The distinction between ATA-T and attention otherwise

[stardustpilgrim]

This is also pertinent: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/5072/conscious?page=3

[stardustpilgrim]

Also pertinent: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/4193/more-conscious-juggling?q=preparatory+work

[zazeniac]

So to help me understand this distinction, you're saying that in zd's recommendation for ATA-T, he suggests attention on the surroundings should flow freely, as long as it stays away from thought, while Nicolls, the person you are quoting suggests it is beneficial to focus attention on the mental mechanism, a specific focus, on the human machine.

In zazen, the room is darkened and the eyes half closed to soften the visual distractions, we focus on the breath, and return to the breath every time the mind wanders to thought. One of the byproducts of this process is exposure of what you would call "the machine." We see our mental tendencies. They are revealed so-to-speak. So the cup of self(ishness) empties a bit. I am less prone to judge and condemn, humbled somewhat. I also lose trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. In addition to this, we are drawn to the silence, between thoughts, where we are unencumbered, where we are free. This freedom, whether walking in the woods, sitting in a cafe or a red light or during zazen is what we are. Tolle calls it presence. It is sensory experience without the mental filter, without labels. This silence, where mind does not intrude is when we are the Self, not experiencing Self, but Being. This is where everything is intimate(loved), close, so close the subject/object dichotomy recedes. The is where there are no objects and hence no separate subject. This is samadhi.

[zendancer]

Aug 25, 2020 12:59:41 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

So to help me understand this distinction, you're saying that in zd's recommendation for ATA-T, he suggests attention on the surroundings should flow freely, as long as it stays away from thought, while Nicolls, the person you are quoting suggests it is beneficial to focus attention on the mental mechanism, a specific focus, on the human machine.

In zazen, the room is darkened and the eyes half closed to soften the visual distractions, we focus on the breath, and return to the breath every time the mind wanders to thought. One of the byproducts of this process is exposure of what you would call "the machine." We see our mental tendencies. They are revealed so-to-speak. So the cup of self(ishness) empties a bit. I am less prone to judge and condemn, humbled somewhat. I also lose trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. In addition to this, we are drawn to the silence, between thoughts, where we are unencumbered, where we are free. This freedom, whether walking in the woods, sitting in a cafe or a red light or during zazen is what we are. Tolle calls it presence. It is sensory experience without the mental filter, without labels. This silence, where mind does not intrude is when we are the Self, not experiencing Self, but Being. This is where everything is intimate(loved), close, so close the subject/object dichotomy recedes. The is where there are no objects and hence no separate subject. This is samadhi.

Yes, when you are sitting in zazen watching the breath, feeling the breath, being the breath, etc, that's a form of ATA-T (because you're shifting attention away from thoughts to some sort of direct sensory perception. It's just a helpful technique for getting out of one's head, and, if pursued, will lead to sustained internal silence--something that seems to be highly correlated with realizations. When meditating on koans, I used to use a similar approach. I'd verbalize a koan, and then spend a few minutes thinking about the issue to see if some answer would appear. If it didn't, then I'd either shift attention to listening to sounds in the environment, shift attention to universal sound, or shift attention to the breathing process. In many cases it only took an hour or so before an answer to a koan would suddenly become obvious.

My favorite form of ATA-T was always done walking in wilderness areas or climbing mountains, but I also pursued it in the same way that Tolle described in his video and especially when driving on the interstate. Eventually ATA-T diminishes the internal dialogue to such a degree that one can stop thinking at will by simply shifting attention to whatever is visually present. As Sifting said, shifting attention beyond the mind can lead to a complete change in mental habits. All kinds of ideas that appeared in the past simply cease to appear, and one lives substantially focused on whatever is happening in the present moment. As this happens, life just gets simpler and simpler.

[stardustpilgrim]

Aug 25, 2020 12:59:41 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

So to help me understand this distinction, you're saying that in zd's recommendation for ATA-T, he suggests attention on the surroundings should flow freely, as long as it stays away from thought, while Nicolls, the person you are quoting suggests it is beneficial to focus attention on the mental mechanism, a specific focus, on the human machine.

