Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 15:56:22 GMT -5
Any offers to help Wikipedia with their page, ZD? KenshoHi Wren: I posted a response to your question, but it disappeared after I posted it. I have no idea what happened. Apparently something like this happened to one of Silence's posts the other day, so there must be some kind of glitch with the website. I'll try again later. Hi  No worries. Thanx for taking the time to write and apologies for the moment that you saw it had vanished. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 30, 2013 22:16:12 GMT -5
That sort of thing (disappearing posts) has been happening with me, too - FYI -  Since the "upgrade" I've been getting timeout errors, no data errors and server errors when I try yo create a post, but I've never lost one. I just back up a page and try again. It sometimes results in a double post that I have to delete. I assume they've been working feverishly to resolve the problem, but I could easily be mistaken about that. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 31, 2013 0:24:07 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Awww, you're so cute when you have nothing to contribute other than your dislike of what you 'think'.. Be well.. ... and you are quite transparent when directly provoked. No more so that your own transparency when you provoke, but.. it's funny, the provocateur feels validated AND threatened by getting what they set-out to get.. all i'm doing is giving you what you want.. so, what do you think you see through all that transparency? Be well.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2013 2:03:11 GMT -5
Greetings.. ... and you are quite transparent when directly provoked. No more so that your own transparency when you provoke, but.. it's funny, the provocateur feels validated AND threatened by getting what they set-out to get.. all i'm doing is giving you what you want.. so, what do you think you see through all that transparency? Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 31, 2013 6:50:41 GMT -5
Greetings.. ... and you are quite transparent when directly provoked. No more so that your own transparency when you provoke, but.. it's funny, the provocateur feels validated AND threatened by getting what they set-out to get.. all i'm doing is giving you what you want.. so, what do you think you see through all that transparency? Be well.. Did you ask him what he wanted? Or are you assuming to know (projecting) and going with what you think (believe ((non-clarity))) he wants? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 31, 2013 8:12:29 GMT -5
Greetings.. ... and you are quite transparent when directly provoked. No more so that your own transparency when you provoke, but.. it's funny, the provocateur feels validated AND threatened by getting what they set-out to get.. all i'm doing is giving you what you want.. so, what do you think you see through all that transparency?Be well.. That referred to two things primarily: 1) identity-based denigration ... aka "insults" 2) an expression of one or more opinions in the same breath as the "just look and see" prescription that directly contradicts it .... that's what that color coding was about and it could have applied to about a half a dozen other recent posts |
|
|
|
Post by silver on May 31, 2013 8:40:52 GMT -5
That sort of thing (disappearing posts) has been happening with me, too - FYI - Since the "upgrade" I've been getting timeout errors, no data errors and server errors when I try yo create a post, but I've never lost one. I just back up a page and try again. It sometimes results in a double post that I have to delete. I assume they've been working feverishly to resolve the problem, but I could easily be mistaken about that. "feverishly" - yeah. I can hear the galloping hoofbeats now.  |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 31, 2013 8:42:09 GMT -5
Hi Wren: I posted a response to your question, but it disappeared after I posted it. I have no idea what happened. Apparently something like this happened to one of Silence's posts the other day, so there must be some kind of glitch with the website. I'll try again later. Hi No worries. Thanx for taking the time to write and apologies for the moment that you saw it had vanished.Wren: I'll try again. I saw the Wiki definition a long time ago, but never posted anything because I assumed that Zen Buddhists would be uninterested in comments by a non-Buddhist. I agree with the basic definition of "kensho" as a "seeing into one's true nature." Hakuin, a famous ZM, described all kinds of kensho experiences from small subtle ones to huge mind-boggling cosmic consciousness ones. The main point is that kensho is an EXPERIENCE. Any time the bottom drops out of one's mind, selfhood vanishes, and clarity ensues that's a kensho-type experience. Sooner or later those kinds of experiences come to an end and one returns to ordinary life. Many Zen people, as noted by Wiki, equate kensho and satori, but I do not. I consider satori something quite different--a realization that ends the spiritual search. That realization is the sudden (timeless) seeing through the illusion of the searcher so completely that it changes one's understanding about what's going on. The search ends because it is seen that the imagined searcher was not the real searcher. The operant searcher is realized to have been Reality, Itself, and the illusion of a "John" or "Jane" having been the searcher collapses. This realization changes everything. Life continues, but there is no longer a person at the center of what appears to be happening. The body/mind, universe, and awareness continue as before, but it is empty of personhood. After this realization, any previous self-identity like "John" or "Jane" is seen in a new light, as an abstract thought structure that was so ingrained in the organism that is was continually overlooked. The most interesting question is, "What happens after this realization