|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 26, 2015 19:42:52 GMT -5
What you're doing here is obviously blowing off some steam. It's a form of self-therapy, and it's incredibly inconsiderate of the others who use this forum.  Your 'services' are always just. so. considerate - yeeaah. Remember. I said, "...but it doesn't change how I perceive things going on here." In spite of your own view of your own self to be always on target, I'd say nuh uh, nope. You're not qualified to judge me, let alone ANYbody else.  It's not funny, really.  |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Feb 27, 2015 1:07:10 GMT -5
Your 'services' are always just. so. considerate - yeeaah. Remember. I said, "...but it doesn't change how I perceive things going on here." In spite of your own view of your own self to be always on target, I'd say nuh uh, nope. You're not qualified to judge me, let alone ANYbody else. It's not funny, really. Neither was your and co's bouncing bunnies and mockery and all that 9 yards of grade school type behavior. (*silver shrug*) We have disagreements...Life goes on. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 27, 2015 6:39:29 GMT -5
The same Q arose over here. A lot of BS bubbled up as a result but didn't quit smelling. Solvents work on the principle of 'like dissolves like' (water is a solvent for most things containing water, some form of grease is a good solvent for greases and oils). The observing the observer loop could be brought up right now. Again, all this smells of BS and grease. Perhaps by keeping attention riveted on the witness, the witness disappears. ATA shifts attention from the conceptual to the senses. But actually it's attention on perception and so there is a constant connection to a perceiver, until there isn't. The mechanism for that? Have no clue -- that smells freshest. Yeah, I picked up that BS and grease odor too. Hehe. I contend that those things do not act as a solvent for self referential thinking, but rather realization does. In those terms ATA is a solvent for patterns of thought and emotion that would appear to obscure what can be realized, which is of course what is already the case. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 27, 2015 9:03:00 GMT -5
Yeah, I picked up that BS and grease odor too. Hehe. I contend that those things do not act as a solvent for self referential thinking, but rather realization does. In those terms ATA is a solvent for patterns of thought and emotion that would appear to obscure what can be realized, which is of course what is already the case. Yeah, ATA can lead to clarity, and clarity is the solvent for self referential thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 3, 2015 0:05:40 GMT -5
A still mind is a hyper-minder goal. Only an overworked monkey mind would find a still mind interesting. You are not the mind. That's all you have to know. Once you own that knowing, you're done with the spiritual circus and the 'still mind good/ active mind bad' strawman. Get involved and let it rip! I like that: Get involved and let it rip!! Yeah, as A-H say, there's a much more powerful stream/momentum already in place than you could ever create with your conscious monkey mind thoughts. It's total well-being, the natural state. In fact, this stream of absolute well-being is so powerful, that it takes a lot of hard work and effort to stay sick, poor and confused and exactly zero effort to stay healthy, wealthy and wise. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 3, 2015 0:17:02 GMT -5
To who do you speak, and why?.. your actions speak clearer than your words.. I speak to the bird in the mirror!  Perfect! |
|
|
|
Post by earnest on Mar 3, 2015 4:08:28 GMT -5
Thanks everyone for the replies, I feel very fortunate to be here. I need to head off to work so can't get into much of a discussion now. Laughter, I'm interested in those two questions you mentioned. why I asked (the op) was is that I can stop thinking at will, and that's nice, but whether I'm thinking or not isn't anywhere near as important as it used to be. Everything is easier without the mental commentary, but it's also easier without being bothered if the mental commentary is happening. And like peeps have said, when the bothering stops things go quiet by themselves!!  I understand the first part of this but not the 2nd.  Do you mean to say without being bothered with the question as to whether or not the mind is still? Do you mean it's easier not to concern yourself with the sort of "self-checking" that ZD mentioned? If you can stop your thinking at will you don't need my questions.  ... I would have asked them separately otherwise, but, they are: (1) Does thinking come naturally to a healthy person who would be considered by most other people to be well-adjusted? (2) Is it possible to pause this process, and what's the effect? Hi Laughter, bit slow on the response sorry. In response to your questions (1) just as naturally to the healthy person as to anyone else. (2) yeah its possible to pause. As to the effect,. Well,. it's quieter that's for sure, and everything keeps rolling on just fine. Life feels a lot smoother though and I have a lot more trust that the quiet space will bring forward what needs to be brought forward (without me trying to fk with it). I'm very thankful for it, but TBH it doesn't feel like that big a deal. To reference Reefs ah post,. It feels much easier to not fk with things than it does to fk with them. (better go find the swear jar...) |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 3, 2015 10:15:14 GMT -5
I understand the first part of this but not the 2nd. Do you mean to say without being bothered with the question as to whether or not the mind is still? Do you mean it's easier not to concern yourself with the sort of "self-checking" that ZD mentioned? If you can stop your thinking at will you don't need my questions. ... I would have asked them separately otherwise, but, they are: (1) Does thinking come naturally to a healthy person who would be considered by most other people to be well-adjusted? (2) Is it possible to pause this process, and what's the effect? Hi Laughter, bit slow on the response sorry. In response to your questions (1) just as naturally to the healthy person as to anyone else. (2) yeah its possible to pause. As to the effect,. Well,. it's quieter that's for sure, and everything keeps rolling on just fine. Life feels a lot smoother though and I have a lot more trust that the quiet space will bring forward what needs to be brought forward (without me trying to fk with it). I'm very thankful for it, but TBH it doesn't feel like that big a deal. To reference Reefs ah post,. It feels much easier to not fk with things than it does to fk with them. (better go find the swear jar...) Exactamente! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 3, 2015 13:56:08 GMT -5
