|
|
Post by andrew on May 16, 2015 4:21:04 GMT -5
Yes. I'm sure gopal wasn't saying that discomfort is not to be noticed and acted upon (he laughed at the scratching an itch example), but I didn't quite get to the bottom of what he considers to be a 'problem' and why. It occurs to me right now, gopal, that I can perhaps see why you would consider pausing and allowing sadness to move through the body to be a 'mind game' based on your understandings, but perhaps 'mind games' of these sorts aren't the 'problem'. Perhaps these sorts of mind games are part of the natural functioning of the organism. Sometimes in these discussions it's easy to lose sight of the fact that when you have an itch, you just scratch it. You don't go wondering off into the forest to contemplate the existential meaning of how to react to the itch. LOL true, though I think examining some of the functions of the organism is useful. Sometimes I think that when peeps get involved with non-duality, spirituality, self-help etc, they end up trying to change the basic functioning of the organism and it ends in strange habits and beliefs. I would say the problem is not really the basic functioning of the organism, it's more just the conditioned habits and beliefs. For example, in the case of the tasty dessert, the body knows when enough is enough and won't crave more, but if we are trying to stuff an emotion, then the craving may continue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 4:32:18 GMT -5
Sometimes in these discussions it's easy to lose sight of the fact that when you have an itch, you just scratch it. You don't go wondering off into the forest to contemplate the existential meaning of how to react to the itch. LOL true, though I think examining some of the functions of the organism is useful. Sometimes I think that when peeps get involved with non-duality, spirituality, self-help etc, they end up trying to change the basic functioning of the organism and it ends in strange habits and beliefs. I would say the problem is not really the basic functioning of the organism, it's more just the conditioned habits and beliefs. For example, in the case of the tasty dessert, the body knows when enough is enough and won't crave more, but if we are trying to stuff an emotion, then the craving may continue. That's often true. Tolle says he likes to drink wine occasionally, Nisargadatta carried on smoking because he said it was just a habit of the body. If in doubt always go to the pub first before making any sudden moves. I enjoyed a couple of cold beers last night. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 5:28:29 GMT -5
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. Nah.. your escape clauses are self-explanatory.. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 5:48:21 GMT -5
No no, I am not talking about meditation as the present movement focus, ofcourse that too present movement focus, but I was not talking about that attending the actual, What I said by the word 'present movement focus' is attending the actual, focusing on the outer world by eliminating thoughts which pop up in our mind. I started this practise after reading Tolle's book of power of now, You can't carry this present movement focus for a long time, sooner mind would suggest you to drag back, and I am pretty sure it ultimately succeed. It's exactly know how to break that state and bring back to the normal thinking mode. The time you start to attend the actual decides the time which you ends the focus as well. Just to expand on that, mind is always in control during the practice, and is careful to not see anything it doesn't want to see. Mind has some sort of agenda for wanting to do the practice, and it has nothing to do with anything that might compromise mind/body identity or leave mind in a position of less apparent control. Usually, it's about attaining a more relaxed state from which mind can launch it's future plans. To be fully present is to be without ego, as ego is in the thoughts only, and so mind rarely allows that to happen, and is prepared to end the meditation if things get too risky. Generally, this whole process is unconscious, and the meditator (mind) is convinced he did his best to be present and see through the illusion. It is, of course, a split mind process. There is the hope, however, that mind may miscalculate or relax it's guard too much. These are very auspicious moments. You really don't understand 'mind', do you?.. you seem to believe that your personal limitations/understandings apply to everyone else.. The experiencer that understands mind, rather than buying into the fantasies of belief systems and conditioning, simply allows the stillness to happen, they become aware of the stillness that is mostly present.. as ZD notes, for most people they exist in stillness for the majority of the time, engaging mind as situations demand.. but, they are mot aware of the stillness because their focus is on their thoughts/beliefs, not unlike the people focused on nonduality.. Clarity is a condition that is not 'subject to' the influences of mind's attachments, the result of a still mind's awareness.. from which the experience of an active mind's activities are understood in relation with the whole process of existing.. the totality is a Both/And dance, still AND active, and being comfortable when either is leading that dance, the music is 'change'.. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 5:52:42 GMT -5
Hey ZD, I can't write again everything I have previously written (but briefly, self-remembering is done with awareness, self-observation of done with attention, self-observation is the observation of the personality (self), defined as the contents of the centers, the contents of the centers being, basically, learned muscle movements, feelings/emotions and thoughts, but that aside, I don't know why you would assume more than I have said. In any case, neither self-remembering nor self-observation are ever described specifically in writing. self-observation does not involve any self-referential thinking, if one drops into this, then it is no longer is self-observation. Seven requirements for correct self-observation: 1) excluding any element of criticism; 2) excluding any element of tutorialness; 3) excluding any element of analysis or other mental process; 4) involving a complete non-identification from the organism; 5) being directed only toward the prescribed area of objectivity; 6) involving the mediation of all sensations appropriate to its objects; 7) not being limited in its exercise to any special times or places. Partially described in more detail: The third characteristic is the absence from active awareness of any element of mental or logical analysis. This prohibition must follow from the sharp and final distinction between consciousness and thought process. To be aware is not to be thinking; thinking has its place in life, but not in awareness. Analysis is a mental process and as such it must be excluded from pure awareness. The absence of analytical accompaniment from active awareness means that one must not be thinking about the object of awareness but, instead, must be observing it solely. from The States of Human Consciousness by C Daly King, 1963 (pages 36, 40) King studied under AR Orage, a principle student, and the only student Gurdjieff mentioned in any of his published writings. ........................ Now, all this was not unloaded on us at once, but over a period of time, but basically, a brief description includes all this and one quickly learns that the act is not the verbal description. Okay. That's makes sense, but what's being called "self observation" sounds like ATA-T to me. I'm not sure why it's called "self" observation if there is no reflection about self involved. Why not just call it observation, looking, or noticing? Again, it may just be a semantic issue. Or, it may be what the Vipassana tradition calls "mindfulness." A rose by any other name....... Do you equate ATA-T with clarity? |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 5:55:21 GMT -5
So experiencing this would be suffering?  Indeed, because you won't want it to end which alas it must. Then you suffer. Like Enigma, you are assuming that your personal limitations apply to others, and they don't.. it sounds like you're still pining over unfulfilled expectations.. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on May 16, 2015 5:57:21 GMT -5
Sounds like turning the t.v. over to another channel trying to escape the adverts but one still remains watching t.v. lols .. In what way does focusing on the present moment resemble changing channels to you,lols? I found it surprising that Tolle would suggest escaping suffering by attending the now . My understanding is that sufferings is 'now' just as much as joy or anything else is . By switching channels or by focusing on something else other than one's sufferings one is not addressing why one is suffering . It would be similar to the drug addict swapping their addiction from drugs to drink whilst paying no attention to the sufferings of their addiction .. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on May 16, 2015 5:58:05 GMT -5
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. That makes sense to me .. although when andy spoke of Tolles deep sufferings endured without working through the causes of such didn't make sense . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 5:59:44 GMT -5
Indeed, because you won't want it to end which alas it must. Then you suffer. Like Enigma, you are assuming that your personal limitations apply to others, and they don't.. it sounds like you're still pining over unfulfilled expectations.. Clarity is the ultimate fulfillment. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 6:04:43 GMT -5
Like Enigma, you are assuming that your personal limitations apply to others, and they don't.. it sounds like you're still pining over unfulfilled expectations.. Clarity is the ultimate fulfillment. We agree on that.. its fulfillment abolishes expectation.. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 16, 2015 6:10:49 GMT -5
Tolle doesn't advocate escape, quite the opposite really. That makes sense to me .. although when andy spoke of Tolles deep sufferings endured without working through the causes of such didn't make sense . The difference between 'letting go' and 'escaping' is subtle but worth noting.. when the experiencer 'lets go' there's no need to work through anything, the issues are no longer present or influencing the experiencer's understandings.. escaping is a contrivance, letting go is a simple release, like letting go of the handle of the baggage the experiencer carries with them.. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 16, 2015 6:11:23 GMT -5
Tolle doesn't advocate escape, quite the opposite really. That makes sense to me .. although when andy spoke of Tolles deep sufferings endured without working through the causes of such didn't make sense . Tolle suffered for years, but when he was on the verge of suicide, he had a strange thought, which triggered a big enlightenment experience. After that happened, he spent a long time in a state of bliss. His past suffering disappeared (along with 80% of his past thoughts), and he later wrote several books about the path of non-duality. As far as I know, he has never advocated escaping from suffering. His primary teaching is to become present and thereby become free from the kinds of thoughts that cause suffering. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 16, 2015 6:17:07 GMT -5
Okay. That's makes sense, but what's being called "self observation" sounds like ATA-T to me. I'm not sure why it's called "self" observation if there is no reflection about self involved. Why not just call it observation, looking, or noticing? Again, it may just be a semantic issue. Or, it may be what the Vipassana tradition calls "mindfulness." A rose by any other name....... Do you equate ATA-T with clarity? ATA-T is simply looking or listening with a still mind. It often leads to clarity because it involves becoming present and leaving a lot of thoughts behind. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 16, 2015 6:18:18 GMT -5
Indeed, because you won't want it to end which alas it must. Then you suffer. Like Enigma, you are assuming that your personal limitations apply to others, and they don't.. it sounds like you're still pining over unfulfilled expectations.. I think Satch's sense of humor got overlooked here. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 16, 2015 6:22:19 GMT -5
That makes sense to me .. although when andy spoke of Tolles deep sufferings endured without working through the causes of such didn't make sense . The difference between 'letting go' and 'escaping' is subtle but worth noting.. when the experiencer 'lets go' there's no need to work through anything, the issues are no longer present or influencing the experiencer's understandings.. escaping is a contrivance, letting go is a simple release, like letting go of the handle of the baggage the experiencer carries with them.. Agreed. |
|
