|
|
Post by zendancer on Feb 6, 2012 12:52:05 GMT -5
I dunno, Andrew. I've read and heard a lot of folk who have explained that we ARE like the leaf. And, I think, once one realizes that they ARE the leaf, they really don't want to go back to thinking anything otherwise.  It can be a nice metaphor, but in reality leaves dont consciously experience decision making, they dont experience intention, they dont experience interests, they dont argue rights and wrongs on internet forums, they dont experience 'this and that'. There are similarities between humans and leaves but there are also differences, some of which are wonderful differences and some perhaps less wonderful. I LOVE the idea of being totally and utterly surrendered to the flow of life in the way the leaf is, and I often talk about that potential (which ironically isnt always appreciated eh E?), but when I look at whats happening now, I see that even enlightened humans are still human and demonstrate basic human characteristics. If you could stop thinking for a while, you would appreciate the leaf analogy more fully. The unimaginable cannot be imagined. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 6, 2012 13:12:33 GMT -5
It can be a nice metaphor, but in reality leaves dont consciously experience decision making, they dont experience intention, they dont experience interests, they dont argue rights and wrongs on internet forums, they dont experience 'this and that'. There are similarities between humans and leaves but there are also differences, some of which are wonderful differences and some perhaps less wonderful. I LOVE the idea of being totally and utterly surrendered to the flow of life in the way the leaf is, and I often talk about that potential (which ironically isnt always appreciated eh E?), but when I look at whats happening now, I see that even enlightened humans are still human and demonstrate basic human characteristics. If you could stop thinking for a while, you would appreciate the leaf analogy more fully. The unimaginable cannot be imagined. I agree. The seemingly interminable problem around these parts is putting this stuff into words. Words lead to imagining, thinking, conceptualizing, and THIS is not something that can be experienced, conceptualized, manipulated, imagined, or even contemplated. It just IS. Seriously, I'm welling up, right now, with that realization. There's an entire universe of Peace to be found floating down the river like that proverbial leaf. But that Peace simply cannot be put into words. How could anyone or anything want for anything else? |
|
|
|
Post by freddy on Feb 6, 2012 13:15:53 GMT -5
To me, peace IS the good stuff. Why would we seek something that isnt good? I would say that the enlightened still seek but its on a moment by moment basis. They turn the tv on. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? I would say its because they seek to feel good. They open the fridge and get some orange juice out because they are thirsty. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? Again, I would say its because they seek to feel good. In this current reality in which the bodymind system experiences both attraction and aversion, there is always going to be seeking happening. There is the problem. You judge something by its appearence. When the enlightened (whatever that is) turns on the television he doesn't do it because of a free personal choice. You separate the enlightened from the whole, but this is false. There cannot be a part which stands separate from the whole (also it seems so). When you go out of bed in the morning then the entire whole, the universe that there is must be completly arranged for doing this. You cannot be the cause for an acting which is separate from the whole. So Zendancer is very right in saying, that thinking is not necessary for acting. The body is acting completly autonomous. You have no control over it and you need none. The entire picture in front of you fluids completly autonomous and therein lies the magic. The body is itsself only in the picture and not separate from it. The one who really realizes that one cannot be a separate cause for anything to do will naturely cease to have intentions or desires. And this is the wise man.  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 13:20:41 GMT -5
It can be a nice metaphor, but in reality leaves dont consciously experience decision making, they dont experience intention, they dont experience interests, they dont argue rights and wrongs on internet forums, they dont experience 'this and that'. There are similarities between humans and leaves but there are also differences, some of which are wonderful differences and some perhaps less wonderful. I LOVE the idea of being totally and utterly surrendered to the flow of life in the way the leaf is, and I often talk about that potential (which ironically isnt always appreciated eh E?), but when I look at whats happening now, I see that even enlightened humans are still human and demonstrate basic human characteristics. If you could stop thinking for a while, you would appreciate the leaf analogy more fully. The unimaginable cannot be imagined. I wouldnt suggest that it can be! I do appreciate the leaf analogy, I just think that practically speaking, leaves and humans have differences. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 13:26:35 GMT -5
To me, peace IS the good stuff. Why would we seek something that isnt good? I would say that the enlightened still seek but its on a moment by moment basis. They turn the tv on. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? I would say its because they seek to feel good. They open the fridge and get some orange juice out because they are thirsty. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? Again, I would say its because they seek to feel good. In this current reality in which the bodymind system experiences both attraction and aversion, there is always going to be seeking happening. There is the problem. You judge something by its appearence. When the enlightened (whatever that is) turns on the television he doesn't do it because of a free personal choice. You separate the enlightened from the whole, but this is false. There cannot be a part which stands separate from the whole (also it seems so). When you go out of bed in the morning then the entire whole, the universe that there is must be completly arranged for doing this. You cannot be the cause for an acting which is separate from the whole. So Zendancer is very right in saying, that thinking is not necessary for acting. The body is acting completly autonomous. You have no control over it and you need none. The entire picture in front of you fluids completly autonomous and therein lies the magic. The body is itsself only in the picture and not separate from it. The one who really realizes that one cannot be a separate cause for anything to do will naturely cease to have intentions or desires. And this is the wise man. I havent suggested that it IS a free personal choice. What I am suggesting is that the tv isnt turned on without reason, and that it doesnt get turned on because the interest is in feeling bad. I also havent suggested that when we get out of bed the universe HASNT arranged for that to happen. But I would say we get out of bed when the inclination to get out of bed is present. I also havent suggested that we have control over the body, though the experience IS one of having some control over the body. For example, this arm can be raised at will, and this attention can be directed with intent. I have seen 'no separate/individual cause' many times and can see it again if I want to. Its no big deal. What is relevant is the experience, and part of our human experience is experiencing separate/individual causes. Thats why even enlightened people get irritable with each other....they are perceiving separate/individual causes. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 6, 2012 13:32:00 GMT -5
To me, peace IS the good stuff. Why would we seek something that isnt good? I would say that the enlightened still seek but its on a moment by moment basis. They turn the tv on. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? I would say its because they seek to feel good. They open the fridge and get some orange juice out because they are thirsty. Why? Because they seek to feel bad? Again, I would say its because they seek to feel good. In this current reality in which the bodymind system experiences both attraction and aversion, there is always going to be seeking happening. There is the problem. You judge something by its appearence. When the enlightened (whatever that is) turns on the television he doesn't do it because of a free personal choice. You separate the enlightened from the whole, but this is false. There cannot be a part which stands separate from the whole (also it seems so). When you go out of bed in the morning then the entire whole, the universe that there is must be completly arranged for doing this. You cannot be the cause for an acting which is separate from the whole. So Zendancer is very right in saying, that thinking is not necessary for acting. The body is acting completly autonomous. You have no control over it and you need none. The entire picture in front of you fluids completly autonomous and therein lies the magic. The body is itsself only in the picture and not separate from it. The one who really realizes that one cannot be a separate cause for anything to do will naturely cease to have intentions or desires. And this is the wise man. I have to agree with Freddy, here, Andrew--you do seem to be one very focused on appearances. Not that anyone is judging such as 'wrong', or that it makes you culpable in any way, but it does go a long way to explain why there is difficulty in communication between you and some of the rest of us here. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 14:04:56 GMT -5
There is the problem. You judge something by its appearence. When the enlightened (whatever that is) turns on the television he doesn't do it because of a free personal choice. You separate the enlightened from the whole, but this is false. There cannot be a part which stands separate from the whole (also it seems so). When you go out of bed in the morning then the entire whole, the universe that there is must be completly arranged for doing this. You cannot be the cause for an acting which is separate from the whole. So Zendancer is very right in saying, that thinking is not necessary for acting. The body is acting completly autonomous. You have no control over it and you need none. The entire picture in front of you fluids completly autonomous and therein lies the magic. The body is itsself only in the picture and not separate from it. The one who really realizes that one cannot be a separate cause for anything to do will naturely cease to have intentions or desires. And this is the wise man. I have to agree with Freddy, here, Andrew--you do seem to be one very focused on appearances. Not that anyone is judging such as 'wrong', or that it makes you culpable in any way, but it does go a long way to explain why there is difficulty in communication between you and some of us the rest of us here.[/quote **** Thats cool, I mean I probably do focus on appearances more than most here. In the end, focusing happens, right? Something is always being focused on, and I struggle to see the point in focusing on something that CANT be focused upon by definition. So I am very practical these days. For me, its all about the love, the joy, the peace, the ease, the bliss, the clarity, the presence. I guess it always has been, but in the old days I didnt value the quality of my experience directly, I valued it indirectly i.e. I prioritized self-image and being right. As such, the quality of my experience was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant, a lot less meaningful...and a lot more empty. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Feb 6, 2012 14:49:57 GMT -5
There is the problem. You judge something by its appearence. When the enlightened (whatever that is) turns on the television he doesn't do it because of a free personal choice. You separate the enlightened from the whole, but this is false. There cannot be a part which stands separate from the whole (also it seems so). When you go out of bed in the morning then the entire whole, the universe that there is must be completly arranged for doing this. You cannot be the cause for an acting which is separate from the whole. So Zendancer is very right in saying, that thinking is not necessary for acting. The body is acting completly autonomous. You have no control over it and you need none. The entire picture in front of you fluids completly autonomous and therein lies the magic. The body is itsself only in the picture and not separate from it. The one who really realizes that one cannot be a separate cause for anything to do will naturely cease to have intentions or desires. And this is the wise man. I have to agree with Freddy, here, Andrew--you do seem to be one very focused on appearances. Not that anyone is judging such as 'wrong', or that it makes you culpable in any way, but it does go a long way to explain why there is difficulty in communication between you and some of us the rest of us here. I agree, and it seems like folks disagreeing on appearances and what's real, is just another appearance... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by desertrat on Feb 6, 2012 16:02:48 GMT -5
You know instead of discussing this hear we could be manifesting all ind of stuff . Once , while just goofing around I asked for a 30 pac. of beer , I found about half a 30 pac of bud light in a store parking lot . I think beer and enlightenment are on different ends of the spectrum , but I did get some thing . desert rat
