|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 13, 2014 16:12:44 GMT -5
Yea........it's an enigma....... sdp Where I entered the conversation is when the comment was made that noticing (realization) requires effort. While the distinction between the effort required in practice, and the effortlessness of realization itself, may seem like a game of semantics to one who's not interested in the distinction, it's important because it means that the seeking effort is the real game. One is manipulating oneself into a position where something can be effortlessly seen. If it is effortless, it can be seen without the self manipulation if there is the willingness to see. If there is not, what is the real aim of the practice? Does one practice in order to become willing to effortlessly see? That game is what makes it complicated. I guess I'm getting closer to understanding your position, however, this seems like new information, from you. I don't recall you ever giving an indication that effort in relation to realization involving any means is necessary or even permissible. I guess it's possible I have just been talking past you for five years. I guess it's too late to ask, if realization is effortless, then why isn't everybody realized? sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 13, 2014 16:16:57 GMT -5
Yeah, Quinn and I have apparently been talking about different uses of meditation, which is fine.  I thought we were talking about effort (using an example from meditation) and whether it's applicable to reducing zombie-hood (becoming more conscious). That's what I've been talking about (and I defined, somewhat, such [ conscious] effort in an earlier post). sdp |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2014 16:18:34 GMT -5
It's clear that effort should never be directed toward the effortless, which is why the distinction is being made. IOW, a practice aimed at any sort of realization is problematic from the start. Practice is in the realm of mind, and so if there is a practice for understanding mind then I'd say this is useful. However, I'm not sure that there is. In the realm of mind, change comes about through understanding. To use Quinn's example, allowing feelings rather than trying to escape them is useful, but it's not really the result of practice but rather understanding how futile and self destructive suppressing emotions is. When mind sees that clearly, it simply doesn't try to escape them, which is not a reconditioning practice. The understanding is what alters the conditioning without any further effort involved. (We could say there is effort involved in understanding) One may gain awareness and understanding through a practice aimed at reconditioning the mind, but it's important to see that changing conditioning is a function of mental clarity and not mental retraining. Mind is functioning far better than ego imagines it does and is always a few steps ahead. It's ego that positions itself as retrainer of mind. Mind isn't being retrained. At best, it is being educated. It's good to take the appearance of effort out of such processes because mind uses the idea in the way you talked about it; as cause for more and more practice, which can become a stalling tactic very quickly. Maybe it can happen that way and maybe not. For me, it was the opposite of what you wrote. The understanding came after the experience of allowing. It became something I realized was true, not because someone told me or I read it somewhere but because I experienced it. And I experienced it because I practiced sitting there - for 1 second, then 5 seconds, etc, until I stopped running scared and faced it. Then, of course, it was quite laughable.   By 'understanding' I don't mean reading or hearing it somewhere. Yes, one can understand by experiencing. And yes, I can see how it becomes a practice to experience. The point I'm trying to make is that you're not reconditioning the mind through the practice, you're coming to an understanding through the experience. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 13, 2014 16:22:46 GMT -5
Where I entered the conversation is when the comment was made that noticing (realization) requires effort. While the distinction between the effort required in practice, and the effortlessness of realization itself, may seem like a game of semantics to one who's not interested in the distinction, it's important because it means that the seeking effort is the real game. One is manipulating oneself into a position where something can be effortlessly seen. If it is effortless, it can be seen without the self manipulation if there is the willingness to see. If there is not, what is the real aim of the practice? Does one practice in order to become willing to effortlessly see? That game is what makes it complicated. I guess I'm getting closer to understanding your position, however, this seems like new information, from you. I don't recall you ever giving an indication that effort in relation to realization involving any means is necessary or even permissible. I guess it's possible I have just been talking past you for five years. I guess it's too late to ask, if realization is effortless, then why isn't everybody realized? sdp sorry, can't help myself... ((**muttley snicker**))
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2014 16:24:02 GMT -5
