|
Post by michaelsees on Nov 22, 2010 16:54:59 GMT -5
Robert,
Yes that is the challenge but much care must be taken to not think you are awaken cuz you have a intellectual understanding of this. Most people not all but most get the intellectual part fairly quickly if you have a good wit about you and a little longer for dummies like myself. Then they have a few experiences and bingo they really feel that they are fully awaken and no more needs to be done and they stop.
Not many folks want to believe or give up that they never been a person for they never existed. This is a tricky area to be in if you are a seeker. So most stop prematurely, few go all the way and very very few are awaken fully like Ramana was.
My advice go within as there is no end to it. Now I am using words that suggest time,distance, space, extras etc just for the sake of explaining this. When a person truly awakes they understand these words have no meaning really. However I have realize there is always more to come regardless if you are awaken or not. If this is a help then use it if not throw it away.
Michael
|
|
|
Post by robert on Nov 22, 2010 21:05:02 GMT -5
thanks guys, r.
|
|
|
Post by teetown on Nov 23, 2010 8:20:46 GMT -5
So robert you found the self inquiry practice helpful? That is good news. I think I will keep up with it and see where it leads...
|
|
|
Post by robert on Nov 23, 2010 9:36:23 GMT -5
t.- i spent too much time looking at practices that seemed more complex and formal. i remember thinking that returning to ones natural state could not be so complicated. so i found the simplest exercise, spoken clearly and i stuck with it. it helped me. good luck, r.
|
|
|
Post by peanut on Nov 23, 2010 18:52:16 GMT -5
robert and michael...very clear and helpful. yes...for a lack of a better word...always deeper or further.
t..."i" used the i am practice for years and it brought me a stillness and realization that i can't even put into words.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Nov 23, 2010 19:59:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 27, 2010 15:43:14 GMT -5
I get confused sometimes as to what is meant by I amness. Who doesn't? The term "I" is insanely misleading. There's no "I" to it. Yeah, I suspect most of my confusion is a reflection of confusion in others who use the term.
|
|
|
Post by teetown on Nov 27, 2010 20:36:58 GMT -5
Nobody, I dunno. sometimes, going deep within for me leads to a breakdown in logic and things get very confused. Do I exist? is a question that comes up quite often now. Looking at "i" or "me" from a detached viewpoint makes it all feel very unreal and I suppose I put quotes around it to illustrate that.
|
|
|
Post by teetown on Nov 27, 2010 21:07:11 GMT -5
Yes. That's the point.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Nov 29, 2010 15:03:37 GMT -5
Yes. That's the point. This is a zen koan on steroids... You do not exist now. Everything is just happening. You did not exist before the body was born. A body with a mind was born, but not your body and not your mind. Everything was just happening... Breathing, seeing, thinking, naming, labeling. How then did the illusion of "you" come to be? If you really want to know the truth, then think until you see the truth in that "you" do not exist. All you have to do is see the truth. And yes, you do have to think. Do not try to silence the mind or achieve an emotional state.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Nov 29, 2010 15:20:44 GMT -5
Nobody,
Interesting Koran,
Nobody wrote "You do not exist now. Everything is just happening. You did not exist before the body was born."
Now I take it to believe that the "you" mentioned above is talking about the personal you, the individual correct? Any true master will tell you that you always have existed that you are the absolute itself.
However if we pretend and take the quote literally it will still make sense in a way. Then the you they speak of is the real you and you are nothing buy a fragment projected by the absolute like people on a movie screen. But even this is a bad example. Speaking just normally does the movie have any connection with the actual characters? How could it, if you throw away the film do the people go away of course not. Can the image of a person on the film go back to the source of the actual actor? Nope But at the end of the day we do see it's possible for a "you" to go back to source using consciousness as a rope to climb up.
No point to be made just pondering today Michael
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 29, 2010 16:18:14 GMT -5
"we do see it's possible for a "you" to go back to source using consciousness as a rope to climb up."
I realize you're trying to 'just speak normally" but that analogy doesn't work for me since nothing ever goes back to the source that it already is.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 29, 2010 20:17:59 GMT -5
Yup. Movement of any kind is an illusion. I never go anywhere. I am always here and always now and always all.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Nov 29, 2010 23:33:58 GMT -5
good response nobody and how true it is. thanks Michael
|
|
|
Post by teetown on Nov 30, 2010 9:54:29 GMT -5
Yes this is all very helpful...I think . Sometimes for me there is a sense that all this is just happening like you say. But it's not permanent. After reading Douglas Harding, sometimes I sometimes have experiences where there seems to be nobody on this side of the view. I've realized that most of the time I'm walking around all day holding an image in my mind of what I think other people are seeing, such as my face and body. Sometimes that drops away and I'm briefly "headless." It's quite strange when a person or animal is looking (apparently) into my eyes. What are they looking at? There's nothing here. These states come and go however. There hasn't been any kind of culmination yet. Actually, most of this seems very ordinary, nothing has happened yet that has really knocked my socks off or anything. Is that what I should be looking for? Some kind of culminating experience?
|
|