|
|
Post by laughter on May 15, 2015 8:37:39 GMT -5
Have you read the book named 'power of now' by Tolle? he says that we could escape the suffering by concentrating on the present movement, But what I realized was, that's also another mind fantasy because it's exactly know where to end. I have always recommended practice and will never change my mind about that. You disapprove because you see practice as a temporary state created by mind. And that is true as a first step. But the second step is to go beyond that when you acquiesce in the silence prior to volitional thought. I am totally clear about this and will never feel challenged by those who say there is no practicer or how can you achieve what you already are and such nonsense. My experience was that the practice was profoundly effected by not rejecting those pointers. By the time I started consciously practicing though, a woo-woo had made what they were pointing to quite clear.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 15, 2015 8:43:13 GMT -5
Have you read the book named 'power of now' by Tolle? he says that we could escape the suffering by concentrating on the present movement, But what I realized was, that's also another mind fantasy because it's exactly know where to end. Sounds like turning the t.v. over to another channel trying to escape the adverts but one still remains watching t.v. lols .. Tolle doesn't advocate escape, quite the opposite really. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 15, 2015 10:01:13 GMT -5
I am not talking about meditation, I am talking about ATA-T. Same same. Shifting attention away from thoughts to breath awareness or shifting attention to what can be seen or heard is the same activity. Not precisely the same. One is self-observation, the other is observation. In the former, one saves energy, in the latter, not. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 15, 2015 11:09:50 GMT -5
Same same. Shifting attention away from thoughts to breath awareness or shifting attention to what can be seen or heard is the same activity. Not precisely the same. One is self-observation, the other is observation. In the former, one saves energy, in the latter, not. That was not my experience, and I experimented with every variety of meditation that you can imagine. FWIW watching thoughts is no more self observation than watching clouds. Whatever you look at (thoughts or trees) it is all YOU! There is no other. The advantage to ATA-T is that sticky thoughts don't suck attention to them. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 15, 2015 11:44:23 GMT -5
Not precisely the same. One is self-observation, the other is observation. In the former, one saves energy, in the latter, not. That was not my experience, and I experimented with every variety of meditation that you can imagine. FWIW watching thoughts is no more self observation than watching clouds. Whatever you look at (thoughts or trees) it is all YOU! There is no other. The advantage to ATA-T is that sticky thoughts don't suck attention to them. -observation is just a name. It's observation of sensations (five senses); bodily movements (walking, running, etc.) including facial expression, tone of voice, gestures, tension, postures; feelings/emotions; lastly, thoughts. In 1976 I was given preparatory practices, not even yet self-observation. One was called the sixty point sensing exercise. After some weeks, I noticed something. I described it and asked what it was, and asked if I could say where I noticed this (the sixty point sensing exercise). The answer was, it's energy. Saying that to say my experience has been otherwise. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2015 12:40:58 GMT -5
Not precisely the same. One is self-observation, the other is observation. In the former, one saves energy, in the latter, not. That was not my experience, and I experimented with every variety of meditation that you can imagine. FWIW watching thoughts is no more self observation than watching clouds. Whatever you look at (thoughts or trees) it is all YOU! There is no other. The advantage to ATA-T is that sticky thoughts don't suck attention to them. I have no idea what this ATA-T is or what it stands for, I've seen it mentioned several times but never bothered to ask, but the whole point of putting the attention on one thought such as breath or a mantra is to eventually let go of it so that only awareness remains without an object. The same would apply to doing that with any thought, but the practice of limiting it to one specific thought is more effective IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 15, 2015 12:57:43 GMT -5
