|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 5:03:53 GMT -5
Post by amit on Sept 13, 2020 5:03:53 GMT -5
Agreed. I think we can agree that the SVP has to be seen for what it is. Which will end the search. But from my perspective, this is having it backwards. What you are describing here is basically a reverse-engineering of a realization by means of logic. Which means this is still all happening in the SVP context. But you can't see thru the SVP from within the context of the SVP. That's the futility that has to be understood by the seeker, not the futility that you are what you seek and therefore the search is futile. As UG put it, the seeker has to realize that there is no way out for the seeker. The only way out is a realization. Which means to step out of the SVP context into that larger context that allows you to see clearly what is actually the case, which the seeker cannot do, of course, because the seeker's perspective is limited to the SVP context, both go hand in hand. Which means logical conclusions (SVP context) are not going to end the search (going prior SVP context). Also worth noting that, from the SVP perspective, trusting that one is already what is sought can't stand for itself because it only makes sense in the a Brahman/oneness theory. But you can't prove the existence of Brahman/oneness from your own SVP perspective, let alone to another SVP. Which means at the end of the day, it never leaves the realm of beliefs, no matter what the conclusion, no matter how sound the logic. At the end of the logical chain always stands some kind of core belief that remains untouched/unquestioned. So my essential point here is that the seeker (SVP) can never see/understand what it means that the seeker is the sought. The seeker can only imagine/speculate what that means. It takes a realization to understand, to see that directly. This is what breaks the viscous cycle of endless conceptualization and thereby ends the search, not flawless logic. So realization has to happen first, then we can try to explain/conceptualize it (pointer) in a way the SVP can understand (logic). And then we can say things like 'one is already what is sought', because then we have an actual reference for what that actually means. Without that actual reference, it's just another theory about reality, a concept easily replaceable by yet another even 'better' concept. But the core concept, the SVP, always remains untouched if logic and thinking is the method. Mind cannot take down the fortress of mind as we used to say here. That's the also the main flaw of all spiritual practice. When ego tries to do a harakiri, what you usually get is a spiritual ego instead. It just gets more subtle, but in essence, nothing changes. An ancient metaphor is "the taste of honey". What you say here about the hypothetical seeker is true, in that it's a tautology: until they realize "where nonduality points" the potential realization is only a sort of rumor .. a description of a color they've never seen or a tone they've never heard. But amit's point about the search ending can be stated a different way, in terms of the search changing. The key to this distinction is whether or not the seeker is self-honest about whether oneness is more than just a rumor for them. If they're not, then, it's as you say, just another round of identity poker. But even in that instance, the orientation has changed. It's a different hand. Yes and resonance is the key. Resonance IS the event which renders All is One as more than a rumour. Before such resonance the concept may have been heard many times during the search but the vibration/frequency of the seeker may not have matched it. So the search itself (with or without practise) seems to have the capacity to evolve the frequency/vibration of the seeker. Once the resonance has occurred, (which may be the change in the search you are referring to) the head is in the Tiger's mouth, and the process (The changed search you mention) of including all as Oneness manifest proceeds to completion and the resonance is consoliated. As we can see from exchanges on this forum, including all as Oneness manifest can be a very difficult process. It reminds me of when we wanted to hide stuff from the police, the advice was to leave it on a shelf in open view when it would not be seen, but if it was hidden they got it every time:).This may be why some were reluctant to make known the Direct Approach way back when, and it seems it is very much still a factor today. Needless to say those days of risky youth are long behind me now:)
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 5:39:32 GMT -5
Post by amit on Sept 13, 2020 5:39:32 GMT -5
Yes feeling disconnected is a feeling which trust that one is already Braman/Oneness can end. However that feeling itself is not disconnected, so in terms of disconnection, nothing whatsoever needs to be done, including trust. Trust may simply end the FEELING of disconnection, but not increase connection in any way, which is already total, unconditional, and unavoidable, as all is already Brahman/Oneness, so there is no root of the problem, including not seeing that. So we basically agree that the problem is perceptual only. Now the questions is, how to correct perception? You say, just trust. I say, take a closer look at the one who thinks he needs to trust and see if he can stand the scrutiny. You see, if you keep banging your head against the wall, the solution to trust that eventually you will get used to it and so numbed out that your head won't hurt anymore isn't really a solution. There's no guarantee for that ever to happen. It's purely wishful thinking. If, instead, you would just stop banging your head against the wall, that would solve your problem immediately, once and for all. And it doesn't require any mental workaround either. That's all I am suggesting. Yes disconnection from Brahman is percieved (I prefer felt) to be the problem when it is no problem at all. The basis of this felt problem depends on whether there is a resonance with Brahman as all there is. If there is such a resonance then the head is in the Tiger's mouth and the seeker can proceed with including all as Oneness manifest until the resonance is consolidated. If there is no such resonance, it seems like the search itself (with or without practise depending on the character of the seeker) can evolve the seeker to match the frequency/vibration of All is One. This can be by Trust according to some (including Niz), or apparently by practise according to others. Either way it is not possible to experience the experience of another to decide or compare the quality of either experience.