occurs?" Well, life continues just as before, but without the illusion that there is a separate entity at the center of it. The body/mind goes about its business doing whatever needs to be done, and knows that the real actor is the totality of "what is." The body/mind lives without knowing what will happen next, and is comfortable with that not-knowing way of life. Zen Masters emphasize the importance of continuing zazen after satori because they think that formal zazen, such as shikan taza, is what led to their freedom from the consensus trance. A few of them seem to realize that it is attentiveness to "what is" that freed them from the mind's domination, but only a few. Is it necessary to remain attentive after satori? Probably. People who stop being attentive to "what is" often fall back into a mind-centered way of life, and the old sense of selfhood sometimes re-emerges. Gangaji doesn't like the idea of "practice", but she has often said, "Vigilance is necessary." I think what she means by that is what I'm pointing to. Most adults spend 99.9% of their time attending thoughts, and they stay lost in the concensus trance. If one becomes free of the trance, probably some minimal amount of time needs to be spent attending "what is" in order to keep the mind from regaining dominance. FWIW, I've never read anything specific about this issue, so this is just speculation. When I reflect upon the "Ten Ox-Herding Pictures" of Zen, it seems to me that what I'm calling "satori" is represented by the eighth picture. This means that there are two further stages of development/integration/understanding that Zen Masters point to. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 31, 2013 9:13:56 GMT -5
Hi No worries. Thanx for taking the time to write and apologies for the moment that you saw it had vanished.Wren: I'll try again. I saw the Wiki definition a long time ago, but never posted anything because I assumed that Zen Buddhists would be uninterested in comments by a non-Buddhist. I agree with the basic definition of "kensho" as a "seeing into one's true nature." Hakuin, a famous ZM, described all kinds of kensho experiences from small subtle ones to huge mind-boggling cosmic consciousness ones. The main point is that kensho is an EXPERIENCE. Any time the bottom drops out of one's mind, selfhood vanishes, and clarity ensues that's a kensho-type experience. Sooner or later those kinds of experiences come to an end and one returns to ordinary life. Many Zen people, as noted by Wiki, equate kensho and satori, but I do not. I consider satori something quite different--a realization that ends the spiritual search. That realization is the sudden (timeless) seeing through the illusion of the searcher so completely that it changes one's understanding about what's going on. The search ends because it is seen that the imagined searcher was not the real searcher. The operant searcher is realized to have been Reality, Itself, and the illusion of a "John" or "Jane" having been the searcher collapses. This realization changes everything. Life continues, but there is no longer a person at the center of what appears to be happening. The body/mind, universe, and awareness continue as before, but it is empty of personhood. After this realization, any previous self-identity like "John" or "Jane" is seen in a new light, as an abstract thought structure that was so ingrained in the organism that is was continually overlooked. The most interesting question is, "What happens after this realization occurs?" Well, life continues just as before, but without the illusion that there is a separate entity at the center of it. The body/mind goes about its business doing whatever needs to be done, and knows that the real actor is the totality of "what is." The body/mind lives without knowing what will happen next, and is comfortable with that not-knowing way of life. Zen Masters emphasize the importance of continuing zazen after satori because they think that formal zazen, such as shikan taza, is what led to their freedom from the consensus trance. A few of them seem to realize that it is attentiveness to "what is" that freed them from the mind's domination, but only a few. Is it necessary to remain attentive after satori? Probably. People who stop being attentive to "what is" often fall back into a mind-centered way of life, and the old sense of selfhood sometimes re-emerges. Gangaji doesn't like the idea of "practice", but she has often said, "Vigilance is necessary." I think what she means by that is what I'm pointing to. Most adults spend 99.9% of their time attending thoughts, and they stay lost in the concensus trance. If one becomes free of the trance, probably some minimal amount of time needs to be spent attending "what is" in order to keep the mind from regaining dominance. FWIW, I've never read anything specific about this issue, so this is just speculation. When I reflect upon the "Ten Ox-Herding Pictures" of Zen, it seems to me that what I'm calling "satori" is represented by the eighth picture. This means that there are two further stages of development/integration/understanding that Zen Masters point to. Hi ZD: It is my experience that "John or Jane" is realized to be 'reality', too.. the difference, when seen/experienced clearly, is the relationship of "John and Jane" with the process of what is actually happening is not central to that process, it is experienced as a holistic contribution.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 31, 2013 9:25:00 GMT -5
