|
Post by andrew on Sept 2, 2019 14:02:35 GMT -5
Take a look at our current politics (UK), and I can assure you that you will see some chaos What's with world leaders' hair these days?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 3, 2019 10:54:27 GMT -5
That question is an existential question. And existential questions don't have 'answers'. At some point, the questioner and the question will just disappear. And that's it. That's how existential questions get resolved or 'answered'. So in that sense, there's no need for these kind of answers you've mentioned. As UG says here, if you want answers to existential questions, go see a scholar, hehe. I have a slightly different perspective. Not better or worse, just different. Perhaps that's because the questions that arose here were always extremely specific and the answers always seemed to be equally specific and easily stated. It may also be because of an exposure to Zen koans, all of which have simple definitive answers that can be discovered via silent contemplation. As one example, this body/mind's final existential question was, "How is it possible to remain in a unity-conscious state of mind permanently?" By that point in the search the body/mind had had many experiences of what it conceived as "unity consciousness"--experiences during which the "me" as a separate observer disappeared. This happened during deep states of samadhi, during cosmic consciousness experiences, while "being in the zone," etc. After these experiences ended, "I" always seemed to come back to a "me in here" looking at a "world out there." I therefore wondered how it might be possible to live in that state of empty non-dual awareness permanently. While on a solo retreat during which that question was periodically pondered, the past sense of a "me" totally disappeared, and it was then realized that there had never been a "me" in the way that had been imagined. The answer to the existential question was then obvious. The question had been based upon an erroneous assumption--that there was a "me" who occasionally disappeared into a state of unity, but afterwards seemed to return to a sense of separateness. The specific "answer" to the question could be stated as, "What I am has always been, and always is, in a state of unity consciousness even though it might not seem that way." I then knew that selfhood was a kind of thought structure that can permanently vanish. FWIW, the old sense of being a separate volitional entity inside a body never returned, and life became a flow of empty isness that this body/mind had only experienced one time in the past. That prior experience lasted about two and a half days following a CC experience after which the old sense of selfhood eventually returned. This body/mind pursued hundreds of existential questions during a long search for truth, and all of those questions ultimately had simple answers that were discovered through non-conceptual realizations. You are such a scholar! If you've got time, take a look into the UG thread in the teachers section and see if you can agree with what UG is saying here and here. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with his point. It's basically my point, too.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 3, 2019 10:57:57 GMT -5
That question is an existential question. And existential questions don't have 'answers'. At some point, the questioner and the question will just disappear. And that's it. That's how existential questions get resolved or 'answered'. So in that sense, there's no need for these kind of answers you've mentioned. As UG says here, if you want answers to existential questions, go see a scholar, hehe. He's a strangely truthful fellow, UG. He basically reduced spirituality to pure biology.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 3, 2019 12:39:31 GMT -5
I have a slightly different perspective. Not better or worse, just different. Perhaps that's because the questions that arose here were always extremely specific and the answers always seemed to be equally specific and easily stated. It may also be because of an exposure to Zen koans, all of which have simple definitive answers that can be discovered via silent contemplation. As one example, this body/mind's final existential question was, "How is it possible to remain in a unity-conscious state of mind permanently?" By that point in the search the body/mind had had many experiences of what it conceived as "unity consciousness"--experiences during which the "me" as a separate observer disappeared. This happened during deep states of samadhi, during cosmic consciousness experiences, while "being in the zone," etc. After these experiences ended, "I" always seemed to come back to a "me in here" looking at a "world out there." I therefore wondered how it might be possible to live in that state of empty non-dual awareness permanently. While on a solo retreat during which that question was periodically pondered, the past sense of a "me" totally disappeared, and it was then realized that there had never been a "me" in the way that had been imagined. The answer to the existential question was then obvious. The question had been based upon an erroneous assumption--that there was a "me" who occasionally disappeared into a state of unity, but afterwards seemed to return to a sense of separateness. The specific "answer" to the question could be stated as, "What I am has always been, and always is, in a state of unity consciousness even though it might not seem that way." I then knew that selfhood was a kind of thought structure that can permanently vanish. FWIW, the old sense of being a separate volitional entity inside a body never returned, and life became a flow of empty isness that this body/mind had only experienced one time in the past. That prior experience lasted about two and a half days following a CC experience after which the old sense of selfhood eventually returned. This body/mind pursued hundreds of existential questions during a long search for truth, and all of those questions ultimately had simple answers that were discovered through non-conceptual realizations. You are such a scholar! If you've got time, take a look into the UG thread in the teachers section and see if you can agree with what UG is saying here and here. