|
Post by relinquish on Jul 28, 2014 3:52:40 GMT -5
Well yeah, that's pretty much what I was driving at. I guess I assumed that was obvious. I was pretty sure I knew what you meant by "saying yes" but other than that, The OP just sort of made my eyebrow raise. It seems that many peeps have the idea that saying "yes" to 'Everything' (total acceptance) is a direct path to liberation. I'm just throwing my two cents into that idea. As is usually the case, cause and effect are habitually confused and so one goes off trying to practice an effect. The same can be said for still mind this and that. What I'm ultimately aiming at is the realization that both "yes" and "no" share a fundamentally causeless origin. No real effort has ever been involved in their appearance. We can't help but be saying one or the other of them at any given moment, at least so long as we're alive......and, apparently, we are. ; )
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 5:01:33 GMT -5
Post by tzujanli on Jul 28, 2014 5:01:33 GMT -5
I was pretty sure I knew what you meant by "saying yes" but other than that, The OP just sort of made my eyebrow raise. As is usually the case, cause and effect are habitually confused and so one goes off trying to practice an effect. The same can be said for still mind this and that. What I'm ultimately aiming at is the realization that both "yes" and "no" share a fundamentally causeless origin. No real effort has ever been involved in their appearance. We can't help but be saying one or the other of them at any given moment, at least so long as we're alive......and, apparently, we are. ; ) Yep, when realization reveals duality, the non-duality believers hypermind another story to explain 'their' belief to 'their' satisfaction..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 5:49:44 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 5:49:44 GMT -5
What I'm ultimately aiming at is the realization that both "yes" and "no" share a fundamentally causeless origin. No real effort has ever been involved in their appearance. We can't help but be saying one or the other of them at any given moment, at least so long as we're alive......and, apparently, we are. ; ) Yep, when realization reveals duality, the non-duality believers hypermind another story to explain 'their' belief to 'their' satisfaction.. No they don't. You are just putting a negative spin on something that eludes you. Total defense mechanism.
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Jul 28, 2014 6:04:17 GMT -5
What I'm ultimately aiming at is the realization that both "yes" and "no" share a fundamentally causeless origin. No real effort has ever been involved in their appearance. We can't help but be saying one or the other of them at any given moment, at least so long as we're alive......and, apparently, we are. ; ) Yep, when realization reveals duality, the non-duality believers hypermind another story to explain 'their' belief to 'their' satisfaction.. One shared, fundamentally causeless origin is duality?
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 7:15:32 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 28, 2014 7:15:32 GMT -5
Always saying "yes" to 'Everything' does not actually equal never saying "no" to anything. "No" happens sometimes. Notice, that whenever it does, it has already been 'said "yes" to'. "After the final no there comes a yes / And on that yes the future the world depends". Wallace Stevens
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 12:42:00 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Jul 28, 2014 12:42:00 GMT -5
Yep, when realization reveals duality, the non-duality believers hypermind another story to explain 'their' belief to 'their' satisfaction.. One shared, fundamentally causeless origin is duality? "saying one or the other of them" (yes or no) "in any given moment" is. The witness says neither yes, nor no, nor maybe.
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 15:54:15 GMT -5
Post by silence on Jul 28, 2014 15:54:15 GMT -5
I was pretty sure I knew what you meant by "saying yes" but other than that, The OP just sort of made my eyebrow raise. As is usually the case, cause and effect are habitually confused and so one goes off trying to practice an effect. The same can be said for still mind this and that. What I'm ultimately aiming at is the realization that both "yes" and "no" share a fundamentally causeless origin. No real effort has ever been involved in their appearance. We can't help but be saying one or the other of them at any given moment, at least so long as we're alive......and, apparently, we are. ; ) I don't really follow what you're getting at.
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Jul 28, 2014 16:15:06 GMT -5
One shared, fundamentally causeless origin is duality? The witness says neither yes, nor no, nor maybe. Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. It can be quite shocking to discover the total absence of resistance at the very heart of all apparent resistance.
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 17:17:03 GMT -5
Post by enigma on Jul 28, 2014 17:17:03 GMT -5
The witness says neither yes, nor no, nor maybe. Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. It doesn't, since the whole question of what 'it says' is misconceived.
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 18:04:15 GMT -5
Post by tzujanli on Jul 28, 2014 18:04:15 GMT -5
Yep, when realization reveals duality, the non-duality believers hypermind another story to explain 'their' belief to 'their' satisfaction.. One shared, fundamentally causeless origin is duality? No.. and, it's also not " One shared, fundamentally causeless origin", but.. once the ideology of " One shared, fundamentally causeless origin" is invoked, the contrasting principle mutually arises, they are interdependent concepts.. duality is only as valid as non-duality, when those concepts are let go the experiencer is that much less burdened by the those attachments.. It's like the video where the "hard core advaitist couple" try to dismiss their use of words that describe what is happening, words like; I me you we they us them, they try to absolve themselves for not adhering to their own beliefs.. they stumble all over their own mistakes believing that denial and dismissiveness validate their beliefs.. take their statement that, 'sex happens but there's no one doing it', which is absurd else there would be no preference as to partner(s).. the other folly that 'hard core advaitists' try to perpetrate on others is that the advaitists have experienced something that non-advaitists haven't, so unless you agree with them you can't 'understand'.. When the discussions evolve past beliefs, duality/non-duality, and become open and authentic expressions of the actual experiences, rather than the beliefs about those experiences.. maybe this hamster-wheel of a forum will see the happening for what it is...
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Jul 28, 2014 18:55:57 GMT -5
Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. It doesn't, since the whole question of what 'it says' is misconceived. That is certainly what is seen 'in the end', sure.
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 20:02:57 GMT -5
Post by tzujanli on Jul 28, 2014 20:02:57 GMT -5
It doesn't, since the whole question of what 'it says' is misconceived. That is certainly what is seen 'in the end', sure. To raise the question is a misconception, it is to engage the mind in mind-play.. there is no 'end', only new points of departure.. I've asked lots of people, from varied understandings and beliefs about their existence, and.. i don't recall anyone that actually thinks/believes they are confined/defined by their 'body-mind'.. most people seem to have the same experience i have, that such notions as body-mind, or ego, or duality, or non-duality, or me or you, us and them, those concepts are usually suspended and the experience is a 'fluid happening', but.. when the situation benefits from integrating intelligence with experience, the experiencer that is not attached to a particular or specialized perspective move between non-duality/duality and oneness/many-ness without hesitation or resistance..
|
|
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 20:51:25 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Jul 28, 2014 20:51:25 GMT -5
The witness says neither yes, nor no, nor maybe. Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. I guess I can see how it might be helpful to suggest this to someone particularly caught up in unconscious patterns of resistance. It can be quite shocking to discover the total absence of resistance at the very heart of all apparent resistance. Any such discovery is done after the fact. Resistance and a sense of separation are intimately linked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 23:06:32 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 23:06:32 GMT -5
The witness says neither yes, nor no, nor maybe. Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. It can be quite shocking to discover the total absence of resistance at the very heart of all apparent resistance. What do you mean "apparent" resistance? There's no such thing as illusiory resistance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YES
Jul 28, 2014 23:09:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 23:09:43 GMT -5
Right, though I do feel that the fact that it never says "no" may deserve special emphasis and recognition. It can be quite shocking to discover the total absence of resistance at the very heart of all apparent resistance. What do you mean "apparent" resistance? There's no such thing as merely apparent resistance. Sounds like some Neo-Advaita stuff.
|
|