|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 2, 2013 12:08:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. 'Experience' is the practice of awareness, the quality of the practice is influenced by the clarity of the practitioner.. I'm curious, when you say, "awareness" is a pointer, what is your understanding of what awareness is pointing at? Be well.. The word awareness is pointing to what is already the case. It's not a something to believe in or intensify or cultivate. What I consider practice is a reinforcement as to what is already the case as most of my life was lived with what is the case taken to be not what was the case. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 2, 2013 12:12:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings..What is 'already the case'? Be well.. That you are aware. We agree.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 2, 2013 12:25:15 GMT -5
Greetings.. Okay, that's something I can understand and discuss. From my perspective, to say that it's all imagination, (which I HAVE said) is to suggest that creation in the largest context is fundamentally imagined into apparent existence. Time/space, as the framework in which experience occurs, is itself conceptual in origin. Imagination is occurring on both individual and 'collective' levels as there is no separation between what seems objective and subjective. Ideas about faeries and unicorns (and who's right and wrong) are not separate from the scientific principles that seem to drive the universe. Likewise, the nature of man is not separate from the nature of life we call 'mother nature'. The reason duality consists of a coin with two sides is that there is no foundation for any of it other than imagination, and so mutually defining polarities are imagined into apparent existence and experienced. There quite literally is no solid place to stand, and no-one to stand there. There isn't even a 'there'. Do you believe that because you believe this understanding to be true, that you may not be able to see clearly the understandings that others share? Be well.. Do you see what is implied about any and all theory, about any and all conceptual structure in what was said? |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 2, 2013 12:38:08 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Do you believe that because you believe this understanding to be true, that you may not be able to see clearly the understandings that others share? Be well.. Do you see what is implied about any and all theory, about any and all conceptual structure in what was said? Yes, i see what is implied.. it is based on assumptions that must be 'believed to be true', which includes the implication within the "conceptual structure".. this maintains the structure so the imagination can pretend it has something it can escape from, which.. of course, necessitates that the 'conceptual structure' be preserved so it can be the object of the belief's story.. quite a subtle relationship, yes? easier to just 'let it go', yes? Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 2, 2013 12:47:01 GMT -5
Greetings.. Do you see what is implied about any and all theory, about any and all conceptual structure in what was said? Yes, i see what is implied.. it is based on assumptions that must be 'believed to be true', which includes the implication within the "conceptual structure".. this maintains the structure so the imagination can pretend it has something it can escape from, which.. of course, necessitates that the 'conceptual structure' be preserved so it can be the object of the belief's story.. quite a subtle relationship, yes? easier to just 'let it go', yes? Be well.. The conceptual structure presented has the potential to collapse upon itself, and maintaining it requires quite a bit of effort. There is no way it can stand in a mind informed by nonconceptual realization. If "just letting go" were all that easy, if the mind could be willed into silence, then I imagine that what we would observe looking outward would be very very different. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 2, 2013 12:55:29 GMT -5
Greetings.. Do you believe that because you believe this understanding to be true, that you may not be able to see clearly the understandings that others share? Be well.. Do you see what is implied about any and all theory, about any and all conceptual structure in what was said? Wouldn't it be great if all concepts self-destructed 5 seconds after their original inception? Everyone would literally be walking around with smoke coming out of their ears.  |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 2, 2013 12:56:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Yes, i see what is implied.. it is based on assumptions that must be 'believed to be true', which includes the implication within the "conceptual structure".. this maintains the structure so the imagination can pretend it has something it can escape from, which.. of course, necessitates that the 'conceptual structure' be preserved so it can be the object of the belief's story.. quite a subtle relationship, yes? easier to just 'let it go', yes? Be well.. The conceptual structure presented has the potential to collapse upon itself, and maintaining it requires quite a bit of effort. There is no way it can stand in a mind informed by nonconceptual realization. If "just letting go" were all that easy, if the mind could be willed into silence, then I imagine that what we would observe looking outward would be very very different. It IS that easy, but the choice to do it is less so.. the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. if there is a practice or training that has merit, it is to enhance the capacity for 'noticing' without engaging the mind.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 2, 2013 13:02:09 GMT -5
