Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 8:44:16 GMT -5
Yes, the cook found the empty places between bones and muscles and tendons, so was only cutting into emptiness so his knife didn't get dull. I guess I admire most seeing solving a unique problem. Yes, as you can see in the video, the specific activity one engages in, i.e. what is done, doesn't really matter, all that matters is how it is done, from self or no-self, from misalignment or alignment. If you've got the skills and a playful attitude, that's already enough and off you go into flow. Then even the most monotonous tasks can be fun and actually vitalizing instead of boring and draining. Instead of routine, it is play. And that's what A-H are pointing to when they say that life is supposed to be fun. In Psychology, they call this an autotelic experience, and someone who lives life that way, an autotelic personality. If you do some reading on this then you'll see the overlaps with the concepts we regularly discuss here - alignment, mindfulness, ATA, wu-wei and the natural state. Here's an interesting article on the autotelic personality: www.unbrokenself.com/developing-an-autotelic-personality/Cool. Reading that link, what they say about "purpose" is exactly what he says in I Am That about God not making things for a purpose beyond their own immediate perfection, and about how to work, without a future reward. I used to think the "alignment" concept that you talk about was pointing to something else, but now it seems it really is exactly the main topic here. I have some interesting memories of watching dancers that had a strong effect on me. And I'm not really into dancing myself so it was a real surprise when it happened. They were woo-woo experiences for me. Unlike some of those youtube videos, one dance was actually super simple, "silly" to the judging mind, and yet...
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 9:02:09 GMT -5
I was merely trying to point out we could not have civilization as we do without abstract thinking, we would still be "living in caves". I stand by what I said but I do not care to continue this specific line. As posted above, you do accept the two truths, that's good enough for me. You seem to have a one track mind trying to get me to see something I already see (and have continually pointed this out to you), to the extend you ignore any other points I make, which, obviously, are irrelevant to you. I can't do anything about that, except play within your boundaries, which I will try to do henceforth. Ever watch a Gary Weber interview from a few years back where he describes all his thinking suddenly stopped? He was the director of a lab at the time and describes running a meeting in complete mental silence. Now, obviously, if you're speaking with other people about tasks and technology then there's some "thinking" going on. But if you listen to everything Gary says you can infer that what was absent during the meeting was any self-referential thinking. Tolle offers a question: "are you using your mind, or is your mind using you?". Noone would argue with this - not successfully anyway - but that you'd raise that point in response to a description of driving to a work site and working in complete mental silence is essentially non-sequitur to the underlying point. Being in flow is not necessarily being on autopilot. It's possible to be quite lucid and aware during flow, but, if that lucidity is maintained it is perceived that any self-referential sense is absent. There is no sense of a separate individual doing something, only the doing. You've written about mental silence well enough and often enough to indicate to me you understand "no-thought", but the absence of the self-referential sense in complete lucidity is something different. Related, but different. In the present moment, now, there is no self-referential thinking, there isn't ~time~ for self-referential thinking. At first it was an escape-from, later it wasn't an escape but a preference. But staying in the present moment is not so easy as anyone who ever tried to meditate knows. Silence is a byproduct of staying in the present moment. (Not that this is anything you don't know). For a long time conditioning tries to jump back in and take over, that's automated thought, mind-chatter, the mechanicalness. For a long time (years), part of my practice was merely a reminder, don't say I to the automated thoughts. In that, what you're doing is withdrawing your attention from the self-referential thinking, by attending to it {I don't care to explain that further, except}: (really just noticing it, and placing your attention elsewhere [but not in sensing the world, although that's a sometime possibility], in attention-alone there is no self-referential thinking. I've pretty obviously never felt the need to explain myself in 12 years, here, that's a tiny peek. "A man is unable to say what he himself really is".
