|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 18, 2024 18:42:45 GMT -5
Jul 6, 2023 at 2:24am @satch said: I think that both sitting practice and mindfulness during activity are beneficial together. But I think it's easier to go deep into non-dual awareness in a sitting practice when you are not attending to anything else other than yourself. It's not so easy to experience that kind of depth when you're driving or cooking dinner or writing an email because they are all distractions. I think that sitting practice is better to cultivate this awareness which then becomes more readily available for practice quite spontaneously when you are engaged in activity. So (but), why is sitting practice significant? Sitting practice is especially organised for singular focus of attention with less distraction, and although people like a meditate everything, they get distracted and revert to the tendencies that prevent them from living in the moment, so it's a good idea to schedule a time exclusively for meditation. When it's consistent and routine, today's sitting leads on from yesterday's and you get a sense of progress. You're close, but not exactly what I have in mind. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 18, 2024 19:20:33 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. This is very good, he doesn't penpoint what I have in mind. But a good introduction to Dzogchen. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/5733/dzogchen-great-perfection-primordial-awarenessAfter I found out about Norbu (and Dzogchen through him) I kept my eye out for books. I found The Mirror in a used bookstore, but it was slightly underlined. Didn't buy for that reason. When I got home I checked, it was out of print and crazy expensive used (more than $500.00, don't recall exactly, it's a small book, less than 100 pages). So I left right then and went back to the bookstore and bought it. It's on my 5 favorite books list (x 2). |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jun 18, 2024 19:56:33 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. This is very good, he doesn't penpoint what I have in mind. But a good introduction to Dzogchen. spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/5733/dzogchen-great-perfection-primordial-awarenessAfter I found out about Norbu (and Dzogchen through him) I kept my eye out for books. I found The Mirror in a used bookstore, but it was slightly underlined. Didn't buy for that reason. When I got home I checked, it was out of print and crazy expensive used (more than $500.00, don't recall exactly, it's a small book, less than 100 pages). So I left right then and went back to the bookstore and bought it. It's on my 5 favorite books list (x 2). It's the same home for all of us. Just different paths, but the same destination. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jun 22, 2024 12:33:39 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. I listened to this while doing some work. The practice explained may indeed lead to a hot boil of the psychological sense of self, at which point it may no longer seem advantageous to cling to it so tightly. It could almost work as an inwardly directed form of morality in which one is in a constant state of observation and discernment, whilst inviting the "Knowledge of the absence of self nature". If listened to in light of the potential for their being no inherent self, it would be understood that it is not a mental knowledge per se, which is something we've talked about (Greek: gnossis v episteme, Spanish: conocer v saber, etc). The psycho-mento-personal struggle is to take such ideas as 'fact/belief' and pursue them at all cost (to the self). Some may get a glimpse, let go of a shit ton of baggage, and think they are done, and then the mind takes over again and creates a lot of personal stories around the 'experience', maybe forms a new cult/sect/religion/path (different designer bag, same mind tricks). And maybe they even mean well. Who knows? But the true KNOWLEDGE is having been Here, being Here, and stabilized Here, which kinda brings me to the point I find a bit misleading. At around 17:00, there's a discussion about steeping on a thorn and saying 'ow', which I sense as indicative of some ignorance. I do not know of the intention of presenting that in such an exposition, but I suspect it creates confusion. Maybe I misunderstood it, but to conclude that saying 'ow' means that one is "still subject to the dualistic condition and that the absence of self nature...." seems to be indicative of having had the realization of no self, but then being attached to that Nothingness. Experiencing pain via the body is entirely within the realm of possibilities, and has very little to do with self, if ya know what I mean.  This 'attachment to Nothingness' is not uncommon with anyone who has had the realization, but in a way, it is only halfway to Here. I sometimes get the feeling that some of the push back here on the board seems to unconsciously question this, which is good. Interestingly, soon thereafter, the video goes on to address something akin to an "attachment to Freedom", which is often part of the subsequent journey to Here after Nothingness (and detachment from it) has been realized. At least that's how I would explain it away in abstractions. I'd be curious to hear others' ideas on this. In the Plotinus model, the journey to Here transcends up through the 'levels' of SVP existence, maybe gets a glimpse of Nous stuff, maybe even The One/ Here. Maybe they even understand IT deeply enough to say (i.e., with a sense of Gnossis/Knowledge) that EVERYTHING emanates from/as/within The One as THIS, right Here, right Now. Either way, to get Here, one will need to travel light. But as you stated later to SDP, same same, but different expression and/or value (and path), depending on how the mind studying/praying/meditating/etc hears it. