|
|
Post by enigma on May 18, 2014 22:02:23 GMT -5
Well, and it's not the only thing being discussed in this thread. Noone reads the threads that are just the ribbets of an evil frog! Ribbet!  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 22:15:42 GMT -5
OK, I'm going to post the last hint. Someone is still working on the answer, is almost there. I delayed this post to give him some more time. If you are not a Doctor Who fan or have not seen the episode I will refer to, there will be another The Matrix clue at the end. (But even if you haven't seen the episode, everything you need to know is posted herein). The first time The Doctor encountered Clara Oswin Oswald, was on a planet where her ship had crashed. She was enclosed in a room and talked to the Doctor only by radio. We see Clara as she saw herself, a pretty young girl. The Doctor and Amy and Rory soon discovered there were Daleks on the planet, which they of course had to evade. In conversation Clara mentioned she liked to make soulffle's. The Doctor figured something was wrong here, and asked Clara how she got eggs and milk to make a soulffle. .......Well, Clara helped the Doctor, Amy and Rory in exchange for their promise to rescue her and take her with them out of the danger of the Daleks. Throughout the show it showed Clara in her locked room, a pretty young lady. Eventually, at peril, the Doctor made his way to Clara's room to rescue her as promised, but there discovered she had been turned into a Dalek. She had maintained her consciousness as human, but she could not accept the fact she had been turned into a Dalek, so her mind made herself maintain her former appearance, as human, to herself. Well, she died in the end helping the Doctor. In another episode, the Doctor encountered Clara again, but he didn't immediately recognize her because, one, she had died earlier, two, the Doctor had never seen her human appearance, only her appearance as a Dalek. He later realized this Clara was the person he had met earlier, somehow, and called her the soulffle girl, from the earlier meeting. She died in that episode also, but appeared again in another episode. Then the Doctor began calling her his Impossible Girl, because she had died twice already. The point of the story is that in the first episode described, Clara did not know that she had turned into a Dalek, because she did not have the direct experience of her ____ ( this). OK, The Matrix clue. I've already gone through describing what Morpheus and crew had to do to remove Neo from the Matrix. silver accurately told what happened, so I thought she would get the answer. She didn't. So, final clue, done, no more, I give up. OK, we see Neo get physically disconnected from the Matrix, all the feeding tubes and the mechanism which was feeding his brain data that made him think he was in the real world, pulled loose. Then we see Neo going down the long tube. What was going down the long tube? What was it that Neo had never experienced in his whole life, until that moment. Oh, just remembered another clue I won't describe. Have you seen the animated film A Scanner Darkly based on the Philip K. Di*K book of the same name? If you have seen it, the very end of the film also gives a clue, but believe me, it's too complicated to go into....   sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:20:48 GMT -5
Somebody got it. He can post or I will confirm that he got it first, with permission..
sdp
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:44:12 GMT -5
When ~you~ ATA-MT, where are ~ you~? (For any new people, ATA-MT is zd's attending the actual, minus thoughts). And, some, probably most here find the MT part not so easy. I've tried to consider an aid to this. When you are reading a book you are replacing the words for your own thoughts. So in a sense when you read you are ATA-MT, they're just somebody else's thoughts, not your own. This shows you can ATA-MT. Next try looking at a work of art, a painting or a sculpture. You can look at it, attend to it, without an internal verbal commentary. And then when you can begin to see that, you can ATA(anything)-MT. So there is ~you~ as self (thoughts being a major part thereof, desire, probably a greater part) and then there is ~ you~ as attending, in some sense. To cut to the chase, this thread is a continuation of the Presence or Absence thread, a sort of Part B. So, the question remains, in ATA-MT, where are you? And in what sense are you? sdp Just to put in my 2 cents worth.. I've found that trying to "minus the thoughts" or to do anything to the thoughts when attending the actual was supremely unhelpful, as it set up the very old and familiar "things (the experience) need to be different (less thoughts) than how they are (current level of thoughts)" which for me anyway is a sure-fire way to keep on suffering. The way I guess I position it for myself is that I'm taking a greater interest in what is being experienced through the senses, rather than commentary about what is being experienced through the senses. So there is more a gentle shifting across of attention rather than a blocking/avoiding/manipulating of an aspect (the thoughts) of what is happening. Would be interested to see what ZD thinks as well  sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:44:44 GMT -5
When ~you~ ATA-MT, where are ~ you~? (For any new people, ATA-MT is zd's attending the actual, minus thoughts). And, some, probably most here find the MT part not so easy. I've tried to consider an aid to this. When you are reading a book you are replacing the words for your own thoughts. So in a sense when you read you are ATA-MT, they're just somebody else's thoughts, not your own. This shows you can ATA-MT. Next try looking at a work of art, a painting or a sculpture. You can look at it, attend to it, without an internal verbal commentary. And then when you can begin to see that, you can ATA(anything)-MT. So there is ~you~ as self (thoughts being a major part thereof) and then there is ~ you~ as attending, in some sense. To cut to the chase, this thread is a continuation of the Presence or Absence thread, a sort of Part B. So, the question remains, in ATA-MT, where are you?sdp Sitting in front of my laptop. sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:48:45 GMT -5
Sitting in front of my laptop. (** breathes in, breathes out **) sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:52:35 GMT -5
My apologies to rupa, earnest and laughter in case you say, but that's what I said (when the answer gets posted).