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Sept 19, 2021 9:20:28 GMT -5
Ever watch a Gary Weber interview from a few years back where he describes all his thinking suddenly stopped? He was the director of a lab at the time and describes running a meeting in complete mental silence. Now, obviously, if you're speaking with other people about tasks and technology then there's some "thinking" going on. But if you listen to everything Gary says you can infer that what was absent during the meeting was any self-referential thinking. Tolle offers a question: "are you using your mind, or is your mind using you?". Noone would argue with this - not successfully anyway - but that you'd raise that point in response to a description of driving to a work site and working in complete mental silence is essentially non-sequitur to the underlying point. Being in flow is not necessarily being on autopilot. It's possible to be quite lucid and aware during flow, but, if that lucidity is maintained it is perceived that any self-referential sense is absent. There is no sense of a separate individual doing something, only the doing. You've written about mental silence well enough and often enough to indicate to me you understand "no-thought", but the absence of the self-referential sense in complete lucidity is something different. Related, but different. In the present moment, now, there is no self-referential thinking, there isn't ~time~ for self-referential thinking. At first it was an escape-from, later it wasn't an escape but a preference. But staying in the present moment is not so easy as anyone who ever tried to meditate knows. Silence is a byproduct of staying in the present moment. (Not that this is anything you don't know). For a long time conditioning tries to jump back in and take over, that's automated thought, mind-chatter, the mechanicalness. For a long time (years), part of my practice was merely a reminder, don't say I to the automated thoughts. In that, what you're doing is withdrawing your attention from the self-referential thinking, by attending to it {I don't care to explain that further, except}: (really just noticing it, and placing your attention elsewhere [but not in sensing the world, although that's a sometime possibility], in attention-alone there is no self-referential thinking. I've pretty obviously never felt the need to explain myself in 12 years, here, that's a tiny peek. "A man is unable to say what he himself really is". There's a cool JK vid about thoughts and being aware of thought while thinking. He argues that when thinking starts, you are lost in thought. In the flow there is no thinking because there are no other concerns but what's at hand. If you're holding on to the notion that things will get better if you don't think, you're doomed to fail. If you think content will improve somehow if your focus is purely form, you will fail. You really really have to let go of content, of goals, completely. This is why zazen, shooting free throws, archery,, tennis,, playing a musical instrument,, dancing or even knitting are so important. Cept real men do zazen. That's freedom. The other, the expectations are vasanas, conditioning.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 9:21:20 GMT -5
I was merely trying to point out we could not have civilization as we do without abstract thinking, we would still be "living in caves". I stand by what I said but I do not care to continue this specific line. As posted above, you do accept the two truths, that's good enough for me. You seem to have a one track mind trying to get me to see something I already see (and have continually pointed this out to you), to the extend you ignore any other points I make, which, obviously, are irrelevant to you. I can't do anything about that, except play within your boundaries, which I will try to do henceforth. Ok. Fair point, so let's back up. I fully agree that we would not have civilization as we know it without abstract thought. The reason all large animals disappeared all over the world during the last 10,000 years is because humans collectively wiped them out because we could imaginatively envision plans, traps, weapons, etc. Without abstract thought we would not have rocket ships or nuclear bombs. I think we can all agree that the evolution of an intellect allowed us to do all kinds of amazing things. That said, most humans are addicted to thought, and do not realize that (1) most thought is unnecessary, (2) thought is the basis of the consensus paradigm, (3) separateness is an illusion, and (4) selfhood is also an illusion. I think you would agree that distinctions, after being made, become internalized in the subconscious, so