|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 3, 2012 11:34:51 GMT -5
Subtitle: What's true for some is not true for all.
I keep dipping into the nondual pool of writers/teachers, have done so for some twenty-odd years, forty if you count Zen and Taoism and such. I'll get to my point, and then back up some...
I have invariably been turned off by the teaching that we're all already there so there is nothing we can do to get there, and in fact, trying to get there is the chief obstruction to realizing we're already there.......
This is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard, yet true, in part.
It's true that there is an aspect of our being which emerges from the whole, is connected with the whole. But it is also true that for most of us, >we< are not >it<. But also, some have had the recognition of unity with the whole.
Now, some have had the recognition via following a traditional path, a trail left behind by others, and in turn, leave a trail (although sometimes it's just a trail of bread-crumbs).
Some, the nondual teachers, have come to recognize the oneness, by way sort of like a quantum leap that does not traverse either time or space, but appears seemingly without cause (this quantum nature of reality is scientifically well established, has been demonstrated to be accurate more than any other scientific theory in history). Not knowing how they came to be in the state they are, they claim that there is no way to get there.
This is where error creeps in, and thus the paradox.
Now, it's not a problem for those who are members of the "club", but it is a problem for the student, because there is a way, there is a path, there is a trail. It causes problems for the student, as they are left up s**t creek without a paddle.
On the (Nondual) Enlightened side, there is looking backward and seeing no trail, true.
On the un-Enlightened side there is looking forward, hearing that there is no trail, and feeling helpless. This is not-true, there is a path, mostly centered around working with attention and awareness, interior practices.
So, the majority of my problem with nondual teaching is this paradox, the confusion it causes for students. And when I hear anyone say there is no way and nothing can be done, I know that they only have partial truth. The truth is that ego can do nothing, but this doesn't mean that nothing can be done.
stardustpilgrim
|
|
|
|
Post by runstill on Feb 3, 2012 12:05:44 GMT -5
Subtitle: What's true for some is not true for all. I keep dipping into the nondual pool of writers/teachers, have done so for some twenty-odd years, forty if you count Zen and Taoism and such. I'll get to my point, and then back up some... I have invariably been turned off by the teaching that we're all already there so there is nothing we can do to get there, and in fact, trying to get there is the chief obstruction to realizing we're already there....... This is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard, yet true, in part. It's true that there is an aspect of our being which emerges from the whole, is connected with the whole. But it is also true that for most of us, >we< are not >it<. But also, some have had the recognition of unity with the whole. Now, some have had the recognition via following a traditional path, a trail left behind by others, and in turn, leave a trail (although sometimes it's just a trail of bread-crumbs). Some, the nondual teachers, have come to recognize the oneness, by way sort of like a quantum leap that does not traverse either time or space, but appears seemingly without cause (this quantum nature of reality is scientifically well established, has been demonstrated to be accurate more than any other scientific theory in history). Not knowing how they came to be in the state they are, they claim that there is no way to get there. This is where error creeps in, and thus the paradox. Now, it's not a problem for those who are members of the "club", but it is a problem for the student, because there is a way, there is a path, there is a trail. It causes problems for the student, as they are left up s**t creek without a paddle. On the (Nondual) Enlightened side, there is looking backward and seeing no trail, true. On the un-Enlightened side there is looking forward, hearing that there is no trail, and feeling helpless. This is not-true, there is a path, mostly centered around working with attention and awareness, interior practices. So, the majority of my problem with nondual teaching is this paradox, the confusion it causes for students. And when I hear anyone say there is no way and nothing can be done, I know that they only have partial truth. The truth is that ego can do nothing, but this doesn't mean that nothing can be done. stardustpilgrim Yep that is pretty much how it looks to me, on the un-enlighten side all we have is self-inquiry. This forum is a heck of a resource to assist in that endeavor. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Feb 3, 2012 12:39:20 GMT -5
For me it's developing the quality of the conscious attention, that needs to be worked on. If I have to use methods to do that, then it's not a problem. If I dump a method for a while and then go back to it, that's also not a problem. Whatever it takes to exercise that ability to focus the attention consciously, is not a problem. Not doing anything, is a problem.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 13:03:25 GMT -5
i'm finding that a lot of what has been happening in this small delusional universe is that i've gradually been becoming comfortable with the framework and terms of how a nondual-type of universe might be constructed. folks are pointing at the moon, but it's taken some time to discern what that thing is that is sticking in the air. just now it's beginning to dawn on me that it's a finger pointing somewhere. <slowly turning head in that direction>.. It's like I've just come to terms with the fact that i've been looking at a menu and now i can order some california rolls and saki and wait to actually taste the stuff. For example, I don't know how many times the concept of non-conceptual awareness has graced these synapses... it's a pretty funny concept as concepts go! and they all go!
