|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 16:20:29 GMT -5
But what was realized/seen through on the mountaintop is left as dust, up on that mountain-top and does not remain an item in your back-pack thereafter.
Either there is a seeing through/absence or there isn't. And when there isn't, then all we have is a mere conceptual grasp. A conceptual grasp of Oneness will still allow one to believe in a fundamental "law" that dictates how/why what shows up in experience, does so.
But an actual seeing through/absence means that the very idea of an Absolute law that dictates what manifests/appears, would defy the very Truth of Oneness/no separation.
Let's take the mirage/oasis metaphor again.
Once you've seen there's no water there, the action/behavior of heading out there to fill your canteen for the purpose of quenching your thirst, ceases.
This idea that ones comes down from the top of 3rd mountain and just goes back to believing again in fundamental laws that dictate 'creation," is plain and simply, false.
Appearances appear in various patterns that intellect and other faculties of mind can take notice of. Sure, but those noticed patterns themselves, remain a facet of 'what's appearing'......it's all fine up until we call it a inviolable, dictating "law."
I like the way Jed mcKenna put it re: LOA....something akin to he'd "almost" call it Truth, but cannot, because it's dream-content....but he did reference just how persistent indeed those apparent patterns can be.
What I've also noticed though about those who are really bought into LOA/deliberate creation is that they that they get very creative at "finding" and then assigning "correlation/pattern" to what is imminently arising.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 16:23:31 GMT -5
The 'exact' same? The mistake of separation is itself a condition. TMT Not important to see that the invoking of separation via erroneous imagining IS itself a condition and that immediately upon seeing through separation....immediately upon the disappearance of the SVP, THAT particular condition is gone?
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 16:38:31 GMT -5
If we include ALL appearing objects/things under the umbrella of "suchness" then there is no context mix. There is nothing that falls outside of 'suchness.' What if there are no objects or things in Suchness?
I certainty did not mean there to say that the objects/things are "In" Suchness. That would be an objectification of "suchness" which really is but a very pointy to pointer to try to talk about what experience is like when separation is no longer in play.
|
|
|
Post by sharon on May 31, 2023 17:25:15 GMT -5
... I mean I'm well aware that her questioning could be very annoying, and she's said some shit in the past. But what I read here, it sounded like a magnanimous invitation to return with a clean slate. But that's not what she got. She got blasted immediately with condescension. Now that's totally understandable, and human – if there's a past conflict, bitterness, grievance, and an entrenched pattern of one-upmanship. My point is: if that's the case, just stop pretending you're High and Enlightened and better than Average Joe, and stop projecting all the issues unto the other party.Hehe....So, You noticed, too? Thanks for saying...
& yeah, for what it's worth, I'm making a strong point to remain as civil and possible and just to address the content of the posts/expressed views themselves. Good to hear, and welcome back. It's been awhile
|
|
|
Post by sharon on May 31, 2023 17:47:07 GMT -5
That doesn't seem to leave a lot of room for 'others may or may not be real perceivers', or however you want to phrase it. It's only really ever been the case that, in whatever context you want to work in, there has to be consistency. Yes. "They may or may not be" is of the relative context only. All questions and wondering pertaining to this issue, relative context only.
SR/awakening/3rd mountain-integration, the question has been well and completely seen as misconceived...the question/wondering no longer arises.....has no legs to stand upon.
A seeker, relatively speaking may think he sees an Oasis off in the distance. He's not entirely sure, but he sure thinks it looks like water and he's thirsty as hell, so he really 'wants' to know. (This is similar to how a seeker find it very important to know that other people are actual/real perceivers, because his peace of mind, his sense of well-being, depends on it).
But, when the seeker heads out and realizes the Oasis was just a mirage and there is no water there (a metaphor of course for 2nd mountain realization of emptiness) and he heads back to camp, he does not wake up the next morn and again, wonder and ask if perhaps that shimmering vision contains real water or not.
At 3rd mountain, "the appearance" of sentience.....the experiencing of self and people as sentient, perceiving, experiencing is what it is and the very idea of trying to dig in deeper to find out IF that experience is something more than just a temporal, ephemeral, transient, empty appearance, just does not even occur. It's clear that beyond it's temporal arising, it's all empty.
At 3rd mountain, the experience itself of a me character/other characters as perceivers/experiencers is more than enough....a beautiful, mystical, magical facet of experience that requires nothing other than it's imminent appearance to evoke awe and gratitude.
I've heard that the Valley on the other side of 3rd Mountain is most tranquil at this time of year.