that understanding and functionality are no longer dependent on the repetition of previous distinctions via mind talk--the voice in the head. Mind talk is just a habit, and that habit inhibits escape from the consensus paradigm, and the realization of what's going on. There are many people who simply don't believe that it's possible to function intelligently in the world without continual mind talk, so that's one reason that I give examples of it so often. From what you've written I assume that you do believe it's possible. I write about it from personal experience because ATA-T eventually led to such a degree of sustained silence that this character can stop thinking at any time simply by shifting attention to direct sensory perception and keeping it there. I think that anyone with sufficient interest could do the same thing, and I don't consider it "special" in any way, other than as a way of making it obvious that the intelligence of THIS is a million times greater than intellectual intelligence. Because the illusion of selfhood was seen through in 1999, this character knows that there is no SVP at the center of anything that's happening, including whatever thoughts are arising, or the shifting of attention away from thoughts. After it's realized that there's no separate entity doing anything, it no longer matters whether there's thinking or no thinking because there's no person choosing either to think or remain silent. As I've said in the past, seeing through selfhood results in freedom, but understanding what sees in the absence of an SVP is what Dosha called "the matter beyond." "The matter beyond" is what most of us refer to as SR, and it results in an even deeper sense of freedom, but it's not a personal sense of freedom. We might say that it's the freedom of THIS to be what it is free from attachment to all ideation. Most of us call it "The Natural State." Nice post, I mostly agree (most people are not even aware that there's a possibility of thinking ceasing. When I tried to talk to my former wife, past 23 years ago, well past 23 years really, about a silent mind, she said, Oh! No! If you have a silent mind that opens the door for the Devil! I didn't bring that up again...and she (she/me/us) is a long story). Maybe the post above helps a little. Going into the slight disagreements would be beating a dead horse. I would just say, always be on the alert for black swans, and further. OK, just one thing, I would put it, the illusion of the small s self as selfhood. Oh that ~I~ wholeheartedly agree.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 9:33:00 GMT -5
In the present moment, now, there is no self-referential thinking, there isn't ~time~ for self-referential thinking. At first it was an escape-from, later it wasn't an escape but a preference. But staying in the present moment is not so easy as anyone who ever tried to meditate knows. Silence is a byproduct of staying in the present moment. (Not that this is anything you don't know). For a long time conditioning tries to jump back in and take over, that's automated thought, mind-chatter, the mechanicalness. For a long time (years), part of my practice was merely a reminder, don't say I to the automated thoughts. In that, what you're doing is withdrawing your attention from the self-referential thinking, by attending to it {I don't care to explain that further, except}: (really just noticing it, and placing your attention elsewhere [but not in sensing the world, although that's a sometime possibility], in attention-alone there is no self-referential thinking. I've pretty obviously never felt the need to explain myself in 12 years, here, that's a tiny peek. "A man is unable to say what he himself really is". There's a cool JK vid about thoughts and being aware of thought while thinking. He argues that when thinking starts, you are lost in thought. In the flow there is no thinking because there are no other concerns but what's at hand. If you're holding on to the notion that things will get better if you don't think, you're doomed to fail. If you think content will improve somehow if your focus is purely form, you will fail. You really really have to let go of content, of goals, completely. This is why zazen, shooting free throws, archery,, tennis,, playing a musical instrument,, dancing or even knitting are so important. Cept real men do zazen. That's freedom. The other, the expectations are vasanas, conditioning. My position, my goals, aims, are all impossible to put into words, I've tried to the extent that I can, for 12 years here. I can put it this way, my teaching/tradition does not exist on the earth. Thus it is said: "You have to jump up and catch a rope".