|
|
Xiao
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 9:45:58 GMT -5
Post by Xiao on Sept 13, 2020 9:45:58 GMT -5
There's a lot of suffering in the world in terms of subjective mental experience, which I think is pretty much beyond doubt. Some people suffer. From an "absolute truth" angle it may be simply Brahman "minding", but that concept doesn't do much for that particular person's suffering. I will concede that "Nothing has to be done about the SVP", in the sense that the SVP (which is by definition within the realm of symbols/thought and unaware of its own unreality) doesn't exist in reality. Still, it feels to exist for many people, and brushing that suffering off as merely another modulation of Brahman does very little to end suffering. In my opinion, the thought free state has the potential to make all of this clear. The intellectual arrangement of nondual ideas doesn't. (Save perhaps a rare few.) Depending on the individual, and their circumstances, various arrangements of the nondual ideas can lend motivation to an interest in pursuing a thought free state. Absolutely! At their best concepts can lead one to an interest in pursuing reality directly. Definitely no free will or volition in it anywhere that I can see either. In the thought-free state there's no need for any of this conversation to take place, and in a sense a large part of this forum is a great example at 1) how interesting and addictive thoughts about reality can be, and 2) how even a conversation and argument for the thought free state will still be completely pointless if it doesn't lead to the actual looking at reality itself.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 13, 2020 10:40:24 GMT -5
Depending on the individual, and their circumstances, various arrangements of the nondual ideas can lend motivation to an interest in pursuing a thought free state. Absolutely! At their best concepts can lead one to an interest in pursuing reality directly. Definitely no free will or volition in it anywhere that I can see either. In the thought-free state there's no need for any of this conversation to take place, and in a sense a large part of this forum is a great example at 1) how interesting and addictive thoughts about reality can be, and 2) how even a conversation and argument for the thought free state will still be completely pointless if it doesn't lead to the actual looking at reality itself. So true! I was at a ND retreat last year and I asked someone who was sitting in a chair on a porch looking lost in thought what he was doing. He replied, "Examining thoughts in order to understand thinking and how to stop thinking." I said something like, "If you'll just shift attention away from whatever thoughts are arising and look at what's in front of your eyes, you'll find that activity far more effective than doing anything mentally--either battling with thoughts or trying to understand why particular thoughts are arising." The view from the porch was stunning, with large old trees in the foreground, a huge mowed field beyond, a forest on one side, a massive rock bluff on the other side, and a river in the valley below. Fleecy white clouds were drifting overhead, and birds were flying around. He said, "That wouldn't be doing the hard work necessary for overcoming the mind." I replied, "Hard work isn't necessary; all you have to do is look. Looking, alone, or listening, can lead to freedom from the mind." He said, "I can see and hear quite well. Are you describing some sort of special seeing or hearing?" I said, "No, but can you look without naming what you see or commenting upon what you see? IOW can you look at the world in total mental silence?" He admitted that he could not. I said, in effect, "Well, it's no big deal; that's just one easy way to become free from the dominance of mind." Later in the day I saw him again sitting on the porch looking lost in thought.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 12:47:33 GMT -5
Post by Reefs on Sept 13, 2020 12:47:33 GMT -5
An ancient metaphor is "the taste of honey". What you say here about the hypothetical seeker is true, in that it's a tautology: until they realize "where nonduality points" the potential realization is only a sort of rumor .. a description of a color they've never seen or a tone they've never heard. Even a logical mind can acknowledge this potential, for themselves. But amit's point about the search ending can be stated a different way, in terms of the search changing. The key to this distinction is whether or not the seeker is self-honest about whether oneness is more than just a rumor for them. If they're not, then, it's as you say, just another round of identity poker. But even in that instance, the orientation has changed. It's a different hand. Not sure what you mean by change. We used to talk about sincerity and how it changes the search, how it is a sign that the search is coming to an end. To Niz it is a sign that the Absolute has taken over. But that's not what Amit is talking about. Oneness doesn't really compute from the SVP perspective, but there's interconnectedness. So I'd say, that's as far as it goes from the SVP perspective.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 12:53:11 GMT -5