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 31, 2023 18:20:58 GMT -5
The three mountains. Self/self. The 9 jhannas. Etc. All are breakdowns of Reality to make it more palatable to a particular intellect. Every model of Reality offered attracts a different type of seeker. Which is to say layer cakes can be useful pointers. But they are the finger, an invitation to discover where it's pointing. To be truly free, you must give up your aversion to everything including layer cakes and the aversion to the aversion of layer cakes. Making absolutist statements about what's real is tricky. It's like talking about silence.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 18:25:22 GMT -5
Hehe....So, You noticed, too? Thanks for saying...
& yeah, for what it's worth, I'm making a strong point to remain as civil and possible and just to address the content of the posts/expressed views themselves. Good to hear, and welcome back. It's been awhile Thank you Sharon.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 18:27:57 GMT -5
Yes. "They may or may not be" is of the relative context only. All questions and wondering pertaining to this issue, relative context only.
SR/awakening/3rd mountain-integration, the question has been well and completely seen as misconceived...the question/wondering no longer arises.....has no legs to stand upon.
A seeker, relatively speaking may think he sees an Oasis off in the distance. He's not entirely sure, but he sure thinks it looks like water and he's thirsty as hell, so he really 'wants' to know. (This is similar to how a seeker find it very important to know that other people are actual/real perceivers, because his peace of mind, his sense of well-being, depends on it).
But, when the seeker heads out and realizes the Oasis was just a mirage and there is no water there (a metaphor of course for 2nd mountain realization of emptiness) and he heads back to camp, he does not wake up the next morn and again, wonder and ask if perhaps that shimmering vision contains real water or not.
At 3rd mountain, "the appearance" of sentience.....the experiencing of self and people as sentient, perceiving, experiencing is what it is and the very idea of trying to dig in deeper to find out IF that experience is something more than just a temporal, ephemeral, transient, empty appearance, just does not even occur. It's clear that beyond it's temporal arising, it's all empty.
At 3rd mountain, the experience itself of a me character/other characters as perceivers/experiencers is more than enough....a beautiful, mystical, magical facet of experience that requires nothing other than it's imminent appearance to evoke awe and gratitude.
I've heard that the Valley on the other side of 3rd Mountain is most tranquil at this time of year.Damn, I'll say.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on May 31, 2023 18:31:52 GMT -5
I remember many moons ago ZD once suggesting that he might write something about "Spiritual Arrogance". I remember hoping he would but don't think he ever did. Maybe I just missed it. The concept of Spiritual Arrogance has crossed my mind of late and thought I'd question the bot and see what it popped out. The results... Question: In terms of non-duality, what would be examples of spiritual arrogance? ChatGPT: "In the context of non-duality, examples of spiritual arrogance can manifest in various ways. Here are a few examples: Believing One's Understanding is Superior: A person who practices non-duality might believe that their understanding of non-dual principles is superior to others. They may consider themselves more enlightened or advanced, looking down upon those who have different perspectives or interpretations. Correcting Others' Views: Someone exhibiting spiritual arrogance may constantly correct or dismiss others who have differing views or interpretations of non-dual teachings. They may feel the need to assert their own understanding as the "correct" or "authentic" one, without allowing space for diverse perspectives. Egoic Identification with Knowledge: Spiritual arrogance can manifest when a person becomes deeply identified with their knowledge of non-dual concepts. They may derive a sense of self-worth and importance from their intellectual understanding, using it as a tool to elevate themselves above others. Judgment and Criticism: Individuals displaying spiritual arrogance may harshly judge or criticize others who have not reached the same level of realization or understanding. They may see these individuals as less evolved or misguided, fostering a sense of separation and superiority. Lack of Humility and Openness: Spiritual arrogance can be characterized by a lack of humility and openness to alternative viewpoints or teachings. The person may believe they have "figured it all out" and close themselves off to new insights or perspectives, considering their own understanding as the ultimate truth. Using Spirituality for Egoic Purposes: Instead of using spiritual teachings as a means of self-transformation and genuine awakening, someone displaying spiritual arrogance may use their spiritual knowledge or practices to bolster their ego. They may seek validation or admiration from others, using spirituality as a tool for self-aggrandizement. It is important to note that these examples are not exhaustive, and spiritual arrogance can manifest in various ways depending on the individual. The essence of non-duality emphasizes humility, compassion, and the recognition of the underlying unity of all beings. True realization goes beyond egoic identifications and judgments, fostering inclusivity and openness to diverse perspectives. Chat-GP....who knew?... a great tool for passively making digs at folks without actually having to step up and put forth and own your opinions... The reader is free to dismiss the words.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 18:36:35 GMT -5
The three mountains. Self/self. The 9 jhannas. Etc. All are breakdowns of Reality to make it more palatable to a particular intellect. Every model of Reality offered attracts a different type of seeker. Which is to say layer cakes can be useful pointers. But they are the finger, an invitation to discover where it's pointing. To be truly free, you must give up your aversion to everything including layer cakes and the aversion to the aversion of layer cakes. Making absolutist statements about what's real is tricky. It's like talking about silence. Thing is, it's not in the person's hands to simply "give up" anything, let alone aversion. But there's no issue with an arising/falling sense of aversion to something.
