|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 12, 2020 22:57:40 GMT
Am curious Laughter, do you, like Sifting, equate 'ignoring all thought' with 'surrender'? I wouldn't describe it that way, but I can see what he means. A seeker - especially one starting out, especially people deep into a frenetic urban trance - they have trouble discerning inner from outer. They often can't distinguish - as Tolle put it in that vid you posted - between a situation, a moment, and their thoughts about that moment. At the core of every emotion is a thought, and one aspect of surrender is to allow powerful emotions to move through you without getting lost in them.
We both know that there's no difference between inner and outer, but that requires a realization. The point that one can be present to these movements without being swept away by them, or having to wall them off and shut down to them, is a nuance that seekers and patients alike might not understand at the outset of either process of pointing or psychoanalysis.
Regardless of how deeply one appears to be entranced, lying to hm about what actually constitutes 'enlightenment' doesn't seem to me to be a stellar move. On the other hand, telling one who is entranced that there is relative relief, conditional upon purposefully turning away from thoughts/ideas, nothing wrong there. Allowing emotions to flow freely is not the same as 'ignoring' thought. Sifting seems to equate thought with feeling, and I'd say this is evidenced as he suggests that one can become free from anxiety by simply ignoring it/turning attention away from it. He can pipe up to correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a common thread through all his teachings that I see, that lumps together all of the phenomenal, which includes thoughts/feelings/emotions, along with the directive to 'ignore' them....stop attending to them. And he calls that absence of attendance to the phenomenal 'enlightenment/SR.' |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 12, 2020 23:18:44 GMT
He's offering a practice/technique so that folks who are fearful can find greater relative/conditional peace through directing attention away from fearful thoughts/ideas TO bodily sensations. Nothing at all wrong with that so long as he's not trying to sell that conditional peace as Enlightenment/SR. He talks a bit before he gets to that about becoming 'aware of mind's content,' and as I see it, that's the auspicious spot....to look 'at' thought is a very different thing than eschewing/ignoring or consciously turning away from thought. The conscious turning away from thought far too often just reinforces the idea of a doer/controller...or in other words, a phenomenal me that stands separate from thought. Again though, nothing at all wrong with advocating any of these practices involving taking different positions relative to thought...it's just important to see the difference between relative freedom/peace vs. actual freedom/peace (which is an absence). |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 12, 2020 23:47:01 GMT
Wow. Here he equates enlightenment with the accessing of direct answers to existential questions, via the following of a mystical path.
Yeah, it's clear, Sifting is selling a 'mind-enlightenment'.
Bottom line, if you enquire into an existential question and come up with any kind of answer, you've taken a wrong turn right back into the dream. Transcendent seeing (realization) reveals all existential questions to be misconceived. Such questions always have an SVP at their helm.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 12, 2020 23:47:04 GMT
Zen has a concept that's quite deep, called "beginner's mind". This idea of "mind enlightenment" is similar, but you're focused on only one end of the stick.
You've formed an opinion here, and debating it with you, would only entrench you in that position.  ....and no 'entrenchment of position' THERE, at all.   oh, no doubt! It's evidence based.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2020 23:48:23 GMT
He's offering a practice/technique so that folks who are fearful can find greater relative/conditional peace through directing attention away from fearful thoughts/ideas TO bodily sensations. Nothing at all wrong with that so long as he's not trying to sell that conditional peace as Enlightenment/SR. He talks a bit before he gets to that about becoming 'aware of mind's content,' and as I see it, that's the auspicious spot....to look 'at' thought is a very different thing than eschewing/ignoring or consciously turning away from thought. The conscious turning away from thought far too often just reinforces the idea of a doer/controller...or in other words, a phenomenal me that stands separate from thought. Again though, nothing at all wrong with advocating any of these practices involving taking different positions relative to thought...it's just important to see the difference between relative freedom/peace vs. actual freedom/peace (which is an absence). Yes, he speaks simply, to the newly ripening. Fear and uncertainty, like many all over the world are experiencing just now, has a way of being very useful in the process of opening people to the idea of freedom from slavery to mind. Shifting attention from thoughts to the hands - which only ever exist in the present moment - is a useful first step for the beginner. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 12, 2020 23:48:34 GMT
....and no 'entrenchment of position' THERE, at all. oh, no doubt! It's evidence based. As is my assertion that Sifting is selling self help and not Truth. |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969 
|
Post by Enigma on Apr 12, 2020 23:53:27 GMT
Sifting, it'll likely seem as though I'm picking on you here, but keep in mind, you have after all put yourself out there as a spiritual teacher. After perusing your videos further, it's very clear that you are selling a form of mind-enlightenment that is conditional upon consciously/conceptually, eschewing the phenomenal in favor of a concept of what you 'really are.' A freedom that depends upon turning all attention away from the world and all it's things, including all thoughts, all feelings, all ideas, is not actual freedom. I'm kind of stunned to see the depth and scope to which this idea of 'ignoring/turning away from the phenomenal' plays within your teachings. Wow.  You could not be more wrong. This is very similar to Satchi's declarations that a meditative state, absent thought, equaled SR/enlightenment...and thus, his assertion that mind must be 'annihilated/destroyed.' Groundedness in Being can (and does in SR) abide simultaneously as the world is engaged and attended to. There is no need to turn away from the world of things to remain free from the world of things. Waking up means seeing the phenomenal as empty and ephemeral and dependent upon Being, but it does not mean ignoring or turning attention away from, the world. Yours is a common mistake, but it's rare to see someone outright, actively 'teaching' such. The phenomenal is not the enemy. See if for an appearance arising within consciousness, and that's all that's necessary to continue to engage it, absent becoming enslaved by it. All good points. There's also a walk/talk issue in that Sifty has one of most active minds I've seen, always seeking the next level intellectually in discussion. His argument will likely be that post enlightenment he's free to engage mind all he wants, but it's the want that comes into question. Why would one want to return to a TMT level of mental function? |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 12, 2020 23:53:29 GMT
I wouldn't describe it that way, but I can see what he means. A seeker - especially one starting out, especially people deep into a frenetic urban trance - they have trouble discerning inner from outer. They often can't distinguish - as Tolle put it in that vid you posted - between a situation, a moment, and their thoughts about that moment. At the core of every emotion is a thought, and one aspect of surrender is to allow powerful emotions to move through you without getting lost in them.