That's what it is to me too. One you is conditioned to move against another you, and that's a split mind mind game. I don't have a problem calling that effort. Then I would say it's a fruitful game, using one to dislodge the other. The first disappears when the second does. Maybe so, but apparently there's no interest in understanding what you're actually doing. If there's more interest in the game, the game is likely to go on forever. When do you throw both thorns away? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2014 17:12:32 GMT -5
Where I entered the conversation is when the comment was made that noticing (realization) requires effort. While the distinction between the effort required in practice, and the effortlessness of realization itself, may seem like a game of semantics to one who's not interested in the distinction, it's important because it means that the seeking effort is the real game. One is manipulating oneself into a position where something can be effortlessly seen. If it is effortless, it can be seen without the self manipulation if there is the willingness to see. If there is not, what is the real aim of the practice? Does one practice in order to become willing to effortlessly see? That game is what makes it complicated. I guess I'm getting closer to understanding your position, however, this seems like new information, from you. I don't recall you ever giving an indication that effort in relation to realization involving any means is necessary or even permissible. I guess it's possible I have just been talking past you for five years. I guess it's too late to ask, if realization is effortless, then why isn't everybody realized? sdp Because a great deal of effort is expended to avoid that realization in the seeking of whatever is sought. There are some things that can be done in the realm of mind, which I talk about, but self realization really has nothing to do with mind. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2014 17:19:50 GMT -5
I thought we were talking about effort (using an example from meditation) and whether it's applicable to reducing zombie-hood (becoming more conscious). That's what I've been talking about (and I defined, somewhat, such [ conscious] effort in an earlier post). sdp That's what I've been talking about too. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 13, 2014 17:30:46 GMT -5
Then I would say it's a fruitful game, using one to dislodge the other. The first disappears when the second does. Maybe so, but apparently there's no interest in understanding what you're actually doing. If there's more interest in the game, the game is likely to go on forever. When do you throw both thorns away? don't. "The first disappears when the second does." Don't understand your comment about no interest in understanding. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 13, 2014 17:31:18 GMT -5
I thought we were talking about effort (using an example from meditation) and whether it's applicable to reducing zombie-hood (becoming more conscious). That's what I've been talking about (and I defined, somewhat, such [ conscious] effort in an earlier post). sdp Yeah. No confusion there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 18:01:17 GMT -5
This experience of observing in an everyday situation is one I share: noticing a train of thought ending and attention shifting to immediate surroundings. Attention shifting from thought to feeling to quiet. The source of the impetus for the directing of attention, and the nature of that source can each be investigated in direct experience. This source and it's nature are empty, void, beyond direct description, and not anything that any pattern localized to "my brain/mind/body" can claim credit for. This is encompassed in what Damiani referred to in your quote, all you need do is specialize the thought that you are observing the metamorphosis of. It might seem like effort to direct attention, but that's an appearance. Ultimately, the only thing that would wrench and grasp attention away from ego is just ego in another guise, and that's what's meant by the term "split mind". What the word "shift" refers to in "shift of attention" from dead mind involves an opening and a relaxing. As it happens there is sort of a release, a lifting, a lightness and a neutrality that the ego can characterize as mundane, boring, uneventful and lacking of stimulation or interest. The witness knows no pride, no exhaustion, no preferences and doesn't appear as a result of coercion. If it's muscular, it's not clarity. I think I have experienced neutrality by doing the Harding experiments. It seems like the substratum of consciousness, a silent presence underlying mental activity. I can doubt many things, but it is difficult to doubt this presence, which is simultaneously an absence. Give it your best shot. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 18:12:11 GMT -5
Maybe so, but apparently there's no interest in understanding what you're actually doing. If there's more interest in the game, the game is likely to go on forever. When do you throw both thorns away? don't. "The first disappears when the second does." Don't understand your comment about no interest in understanding. Both thorns are being imagined. Where is the interest in seeing this?
