but...
And you seem to consider that any movement of ZD doesn't come from "ZD", but comes as/(from) a movement of the Whole. But it seems that alignment/purification necessarily involves a "center" that is somehow acting.
And you don't make a distinction between the "inside" and the "outside". If there is a seeming-self seeming-acting, it's not acting from outside the everything.
I think that Reefs and I mean the same thing when we refer to SR. Even though there is no sense of "inside" or "outside" in the old way, there's still a recognition that there's a body that acts in the world even though all action is understood to be a movement of the Whole. Life is undoubtedly somewhat different for people whose minds are significantly silent because the usual reflective repetitive type of thinking centered upon the idea of a volitional entity is substantially absent. Nevertheless, life is not lived in some sort of woo woo state; it goes on much as before but without a lot of the self-referential thinking patterns that were once dominant.
To get some sense of what's being pointed to, imagine not having any unresolved existential questions. Next, imagine letting go of all self-referential thoughts. Next, imagine not having any ideas about how the world ought to be, or how other people ought to be, or how you ought to be. Next, imagine having no thoughts about anything that might happen in the future or anything that has happened in the past. Next, imagine not having any thoughts about higher or lower states of consciousness. As you imagine letting go of all this type of stuff that usually occupies peoples' minds, can you get a sense of how free life would feel? Can you get a sense of how empty open awareness might simply see "what is" without imagining anything about it (without "touching" it)? Can you get a sense of how living in that state of mind would eliminate virtually all of the problems that occupy most peoples' thoughts.
I'll post a quote in response to Laughter's post later today that may provide an even better flavor of what's being pointed to. The acronym "TNS" is not pointing to anything special; it's pointing to something incredibly simple, down to earth, peaceful, and free-flowing.
I like that expression.
“God is, as it were, the sewer into which all contradictions flow.” ~ Hegel
The devil's advocate would pose the question: what's the cause, and what's the effect? Is the cause a good attitude and the effect good habits, or vice-versa? Obviously, the question is loaded.
As a loaded question its a fair comment, and in my experience I spent many years sedentary, taking no particular diet care and indulging in things detrimental to well-being, and came to a pont where I thought, I gotta do something, so I joined a gym and started moving, which led to a lot of reading up on sports nutrition, and within tree months I was lifting and eating like an athlete. The practice, reps, with a mind muscle connection, began to embed in my psyche the psychological profile of an athlete, and changed my psychological identity. The cause, so to speak, is a strength that already exists, a strength of character that can put their mind to something, dedicate to it, commit to it, and persevere with it, and when such strengths are applied to the body, the body must adapt to them and in turn become stronger... but then... the habit of practice of the body becomes the shape of the mind, as it were, and the whole attitude comes to settle on the whole lifestyle of it. I have just completed my first week undertaking a college course in fitness, which will qualify me as a personal trainer, so indeed, my imagined persona, my future vision is entirely transformed from what it was but a year ago. I will probably die of cancer anyway, as I have had already had several excisions skin cancers including a melanoma, maybe that's the result of my past kamma, or maybe it's just a fair freckly person who spent a long time in the sun is statistically prone to dancing with jack dancer, but for now I have heavy a$$ sh!t to lift - indoors.
Laughter: Tess Hughes is one of those people about whom I have no doubts, and she is a good example of someone who searched for the truth, found it, and was changed forever by what she found. She grew up on a farm in Ireland in the 1950's, and her first existential crisis occurred when she was 8. As a child, she assumed that only old people and old things die, but a young calf died, and it shook her world. She realized that if a young calf could die, she could die. She asked her mother, a simple farm woman, about this issue, and her mother replied matter of factly, "Yes, Tess, everything dies." Tess realized that every living thing in her world would be dead in a hundred years, and the horror of that realization stayed with her for a long time. Later, other questions arose, but it was;t until after she had married and had children that she became a serious seeker.
She had no one with whom to share her existential search until she googled the name of an old boyfriend. Ironically, his name was Richard Rose, and her google search led her to the Richard Rose who started the TAT foundation. She was amazed to discover that there were other people interested in the same thing she was interested in, and she came to a TAT retreat in the USA and met Art Ticknor, as well as many serious seekers. Later, she went on retreats with people like Jac O'Keefe. It's a long and interesting story, but her search finally came to an end on the last day of a week-long solitary retreat. She writes,
"About an hour after the mind had come back, I (the mind) decided to look inside to see what I was feeling or thinking, only to realize that there was no inside anymore. I was gone, totally. It was then I realized that when there is no inside, there is no outside because inside and outside exist only in relation to each other. There is only This. Consciousness is all, no center, no boundaries. It just is. Despite what I had read or heard about "no self" or "all is one," in the past, the reality of coming upon this was completely unexpected and startling, shocking even.......Such a thing I could not have imagined. But, here I was and this was the new me--no center, no boundaries--just spacious Awareness. No ego is one thing, no self is another....
Some weeks into this new way of being, I became aware that I no longer felt the slightest twinge of of fear or anxiety. On looking at this I realized that not only did I no longer experience fear or anxiety, I was incapable of it. Fear had vanished along with the inside.....
There was a great sense of peace and relief, relief that the struggle was over, relief that confusion and insecurity had ended. It felt as if the weight of the world had been lifted from me, a weight I hadn't realized that I was carrying until it was removed. The world, "I," was spacious in a way it had not been before. I was in no doubt that what had happened was the final revelation. I knew I had found what I had been looking for,I knew who I am....."
When I talked to Tess at a TAT retreat earlier this year, she said, "Nothing ever really changed since that day seven years ago when I looked inside and discovered that Tess had vanished. Life has been peaceful and simple ever since." I told her that the same thing was true for this body/mind. "Bob" disappeared 18 years ago next month, and all I can say is, "Good riddance to that crazy little guy in the head!" haha.
I do not understand how anyone could have the kind of realization Tess describes, and then claim that suffering continued. It also makes me suspect the enlightened claims of people who cannot answer the simple question, "Who are you?" although I realize that Zen people have a more concrete way of expressing their understanding than people who are not familiar with how koans can be answered somatically.
A supposedly-enlightened individual gave a talk a few months ago during which he claimed that his major existential question had been "Who am I?" After the talk was finished, and people in the audience began asking questions, someone asked, "So, who are you?" The speaker just shrugged his shoulders and remained silent with a look on his face that seemed to say, "The question is meaningless to me." I can't believe that anyone who has had the kind of realization that Tess describes in her book, which we refer to here as "SR," would respond in that way. At the least, I would have serious doubts about the depth of their insight and understanding.