|
|
Post by ivory on Sept 23, 2011 15:16:50 GMT -5
Actually Tat, I take that back. I'm sitting here looking at the sh1t show of a mind here, knowing that I can't control it, while overlooking the fact that you have no control over yours either. Then again, maybe you do, or think you do. Either way, its all good. Carry on good sir.
|
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 15:58:25 GMT -5
Hmmm. Not specifically. Thing is I wouldnt particularly say that individuation talks to individuation, but it makes more sense than saying absolute talks to absolute because at least at the relative level there is both form and contrast. There's talking, but there's no particular single thing that's talking. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:00:37 GMT -5
What if I pick up a need for paradox instead of a need for knowledge? well, I guess that would need releasing too. But how do we release things? Do we open the door and kick them out, or close the door so they don't come in? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:10:15 GMT -5
Hmmm. Not specifically. Thing is I wouldnt particularly say that individuation talks to individuation, but it makes more sense than saying absolute talks to absolute because at least at the relative level there is both form and contrast. There's talking, but there's no particular single thing that's talking. I would say that talking is as real or actual as a talker though Im not particularly suggesting that the talker is the cause of the talking. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:13:18 GMT -5
There's talking, but there's no particular single thing that's talking. I would say that talking is as real or actual as a talker though Im not particularly suggesting that the talker is the cause of the talking. So what is the talker if it's not the cause/source of talking? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:13:28 GMT -5
well, I guess that would need releasing too. But how do we release things? Do we open the door and kick them out, or close the door so they don't come in? There are lots of different ways of releasing problematic 'needs' of different kinds. EFT is a good popular tool for example. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:14:49 GMT -5
I would say that talking is as real or actual as a talker though Im not particularly suggesting that the talker is the cause of the talking. So what is the talker if it's not the cause/source of talking? I am comfortable with the idea that a human being is a talker (though again, Im not implying the human is necessarily the cause of the talking) |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:20:47 GMT -5
But how do we release things? Do we open the door and kick them out, or close the door so they don't come in? There are lots of different ways of releasing problematic 'needs' of different kinds. EFT is a good popular tool for example. Aren't we bringing more stuff in when we learn how to use these tools? |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:22:38 GMT -5
So what is the talker if it's not the cause/source of talking? I am comfortable with the idea that a human being is a talker (though again, Im not implying the human is necessarily the cause of the talking) So the main feature of the talker is that it's a human being? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:26:00 GMT -5
There are lots of different ways of releasing problematic 'needs' of different kinds. EFT is a good popular tool for example. Aren't we bringing more stuff in when we learn how to use these tools? Yes, but I think sometimes its worth creating an illusion to release a more problematic persistent one. In a sense, every time a teacher points beyond form s/he is creating an illusion. Sometimes that is the most helpful thing to do though. If someone is at the bottom of a hole and cant get to the top in one leap, the most loving thing to do is to go down the hole and meet them half way. In a way we create a series of illusionary stepping stones for those that think they need them. And most people do, otherwise miracles would be common place. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:26:31 GMT -5
I am comfortable with the idea that a human being is a talker (though again, Im not implying the human is necessarily the cause of the talking) So the main feature of the talker is that it's a human being? No, a human being is just an example of a talker. |
|
|
|
Post by tathagata on Sept 23, 2011 16:31:46 GMT -5
There are lots of different ways of releasing problematic 'needs' of different kinds. EFT is a good popular tool for example. Aren't we bringing more stuff in when we learn how to use these tools? The mind is moving already...it can move outward to either internal or external phenomena, which is the process of creation, or it can move inward by observing and releasing phenomena and undoing....by undoing, either by stopping or releasing, we can come back to being aware of our full nature, Becuase all that's happening when we are not aware of our full nature, is that we are focused on a specific part to the exclusion of the whole... So the mind is moving anyway, its moving into a focus of awareness on specific parts, one part after another....tools are like the steering wheel that turns the focus from outward to inward, and in so doing we unfocuse on the parts and expand our awareness ultimately to the whole, once we come back into direct awareness of the whole we can then move beyond awareness of the whole to pure nonbeing beeing.....there are lots of differant kinds of steering wheels. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:34:39 GMT -5
So the main feature of the talker is that it's a human being? No, a human being is just an example of a talker. What is a talker then? What makes it a talker? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 23, 2011 16:42:32 GMT -5
No, a human being is just an example of a talker. What is a talker then? Well, I could just tell you but that will probably lead to further analysis so it seems to me that the simplest option is for you to tell me what you think talking is, then I will tell you what a talker is in relation to that. |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Sept 23, 2011 16:43:43 GMT -5
Aren't we bringing more stuff in when we learn how to use these tools? Yes, but I think sometimes its worth creating an illusion to release a more problematic persistent one. In a sense, every time a teacher points beyond form s/he is creating an illusion. Not if you run into someone who twists your nose or pokes you with a stick! (I know, you are an exception to this) |
|