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with his point. It's basically my point, too. I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. The first kensho showed me that everything I wanted to understand was "inside," and based on what had happened I theorized that if the mind became sufficiently silent, the answers to all of my many other existential questions could be resolved. It took longer than I imagined it would, but essentially that's what happened. I once had a very serious "personal" quandary that became a simple question, "What should I do?" Because I had gained confidence in contemplation by that time I sat down, considered the question, and resolved to contemplate the issue until an answer arose. I then shifted attention away from thoughts to universal sound and two or three hours later, the answer to my question appeared.There was absolutely no doubt about what was revealed. I then knew what I had to do, and I did it. From my POV a question arose that required an answer, and contemplation resulted in an answer that was 100% rock solid. I didn't have to keep repeating the question because the question was clear and also important. This may be a Rinzai Zen-type thing, but this type of approach is pretty common in that tradition. I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Sept 3, 2019 13:31:27 GMT -5
You are such a scholar! If you've got time, take a look into the UG thread in the teachers section and see if you can agree with what UG is saying here and here. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with his point. It's basically my point, too. I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. The first kensho showed me that everything I wanted to understand was "inside," and based on what had happened I theorized that if the mind became sufficiently silent, the answers to all of my many other existential questions could be resolved. It took longer than I imagined it would, but essentially that's what happened. I once had a very serious "personal" quandary that became a simple question, "What should I do?" Because I had gained confidence in contemplation by that time I sat down, considered the question, and resolved to contemplate the issue until an answer arose. I then shifted attention away from thoughts to universal sound and two or three hours later, the answer to my question appeared.There was absolutely no doubt about what was revealed. I then knew what I had to do, and I did it. From my POV a question arose that required an answer, and contemplation resulted in an answer that was 100% rock solid. I didn't have to keep repeating the question because the question was clear and also important. This may be a Rinzai Zen-type thing, but this type of approach is pretty common in that tradition. I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational. I know exactly what you’re talking about, but I think it’s important to note that this method may result in answers that “feel right” but are not necessarily any more guaranteed to actually give desired results than any other method, depending on the circumstances. And there may well be limits on what it can do that are tied to previous conscious reflective effort. For example, if I ask you to calculate the square root of 3737377482927272273737636552, you could sit there for 30 years with your mind blank and you’re unlikely to spontaneously generate the answer. Perhaps some genius mathematician could do it, but not you or I.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 3, 2019 14:29:22 GMT -5
I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. The first kensho showed me that everything I wanted to understand was "inside," and based on what had happened I theorized that if the mind became sufficiently silent, the answers to all of my many other existential questions could be resolved. It took longer than I imagined it would, but essentially that's what happened. I once had a very serious "personal" quandary that became a simple question, "What should I do?" Because I had gained confidence in contemplation by that time I sat down, considered the question, and resolved to contemplate the issue until an answer arose. I then shifted attention away from thoughts to universal sound and two or three hours later, the answer to my question appeared.There was absolutely no doubt about what was revealed. I then knew what I had to do, and I did it. From my POV a question arose that required an answer, and contemplation resulted in an answer that was 100% rock solid. I didn't have to keep repeating the question because the question was clear and also important. This may be a Rinzai Zen-type thing, but this type of approach is pretty common in that tradition. I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational. I know exactly what you’re talking about, but I think it’s important to note that this method may result in answers that “feel right” but are not necessarily any more guaranteed to actually give desired results than any other method, depending on the circumstances. And there may well be limits on what it can do that are tied to previous conscious reflective effort. For example, if I ask you to calculate the square root of 3737377482927272273737636552, you could sit there for 30 years with your mind blank and you’re unlikely to spontaneously generate the answer. Perhaps some genius mathematician could do it, but not you or I. Well, what I'm pointing to doesn't really have anything to do with results relating to desire. It's a beginner's mind type thing, and perhaps faith that the body knows at some level what the mind wants to know at a more superficial level. In this case I'm only talking about existential questions, but I'm not sure about the square root-kind of question. I have no interest in that kind of question, but I'm not sure that the body couldn't find the answer if one were sufficiently interested in that sort of thing. From my POV it's like tapping into something so deep that nothing is beyond reach. I think it was Maurice Nicoll who once wrote, "The universe may best be defined as 'response to request'" or as Jesus said, "Seek, and ye shall find." I'm not sure that there are any limits to what can be found if sufficient seriousness of intent is there.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Sept 3, 2019 14:41:45 GMT -5
