|
|
Post by andrew on May 3, 2017 6:09:54 GMT -5
If you are saying there is a difference between the sense of 'I am existing' and the sense of 'just existing', then yes I agree. I can sit here right now and test the difference, though I have to work a little more to find the 'I am existing' sense. Though Niz has pointed out that even the 'just existing' sense is a memory, and I guess this might be what you mean bu 'there is no sense of it, there is only it'. My experience is much better described as one in which I experience a 'field of electricity', rather than a 'world of objects', so I can relate to that description. It's rather more that there is no sense of just existing . Existence itself doesn't have a sense of itself, The sense comes from a sense of I am that . Fundamentally existence doesnt have a sense of itself i agree. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 3, 2017 9:49:29 GMT -5
You: Being knows it's Being without I am. You are Being, not I am. To think you are I am is a mistake of misidentification. Me: 'I am' isn't about identification. It's about existence. (Being?) Being knows it IS, right? Yes, Being knows it is. But who is saying that Being knows it is? I am. But I am also Being because there is nothing but Being. This will never be resolved by the mind. Awareness which is Being is not an object and knows itself. I can refer to awareness as if it's an object from my point of view. But what is this separate me? What is this point of view? It's not really separate but it is also separate. This paradox cannot be understood or explained in way that will satisfy the mind. It's impossible, but peeps continue to discuss it for years on forums until one day they might just stop and then the questions won't matter any more because they've been replaced with Peace that is undisturbed by unity and diversity occurring simultaneously. There's an udder failure to communicate here, so we'll move along. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 3, 2017 9:54:13 GMT -5
Being can speak for itself. Though in this case, clearly not. Being cannot speak. It has no vocal chords, or mouth from which to speak. It is silent. It has nothing to say. Well, it can, like, write emails and stuff, right?  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 3, 2017 10:03:16 GMT -5
Would you call it a movement of mind? Cuz that's what I understand a movement to be. I would prefer to say a movement of attention. 'Movement of mind' carries an implication that doesn't quite work for me in this context. I think because I do see the sense of being as prior to mind and more fundamentally than phenomena. Attention seems a little more apt to me. Ah, it is because the idea of 'mind' is associated with creativity (and formulation). The sense of being isn't 'created' as such and definitely isn't formulated. Okay. 'Movement of attention' doesn't really give me conniption fits, so no biggie.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 10:23:20 GMT -5
Being cannot speak. It has no vocal chords, or mouth from which to speak. It is silent. It has nothing to say. Well, it can, like, write emails and stuff, right? That would be a person who does that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 10:25:17 GMT -5
Yes, Being knows it is. But who is saying that Being knows it is? I am. But I am also Being because there is nothing but Being. This will never be resolved by the mind. Awareness which is Being is not an object and knows itself. I can refer to awareness as if it's an object from my point of view. But what is this separate me? What is this point of view? It's not really separate but it is also separate. This paradox cannot be understood or explained in way that will satisfy the mind. It's impossible, but peeps continue to discuss it for years on forums until one day they might just stop and then the questions won't matter any more because they've been replaced with Peace that is undisturbed by unity and diversity occurring simultaneously. There's an udder failure to communicate here, so we'll move along. Looks good from here. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 3, 2017 10:30:43 GMT -5
Oh, the bit I was specifically responding to there was the comment about the irony. What that unconscious knowing pre any realisations is something to be frowned upon and post them, it's to be glorified? There's a natural way of using the unconscious, and an unnatural way. The natural way assists in mind/body functioning, and the unnatural way disrupts it. So while it sounds ironic to become conscious, and then go unconscious again, we're actually just talking about cleaning up the process. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 10:31:23 GMT -5
'I am' isn't about identification. It's about existence. (Being?) Being knows it IS, right? Yes Being knows itself but veils itself from itself and identifies with objects. Falling into the dream. That can be reverse engineered. If you believe the thought that you can be veiled and fall into Maya, that will be your experience. Drop that belief and see what happens. Especially the next time you aren't happy with your person. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 10:46:08 GMT -5
It's rather more that there is no sense of just existing . Existence itself doesn't have a sense of itself, The sense comes from a sense of I am that . Fundamentally existence doesnt have a sense of itself i agree. Consciousness is itself, it doesn’t need to know itself. However if it wants to know something other than itself, it modulates itself into a 'sense' of itself. It is the birth of duality. |
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on May 3, 2017 11:19:55 GMT -5
Mr. Mind can want even that, though. Mind can pretend that it wants to. That's what most of us are doing. Pretending that we aren't what we are. Playing hide and seek. Looking for consciousness where it can't be found. That's why we can wake up to that place where we are looking from at any time. We really just don't want to. As Satch has said, he is quite happy with his person. So this is all about fixation/attachment it seems. Mind moves along. I Am and all the extras. Most folks are fixated on the glitter and other drama; all that movement. So when you say Mr Mind doesn't want to "go to the place empty of belief" it's because it would be self-annihilating for Mr Mind to do that. |
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on May 3, 2017 11:23:05 GMT -5
That's precisely my understanding. "In the state of a realized person the "I Am" is there; he just doesn't give much importance to it. A jnani is not guided by a concept." And NS is a state where "I Am" is not there? Or is it there in the same way, but just not attended to? Is deep sleep a case where the I Am is not there? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 11:38:57 GMT -5
Mind can pretend that it wants to. That's what most of us are doing. Pretending that we aren't what we are. Playing hide and seek. Looking for consciousness where it can't be found. That's why we can wake up to that place where we are looking from at any time. We really just don't want to. As Satch has said, he is quite happy with his person. So this is all about fixation/attachment it seems. Mind moves along. I Am and all the extras. Most folks are fixated on the glitter and other drama; all that movement. So when you say Mr Mind doesn't want to "go to the place empty of belief" it's because it would be self-annihilating for Mr Mind to do that. The belief and therefore fear of anhilation 'seems' like a real possibility. It will be your experience. But is it true? From the place where you are looking, is where the truth resides. It may take some courage to let go of that fear, but not much, especially for a meditator that is used to letting go of the phenomenal. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 3, 2017 11:46:26 GMT -5
Well, it can, like, write emails and stuff, right? That would be a person who does that. The separate volitional person (SVP)? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2017 11:48:38 GMT -5
Yes Being knows itself but veils itself from itself and identifies with objects. Falling into the dream. That can be reverse engineered. If you believe the thought that you can be veiled and fall into Maya, that will be your experience. Drop that belief and see what happens. Especially the next time you aren't happy with your person. I'm describing my experience. If you think it's a belief that's okay by me. If you know the Self it doesn't matter what you believe or not believe. It's irrelevant because you're not the mind. Who cares what it conjures up. It's not possible to tell someone the truth or show them the truth. You can only point to sign posts. |
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on May 3, 2017 11:50:14 GMT -5
So this is all about fixation/attachment it seems. Mind moves along. I Am and all the extras. Most folks are fixated on the glitter and other drama; all that movement. So when you say Mr Mind doesn't want to "go to the place empty of belief" it's because it would be self-annihilating for Mr Mind to do that. The belief and therefore fear of anhilation 'seems' like a real possibility. It will be your experience. But is it true? From the place where you are looking, is where the truth resides. It may take some courage to let go of that fear, but not much, especially for a meditator that is used to letting go of the phenomenal. Seems to me I've never been close to that place cuz I've yet to encounter the (made-up) fear that so many point to as a sign. During meditation, I've always found the unpleasant feelings to be the easiest to let go of. It's the interesting/desired ones that I get lost in. |
|