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 22, 2024 20:31:00 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. I listened to this while doing some work. The practice explained may indeed lead to a hot boil of the psychological sense of self, at which point it may no longer seem advantageous to cling to it so tightly. It could almost work as an inwardly directed form of morality in which one is in a constant state of observation and discernment, whilst inviting the "Knowledge of the absence of self nature". If listened to in light of the potential for their being no inherent self, it would be understood that it is not a mental knowledge per se, which is something we've talked about (Greek: gnossis v episteme, Spanish: conocer v saber, etc). The psycho-mento-personal struggle is to take such ideas as 'fact/belief' and pursue them at all cost (to the self). Some may get a glimpse, let go of a shit ton of baggage, and think they are done, and then the mind takes over again and creates a lot of personal stories around the 'experience', maybe forms a new cult/sect/religion/path (different designer bag, same mind tricks). And maybe they even mean well. Who knows? But the true KNOWLEDGE is having been Here, being Here, and stabilized Here, which kinda brings me to the point I find a bit misleading. At around 17:00, there's a discussion about steeping on a thorn and saying 'ow', which I sense as indicative of some ignorance. I do not know of the intention of presenting that in such an exposition, but I suspect it creates confusion. Maybe I misunderstood it, but to conclude that saying 'ow' means that one is "still subject to the dualistic condition and that the absence of self nature...." seems to be indicative of having had the realization of no self, but then being attached to that Nothingness. Experiencing pain via the body is entirely within the realm of possibilities, and has very little to do with self, if ya know what I mean. This 'attachment to Nothingness' is not uncommon with anyone who has had the realization, but in a way, it is only halfway to Here. I sometimes get the feeling that some of the push back here on the board seems to unconsciously question this, which is good. Interestingly, soon thereafter, the video goes on to address something akin to an "attachment to Freedom", which is often part of the subsequent journey to Here after Nothingness (and detachment from it) has been realized. At least that's how I would explain it away in abstractions. I'd be curious to hear others' ideas on this. In the Plotinus model, the journey to Here transcends up through the 'levels' of SVP existence, maybe gets a glimpse of Nous stuff, maybe even The One/ Here. Maybe they even understand IT deeply enough to say (i.e., with a sense of Gnossis/Knowledge) that EVERYTHING emanates from/as/within The One as THIS, right Here, right Now. Either way, to get Here, one will need to travel light. But as you stated later to SDP, same same, but different expression and/or value (and path), depending on how the mind studying/praying/meditating/etc hears it. Dzogchen is known as the practice that isn't a practice. It goes directly to what Dzogchen calls the natural state. So Dzogchen goes directly to ND, without method (it's passed on in private, teacher to student). Gurdjieff is very evasive about his sources. But he spent a lot of time in Tibet. He wasn't interested in 'sightseeing', in his journeying he went directly and found the 'people who know'. When I found out about Dzogchen, the non-practice, and read more and more, it sounded very nearly like self-remembering. So I started looking for bread crumbs. But happenstance and reading, I found a few. In Beelzebub's Tales Gurdjieff writes about Saint Buddha, Saint Muhammad, Saint Moses, and Saint Lama. He never identifies him further. But a few years ago I read in a book by and about the Ladies of the Rope (a work group of women Gurdjieff worked with) that Gurdjieff had a small statue of Padmasambhava who Gurdjieff revered. So then I knew that Saint Lama was an actual person, Padmasambhava. Padmasambhava left India and took Dzogchen to Tibet, he's the top one or two teachers of Dzogchen in Tibetan history (he's very famous, storied. He wrote a lot and buried many of the writings later to be found). And Gurdjieff's ultimate source is the Sarmoung Brotherhood. And the ultimate source also for the Dzogchen teachers, is the Sarmoung Brotherhood, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche wrote about the Sarmoung Brotherhood, and Shambhala. But Gurdjieff said he found the main Sarmoung Brotherhood Monastery, and lived there a while, in Central Asia. He writes about this in Meetings With Remarkable Men (and it's depicted in the film by the same name). This is not the best description of Dzogchen, the video. I'll see if I can put some quotes up from The Mirror, by Norbu. Ow is nothing. Anybody would feel the pain, may or may not say Ow! |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 22, 2024 21:49:25 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. Edit, listening to again. The first eight minute are very clear, everything else must be on this basis. After eight minutes, he is quoting, and then at 9:50 he 'goes off the rails', but then gets back on track. This puts it more accurate (it's in line with the first eight minutes).
