|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:01:58 GMT -5
Same thing was noticed here. Effort always involves a split mind in which one is struggling against oneself, and so resolving that struggle becomes the actual issue. ha! ha! lucky me! By the time I fell into practice the internet was in full swing and there were all these dudes writing about split-mind and how there was nothing to find or achieve and advising not to dwell in mind. I guess I kinda' cheated.  Dat's good! It means all this jabbering is actually useful sometimes.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 11, 2014 14:03:53 GMT -5
ha! ha! lucky me! By the time I fell into practice the internet was in full swing and there were all these dudes writing about split-mind and how there was nothing to find or achieve and advising not to dwell in mind. I guess I kinda' cheated. Dat's good! It means all this jabbering is actually useful sometimes. " useful"? ..  .. (** effortless snickerless snicker **) |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 14:08:28 GMT -5
Same thing was noticed here. Effort always involves a split mind in which one is struggling against oneself, and so resolving that struggle becomes the actual issue. Not my experience, but I probably have a broader definition of meditation than you two do. The effort (and thought) involved in returning to the breath or 'noticing' is, imo, part of meditation. Over time, it becomes less and less of a factor. A+ also (IMvhO). sdp |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 14:15:39 GMT -5
Seems to me there's thinking that requires effort -- like planning or strategic thinking, problem-solving (though not always), studying... -- and there's thinking that doesn't seem to require effort but may require work/energy -- daydreaming, revery, creative, opining, blathering -- and then there's thinking that seems to add energy, be revitalizing in some way -- inspiration and such. In my experience, ATA is not 'not thinking.' The intention of ATA is to continually shift attention back onto 'the actual minus thought,' in other words, bodily sensations. In practice, in my experience, ATA is a succession of no thought (attending the actual) and being submersed in thinking with automatic reminders to attend the actual. ATA is ATA and also the process of shifting attention back to TA. I've noticed that there are roughly two types of thinking experience. 1. Absorbed in it and lacking any sort of conscious witnessing of it; 2. a witnessing of thinking/thought. An example of the latter is what is happening right now, as I write this. An example of the former just happened and I am now reporting on it -- a colleague interrupted me with some work-related questions. I returned to this screen and had to re-read what I had written. It wasn't until just before I started writing again that I realized I had been in the type of thinking outlined in 1. And now, ATA. A+ ....you have passed the first test (coming to realize there is a distinction). I don't have much evidence on ST's that many people get there (there are noted exceptions, and I can only go by what's posted, meaning lack of evidence is not evidence of lack). Not asking for a public answer, but something to consider, which is the more natural state? Meaning, by % how much time is spend in 1. versus 2.? What does it '~ take~' to move from 1. to 2. or from 2. to 1.? sdp I don't know what you're talking about re: tests. I'm just trying to articulate experience. I put it out here to see if it's in the ballpark of how others may experience things. It seems like a boring no-brainer to me yet I share it because it's what I can share. On 'natural state,' I don't know. 97% seems high. During parenting, roughly 4 hours per weekday -- it's maybe 97%. During work, 7.5 hours, with enlightened procrastination techniques, maybe 60%. Commute maybe 80%. Drifting off to sleep 90%. Other, 60%. I don't have any say in going from 1 to 2. It just happens. And I'm not sure if it's more or less frequent. My guess is that enlightened procrastination techniques and other extracurricular interests have conditioned some reminders and grooves that have upped the frequency, but it's probably just wishful thinking. Going 2 to 1 is even more of a mystery. The fact that it happened is always recognized after the fact. Going 1 to 2 happens more consciously, by definition, kind of like a slippery slope into unconsciousness. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 14:18:36 GMT -5
Ba-da Bing....go. But I don't agree that it's effortless. What's effortless is to continually let thoughts go on and on and on and on and on and on........... that's easy and effortless...................................... ATA is not effortless..........until you get a taste of the state....and come to love it vs thought that drones on and on........... Thinking requires effort. Not thinking does not. What you're referring to as effortful is playing the split mind game of wanting to think and also wanting to not think. If not thinking does not require effort then that should be anyone's natural state, default state. Yes? So any time thought is not required then the mind is silent and alert. Yes? Anybody disagree? sdp |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:20:44 GMT -5
Yeah, but I don't see two parts to the process. Mind is structured as a doing thingy and can't function as a 'not doing' thingy, because mind is a process. (a verb) Hencely, to direct mind to not think is to ask it to think about not thinking. So, instead attention is directed away from mind. It's the same reason mind cannot be directed to not resist, and instead is directed to invite resistance. To direct mind to 'not do' is to throw it into existential crisis since it is a movement only, which ceases when not in motion. Minding can be alert activity or attention, maybe curiosity, observing, listening. Perhaps inarticulable or ineffable. I do, but it's one of those 'special' words, and we're all free to define it however we want. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:26:04 GMT -5