In zazen, the room is darkened and the eyes half closed to soften the visual distractions, we focus on the breath, and return to the breath every time the mind wanders to thought. One of the byproducts of this process is exposure of what you would call "the machine." We see our mental tendencies. They are revealed so-to-speak. So the cup of self(ishness) empties a bit. I am less prone to judge and condemn, humbled somewhat. I also lose trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. In addition to this, we are drawn to the silence, between thoughts, where we are unencumbered, where we are free. This freedom, whether walking in the woods, sitting in a cafe or a red light or during zazen is what we are. Tolle calls it presence. It is sensory experience without the mental filter, without labels. This silence, where mind does not intrude is when we are the Self, not experiencing Self, but Being. This is where everything is intimate(loved), close, so close the subject/object dichotomy recedes. The is where there are no objects and hence no separate subject. This is samadhi.

You make some very good points, about "the machine", our mental tendencies, loosing trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. These are what Tolle and zd/ATA-T ~takes one out of~, and you describe what results very well.

But what I wanted to look at more than this, is where Nicoll and Tolle overlap (and this is what I don't recall zd ever discussing). Yes Tolle begins by talking about Presence, but he shifts and uses the word Consciousness. About minute 1:20 he says Presence of Consciousness, you as Consciousness. And he brings this up several times, feel the presence of yourself. At minute 2:30 he says your own aliveness is the basis you sense the aliveness of others. And at 6:50 he makes this clear that this is not the ordinary sense of self because you are not there as a person, that this requires a shift in Consciousness. At 9:10 choosing Presence, at 10:30, it's always in the present moment. At 11:00 he uses the words being more conscious. At 11:45 he says if you are not aware in the present moment you have missed it, and you miss your whole life, where you are, what's around you. At 12:40 he says the essence of the present moment is Consciousness. You are the present moment, as Consciousness. You are that Consciousness.

Now, what Tolle is saying directly corresponds to what Nicoll says about Consciousness, and they mean the same by the word. Nicoll asks: What is the most precious, the most mysterious, and the most indefinable possession we have been given? The answer is-Consciousness. We are given a little of this indescribable and unfathomable mystery. And he then describes a little what you do, in our ordinary state we surrender Consciousness to every pleasing mood, every passing thought, and this is what hypnotic sleep is. But he goes on to say what's possible, "You must become conscious of your consciousness". This exactly corresponds to what Tolle is saying (above excerpts). "This leads to a definite increase in Consciousness". This corresponds to what Tolle said, "being more conscious". (And this is a point E and sdp come to an agreement on in the conscious versus conscious thread, E said I have been talking about becoming more conscious for years). Nicoll goes on: "You have a new consciousness of that former consciousness with which you were identified" (which you describe well). Nicoll: "You begin to see your life in a new way-that is, to become newly conscious of it. ...since you are beginning to awaken from the hypnotic sleep of life you begin to touch the first traces of another consciousness which is not that belonging to hypnotic sleep".

So, since zd said what Tolle is talking about is ATA-T, I was comparing what Tolle said to what zd says here on ST's. I don't recall zd ever discussing Presence and Consciousness as Tolle does in the video. The way Tolle (and Nicoll) talk about Consciousness is in addition to what zd says about ATA-T. Now, I tried to press zd on this five years ago in my analogy of the fish in water on the conscious versus thread, but he didn't reply further.

Basically, there is a mountain of difference between self-reflective thought (or any kind of thought) and being conscious of Consciousness, they don't even compare, they don't exist on the same planet, they are light-years apart. Tolle makes it clear the difference, he uses the words you as Consciousness and makes the distinction saying in you as Consciousness, you are not there as a person. I have tried to point out this distinction many times in discussion with zd.

Now, having clarified the question, I think maybe zd can clarify, you already have in a sense ending with "This is samadhi". I would insert here, sahaja, This is sahaja samadhi, in the context of this discussion. But what I would like at minimum is zd's response to Tolle's discussion about Consciousness.

Tolle also gives some key indications of indicators of being in the present moment.

But another major difference in discussion, sdp places the highest value on Consciousness as talked about by Tolle and Nicoll.

[zazeniac]

Aug 25, 2020 18:09:36 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

Aug 25, 2020 12:59:41 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

So to help me understand this distinction, you're saying that in zd's recommendation for ATA-T, he suggests attention on the surroundings should flow freely, as long as it stays away from thought, while Nicolls, the person you are quoting suggests it is beneficial to focus attention on the mental mechanism, a specific focus, on the human machine.

