|
Post by enigma on Apr 4, 2013 12:45:45 GMT -5
The realizations are not articulated so that answers can be found but so that questions can be dissolved in the seeing of that which is pointed to by the articulation. If your attempt to simply be present were perpetually successful, the articulation of the realizations would not be necessary, but the questions remain, and these questions entangle mind without asking permission. I don't care for the notion 'I'll see it when I see it'. The truth is, you'll see it when you are willing to see it, so there is a bit of gaming going on. I don't think I understand that. I refer to 'I'll see it when I see it' as an acceptance that Realization can not be understood, only lived. I can not speak confidently about Oneness or Unilimited Intelligence or Conscious creating everything because these remain as concepts to me, they are not lived, there has been no realization. I'm not sure what you mean when you say it has to be lived. Realizations are simply realized when there is the willingness to look and to see. Nothing else is required and time is not a factor. I don't mean the willingness to accept the truth of it, I mean the willingness to see what you hide from yourself. Along with realization comes the understanding that you already knew all along, and it's this absurdity which leads to the Buddha belly laugh. So I'm saying you already know and are playing the game of pretending not to know. Part of this game is to say 'I'll see it when I see it'. This isn't about finding Truth, it's about putting an end to the game. Yes, though being present is not the goal. You are already present and can't not be present, and such will become irrelevant to you once that's realized. 'Being present' is another means to an end.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 12:46:12 GMT -5
Seems like that post is talking about if you had to do verbal self inquiry how that works for you. I was wondering where/how you see mind fitting into your version of inquiry.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Apr 4, 2013 12:58:52 GMT -5
Seems like that post is talking about if you had to do verbal self inquiry how that works for you. I was wondering where/how you see mind fitting into your version of inquiry. It doesn't seem to, anymore, and if it does, it only echoes the inquiry.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:00:40 GMT -5
Okay. What I'm getting at is whether the discovery of what's true seems like something that's unfolding and becoming true now or are you discovering that what's true has always been true. In other words, it's very different to say "I was once the chooser and now I lost it" vs. "I discovered there never really was a chooser but choosing happens anyway". Okay, well, your use of the phrase 'what's true' throws me off a little, here, as 'what's true' is synonymous with 'what is', though 'what is' is neither true nor false (if that makes any sense). 'What is' is ... well, all there is. That said, I can perhaps answer the rest of your question by saying that 'what is' has always been, and shall ever be 'what is'. Such is rarely realized, and the practice of self-inquiry (whether a chosen act, or not) has certainly helped me to realize it. What's really 'unfolding' is the release of the attachment to the self that thinks it's discovered or discovering anything. And, indeed, your comparison is clear, though I cannot rez with either sentiment, myself. I am more like, "I thought there was a chooser, and so I chose, but through that very choice, realized that there never was a chooser" (if that makes any sense). Discovery of what's true is just another way of talking about the absence of what isn't. I don't actually mean to make it into an object like a oneness blob or anything like that. The sentiments are just ways of illustrating what I'm talking about rather than statements to hold internally. In regards to releasing attachment, I do understand but I would say that there really is a sense of discovery happening. It's happening every moment of your life. The entire meaning and purpose of your life is what you're doing right now. When we start getting into this perpetual releasing attachment mode, it can seem never ending. It's enough to recognize that you never become what you already are but that you can have the experience of forgetting and discovering yourself. On the sidelines there might be a little voice trying to claim that discovery but it need only be recognized for the silly little voice that it is rather than a serious threat that needs years of attachment release strategies.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Apr 4, 2013 13:02:38 GMT -5
Okay, well, your use of the phrase 'what's true' throws me off a little, here, as 'what's true' is synonymous with 'what is', though 'what is' is neither true nor false (if that makes any sense). 'What is' is ... well, all there is. That said, I can perhaps answer the rest of your question by saying that 'what is' has always been, and shall ever be 'what is'. Such is rarely realized, and the practice of self-inquiry (whether a chosen act, or not) has certainly helped me to realize it. What's really 'unfolding' is the release of the attachment to the self that thinks it's discovered or discovering anything. And, indeed, your comparison is clear, though I cannot rez with either sentiment, myself. I am more like, "I thought there was a chooser, and so I chose, but through that very choice, realized that there never was a chooser" (if that makes any sense). Discovery of what's true is just another way of talking about the absence of what isn't. I don't actually mean to make it into an object like a oneness blob or anything like that. The sentiments are just ways of illustrating what I'm talking about rather than statements to hold internally. In regards to releasing attachment, I do understand but I would say that there really is a sense of discovery happening. It's happening every moment of your life. The entire meaning and purpose of your life is what you're doing right now. When we start getting into this perpetual releasing attachment mode, it can seem never ending. It's enough to recognize that you never become what you already are but that you can have the experience of forgetting and discovering yourself. On the sidelines there might be a little voice trying to claim that discovery but it need only be recognized for the silly little voice that it is rather than a serious threat that needs years of attachment release strategies. Yep. Can't argue against that.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:07:05 GMT -5
