|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 2, 2013 9:16:05 GMT -5
Bobby, it doesn't work. I imagine that you will reply, as you usually do, by pointing out that it's the mind and the flawed character that sabotages the efforts or prevents one from doing ATA for a long enough time - but this is simply a strategy of finding something to blame for the fact that ATA doesn't work. Or, that people can't ATA successfully is not a problem of the people, instead it's suggestive of the fact that ATA is a flawed strategy. staying in the present .. doesn't work? where the hell else are you going to go? nevermind .. Bobby says that all people have to do to get enlightened is to attend qualia minus thoughts long enough and intensely enough. I'm saying that Bobby's approach is flawed. Not only is it extremely difficult to do what he proposes, but it's also no guarantee for anything. I've tried and it was a waste of time and resulted in nothing but frustration. This is not a philosohical debate, we don't care whether it should work or not in principle, all we care about is whether it in actuality works or not, which ATA clearly doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 9:30:22 GMT -5
Bobby, it doesn't work. I imagine that you will reply, as you usually do, by pointing out that it's the mind and the flawed character that sabotages the efforts or prevents one from doing ATA for a long enough time - but this is simply a strategy of finding something to blame for the fact that ATA doesn't work. Or, that people can't ATA successfully is not a problem of the people, instead it's suggestive of the fact that ATA is a flawed strategy. staying in the present .. doesn't work? where the hell else are you going to go? nevermind .. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/128580/threadGiven our friend's penchant for waxing high-philosophic and referring to the material sense as vulgar, I am wondering if perhaps he prefers his "symbolic order" and the realm of the signifier over immersion into the realm of the signified-absent-the-signifier.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 9:31:55 GMT -5
staying in the present .. doesn't work? where the hell else are you going to go? nevermind .. Bobby says that all people have to do to get enlightened is to attend qualia minus thoughts long enough and intensely enough. I'm saying that Bobby's approach is flawed. Not only is it extremely difficult to do what he proposes, but it's also no guarantee for anything. I've tried and it was a waste of time and resulted in nothing but frustration. This is not a philosohical debate, we don't care whether it should work or not in principle, all we care about is whether it in actuality works or not, which ATA clearly doesn't.
You got frustrated. It was working.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 2, 2013 9:47:47 GMT -5
staying in the present .. doesn't work? where the hell else are you going to go? nevermind .. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/128580/threadGiven our friend's penchant for waxing high-philosophic and referring to the material sense as vulgar, I am wondering if perhaps he prefers his "symbolic order" and the realm of the signifier over immersion into the realm of the signified-absent-the-signifier. Please be polite enough to speak to me and not about me, and especially not in such a tone. Or post such things in the "unmoderated discussion" area. Thank you. I was supposed to get enlightenment. All I got was a waste of time and frustration. I clearly didn't work.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jul 2, 2013 10:42:20 GMT -5
An except of a conversation between Francis Lucille and Iain McNay
Iain: I was just going to start by asking you something that came up later in the evening that interested me a lot; it has to do with the intent of the seeker. Somebody here was saying - and I’m putting this in my own words - that the intent is so important, the passion for the truth is so important for the seeker, for someone trying to find the truth. And I’m just wondering what your response to that is.
Francis: Yes, it is important. It is the only determining factor for the success of this endeavour. The rest is almost irrelevant, because the rest is about the abilities of the mind and of the body. The problem is that, if the mind is strong, it has accumulated strong obstacles, and therefore there is no advantage in having a strong mind. There is no disadvantage either, because the same strong mind which has accumulated the obstacles has the ability to deconstruct them. However, the sole prerequisite for success is the love, the desire, for the truth. That cannot be conveyed by a human touch - it is only conveyed by grace, which is God’s touch.