Post by Reefs on Sept 13, 2020 12:53:11 GMT -5
That's beside the point. The point here is that there is the experience of existential suffering and the root of that experience is the SVP. Take the SVP out of the equation and that experience is gone as well. Now, what you are saying is, that's not necessary, it's enough for the SVP to understand that it's all just Brahman. To which I say, the SVP, by definition, cannot understand that all is just Brahman. So at best what you are suggesting is going to be a mind game. You can't fake this from the SVP perspective. The SVP perspective needs to be transcended. And that can only happen with a realization, not mere insights or logic. The SVP has no actual reference for what the term 'Brahman' is pointing to. It's all conjecture. It never leaves the realm of the conceptual. No actual reference, no. But, various degrees of indirect enticement of interest and attention. Most people have some sort of intuitional pull away from the existential delusion. Without that, noone would have any interest in Zen or Advaita or, whatever. Alignment is addictive!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 13, 2020 13:04:46 GMT -5
So we basically agree that the problem is perceptual only. Now the questions is, how to correct perception? You say, just trust. I say, take a closer look at the one who thinks he needs to trust and see if he can stand the scrutiny. You see, if you keep banging your head against the wall, the solution to trust that eventually you will get used to it and so numbed out that your head won't hurt anymore isn't really a solution. There's no guarantee for that ever to happen. It's purely wishful thinking. If, instead, you would just stop banging your head against the wall, that would solve your problem immediately, once and for all. And it doesn't require any mental workaround either. That's all I am suggesting. Yes disconnection from Brahman is percieved (I prefer felt) to be the problem when it is no problem at all. The basis of this felt problem depends on whether there is a resonance with Brahman as all there is. If there is such a resonance then the head is in the Tiger's mouth and the seeker can proceed with including all as Oneness manifest until the resonance is consolidated. If there is no such resonance, it seems like the search itself (with or without practise depending on the character of the seeker) can evolve the seeker to match the frequency/vibration of All is One. This can be by Trust according to some (including Niz), or apparently by practise according to others. Either way it is not possible to experience the experience of another to decide or compare the quality of either experience. But you see, Niz had a real guru, he didn't just trust some words he read in a book that resonated with him. He had someone he could talk to, someone he could observe in real life, someone he felt drawn to. That's different from mere intellectual exposure to truth. Niz met the real deal in the flesh in real life. So his entire being came in contact with the truth. And that's something you can trust, I agree.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 13:47:12 GMT -5
Post by zendancer on Sept 13, 2020 13:47:12 GMT -5
Yes disconnection from Brahman is percieved (I prefer felt) to be the problem when it is no problem at all. The basis of this felt problem depends on whether there is a resonance with Brahman as all there is. If there is such a resonance then the head is in the Tiger's mouth and the seeker can proceed with including all as Oneness manifest until the resonance is consolidated. If there is no such resonance, it seems like the search itself (with or without practise depending on the character of the seeker) can evolve the seeker to match the frequency/vibration of All is One. This can be by Trust according to some (including Niz), or apparently by practise according to others. Either way it is not possible to experience the experience of another to decide or compare the quality of either experience. But you see, Niz had a real guru, he didn't just trust some words he read in a book that resonated with him. He had someone he could talk to, someone he could observe in real life, someone he felt drawn to. That's different from mere intellectual exposure to truth. Niz met the real deal in the flesh in real life. So his entire being came in contact with the truth. And that's something you can trust, I agree. I think Amit is claiming a bit more than that. Niz met his teacher who said, "You are the ultimate, and in order to realize that, stay with the thought 'I am'." Niz trusted his teacher, but he still had to spend three years staying with the sense of "I am" in order to attain freedom and realize through direct experience (via a realization) that he was, indeed, the whole shebang. Amit is claiming that if someone simply trusts that s/he is the ultimate (due to resonance with that claim), that resonance short-circuits the need to do anything else. He's claiming that trust, alone, is a shorter and more direct path than any kind of practice/doing activity, and he is making that claim based upon something Niz told a seeker. He can correct me if this is not what he's claiming. I have no doubt that Niz told people that trust, and what he called "earnestness," will lead to realization faster than meditative practices that are not based on trust or earnestness, but I don't think Niz is saying that trust, alone, is all that it takes to attain SR, freedom, peace, etc.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 14:14:22 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 13, 2020 14:14:22 GMT -5