Likes and dislikes continue on post SR. So long as there's an apparent me character, there is still personality, complete with dislikes/aversions as well as likes/preferences.
It's not an arising sense of aversion per se that binds/limits, it's the overlay of an SVP and his judgments that does. The SVP overlay means the arising sense of aversion that will ebb on through easily and absent stickiness IF it's just allowed to, instead gets judged as bad/wrong/something that must not/should not arise, and also gets regarded as evidence that the world is not currently conforming with personal desires, and to an SVP...that's bad....very bad...
To equate challenge of a particular idea during Truth-talk, specifically with "aversion" is going a little far imo.
One does not have to 'dislike/feel aversion towards' a particular assertion to simply call it out as false.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 18:37:04 GMT -5
Chat-GP....who knew?... a great tool for passively making digs at folks without actually having to step up and put forth and own your opinions... The reader is free to dismiss the words. Agreed!
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on May 31, 2023 18:38:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 31, 2023 18:56:45 GMT -5
The three mountains. Self/self. The 9 jhannas. Etc. All are breakdowns of Reality to make it more palatable to a particular intellect. Every model of Reality offered attracts a different type of seeker. Which is to say layer cakes can be useful pointers. But they are the finger, an invitation to discover where it's pointing. To be truly free, you must give up your aversion to everything including layer cakes and the aversion to the aversion of layer cakes. Making absolutist statements about what's real is tricky. It's like talking about silence. Thing is, it's not in the person's hands to simply "give up" anything, let alone aversion. But there's no issue with an arising/falling sense of aversion to something.
Likes and dislikes continue on post SR. So long as there's an apparent me character, there is still personality, complete with dislikes/aversions as well as likes/preferences.
It's not an arising sense of aversion per se that binds/limits, it's the overlay of an SVP and his judgments that does. The SVP overlay means the arising sense of aversion that will ebb on through easily and absent stickiness IF it's just allowed to, instead gets judged as bad/wrong/something that must not/should not arise, and also gets regarded as evidence that the world is not currently conforming with personal desires, and to an SVP...that's bad....very bad...
To equate challenge of a particular idea during Truth-talk, specifically with "aversion" is going a little far imo.
One does not have to 'dislike/feel aversion towards' a particular assertion to simply call it out as false.
Yeah. It's a tricky pronouncement. I find a lot of what passes for nonduality is someone blue and shivering in the pool beckoning for others to jump in. "The water's fine."
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 19:00:10 GMT -5
Thing is, it's not in the person's hands to simply "give up" anything, let alone aversion. But there's no issue with an arising/falling sense of aversion to something.
Likes and dislikes continue on post SR. So long as there's an apparent me character, there is still personality, complete with dislikes/aversions as well as likes/preferences.
It's not an arising sense of aversion per se that binds/limits, it's the overlay of an SVP and his judgments that does. The SVP overlay means the arising sense of aversion that will ebb on through easily and absent stickiness IF it's just allowed to, instead gets judged as bad/wrong/something that must not/should not arise, and also gets regarded as evidence that the world is not currently conforming with personal desires, and to an SVP...that's bad....very bad...
To equate challenge of a particular idea during Truth-talk, specifically with "aversion" is going a little far imo.
One does not have to 'dislike/feel aversion towards' a particular assertion to simply call it out as false.
Yeah. It's a tricky pronouncement. I find a lot of what passes for nonduality is someone blue and shivering in the pool beckoning for others to jump in. "The water's fine." Sometimes tricky though too to know if what you deem to be 'blue & shivering in the pool' is truly what's going on....
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 31, 2023 19:05:01 GMT -5
The three mountains. Self/self. The 9 jhannas. Etc. All are breakdowns of Reality to make it more palatable to a particular intellect. Every model of Reality offered attracts a different type of seeker. Which is to say layer cakes can be useful pointers. But they are the finger, an invitation to discover where it's pointing. To be truly free, you must give up your aversion to everything including layer cakes and the aversion to the aversion of layer cakes. Making absolutist statements about what's real is tricky. It's like talking about silence. I'm sure I first heard: Nirvana is samsara, samsara is nirvana, at age 18 in An Introduction to Eastern Religions. That seemed key, it never left my mind. For years and years I was a glass half empty guy, it took me a long time to become a glass half full guy.
|
|