In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53
If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32
The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996
|
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 23, 2024 5:05:46 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. This puts it more accurate. In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53 If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32 The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996 "Let all the children boogie." ~ David Bowie. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 23, 2024 5:15:49 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. I listened to this while doing some work. The practice explained may indeed lead to a hot boil of the psychological sense of self, at which point it may no longer seem advantageous to cling to it so tightly. It could almost work as an inwardly directed form of morality in which one is in a constant state of observation and discernment, whilst inviting the "Knowledge of the absence of self nature". If listened to in light of the potential for their being no inherent self, it would be understood that it is not a mental knowledge per se, which is something we've talked about (Greek: gnossis v episteme, Spanish: conocer v saber, etc). The psycho-mento-personal struggle is to take such ideas as 'fact/belief' and pursue them at all cost (to the self). Some may get a glimpse, let go of a shit ton of baggage, and think they are done, and then the mind takes over again and creates a lot of personal stories around the 'experience', maybe forms a new cult/sect/religion/path (different designer bag, same mind tricks). And maybe they even mean well. Who knows? But the true KNOWLEDGE is having been Here, being Here, and stabilized Here, which kinda brings me to the point I find a bit misleading. At around 17:00, there's a discussion about steeping on a thorn and saying 'ow', which I sense as indicative of some ignorance. I do not know of the intention of presenting that in such an exposition, but I suspect it creates confusion. Maybe I misunderstood it, but to conclude that saying 'ow' means that one is "still subject to the dualistic condition and that the absence of self nature...." seems to be indicative of having had the realization of no self, but then being attached to that Nothingness. Experiencing pain via the body is entirely within the realm of possibilities, and has very little to do with self, if ya know what I mean. This 'attachment to Nothingness' is not uncommon with anyone who has had the realization, but in a way, it is only halfway to Here. I sometimes get the feeling that some of the push back here on the board seems to unconsciously question this, which is good. Interestingly, soon thereafter, the video goes on to address something akin to an "attachment to Freedom", which is often part of the subsequent journey to Here after Nothingness (and detachment from it) has been realized. At least that's how I would explain it away in abstractions. I'd be curious to hear others' ideas on this.In the Plotinus model, the journey to Here transcends up through the 'levels' of SVP existence, maybe gets a glimpse of Nous stuff, maybe even The One/ Here. Maybe they even understand IT deeply enough to say (i.e., with a sense of Gnossis/Knowledge) that EVERYTHING emanates from/as/within The One as THIS, right Here, right Now. Either way, to get Here, one will need to travel light. But as you stated later to SDP, same same, but different expression and/or value (and path), depending on how the mind studying/praying/meditating/etc hears it. Perhaps it's just the nature of experience, to constantly feel like doorways are opened whereas in reality they are never closed to be able to open again. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jun 23, 2024 5:56:42 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. This puts it more accurate. In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53 If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32 The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996 "Let all the children boogie." ~ David Bowie. What does he know? He died of cancer. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 23, 2024 6:01:22 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. This puts it more accurate. In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53 If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32 The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996 About a month ago I stumbled upon this book by Hugh Brockwell Ripman, Questions and Answers Along the Way (from his meetings in Washington DC), he was a student of the Gurdjieff teaching, and briefly met Gurdjieff in 1948. He became a student of PD Ouspensky in 1934, as well as Madame Ouspensky. I had his earlier book, Search For Truth, so I ordered the newer book, published in 2009. It's very good, most new books out don't add much. After quoting Norbu here I went to bed and read the following, at my bookmark, hadn't read it previously. He starts Chapter 4, The Silent Witness with a quote, he's talking to new people: Like two birds of golden plumage, inseparable companion, the individual self and the immortal Self are perched on the branches of the selfsame tree. The former tastes of the sweet and bitter fruits of the tree; the latter, tasting of neither, calmly observes. The Upanishads I spoke last time about the first step in