|
Post by earnest on Apr 4, 2013 23:40:11 GMT -5
What is being subtracted? Ideas about what is true. I'm a good/bad person, someone else is good/bad, circumstances are good/bad, shoulda woulda coulda etc. Would you be seeking to know your true nature if you were perfectly happy? A few things. Yeah cos (and this is stealing something I heard Richard Rose had said) I'm interested in what's beyond happy. I became *a lot* happier when the efforting of seeking died down (not that its all gone). There is a bittersweet sense of being homesick, and I want to go home.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Apr 5, 2013 0:06:58 GMT -5
So this non-abidance in mind is ATA? Yes, I think ZD would agree with that. cool beans and this side steps the saying one thing and wanting another? No, the moment you say you want something you're abiding in mind again. ah of couse, back into mind as soon you want something. I had thought that ATA was a form of surrender, that the simplicity of just attending to whats in front of you weakens all the mental gymnastics until it collapses. I'd be really interested to hear you speak more about this... By definition, it will eliminate the mental gymnastics if you can do it. If you can, there's no problem, also by definition. If you can't then purposefully weakening the mental gymnastics is what is called for. How that happens is by seeing through our self created illusions, and I say that happens by becoming conscious and noticing what in blazes is actually going on. cool I understand (at least in my head) what you mean. Thanks Enigma.
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Apr 5, 2013 0:12:29 GMT -5
Right. If I go up to someone staring at some birds intensely and I ask them why they're doing this and they tell me they're "ATA'ing", I would be inclined to ask why. If the answer, the real answer is about this activity creating or causing or altering their experience in some way there is self deception happening. This is mind purposefully going into low gear, temporarily shutting down overt thinking because it's thought that doing so will get it what it wants. This is mental gymnastics and THAT should be addressed rather than making bird watching into a full time activity. If on the other hand there is a natural inclination to let go to various degrees for various amounts of time and soak in what's going on outside of imagination, there is no issue. Tapping into that inclination more and more is like opening the veil and letting some light into the sanitorium. Thanks Silence, that made a lot of sense. The bit in bold is what I was on about when I said that I was becoming more interested in what was going on than my thoughts about what was going on.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 5, 2013 1:54:07 GMT -5
Yes, I think ZD would agree with that. cool beans No, the moment you say you want something you're abiding in mind again. ah of couse, back into mind as soon you want something. By definition, it will eliminate the mental gymnastics if you can do it. If you can, there's no problem, also by definition. If you can't then purposefully weakening the mental gymnastics is what is called for. How that happens is by seeing through our self created illusions, and I say that happens by becoming conscious and noticing what in blazes is actually going on. cool I understand (at least in my head) what you mean. Thanks Enigma. Cool beans.
|
|
|
Post by onehandclapping on Apr 5, 2013 3:48:33 GMT -5
Obviously, but to those not yet aware of that, they need to get their minds "out of the imagined way" to create the space needed to see that. Focusing on the moment and ignoring the mind might give that opportunity. They have to play with the dealt cards. If there is still an imagined self, might as well give it imagined tasks, to reach the imagined goal. I used to use Papaji's mantra of "stop" a lot before my shift. Then I'd stop trying to stop. And stop trying to try. Eventually if you follow that "thought line" long enough you seem to find yourself completely focused on what is real. ZD called it ATA if he is still on here. Sure, I'm in favor of creating that 'space'. Howsoever, what I've noticed is that the 'space' can't be empty. That is, what is seen in this space must somehow impact the conditioning that normally fills that space, or one finds oneself ATA'ing or 'being present'as a perpetual kind of meditation practice that always ends with mind returning to it's usual programming. I say what is needed is alert, thoughtless attention, with a focus provided by mind. Essentially, this is what is being suggested with the inquiry, 'Who am I', (which is a mind based question without a mind based answer) though that particular focus is not appropriate for everybody. I use that 'style of pointing' continuously. I talk to peeps about whatever they bring, which may not be what they think they're bringing. I figure rules are made to be broken. Mmmmm mmmm good..... Sounds like two sides of a single side coin having a conversation. I've found through ATA-ing that most of the programmed stuff has fallen away. Much more of the thoughtless attention as you call it, seemingly occurs. It kinda starts as a meditation type thing but transforms into a constant state of being. Explain further if you can in what you meant by "focus provided by the mind"? It's seemingly contradictory to "thoughtless attention" and yet you seem to be tying them together. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by topology on Apr 5, 2013 6:48:30 GMT -5
