|
Post by amit on Aug 25, 2020 4:30:51 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust?
Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect.
From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are.
If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust?
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 10:48:32 GMT -5
Post by zazeniac on Aug 25, 2020 10:48:32 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? There is also talk of "ripeness." This is mentioned often. Some folks are ready to shed their old form. Perhaps this is why they can more easily trust. Those of us with more "karma," baggage, what-have-you need to do some work, hence practice.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 12:02:42 GMT -5
Post by amit on Aug 25, 2020 12:02:42 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? There is also talk of "ripeness." This is mentioned often. Some folks are ready to shed their old form. Perhaps this is why they can more easily trust. Those of us with more "karma," baggage, what-have-you need to do some work, hence practice. Yes maybe those who practise are not particularly trusting and need the experiences (embody) offered by the particular practise followed before trust in the practise, and lose trust if those experiences are not forthcoming, and move onto another practise which may work. Those who trust do not need such experiences so practise is not required. What suits one may not suit another.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 12:13:16 GMT -5
Post by amit on Aug 25, 2020 12:13:16 GMT -5
There is also talk of "ripeness." This is mentioned often. Some folks are ready to shed their old form. Perhaps this is why they can more easily trust. Those of us with more "karma," baggage, what-have-you need to do some work, hence practice. Yes maybe those who practise are not particularly trusting and need the experiences (embodiment) offered by the particular practise followed before trust/ripening in the practise. If those experiences are not forthcoming, they can move onto another practise which may work. Those who trust do not need such experiences so practise is not required. What suits one may not suit another. If trust is fundemental to both approaches, maybe practise could include looking at the conditioning in childhood, that led to a lack of trust, such as being let down a lot, which may lead to trust being restored as not such a fearful thing in adulthood.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 16:45:50 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Aug 25, 2020 16:45:50 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?".
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 25, 2020 18:17:01 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?". Douwe Tiemersma wrote in the Forward of "I Am That" the following: "The best that you can do is to listen attentively to the jnani (gnani) — of whom Sri Nisargadatta is a living example — and to trust and believe him. By such listening you will realize that his reality is your reality. He helps you in seeing the nature of the world and of the ‘I am’. He urges you to study the workings of the body and the mind with solemn and intense concentration, to recognize that you are neither of them and to cast them off. He suggests that you return again and again to ‘I am’ until it is your only abode, outside of which nothing exists; until the ego as a limitation of ‘I am’, has disappeared. It is then that the highest realization will just happen effortlessly".
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 19:02:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 25, 2020 19:02:05 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?". You become interested in what somebody says because they have something you want and you think they can tell you how to get it or know something you want to know. I say throw trust out the window. Show me how to verify for myself what you have.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 25, 2020 23:07:14 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Aug 25, 2020 23:07:14 GMT -5
Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?". You become interested in what somebody says because they have something you want and you think they can tell you how to get it or know something you want to know. That's one specific potential scenario, for sure. But the topic is broader than that. I say throw trust out the window. Show me how to verify for myself what you have. As Amit pointed out in the OP, Niz agrees that throwing trust out the window is certainly one way to go. And I'd go further to say that anyone who ever gets someone else to trust them should do whatever they can to encourage the one who trusts them to find their own inner authority, which is what Nizzes guru did for him at the outset. But if you want someone to show you how to verify for yourself, then at that point the question of trust is already a foregone conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Aug 26, 2020 0:04:17 GMT -5
You become interested in what somebody says because they have something you want and you think they can tell you how to get it or know something you want to know. I say throw trust out the window. Show me how to verify for myself what you have. I'd say so too.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 0:17:05 GMT -5
Post by inavalan on Aug 26, 2020 0:17:05 GMT -5
You become interested in what somebody says because they have something you want and you think they can tell you how to get it or know something you want to know. That's one specific potential scenario, for sure. But the topic is broader than that. I say throw trust out the window. Show me how to verify for myself what you have. As Amit pointed out in the OP, Niz agrees that throwing trust out the window is certainly one way to go. And I'd go further to say that anyone who ever gets someone else to trust them should do whatever they can to encourage the one who trusts them to find their own inner authority, which is what Nizzes guru did for him at the outset. But if you want someone to show you how to verify for yourself, then at that point the question of trust is already a foregone conclusion. That is amusing ... quoting a guru supporting "throwing trust [in others' teachings] out the window"! No offense intended, just for laughter ...
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 0:31:29 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Aug 26, 2020 0:31:29 GMT -5
That's one specific potential scenario, for sure. But the topic is broader than that. As Amit pointed out in the OP, Niz agrees that throwing trust out the window is certainly one way to go. And I'd go further to say that anyone who ever gets someone else to trust them should do whatever they can to encourage the one who trusts them to find their own inner authority, which is what Nizzes guru did for him at the outset. But if you want someone to show you how to verify for yourself, then at that point the question of trust is already a foregone conclusion. That is amusing ... quoting a guru supporting "throwing trust [in others' teachings] out the window"! No offense intended, just for laughter ... Sure, I can understand the irony in it. But it's a recurring theme in the cultures that present nonduality: "this is what I'm telling you, but you don't have to trust me. Verify it for yourself".