We both know that there's no difference between inner and outer, but that requires a realization. The point that one can be present to these movements without being swept away by them, or having to wall them off and shut down to them, is a nuance that seekers and patients alike might not understand at the outset of either process of pointing or psychoanalysis.
Regardless of how deeply one appears to be entranced, lying to hm about what actually constitutes 'enlightenment' doesn't seem to me to be a stellar move. On the other hand, telling one who is entranced that there is relative relief, conditional upon purposefully turning away from thoughts/ideas, nothing wrong there. Allowing emotions to flow freely is not the same as 'ignoring' thought. Sifting seems to equate thought with feeling, and I'd say this is evidenced as he suggests that one can become free from anxiety by simply ignoring it/turning attention away from it. He can pipe up to correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a common thread through all his teachings that I see, that lumps together all of the phenomenal, which includes thoughts/feelings/emotions, along with the directive to 'ignore' them....stop attending to them. And he calls that absence of attendance to the phenomenal 'enlightenment/SR.' No, and I didn't say it was, but a seeker has to start somewhere. Did you ever have the experience of your mind suddenly getting very quiet? Of all emotions except a profound joy just draining away? Not that it matters if you didn't, but some of us can relate to that, and making the decision to re-orient our perspective toward the contents of mind prior to such an event is a common path story.
Characterizing sifty as a liar who can "pipe up" to correct you is adding to my journal of evidence.  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 12, 2020 23:55:47 GMT
oh, no doubt! It's evidence based. As is my assertion that Sifting is selling self help and not Truth. Well, no, that's an opinion, but my prediction that you won't change your mind in this thread no matter what anyone writes is a prophesy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 0:57:27 GMT
Sifting, it'll likely seem as though I'm picking on you here, but keep in mind, you have after all put yourself out there as a spiritual teacher. After perusing your videos further, it's very clear that you are selling a form of mind-enlightenment that is conditional upon consciously/conceptually, eschewing the phenomenal in favor of a concept of what you 'really are.' A freedom that depends upon turning all attention away from the world and all it's things, including all thoughts, all feelings, all ideas, is not actual freedom. I'm kind of stunned to see the depth and scope to which this idea of 'ignoring/turning away from the phenomenal' plays within your teachings. Wow. You could not be more wrong. This is very similar to Satchi's declarations that a meditative state, absent thought, equaled SR/enlightenment...and thus, his assertion that mind must be 'annihilated/destroyed.' Groundedness in Being can (and does in SR) abide simultaneously as the world is engaged and attended to. There is no need to turn away from the world of things to remain free from the world of things. Waking up means seeing the phenomenal as empty and ephemeral and dependent upon Being, but it does not mean ignoring or turning attention away from, the world. Yours is a common mistake, but it's rare to see someone outright, actively 'teaching' such. The phenomenal is not the enemy. See if for an appearance arising within consciousness, and that's all that's necessary to continue to engage it, absent becoming enslaved by it. All good points. There's also a walk/talk issue in that Sifty has one of most active minds I've seen, always seeking the next level intellectually in discussion. His argument will likely be that post enlightenment he's free to engage mind all he wants, but it's the want that comes into question. Why would one want to return to a TMT level of mental function?Yup. That's precisely what ignited my interest to click his link in his sig to have a look to see if he's addressed the covid issue in his teachings and if so, how. Re: the TMT; Indeed, thinking is not the enemy, and thus, there is no need to actively eschew or avoid it, but freedom 'from' thought, does mean that those erroneous kinds of thoughts that have identification at their crux, and thus, hook, and lead to TMT, no longer arise in the first place. |
|