In zazen, the room is darkened and the eyes half closed to soften the visual distractions, we focus on the breath, and return to the breath every time the mind wanders to thought. One of the byproducts of this process is exposure of what you would call "the machine." We see our mental tendencies. They are revealed so-to-speak. So the cup of self(ishness) empties a bit. I am less prone to judge and condemn, humbled somewhat. I also lose trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. In addition to this, we are drawn to the silence, between thoughts, where we are unencumbered, where we are free. This freedom, whether walking in the woods, sitting in a cafe or a red light or during zazen is what we are. Tolle calls it presence. It is sensory experience without the mental filter, without labels. This silence, where mind does not intrude is when we are the Self, not experiencing Self, but Being. This is where everything is intimate(loved), close, so close the subject/object dichotomy recedes. The is where there are no objects and hence no separate subject. This is samadhi.

You make some very good points, about "the machine", our mental tendencies, loosing trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. These are what Tolle and zd/ATA-T ~takes one out of~, and you describe what results very well.

But what I wanted to look at more than this, is where Nicoll and Tolle overlap (and this is what I don't recall zd ever discussing). Yes Tolle begins by talking about Presence, but he shifts and uses the word Consciousness. About minute 1:20 he says Presence of Consciousness, you as Consciousness. And he brings this up several times, feel the presence of yourself. At minute 2:30 he says your own aliveness is the basis you sense the aliveness of others. And at 6:50 he makes this clear that this is not the ordinary sense of self because you are not there as a person, that this requires a shift in Consciousness. At 9:10 choosing Presence, at 10:30, it's always in the present moment. At 11:00 he uses the words being more conscious. At 11:45 he says if you are not aware in the present moment you have missed it, and you miss your whole life, where you are, what's around you. At 12:40 he says the essence of the present moment is Consciousness. You are the present moment, as Consciousness. You are that Consciousness.

Now, what Tolle is saying directly corresponds to what Nicoll says about Consciousness, and they mean the same by the word. Nicoll asks: What is the most precious, the most mysterious, and the most indefinable possession we have been given? The answer is-Consciousness. We are given a little of this indescribable and unfathomable mystery. And he then describes a little what you do, in our ordinary state we surrender Consciousness to every pleasing mood, every passing thought, and this is what hypnotic sleep is. But he goes on to say what's possible, "You must become conscious of your consciousness". This exactly corresponds to what Tolle is saying (above excerpts). "This leads to a definite increase in Consciousness". This corresponds to what Tolle said, "being more conscious". (And this is a point E and sdp come to an agreement on in the conscious versus conscious thread, E said I have been talking about becoming more conscious for years). Nicoll goes on: "You have a new consciousness of that former consciousness with which you were identified" (which you describe well). Nicoll: "You begin to see your life in a new way-that is, to become newly conscious of it. ...since you are beginning to awaken from the hypnotic sleep of life you begin to touch the first traces of another consciousness which is not that belonging to hypnotic sleep".

So, since zd said what Tolle is talking about is ATA-T, I was comparing what Tolle said to what zd says here on ST's. I don't recall zd ever discussing Presence and Consciousness as Tolle does in the video. The way Tolle (and Nicoll) talk about Consciousness is in addition to what zd says about ATA-T. Now, I tried to press zd on this five years ago in my analogy of the fish in water on the conscious versus thread, but he didn't reply further.

Basically, there is a mountain of difference between self-reflective thought (or any kind of thought) and being conscious of Consciousness, they don't even compare, they don't exist on the same planet, they are light-years apart. Tolle makes it clear the difference, he uses the words you as Consciousness and makes the distinction saying in you as Consciousness, you are not there as a person. I have tried to point out this distinction many times in discussion with zd.

Now, having clarified the question, I think maybe zd can clarify, you already have in a sense ending with "This is samadhi". I would insert here, sahaja, This is sahaja samadhi, in the context of this discussion. But what I would like at minimum is zd's response to Tolle's discussion about Consciousness.

Tolle also gives some key indications of indicators of being in the present moment.

But another major difference in discussion, sdp places the highest value on Consciousness as talked about by Tolle and Nicoll.

I offer these quotes from Ramana to clarify sahaja and the nirvikalpa/ savikalpa distinction. In my opinion, ATA-T, self-inquiry, zazen, holding I-am, even self-remembering are examples of savikalpa samadhi. That is, attending to the Self with effort through the mental interference. Now some of the purists will take offence to what I just wrote and insist that only self-inquiry is savilkalpa samadhi. I will not quarrel this assertion. 