I know exactly what you’re talking about, but I think it’s important to note that this method may result in answers that “feel right” but are not necessarily any more guaranteed to actually give desired results than any other method, depending on the circumstances. And there may well be limits on what it can do that are tied to previous conscious reflective effort. For example, if I ask you to calculate the square root of 3737377482927272273737636552, you could sit there for 30 years with your mind blank and you’re unlikely to spontaneously generate the answer. Perhaps some genius mathematician could do it, but not you or I. Well, what I'm pointing to doesn't really have anything to do with results relating to desire. It's a beginner's mind type thing, and perhaps faith that the body knows at some level what the mind wants to know at a more superficial level. In this case I'm only talking about existential questions, but I'm not sure about the square root-kind of question. I have no interest in that kind of question, but I'm not sure that the body couldn't find the answer if one were sufficiently interested in that sort of thing. From my POV it's like tapping into something so deep that nothing is beyond reach. I think it was Maurice Nicoll who once wrote, "The universe may best be defined as 'response to request'" or as Jesus said, "Seek, and ye shall find." I'm not sure that there are any limits to what can be found if sufficient seriousness of intent is there. You may not be sure, but there’s no evidence of that being the case. Wishing for something and having it come true is of course “possible,” but that kind of faith has nothing to do with realization... it’s more akin to a faith in superstition or miracles. I could believe that if I sat down in meditation for long enough I could sprout wings and fly, but that belief has no evidence backing it, and can’t be granted the status of existential truth. While all is possible to God, it doesn’t follow that all is possible for man.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 3, 2019 14:49:57 GMT -5
Well, what I'm pointing to doesn't really have anything to do with results relating to desire. It's a beginner's mind type thing, and perhaps faith that the body knows at some level what the mind wants to know at a more superficial level. In this case I'm only talking about existential questions, but I'm not sure about the square root-kind of question. I have no interest in that kind of question, but I'm not sure that the body couldn't find the answer if one were sufficiently interested in that sort of thing. From my POV it's like tapping into something so deep that nothing is beyond reach. I think it was Maurice Nicoll who once wrote, "The universe may best be defined as 'response to request'" or as Jesus said, "Seek, and ye shall find." I'm not sure that there are any limits to what can be found if sufficient seriousness of intent is there. You may not be sure, but there’s no evidence of that being the case. Wishing for something and having it come true is of course “possible,” but that kind of faith has nothing to do with realization... it’s more akin to a faith in superstition or miracles. I could believe that if I sat down in meditation for long enough I could sprout wings and fly, but that belief has no evidence backing it, and can’t be granted the status of existential truth. While all is possible to God, it doesn’t follow that all is possible for man. I think it would take zd about 0.0 seconds to figure that one out.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 3, 2019 15:17:10 GMT -5
Well, what I'm pointing to doesn't really have anything to do with results relating to desire. It's a beginner's mind type thing, and perhaps faith that the body knows at some level what the mind wants to know at a more superficial level. In this case I'm only talking about existential questions, but I'm not sure about the square root-kind of question. I have no interest in that kind of question, but I'm not sure that the body couldn't find the answer if one were sufficiently interested in that sort of thing. From my POV it's like tapping into something so deep that nothing is beyond reach. I think it was Maurice Nicoll who once wrote, "The universe may best be defined as 'response to request'" or as Jesus said, "Seek, and ye shall find." I'm not sure that there are any limits to what can be found if sufficient seriousness of intent is there. You may not be sure, but there’s no evidence of that being the case. Wishing for something and having it come true is of course “possible,” but that kind of faith has nothing to do with realization... it’s more akin to a faith in superstition or miracles. I could believe that if I sat down in meditation for long enough I could sprout wings and fly, but that belief has no evidence backing it, and can’t be granted the status of existential truth. While all is possible to God, it doesn’t follow that all is possible for man. What I'm pointing to has nothing to do with wishing for anything or believing anything. It's a state of not-knowing-but-wanting-to-know-something. Just based upon spiritual literature in general, realizations seem to be highly correlated with mental silence and contemplation, and I suspect that's because a jabbering mind tends to obscure.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2019 16:45:41 GMT -5
I have a slightly different perspective. Not better or worse, just different. Perhaps that's because the questions that arose here were always extremely specific and the answers always seemed to be equally specific and easily stated. It may also be because of an exposure to Zen koans, all of which have simple definitive answers that can be discovered via silent contemplation. As one example, this body/mind's final existential question was, "How is it possible to remain in a unity-conscious state of mind permanently?" By that point in the search the body/mind had had many experiences of what it conceived as "unity consciousness"--experiences during which the "me" as a separate observer disappeared. This happened during deep states of samadhi, during cosmic consciousness experiences, while "being in the zone," etc. After these experiences ended, "I" always seemed to come back to a "me in here" looking at a "world out there." I therefore wondered how it might be possible to live in that state of empty non-dual awareness permanently. While on a solo retreat during which that question was periodically pondered, the past sense of a "me" totally disappeared, and it was then realized that there had never been a "me" in the way that had been imagined. The answer to the existential question was then obvious. The question had been based upon an erroneous assumption--that there was a "me" who occasionally disappeared into a state of unity, but afterwards seemed to return to a sense of separateness. The specific "answer" to the question could be stated as, "What I am has always been, and always is, in a state of unity consciousness even though it might not seem that way." I then knew that selfhood was a kind of thought structure that can permanently vanish. FWIW, the old sense of being a separate volitional entity inside a body never returned, and life became a flow of empty isness that this body/mind had only experienced one time in the past. That prior experience lasted about two and a half days following a CC experience after which the old sense of selfhood eventually returned. This body/mind pursued hundreds of existential questions during a long search for truth, and all of those questions ultimately had simple answers that were discovered through non-conceptual realizations. You are such a scholar! If you've got time, take a look into the UG thread in the teachers section and see if you can agree with what UG is saying here and here. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with his point. It's basically my point, too. Just because there are no intellectual answers to the existential questions doesn't mean that all the answers that people peeps get attached to are created equal.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2019 18:25:00 GMT -5
I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. The first kensho showed me that everything I wanted to understand was "inside," and based on what had happened I theorized that if the mind became sufficiently silent, the answers to all of my many other existential questions could be resolved. It took longer than I imagined it would, but essentially that's what happened. I once had a very serious "personal" quandary that became a simple question, "What should I do?" Because I had gained confidence in contemplation by that time I sat down, considered the question, and resolved to contemplate the issue until an answer arose. I then shifted attention away from thoughts to universal sound and two or three hours later, the answer to my question appeared.There was absolutely no doubt about what was revealed. I then knew what I had to do, and I did it. From my POV a question arose that required an answer, and contemplation resulted in an answer that was 100% rock solid. I didn't have to keep repeating the question because the question was clear and also important. This may be a Rinzai Zen-type thing, but this type of approach is pretty common in that tradition. I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational. I know exactly what you’re talking about, but I think it’s important to note that this method may result in answers that “feel right” but are not necessarily any more guaranteed to actually give desired results than any other method, depending on the circumstances. And there may well be limits on what it can do that are tied to previous conscious reflective effort. For example, if I ask you to calculate the square root of 3737377482927272273737636552, you could sit there for 30 years with your mind blank and you’re unlikely to spontaneously generate the answer. Perhaps some genius mathematician could do it, but not you or I. There seems to me two legitimate sides to this coin, but the one I'm biased toward is body/mind quiescence. So while there are some potentially interesting lines of dialog involving the topics of Rain men, creative mathematicians, the nature of intellect, the subconscious, the relation of thought and emotion to the body and emotional distortion and how intellect can sever one's attention from the body and emotions, I'll pass.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 3, 2019 18:31:14 GMT -5
You may not be sure, but there’s no evidence of that being the case. Wishing for something and having it come true is of course “possible,” but that kind of faith has nothing to do with realization... it’s more akin to a faith in superstition or miracles. I could believe that if I sat down in meditation for long enough I could sprout wings and fly, but that belief has no evidence backing it, and can’t be granted the status of existential truth. While all is possible to God, it doesn’t follow that all is possible for man. What I'm pointing to has nothing to do with wishing for anything or believing anything. It's a state of not-knowing-but-wanting-to-know-something. Just based upon spiritual literature in general, realizations seem to be highly correlated with mental silence and contemplation, and I suspect that's because a jabbering mind tends to obscure. Even people with no interest in spirituality have a point of reference for the kind of contemplation you describe. They call it getting their head together or "thinking about it", "stepping back", etc. But the typical orientation toward the process is rather benighted. It is of course, a matter of degree, and you're describing very deep water. The bias in our culture toward rational process is rather pronounced and unbalanced.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 4, 2019 7:48:08 GMT -5
I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. I'm pretty sure you are going to rez with this quote: I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational. That's what UG is teaching as well.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 4, 2019 8:01:02 GMT -5
You are such a scholar! If you've got time, take a look into the UG thread in the teachers section and see if you can agree with what UG is saying here and here. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with his point. It's basically my point, too. Just because there are no intellectual answers to the existential questions doesn't mean that all the answers that people peeps get attached to are created equal. I think our definitions of what constitutes an existential question and what doesn't seem to differ. ZD seems to have a rather broad definition. Mine is rather narrow. Existential questions can be answered on an intellectual level, of course. But these answers don't really mean anything, except in a purely intellectual framework. And the answers will also vary greatly depending on what kind of model of perception someone prefers, like let's say science vs. new age. And here I always found it fascinating how these two seemingly diametrically opposed models of reality actually somewhat converge in the models that Seth and QM present.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 4, 2019 8:02:54 GMT -5
I must be a scholar because my perspective is different than UG, and FWIW I never related to the guy. haha. I'm pretty sure you are going to rez with this quote: I like to call it "body knowing" as opposed to "head knowing," and body knowing can be quite deep as well as non-local and non-rational. That's what UG is teaching as well. You're right. I definitely rez with that.
|
|