|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 12:57:19 GMT -5
But there is still personhood operating. The program is still running. There is no bug in the code. When the "little guy in the head" vanished, that ended the search because it then became obvious who the real searcher had been. The little guy has now been gone for 19 years, and all I can say is, "Good riddance!l Life without having to search for anything is well worth searching for. Oh really and who is analysing this idea right now?
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 13:03:53 GMT -5
Lol if it's not operating you're dead! Do you see the difference between life is being witnessed and life is being controlled and protected? If the first one is happening, then illusion of personal selfhood is not in the play, If you second one is happening, then obviously selfhood is in play. The truth is that I am both the person and not the person.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2019 13:28:41 GMT -5
Do you see the difference between life is being witnessed and life is being controlled and protected? If the first one is happening, then illusion of personal selfhood is not in the play, If you second one is happening, then obviously selfhood is in play. The truth is that I am both the person and not the person. That's not making any sense to me. Seeing through the illusion is knowing the false idea.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 13:35:21 GMT -5
The truth is that I am both the person and not the person. That's not making any sense to me. Seeing through the illusion is knowing the false idea. I know this doesn't make any sense to you and zendancer because you both have conceptual and wrong views about non-duality. There is no way I can offer you a rational argument about why one is everything and everything is one. I'll put it another confusing way for you. I am not the doer but I am the supreme doer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2019 13:40:48 GMT -5
That's not making any sense to me. Seeing through the illusion is knowing the false idea. I know this doesn't make any sense to you and zendancer because you both have conceptual and wrong views about non-duality. There is no way I can offer you a rational argument about why one is everything and everything is one. I'll put it another confusing way for you. I am not the doer but I am the supreme doer.I can perfectly make sense out of this line. You are here saying person is not the doer but you are the doer. And do you know that's what he is saying as well. I think you both are saying the same but with different words.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 16, 2019 13:42:56 GMT -5
When the "little guy in the head" vanished, that ended the search because it then became obvious who the real searcher had been. The little guy has now been gone for 19 years, and all I can say is, "Good riddance!l Life without having to search for anything is well worth searching for. Oh really and who is analysing this idea right now? Satch: Your response indicates that you probably never had the sense of selfhood that some people have. A few years ago I was surprised to discover that many people have a diffuse non-locatable sense of selfhood, and other people have what I call "a hard-core" sense of selfhood, as though a little person (we laughingly called it "a homunculus") is located behind the eyes looking out at the world. For people with the sense of being a little guy/gal in the head it feels as though the "me" is a distinct entity inside the body directing and controlling what the body does. This sense of selfhood is visceral, and there is a distinct sense of psychological separation between "inside" and "outside." It feels like "I'm in here" looking at a world "out there." My speculation is that this rigid sense of selfhood is some kind of a thought structure, and it can suddenly collapse and vanish without a trace (an event highly correlated with sustained mental silence). On a particular day in 1999 after a six-day ATA-T hiking retreat, I attempted to look "inside," and was shocked to discover that the inside, as well as all trace of "me" as I had known myself, had disappeared. Only then did it become obvious who the real searcher for truth had been. I've talked to other people who, at a particular point in their search, have made the same exact discovery in the same way. Tess Hughes, for example, described an almost identical moment when she looked inside and the past sense of "me" had vanished. She said, "Only then did I finally discover the solid ground of being, and realize what I had always been searching for." While talking to seekers, I've learned that some people know exactly what's being referred to by the words "little guy/gal in the head," and other people have no idea at all. My daughter, for example, knows exactly what I'm describing, but my wife has no sense of it at all. I can only speak for those of us who have had a hard-core sense of self identity, and say that when that rigid sense of identity suddenly vanishes, one finally sees the obvious and realizes that there was never a volitional entity in any sense. The illusion of selfhood has been seen through. Your realization may have been different than this, but this is how it happens for some of us.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 16, 2019 13:43:48 GMT -5
I know this doesn't make any sense to you and zendancer because you both have conceptual and wrong views about non-duality. There is no way I can offer you a rational argument about why one is everything and everything is one. I'll put it another confusing way for you. I am not the doer but I am the supreme doer.I can perfectly make sense out of this line. You are here saying person is not the doer but you are the doer. And do you know that's what he is saying as well. I think you both are saying the same but with different words. Correct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2019 13:46:48 GMT -5
Do you see the difference between life is being witnessed and life is being controlled and protected? If the first one is happening, then illusion of personal selfhood is not in the play, If you second one is happening, then obviously selfhood is in play. The truth is that I am both the person and not the person. How 'bout, You are that which gives rise to the 'appearing' person and there is no separation between the two, which can also take the worded form as "I am all of it/both." It's important though to denote the person is just an 'appearance' and not an actual independently existing 'entity.'
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 13:47:37 GMT -5
I know this doesn't make any sense to you and zendancer because you both have conceptual and wrong views about non-duality. There is no way I can offer you a rational argument about why one is everything and everything is one. I'll put it another confusing way for you. I am not the doer but I am the supreme doer.I can perfectly make sense out of this line. You are here saying person is not the doer but you are the doer. And do you know that's what he is saying as well. I think you both are saying the same but with different words. If what I am saying is understood by you then obviously you have no understanding.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 13:54:21 GMT -5
The truth is that I am both the person and not the person. How 'bout, You are that which gives rise to the 'appearing' person and there is no separation between the two, which can also take the worded form as "I am all of it/both." It's important though to denote the person is just an 'appearance' and not an actual independently existing 'entity.' Yes I'll accept that. The appearance is still me. It has no independent existence because there is only myself. No separation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2019 14:00:53 GMT -5
I can perfectly make sense out of this line. You are here saying person is not the doer but you are the doer. And do you know that's what he is saying as well. I think you both are saying the same but with different words. If what I am saying is understood by you then obviously you have no understanding.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Mar 16, 2019 14:02:09 GMT -5
If what I am saying is understood by you then obviously you have no understanding. It cannot be understood conceptually.
|
|