The word awareness is pointing to what is already the case. It's not a something to believe in or intensify or cultivate. What I consider practice is a reinforcement as to what is already the case as most of my life was lived with what is the case taken to be not what was the case. Most of your life was lived not knowing you were aware? |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 2, 2013 13:03:46 GMT -5
Greetings.. We agree.. Be well.. Didn't see that coming. I'll take it and won't get into an endless discussion about the word you bolded. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 2, 2013 13:07:03 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. We agree.. Be well.. Didn't see that coming. I'll take it and won't get into an endless discussion about the word you bolded. <grateful and humble bows> Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 2, 2013 13:08:24 GMT -5
Greetings.. The conceptual structure presented has the potential to collapse upon itself, and maintaining it requires quite a bit of effort. There is no way it can stand in a mind informed by nonconceptual realization. If "just letting go" were all that easy, if the mind could be willed into silence, then I imagine that what we would observe looking outward would be very very different. It IS that easy, but the choice to do it is less so.. the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. if there is a practice or training that has merit, it is to enhance the capacity for 'noticing' without engaging the mind.. Be well.. Where does the boundary of mind end so that we may notice without its interference? |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 2, 2013 13:16:57 GMT -5
Greetings.. Yes, i see what is implied.. it is based on assumptions that must be 'believed to be true', which includes the implication within the "conceptual structure".. this maintains the structure so the imagination can pretend it has something it can escape from, which.. of course, necessitates that the 'conceptual structure' be preserved so it can be the object of the belief's story.. quite a subtle relationship, yes? easier to just 'let it go', yes? Be well.. The conceptual structure presented has the potential to collapse upon itself, and maintaining it requires quite a bit of effort. There is no way it can stand in a mind informed by nonconceptual realization. If "just letting go" were all that easy, if the mind could be willed into silence, then I imagine that what we would observe looking outward would be very very different. People really can will themselves into "silent" states and this is often how spiritual progress enters the picture as one hones the ability to create self controlled mind breaks for longer and longer periods. What becomes increasingly more difficult to notice as one gets better and better at this is that it is the polar opposite of letting go and that they feel more in control than ever. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jun 2, 2013 13:18:10 GMT -5
Greetings.. It IS that easy, but the choice to do it is less so.. the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. if there is a practice or training that has merit, it is to enhance the capacity for 'noticing' without engaging the mind.. Be well.. Where does the boundary of mind end so that we may notice without its interference? I think the key is "the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. " To think and say that our minds 'interfere' is an undesirable, negative way of looking at what our mind is (not that it matters) and in itself allows this 'interference.' Just my 2 cents. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 2, 2013 13:26:56 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. It IS that easy, but the choice to do it is less so.. the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. if there is a practice or training that has merit, it is to enhance the capacity for 'noticing' without engaging the mind.. Be well.. Where does the boundary of mind end so that we may notice without its interference? Just as 'you' have no boundary, there is no boundary of mind.. stillness is non-interference, looking for boundaries is distraction.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jun 2, 2013 13:37:44 GMT -5
I think the key is "the mind isn't "willed into silence", it's allowed to fall silent.. The second scenario is simply a more devious form of the first. Both involve someone at the steering wheel. we are still and silent more than we understand, but precisely because we are still and silent, it isn't 'noticed'.. " I basically agree. People aren't looking for the obvious. The obvious has already been discounted long ago. To think and say that our minds 'interfere' is an undesirable, negative way of looking at what our mind is (not that it matters) and in itself allows this 'interference.' Just my 2 cents. It was in response to Tzu talking about noticing without engaging the mind. I'm basically saying mind isn't being shut down and then coming back into the picture as most would have it. |
|