Nirvikalpa samadhi is Being/Self without effort. In other words the mental disruption seems to stop. Usually for a prolonged period without effort. It can happen during meditation where thought dissipates and there is no longer a need to return focus. It's like an air plane ride where you've been bounced around quite a bit and then suddenly it stops and the ride is as smooth as silk.


Q: When can one practise sahaja samadhi?

A: Even from the beginning. Even though one practises kevala nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, if one has not rooted out the vasanas one will not attain liberation.

Q: May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

A: Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

Q: Is nirvikalpa samadhi absolutely necessary before the attainment of sahaja?

A: Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikalpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the body- consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

[stardustpilgrim]

Aug 27, 2020 11:49:36 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

Aug 25, 2020 18:09:36 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

You make some very good points, about "the machine", our mental tendencies, loosing trust in the machine, the mental mechanism or ego. These are what Tolle and zd/ATA-T ~takes one out of~, and you describe what results very well.

But what I wanted to look at more than this, is where Nicoll and Tolle overlap (and this is what I don't recall zd ever discussing). Yes Tolle begins by talking about Presence, but he shifts and uses the word Consciousness. About minute 1:20 he says Presence of Consciousness, you as Consciousness. And he brings this up several times, feel the presence of yourself. At minute 2:30 he says your own aliveness is the basis you sense the aliveness of others. And at 6:50 he makes this clear that this is not the ordinary sense of self because you are not there as a person, that this requires a shift in Consciousness. At 9:10 choosing Presence, at 10:30, it's always in the present moment. At 11:00 he uses the words being more conscious. At 11:45 he says if you are not aware in the present moment you have missed it, and you miss your whole life, where you are, what's around you. At 12:40 he says the essence of the present moment is Consciousness. You are the present moment, as Consciousness. You are that Consciousness.

Now, what Tolle is saying directly corresponds to what Nicoll says about Consciousness, and they mean the same by the word. Nicoll asks: What is the most precious, the most mysterious, and the most indefinable possession we have been given? The answer is-Consciousness. We are given a little of this indescribable and unfathomable mystery. And he then describes a little what you do, in our ordinary state we surrender Consciousness to every pleasing mood, every passing thought, and this is what hypnotic sleep is. But he goes on to say what's possible, "You must become conscious of your consciousness". This exactly corresponds to what Tolle is saying (above excerpts). "This leads to a definite increase in Consciousness". This corresponds to what Tolle said, "being more conscious". (And this is a point E and sdp come to an agreement on in the conscious versus conscious thread, E said I have been talking about becoming more conscious for years). Nicoll goes on: "You have a new consciousness of that former consciousness with which you were identified" (which you describe well). Nicoll: "You begin to see your life in a new way-that is, to become newly conscious of it. ...since you are beginning to awaken from the hypnotic sleep of life you begin to touch the first traces of another consciousness which is not that belonging to hypnotic sleep".

So, since zd said what Tolle is talking about is ATA-T, I was comparing what Tolle said to what zd says here on ST's. I don't recall zd ever discussing Presence and Consciousness as Tolle does in the video. The way Tolle (and Nicoll) talk about Consciousness is in addition to what zd says about ATA-T. Now, I tried to press zd on this five years ago in my analogy of the fish in water on the conscious versus thread, but he didn't reply further.

Basically, there is a mountain of difference between self-reflective thought (or any kind of thought) and being conscious of Consciousness, they don't even compare, they don't exist on the same planet, they are light-years apart. Tolle makes it clear the difference, he uses the words you as Consciousness and makes the distinction saying in you as Consciousness, you are not there as a person. I have tried to point out this distinction many times in discussion with zd.

Now, having clarified the question, I think maybe zd can clarify, you already have in a sense ending with "This is samadhi". I would insert here, sahaja, This is sahaja samadhi, in the context of this discussion. But what I would like at minimum is zd's response to Tolle's discussion about Consciousness.

Tolle also gives some key indications of indicators of being in the present moment.

But another major difference in discussion, sdp places the highest value on Consciousness as talked about by Tolle and Nicoll.

I offer these quotes from Ramana to clarify sahaja and the nirvikalpa/ savikalpa distinction. In my opinion, ATA-T, self-inquiry, zazen, holding I-am, even self-remembering are examples of savikalpa samadhi. That is, attending to the Self with effort through the mental interference. Now some of the purists will take offence to what I just wrote and insist that only self-inquiry is savilkalpa samadhi. I will not quarrel this assertion. 