at the same time i've also noticed a shift in interest in things like meditation. it's not the same sort of interest as it was before when i did it. it's fun and not relegated to sitting. it happens.
my interest in doing stuff (the seeky peep doing) has waned too. stuff just happens. there's no agenda.
i welcome pokes and clarifications
|
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 3, 2012 13:15:56 GMT -5
i'm finding that a lot of what has been happening in this small delusional universe is that i've gradually been becoming comfortable with the framework and terms of how a nondual-type of universe might be constructed. folks are pointing at the moon, but it's taken some time to discern what that thing is that is sticking in the air. just now it's beginning to dawn on me that it's a finger pointing somewhere. <slowly turning head in that direction>.. It's like I've just come to terms with the fact that i've been looking at a menu and now i can order some california rolls and saki and wait to actually taste the stuff. For example, I don't know how many times the concept of non-conceptual awareness has graced these synapses... it's a pretty funny concept as concepts go! and they all go! at the same time i've also noticed a shift in interest in things like meditation. it's not the same sort of interest as it was before when i did it. it's fun and not relegated to sitting. it happens. my interest in doing stuff (the seeky peep doing) has waned too. stuff just happens. there's no agenda. i welcome pokes and clarifications Same thing's been happening to me, Max. I really think it's simply part of the process of full awakening. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 3, 2012 13:37:52 GMT -5
Subtitle: What's true for some is not true for all. I keep dipping into the nondual pool of writers/teachers, have done so for some twenty-odd years, forty if you count Zen and Taoism and such. I'll get to my point, and then back up some... I have invariably been turned off by the teaching that we're all already there so there is nothing we can do to get there, and in fact, trying to get there is the chief obstruction to realizing we're already there....... This is the biggest load of crap I've ever heard, yet true, in part. It's true that there is an aspect of our being which emerges from the whole, is connected with the whole. But it is also true that for most of us, >we< are not >it<. But also, some have had the recognition of unity with the whole. Now, some have had the recognition via following a traditional path, a trail left behind by others, and in turn, leave a trail (although sometimes it's just a trail of bread-crumbs). Some, the nondual teachers, have come to recognize the oneness, by way sort of like a quantum leap that does not traverse either time or space, but appears seemingly without cause (this quantum nature of reality is scientifically well established, has been demonstrated to be accurate more than any other scientific theory in history). Not knowing how they came to be in the state they are, they claim that there is no way to get there. This is where error creeps in, and thus the paradox. Now, it's not a problem for those who are members of the "club", but it is a problem for the student, because there is a way, there is a path, there is a trail. It causes problems for the student, as they are left up s**t creek without a paddle. On the (Nondual) Enlightened side, there is looking backward and seeing no trail, true. On the un-Enlightened side there is looking forward, hearing that there is no trail, and feeling helpless. This is not-true, there is a path, mostly centered around working with attention and awareness, interior practices. So, the majority of my problem with nondual teaching is this paradox, the confusion it causes for students. And when I hear anyone say there is no way and nothing can be done, I know that they only have partial truth. The truth is that ego can do nothing, but this doesn't mean that nothing can be done. stardustpilgrim The timeless nature of realization doesn't have anything to do with quantum physics. Time, and therefore movement and progression, are illusions formed in mind, and the realization of oneness is prior to mind and it's temporal and spatial illusions. Realization is timeless because it's not conceptual mind that realizes. I think everybody has had the 'experience' of realizing something timelessly, as in the classic 'AHA!' moment of the scientist, but the noticing of the timeless nature of this realization also has to be noticed timelessly, since there is not a linear 'realization experience' that mind can recall. What is seen in the realization is seen whole and complete in the moment of seeing, and there is no concept about it until mind forms one, but the linear concept is not the realization, only a conceptual reflection of it. When a teacher wants to talk about a realization, he