The intention and effort made to ATA must fall away at some point
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 5, 2013 8:00:15 GMT -5
The intention and effort made to ATA must fall away at some point Actually, what happens eventually is that the one who was imagined to be ATA'ing is seen through, and then it doesn't matter what is happening. It is realized that there is no person behind any activity, even ATA. That's why I said that everyone starts out under the illusion that there is a person who is meditating, ATA'ing, etc, but this illusion utlimately collapses, and all twoness comes to an end. From that point on there is neither oneness nor twoness because there is no longer any imagined separation. There is simply washing dishes, mowing the lawn, having dinner with friends, going to work, etc. The body/mind will still meditate, ATA, or think, but the previously imagined separation is no longer imagined. The body is intelligent, and it becomes obvious that ordinary everyday life is perfect just the way it is. (If the sage is in the middle of a war zone and is asked, "Is this perfect?" she will respond, "Shut up and pass the ammunition!") By the time the illusion of selfhood is seen through, imagination has been realized as the culprit that gave rise to the illusion of separation, so imagination plays a much smaller role in the life of the sage than in people who have not seen this. The sage, who is one-with the truth, is content with life however it manifests, acts appropriately, and is no longer jerked around by fantasies and other machinations of mind. Mind is a docile servant providing practical answers to practical questions, and no longer roams around in a world of complex layered abstractions. There is no longer any need to control thinking (because the imagined controller has vanished), but the body may enjoy sitting and looking at the world in mental silence (ATA) in the same way that a bird watcher may enjoy watching birds. There is no ulterior purpose in that activity; it is simply what the body does. If someone asks a sage, "Why do you sit and look at the world in silence?" the sage will simply smile.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Apr 5, 2013 8:48:21 GMT -5
The intention and effort made to ATA must fall away at some point Actually, what happens eventually is that the one who was imagined to be ATA'ing is seen through, and then it doesn't matter what is happening. It is realized that there is no person behind any activity, even ATA. That's why I said that everyone starts out under the illusion that there is a person who is meditating, ATA'ing, etc, but this illusion utlimately collapses, and all twoness comes to an end. From that point on there is neither oneness nor twoness because there is no longer any imagined separation. There is simply washing dishes, mowing the lawn, having dinner with friends, going to work, etc. The body/mind will still meditate, ATA, or think, but the previously imagined separation is no longer imagined. The body is intelligent, and it becomes obvious that ordinary everyday life is perfect just the way it is. (If the sage is in the middle of a war zone and is asked, "Is this perfect?" she will respond, "Shut up and pass the ammunition!") By the time the illusion of selfhood is seen through, imagination has been realized as the culprit that gave rise to the illusion of separation, so imagination plays a much smaller role in the life of the sage than in people who have not seen this. The sage, who is one-with the truth, is content with life however it manifests, acts appropriately, and is no longer jerked around by fantasies and other machinations of mind. Mind is a docile servant providing practical answers to practical questions, and no longer roams around in a world of complex layered abstractions. There is no longer any need to control thinking (because the imagined controller has vanished), but the body may enjoy sitting and looking at the world in mental silence (ATA) in the same way that a bird watcher may enjoy watching birds. There is no ulterior purpose in that activity; it is simply what the body does. If someone asks a sage, "Why do you sit and look at the world in silence?" the sage will simply smile. Geez, how I suddenly wish I could put things so simply. This is beautiful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2013 10:24:12 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. What I'm hearing is that you can't NOT be present. There is presence even in delusion. And the phenomenon of seemingly going in and out of presence is just the appearing and disappearing of that delusion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2013 10:33:02 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. Okay, we can make up a new term and call it True willingness and True sincerity. uh oh Well since I haven't been booted of the RH forum yet, and I assume the sincerity requirement there refers to the hallowed True Sincerity, doesn't this mean I've passed some sort of test? It was the willingness thing. It seems like willingness should belong to someone. If we're talking a universal willingness, belonging to no one except Oneness, I don't really understand why this particular manifestation/experience would lack it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2013 10:35:07 GMT -5
