|
|
Post by amit on Jun 10, 2013 4:38:09 GMT -5
Hi trf, Not if there is only Mind/Oneness. In would be mind/Oneness that is aware of itself. amit Oh, you mean like Mind/Oneness is dependent on what we are, but what we are is not dependent on Mind/Oneness? Hi trf, That is not what was meant. From a nondual perspective there is no 'we', just Oneness/Mind appearing as all, 'attaching itself' to itself as the appearance of difference where there is none. amit |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 10, 2013 11:03:33 GMT -5
Onenessblob.com doesn't exist......Hmmmm, I'm beginning to think oneness isn't the truth.  Dear Dude/Dudette, There's a onenessblog.com which may or may not dispel such doubts. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize If they can't spell 'blob' right, it doesn't really inspire confidence so much really. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 10, 2013 11:11:15 GMT -5
Onenessblob.com doesn't exist......Hmmmm, I'm beginning to think oneness isn't the truth. can help renew your faith, hehe. 806,000 awakened! Well, that's pudding proof right there! Why haven't I heard about this on the evening news?  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 10, 2013 11:15:09 GMT -5
Onenessblob.com doesn't exist......Hmmmm, I'm beginning to think oneness isn't the truth. There's also this: oneness blob realization. Step two is where it's at. That's it! Uni......verse. Why didn't I think of that?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 11:39:57 GMT -5
Oh, you mean like Mind/Oneness is dependent on what we are, but what we are is not dependent on Mind/Oneness? Hi trf, That is not what was meant. From a nondual perspective there is no 'we', just Oneness/Mind appearing as all, 'attaching itself' to itself as the appearance of difference where there is none. amit Oh, so you mean a non-dual perspective is appearing and disappearing in what we are? |
|
|
|
Post by amit on Jun 11, 2013 1:05:19 GMT -5
Hi trf, That is not what was meant. From a nondual perspective there is no 'we', just Oneness/Mind appearing as all, 'attaching itself' to itself as the appearance of difference where there is none. amit Oh, so you mean a non-dual perspective is appearing and disappearing in what we are? Hi trf, Please see my last post for a response to the 'we' question. amit |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 11, 2013 22:35:43 GMT -5
That's it! Uni......verse. Why didn't I think of that? Far out. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 6, 2016 19:07:34 GMT -5
.......bumped for Gopal also......
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 7, 2016 9:37:31 GMT -5
Spencer Brown in "Laws of Form" has these interesting statements:
"unus=one, vertere=turn. Any given (or captivated) universe is what is seen as the result of a making of one turn, and thus is the appearance of any first distinction, and only a minor aspect of all being, apparent and non-apparent. It's particularity is the price we pay for its visibility."
"Thus we cannot escape the fact that the world we know is constructed in order (and thus in such a way as to be able) to see itself. This is indeed amazing. Not so much in view of what it sees, although this may appear fantastic enough, but in respect of the fact that it can see at all.
But in order to do so, evidently it must first cut itself up into at least one state that sees, and at least one other state that is seen. In this severed and mutilated condition, whatever it sees is only partially itself......in any attempt to see itself as an object, it must, equally undoubtedly, act so as to make itself distinct from , and therefore false to, itself. In this condition it will always partially elude itself."
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 16, 2021 18:14:29 GMT -5
Visiting the past, which happens to be current. We all know what thinking is, we spend the majority of our time there. Words just rattle around up there, a continuous stream of sense or nonsense, symbolic abstract representation at least once removed from reality. That's the function of the superficial layer of mind (other functions are emotion, and acts via muscular movement). But there is another way to live. What is deeper than thought? What is prior to thought? Your awareness is separate from thought. Your attention is separate from thought. The problem is that one's attention and one's awareness become the slave of thought, the deeper aspect of our being is subjected to the more shallow. Now, you can't function in the world without minimal awareness of your exterior surroundings. The question is, what do you value? Now, you have to get a taste of the difference between living mostly through thought, OTOH, and living primarily through one's awareness OTOH. We are thoroughly familiar with what it means to live through thought. You can begin exploring living through awareness by sensing, or watching one's breath. Try something simple, we all almost always have tension is our facial muscles. Right now, for a few seconds, become aware of the tension in your face. Or become aware of the pressure of your body against your chair as you sit. What happens when you try these? Thoughts almost immediately pop up. Thoughts just magically appear in the space a little above and behind your eyes. Now you have a choice, you can continue to live 'as normal', through your thoughts (which are necessarily at least once removed from reality), or you can take back your awareness, and live primarily through your awareness, secondarily through thought. But you have to really get a feel for the distinction, a taste, and value one over the other, or else you will simply disappear back into ordinary life. One thing you can try anytime when you think to do so, ask yourself where your attention is. These are just words. You have to actually explore this for yourself, find it in yourself. It is possible to find the deeper and more essential in yourself. sdp |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Aug 17, 2021 7:45:16 GMT -5