Seems to me there's thinking that requires effort -- like planning or strategic thinking, problem-solving (though not always), studying... -- and there's thinking that doesn't seem to require effort but may require work/energy -- daydreaming, revery, creative, opining, blathering -- and then there's thinking that seems to add energy, be revitalizing in some way -- inspiration and such. In my experience, ATA is not 'not thinking.' The intention of ATA is to continually shift attention back onto 'the actual minus thought,' in other words, bodily sensations. In practice, in my experience, ATA is a succession of no thought (attending the actual) and being submersed in thinking with automatic reminders to attend the actual. ATA is ATA and also the process of shifting attention back to TA. I've noticed that there are roughly two types of thinking experience. 1. Absorbed in it and lacking any sort of conscious witnessing of it; 2. a witnessing of thinking/thought. An example of the latter is what is happening right now, as I write this. An example of the former just happened and I am now reporting on it -- a colleague interrupted me with some work-related questions. I returned to this screen and had to re-read what I had written. It wasn't until just before I started writing again that I realized I had been in the type of thinking outlined in 1. And now, ATA. (there are noted exceptions, and I can only go by what's posted, meaning lack of evidence is not evidence of lack). Not asking for a public answer, but something to consider, which is the more natural state? Meaning, by % how much time is spend in 1. versus 2.? What does it '~ take~' to move from 1. to 2. or from 2. to 1.? sdp We talk rather continuously about that distinction here. (being conscious, witnessing, falling into the river, etc) Is this something new to you? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:31:27 GMT -5
Same thing was noticed here. Effort always involves a split mind in which one is struggling against oneself, and so resolving that struggle becomes the actual issue. Not my experience, but I probably have a broader definition of meditation than you two do. The effort (and thought) involved in returning to the breath or 'noticing' is, imo, part of meditation. Over time, it becomes less and less of a factor. But noticing is effortless. You don't notice by expending effort, and noticing doesn't require thought. Apparently, noticing means something different to you. I guess that's today's theme. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:33:09 GMT -5
Dat's good! It means all this jabbering is actually useful sometimes. " useful"? .. .. (** effortless snickerless snicker **)Yeah, useful. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 14:38:04 GMT -5
Thinking requires effort. Not thinking does not. What you're referring to as effortful is playing the split mind game of wanting to think and also wanting to not think. So any time thought is not required then the mind is silent and alert. Yes? Anybody disagree? sdp Yes. Do I get an A+? |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 14:45:37 GMT -5
If not thinking does not require effort then that should be anyone's natural state, default state. Yes? So any time thought is not required then the mind is silent and alert. Yes? Anybody disagree? sdp Yes. Do I get an A+? It's not clear what you're saying yes to. sdp |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 14:45:50 GMT -5
Not my experience, but I probably have a broader definition of meditation than you two do. The effort (and thought) involved in returning to the breath or 'noticing' is, imo, part of meditation. Over time, it becomes less and less of a factor. But noticing is effortless. You don't notice by expending effort, and noticing doesn't require thought. Apparently, noticing means something different to you. I guess that's today's theme. There is noticing. And there is recognizing one has not been noticing. Strictly speaking, one can't notice not noticing in the moment. It's only after the fact that not noticing is recognized. So maybe noticing requires no effort, is effortless. But what of this transitory phase between noticing and not noticing, or of not noticing itself? To me, the recognition and transition happens something like this: 'ah well I've been a little absorbed, what's happening?' (commence mindfulness or ATA). Perhaps, as I understand ZD, this shift is labeled an effort but isn't actually. I'm okay with that idea. It seems like conditioning to me, as I don't feel like I have any say in it at all. Some conditioned reminder pulls me out of the river. I'll be in the river again due to some sort of conditioning as well, unconscious hangups. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 15:03:34 GMT -5
A+ ....you have passed the first test (coming to realize there is a distinction). I don't have much evidence on ST's that many people get there (there are noted exceptions, and I can only go by what's posted, meaning lack of evidence is not evidence of lack). Not asking for a public answer, but something to consider, which is the more natural state? Meaning, by % how much time is spend in 1. versus 2.? What does it '~ take~' to move from 1. to 2. or from 2. to 1.? sdp We talk rather continuously about that distinction here. (being conscious, witnessing, falling into the river, etc) Is this something new to you? I said there are noted exceptions. There are the noted exceptions and then there seems to be many who have never experienced the silent mind, or seldom. I'm looking for the pleasure of movement from one to the other. Seems nobody can tell anybody how to get from one to the other. Seems it just sort of happens, or not. I'd just like for anybody to feel free to post their experience. sdp |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 15:21:33 GMT -5
We talk rather continuously about that distinction here. (being conscious, witnessing, falling into the river, etc) Is this something new to you? I said there are noted exceptions. There are the noted exceptions and then there seems to be many who have never experienced the silent mind, or seldom. I'm looking for the pleasure of movement from one to the other. Seems nobody can tell anybody how to get from one to the other. Seems it just sort of happens, or not. I'd just like for anybody to feel free to post their experience. sdp My hunch is that conditioning determines the movement either way. When I say it just sort of happens it is pointing to the fact that I don't really know what specific element of conditioning was the factor. Further, going from unconscious daydreaming, for example, to conscious noticing may be because of some sort of conditioned flag that is part of a daydream or rote experience. For example the discomfort of anger may remind one to be mindful, to attend to the actual. Whereas the pleasurable feelings may more easily keep one unconscious. I've noticed that feeling embarrassed by some memory (regret) is a good trigger to shift back into alertness. Of course it's interesting how I use the bad feelings as triggers more often than the good feelings. Actually the good feeling triggers are probably the ones that send me into unconsciousness more often. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 15:22:50 GMT -5
Yes. Do I get an A+? It's not clear what you're saying yes to. sdp The part I underlined. |
|