That was not my experience, and I experimented with every variety of meditation that you can imagine. FWIW watching thoughts is no more self observation than watching clouds. Whatever you look at (thoughts or trees) it is all YOU! There is no other. The advantage to ATA-T is that sticky thoughts don't suck attention to them. -observation is just a name. It's observation of sensations (five senses); bodily movements (walking, running, etc.) including facial expression, tone of voice, gestures, tension, postures; feelings/emotions; lastly, thoughts. In 1976 I was given preparatory practices, not even yet self-observation. One was called the sixty point sensing exercise. After some weeks, I noticed something. I described it and asked what it was, and asked if I could say where I noticed this (the sixty point sensing exercise). The answer was, it's energy. Saying that to say my experience has been otherwise. Okay, but when you write "it's observation of sensations," that sounds like someone is observing sensations--that there is a relationship of some sort between the looker and that which is being looked at. When ATA-T occurs, the observer disappears in the act of direct sensory perception because attention has shifted away from thoughts (including the thought of someone looking or listening) to what is seen or heard. IOW ATA-T bypasses the self-referential neural network that Weber has written about. The body sees like the lens of a camera rather than there being a someone who looks. This may be a semantic issue, or it may be a subtle difference in what one is doing. You wrote that after some weeks of doing the practice you mention, you noticed something, and was told that it's energy. A ZM would have responded to you quite differently, and told you to ignore anything other than what you were focusing upon. All kinds of strange stuff can arise from the subconscious during the first few years of meditation, but it all goes away if you continue. I experienced many kinds of unusual energy phenomena initially, but it all subsided after about three years. You can ask Laughter and other meditators about this, but I suspect you'll hear them say something similar. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 15, 2015 13:09:50 GMT -5
That was not my experience, and I experimented with every variety of meditation that you can imagine. FWIW watching thoughts is no more self observation than watching clouds. Whatever you look at (thoughts or trees) it is all YOU! There is no other. The advantage to ATA-T is that sticky thoughts don't suck attention to them. I have no idea what this ATA-T is or what it stands for, I've seen it mentioned several times but never bothered to ask, but the whole point of putting the attention on one thought such as breath or a mantra is to eventually let go of it so that only awareness remains without an object. The same would apply to doing that with any thought, but the practice of limiting it to one specific thought is more effective IMHO. Satch: It's the same sort of thing. ATA-T stands for "attending the actual minus thoughts." IOW, the body/mind simply looks, listens, feels, etc. without naming, interpreting, or thinking ABOUT what is seen, heard, felt, etc. When someone sits and watches the breath, that's a form of ATA-T. The meditator is shifting attention away from thoughts to direct sensory perception of the breath. The advantage to ATA-T over conventional sitting meditation is that it can be done anywhere and at any time, so it greatly extends the duration of attentiveness and bypasses the usual self-referential thought process of "am I making progress?" If that thought occurs, it is like a dharma bell reminding one to shift attention back to looking or listening, etc. I started doing ATA-T on silent meditation retreats. In between the sitting sessions I would walk through the countryside while shifting attention away from thoughts to what could be seen or heard. After a few years, I realized that my informal ATA-T was accomplishing the same thing as any kind of formal meditation, and I did more of that and less of the formal thing. Eventually I could simply look at the world in total silence. When this happens, only silent awareness remains without any object because nothing (no thing) is being distinguished. The world is thus seen in the same way that a little child looks at it--without cognition. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2015 13:14:17 GMT -5
I have no idea what this ATA-T is or what it stands for, I've seen it mentioned several times but never bothered to ask, but the whole point of putting the attention on one thought such as breath or a mantra is to eventually let go of it so that only awareness remains without an object. The same would apply to doing that with any thought, but the practice of limiting it to one specific thought is more effective IMHO. Satch: It's the same sort of thing. ATA-T stands for "attending the actual minus thoughts." IOW, the body/mind simply looks, listens, feels, etc. without naming, interpreting, or thinking ABOUT what is seen, heard, felt, etc. When someone sits and watches the breath, that's a form of ATA-T. The meditator is shifting attention away from thoughts to direct sensory perception of the breath. The advantage to ATA-T over conventional sitting meditation is that it can be done anywhere and at any time, so it greatly extends the duration of attentiveness and bypasses the usual