Nirvikalpa samadhi is Being/Self without effort. In other words the mental disruption seems to stop. Usually for a prolonged period without effort. It can happen during meditation where thought dissipates and there is no longer a need to return focus. It's like an air plane ride where you've been bounced around quite a bit and then suddenly it stops and the ride is as smooth as silk.


Q: When can one practise sahaja samadhi?

A: Even from the beginning. Even though one practises kevala nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, if one has not rooted out the vasanas one will not attain liberation.

Q: May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

A: Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

Q: Is nirvikalpa samadhi absolutely necessary before the attainment of sahaja?

A: Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikalpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the body- consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

Yes.

Thanks, that clarifies those terms. I will make a comparison from Zen, sudden enlightenment and gradual enlightenment. From my standpoint everything is in terms of energy. As analogy, take a plastic jug with holes poked in it, place it under a faucet. The faucet for me would be food, air and impressions (sensory impressions, that is, what enters via the 5 senses). The jug is the body/organism. The holes represent vasanas. A dripping faucet represents savikalpa samadhi, a conscious effort. The more effort the faster the drops, this is gradual enlightenment or gradual awakening. What is the meaning of gradual? The vasanas drain energy. To begin to get anywhere the drops entering from effort must exceed the drops lost from vasanas. Now, two things can be done to accumulate more energy. You can make more effort or you eliminate the vasanas, that is, seal the holes, or have a combination of both. (Although eliminating the vasanas is exponentially more significant).

So what is sudden enlightenment/awakening or nirvikalpa samadhi? This is when the jug is filled with water and overflows. One last drop, the jug is filled to the brim. Nothing extraordinary, just full. Add just one more drop and the jug overflows, by itself. This is nirvikalpa samadhi/sudden awakening, the extraordinary. If there are still vasanas, the water will drain and the nirvikalpa samadhi will end, the overflow ceases, the ordinary returns. If one can eliminate all vasanas, seal all the holes, the more easily one stays in nirvikalpa samadhi, and eventually sahaja samadhi. A quote from Dogen is pertinent, practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. Practice brings the state, eventually, the state is what practice was. Only in a certain sense, practice is no longer necessary because practice and enlightenment are one and the same. This is the continual overflow of water. A few words and arrows could be added, but I'll stop there. And zd said something recently which is pertinent but I don't recall him saying previously, ATA-T is accumulative.

Your quotes are very significant from my POV, especially the last answer.

Now, we can add something from the Tolle video. The overflow of water is Consciousness.

[zazeniac]

Aug 27, 2020 13:10:32 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

Aug 27, 2020 11:49:36 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

I offer these quotes from Ramana to clarify sahaja and the nirvikalpa/ savikalpa distinction. In my opinion, ATA-T, self-inquiry, zazen, holding I-am, even self-remembering are examples of savikalpa samadhi. That is, attending to the Self with effort through the mental interference. Now some of the purists will take offence to what I just wrote and insist that only self-inquiry is savilkalpa samadhi. I will not quarrel this assertion. 

Nirvikalpa samadhi is Being/Self without effort. In other words the mental disruption seems to stop. Usually for a prolonged period without effort. It can happen during meditation where thought dissipates and there is no longer a need to return focus. It's like an air plane ride where you've been bounced around quite a bit and then suddenly it stops and the ride is as smooth as silk.


Q: When can one practise sahaja samadhi?

A: Even from the beginning. Even though one practises kevala nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, if one has not rooted out the vasanas one will not attain liberation.

Q: May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

A: Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

Q: Is nirvikalpa samadhi absolutely necessary before the attainment of sahaja?

A: Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikalpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the body- consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

OK, thanks, that clarifies those terms. I will make a comparison from Zen, sudden enlightenment and gradual enlightenment. From my standpoint everything is in terms of energy. As analogy, take a plastic jug with holes poked in it, place it under a faucet. The faucet for me would be food, air and impressions (sensory impressions, that is, what enters via the 5 senses). The jug is the body/organism. The holes represent vasanas. A dripping faucet represents savikalpa samadhi, a conscious effort. The more effort the faster the drops, this is gradual enlightenment or gradual awakening. What is the meaning of gradual? The vasanas drain energy. To begin to get anywhere the drops entering from effort must exceed the drops lost from vasanas. Now, two things can be done to accumulate more energy. You can make more effort or you eliminate the vasanas, that is, seal the holes, or have a combination of both.