I understand the first part of this but not the 2nd. Do you mean to say without being bothered with the question as to whether or not the mind is still? Do you mean it's easier not to concern yourself with the sort of "self-checking" that ZD mentioned? If you can stop your thinking at will you don't need my questions. ... I would have asked them separately otherwise, but, they are: (1) Does thinking come naturally to a healthy person who would be considered by most other people to be well-adjusted? (2) Is it possible to pause this process, and what's the effect? Hi Laughter, bit slow on the response sorry. In response to your questions (1) just as naturally to the healthy person as to anyone else. (2) yeah its possible to pause. As to the effect,. Well,. it's quieter that's for sure, and everything keeps rolling on just fine. Life feels a lot smoother though and I have a lot more trust that the quiet space will bring forward what needs to be brought forward (without me trying to fk with it). I'm very thankful for it, but TBH it doesn't feel like that big a deal. To reference Reefs ah post,. It feels much easier to not fk with things than it does to fk with them. (better go find the swear jar...) Yes, your description in (2) matches my idea and experience of a still mind, and no, it doesn't necessarily feel like a big deal, especially after it becomes a familiar state ... but I'd say that it is a big deal, but not in any woo-woo sense. Any apparent contradiction between that fact and the feeling is just a tricky twist of words by the mind. But bottom line, a still mind is as simple as you describe. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jul 26, 2024 13:46:54 GMT -5
I've been thinking about this still mind bizniz... What I've taken from a lot of talk about it is that it's a goal to obtain (but I could be wrong). Is a non-still mind seen as a problem? Do you need to move from having a non-still mind to a still mind? Do you have a still mind, or does still mind have a you? I can see how the persuit of a still mind could create a whole lot of gear grinding and frustration... (I know because I've poured years of effort into it!!! heh heh heh ) Once you've got a still mind can you lose it? A still or relatively still mind when there is no need for heightened mental activity is simply a sign of sanity. The goal isn't to become brain dead or lose your imagination. Everything you can categorize as mind is what you're looking at. If you can discern where you're looking from, that is the unshakable stillness. It's really a pretty simple matter. Nobody is achieving anything. I still think this is one of the best posts ever written. Thanks Silence |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 26, 2024 14:58:54 GMT -5
A still or relatively still mind when there is no need for heightened mental activity is simply a sign of sanity. The goal isn't to become brain dead or lose your imagination. Everything you can categorize as mind is what you're looking at. If you can discern where you're looking from, that is the unshakable stillness. It's really a pretty simple matter. Nobody is achieving anything. I still think this is one of the best posts ever written. Thanks Silence That's the meaning of practice, to keep returning to that. And there is no limit to the ~depth~ of that. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 27, 2024 4:45:34 GMT -5
I still think this is one of the best posts ever written. Thanks Silence That's the meaning of practice, to keep returning to that. And there is no limit to the ~depth~ of that. Other folks take an entirely different meaning away from that. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 27, 2024 10:27:35 GMT -5
That's the meaning of practice, to keep returning to that. And there is no limit to the ~depth~ of that. Other folks take an entirely different meaning away from that. Yes. When the idea that there is someone practicing, or someone needing to practice, falls away, there is true freedom. Then, one can go about his/her business effortlessly. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jul 27, 2024 10:43:01 GMT -5
Other folks take an entirely different meaning away from that. Yes. When the idea that there is someone practicing, or someone needing to practice, falls away, there is true freedom. Then, one can go about his/her business effortlessly. If there is no self in any sense, then what does 'go about his/her business even mean'? |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 27, 2024 11:16:48 GMT -5
Yes. When the idea that there is someone practicing, or someone needing to practice, falls away, there is true freedom. Then, one can go about his/her business effortlessly. If there is no self in any sense, then what does 'go about his/her business even mean'? It's only a pointer to a felt sense of freedom--a freedom so total that it isn't even thought about except on a spiritual forum like this. Suzanne Segal described what life was like after the sense of selfhood ended and she came to terms with it. In essence she said, "The body does what needs to be done and then it does the next thing that needs to be done." She was attempting to describe how the body/mind organism functions when the usual sense of self reference and ideas about self reference are no longer imagined as motivating factors. One ZM described is as feeling like a fish that had been stuck in a barrel of glue suddenly being released into the ocean. |
|
Do you mean to say without being bothered with the question as to whether or not the mind is still? Do you mean it's easier not to concern yourself with the sort of "self-checking" that ZD mentioned?
... I would have asked them separately otherwise, but, they are:
