|
Post by Figgles on Oct 20, 2023 20:26:02 GMT
I think you work overtime Tenka, actually make an effort to mangle the pointers that get offered to you...it's as though you reject the pointers without even considering what they might actually be referencing.
You have taken "the world is a dream" much too literally....you mistake that pointer to mean that the wakeful experience in comparison to the nightime dream experience, is without 'relative' difference/distinction.
That's plain and simply NOT true. Experientially speaking, the SR/awakened can still distinguish between the experience of wakeful, daily life experience vs. their sleeping, night-time dreaming experience.
What the pointer "the world is a dream" is indicating is that the entire world of perceivables arises, absent any fundamental separation at all, within/to awareness....there IS no separation there, no inherent existence re: the perceivables....their temporal, fleeting, imminent appearance is entirely dependent upon the ground of awareness, that abides...that never wavers, regardless of 'what' is appearing.
The "dream" pointer is a reference to the absence of inherent substance/existence of anything that appears...anything at all that is experienced and it's a 'dream' in counter to 'abiding awareness,' which 'exists/IS foundational to the appearing world.
(s)elf (the appearing me character) is NOT "an illusion/delusion." A me character does appear....a (s)elf is experienced. It simply has no inherent existence in it's own right....it's not a separate entity/something that stands alone...has creative/catalyzing powers to control stuff within the experiential realm.
What "realization" refers to, is a seeing/apprehension from the 'vantage point' (it's actually unfixed...untethered...but for lack of a better word...I use that term to point) that which lies beyond...foundational/fundamental to all arising perceivables.
(s)elf appears within Awareness. Do you have any reference for that ground of unchanging 'aware' foundation within which (s)elf is seen/known to be appearing?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 20, 2023 20:30:25 GMT
It is apparently so that many who 'think' they've fully seen through separation, are SR, are not, and have mistaken a mere conceptual grasp/understanding for the real deal...that does happen.
But you seem to be saying that that is always the case...that there is no such thing as a realization/seeing through that is 'prior to/beyond' the (s)elf?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 20, 2023 20:52:31 GMT
Very much so! Freedom lies in where primary seeing is happening from...is it located within the experiential, within the person...is 'primary' locus of seeing felt/known to be happening via human eyes and senses, or is all of that experience, couched within a higher/greater/untethered 'seeing' from beyond it all?
It really is not one vs. the other if wakefulness is the case....post SR, the experience of seeing through eyes of a body/mind still arises, but it's now couched within the greater seeing of awareness....there is a 'groundedness' in awareness AS the relative, apparently limited window of personal perception appears within it...as an expression of it.
There is then a conceptual, experiential re-framing of all things phenomenal, including the temporal, appearing 'me character,' whereby the previously, erroneously assigned 'substance' of separate, inherent existence, is now absent relative to all appearing things....including the "me person/character"...all appearing characters.
As the phenomenal (s)elf arises within/to abiding, existent Awareness, as an expression of, of course, ultimately, the experiential me character is also essentially, THAT, however, they do not stand on equal footing in terms of 'existing/abiding.'
Awareness as ground can stand alone...does stand alone...exists in it's own right, while the appearing "me character," is dependent upon that ground for it's ephemeral, temporal appearance.
The ground never wavers, does not come and go... while the appearing me character, does.
The shift to primary locus of seeing that is now 'beyond' the phenomenal is not a shift to some kind of nebulous "spiritual" something that is "non-physical." That's too limiting a term....we can ultimately only point to "the ground of awareness" but using the term "non-physical," just sets mind off in the entirely wrong direction, as it's clear you have gone.
Awareness is beyond ideas of physical vs. non-physical. "Non-physical" is still within the realm of experience. Awareness as ground, is beyond all of that...beyond all ideas...anything at all that is 'experienced.'
If you are talking about any of that, then you are plain and simply not talking Truth/Nonduality/SR.
From an awakened perspective, vibrations, levels, frequencies...all dream-stuff. Not Truthy. That is not to say that they cannot play an integral part in personal experience and be as real and viscerally tangible in terms of experience as anything else that commonly is experienced.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 23, 2023 19:40:31 GMT
I am thinking that you were term "annihilation of mind," is what I term "complete transcendence of mind."
Unless and until there is a full and clear distinction able to be made between that which IS mind/minding/mind content vs. that which abides and is prior to mind, one remains trapped within the dream.
There are so many seekers who believe they are SR, but who still have no yet realized how sweeping and inclusive that "empty appearance" umbrella is...they are still mistaking certain aspects of mind/minding to be 'aspects of' the abiding, unchanging ground.
This is what's in play for Reefs/ZD as they insist that a realization of certain specific qualities/properties are included in SR/awakening....and not merely as "newly acquired knowing as mind is informed," but as actual "realization."
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 23, 2023 19:46:00 GMT
Methinks the term was used in the old/initial teachings to represent the sweeping, ALL inclusive nature of the realization of emptiness....that the "entirety" of mind's content must be included in that seeing....vs. the exclusion of certain 'sacred' facets that you yourself are guilty of erroneously trying to preserve as something '/beyond/prior to' mind. To see through mind in it's "totality" is what is necessary. Now, that of course does not mean that mind is no longer in play as experience unfolds...that would be ridiculous, but it is now all realized to be 'empty' of inherent existence...anything at all that 'arises within mind'...be it an idea....a thing...a circumstance...a quality...a property...(yes Reefs, even the very, very awe-inspiring stuff! )
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 23, 2023 21:05:13 GMT
And, in looking up that term, it's very clear, it's a reference to the death of 'the present form of mind that identifies with objects of mind...that erroneously assigns inherent, independent existence to mind and it's conent.'
Other ways of saying the same; Render mind the servant vs. the master.....completely transcend and thus, subdue mind, realize mind & all it's content to be an empty appearance only, arising within Awareness rather than the other way around.
To "make mind subserviant" is to fully transcend mind, to now see primarily from a position where mind is secondary to/couched within, Awareness.
The "I do know" crowd, still have yet to transcend personal mind/content/appearance, in this way... That's the only way you could have "Absolute/realized knowledge" that says each appearing person/body, rock, sock, paper-clip, Is for certain, a perceiver/experiencer...in that, there's an erroneous assignation to the appearance, of it's own inherent existence/substance, when in actuality, the appearing person AND personal mind/mind content, arise within/to the ground of abiding awareness.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 23, 2023 21:08:37 GMT
Nice.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 27, 2023 18:48:56 GMT
Nice. ZD's "reality is a unified whole," is a conceptualized version of what the term "Oneness/not separate/not two" is pointing to. When it's realized there never WAS fundamental separation, there is no-thing which needs to be "unified" or connected or made into a "whole." ZD invokes what we jokingly used to refer to on ST as the "Oneness blob." It's what happens when the pointer of Oneness gets mistaken and accepted as a concept only. From there, the seeker, who believes he's a sage, gets into all sorts of twisted pretzels trying to wave away his imagined, separate personal self-hood with a magic wand.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 11, 2023 20:38:33 GMT
If that existed, it would confirm and affirm actual "separation."
SR reveals that apparent people are not actually "entities" at all. (an entity being a separately, existent someone/something)....it also reveals that ultimately, there is no 'other' fundamental awareness...that both the me character and it's apparent, directly known, individuated 'window of perception,' and all 'you characters' and their apparent individuated windows of perception, all fall equally under the umbrella of "perceivables/appearance only." As such, it can said to be the Ultimate Truth that "there are no ACTUAL others."
As you allude to, there IS empathy, in the sense that it arises as a facet of so called "normal" experience, but that is indeed something different than an experience of stepping directly into the experience/window of perception of "another" to know first hand, the specific, imminently arising perceptions.
If it True that Kensho/CC experience leaves one imminently, knowledgeable of an apparent other's direct, window of perception, that would by virtue of that 'direct knowledge' also include certain knowing of the content of that window of perception. And not just a once in a while thing....All truly "realized" knowing, abides...is imminent....here, NOW, vs. just a memory of a past 'something seen' in an awe-inspiring, woo-woo experience.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 14, 2023 7:28:47 GMT
Again, a nice idea and wouldn't it be great for the deluded person if that were so! But it's not.
You are erroneously conflating the seeing through of fundamental limitation/Absolute boundary (realization of absence of inherent existence re: appearance/perceivables) with an experiential, apparent, relative unity/merging/connection between appearing things. That's not what the pointer 'not two' is pointing to.
Oneness is not an 'experiential manifestation.' It's apprehension is beyond all manifest experience....prior to all minding, all conceptualization, all experience, all perceivables.
An absence of separation does not show up within experiential manifestations and even more important; Fundamental separation, is only ever imagined...it never shows up in experiential manifestation either, other than as a delusion.
ZD makes this same mistake.....he conflates a conceptual unity/connection between appearing things with the realization of "not two/no separation."
Distinction between objects does not need to disappear/dissolve for fundamental Oneness to BE. Apparent boundaries and experiential limitations abide the apprehension of fundamental Oneness, just fine.
|
|