getting to know oneself better and having the opportunity to prove to oneself whether what Gurdjieff says about man's condition and situation is true for you personally. I spoke about a method of observation of self--of one's thoughts, one's emotions, one's sensations, one's actions--which requires a special effort with attention: a division of attention into two parts. One of these parts is directed towards whatever activity it's engaged in, whether it be thought or action or whatever, and the other is directed to the experience of a point of awareness of what is going on. I call it the Silent Witness. It's an impartial, unjudgmental witness to what goes on. It is extremely difficult to do this, and you will find you can only do it for a split second, and then you find yourself with your attention wholly drawn into what you're doing: but with practice it becomes more possible. Q: Could you say more about the Silent Witness? HBR: Well, you start with the fact that it is silent. It is not talking or thinking about what you are doing, but it is aware of what you are doing. You know, for instance, that you can be absorbed in a book and be absolutely unaware of your posture or the sensations of your body because you are lost in the book. You also know that if I call your attention to that, you become more aware of your posture and the sensations which are there all the time. The Silent Witness pays attention to what goes on in the centers: to what goes on in the head, to what goes on in the heart, to what goes on in the body. It simply pays attention. It's like listening to music. You don't have to manipulate the impressions you receive from music; you just receive them. The Silent Witness just receives impressions from your behavior. She hears your voice, both your inner and your outer voice; she is aware of what happens to you. You have to struggle towards this. But at any rate, be sure that it's not thinking or internally talking about what's going on in you. It is simply being aware, as though each function had a mirror placed in front of it. pages 54,55 |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 23, 2024 6:08:48 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. This puts it more accurate. In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53 If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32 The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996 This quote is also misleading. Who/what is it that would make an effort to not get distracted? Who/what is it that imagines a need to be present?  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 23, 2024 6:19:09 GMT -5
The Norbu video is a little misleading. This puts it more accurate. In general not getting distracted means being present in everything we do: for example, if I think of getting up and walking, I get up with the recognition that this thought has arisen. It does not mean I have to assiduously think, "I am getting up": presence in what I have thought and what I am now doing is enough. You must not confuse presence with the effort of maintaining a thought. pg 53 If our mind, the "King who creates everything," is not in its authentic state, then even if we apply the tantric methods of "developing" and "perfecting" and recite numerous mantras, we are not on the path of total liberation. One must overthrow the King to conquer the kingdom--it is hardly enough to subjugate some members of the court or a part of the populace. Likewise, if we do not know or figure out how to maintain presence without getting sidetracked, but let ourselves get lost in distraction and illusion, we will never free ourselves from limitless transmigration. On the other hand, if our mind does not slip out of focus and lose track of itself; if it refuses to allow itself to be conditioned by illusion and instead manages to gain self-control and maintain presence of its true state, it becomes the essence of all the teachings and the root of all paths. pg 31,32 The Mirror, Advice on the Presence of Awareness, Namkhai Norbu, 1983, 1989, 1996 This quote is also misleading. Who/what is it that would make an effort to not get distracted? Who/what is it that imagines a need to be present? Everything depends upon ~you~, that's the whole point. ~You~ have to decide that. I just added a second quote, and a Upanishad quote, to this, from Mr. Ripman, it is somewhat helpful, unless it isn't. Everything centers around what your aim is. If you have no aim, the words mean nothing, it's just like reading baseball scores. The most important part of the quote, finding out the meaning of distraction and illusion. If you don't know what it means to be present, then you are never present. I can't help that. But my point is the video isn't clear about the difference between thought-mental-processing, and awareness. Added note, just started listening to the video again. The first eight minutes are very clear, the whole video has to be heard on that basis. Thoughts-mental-processing mean very little, like a fly on an elephant. Awareness means everything. And neither Norbu nor Ripman mean ordinary awareness, which is mostly unconscious, that is, it just happens. This extraordinary awareness, means you are present to what you are doing. Otherwise, nobody at home. Mere thinking, mere feeling/emotions, mere sensations, mere bodily actions, mean, nobody at home. Nobody. ZD, listen to at least the first eight minutes of the Norbu video. If you don't get that, I don't want anything you think you have. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Jun 23, 2024 6:29:50 GMT -5