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 9:44:04 GMT -5
Generally, I post about a specific point. Invariably you almost never reply to that specific point, you do to me what you do to everyone who you think doesn't get it, you point to ND. I don't need any pointing. I first read Alan Watts in my 20's, I remember reading specifically The Book on the Taboo of Knowing Who You Are (plus several other of his books, The Wisdom of Insecurity was way up on my list). So I've had being pointing to, for over 40 years. As I said the other day, as a general rule I don't write about experiences and I don't write specifically about practices (I don't know what you thought I meant by that the other day, but I meant simply that. I did not indicate in any way other people should do likewise). I posted here for a couple of years without giving my Gurdjieff connection. Then one day you posted about self-remembering, and what you said was incorrect, so I felt the need to say so. I said so and gave a quote by Gurdjieff from Life Is Real Only Then When I Am. In the quote he wrote specifically about quieting thoughts, that is, stopping the train of associative thinking (his language). Gurdjieff taught numerous practices, one he called making all quiet inside. I have written several times here about being suicidal in 1975 and 1976, and having constant destructive thoughts. This was before finding the Gurdjieff teaching (I had read J Krishnamurti extensively, I pinpointed attention was the key, from him). I've written about the only relief I could get from these dark thoughts was watching my legs as I ice skated, I could get most of 2-3 hours of relief at a time. In March of 1976 I found the Gurdjieff Work, not just through books. So I learned more about attention and awareness. I've written here before about dragging brush across a yard (I was a tree climber's helper), about ten seconds of a completely quiet mind, no thoughts. When I got to the truck, thoughts of wow! popped up, but it was a victory anyway. That was 45 years ago, I've made a little progress since then...which I don't care to share. So you don't need to post to me, to point to see, to try to get me to see, anything. If you want to, fine, but it's really a waste of time for you. I have my own reasons for choosing to live through a silent mind as much as possible. Form what you have said over the years, you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind, I've asked you specifically about value. You basically say, once you have had certain realizations, nothing else matters (my words). Well, for me, practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. If you would care to engage in actual dialogue instead of continually merely using the occasion to point, I'm OK with that, but I understand your reasons for, not. I frame everything differently than you do, that's just a fact. I have no problem whatsoever with your views and your realizations, but I post to indicate other things. Have a nice day. Ok. let's talk about value. You wrote: "..you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind.... ..you basically say, once you have had various realizations nothing else matters (my words)."
Correct. Attaining a certain degree of silence seems to be highly correlated with the occurrence of existential realizations, and if sufficient realization leads to non-abidance in mind and the realization that there is no separate entity at the center of anything that's happening, then it no longer matters whether the mind is silent or talkative. IOW, meditation (in the Buddha's words) is like a boat for carrying someone across a lake. After one gets across the lake (after one sees through the consensus paradigm and discovers what's going on), the boat is no longer necessary. One then realizes that there is only THIS doing whatever THIS does. All personal striving ceases because the person has been seen through.
The idea of value is predicated upon the idea of two or more distinct states, one of which is imagined as more valuable than the other, but what if there is no twoness? What if there is no separate entity that imagines abstract states differing in value? What if all value, purpose, and meaning is absolute rather than relative?A sufficient depth of realization leaves a human adult in a childlike state of mind with no goals, no desires, no efforting, no past or future, no fear, no reasons, and an open acceptance of whatever might happen. Life becomes simple and uncomplicated, and the character/body/THIS always knows what to do. The focus of life stays in the present moment. You wrote that practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. Ok, what's your primary reason for practice? This is why I have said for years here that ND makes all things equal. And then you and all the other ND people here say no, no, no.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 10:06:15 GMT -5
Generally, I post about a specific point. Invariably you almost never reply to that specific point, you do to me what you do to everyone who you think doesn't get it, you point to ND. I don't need any pointing. I first read Alan Watts in my 20's, I remember reading specifically The Book on the Taboo of Knowing Who You Are (plus several other of his books, The Wisdom of Insecurity was way up on my list). So I've had being pointing to, for over 40 years. As I said the other day, as a general rule I don't write about experiences and I don't write specifically about practices (I don't know what you thought I meant by that the other day, but I meant simply that. I did not indicate in any way other people should do likewise). I posted here for a couple of years without giving my Gurdjieff connection. Then one day you posted about self-remembering, and what you said was incorrect, so I felt the need to say so. I said so and gave a quote by Gurdjieff from Life Is Real Only Then When I Am. In the quote he wrote specifically about quieting