Iain: But the thing that interests me is that people will have awakenings in so many different conditions and situations and backgrounds. Certain people have awakenings who have done no spiritual work; they’ve had no interest in that. And yet something happens that fundamentally changes their life, changes the way they see life; and then in their own way they start looking. It’s almost as if awakening, realisation - whatever we call it - is random at times. It will hit someone who’s a seeker but it will also (I’m using my own words here) hit someone who’s obviously done nothing.
Francis: Yes, perhaps. However, we have to be careful when we use the word ‘awakening’: we may be talking about apples and oranges.
Iain: Apples and oranges [smiling]. So what do you mean by that?
Francis: I mean that what one person calls awakening is not necessarily the same thing as what another person calls awakening.
Iain: Well, that interests me, so let’s have a look at that, because the word awakening comes up, realisation comes up, enlightenment comes up, non-duality comes up. So I wonder how you see them; I wonder how you see them as different from one another?
Francis: Awakening would be the experience of consciousness seeing itself in the absence of objects, in its total freedom and independence, in its autonomy. It is the revelation of absolute happiness, of absolute splendour, of absolute love and intelligence - that would be awakening, or enlightenment. As a result of this transforming event, a gradual elimination of the residues of ignorance takes place that could be called the self-realisation process. That ends up in the continued experience of our natural state, which is the absence of any illusion as to what we are, either at the level of thoughts or concepts, or at the level of bodily sensations, feelings and sense perceptions. Now what was the other term to define?
Iain: Well, I mentioned enlightenment, and also non-duality.
Francis: Now, duality would be the belief in the existence of more than one reality. Non-duality could be expressed by the simple formula: “There is only one reality”.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 10:44:22 GMT -5
spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/128580/threadGiven our friend's penchant for waxing high-philosophic and referring to the material sense as vulgar, I am wondering if perhaps he prefers his "symbolic order" and the realm of the signifier over immersion into the realm of the signified-absent-the-signifier. Please be polite enough to speak to me and not about me, and especially not in such a tone. Or post such things in the "unmoderated discussion" area. Thank you. I was supposed to get enlightenment. All I got was a waste of time and frustration. I clearly didn't work. Enlightenment is the absence of that which gets frustrated. Getting frustrated is how that comes to the surface to be released or disidentified with. Merrell-Wolf talks about liberation versus crucifixion. Liberation happens when the persona and mind can be let go of with ease. Crucifixion happens when the attachment is strong and there is a tremendous resistance to that letting go. You come across to me as very mind-identified, Q. Anything which challenges or erodes at that identification (attachment) is going to be very frustrating. But there is no "enlightenment" without that erosion and loss of identification. ATA/Samadhi arises effortlessly in the absence of a strongly attached mind. Practicing ATA, Zazen, sitting in silence, etc, is going to be very frustrating at first as the mind is not being fed all the attention it is used to receiving. It becomes like a petulant child and creates the noise of frustration so that attention returns to the mind and its obsessions. You could say that ATA failed, or alternatively it could be said that you gave up just when you were getting results. You have an apriori expectation of what enlightenment looks like or what should come of the process and when you got what it gives, it didn't match your expectation. Nobody really wants enlightenment and yet they'll never be satisfied with anything less. When people pursue enlightenment, they don't know what they are pursuing. Enlightenment is obtained in the loss of that which seeks it. Until that loss happens, the state is only a fantasy in the mind of the seeker. Enlightenment is never what you think it is, and frustration is inevitable as the expectation we have becomes dissatisfied and disillusioned with the actuality of the experience. Speaking as someone who has been very mind-identified, I know how frustrating these practices can be. But its a measure of self-control as to whether or not you stick with the practice despite the frustration and burn through what is getting frustrated, or you succumb to the mind's dominance and control patterns. The 'I' does not become enlightened. Enlightenment happens in the loss of the 'I'. By its very nature, the 'I' will be perpetually frustrated by enlightenment. The ATA was working. What does enlightenment look like to you?