Wren: I'll try again. I saw the Wiki definition a long time ago, but never posted anything because I assumed that Zen Buddhists would be uninterested in comments by a non-Buddhist. I agree with the basic definition of "kensho" as a "seeing into one's true nature." Hakuin, a famous ZM, described all kinds of kensho experiences from small subtle ones to huge mind-boggling cosmic consciousness ones. The main point is that kensho is an EXPERIENCE. Any time the bottom drops out of one's mind, selfhood vanishes, and clarity ensues that's a kensho-type experience. Sooner or later those kinds of experiences come to an end and one returns to ordinary life. Many Zen people, as noted by Wiki, equate kensho and satori, but I do not. I consider satori something quite different--a realization that ends the spiritual search. That realization is the sudden (timeless) seeing through the illusion of the searcher so completely that it changes one's understanding about what's going on. The search ends because it is seen that the imagined searcher was not the real searcher. The operant searcher is realized to have been Reality, Itself, and the illusion of a "John" or "Jane" having been the searcher collapses. This realization changes everything. Life continues, but there is no longer a person at the center of what appears to be happening. The body/mind, universe, and awareness continue as before, but it is empty of personhood. After this realization, any previous self-identity like "John" or "Jane" is seen in a new light, as an abstract thought structure that was so ingrained in the organism that is was continually overlooked. The most interesting question is, "What happens after this realization occurs?" Well, life continues just as before, but without the illusion that there is a separate entity at the center of it. The body/mind goes about its business doing whatever needs to be done, and knows that the real actor is the totality of "what is." The body/mind lives without knowing what will happen next, and is comfortable with that not-knowing way of life. Zen Masters emphasize the importance of continuing zazen after satori because they think that formal zazen, such as shikan taza, is what led to their freedom from the consensus trance. A few of them seem to realize that it is attentiveness to "what is" that freed them from the mind's domination, but only a few. Is it necessary to remain attentive after satori? Probably. People who stop being attentive to "what is" often fall back into a mind-centered way of life, and the old sense of selfhood sometimes re-emerges. Gangaji doesn't like the idea of "practice", but she has often said, "Vigilance is necessary." I think what she means by that is what I'm pointing to. Most adults spend 99.9% of their time attending thoughts, and they stay lost in the concensus trance. If one becomes free of the trance, probably some minimal amount of time needs to be spent attending "what is" in order to keep the mind from regaining dominance. FWIW, I've never read anything specific about this issue, so this is just speculation. When I reflect upon the "Ten Ox-Herding Pictures" of Zen, it seems to me that what I'm calling "satori" is represented by the eighth picture. This means that there are two further stages of development/integration/understanding that Zen Masters point to. Hi ZD: It is my experience that "John or Jane" is realized to be 'reality', too.. the difference, when seen/experienced clearly, is the relationship of "John and Jane" with the process of what is actually happening is not central to that process, it is experienced as a holistic contribution.. Be well.. When John and Jane are experienced as objects (others) I agree with you. However John and Jane as subjects are capable of losing the story they tell about themselves and in losing that story they also lose the personal self-identification as John or Jane. What John and Jane discover about who they are in the absence of what they think and conceive about themselves is the subject matter of discussion on this forum. John and Jane as objects (others) is not really being talked about or argued against. The focus is on how the subject relates to and understands itself. There is a phenomenon where personal identity is lost but consciousness remains intact and the body and mind do their thing without direction or mitigation by the self-conception. In this the object John is heard to be testifying about the absence of the subject John. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 31, 2013 9:43:11 GMT -5
Hi ZD: It is my experience that "John or Jane" is realized to be 'reality', too.. the difference, when seen/experienced clearly, is the relationship of "John and Jane" with the process of what is actually happening is not central to that process, it is experienced as a holistic contribution.. Be well.. When John and Jane are experienced as objects (others) I agree with you. However John and Jane as subjects are capable of losing the story they tell about themselves and in losing that story they also lose the personal self-identification as John or Jane. What John and Jane discover about who they are in the absence of what they think and conceive about themselves is the subject matter of discussion on this forum. John and Jane as objects (others) is not really being talked about or argued against. The focus is on how the subject relates to and understands itself. There is a phenomenon where personal identity is lost but consciousness remains intact and the body and mind do their thing without direction or mitigation by the self-conception. In this the object John is heard to be testifying about the absence of the subject John. Are you certain about the subject matter of this forum? That phenomenon is a belief.. it is only describable by the belief of "John's or Jane's" private mindscape in the existence of the phenomenon, and.. the description of that belief as 'subject' of this forum begins to unravel any claim of authenticity.. it becomes a 'story' about what identity is and does, and what should or shouldn't be believed.. this attachment to a story about a body-mind that functions independent of its personal history, and the influences of its relationship with existence throughout that history, is an imagined story line.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 31, 2013 9:57:34 GMT -5
The world of the sciaphobic groundhog knows perpetual winter.