thoughts, that is, stopping the train of associative thinking (his language). Gurdjieff taught numerous practices, one he called making all quiet inside. I have written several times here about being suicidal in 1975 and 1976, and having constant destructive thoughts. This was before finding the Gurdjieff teaching (I had read J Krishnamurti extensively, I pinpointed attention was the key, from him). I've written about the only relief I could get from these dark thoughts was watching my legs as I ice skated, I could get most of 2-3 hours of relief at a time. In March of 1976 I found the Gurdjieff Work, not just through books. So I learned more about attention and awareness. I've written here before about dragging brush across a yard (I was a tree climber's helper), about ten seconds of a completely quiet mind, no thoughts. When I got to the truck, thoughts of wow! popped up, but it was a victory anyway. That was 45 years ago, I've made a little progress since then...which I don't care to share. So you don't need to post to me, to point to see, to try to get me to see, anything. If you want to, fine, but it's really a waste of time for you. I have my own reasons for choosing to live through a silent mind as much as possible. Form what you have said over the years, you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind, I've asked you specifically about value. You basically say, once you have had certain realizations, nothing else matters (my words). Well, for me, practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. If you would care to engage in actual dialogue instead of continually merely using the occasion to point, I'm OK with that, but I understand your reasons for, not. I frame everything differently than you do, that's just a fact. I have no problem whatsoever with your views and your realizations, but I post to indicate other things. Have a nice day. Ok. let's talk about value. You wrote: "..you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind......you basically say, once you have had various realizations nothing else matters (my words)." Correct. Attaining a certain degree of silence seems to be highly correlated with the occurrence of existential realizations, and if sufficient realization leads to non-abidance in mind and the realization that there is no separate entity at the center of anything that's happening, then it no longer matters whether the mind is silent or talkative. IOW, meditation (in the Buddha's words) is like a boat for carrying someone across a lake. After one gets across the lake (after one sees through the consensus paradigm and discovers what's going on), the boat is no longer necessary. One then realizes that there is only THIS doing whatever THIS does. All personal striving ceases because the person has been seen through. The idea of value is predicated upon the idea of two or more distinct states, one of which is imagined as more valuable than the other, but what if there is no twoness? What if there is no separate entity that imagines abstract states differing in value? What if all value, purpose, and meaning is absolute rather than relative? A sufficient depth of realization leaves a human adult in a childlike state of mind with no goals, no desires, no efforting, no past or future, no fear, no reasons, and an open acceptance of whatever might happen. Life becomes simple and uncomplicated, and the character/body/THIS always knows what to do. The focus of life stays in the present moment. You wrote that practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. Ok, what's your primary reason for practice? You've heard of the idea of being hermetically sealed, I'm sure. That's from an ancient tradition. Basically it means to contain energy. The mind-body-organism is a device for transforming energy, even in an ordinary sense. (We eat food that derives back to the Sun from plant photosynthesis). The human organism is a chemical laboratory in another sense, in an alchemical sense. We are a permeable membrane that can be a semi-permeable membrane, that is, energy can enter, and stay, and be transformed into a higher quality energy. This is what the evolution of consciousness is about. Energy flows where attention goes, that's the key (a key). So energy not-going into abstract mind-chatter useless thinking is one way to save energy, which can be transformed into a different quality of energy. So for me the primary reason for ceasing ordinary useless mind-chatter/associative thinking, is to save energy. Another reason, what if you had only so many thoughts possible in your life, and when you run out of your (personal) allotted thoughts you basically go senile? Gurdjieff said over 100 years ago that most people die in thirds. (Of course if the body dies first the mind and emotions go with it). This is what alchemy in Taoism is all about also, it's not merely metaphorical. www.learnreligions.com/internal-alchemy-in-taoism-an-overview-3182918
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 19, 2021 12:18:06 GMT -5
Ok. let's talk about value. You wrote: "..you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind.... ..you basically say, once you have had various realizations nothing else matters (my words)."
Correct. Attaining a certain degree of silence seems to be highly correlated with the occurrence of existential realizations, and if sufficient realization leads to non-abidance in mind and the realization that there is no separate entity at the center of anything that's happening, then it no longer matters whether the mind is silent or talkative. IOW, meditation (in the Buddha's words) is like a boat for carrying someone across a lake. After one gets across the lake (after one sees through the consensus paradigm and discovers what's going on), the boat is no longer necessary. One then realizes that there is only THIS doing whatever THIS does. All personal striving ceases because the person has been seen through.
