|
|
Post by earnest on May 14, 2014 16:40:22 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  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 14, 2014 17:09:54 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  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 14, 2014 17:28:31 GMT -5
Sitting in front of my laptop. (** breathes in, breathes out **) |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 14, 2014 17:31:01 GMT -5
Ellipsis ... "omission" or "falling short" is a series of dots that usually indicates an intentional omission of a word, sentence, or whole section from a text without altering its original meaning. Then the answer to the How? ....... question, is the asking of the How? ......... question itself.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2014 18:36:05 GMT -5
Then the answer to the How? ....... question, is the asking of the How? ......... question itself. ......sneaks away. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 14, 2014 19:11:37 GMT -5
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. One more thing, (any)one who has this continual internal verbal commentary lives mostly in their head. That's pretty minimal cubic centimeters of living space when you consider that we can look out into space at night and see billions of miles. So living MT is a way to get outside the head. laughter and earnest have given a hint of this . sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 14, 2014 19:12:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 14, 2014 19:22:33 GMT -5
. Don't fret. He is always Here, even when he thinks he is not. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2014 19:27:02 GMT -5
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. One more thing, (any)one who has this continual internal verbal commentary lives mostly in their head. That's pretty minimal cubic centimeters of living space when you consider that we can look out into space at night and see billions of miles. So living MT is a way to get outside the head. laughter and earnest have given a hint of this . sdp 'Looking' out into 'space' at 'night' and seeing 'billions' of 'miles' is the internal verbal commentary. The experience of Knowing 'Seeing' is a different matter. It might even be MT, whatever that is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2014 19:28:18 GMT -5
. Don't fret. He is always Here, even when he thinks he is not. True dat. I've never experienced my absence. Nor has anyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 15, 2014 18:33:05 GMT -5
. Don't fret. He is always Here, even when he thinks he is not. True dat. I've never experienced my absence. Nor has anyone else. There is something you regularly do not experience the (non)absence of every day, a significant part of every day (if I gave a timeframe, you wouldn't believe me). zd refers to it often enough that I figured someone would get it from recalling his past posts, and the reason that no one has posted it, in one or two words, is significant (if/when someone names it, I will confirm, but ...........). laughter, very close without being specific, likewise earnest, rupa all but........... sdp |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 15, 2014 18:54:28 GMT -5
True dat. I've never experienced my absence. Nor has anyone else. There is something you regularly do not experience the absence of every day, a significant part of every day. zd refers to it often enough that I figured someone would get it from recalling his past posts, and the reason that no one has posted it, in one or two words, is significant (if/when someone names it, I will confirm, but ...........). laughter, very close without being specific, likewise earnest, rupa all but........... sdp We've already gone a couple of rounds with Rupa's idea that we're not aware of the absence of awareness. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 15, 2014 18:59:01 GMT -5
There is something you regularly do not experience the absence of every day, a significant part of every day. zd refers to it often enough that I figured someone would get it from recalling his past posts, and the reason that no one has posted it, in one or two words, is significant (if/when someone names it, I will confirm, but ...........). laughter, very close without being specific, likewise earnest, rupa all but........... sdp We've already gone a couple of rounds with Rupa's idea that we're not aware of the absence of awareness. Try again.......... |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 15, 2014 19:23:42 GMT -5
We've already gone a couple of rounds with Rupa's idea that we're not aware of the absence of awareness. Try again.......... I'm not playing your riddle game. Just telling you where the conversation is going. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 15, 2014 19:30:54 GMT -5
What are you not experiencing the (non)absence of right now?
|
|