I tried to get you to clarify, but as that was not forthcoming, I couldn't verify.
sdp
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 19, 2014 23:54:34 GMT -5
I won't say, because at this point it would be overkill, but that which is missing isn't missed when it is missing. *chuckle* From this, to me it was obvious zd had it. later....... sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 20, 2014 0:17:36 GMT -5
I was going to suggest a famous book on Zen, stories complied by Paul Reps and Nyogen Senzaki, the answer might be in it. But, maybe just read the ten zen ox-herding pictures. The name of the book is, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones. sdp |
|
|
|
Post by earnest on May 20, 2014 3:45:46 GMT -5
My apologies to rupa, earnest and laughter in case you say, but that's what I said (when the answer gets posted). I tried to get you to clarify, but as that was not forthcoming, I couldn't verify. sdp Sorry sdp,. not quite up to speed in this thread... I did have an interesting sit this morning though that may or may not be related to the koany thing. ZDs "where is your wrist" thing was rolling around in my head and then,. WTF,. wrist is just an fkn idea! The actual experience is its all the one thing, so everything is here. The most basic actual experience is that one thing is not separate from another. Thinking or not thinking about it doesn't make any difference. Head tingling! Ha |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 20, 2014 5:22:39 GMT -5
My apologies to rupa, earnest and laughter in case you say, but that's what I said (when the answer gets posted). I tried to get you to clarify, but as that was not forthcoming, I couldn't verify. sdp Sorry sdp,. not quite up to speed in this thread... I did have an interesting sit this morning though that may or may not be related to the koany thing. ZDs "where is your wrist" thing was rolling around in my head and then,. WTF,. wrist is just an fkn idea! The actual experience is its all the one thing, so everything is here. The most basic actual experience is that one thing is not separate from another. Thinking or not thinking about it doesn't make any difference. Head tingling! Ha Hi Earnest: When you go to the ER and that region between your hand and your forearm is in severe pain from a fall skateboarding, how do you explain to the doctor what the problem is.. do you say, "something hurts and it's all 'one thing', Doc, you figure it out"? You can lose a gall bladder or kidney and survive, but not so much when you lose a heart.. yes, the body functions as one, but is comprised of many separate and distinct parts.. if the liver and stomach and heart were not separate there would be a bit of a mess in the inner workings of our physically manifested presence.. The wrist is a describable region of the human body, it represents something real, tangible and which can be reliably referenced and understood.. much less so, are the ideologies and beliefs that exist only in the minds of the believers.. |
|
|
|
Post by earnest on May 20, 2014 5:46:19 GMT -5
Sorry sdp,. not quite up to speed in this thread... I did have an interesting sit this morning though that may or may not be related to the koany thing. ZDs "where is your wrist" thing was rolling around in my head and then,. WTF,. wrist is just an fkn idea! The actual experience is its all the one thing, so everything is here. The most basic actual experience is that one thing is not separate from another. Thinking or not thinking about it doesn't make any difference. Head tingling! Ha Hi Earnest: When you go to the ER and that region between your hand and your forearm is in severe pain from a fall skateboarding, how do you explain to the doctor what the problem is.. do you say, "something hurts and it's all 'one thing', Doc, you figure it out"? You can lose a gall bladder or kidney and survive, but not so much when you lose a heart.. yes, the body functions as one, but is comprised of many separate and distinct parts.. if the liver and stomach and heart were not separate there would be a bit of a mess in the inner workings of our physically manifested presence.. The wrist is a describable region of the human body, it represents something real, tangible and which can be reliably referenced and understood.. much less so, are the ideologies and beliefs that exist only in the minds of the believers.. I'll answer your question after you answer the question I asked you earlier btw,. I am quite happy to be completely and utterly wrong about anything I write/say on this forum  |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 20, 2014 5:54:51 GMT -5
Hi Earnest: When you go to the ER and that region between your hand and your forearm is in severe pain from a fall skateboarding, how do you explain to the doctor what the problem is.. do you say, "something hurts and it's all 'one thing', Doc, you figure it out"? You can lose a gall bladder or kidney and survive, but not so much when you lose a heart.. yes, the body functions as one, but is comprised of many separate and distinct parts.. if the liver and stomach and heart were not separate there would be a bit of a mess in the inner workings of our physically manifested presence.. The wrist is a describable region of the human body, it represents something real, tangible and which can be reliably referenced and understood.. much less so, are the ideologies and beliefs that exist only in the minds of the believers.. I'll answer your question after you answer the question I asked you earlier btw,. I am quite happy to be completely and utterly wrong about anything I write/say on this forum Restate your question, please.. |
|
|
|
Post by earnest on May 20, 2014 6:05:08 GMT -5
I'll answer your question after you answer the question I asked you earlier btw,. I am quite happy to be completely and utterly wrong about anything I write/say on this forum Restate your question, please.. It's in the link that I've bolded above, but in summary you state to say there are situations that "can't be talked about" is the nondualist's escape clause, when their understandings are exposed as beliefs/attachments I'd like to see some evidence of this. Some quotes to support your position. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 20, 2014 8:01:47 GMT -5
Earnest: As you know, duality is obvious, but non-duality is not. Those who become free of the mind and free of duality do not ignore duality; they simply know that there is another side of the coin. If someone has only seen the obvious side of the coin, all one can do is point out that there is another side of the coin and leave it at that. Whether one will ever discover what it means to say that both "wrists" and "oneness" are cognitive illusions is unknowable.
If someone is strongly attached to either "separateness" or "oneness," it is almost impossible to have a meaningful conversation about the nature of "what is." That's the main point of the cigarette-man koan--"How is it possible to teach the cigarette-man (who is so strongly attached to oneness that he won't listen to anyone)? If the cigarette-man is strongly attached to "thingness" or "separateness," the same koan applies. IOW, how do you teach anyone who is so strongly attached to his/her ideas that s/he won't listen to anything that's said?
|
|