The idea of value is predicated upon the idea of two or more distinct states, one of which is imagined as more valuable than the other, but what if there is no twoness? What if there is no separate entity that imagines abstract states differing in value? What if all value, purpose, and meaning is absolute rather than relative?A sufficient depth of realization leaves a human adult in a childlike state of mind with no goals, no desires, no efforting, no past or future, no fear, no reasons, and an open acceptance of whatever might happen. Life becomes simple and uncomplicated, and the character/body/THIS always knows what to do. The focus of life stays in the present moment. You wrote that practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. Ok, what's your primary reason for practice? This is why I have said for years here that ND makes all things equal. And then you and all the other ND people here say no, no, no. Well, remember that I was referring to absolute meaning, absolute purpose, absolute action that is essentially "what is" being "what is." That doesn't mean that everything is equal in the way that I think you're implying or imagining. It just means that there's an open acceptance (no psychological resistance) of however THIS might unfold. I have no idea what may happen one moment from now, but I/THIS will deal with it in whatever way seems appropriate. Life is mysterious and unpredictable, and that's just the way it is. Living life is like playing a role in a play where the script unfolds as the play progresses. One day many years I planned to go take a long hike up a fascinating mountain trail, but after parking my car at the trailhead, I accidentally punctured a can of bear spray lying beside my backpack that sprayed me in the face! Haha. I instantly discovered why it deters bears because it rendered me unable to see and virtually unable to breathe. That ended any plans for a hike. Would I have preferred to go for a hike rather than staggering around unable to see or breathe for twenty minutes, and then having to drive home with all the windows down in 20 degree weather because the inside of the car was so toxic? Sure, but that's not how life unfolded. Taking a hike and getting blasted in the face with bear spray are not what I would call equal events, but that's just what happened.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Sept 19, 2021 12:24:12 GMT -5
Ok. let's talk about value. You wrote: "..you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind......you basically say, once you have had various realizations nothing else matters (my words)." Correct. Attaining a certain degree of silence seems to be highly correlated with the occurrence of existential realizations, and if sufficient realization leads to non-abidance in mind and the realization that there is no separate entity at the center of anything that's happening, then it no longer matters whether the mind is silent or talkative. IOW, meditation (in the Buddha's words) is like a boat for carrying someone across a lake. After one gets across the lake (after one sees through the consensus paradigm and discovers what's going on), the boat is no longer necessary. One then realizes that there is only THIS doing whatever THIS does. All personal striving ceases because the person has been seen through. The idea of value is predicated upon the idea of two or more distinct states, one of which is imagined as more valuable than the other, but what if there is no twoness? What if there is no separate entity that imagines abstract states differing in value? What if all value, purpose, and meaning is absolute rather than relative? A sufficient depth of realization leaves a human adult in a childlike state of mind with no goals, no desires, no efforting, no past or future, no fear, no reasons, and an open acceptance of whatever might happen. Life becomes simple and uncomplicated, and the character/body/THIS always knows what to do. The focus of life stays in the present moment. You wrote that practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. Ok, what's your primary reason for practice? You've heard of the idea of being hermetically sealed, I'm sure. That's from an ancient tradition. Basically it means to contain energy. The mind-body-organism is a device for transforming energy, even in an ordinary sense. (We eat food that derives back to the Sun from plant photosynthesis). The human organism is a chemical laboratory in another sense, in an alchemical sense. We are a permeable membrane that can be a semi-permeable membrane, that is, energy can enter, and stay, and be transformed into a higher quality energy. This is what the evolution of consciousness is about. Energy flows where attention goes, that's the key (a key). So energy not-going into abstract mind-chatter useless thinking is one way to save energy, which can be transformed into a different quality of energy. So for me the primary reason for ceasing ordinary useless mind-chatter/associative thinking, is to save energy. Another reason, what if you had only so many thoughts possible in your life, and when you run out of your (personal) allotted thoughts you basically go senile? Gurdjieff said over 100 years ago that most people die in thirds. (Of course if the body dies first the mind and emotions go with it). This is what alchemy in Taoism is all about also, it's not merely metaphorical. www.learnreligions.com/internal-alchemy-in-taoism-an-overview-3182918Reading that paragraph leaves me totally speechless, so all I can say is "best wishes."