+1 I've been rezzing with everything you've said for a while now. Inquiry is mental activity attempting to resolve a tension. It is not the mind at rest. Applying the verb "rest" to the mind can mean two different things that are pretty much opposites of each other. On one hand, it can be used to describe a state that is comfortable and stable based on belief ... on the other hand, it can be used to describe, as I infer you meant there, a mind that is quiet. For example, in this book, the primary prescription of the author is "arouse the mind without resting it on anything". My experience is that inquiry done in the context of the first meaning is not really inquiry and inquiry done in which the mind is not in a state as described by the second meaning will not result in "progress" as it will "be unfruitful", for want of a better way to express this atm. I'd say we can talk about mind as being something that's not ever truly at rest which can be a very good pointer for people waiting around for such a time when mind turns into some calm tensionless stuffed animal. Then we can also talk about the very real possibility of mind not looking around for things gone missing, grasping at anything to solve imaginary problems. There's still a necessary level of tension happening which makes life possible but the perpetual neurotic anxiety has ceased.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:08:50 GMT -5
... well then obviously you are a deluded little-forum-punk who is clearly unconscious and takes everything personal and yer feet stink too ... Actually, other friends think I'm just 'out to lunch'. I think you actively play into that description.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:13:19 GMT -5
No sympathies necessary. My ears have rung ever since I could remember, so I don't even notice it, 99% of the time. It's not really much of a problem. Didn't we establish earlier that tinnitis was the mark of Realization? Nope, now it's migraines. Gotta pass the migraine test.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:15:04 GMT -5
I hear you and others talking about Oneness and how Consciousness creates everything, Unlimited Potential or Intelligence, and things like that, and I wonder how important those understandings are to straight up presence. When I'm honed in on Presence, all thoughts are seen for what they are -- just passing appearances, like everything else. So these profound attempts to articulate realizations, just come and go away. What's more, I figure it doesn't matter -- those things are realized or they aren't. 'I'll see it when I see it' (and this may be never). You don't need to understand ANYTHING to be present.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2013 13:18:28 GMT -5
Okay, well, your use of the phrase 'what's true' throws me off a little, here, as 'what's true' is synonymous with 'what is', though 'what is' is neither true nor false (if that makes any sense). 'What is' is ... well, all there is. That said, I can perhaps answer the rest of your question by saying that 'what is' has always been, and shall ever be 'what is'. Such is rarely realized, and the practice of self-inquiry (whether a chosen act, or not) has certainly helped me to realize it. What's really 'unfolding' is the release of the attachment to the self that thinks it's discovered or discovering anything. And, indeed, your comparison is clear, though I cannot rez with either sentiment, myself. I am more like, "I thought there was a chooser, and so I chose, but through that very choice, realized that there never was a chooser" (if that makes any sense). Discovery of what's true is just another way of talking about the absence of what isn't. I don't actually mean to make it into an object like a oneness blob or anything like that. The sentiments are just ways of illustrating what I'm talking about rather than statements to hold internally. In regards to releasing attachment, I do understand but I would say that there really is a sense of discovery happening. It's happening every moment of your life. The entire meaning and purpose of your life is what you're doing right now. When we start getting into this perpetual releasing attachment mode, it can seem never ending. It's enough to recognize that you never become what you already are but that you can have the experience of forgetting and discovering yourself. On the sidelines there might be a little voice trying to claim that discovery but it need only be recognized for the silly little voice that it is rather than a serious threat that needs years of attachment release strategies. But you are turning truth into a oneness blob whether you mean to or not, by explaining your thought system on the matter aren't you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2013 13:19:03 GMT -5