self-referential thought process of "am I making progress?" If that thought occurs, it is like a dharma bell reminding one to shift attention back to looking or listening, etc. I started doing ATA-T on silent meditation retreats. In between the sitting sessions I would walk through the countryside while shifting attention away from thoughts to what could be seen or heard. After a few years, I realized that my informal ATA-T was accomplishing the same thing as any kind of formal meditation, and I did more of that and less of the formal thing. Eventually I could simply look at the world in total silence. When this happens, only silent awareness remains without any object because nothing (no thing) is being distinguished. The world is thus seen in the same way that a little child looks at it--without cognition. Thanks for clearing that up. Isn't that what some would call mindfulness. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 15, 2015 13:27:29 GMT -5
Satch: It's the same sort of thing. ATA-T stands for "attending the actual minus thoughts." IOW, the body/mind simply looks, listens, feels, etc. without naming, interpreting, or thinking ABOUT what is seen, heard, felt, etc. When someone sits and watches the breath, that's a form of ATA-T. The meditator is shifting attention away from thoughts to direct sensory perception of the breath. The advantage to ATA-T over conventional sitting meditation is that it can be done anywhere and at any time, so it greatly extends the duration of attentiveness and bypasses the usual self-referential thought process of "am I making progress?" If that thought occurs, it is like a dharma bell reminding one to shift attention back to looking or listening, etc. I started doing ATA-T on silent meditation retreats. In between the sitting sessions I would walk through the countryside while shifting attention away from thoughts to what could be seen or heard. After a few years, I realized that my informal ATA-T was accomplishing the same thing as any kind of formal meditation, and I did more of that and less of the formal thing. Eventually I could simply look at the world in total silence. When this happens, only silent awareness remains without any object because nothing (no thing) is being distinguished. The world is thus seen in the same way that a little child looks at it--without cognition. Thanks for clearing that up. Isn't that what some would call mindfulness. No. It's much more powerful than mindfulness IMO. Mindfulness is ATA+T, so a person being mindful is also watching thoughts. ATA-T ignores thoughts altogether, and only uses thoughts as a dharma bell/reminder to shift attention away from them. Thoughts are sticky, and people practicing mindfulness often get caught up in the thoughts rather than remaining detached. That problem is greatly diminished for someone doing ATA-T. ATA-T also eventually enables one to stop thinking at will, which makes many things discussed on this forum become extremely clear. If people were able to stop thinking for even an hour, they would discover that thinking is not necessary for 95% of their usual activities. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2015 13:40:03 GMT -5
Thanks for clearing that up. Isn't that what some would call mindfulness. No. It's much more powerful than mindfulness IMO. Mindfulness is ATA+T, so a person being mindful is also watching thoughts. ATA-T ignores thoughts altogether, and only uses thoughts as a dharma bell/reminder to shift attention away from them. Thoughts are sticky, and people practicing mindfulness often get caught up in the thoughts rather than remaining detached. That problem is greatly diminished for someone doing ATA-T. ATA-T also eventually enables one to stop thinking at will, which makes many things discussed on this forum become extremely clear. If people were able to stop thinking for even an hour, they would discover that thinking is not necessary for 95% of their usual activities. I take your point if that's your definition, but if you want some amusement just google mindfulness and look at some of the broad range of explanations. I particularly like the ones that incorporate it into self improvement and life coaching LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 15, 2015 13:57:12 GMT -5
No. It's much more powerful than mindfulness IMO. Mindfulness is ATA+T, so a person being mindful is also watching thoughts. ATA-T ignores thoughts altogether, and only uses thoughts as a dharma bell/reminder to shift attention away from them. Thoughts are sticky, and people practicing mindfulness often get caught up in the thoughts rather than remaining detached. That problem is greatly diminished for someone doing ATA-T. ATA-T also eventually enables one to stop thinking at will, which makes many things discussed on this forum become extremely clear. If people were able to stop thinking for even an hour, they would discover that thinking is not necessary for 95% of their usual activities. I take your point if that's your definition, but if you want some amusement