|
|
|
|
Post by freddy on Feb 6, 2012 16:31:59 GMT -5
Thats cool, I mean I probably do focus on appearances more than most here. In the end, focusing happens, right? Something is always being focused on, and I struggle to see the point in focusing on something that CANT be focused upon by definition. So I am very practical these days. For me, its all about the love, the joy, the peace, the ease, the bliss, the clarity, the presence. I guess it always has been, but in the old days I didnt value the quality of my experience directly, I valued it indirectly i.e. I prioritized self-image and being right. As such, the quality of my experience was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant, a lot less meaningful...and a lot more empty.So and now ? Does it matter to you if there was an experience which quality was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant and a lot less meanigful ? Does I understand you right, that you are worrying about the experience that it should be better ? (no offence here) |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 16:46:06 GMT -5
Thats cool, I mean I probably do focus on appearances more than most here. In the end, focusing happens, right? Something is always being focused on, and I struggle to see the point in focusing on something that CANT be focused upon by definition. So I am very practical these days. For me, its all about the love, the joy, the peace, the ease, the bliss, the clarity, the presence. I guess it always has been, but in the old days I didnt value the quality of my experience directly, I valued it indirectly i.e. I prioritized self-image and being right. As such, the quality of my experience was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant, a lot less meaningful...and a lot more empty.So and now ? Does it matter to you if there was an experience which quality was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant and a lot less meanigful ? Does I understand you right, that you are worrying about the experience that it should be better ? (no offence here) Thats cool....no offence, no, it doesnt matter to me that there was an experience that was a lot less rich etc. If anything I am grateful for that experience. Equally Im not worrying that my current experience should be better. I can see/feel where (or who/what) I would like to be in the not too distant future, yet am also happy to take it as it comes, one step at a time. |
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Feb 6, 2012 17:58:06 GMT -5
So and now ? Does it matter to you if there was an experience which quality was a lot less rich, a lot less vibrant and a lot less meanigful ? Does I understand you right, that you are worrying about the experience that it should be better ? (no offence here) Thats cool....no offence, no, it doesnt matter to me that there was an experience that was a lot less rich etc. If anything I am grateful for that experience. Equally Im not worrying that my current experience should be better. I can see/feel where (or who/what) I would like to be in the not too distant future, yet am also happy to take it as it comes, one step at a time. Can you see/feel that the thought to be something different in the future is also an appearance? What if there was no future? What if there were Just thoughts and appearances about the future? Does anyone actually reach the future? Or isn't it always just the now? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2012 3:04:49 GMT -5
Thats cool....no offence, no, it doesnt matter to me that there was an experience that was a lot less rich etc. If anything I am grateful for that experience. Equally Im not worrying that my current experience should be better. I can see/feel where (or who/what) I would like to be in the not too distant future, yet am also happy to take it as it comes, one step at a time. Can you see/feel that the thought to be something different in the future is also an appearance? What if there was no future? What if there were Just thoughts and appearances about the future? Does anyone actually reach the future? Or isn't it always just the now? I can see that there are thoughts and appearances about the future and I can see that its always just the now (I was heavily into Eckhart Tolle for a long time!) However, regardless of whether or not 'the future' is an illusion and a delusion, thoughts about the future happen. As humans we make plans to go on vacation, we set intention to go to the grocery store to get dinner for dinner. We decide to get out of bed and make breakfast. We all have clocks in our house I bet. When I looked really closely at what I was doing I could see I was using a lot of effort to somehow NOT look to the future, but actually this effort was coming from fear and in its own way, was STILL looking to the future. I was trying to control my mind. Looking to the future happens, its really quite unavoidable for humans and I dont have an issue with it anymore even though I can see (if I look) that the future is an illusion/delusion. I dont worry about the mind anymore really, and neither do I care if there is some illusion/delusion happening. I work with the mind these days to produce a good quality experience, and if that means looking an an illusionary future sometimes, then so be it. I think the danger is confusing 'the now' with time when its not, it is prior to time. So the past, the present and future are all as illusionary as each other. In my opinion, we can reside peacefully and joyfully in the now and still look to the future, and actually looking to the future is just as delusionary as looking to the present. |
|
|
|
Post by exactamente on Feb 7, 2012 3:15:06 GMT -5
I think the danger is confusing 'the now' with time when its not, it is prior to time. So the past, the present and future are all as illusionary as each other. In my opinion, we can reside peacefully and joyfully in the now and still look to the future, and actually looking to the future is just as delusionary as looking to the present. Right. Past present and future is mind-ing, they all need reference points. Truthin' can only be NOW - it stands for itself, no room for reference points. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2012 9:10:14 GMT -5
I think the danger is confusing 'the now' with time when its not, it is prior to time. So the past, the present and future are all as illusionary as each other. In my opinion, we can reside peacefully and joyfully in the now and still look to the future, and actually looking to the future is just as delusionary as looking to the present. Right. Past present and future is mind-ing, they all need reference points. Truthin' can only be NOW - it stands for itself, no room for reference points. Ya. Still not quite sure about that 'truthin' word but if Im interpreting you right here, then I agree. |
|