I don't think I understand that. I refer to 'I'll see it when I see it' as an acceptance that Realization can not be understood, only lived. I can not speak confidently about Oneness or Unilimited Intelligence or Conscious creating everything because these remain as concepts to me, they are not lived, there has been no realization. I'm not sure what you mean when you say it has to be lived. Realizations are simply realized when there is the willingness to look and to see. Nothing else is required and time is not a factor. What you mean by a "willingness to look and see" is sort of a puzzler to me. It's sort of like the 'sincerity' business. From my perspective there is willingness and sincerity. But obviously if the fruits of the willingness and sincerity you are speaking of are to realize some of that aforementioned stuff, it's not the same willingness and sincerity. Yes I see 'putting and end to the game' as similar to the willingness and sincerity differences. In your use of the terms, who is willing or not willing, who can put and end to the game or not put an end to the game? From my perspective, there is willingness, and there is no game of pretending not to know. I think I understand what your saying. Re: the pendulum perspective. 'Being present' aids in the shift of perspective.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:22:48 GMT -5
Discovery of what's true is just another way of talking about the absence of what isn't. I don't actually mean to make it into an object like a oneness blob or anything like that. The sentiments are just ways of illustrating what I'm talking about rather than statements to hold internally. In regards to releasing attachment, I do understand but I would say that there really is a sense of discovery happening. It's happening every moment of your life. The entire meaning and purpose of your life is what you're doing right now. When we start getting into this perpetual releasing attachment mode, it can seem never ending. It's enough to recognize that you never become what you already are but that you can have the experience of forgetting and discovering yourself. On the sidelines there might be a little voice trying to claim that discovery but it need only be recognized for the silly little voice that it is rather than a serious threat that needs years of attachment release strategies. But you are turning truth into a oneness blob whether you mean to or not, by explaining your thought system on the matter aren't you? Are you hoping to have a conversation about the limitations of language?
|
|
|
Post by silence on Apr 4, 2013 13:28:37 GMT -5
What you mean by a "willingness to look and see" is sort of a puzzler to me. It's sort of like the 'sincerity' business. From my perspective there is willingness and sincerity. But obviously if the fruits of the willingness and sincerity you are speaking of are to realize some of that aforementioned stuff, it's not the same willingness and sincerity. If you zoomed all the way out so to speak it would be obvious that the situation is not what it seems. In other words, you're pretending not to know what you already know. Zoom back down again and there very well may be willingness and sincerity present but likely only to see a very limited amount at a time. In any case it's never about waiting for God to slam his gavel and grant you realization. It's about catching on to the very game you're playing. Once you're on to yourself it's much more difficult to keep the sharade going.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2013 13:34:02 GMT -5
I'm not sure what you mean when you say it has to be lived. Realizations are simply realized when there is the willingness to look and to see. Nothing else is required and time is not a factor. What you mean by a "willingness to look and see" is sort of a puzzler to me. It's sort of like the 'sincerity' business. From my perspective there is willingness and sincerity. But obviously if the fruits of the willingness and sincerity you are speaking of are to realize some of that aforementioned stuff, it's not the same willingness and sincerity. Yes I see 'putting and end to the game' as similar to the willingness and sincerity differences. In your use of the terms, who is willing or not willing, who can put and end to the game or not put an end to the game? From my perspective, there is willingness, and there is no game of pretending not to know. I think I understand what your saying. Re: the pendulum perspective. 'Being present' aids in the shift of perspective. I'm stilling wondering how 'Being present' is another means to an end of 'Being present'?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 4, 2013 13:37:25 GMT -5
Applying the verb "rest" to the mind can mean two different things that are pretty much opposites of each other. On one hand, it can be used to describe a state that is comfortable and stable based on belief ... on the other hand, it can be used to describe, as I infer you meant there, a mind that is quiet. For example, in this book, the primary prescription of the author is "arouse the mind without resting it on anything". My experience is that inquiry done in the context of the first meaning is not really inquiry and inquiry done in which the mind is not in a state as described by the second meaning will not result in "progress" as it will "be unfruitful", for want of a better way to express this atm. I'd say we can talk about mind as being something that's not ever truly at rest which can be a very good pointer for people waiting around for such a time when mind turns into some calm tensionless stuffed animal. Then we can also talk about the very real possibility of mind not looking around for things gone missing, grasping at anything to solve imaginary problems. There's still a necessary level of tension happening which makes life possible but the perpetual neurotic anxiety has ceased. ooooh yeah
|
|