That's essentially trusting that the search will - somehow, eventually - come to an end, isn't it Trusting that one is already what is sought ends the search by rendering it pointless for one cannot become what one already is. This is so regardless of what state one may already be in for Brahman/Oneness is all states, including the state of not realizing any of this, OR trusting. Feeling disconnected from Oneness is not disconnected. Nothing whatsoever needs to change for connection to be always total, unconditional, and unavoidable. I've read all the way to the end of this thread. I thought of an analogy that might apply. I was raised as a Southern Baptist. The view was you say this prayer asking Jesus into your heart and you're done, that's all it takes. You are then saved forever and forever. End of story. That's what you seem to be saying. Except everything is already all right. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But that was not good enough for me. So I essentially left the church to find my own answers (gradually, starting about age 14 and then essentially leaving at 17). Later (about 12-15 years), after getting some answers, I saw that was a totally shortsighted view of Christianity and the exact opposite of what Jesus actually taught. The words, the view, has to be actualized. Trust is not enough. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jesus said, he who believe my words, and does what I say...
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 15:36:32 GMT -5
Post by amit on Sept 13, 2020 15:36:32 GMT -5
But you see, Niz had a real guru, he didn't just trust some words he read in a book that resonated with him. He had someone he could talk to, someone he could observe in real life, someone he felt drawn to. That's different from mere intellectual exposure to truth. Niz met the real deal in the flesh in real life. So his entire being came in contact with the truth. And that's something you can trust, I agree. I think Amit is claiming a bit more than that. Niz met his teacher who said, "You are the ultimate, and in order to realize that, stay with the thought 'I am'." Niz trusted his teacher, but he still had to spend three years staying with the sense of "I am" in order to attain freedom and realize through direct experience (via a realization) that he was, indeed, the whole shebang. Amit is claiming that if someone simply trusts that s/he is the ultimate (due to resonance with that claim), that resonance short-circuits the need to do anything else. He's claiming that trust, alone, is a shorter and more direct path than any kind of practice/doing activity, and he is making that claim based upon something Niz told a seeker. He can correct me if this is not what he's claiming. I have no doubt that Niz told people that trust, and what he called "earnestness," will lead to realization faster than meditative practices that are not based on trust or earnestness, but I don't think Niz is saying that trust, alone, is all that it takes to attain SR, freedom, peace, etc. Yes the assertion is as you have described it for some seekers, but not all. Niz told the seeker he was speaking with (In the quote you know) that trust would do it. I have talked with many who describe that the search ended based on trust. I know from responses here and elsewhere that trust is not enough for some, and is not the traditional view. There is room for both as not all are suited by practise. Niz suggested practise (including the focus on I Am) or trust, depending on how he saw where seekers were at.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 15:44:33 GMT -5
Post by amit on Sept 13, 2020 15:44:33 GMT -5
Trusting that one is already what is sought ends the search by rendering it pointless for one cannot become what one already is. This is so regardless of what state one may already be in for Brahman/Oneness is all states, including the state of not realizing any of this, OR trusting. Feeling disconnected from Oneness is not disconnected. Nothing whatsoever needs to change for connection to be always total, unconditional, and unavoidable. I've read all the way to the end of this thread. I thought of an analogy that might apply. I was raised as a Southern Baptist. The view was you say this prayer asking Jesus into your heart and you're done, that's all it takes. You are then saved forever and forever. End of story. That's what you seem to be saying. Except everything is already all right. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But that was not good enough for me. So I essentially left the church to find my own answers (gradually, starting about age 14 and then essentially leaving at 17). Later (about 12-15 years), after getting some answers, I saw that was a totally shortsighted view of Christianity and the exact opposite of what Jesus actually taught. The words, the view, has to be actualized. Trust is not enough. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jesus said, he who believe my words, and does what I say... Yes the message in the words does not impact without resonance. It seems that the message in the words you attribute to Jesus/Christianity did not resonate enough with you, so the search continued.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 16:02:07 GMT -5
Post by amit on Sept 13, 2020 16:02:07 GMT -5
Yes disconnection from Brahman is percieved (I prefer felt) to be the problem when it is no problem at all. The basis of this felt problem depends on whether there is a resonance with Brahman as all there is. If there is such a resonance then the head is in the Tiger's mouth and the seeker can proceed with including all as Oneness manifest until the resonance is consolidated. If there is no such resonance, it seems like the search itself (with or without practise depending on the character of the seeker) can evolve the seeker to match the frequency/vibration of All is One. This can be by Trust according to some (including Niz), or apparently by practise according to others. Either way it is not possible to experience the experience of another to decide or compare the quality of either experience. But you see, Niz had a real guru, he didn't just trust some words he read in a book that resonated with him. He had someone he could talk to, someone he could observe in real life, someone he felt drawn to. That's different from mere intellectual exposure to truth. Niz met the real deal in the flesh in real life. So his entire being came in contact with the truth. And that's something you can trust, I agree. Not all seekers need a guru they can talk with. Some can read a message and have a strong resonance which results in the end of the search by trust or practise. One size does not fit all and the quality of the experience of one cannot be known by another.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 16:16:34 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 13, 2020 16:16:34 GMT -5
I've read all the way to the end of this thread. I thought of an analogy that might apply. I was raised as a Southern Baptist. The view was you say this prayer asking Jesus into your heart and you're done, that's all it takes. You are then saved forever and forever. End of story. That's what you seem to be saying. Except everything is already all right. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But that was not good enough for me. So I essentially left the church to find my own answers (gradually, starting about age 14 and then essentially leaving at 17). Later (about 12-15 years), after getting some answers, I saw that was a totally shortsighted view of Christianity and the exact opposite of what Jesus actually taught. The words, the view, has to be actualized. Trust is not enough. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jesus said, he who believe my words, and does what I say... Yes the message in the words does not impact without resonance. It seems that the message in the words you attribute to Jesus/Christianity did not resonate enough with you, so the search continued. No, the truth of Jesus resonated to such an extent that they contradicted what I was being taught in church, and I had to go outside. That's why I said I was raised Southern Baptist. Jesus is still my main dude. I think you didn't get my point.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 16:23:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by zazeniac on Sept 13, 2020 16:23:49 GMT -5
It's a most delicious paradox. Accepting the world as is, conscious and unconscious, that it is perfect, is freedom. And yet rejecting what is is what drives us to acceptance. Houdini couldn't get out of this one.
|
|
|
Trust
Sept 13, 2020 18:19:48 GMT -5
Post by laughter on Sept 13, 2020 18:19:48 GMT -5
Depending on the individual, and their circumstances, various arrangements of the nondual ideas can lend motivation to an interest in pursuing a thought free state. Absolutely! At their best concepts can lead one to an interest in pursuing reality directly. Definitely no free will or volition in it anywhere that I can see either. In the thought-free state there's no need for any of this conversation to take place, and in a sense a large part of this forum is a great example at 1) how interesting and addictive thoughts about reality can be, and 2) how even a conversation and argument for the thought free state will still be completely pointless if it doesn't lead to the actual looking at reality itself. heh heh .. well, sometimes I think I read circular pointlessness into the dialogs here, elsewhere, and generally .. but, the source of that thought, is interesting, in and of itself.
|
|