|
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 31, 2013 10:11:50 GMT -5
When John and Jane are experienced as objects (others) I agree with you. However John and Jane as subjects are capable of losing the story they tell about themselves and in losing that story they also lose the personal self-identification as John or Jane. What John and Jane discover about who they are in the absence of what they think and conceive about themselves is the subject matter of discussion on this forum. John and Jane as objects (others) is not really being talked about or argued against. The focus is on how the subject relates to and understands itself. There is a phenomenon where personal identity is lost but consciousness remains intact and the body and mind do their thing without direction or mitigation by the self-conception. In this the object John is heard to be testifying about the absence of the subject John. Are you certain about the subject matter of this forum? That phenomenon is a belief.. it is only describable by the belief of "John's or Jane's" private mindscape in the existence of the phenomenon, and.. the description of that belief as 'subject' of this forum begins to unravel any claim of authenticity.. it becomes a 'story' about what identity is and does, and what should or shouldn't be believed.. this attachment to a story about a body-mind that functions independent of its personal history, and the influences of its relationship with existence throughout that history, is an imagined story line.. Be well.. Do you deliberately misunderstand what I'm saying? I never said the body-mind functions independent of its personal history (conditioning). I said it functions without the story of the self-conception. We're both advocating dropping story. But you keep spinning stories about my advocation being a bunch of story. But the story you spin misrepresents what I have said. My direct experience is that the body and mind function with little to no direction from -me-. Thoughts come and go beyond my control. The body's organs grind away without my direction. The body's cleaning itself in the shower is automatic with little to no direction from a -me-. It happens without me making it happen. There is no self directing these actions. Yes the body and mind are operating from conditioning accumulated through (past) experience. I am not denying that. I'm testifying to the fact that I have no earthly idea who or what this "Edward" character is. Every person has a different perception and conception of "Edward" and what I experience of myself is mostly identified as Body, Mind, and Awareness. The body and mind could be anybody, have any conditioning. The -me- and "Who am I?" has shifted more towards the silent aware presence. Watching things happen. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 31, 2013 10:15:45 GMT -5
Hi ZD: It is my experience that "John or Jane" is realized to be 'reality', too.. the difference, when seen/experienced clearly, is the relationship of "John and Jane" with the process of what is actually happening is not central to that process, it is experienced as a holistic contribution.. Be well.. When John and Jane are experienced as objects (others) I agree with you. However John and Jane as subjects are capable of losing the story they tell about themselves and in losing that story they also lose the personal self-identification as John or Jane. What John and Jane discover about who they are in the absence of what they think and conceive about themselves is the subject matter of discussion on this forum. John and Jane as objects (others) is not really being talked about or argued against. The focus is on how the subject relates to and understands itself. There is a phenomenon where personal identity is lost but consciousness remains intact and the body and mind do their thing without direction or mitigation by the self-conception. In this the object John is heard to be testifying about the absence of the subject John. Top: Yes, I agree with what you've written here, but I also agree with Tzu in the sense that imagination is also part of reality and even identification with a self-identity is no other than THIS doing what THIS does. I think Tzu is saying (he can correct me if I'm wrong about this) that the "big I" and the "little I" are one and the same. Practically speaking, I still answer to the name of "Bob," but I no longer think that there is a separate entity, named "Bob," who is separate from the truth. I AM the truth being Bob! The other difference that you and others might comment upon is the sense of being a "human doing" rather than a "human being." IOW, when the search for truth comes to an end, life is more like a flow of activity(s) rather than a reflective/contemplative/focused search. With nothing to search for, other interests come to the foreground and replace the past interest in searching. The most important interest after the search ends is helping other people see through the same illusions that were once so blinding to oneself. I have met lots of people whose search came to an end, and every single one of them consider helping other searchers as their highest interest. Clearly, THAT is what THIS likes to do. *smiles* |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 31, 2013 10:33:43 GMT -5
Greetings.. The world of the sciaphobic groundhog knows perpetual winter. Yes.. seeing themselves for what they are, holistic parts of a dynamic whole, there is the phobic reaction to deny that realization in favor of a belief that absolves the observer of any 'personal' responsibility for its perceptions of undesirable conditions related to that 'Whole'.. Be well.. |
|