The vid talks about integrating what happens in meditation sessions with everyday life. I listened to this while doing some work. The practice explained may indeed lead to a hot boil of the psychological sense of self, at which point it may no longer seem advantageous to cling to it so tightly. It could almost work as an inwardly directed form of morality in which one is in a constant state of observation and discernment, whilst inviting the "Knowledge of the absence of self nature". If listened to in light of the potential for their being no inherent self, it would be understood that it is not a mental knowledge per se, which is something we've talked about (Greek: gnossis v episteme, Spanish: conocer v saber, etc). The psycho-mento-personal struggle is to take such ideas as 'fact/belief' and pursue them at all cost (to the self). Some may get a glimpse, let go of a shit ton of baggage, and think they are done, and then the mind takes over again and creates a lot of personal stories around the 'experience', maybe forms a new cult/sect/religion/path (different designer bag, same mind tricks). And maybe they even mean well. Who knows? But the true KNOWLEDGE is having been Here, being Here, and stabilized Here, which kinda brings me to the point I find a bit misleading. At around 17:00, there's a discussion about steeping on a thorn and saying 'ow', which I sense as indicative of some ignorance. I do not know of the intention of presenting that in such an exposition, but I suspect it creates confusion. Maybe I misunderstood it, but to conclude that saying 'ow' means that one is "still subject to the dualistic condition and that the absence of self nature...." seems to be indicative of having had the realization of no self, but then being attached to that Nothingness. Experiencing pain via the body is entirely within the realm of possibilities, and has very little to do with self, if ya know what I mean. This 'attachment to Nothingness' is not uncommon with anyone who has had the realization, but in a way, it is only halfway to Here. I sometimes get the feeling that some of the push back here on the board seems to unconsciously question this, which is good. Interestingly, soon thereafter, the video goes on to address something akin to an "attachment to Freedom", which is often part of the subsequent journey to Here after Nothingness (and detachment from it) has been realized. At least that's how I would explain it away in abstractions. I'd be curious to hear others' ideas on this. In the Plotinus model, the journey to Here transcends up through the 'levels' of SVP existence, maybe gets a glimpse of Nous stuff, maybe even The One/ Here. Maybe they even understand IT deeply enough to say (i.e., with a sense of Gnossis/Knowledge) that EVERYTHING emanates from/as/within The One as THIS, right Here, right Now. Either way, to get Here, one will need to travel light. But as you stated later to SDP, same same, but different expression and/or value (and path), depending on how the mind studying/praying/meditating/etc hears it. I enjoyed the vid. It reminded me of so many things:self-inquiry, surrender, mindfulness, ATA. It reminded me of Hedderman's "living in what's not happening." I particularly liked the poison cup analogy to explain "presence." I enjoyed the vid much like I enjoy reading RM or listening to Hedderman or Tony Parsons. It's like listening to different composers. I don't agree or disagree with any of it. As to the "ow" comment. It reminded me of Thic Quang Duc. Quite a high bar huh. Freedom can be misconstrued. I have a thirteen year old granddaughter. Smart as a whip. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 23, 2024 7:39:36 GMT -5
"Let all the children boogie." ~ David Bowie. What does he know? He died of cancer.  |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 23, 2024 7:51:10 GMT -5
It's interesting that work is done in sitting practice, but more often than not, an opening up happens unexpectedly at some other time. Sitting practice for me was (and on occasion these days even, is) a way of confirmation and stabilization. And also a focus of curiosity. Eyes/mind open 16/7 questioning was my primary mode of exploration. Witnessing inner movements as the outside flowed. Ever subtler - similar to your descriptions of sitting. Seems to me that it's common for many people to seek out a a quiet moment now and then. And solitary walks. Skiing is an added dimension to the walks. Swimming an added dimension to the quiet moment. These are a sort of pre-cursor to the two kinds of meditation. Something people do that they might not connect with meditation, but similar effects. Likely that the predilection for one or the other effects the mode of meditation they eventually pursue - assuming they ever "get that far". And then there are some folks who have minds that are like sharks. They always have to be on the move. It's as if they feel that if they stop talking/thinking/doing, even for a minute, they will cease to exist.An elderly Jamaican woman once told me that, you have to get through a lot of Sharks to get to the Dolphin. |
|
This 'attachment to Nothingness' is not uncommon with anyone who has had the realization, but in a way, it is only halfway to Here. I sometimes get the feeling that some of the push back here on the board seems to unconsciously question this, which is good.