what E says about the unknown knowns is an unavoidable truth. What E is saying about unknown knowns remains unknown to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2013 10:40:36 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. This is what I figure. The the zoomed out perspective of seeing what is going on here as game-playing or lack of willingness or sincerity can only be imagined from this zoomed in perspective. I am willing to believe and have faith in this zoomed out perspective. Maybe that willingness to believe in a zoomed out perspective is because it is secretly rooted in True Willingness? But right now, call it game playing or lack of willingness or whatever, it's just what it is.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 5, 2013 11:06:58 GMT -5
Sure, I'm in favor of creating that 'space'. Howsoever, what I've noticed is that the 'space' can't be empty. That is, what is seen in this space must somehow impact the conditioning that normally fills that space, or one finds oneself ATA'ing or 'being present'as a perpetual kind of meditation practice that always ends with mind returning to it's usual programming. I say what is needed is alert, thoughtless attention, with a focus provided by mind. Essentially, this is what is being suggested with the inquiry, 'Who am I', (which is a mind based question without a mind based answer) though that particular focus is not appropriate for everybody. I use that 'style of pointing' continuously. I talk to peeps about whatever they bring, which may not be what they think they're bringing. I figure rules are made to be broken. Mmmmm mmmm good..... Sounds like two sides of a single side coin having a conversation. I've found through ATA-ing that most of the programmed stuff has fallen away. Much more of the thoughtless attention as you call it, seemingly occurs. It kinda starts as a meditation type thing but transforms into a constant state of being. I'm curious about this 'falling away'. Do you mean to say there's no clarity involved? Stuff just doesn't happen anymore? Sure, I'll use an example. The classic 'AHA!' moment comes about in a fascinating way. A scientist may work intensely on a problem, to no avail, and decide to take a nap, whereupon the answer occurs to him as a sudden realization. We wouldn't say that his intense thinking caused the realization, but we also wouldn't say his emptying the mind out due to mental exhaustion caused it either. What we can say about it is that his thinking about the problem amounts to a focus of consciousness on a particular question or issue, kinda like shining the light of awareness on a particular part of the content of Consciousness as a whole. The mind is this focusing mechanism. While he's thinking, this focus is very constricted by that thinking process and limited to the knowledge in his memory, but when the thinking relaxes, his attention expands, and it expands around that prior focus. We now have a subtle, expanded focus of attention without thought. This is the empty, open, (hopefully alert) attention without thought, which is our recipe for transcendent clarity, which just means it transcends the boundaries of the thinking mind. The clarity that the scientist experiences is the same clarity the seeker seeks, only the content is different. The religious devotee who contemplates an existential question, and then surrenders to God, and becomes receptive to his guidance, may well have a realization. The seeker who silently contemplates a similar question, and then empties his mind with the understanding that the answer was never in the mind to begin with, may also have a realization. Scientists, philosophers, poets, artists, seekers, mystics and lovers of God are all doing the same thing. This is the stuff of greatness, creativity and freedom, because it transcends the boundaries of the human mind.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 5, 2013 11:07:15 GMT -5
what E says about the unknown knowns is an unavoidable truth. What E is saying about unknown knowns remains unknown to me. Well you know me by now Max, and that was just me having a little fun, and I know you well enough by now to realize the likely possibility that you are too. In the interest of not propagating confusion and at the risk of working directly against that I'll add the following. Assuming that one has not realized what enigma was referring to, when they do realize, part of the realization will include the notion that what they realized was something that they actually knew all along. ie: an unknown known.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Apr 5, 2013 11:11:00 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, Here's the orignal quote: Seems to me that Gray Roshi completely rejects all questions coming from the patina experience level of existence. edit: "NOW what" isn't really asking "What am I going to do now?" It's way more profound. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Is it dangerous in the sense that there could be stuff that is happening that one does not like and by asking 'Now what?' the invitation is to keep putting one's attention on that stuff? What is trying to be avoided is being placed again back in center stage? Dear Dude/Dudette, TMT Alert! Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize
|
|