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 2, 2013 12:54:35 GMT -5
I don't like being patronized and analized. Please don't do that. Thank you. I don't care about your excuses. The plain fact is that it didn't work. It wasn't my fault, but rather that the strategy itself is flawed. I'm a normal person, if it didn't work for me then it won't work for the vast majority of other people. Instead of clinging to the available practises and interpretations those who are interested in helping others should clearly explore the issue from alternative points of view.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 2, 2013 12:56:00 GMT -5
If you get it, you'll have to let go of it. Same with voyeurism. Let it go, too. The problem is mind, and the reliance upon mind as the sole arbiter of where attention is focused. Look where the words are pointing. They are pointing to how you interacted with the world as a young child. Forget all the non-dual garbage and focus on what can be seen or heard in this moment, and then this moment, and then this moment. Does it seem boring? Forget boring, and come back to here and now again and again until the one who keeps coming back is no longer known. Then, keep coming back until the mind understands what's going on. Bobby, it doesn't work. I imagine that you will reply, as you usually do, by pointing out that it's the mind and the flawed character that sabotages the efforts or prevents one from doing ATA for a long enough time - but this is simply a strategy of finding something to blame for the fact that ATA doesn't work. Or, that people can't ATA successfully is not a problem of the people, instead it's suggestive of the fact that ATA is a flawed strategy. One Saturday in 1975 I planned to get up and work on a long stone wall that I had under construction. It was like a work of art, and all week long I had looked forward to the fun of selecting and laying the stone in a particular pattern on my day off. That morning I got up and went outside to start work and discovered that it was raining. I got incredibly angry and frustrated that I couldn't do what I had planned to do. Today when I remember that episode, I find it very funny. It is amazing how often reality does not conform to our thoughts. The problem, however, does not lie with reality. People tell themselves lots of stories, and they get very attached to them. FWIW ATA is not a strategy for getting anything. It is simply the shifting of attention to what is already here and now. Most people would rather spend their time thinking, telling themselves stories, chasing figments of their imagination, and getting angry that reality does not conform to their ideas than looking at the world and interacting with it directly. A sage once told a man to go for a relaxing walk in a nearby park and to look at what was there. The man asked, "What will I gain from doing that?" The sage replied, "Nothing whatsoever." The man asked, "Why should I do something that will not result in some gain?" The sage replied, "No reason whatsoever." The man said, "I don't get it." The sage said, "There isn't anything to get." The man said, "You're a fool." The sage replied, "That may be true, but I'm not the one who's frustrated, unhappy, or upset about anything."
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 2, 2013 13:06:46 GMT -5
FWIW ATA is not a strategy for getting anything. Bobby, you can deny it all you want, the plain fact is that ATA clearly is a strategy for getting something - namely enlightenment. Please show some solidarity and stop speaking so badly of people. We are how we are, insulting us will not help. We enjoy thinking, stories and imagination. We don't like being bored and frustrated.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 2, 2013 13:28:34 GMT -5
FWIW ATA is not a strategy for getting anything. Bobby, you can deny it all you want, the plain fact is that ATA clearly is a strategy for getting something - namely enlightenment. Please show some solidarity and stop speaking so badly of people. We are how we are, insulting us will not help. We enjoy thinking, stories and imagination. We don't like being bored and frustrated. I rarely insult people, but you are indulging in a story that you obviously enjoy, and you have gotten strongly attached to it. If you asked me for advice, which you haven't, I would tell you to forget about enlightenment--that the point of this pathless path is primarily about becoming free of the mind rather than attaining some imaginatively wondrous state. You obviously love your ideas, so you have no real interest in leaving them behind. By contrast, people who want to know the truth are willing to give up everything to find it, and that includes everything that they know. On this path it helps to have a "beginner's mind," and to realize that you know nothing of any importance. Only when the mind is open can anything new be learned. Are you willing to let go of all your ideas? I doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jul 2, 2013 13:47:48 GMT -5
How 'bout enlightenment is knowing which ideas to keep and which to leave in the dust? I kinda like that.
Aren't we constantly having ideas? Are most or all of our ideas garbage? Why toss them all out if we're just going to have them again?