So what is sudden enlightenment/awakening or nirvikalpa samadhi? This is when the jug is filled with water and overflows. One last drop, the jug is filled to the brim. Nothing extraordinary, just full. Add just one more drop and the jug overflows. This is nirvikalpa samadhi/sudden awakening, the extraordinary. If there are still vasanas, the water will drain and the nirvikalpa samadhi will end, the overflow ceases, the ordinary returns. If one can eliminate all vasanas, seal all the holes, the more easily one stays in nirvikalpa samadhi, and eventually sahaja samadhi. A quote from Dogen is pertinent, practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. Practice brings the state, eventually, the state is what practice was. Practice is no longer necessary because practice and enlightenment are one and the same. This is the continual overflow of water. A few words and arrows could be added, but I'll stop there. And zd said something recently which is pertinent but I don't recall him saying previously, ATA-T is accumulative.

Your quotes are very significant from my POV, especially the last answer.

Now, we can add something from the Tolle video. The overflow of water is Consciousness.

Yeah the bottle "runneth over" like Psalm 23:5. We have slightly different views on sudden vs gradusl, but no biggie. You can still have vasanas IMO and experience nirvikalpa samadhi. It's why you get knocked off the horse. One of mine is caring what other people think and feel about me. Knocks me off every time. Still it was a very useful analogy. Thanks.
 

[stardustpilgrim]

Aug 27, 2020 13:34:26 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

Aug 27, 2020 13:10:32 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

OK, thanks, that clarifies those terms. I will make a comparison from Zen, sudden enlightenment and gradual enlightenment. From my standpoint everything is in terms of energy. As analogy, take a plastic jug with holes poked in it, place it under a faucet. The faucet for me would be food, air and impressions (sensory impressions, that is, what enters via the 5 senses). The jug is the body/organism. The holes represent vasanas. A dripping faucet represents savikalpa samadhi, a conscious effort. The more effort the faster the drops, this is gradual enlightenment or gradual awakening. What is the meaning of gradual? The vasanas drain energy. To begin to get anywhere the drops entering from effort must exceed the drops lost from vasanas. Now, two things can be done to accumulate more energy. You can make more effort or you eliminate the vasanas, that is, seal the holes, or have a combination of both.

So what is sudden enlightenment/awakening or nirvikalpa samadhi? This is when the jug is filled with water and overflows. One last drop, the jug is filled to the brim. Nothing extraordinary, just full. Add just one more drop and the jug overflows. This is nirvikalpa samadhi/sudden awakening, the extraordinary. If there are still vasanas, the water will drain and the nirvikalpa samadhi will end, the overflow ceases, the ordinary returns. If one can eliminate all vasanas, seal all the holes, the more easily one stays in nirvikalpa samadhi, and eventually sahaja samadhi. A quote from Dogen is pertinent, practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. Practice brings the state, eventually, the state is what practice was. Practice is no longer necessary because practice and enlightenment are one and the same. This is the continual overflow of water. A few words and arrows could be added, but I'll stop there. And zd said something recently which is pertinent but I don't recall him saying previously, ATA-T is accumulative.

Your quotes are very significant from my POV, especially the last answer.

Now, we can add something from the Tolle video. The overflow of water is Consciousness.

Yeah the bottle "runneth over" like Psalm 23:5. We have slightly different views on sudden vs gradusl, but no biggie. You can still have vasanas IMO and experience nirvikalpa samadhi. It's why you get knocked off the horse. One of mine is caring what other people think and feel about me. Knocks me off every time. Still it was a very useful analogy. Thanks.
 

Yes, Jesus talked about it too, a well springing up from within.

Yes.

Yes, me too, my Achilles heel. For me/us this is called internal considering. Very nasty, big drain.

Sure.

[zendancer]

Aug 27, 2020 13:10:32 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

Aug 27, 2020 11:49:36 GMT -5 zazeniac said:

I offer these quotes from Ramana to clarify sahaja and the nirvikalpa/ savikalpa distinction. In my opinion, ATA-T, self-inquiry, zazen, holding I-am, even self-remembering are examples of savikalpa samadhi. That is, attending to the Self with effort through the mental interference. Now some of the purists will take offence to what I just wrote and insist that only self-inquiry is savilkalpa samadhi. I will not quarrel this assertion. 