The second thorn and the pain it gives is being used as a protection, so it can't disappear, until the want for protection is released.
|
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 13, 2014 18:32:02 GMT -5
You don't. "The first disappears when the second does." Don't understand your comment about no interest in understanding. Both thorns are being imagined. Where is the interest in seeing this?
The second thorn and the pain it gives is being used as a protection, so it can't disappear, until the want for protection is released.
The pain from the thorn is not imagined, only the thorn itself. The same is true for all suffering. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 18:34:01 GMT -5
Both thorns are being imagined. Where is the interest in seeing this?
The second thorn and the pain it gives is being used as a protection, so it can't disappear, until the want for protection is released.
The pain from the thorn is not imagined, only the thorn itself. The same is true for all suffering. What is the thorn made from? |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 13, 2014 18:38:31 GMT -5
There are hundreds of different forms of meditation. Really what I was talking about there was the self-inquiry arm of Vipassana. Meditation that's purely resting in awareness is cool too. My original point was that for a beginning meditator who's steeped in unconsciousness and strongly identified with thoughts, effort is required to begin seeing even slightly clearer. Part of that effort often has to do with resisting the urge to turn away from what makes us uncomfortable. Another part is resisting the urge to take up residence in Blissville. There are quite a few pitfalls to be aware of and they may require effort. For those who don't want to call that effort, fine. I get the feeling, though, that you're (collective you) adding 'will power' and 'battle' and all sorts of things to the word effort. To me, effort is just a description of that movement that feels contrary to conditioning. Here is part of the story of how and why I first picked up meditation: "When I began meditating in 2006 I did so because I was locked into living in a house with a witch of a woman, who could control my emotions, and make me angry and upset with her incessant nonsensical bit*hing and badgering. She could make me want to knock her out and I found that disturbing. Her regular "fits" of rage were so bad that I had to put a lock on the inside of my bedroom door to keep her out. At first I could not resist arguing angrily with her, even through a closed door. Later I resorted to wearing headphones while watching TV in my bedroom to tune out her haranguing until she wore herself out and went to sleep in her room. But it was the painful awareness of not being able to deal with this situation properly that eventually made me realize that until I got control of myself, these angry thoughts and emotions, I could never hope to find peace. So one day I began to meditate with the idea that I must learn the art of separating from my thoughts and emotions, and find the means to gain control over my reactions. Though I did not like the lack of emotional control, the awareness of that lack would eventually morph into a longing for the ability to remain unmoved in the face of torment. So I resolved to sit every morning for 20 or 30 minutes observing my mind stuff. After a while noticed a growth in increasing objectivity to things inside and out. In some ways it seemed like putting on a kind of armour in preparation to deal with whatever awaited me "out there" in the world beyond my waking meditation and bedroom door. I persisted in my meditation and one day began to notice a clearly increasing immunity to this womans angry, jealous, possessive and hateful words and antics.. Gradually but inexorably she disturbed me less and less as I learned to stop resenting her and began to use, almost look forward to, her antics as daily practice in remaining quietly detached. My progress did not escape her notice. I continued to get better at enduring her outlandishness calmly and soon that `calm' had unexpected results. First, in spite of herself, I saw that she found it increasingly difficult to react badly for long...her bouts of rage became less intense, and less long lasting. She would retreat to her room faster, more often and for longer periods of time, leaving me with more and more peace. I could see that she was discovering the feedback of "pain and fear" that emotional non-reaction can wreak, and it wasn't long before she was compelled, by her own behest, to move out of my home and thus resolving the issue for me without effort on my part." Nice. We can begin meditation for a huge variety of reasons. I mostly just wanted to relax! It certainly turned in to more than I bargained for. Detachment is an interesting conversation. People get worked up about that word because it connotes a disorder, but I've come to see it as a detachment from the story as opposed to any person or feelings. Gotta be able to see the story to realize it's a story.  |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 13, 2014 18:39:54 GMT -5
The pain from the thorn is not imagined, only the thorn itself. The same is true for all suffering. What is the thorn made from? Memories, beliefs, incessant thoughts - all imagination. |
|