must 'look again now', and conceptualize what is seen timelessly, using mind and it's concepts. The teacher calls it a realization because it is not a time based reflection/conceptualization. He might say there is only the present moment because he realizes the illusory nature of linear time and how it is formed in mind. It's clear that this realization cannot be at the other end of a progression in time, and is therefore available here and now only. Any seeming progression is only a conceptual idea formed in mind, and no actual movement toward or away from this truth is possible. This is why some teachers will say that their seeking was irrelevant and had nothing to do with the realization. So he might say there is no path that leads to truth as one never left it and can't get closer to it. Imagining that something has to be done in order to arrive at truth then becomes an obstacle to this timeless realization. Attention is not turned toward what is so, now, because it is believed that a few more lifetimes of horse stances are required. It doesn't mean that nothing can be done so much as the doing is not the meaningful progression that it appears to be. It also doesn't mean that doing is not necessary in order to exhaust the doing or that an exploration of illusion is not required in order to release the attachment to, and focus on, these illusions. There is work to be done, and the work may increase the potential of realization, but it cannot be said that one can get closer to truth, as one IS the truth one seeks, and it cannot be said that the work is required in order for realization to occur as it is such ideas of progress that actually prevent the turning toward this realization. It cannot be said that any method, path or practice leads to realization, though it can be said that the appropriate path leads to the end of the seeking, which is the goal of the seeking. No seeking, as such, results in finding, only in the futility of the seeking. In this futility, attention is released from the seeking, and naturally turns toward what is always the case right now, which is the realization one was seeking. It was never hidden but only not attended to because of the belief that mind needs to do something, and therein lies the importance of pointing out that nothing needs to be done. It's not a prescription for doing nothing, but rather a pointer toward the fact that what is sought is already here. IOW, being "up sh*t creek without a paddle" is where you actually need to be. "Helpless and hopeless" is eggzakly what you should feel. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 3, 2012 13:53:08 GMT -5
There is work to be done, and the work may increase the potential of realization, but it cannot be said that one can get closer to truth, as one IS the truth one seeks, and it cannot be said that the work is required in order for realization to occur as it is such ideas of progress that actually prevent the turning toward this realization. I read this, and initially disagreed. But, after releasing the thought, I considered something else: could it be that the concept of 'process' gets confused for 'progress'? Speaking from my own experience, I can't say work is 'required'; I will say, however, that there is indeed a process going on, which often leaves me 'helpless and hopeless', hence, it sure as heck feels like 'work' to me. It's not 'required', but such would imply a choice, and choice would imply volition. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 3, 2012 14:51:51 GMT -5
There is work to be done, and the work may increase the potential of realization, but it cannot be said that one can get closer to truth, as one IS the truth one seeks, and it cannot be said that the work is required in order for realization to occur as it is such ideas of progress that actually prevent the turning toward this realization. I read this, and initially disagreed. But, after releasing the thought, I considered something else: could it be that the concept of 'process' gets confused for 'progress'? Yeah, I'll buy that. Maybe we could say that work is required in order to notice that work isn't required in the same way that suffering is necessary in order to realize that suffering isn't necessary. It's not a prescription of doing nothing, but a pointer to the futility of doing as a means to accomplish realization. I don't think 'work' or 'required' actually implies volition, it just says it (usually) needs to happen. The other idea of "nothing can be done" seems to point to nonvolition rather than the idea that there's nothing that needs to happen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 15:13:27 GMT -5
i suspect that the concept of folks being led astray and "doing nothing" is really just a myth. it sounds like a claim stemming from a defense of "doing something." trying to do either is just claiming ownership for stuff that is happening.