just google mindfulness and look at some of the broad range of explanations. I particularly like the ones that incorporate it into self improvement and life coaching LOL. ha ha! Yes, I've read some of that stuff. Most of the mindfulness information I used to read came from the Vipassana tradition. A few Zen students also used mindfulness as a meditative approach. I experimented with it, but later found that ATA-T was a "cleaner" and more efficacious approach. I also liked it because it wasn't "special," and didn't require a rigid approach like Zen. I was always a very undisciplined Zen student, so it fit my do-it-yourself-have-fun-enjoy-life-joie-de-vivre lifestyle! Ha ha! |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 15, 2015 14:03:02 GMT -5
Gopal, help me understand this. You say everything is an appearance in consciousness. I agree. You say perceiver is same as perceived. I agree. You seem to agree with Enigma. So what is your disagreement with ZD. he he  he never read what I say and start to advise. that's the only problem with him, I am pointing it very clearly that everything is appearance so nothing can be known beyond that, but don't even consider what I am saying, but he starts to advice me, You see, I am finding very interesting to discuss with certain people here for an example, Enigma,you,Laughter,pilgrims because that interest me a lot, the main reason is, first of all you people listen me what I say and if you accept you would accept, If not , you would reject, I like this way of going, but he never listen what I speak, he directly jump for advising. With Zendancer if you ask me what is the disagreement, I would say I never believe the practices, he always suggest practices. Practices are mind games for me. From my perspective, ZD is not as interested in satisfying the desire for discussion as he is in pointing peeps in the direction of freedom, and so he's wanting you to abandon your questions and logical analysis and simply look at what is being pointed to. So it's not that he doesn't listen to you, but that he doesn't see it to be in your best interest for him to follow you down the intellectual wabbit hole. (Hopefully ZD will correct any mischaracterization of his intentions) I, in fact, align with those intentions generally, though I see that you are not interested in looking, and in fact believe that you have already found what he is pointing to, so that approach may be more fruitless than usual. I'm willing to follow you down the bunny hole just so far, and when it starts to get really dark, I have to leave you and make my way back to the surface. That's why you don't hear me answering anymore. You conclude that I have no answer and have hung my head in shameful retreat, which is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 15, 2015 14:04:48 GMT -5
You're safe. You can't 'rig' the exploration because your essence does not have a mind. As you say, you experience yourself through this unique presence, and not by any other means. Mind IS essence.. you/me/we/us/them/Life/All are essence.. this is where you are trying to create separation in the oneness you say you believe.. oneness doesn't 'have' a mind, it 'IS' mind.. Remind me to explain context to you sometime. |
|
|
|
Post by zin on May 15, 2015 14:14:19 GMT -5
I take your point if that's your definition, but if you want some amusement just google mindfulness and look at some of the broad range of explanations. I particularly like the ones that incorporate it into self improvement and life coaching LOL. ha ha! Yes, I've read some of that stuff. Most of the mindfulness information I used to read came from the Vipassana tradition. A few Zen students also used mindfulness as a meditative approach. I experimented with it, but later found that ATA-T was a "cleaner" and more efficacious approach. I also liked it because it wasn't "special," and didn't require a rigid approach like Zen. I was always a very undisciplined Zen student, so it fit my do-it-yourself-have-fun-enjoy-life-joie-de-vivre lifestyle! Ha ha! I heard of ATA (-T) only when I came to st, I found it just like you say - not special and clean. Also that you seem to be having fun all the time was an encouraging factor! I am not sure about energy, but it is mostly pleasing. |
|
he never read what I say and start to advise. that's the only problem with him, I am pointing it very clearly that everything is appearance so nothing can be known beyond that, but don't even consider what I am saying, but he starts to advice me, You see, I am finding very interesting to discuss with certain people here for an example, Enigma,you,Laughter,pilgrims because that interest me a lot, the main reason is, first of all you people listen me what I say and if you accept you would accept, If not , you would reject, I like this way of going, but he never listen what I speak, he directly jump for advising. With Zendancer if you ask me what is the disagreement, I would say I never believe the practices, he always suggest practices. Practices are mind games for me. 