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 2:28:25 GMT -5
Post by amit on Aug 26, 2020 2:28:25 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?".
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 2:54:13 GMT -5
Post by amit on Aug 26, 2020 2:54:13 GMT -5
Niz refers to fast realization as Trust, and slow as Practise, and that either is appropriate depending on the character of the seeker. We know what he means by Practise but do we know what he means by Trust? Dictionay defines Trust as firm belief in reliablity or truth, and is quite close to Faith in this respect. From our own experience what does it mean/or what determines whether we Trust, or not? Does it depend on , like much else, our conditioning/experience in life? and if so , if we have been let down a lot, can our ability to Truat be restored? if so how? Presumably each will know from own experience, how trusting they are. If our ability to Trust has been undermined , are we more likely to choose practise in the spiritual search rather than Truat? and is this a major determinant of why some choose Practise and others just Trust? Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?". [/quote} Maybe those who practise are not particularly trusting and need the experiences (embodiment) offered by the particular practise followed before trust/ripening in the practise. If those experiences are not forthcoming, they can move onto another practise which may work. Those who trust do not need such experiences so practise is not required. What suits one may not suit another. If trust is fundemental to both approaches, maybe practise could include looking at the conditioning in childhood, that led to a lack of trust, such as being let down a lot, which may lead to trust being restored as not such a fearful thing in adulthood. The search is motivated by discomfort. Some have no experience in memory to help them, so look externally for more data, some of which is of course provided by those who have already addressed the problem. Some trust what they hear until there is evidence to the contrary, others are very suspicous right from the start. The latter are more likely to want self validaton, which is also filled with potential difficulties requiring addressing conditioning. As usual there is room for different approaches depending on the character of the seeker.
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 6:35:39 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 26, 2020 6:35:39 GMT -5
Niz said that the reason he could be trusted is because he didn't want anything from the person asking the question, but, instead, hoped and wished for them that they could discover what he had. I think he might have even said this more than once. Why does anyone ever get interested in what someone else has to say? This can be all over the map. It can be because we can relate to what we imagine the other person to be like based on their descriptions of their past experience and how we react to what they're saying. It can be because they represent something that's foreign to us that sparks our curiosity for some reason. I can also be because they evoke a strong negative reaction. Trust can only ever follow from that initial interest, and, like any other movement of mind, it might involve varying degrees of subconscious entanglement we're not even aware of as it's happening. This is the salesman's secret, by the way. So, to answer one of your questions, yes, trust is based, in part, on our conditioned psyche/body/mind. But there is something deeper going on as well. Niz also said more than once that what he was saying could be self-validated, and yes, I recall this particular dialog where he lays out the difference between these two paths. Perhaps, we might infer that a path to trust might be asking first, "what does this person want from me?".
Doesn't that seem to implicate, also .. "what is it that I want, from them?". [/quote} Maybe those who practise are not particularly trusting and need the experiences (embodiment) offered by the particular practise followed before trust/ripening in the practise. If those experiences are not forthcoming, they can move onto another practise which may work. Those who trust do not need such experiences so practise is not required. What suits one may not suit another. If trust is fundemental to both approaches, maybe practise could include looking at the conditioning in childhood, that led to a lack of trust, such as being let down a lot, which may lead to trust being restored as not such a fearful thing in adulthood. amit wrote: The search is motivated by discomfort. Some have no experience in memory to help them, so look externally for more data, some of which is of course provided by those who have already addressed the problem. Some trust what they hear until there is evidence to the contrary, others are very suspicous right from the start. The latter are more likely to want self validaton, which is also filled with potential difficulties requiring addressing conditioning. As usual there is room for different approaches depending on the character of the seeker.sdp wrote: This is correct. But there is always the stick and the carrot. The weight of one or the other has more influence. The problem with seeking, at least in the beginning, is that the seeking is usually based upon the ego/small s self/conditioning. Integrity has to enter here, seeking the truth, period, wherever it leads. Because it will eventually lead to the negation of the ego/small s self/conditioning. And what happens then, if the basis of seeking is the ego/small s self/conditioning?
|
|
|
Trust
Aug 26, 2020 8:52:00 GMT -5
Post by amit on Aug 26, 2020 8:52:00 GMT -5
sdp wrote: This is correct. But there is always the stick and the carrot. The weight of one or the other has more influence. The problem with seeking, at least in the beginning, is that the seeking is usually based upon the ego/small s self/conditioning. Integrity has to enter here, seeking the truth, period, wherever it leads. Because it will eventually lead to the negation of the ego/small s self/conditioning. And what happens then, if the basis of seeking is the ego/small s self/conditioning? Yes, and some feel that it can never be known whether they have got to the bottom of their conditioning, and never come to trust even profound spiritual experiences through successful practise. Mind/ego can easily construct these. Those that see these difficulties feel it is better not to bother in view of such an uncertain outcome, and just trust instead. However there are no guarentees with trust either, but at least one should be able to discover the conditioning that led to loss of trust in the child, and hopefully through those realizations as an adult, restore it.
|
|