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 19, 2021 15:08:19 GMT -5
You've heard of the idea of being hermetically sealed, I'm sure. That's from an ancient tradition. Basically it means to contain energy. The mind-body-organism is a device for transforming energy, even in an ordinary sense. (We eat food that derives back to the Sun from plant photosynthesis). The human organism is a chemical laboratory in another sense, in an alchemical sense. We are a permeable membrane that can be a semi-permeable membrane, that is, energy can enter, and stay, and be transformed into a higher quality energy. This is what the evolution of consciousness is about. Energy flows where attention goes, that's the key (a key). So energy not-going into abstract mind-chatter useless thinking is one way to save energy, which can be transformed into a different quality of energy. So for me the primary reason for ceasing ordinary useless mind-chatter/associative thinking, is to save energy. Another reason, what if you had only so many thoughts possible in your life, and when you run out of your (personal) allotted thoughts you basically go senile? Gurdjieff said over 100 years ago that most people die in thirds. (Of course if the body dies first the mind and emotions go with it). This is what alchemy in Taoism is all about also, it's not merely metaphorical. www.learnreligions.com/internal-alchemy-in-taoism-an-overview-3182918Reading that paragraph leaves me totally speechless, so all I can say is "best wishes." thesecretofthegoldenflower.com/summary.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 21:57:53 GMT -5
If most folk die in thirds (gig) I must be on my last life, cat-fur lining the pavement. Life after life a door to the Eternal dying daily deflates all mental-reconstructions immediately they arise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 0:23:09 GMT -5
If most folk die in thirds (gig) I must be on my last life, cat-fur lining the pavement. Life after life a door to the Eternal dying daily deflates all mental-reconstructions immediately they arise. Ty dear one.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 20, 2021 6:26:56 GMT -5
Ever watch a Gary Weber interview from a few years back where he describes all his thinking suddenly stopped? He was the director of a lab at the time and describes running a meeting in complete mental silence. Now, obviously, if you're speaking with other people about tasks and technology then there's some "thinking" going on. But if you listen to everything Gary says you can infer that what was absent during the meeting was any self-referential thinking. Tolle offers a question: "are you using your mind, or is your mind using you?". Noone would argue with this - not successfully anyway - but that you'd raise that point in response to a description of driving to a work site and working in complete mental silence is essentially non-sequitur to the underlying point. Being in flow is not necessarily being on autopilot. It's possible to be quite lucid and aware during flow, but, if that lucidity is maintained it is perceived that any self-referential sense is absent. There is no sense of a separate individual doing something, only the doing. You've written about mental silence well enough and often enough to indicate to me you understand "no-thought", but the absence of the self-referential sense in complete lucidity is something different. Related, but different. In the present moment, now, there is no self-referential thinking, there isn't ~time~ for self-referential thinking. At first it was an escape-from, later it wasn't an escape but a preference. But staying in the present moment is not so easy as anyone who ever tried to meditate knows. Silence is a byproduct of staying in the present moment. (Not that this is anything you don't know). For a long time conditioning tries to jump back in and take over, that's automated thought, mind-chatter, the mechanicalness. For a long time (years), part of my practice was merely a reminder, don't say I to the automated thoughts. In that, what you're doing is withdrawing your attention from the self-referential thinking, by attending to it {I don't care to explain that further, except}: (really just noticing it, and placing your attention elsewhere [but not in sensing the world, although that's a sometime possibility], in attention-alone there is no self-referential thinking. I've pretty obviously never felt the need to explain myself in 12 years, here, that's a tiny peek. "A man is unable to say what he himself really is". The present moment, the natural state is all that ever is, and the limitlessness that you are. What takes effort, is to maintain the sense otherwise. But this effort is happening right under your nose, unnoticed. You say you have no self-referential thinking, but the root of that sense of it being hard to stay in the present moment is a subconscious sense of personalized identity. That is the existential illusion.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 20, 2021 6:54:20 GMT -5