i've actually had fun trying to do nothing. Now I am going to take up the practice of not attending the actual.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 3, 2012 15:18:50 GMT -5
I read this, and initially disagreed. But, after releasing the thought, I considered something else: could it be that the concept of 'process' gets confused for 'progress'? Yeah, I'll buy that. Maybe we could say that work is required in order to notice that work isn't required in the same way that suffering is necessary in order to realize that suffering isn't necessary. It's not a prescription of doing nothing, but a pointer to the futility of doing as a means to accomplish realization. I don't think 'work' or 'required' actually implies volition, it just says it (usually) needs to happen. The other idea of "nothing can be done" seems to point to nonvolition rather than the idea that there's nothing that needs to happen. Oh, the difficulties of explaining such paradoxical stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2012 15:22:10 GMT -5
i at the same time i've also noticed a shift in interest in things like meditation. it's not the same sort of interest as it was before when i did it. it's fun and not relegated to sitting. it happens. I like this. I think a mistake people make sometimes is in thinking that the enlightened dont meditate or observe or ask questions or whatever. They do. They just do it without grandiose intent. They do it because it feels good and right to do it. They do it because its the most appropriate thing to do in the moment. As you say, it happens. As someone said the other day, something is always happening. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2012 15:23:23 GMT -5
For me it's developing the quality of the conscious attention, that needs to be worked on. If I have to use methods to do that, then it's not a problem. If I dump a method for a while and then go back to it, that's also not a problem. Whatever it takes to exercise that ability to focus the attention consciously, is not a problem. Not doing anything, is a problem. I like the energy of this too. |
|
|
|
Post by nobodyishome on Feb 3, 2012 15:34:12 GMT -5
OMG I got lost. I thought I was on the short and sweet thread and then I read E post and found out fast.
SDP I know exactly what you are saying. My own experience of teachers is similar. Take Tony P. He had this cloud of the unknowing and wanted to know so he did many things and then one day he walks through the park and bingo. If you research Tony more you will see he spent years after that experience/revelation trying to get it back. I feel strongly that we have a significant difference between a experience vs a revelation.
I think the danger is when we chase after experience. The wanting more concept will play with you forever.
I don't think awakening is that hard or difficult. We all awaken during the day. The thing is most of us simply don't see it so we miss it. As TRF said it's a attention thing but not a forced type of attention from my own journey. What I do daily is to simply go on with my day accepting and letting the day happen. This simple practice of mine to allow and accept and not add to helps a lot in dropping the idea of a "me"
NBisH
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 3, 2012 16:00:06 GMT -5
i suspect that the concept of folks being led astray and "doing nothing" is really just a myth. it sounds like a claim stemming from a defense of "doing something." trying to do either is just claiming ownership for stuff that is happening. Yeah, comes from the frustration of not having any way to get there, and it's not that folks are being told they can't get there so much that the one who is trying to get there is just an idea, and that one is already 'there'. As Steven has said, it's about where one (thinks) one is looking from. There....gave some credit to Steven. Hehe. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 3, 2012 16:02:17 GMT -5
Yeah, I'll buy that. Maybe we could say that work is required in order to notice that work isn't required in the same way that suffering is necessary in order to realize that suffering isn't necessary. It's not a prescription of doing nothing, but a pointer to the futility of doing as a means to accomplish realization. I don't think 'work' or 'required' actually implies volition, it just says it (usually) needs to happen. The other idea of "nothing can be done" seems to point to nonvolition rather than the idea that there's nothing that needs to happen. Oh, the difficulties of explaining such paradoxical stuff. I don't see it as paradox so much as misconception and assumption. |
|