Nirvikalpa samadhi is Being/Self without effort. In other words the mental disruption seems to stop. Usually for a prolonged period without effort. It can happen during meditation where thought dissipates and there is no longer a need to return focus. It's like an air plane ride where you've been bounced around quite a bit and then suddenly it stops and the ride is as smooth as silk.


Q: When can one practise sahaja samadhi?

A: Even from the beginning. Even though one practises kevala nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, if one has not rooted out the vasanas one will not attain liberation.

Q: May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

A: Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

Q: Is nirvikalpa samadhi absolutely necessary before the attainment of sahaja?

A: Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikalpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the body- consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

Yes.

Thanks, that clarifies those terms. I will make a comparison from Zen, sudden enlightenment and gradual enlightenment. From my standpoint everything is in terms of energy. As analogy, take a plastic jug with holes poked in it, place it under a faucet. The faucet for me would be food, air and impressions (sensory impressions, that is, what enters via the 5 senses). The jug is the body/organism. The holes represent vasanas. A dripping faucet represents savikalpa samadhi, a conscious effort. The more effort the faster the drops, this is gradual enlightenment or gradual awakening. What is the meaning of gradual? The vasanas drain energy. To begin to get anywhere the drops entering from effort must exceed the drops lost from vasanas. Now, two things can be done to accumulate more energy. You can make more effort or you eliminate the vasanas, that is, seal the holes, or have a combination of both. (Although eliminating the vasanas is exponentially more significant).

So what is sudden enlightenment/awakening or nirvikalpa samadhi? This is when the jug is filled with water and overflows. One last drop, the jug is filled to the brim. Nothing extraordinary, just full. Add just one more drop and the jug overflows, by itself. This is nirvikalpa samadhi/sudden awakening, the extraordinary. If there are still vasanas, the water will drain and the nirvikalpa samadhi will end, the overflow ceases, the ordinary returns. If one can eliminate all vasanas, seal all the holes, the more easily one stays in nirvikalpa samadhi, and eventually sahaja samadhi. A quote from Dogen is pertinent, practice is enlightenment, enlightenment is practice. Practice brings the state, eventually, the state is what practice was. Only in a certain sense, practice is no longer necessary because practice and enlightenment are one and the same. This is the continual overflow of water. A few words and arrows could be added, but I'll stop there. And zd said something recently which is pertinent but I don't recall him saying previously, ATA-T is accumulative.

Your quotes are very significant from my POV, especially the last answer.

Now, we can add something from the Tolle video. The overflow of water is Consciousness.

By accumulative all I meant was that the more time one spends in a state of mental silence, the easier it becomes to stay in a state of mental silence. Niz said the same sort of thing about staying in the I am. He said that it took a lot of effort at first, but became easier and easier as time went by. He also said that at first "the mind will rebel" but that "it will eventually yield and become silent." The mind doesn't actually rebel; that's just a way of pointing to the fact that mental habits can change, and the addictive habit of thought can be broken. The habit is not broken by a person, but that's the way it appears to someone who hasn't yet seen through the illusion of selfhood or personal doership.

Again, what's the goal with all of this seeking? It's to realize what's going on so that one can relax and live life being present to and psychologically one-with whatever is happening. After seeing the context of human life and becoming free from the usual consensus paradigm, there is never any doubt about what to do. Why? Because there is no longer any effort to get from point A to point B. One realizes that what we are is always at point A.

Think about it. Children are asked, "What do you want to be when you grow up?" This is cultural conditioning that orients the child toward an imaginary future, and the same sort of conditioning creates all of the efforting by humans to get from where they are to where they think they should be in some imaginary future. There's usually very little acceptance or enjoyment of what is already here and now. People think, "I'll be happy when I get a new _____________," or, "I'll be happy when I'm, able to retire with plenty of money," or "I'll be happy when people recognize me, love me, honor me, etc," or "I'll be happy when I find the perfect relationship," etc. Silence once put up a short post, "This. Is. It." Realizing that "THIS is IT" results in peace, freedom, equanimity, and a simple ordinary down-to-earth straight-forward way of life. For a sage complexity, complication, efforting, expectations, comparison thinking, judging, second-guessing, and multi-layer cake models are all in the past. The truth is obvious, simple, and closer than one's own breath.

[steven]

Aug 11, 2020 7:02:47 GMT -5 zendancer said:

Aug 11, 2020 5:42:20 GMT -5 Xiao said:

This is going to sound like a "cop-out" a bit, but I think these sorts of distinctions miss the point, almost by necessity in the sense that a linguistic attempt to discuss something like ATA-t or Nonduality in general is always going to fail.

