|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 19, 2020 5:22:35 GMT -5
Non - Conceptual Knowing? Arriving at the Experience of Nonconceptual Awareness Through Negation One way to arrive at the experience of nonconceptual awareness is through negation. We first negate presence or being, and we experience absence, or metaphysical emptiness. This negation comes not from a denial or rejection or attempt to go beyond, but simply through one’s awareness expanding or deepening past being and presence. Then we negate absence, arriving at nonconceptual presence, which is pure awareness. This occurs experientially in the path of the Diamond Approach, where the student moves from pure presence to pure absence, recognizing the ontological emptiness of presence and all phenomena predicated on presence. The revelation of truth continues to pure awareness, beyond presence and absence. Traditionally, the most common route in this process is the transcendence of the discriminating mind, by going beyond any discriminating cognition and simply pointing to what is. The Inner Journey Home, pg. 327 Great bit of writing there by that guy. One of the Zen bull pictures is when the seeker see's the tracks. Ironically, there are some very heavy-duty conceptual constructs that hint at the limitations of mind. These are the products of mathematics and physics. The latter is also a process of negation, as this is what the scientific method embodies, but with attention directed outward, objectively, and with the implicit assumption of the reality of the ephemeral comings and goings that are observed. Discovering the Footprints Along the riverbank under the trees, I discover footprints. Even under the fragrant grass, I see his prints. Deep in remote mountains they are found. These traces can no more be hidden than one's nose, looking heavenward Eventually the sincere seeker discovers that what must be investigated is the mind itself. Perhaps the seeker has fortunate karma ripening, coming into contact with the Buddha Dharma. It is when we stop looking to external things to save or liberate us.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 5:24:08 GMT -5
Yes. One would have had to have had the realization to understand what the words are pointing to. The realization would not be an experience; it would be a self evident seeing and non-conceptual knowing. I don't mean this facetiously, but if that person is blind, is it a self evident hearing or self evident feeling? I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'. I regularly work for a blind lady. We were laughing the other day about how she always says "See you later."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 5:52:57 GMT -5
Yes. One would have had to have had the realization to understand what the words are pointing to. The realization would not be an experience; it would be a self evident seeing and non-conceptual knowing. I don't mean this facetiously, but if that person is blind, is it a self evident hearing or self evident feeling? I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'.In my understanding it's just short-hand for perceive. Or 'I will know of..'.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2020 5:52:58 GMT -5
I don't mean this facetiously, but if that person is blind, is it a self evident hearing or self evident feeling? I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'.I regularly work for a blind lady. We were laughing the other day about how she always says "See you later." lol yes, perhaps culturally we have put a lot of emphasis over the years on our 'seeing' sense, so it shows up linguistically a lot. Perhaps, 'feel you later' would be better (though perhaps inappropriate in today's climate!!) Or....'know you later'
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 19, 2020 5:54:49 GMT -5
I don't mean this facetiously, but if that person is blind, is it a self evident hearing or self evident feeling? I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'.In my understanding it's just short-hand for perceive. Or 'I will know of..'. ha yes, as I just said above...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 5:56:52 GMT -5
I regularly work for a blind lady. We were laughing the other day about how she always says "See you later." lol yes, perhaps culturally we have put a lot of emphasis over the years on our 'seeing' sense, so it shows up linguistically a lot. Perhaps, 'feel you later' would be better (though perhaps inappropriate in today's climate!!) Or....'know you later' Yeah sight is one of the primary recognition tools. Though that's not to say that we don't also activate the other senses during communication.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 5:57:36 GMT -5
In my understanding it's just short-hand for perceive. Or 'I will know of..'. ha yes, as I just said above... Yeah, yeah.. I was just doing a little Gopal shuffle for ya
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 19, 2020 6:11:34 GMT -5
Or if we 'see through' an illusion, can we hear through or smell through? Or is it a way of talking about 'insight' or 'understanding'? Or......? Do you know what a "bindi" is? Ever heard of "the third eye"?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 19, 2020 6:43:30 GMT -5
It doesn't sound like an experience; it sounds like a shift to a different way of being, and that's one more reason why I think the realization/experience either/or distinction is lacking something essential. Yes. It’s not an experience as such but it is experiential in nature - it has an energetic, felt-sense, ‘expansive’ quality to it. A realisation without this experiential component is essentially an intellectual understanding. Precisely. There's a visceral component to realizations because realizations affect one's entire being as opposed to mere intellectual understandings that are more of a sterile nature because they are limited to the realm of the intellect. No realization happens in a vacuum. Realizations tend to be accompanied by rather memorable experiences. The challenge then is to not take the accompanying experience for the actual realization. Which is relatively easy for those who have an actual reference for that realization and next to impossible for those who don't.
|
|
theo
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by theo on Jan 19, 2020 7:50:46 GMT -5
What transcendant ? Realized, how? ... and by who/what ? Virtually every mystic in the world would disagree with that statement. The transcendent/Infinite can be directly apprehended via a human, which also results in a realization. Yes i can agree, but words, words, what a curse no separate entity involved and no expérience, direct or otherwise.. "talking abour all this, a discussion board about "spirituality", what a trap ! I still wonder why i came back here.. may be because i like you all folks...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 8:15:59 GMT -5
Yes i can agree, but words, words, what a curse no separate entity involved and no expérience, direct or otherwise.. "talking abour all this, a discussion board about "spirituality", what a trap ! I still wonder why i came back here.. may be because i like you all folks... Theo, the one that thinks there is no separate entity is the separate entity.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jan 19, 2020 8:29:01 GMT -5
I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'. It's synonymous with the word "in-sight" Insight: the act or result of apprehending the inner nature of things or of seeing intuitively. the capacity to gain an accurate and deep intuitive understanding of a person or thing.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 19, 2020 11:12:40 GMT -5
No, realizations are not experienced. When did you realize that? I was just quoting other people, thus I deferred to zd and E. Any realizations I have had were a result of experience, experience and knowledge, or experience beyond knowledge (which then became knowledge). Probably, most likely (can't think of otherwise) any realizations I have had were the connecting of dots, putting another dot between dots. I don't get this lightning-strike-out-of-the-blue business.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 19, 2020 11:32:42 GMT -5
Yes. One would have had to have had the realization to understand what the words are pointing to. The realization would not be an experience; it would be a self evident seeing and non-conceptual knowing. I don't mean this facetiously, but if that person is blind, is it a self evident hearing or self evident feeling? I'm curious about why we so often use the word 'seeing'.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 19, 2020 11:35:52 GMT -5
Or if we 'see through' an illusion, can we hear through or smell through? Or is it a way of talking about 'insight' or 'understanding'? Or......? 'Smell our way through an illusion.' Hehe
|
|