|
Post by Figgles on Sept 13, 2021 1:04:57 GMT
Whoah, whoah, whoah.....wait....hold the phone, here. Are you actually asserting "Self-realization/Nonduality" as inherent (or even compatible with/to) the Abraham Hicks message? The very idea that 'you' must align vibrationally with Source, in order to manifest a future condition that aligns with your present, personal desire, is antithetical to Truth/Nonduality. Not only is the seeing through of the separate, volitional person not a facet of those teachings/ideas, the AH message, all LOA teachings, reinforce the separate entity/person. And...you also seem intent on the erroneous idea that SR is comprised of a seeing through/realization AND also, a mystical experience that "adds to" the person's suitcase full of knowledge rather than subtracts from it, which of course, is a nonsense. You used to say so yourself:
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 13, 2021 1:22:44 GMT
Tolle's framing of pain into an entity is really not so different than AH framing appearing personal desires, thoughts, feelings into an entity/someone/thing that can be either aligned with/or not aligned with something otherly enough from itself for that to be so. In Tolle's case, he's not assigning inherent existence to the pain body as AH does, rather, he's just acknowledging the power of mind to imagine a something where there is no-thing and the impact of that....his pain body simply alludes to the power of a conglomerate of limiting ideas that continually gets over-layed upon an arising moment of 'pain.' Hehe, similarly....imagine Niz or Ramana talking about manipulating focus/feelings so that personal desires, that have their inception in ideas of limitation and bondage, manifest at future moment. Yes, agreed, Tolle makes far more concessions to mind than the old gurus did for sure. That said, don't dismiss what he's alluding to so quickly. Ideas of limitation...judgments about what's arising are far more insidious than you apparently realize. Your own strong and obvious interest in the idea of being able to manifest personal desires in a future moment through manipulating focus/feelings in the present, is clear evidence of a resistance to 'what is,' that you are failing to see/acknowledge...likely, not even aware of.
|
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by Esponja on Sept 13, 2021 7:04:40 GMT
Whoah, whoah, whoah.....wait....hold the phone, here. Are you actually asserting "Self-realization/Nonduality" as inherent (or even compatible with/to) the Abraham Hicks message? The very idea that 'you' must align vibrationally with Source, in order to manifest a future condition that aligns with your present, personal desire, is antithetical to Truth/Nonduality. Not only is the seeing through of the separate, volitional person not a facet of those teachings/ideas, the AH message, all LOA teachings, reinforce the separate entity/person. And...you also seem intent on the erroneous idea that SR is comprised of a seeing through/realization AND also, a mystical experience that "adds to" the person's suitcase full of knowledge rather than subtracts from it, which of course, is a nonsense. You used to say so yourself: AH is even worse than going to a bar and getting sloshed every day for a seeker 🤣.
|
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by Esponja on Sept 13, 2021 7:09:42 GMT
Tolle's framing of pain into an entity is really not so different than AH framing appearing personal desires, thoughts, feelings into an entity/someone/thing that can be either aligned with/or not aligned with something otherly enough from itself for that to be so. In Tolle's case, he's not assigning inherent existence to the pain body as AH does, rather, he's just acknowledging the power of mind to imagine a something where there is no-thing and the impact of that....his pain body simply alludes to the power of a conglomerate of limiting ideas that continually gets over-layed upon an arising moment of 'pain.' Hehe, similarly....imagine Niz or Ramana talking about manipulating focus/feelings so that personal desires, that have their inception in ideas of limitation and bondage, manifest at future moment. Yes, agreed, Tolle makes far more concessions to mind than the old gurus did for sure. That said, don't dismiss what he's alluding to so quickly. Ideas of limitation...judgments about what's arising are far more insidious than you apparently realize. Your own strong and obvious interest in the idea of being able to manifest personal desires in a future moment through manipulating focus/feelings in the present, is clear evidence of a resistance to 'what is,' that you are failing to see/acknowledge...likely, not even aware of. Tolle is addressing the masses. He diverts from the Trutn even in his creating a New Earth. That’s just what expresses through him but not ‘Truth’ so pinch of salt needed. I may go back to read it again, when I first read it years ago, I couldn’t understand the ‘pain body’ part. I do now from all the subconscious healing stuff. It’s a great book really. He’s added layers and concepts onto Truth but so have many others.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 13, 2021 20:06:40 GMT
Tolle's framing of pain into an entity is really not so different than AH framing appearing personal desires, thoughts, feelings into an entity/someone/thing that can be either aligned with/or not aligned with something otherly enough from itself for that to be so. In Tolle's case, he's not assigning inherent existence to the pain body as AH does, rather, he's just acknowledging the power of mind to imagine a something where there is no-thing and the impact of that....his pain body simply alludes to the power of a conglomerate of limiting ideas that continually gets over-layed upon an arising moment of 'pain.' Hehe, similarly....imagine Niz or Ramana talking about manipulating focus/feelings so that personal desires, that have their inception in ideas of limitation and bondage, manifest at future moment. Yes, agreed, Tolle makes far more concessions to mind than the old gurus did for sure. That said, don't dismiss what he's alluding to so quickly. Ideas of limitation...judgments about what's arising are far more insidious than you apparently realize. Your own strong and obvious interest in the idea of being able to manifest personal desires in a future moment through manipulating focus/feelings in the present, is clear evidence of a resistance to 'what is,' that you are failing to see/acknowledge...likely, not even aware of. Tolle is addressing the masses. He diverts from the Trutn even in his creating a New Earth. That’s just what expresses through him but not ‘Truth’ so pinch of salt needed. I may go back to read it again, when I first read it years ago, I couldn’t understand the ‘pain body’ part. I do now from all the subconscious healing stuff. It’s a great book really. He’s added layers and concepts onto Truth but so have many others. Yes, he clearly does divert from the Truth....and as you suggest, I suspect that is as a concession to the masses that he addresses....as we well know, bare-faced Nonduality pointers are more like vinegar than honey to the average seeker.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 14, 2021 2:21:35 GMT
So (S)elf discovery goes on and on? This implies that there is something to know "about" Self. Does Self have qualities/properties that reveal themselves over time? Clearly, you've objectified/reified the pointer "Self."