That being said, I feel like in ATA-t there isn't a "freely chosen" object of attention, nor is there necessarily even a conscious reason for attending it. 

A thought might arise, and then subsequently there might be a thought, "I should really get back to this ATA stuff so I can make some progress," and then it might happen that all of this is seen as the machinations of mind and there is a dropping into silence. 

Certainly something chooses to do this or that, but that totality or intelligence or whatever you want to call it is definitely not asking for permissions from a "me", which is simply a linguistic convention to begin with. 

I do wholeheartedly agree that a distinction need to be made between ATA-t and other "forms" (for lack of a better word) of attention, but I think it's as simple as having the general intention to drop thought when it's presence is noted. Nobody can make that intention be there 24/7 or forcefully hold it there, but in time there seems to be a preference for presence without thought as opposed to the typical mental narration that goes on in most peoples' heads. 

I apologize if at any point I misunderstood you or mischaracterized you here! 🙏 

I agree with most of this. My only disagreement would be that sometimes there is a conscious reason for doing ATA-T because of what is intuited about the possible effectiveness of that activity. I initially started doing ATA-T because I wondered if it was possible for an adult to look at the world like a small child--without naming or commenting upon what was seen. IOW, I wondered, "Can the world be looked at in silence?" Almost as soon as I started trying to do that (while walking down a country road in the afternoon after work), memories from childhood returned. I remembered smells that I hadn't smelled in many years (honeysuckle, new-mown grass, etc). Within a day or so I saw birds and squirrels, and was surprised because I hadn't seen them in years and sort of assumed that they had all been killed by hunters. These experiences made me realize that I had been living in my head for a long time and hadn't consciously looked at the natural world. I had been spending all of my time attending thoughts about finance, construction problems, customers, employees, etc.

At that time I also realized that there was a big difference between interacting with the world directly, through sensory perception and physical activity like small children, and interacting with the world indirectly through thoughts, like adults. This increased my curiosity and motivation to spend more time formerly meditating using a breath awareness practice. I hadn't yet realized that ATA-T is a major aspect of many forms of meditation. Later, I realized that breath awareness meditation is another form of ATA-T (one is shifting attention away from thoughts to watching the breathing process).

It took about 7 or 8 years of experimenting with many forms of meditation before I fully realized the value of informally doing ATA-T during everyday life. Until that time my focus was still primarily upon formal sitting meditation, but after I saw the value of shifting attention away from thoughts while driving my truck, and during other activities throughout the day, that increased the amount of time spent in that form of meditation. I also began going on solo mountain hiking/climbing retreats during which I purposely did ATA-T virtually around the clock. The effect of doing this was noticeable because it led to significantly more internal silence and longer and longer periods of time during which there was no thinking at all.

Of course, after the illusion of selfhood collapsed (after the "little guy in the head" vanished), and I finally realized what we all are and what's going on, there was no longer any need to do ATA-T or any other kind of meditation. It became obvious that THIS sometimes thinks and THIS sometimes is silent via human organisms, and the only value in becoming silent is to escape from the incessant thoughts that obscure the underlying truth. Ironically, by the time all of this was realized, mind talk had become minimal compared with earlier in life, and the character was able to interact with the world with very little reflective thinking.

In short, I think that mind talk is the biggest single obstacle to realizations that would inform mind about what's going on (because that activity keeps the mind focused on abstractions rather than what is actual), and I feel just like Eckhart Tolle who once said, "one of the greatest attainments in life is attaining freedom from the compulsion of incessant thought."

Look up or watch some YouTube videos on an organ within the brain called the Reticular Activating System (RAS)

It’s the brain’s filtering mechanism, and it’s both programmable and de-programmable.

It can make you blind to obvious things right in front of you, and let you see what was previously hidden from you by your own programming.

I suspect that one day scientist will find a very intimate connection between true mind stopping alert meditation practice and the removing of some of the filtering we pile unto our RAS throughout a lifetime.

Experientially I’ve found this to be truthy lol


And the RAS filters everything, certainly sensory experiences, but also thoughts, thought patterns, beliefs, memories, simply everything we experience whether that experience is perceived to be an inner thought or emotional experience or an outer sensory experience.

It’s quite interesting to look at all the stuff talked about in this forum through and understanding of the RAS :-)