Ok. let's talk about value. You wrote: "..you find no difference in the value of a silent mind versus a thinking mind......you basically say, once you have had various realizations nothing else matters (my words)." Correct. Attaining a certain degree of silence seems to be highly correlated with the occurrence of existential realizations, and if sufficient realization leads to non-abidance in mind and the realization that there is no separate entity at the center of anything that's happening, then it no longer matters whether the mind is silent or talkative. IOW, meditation (in the Buddha's words) is like a boat for carrying someone across a lake. After one gets across the lake (after one sees through the consensus paradigm and discovers what's going on), the boat is no longer necessary. One then realizes that there is only THIS doing whatever THIS does. All personal striving ceases because the person has been seen through. The idea of value is predicated upon the idea of two or more distinct states, one of which is imagined as more valuable than the other, but what if there is no twoness? What if there is no separate entity that imagines abstract states differing in value? What if all value, purpose, and meaning is absolute rather than relative? A sufficient depth of realization leaves a human adult in a childlike state of mind with no goals, no desires, no efforting, no past or future, no fear, no reasons, and an open acceptance of whatever might happen. Life becomes simple and uncomplicated, and the character/body/THIS always knows what to do. The focus of life stays in the present moment. You wrote that practice leads to a silent mind, but that's not the primary reason for practice. Ok, what's your primary reason for practice? You've heard of the idea of being hermetically sealed, I'm sure. That's from an ancient tradition. Basically it means to contain energy. The mind-body-organism is a device for transforming energy, even in an ordinary sense. (We eat food that derives back to the Sun from plant photosynthesis). The human organism is a chemical laboratory in another sense, in an alchemical sense. We are a permeable membrane that can be a semi-permeable membrane, that is, energy can enter, and stay, and be transformed into a higher quality energy. This is what the evolution of consciousness is about. Energy flows where attention goes, that's the key (a key). So energy not-going into abstract mind-chatter useless thinking is one way to save energy, which can be transformed into a different quality of energy. So for me the primary reason for ceasing ordinary useless mind-chatter/associative thinking, is to save energy. Another reason, what if you had only so many thoughts possible in your life, and when you run out of your (personal) allotted thoughts you basically go senile? Gurdjieff said over 100 years ago that most people die in thirds. (Of course if the body dies first the mind and emotions go with it). This is what alchemy in Taoism is all about also, it's not merely metaphorical. www.learnreligions.com/internal-alchemy-in-taoism-an-overview-3182918Neither you nor any other human being is a machine. As long as a man uses his mind to think of himself or another as a machine he can come up with all sorts of useful innovation. But, once his mind starts using him in this regard, the result is always existential falsity, and, in extreme cases all manner of horrific manifestation like addictive drugs for the purposes of wealth or all other manner of sophisticated but manipulative culture.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 7:51:18 GMT -5
You seem to have a one track mind trying to get me to see something I already see (and have continually pointed this out to you), to the extend you ignore any other points I make, which, obviously, are irrelevant to you. I can't do anything about that, except play within your boundaries, which I will try to do henceforth. It may be your writing style, or your particular focus and what you find interesting, but you do seem to give off conflicting indications about what you "see" (or better to say: " feel") about "non duality". So I don't think ZD is ignoring what you say, but he's looking at the other things you say (or don't say). You appear to you come at it from an intellectual/philosophical angle. That's fine, but there is more to it. I'm not trying to tell you that you "should" want to go in that direction. It's better of course to be true to ourselves. Follow what interests you, of course. I'm just pointing out why you're in a back-and-forth with Zendances.
|
|