Experiential discovery regarding the world....life....the dream, of course continue on post SR, but the very idea that post Self Realization, there are undending more/numerous realization about Self to be had, is a nonsense.
The idea of "un-ending" Self-discovery, Self-realization has the idea of "more", something beyond here/now at it's basis.
Beware of any seeing that seems to be "deeper than" anything seen before....or "deep" period, for that matter. Seeing through falsity is not about "depth" of seeing, it's about "clarity" of seeing.
|
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by Esponja on Sept 14, 2021 14:06:52 GMT
So (S)elf discovery goes on and on? This implies that there is something to know "about" Self. Does Self have qualities/properties that reveal themselves over time? Clearly, you've objectified/reified the pointer "Self." Experiential discovery regarding the world....life....the dream, of course continue on post SR, but the very idea that post Self Realization, there are undending more/numerous realization about Self to be had, is a nonsense. The idea of "un-ending" Self-discovery, Self-realization has the idea of "more", something beyond here/now at it's basis. Beware of any seeing that seems to be "deeper than" anything seen before....or "deep" period, for that matter. Seeing through falsity is not about "depth" of seeing, it's about "clarity" of seeing. Sound like experiences that come and go.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 15, 2021 22:25:56 GMT
You speak there as though there are actually experiences that DO have a separate experiencer, having them. The thing is, regardless of what it may 'seem like,' in actuality, a separate "experiencer" is only ever imagined, regardless of experience. Same with a "doer" that does stuff....a seeing that sees stuff, etc. That sense of there being an experiencer who/that is experiencing, is erroneous. Do you currently have a sense of being an experiencer who is having an experience? If not, then does that mean the content of whatever arises in experience qualifies as realization? If not, why is CC/Kensho different? You posit the fact of no experiencer as a different kind of experience that qualifies as "Truth," but in actuality, even the most mundane of experience is absent an actual experiencer. What you are describing with your CC/Kensho, (if the most significant aspect of it was indeed the absence of experiencer) is a temporary absence of separation/SVP. The fact though that you came away focused upon the "experiential content," vs. "the absence," merely indicates the temporary nature of that absence/seeing through, and that the reinstating of the SVP into the forefront, also meant that mind came rushing back in, to declare the woo-woo, mystical, experiential content as the important facet....as the Truth.
If SVP had remained absent, that would not have happened...the content would have been seen as empty as all other experiential content. It's the 'person' who declared the content of the CC as special and transcendent...as Truth. That bit right there speaks volumes and should give you a clue why E argued with you. Seeing through separation does not answer existential questions but rather, it illuminates them to be misconceived. If you have pat, fixed answers to your existential questions, and you believe those to be absolute Truth, you are deep in delusion...obviously, still imagining separation to be the case....still seeing through eyes of an SVP. The seeing that reality is not what you thought it was, if it's truly a seeing through/realization, an absence, means seeing that there is no conceptualization, no-thing that you can think, feel, or experience, that can capture "reality,"...that all we can do to try to talk about reality/Truth, or express 'it,' is to point. What you are stating above there amounts to; I saw that reality cannot be captured by mind's conception, but I also arrived at a whole new way of conceptualizing reality....I now 'know' the qualities of reality and 'experience' them. The latter contradicts the former. The Truth about reality cannot be conveyed by an experience, nor expressed by words denoting quality/property...all experience is conceptual regardless of whether or not there seems to be an SVP involved or not....regardless of how awe inspiring it is.
You are one hand denoting time and space as imaginary, but then you are also defining what time/space is...."an abstract cognitive grid."... You are reifying time/space in doing so. This is not nonduality but rather, new age spirituality. "The whole" here = the "oneness blob," that used to get joked about on ST. You just invoked the ideas of volition, separation, causality, and time/space.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 15, 2021 22:41:25 GMT
I agree, it's very well-stated, but am surprised you like it so much. Do you actually agree with this bit?
Your assertion that socks, rocks, appearing people are known for certain to be individually alive, experiencing, conscious, perceiving, stands in direct contrast to that. He even uses the terms 'contingently - and apparently. That another way of saying all arisings are "empty, appearance only." You outright said in past discussion the term 'appearance only' doesn't work for you.
And the bit where he speaks about contemplation, analysis and logic completely coming to an end, is where 'not knowing,' enters in...the end of conceptualization is another way to same the same. But you insist that via your Kensho/CC, you know the specific qualities/properties of reality.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Sept 19, 2021 3:56:27 GMT
Nonsense. If there's been an actual non-conceptual "realization/seeing through" of the separate person/me, then the 'seer' of the world is also simultaneously seen through.
If the discoveries are distinct, the way you suggest...first one, then the other, then obviously both are merely conceptual.
|
|