|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 18:19:17 GMT -5
From almost total unconsciousness (beginning meditation), noticing takes effort. That seems really obvious to me. The word commitment comes to mind. I don't think it is a coincidence that those who have committed themselves to long periods of internal vigilance/exploration over long periods of time usually end up with a kind of indefinable authority and clarity that other so called teachers seem to lack. Niz, Ramana, Tolle, ZD, Adyashanti, Klein, Mooji to name a few who have that in common. Likewise. sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 18:22:52 GMT -5
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. Agreed. Unconsciousness actually has a function for the self identification. It's done rather purposely to avoid discomfort, so there's an ongoing tendency to fall back into unconsciousness. Yea, as in default setting, for most people, probably even most here on ST's. sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 18:36:27 GMT -5
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. Correct. When we first start meditating or doing ATA, we think, "I've got to remember to do this. I can see that I've been conditioned to live like a robot that gets constantly jerked around by thoughts, and if I want to get free, I've got to change this habit and pay attention to what is." After having such a thought, we shift attention to whatever can be seen or heard. Shortly thereafter, we notice that we've gotten lost in thoughts again, and we feel as if we are a person who is making an effort to constantly shift attention back to "what is." This kind of split-mind internal conversation is based upon the illusion that we're a person "in here" making an effort to break a bad habit--habitual self-referential thought or habitual thought that is utterly unnecessary (fantasy, judgment, second-guessing, tape loops, etc). In fact, what we ARE is the cosmos intelligently responding to various stimuli, including thoughts. Somewhere Adyashanti has said that "true meditation" begins AFTER the illusion of selfhood collapses. What he means is that from that point onward, there is no illusion that there is a someone behind the activity of what's happening, so it becomes obvious that the cosmos is the real meditator, whenever meditation occurs, rather than a person. This eliminates all "gaining" ideas. It is then seen that there is no one who is going to achieve anything, or become anything, or get anything as a result of meditation; meditation/ATA is simply something that the cosmos may or may not do, when manifesting as a human being, and the cosmos is also what watches whatever is happening. As noted elsewhere, there seem to be three main types of thinking--1) problem solving, 2) Planning, and 3) self-referencing. If self-referential thinking ceases, then the body/mind continues to respond intelligently to whatever is happening, but without referencing everything back to a personal self. Whatever is happening is "empty." Thinking may occur, or not, but it doesn't matter either way. A sage might go through the day with virtually no thoughts, or with lots of thoughts, but generally speaking, a sage will spend more time being alertly aware of "what is" as it is than someone who has never investigated the nature of mind or broken the habit of engaging in "unnecessary and superfluous" thoughts (comparing thoughts, desiring thoughts, judging thoughts, second-guessing thoughts, fantasies, reflections, tape loops, etc). The sage generally lives in the present moment rather than in memories about the past or fantasies about the future. The sage responds to reality as it IS rather than to ideas about how it "should be" or "ought to be." A sage is not attached to expectations of any kind because she never knows what will happen next. She might make plans, but she (wisely) does not get attached to them. You make it sound like a magic trick. The audience doesn't know how the trick works, the sages are in on the trade secret. So there isn't a ~way~ to get from here to there? sdp |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 18:48:12 GMT -5
I assume the "random mutation" you're referring to is ego, or self identification. I don't see it as a mutation but rather as a natural consequence of increased sophistication of the mind. This greater potential, which we could say is the result of mutation (in this context) improves survivability, and also allows for biological self awareness, but that doesn't imply that self identification is a survival advantage. The mutation I'm talking about is the extremely complex process of the brain that functions as the capacity for self reflection, labeling and problem solving. And I'm saying the capacity for self reflection is one aspect of an advanced intellect, but that aspect alone doesn't imply survival advantage. (If the absence of a capacity is a disadvantage, then the presence of it is an advantage)  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 11, 2014 18:50:00 GMT -5
The word commitment comes to mind. I don't think it is a coincidence that those who have committed themselves to long periods of internal vigilance/exploration over long periods of time usually end up with a kind of indefinable authority and clarity that other so called teachers seem to lack. Niz, Ramana, Tolle, ZD, Adyashanti, Klein, Mooji to name a few who have that in common. Likewise. sdp Likewise what? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 18:55:17 GMT -5
I think you should have at least gotten an honorable mention .. hehe |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 11, 2014 18:56:14 GMT -5
An unfortunate break between pages 5 & 6, the previous two posts were about conscious efforts, the comment likewise, likewise. (Although you could probably leave Ramana and Tolle off the list). sdp |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2014 19:12:49 GMT -5
An unfortunate break between pages 5 & 6, the previous two posts were about conscious efforts, the comment likewise, likewise. (Although you could probably leave Ramana and Tolle off the list). sdp leave Ramana off? what.......?  although any list you might come up with is likely to be problematic |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 11, 2014 19:26:59 GMT -5
From almost total unconsciousness (beginning meditation), noticing takes effort. That seems really obvious to me. The word commitment comes to mind. I don't think it is a coincidence that those who have committed themselves to long periods of internal vigilance/exploration over long periods of time usually end up with a kind of indefinable authority and clarity that other so called teachers seem to lack. Niz, Ramana, Tolle, ZD, Adyashanti, Klein, Mooji to name a few who have that in common. Likewise. heh heh. (I agree.) |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 11, 2014 19:27:11 GMT -5
An unfortunate break between pages 5 & 6, the previous two posts were about conscious efforts, the comment likewise, likewise. (Although you could probably leave Ramana and Tolle off the list). sdp Ramana and Tolle were exceptions in the list because both had the sense of personal selfhood disappear involuntarily. But what they have in common with the others in the list is that, like the others post loss of selfhood, there is a strong preference for being with Being whenever possible. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 11, 2014 19:41:14 GMT -5
An unfortunate break between pages 5 & 6, the previous two posts were about conscious efforts, the comment likewise, likewise. (Although you could probably leave Ramana and Tolle off the list). sdp Ramana and Tolle were exceptions in the list because both had the sense of personal selfhood disappear involuntarily. But what they have in common with the others in the list is that, like the others post loss of selfhood, there is a strong preference for being with Being whenever possible. ...being with Being? Awww, could you please explain that bit? |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 11, 2014 19:44:02 GMT -5
Ramana and Tolle were exceptions in the list because both had the sense of personal selfhood disappear involuntarily. But what they have in common with the others in the list is that, like the others post loss of selfhood, there is a strong preference for being with Being whenever possible. ...being with Being? Awww, could you please explain that bit? being with their self. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 11, 2014 19:57:56 GMT -5
...being with Being? Awww, could you please explain that bit? being with their self. That's it?  |
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Aug 11, 2014 19:57:54 GMT -5
The mutation I'm talking about is the extremely complex process of the brain that functions as the capacity for self reflection, labeling and problem solving. And I'm saying the capacity for self reflection is one aspect of an advanced intellect, but that aspect alone doesn't imply survival advantage. (If the absence of a capacity is a disadvantage, then the presence of it is an advantage) Fair enough. Then I think we could say that it is the highly evolved advanced intellect as a whole that IS advantageous to survival, but the self reflection is simply a useless yet inevitable byproduct of it. |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 11, 2014 20:00:17 GMT -5
That's it? That's everything. |
|