I also like the idea of unwanted thoughts getting weeded out - I think this is what happens when we do EFT or NLP type exercises.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Jul 2, 2013 14:01:08 GMT -5
I rarely insult people, but you are indulging in a story that you obviously enjoy, and you have gotten strongly attached to it. If you asked me for advice, which you haven't, I would tell you to forget about enlightenment--that the point of this pathless path is primarily about becoming free of the mind rather than attaining some imaginatively wondrous state. You obviously love your ideas, so you have no real interest in leaving them behind. By contrast, people who want to know the truth are willing to give up everything to find it, and that includes everything that they know. On this path it helps to have a "beginner's mind," and to realize that you know nothing of any importance. Only when the mind is open can anything new be learned. Are you willing to let go of all your ideas? I doubt it. Bobby, I didn't ask you for advice. Please don't patronize and analize me. Thank you. If you really believe your accusations about me, then you wouldn't have replied to me, unless of course you enjoy insulting people, which makes me doubt that you insult people "rarely". It seems to me that it is you who is strongly attached to ideas and is in love with his own narrative. You don't allow criticism, instead you just accuse the other of being stuck in mind. If such is your attitude then a dialogue is not possible. You say that people who want to participate in what you think is true have to be willing to give up everything. I have never in my entire life met a person who is willing to give up everything for some unknown and suspected-to-exist "truth". It is an impossible ideal, and if you truly believe in it then I strongly suspect that it's nothing more than a defense mechnism for your theory of ATA. Normal people are rational, they would correctly reject your equation, and if such a mad drive is a requirement for the success of ATA then you might aswell admit that ATA doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 14:26:48 GMT -5
Greetings.. Bobby, you can deny it all you want, the plain fact is that ATA clearly is a strategy for getting something - namely enlightenment. Please show some solidarity and stop speaking so badly of people. We are how we are, insulting us will not help. We enjoy thinking, stories and imagination. We don't like being bored and frustrated. I rarely insult people, but you are indulging in a story that you obviously enjoy, and you have gotten strongly attached to it. If you asked me for advice, which you haven't, I would tell you to forget about enlightenment--that the point of this pathless path is primarily about becoming free of the mind rather than attaining some imaginatively wondrous state. You obviously love your ideas, so you have no real interest in leaving them behind. By contrast, people who want to know the truth are willing to give up everything to find it, and that includes everything that they know. On this path it helps to have a "beginner's mind," and to realize that you know nothing of any importance. Only when the mind is open can anything new be learned. Are you willing to let go of all your ideas? I doubt it. I suspect that one cannot "become free of mind", but.. in understanding 'mind', one can be free of attachments to the illusions created by mind.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 2, 2013 15:06:10 GMT -5
Greetings.. I rarely insult people, but you are indulging in a story that you obviously enjoy, and you have gotten strongly attached to it. If you asked me for advice, which you haven't, I would tell you to forget about enlightenment--that the point of this pathless path is primarily about becoming free of the mind rather than attaining some imaginatively wondrous state. You obviously love your ideas, so you have no real interest in leaving them behind. By contrast, people who want to know the truth are willing to give up everything to find it, and that includes everything that they know. On this path it helps to have a "beginner's mind," and to realize that you know nothing of any importance. Only when the mind is open can anything new be learned. Are you willing to let go of all your ideas? I doubt it. I suspect that one cannot "become free of mind", but.. in understanding 'mind', one can be free of attachments to the illusions created by mind.. Be well.. My bad. I should have written "free from the dominance of mind." Thanks. The meaning of that phrase would also include "becoming free of attachments to illusions created by mind."
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 2, 2013 15:10:58 GMT -5
<abbr>youtube vid</abbr>eo When I see these videos the people in it appear to me as monstrous, as if they are no longer human and instead just puppets fully controlled by affects. Yes, from a certain perspective, people and the world can sometimes seem harsh.
|
|