We all know what thinking is, we spend the majority of our time there. Words just rattle around up there, a continuous stream of sense or nonsense, symbolic abstract representation at least once removed from reality. That's the function of the superficial layer of mind (other functions are emotion, and acts via muscular movement). But there is another way to live. What is deeper than thought? What is prior to thought? Your awareness is separate from thought. Your attention is separate from thought. The problem is that one's attention and one's awareness become the slave of thought, the deeper aspect of our being is subjected to the more shallow. Now, you can't function in the world without minimal awareness of your exterior surroundings. The question is, what do you value? Now, you have to get a taste of the difference between living mostly through thought, OTOH, and living primarily through one's awareness OTOH. We are thoroughly familiar with what it means to live through thought. You can begin exploring living through awareness by sensing, or watching one's breath. Try something simple, we all almost always have tension is our facial muscles. Right now, for a few seconds, become aware of the tension in your face. Or become aware of the pressure of your body against your chair as you sit. What happens when you try these? Thoughts almost immediately pop up. Thoughts just magically appear in the space a little above and behind your eyes. Now you have a choice, you can continue to live 'as normal', through your thoughts (which are necessarily at least once removed from reality), or you can take back your awareness, and live primarily through your awareness, secondarily through thought. But you have to really get a feel for the distinction, a taste, and value one over the other, or else you will simply disappear back into ordinary life. One thing you can try anytime when you think to do so, ask yourself where your attention is. These are just words. You have to actually explore this for yourself, find it in yourself. It is possible to find the deeper and more essential in yourself. sdp "Do you want to be interested or do you want to be happy?" Thought = interest. Being/Mauna = Happiness I prefer happiness. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 17, 2021 7:53:45 GMT -5
We all know what thinking is, we spend the majority of our time there. Words just rattle around up there, a continuous stream of sense or nonsense, symbolic abstract representation at least once removed from reality. That's the function of the superficial layer of mind (other functions are emotion, and acts via muscular movement). But there is another way to live. What is deeper than thought? What is prior to thought? Your awareness is separate from thought. Your attention is separate from thought. The problem is that one's attention and one's awareness become the slave of thought, the deeper aspect of our being is subjected to the more shallow. Now, you can't function in the world without minimal awareness of your exterior surroundings. The question is, what do you value? Now, you have to get a taste of the difference between living mostly through thought, OTOH, and living primarily through one's awareness OTOH. We are thoroughly familiar with what it means to live through thought. You can begin exploring living through awareness by sensing, or watching one's breath. Try something simple, we all almost always have tension is our facial muscles. Right now, for a few seconds, become aware of the tension in your face. Or become aware of the pressure of your body against your chair as you sit. What happens when you try these? Thoughts almost immediately pop up. Thoughts just magically appear in the space a little above and behind your eyes. Now you have a choice, you can continue to live 'as normal', through your thoughts (which are necessarily at least once removed from reality), or you can take back your awareness, and live primarily through your awareness, secondarily through thought. But you have to really get a feel for the distinction, a taste, and value one over the other, or else you will simply disappear back into ordinary life. One thing you can try anytime when you think to do so, ask yourself where your attention is. These are just words. You have to actually explore this for yourself, find it in yourself. It is possible to find the deeper and more essential in yourself. sdp "Do you want to be interested or do you want to be happy?" Thought = interest. Being/Mauna = Happiness I prefer happiness. Happiness is a byproduct, gravy. Happiness is way down on my list. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Aug 17, 2021 8:34:18 GMT -5
"Do you want to be interested or do you want to be happy?" Thought = interest. Being/Mauna = Happiness I prefer happiness. Happiness is a byproduct, gravy. Happiness is way down on my list. Semantics. Attention inward on/as Self (not on thoughts or sensations) is the state of peace and perfect contentment. I would say it is not even a state within "normal" human consciousness. |
|
Xiao
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
Post by Xiao on Aug 17, 2021 10:03:13 GMT -5
Happiness is a byproduct, gravy. Happiness is way down on my list. Semantics. Attention inward on/as Self (not on thoughts or sensations) is the state of peace and perfect contentment. I would say it is not even a state within "normal" human consciousness. Roy, could you briefly describe what you mean by not focusing on sensations? I think we all get not focusing on thoughts. That is simple to explain. But in the absence of thought, there is only this energetic aliveness going on. Sights, sounds, sensations in the body. These are all what you mean by sensations, yes? If you mean that recognition of awareness as the effortlessly present cognizance, and the "taking up home" there while disregarding thoughts or sensations, then I feel I understand. It's quite a subtle shift in a way, if one wants to call it that. I generally view that as "witness consciousness" or this sort of thing, where one is able to recognize one's presence/identity as the subjectivity. I'd love you to clarify. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Aug 19, 2021 9:54:26 GMT -5
Semantics. Attention inward on/as Self (not on thoughts or sensations) is the state of peace and perfect contentment. I would say it is not even a state within "normal" human consciousness. Roy, could you briefly describe what you mean by not focusing on sensations? I think we all get not focusing on thoughts. That is simple to explain. But in the absence of thought, there is only this energetic aliveness going on. Sights, sounds, sensations in the body. These are all what you mean by sensations, yes? If you mean that recognition of awareness as the effortlessly present cognizance, and the "taking up home" there while disregarding thoughts or sensations, then I feel I understand. It's quite a subtle shift in a way, if one wants to call it that. I generally view that as "witness consciousness" or this sort of thing, where one is able to recognize one's presence/identity as the subjectivity. I'd love you to clarify. Your question brought to mind this exchange with RM which I always found quite interesting. Q: Is there no dehatma buddhi [I-am-the-body idea] for the jnani? If, for instance, Sri Bhagavan is bitten by an insect, is there no sensation? A: There is the sensation and there is also the dehatma buddhi. The latter is common to both jnani and ajnani with this difference, that the ajnani thinks only the body is myself, whereas the jnani knows all is of the Self, or all this is Brahman. If there be pain let it be. It is also part of the Self. The Self is poorna [perfect]. After transcending dehatma buddhi one becomes a jnani. In the absence of that idea there cannot be either kartritva [doership] or karta [doer]. So a jnani has no karma [that is, a jnani performs no actions]. That is his experience. Otherwise he is not a jnani. However the ajnani identifies the jnani with his body, which the jnani does not do. |
|
