|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 1:00:11 GMT
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.  I didn't posit him as any such thing. I was actually positing myself as someone who has perhaps misunderstood him in that sense. As in: If he was to read my specific assessment there (that he equates thoughts and feelings) and disagree, he might want to 'pipe up' to correct me. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 1:07:03 GMT
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.
Enlightenment is not the 'ignoring of thought.' Do you regard that to be mere 'opinion'? How 'bout this; Enlightenment is fundamentally an absence. As I see it, I am pointing there and not expressing a mere opinion. That must be 'realized' to be grasped. And in the videos Sifty has posted, I don't see him pointing to an absence at all, but rather, he outright says in one of them, that enlightenment equals the acquisition of direct answers to existential questions. In other words, that enlightenment equals the addition of something known about existence. Yeah....I'm expressing my opinion of his words/teachings. But there is realization behind that opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 1:14:16 GMT
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. Fair enough. If Sifty hadn't characterized the eschewing/ignoring of thought as 'enlightenment' and instead, offered it up for a good practice for a seeker to experience relative freedom from fear, I wouldn't taken issue with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 1:25:36 GMT
I am curious Sifty if you find yourself mostly agreeing with ZD? He also equates SR/enlightenment with receiving direct answers/resolve to his existential questions vs. seeing all existential questions as misconceived.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 13, 2020 1:49:55 GMT
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. . I was actually positing myself as someone who has perhaps misunderstood him in that sense. As in: If he was to read my specific assessment there (that he equates thoughts and feelings) and disagree, he might want to 'pipe up' to correct me. 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. ... He can pipe up to correct me if I'm wrong |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 13, 2020 1:54:12 GMT
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.
Enlightenment is not the 'ignoring of thought.' Do you regard that to be mere 'opinion'? How 'bout this; Enlightenment is fundamentally an absence. As I see it, I am pointing there and not expressing a mere opinion. That must be 'realized' to be grasped. And in the videos Sifty has posted, I don't see him pointing to an absence at all, but rather, he outright says in one of them, that enlightenment equals the acquisition of direct answers to existential questions. In other words, that enlightenment equals the addition of something known about existence. Yeah....I'm expressing my opinion of his words/teachings. But there is realization behind that opinion. Describing "enlightenment" to someone curious about it can be all over the map, but relate what sifty said in his vid to some of the things you've written about nonattachment over the years. Personally, I wouldn't say something like that because of how it might be misinterpreted, but by the same token, I see were he's coming from and what he's trying to do.
Of course it's just an opinion. Otherwise you'd be able to prove that you were enlightened by what you write.  |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 4:43:39 GMT
I didn't posit him as any such thing. I was actually positing myself as someone who has perhaps misunderstood him in that sense. As in: If he was to read my specific assessment there (that he equates thoughts and feelings) and disagree, he might want to 'pipe up' to correct me. 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. ... He can pipe up to correct me if I'm wrong Oh yeah. I remember how all this goes.  The 'lying' point, was in response to your assertions about speaking to 'beginners.' It's not been established yet whether or not Sifting's view regarding beginners/seekers actually aligns with your defense of him or not. That was not an assertion of my belief that Sifty is lying to seekers as much as it's an assertion that your suggestion that 'beginners' should be addressed/spoken to in the manner you suggested they should be, constitutes unnecessarily 'lying' to them. You may think you are speaking 'for' Sifty there, but really, you are espousing your own opinions on the matter. It was those opinions I was addressing when I suggested that it's not the best move to lie to seekers. |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 13, 2020 4:47:04 GMT
(** shakes head sadly **) Oh yeah. I remember how all this goes. The 'lying' point, was in response to your assertions about speaking to 'beginners.' It's not been established yet whether or not Sifting's view regarding beginners/seekers actually aligns with your defense of him or not. That was not an assertion of my belief that Sifty is lying to seekers as much as it's an assertion that your suggestion that 'beginners' should be addressed/spoken to in the manner you suggested they should be, constitutes unnecessarily 'lying' to them.  |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Apr 13, 2020 4:50:12 GMT
Oh yeah. I remember how all this goes. The 'lying' point, was in response to your assertions about speaking to 'beginners.' It's not been established yet whether or not Sifting's view regarding beginners/seekers actually aligns with your defense of him or not. That was not an assertion of my belief that Sifty is lying to seekers as much as it's an assertion that your suggestion that 'beginners' should be addressed/spoken to in the manner you suggested they should be, constitutes unnecessarily 'lying' to them.  |
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Apr 13, 2020 4:52:07 GMT
(** shakes head sadly **) Oh yeah. I remember how all this goes. The 'lying' point, was in response to your assertions about speaking to 'beginners.' It's not been established yet whether or not Sifting's view regarding beginners/seekers actually aligns with your defense of him or not. That was not an assertion of my belief that Sifty is lying to seekers as much as it's an assertion that your suggestion that 'beginners' should be addressed/spoken to in the manner you suggested they should be, constitutes unnecessarily 'lying' to them. You may think you are speaking 'for' Sifty there, but really, you are espousing your own opinions on the matter. It was those opinions I was addressing when I suggested that it's not the best move to lie to seekers. But you see, darling, I never advocated saying anything about "enlightenment" to a beginner, much less, lying to them about it. Stick to what we each actually wrote.  |
|
