|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2012 11:45:01 GMT -5
You see how angry sdp gets when I even hint at the ultimate futility of all of it. It makes you angry too, because it leaves you with a tool box full of useless tools. It leaves Steven angry because he's left with a book of 10,000 futile practices. I dont have an issue with the idea of ultimate futility of all of it. I just dont think you can see the boundaries of the practice you offer. To say that it's all futile is to say all practices have a boundary. Namely, that they're futile. That's why I don't offer a practice, just a pointer. |
|
|
|
Post by exactamente on Feb 5, 2012 11:54:24 GMT -5
And the funny thing is, if he has done his 10,000 practices over 10,000 years and suddenly sees clearly, others like him will say it's because of his practices that he now sees clearly. No. Buddha said there is such a thing as right mindfulness. Meaning, any-ole-practice doesn't get results. Right mindfulness gets results (one Buddha said, is freedom from suffering). sdp And who was he talking to? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 11:55:21 GMT -5
I dont have an issue with the idea of ultimate futility of all of it. I just dont think you can see the boundaries of the practice you offer. What practice does he offer? I see him only talking about noticing which he admits is effortless. How do you practice effortlessness? The specific practice is noticing 'what isnt true'. The degree of effort is really irrelevant, it takes no effort to sit quietly and focus on the breath. |
|
|
|
Post by exactamente on Feb 5, 2012 11:58:07 GMT -5
What practice does he offer? I see him only talking about noticing which he admits is effortless. How do you practice effortlessness? The specific practice is noticing 'what isnt true'. The degree of effort is really irrelevant, it takes no effort to sit quietly and focus on the breath. Focusing willingly is also effort. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2012 12:00:36 GMT -5
You can't make yourself want what you don't want, because you don't want to. If there is even a small part of you (or anyone else) that wants something, it can be made more compelling and attractive. For example, there are many that SAY they want to lose weight but really its only a small part of them that does. They can see logically and rationally and intelligently that losing weight is a good option, they just dont really want to lose weight. There are ways of making the small part compelling and attractive and at the same time create an adversity to the formerly big part. This can be applied to enlightenment. Its a way of dealing with self-sabotage if we notice it but cant seem to get beyond it. It's not that they don't want to lose weight, or that just a small part of them wants to lose weight, it's that they want to have their cake and eat it too, and splitting the mind seems to be the way to do that, but only if the process remains unconscious. Splitting the mind consciously is insane. Being very clear about the internal battle will end the battle, which is an example of stuff falling away when it's noticed. In that clarity, it can go either way. We may discover we're not sincere about truthin and go off looking for a one-ended stick, or we may find that the split mind was just an unconscious defense, and that obstacle is removed in the seeing. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 5, 2012 12:02:25 GMT -5
No. Buddha said there is such a thing as right mindfulness. Meaning, any-ole-practice doesn't get results. Right mindfulness gets results (one Buddha said, is freedom from suffering). sdp And who was he talking to? Anybody and everybody. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 12:02:35 GMT -5
I dont have an issue with the idea of ultimate futility of all of it. I just dont think you can see the boundaries of the practice you offer. To say that it's all futile is to say all practices have a boundary. Namely, that they're futile. That's why I don't offer a practice, just a pointer. Seeing the futility of practices can be a helpful thing to see once in a while, I dont think that seeing that is enough to release disidentification though. Your difficulty is that part of what you suggest people do is notice the futility of practices, so you have to somehow find a way of talking about what you offer as something other than a practice! It is a practice, and it has very clear boundaries and problems. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 12:03:49 GMT -5
The specific practice is noticing 'what isnt true'. The degree of effort is really irrelevant, it takes no effort to sit quietly and focus on the breath. Focusing willingly is also effort. Im not sure it takes 'will' as such to focus on the breath. Maybe just intent. It takes just as much intent to notice 'what isnt true', maybe more so. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 5, 2012 12:04:03 GMT -5
I dont have an issue with the idea of ultimate futility of all of it. I just dont think you can see the boundaries of the practice you offer. I just wanted to make a copy of this........ ;D ............ sdp |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2012 12:04:04 GMT -5
And the funny thing is, if he has done his 10,000 practices over 10,000 years and suddenly sees clearly, others like him will say it's because of his practices that he now sees clearly. No. Buddha said there is such a thing as right mindfulness. Meaning, any-ole-practice doesn't get results. Right mindfulness gets results (one Buddha said, is freedom from suffering). sdp But it doesn't get results. There's no enlightenment practice. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2012 12:05:28 GMT -5
You can't make yourself want what you don't want, because you don't want to. That's quite true, quite profound, and actually a paraphrase of Schopenhauer (who understood man's predicament, but had no solutions). sdp I have no solutions either, except perhaps to notice there are no solutions. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 12:08:22 GMT -5
If there is even a small part of you (or anyone else) that wants something, it can be made more compelling and attractive. For example, there are many that SAY they want to lose weight but really its only a small part of them that does. They can see logically and rationally and intelligently that losing weight is a good option, they just dont really want to lose weight. There are ways of making the small part compelling and attractive and at the same time create an adversity to the formerly big part. This can be applied to enlightenment. Its a way of dealing with self-sabotage if we notice it but cant seem to get beyond it. It's not that they don't want to lose weight, or that just a small part of them wants to lose weight, it's that they want to have their cake and eat it too, and splitting the mind seems to be the way to do that, but only if the process remains unconscious. Splitting the mind consciously is insane. Being very clear about the internal battle will end the battle, which is an example of stuff falling away when it's noticed. In that clarity, it can go either way. We may discover we're not sincere about truthin and go off looking for a one-ended stick, or we may find that the split mind was just an unconscious defense, and that obstacle is removed in the seeing. It is that they dont want to lose weight and they do want to lose weight, its basically a conflict of interests and values - but yes, I agree that in that sense it is a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Seeing the internal battle clearly doesnt necessarily end the battle. I could give many examples of people who see an internal battle clearly but havent found a way to resolve it. Ive been there myself. There are great tools to be used to resolve self-sabotage these days though. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 12:09:44 GMT -5
That's quite true, quite profound, and actually a paraphrase of Schopenhauer (who understood man's predicament, but had no solutions). sdp I have no solutions either, except perhaps to notice there are no solutions. That solution aint gonna work for most people. Its just gonna create intellectual non-dualists that are all style over substance, and understanding over love. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 5, 2012 12:10:31 GMT -5
No. Buddha said there is such a thing as right mindfulness. Meaning, any-ole-practice doesn't get results. Right mindfulness gets results (one Buddha said, is freedom from suffering). sdp And who was he talking to? Peeps who weren't in their right mind? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by exactamente on Feb 5, 2012 12:11:13 GMT -5
Focusing willingly is also effort. Im not sure it takes 'will' as such to focus on the breath. Maybe just intent. It takes just as much intent to notice 'what isnt true', maybe more so. No. It's your natural state and therefore effortless. Clinging to maya requires hard work and effort. |
|
