ZD's Mistake | Spiritualgab

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 9, 2022 20:31:44 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 9, 2022 20:31:44 GMT

ZD: I do agree with this. "Hand," "finger," and "body" are all abstractions/distinctions. What the words point to is NOT abstract and remains an incomprehensible and infinite field of being until an act of cognition artificially divides the actuality into imaginary states.

Yet there is the potential for pre-'conscious mind talk' tree-thwacking. Which means that somehow, prior to the artificial cognitive division of the actuality into imaginary states there are states distinct enough for thwacking to occur.

Ouroboros:
edit. This ties in with what I mean when I say I sense you are over-concretizing the conditioned btw, which on this occasion you are lumping in with actuality, and on others 'this'.

I think my first line highlights that the process of distinction begins prior to cognition/imagination. Plus, there are issues with over-concretizing that which is subject to emptiness, (namely the conditioned), and lumping it in with the unconditioned. Or rather it's like you are not putting that distinction deep enough, by effectively placing it at the level of cognition/imagination. I think it runs deepr. It's difficult to get to the bottom of exactly whats going on here. But you don't seem to allow for the fact that sensory perception itself, prior to cognition, is effectively a process of distinction.

Bingo!! Precisely! ZD posits that which is perceived prior to the overlay of minding upon it, as having objective, inherent existence in it's right, equal to the abiding, unwavering awareness that never changes.

He is denying the distinction between the transient/appearance and the abiding/ground. So long as there is some-thing arising in experience, that distinction is in play. (distinction does not = separation).

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 9, 2022 20:51:09 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 9, 2022 20:51:09 GMT

Zendancer:
From my experience sensory perception is NOT a process of distinction because it is prior to cognition/distinction.

Dude! The very fact that you look to "your experience," to make that assertion, says it all. Sensory perception, ANY perception = a distinction (a movement) arising/expressed within/to the unchanging ground.

When we look, if we are simply looking in mental silence, we see "what is." THIS, and the word "actuality" are both pointing to the same infinite field of being that the words "what is" point to.

In nonduality talk, the term 'actuality,' is a reference to 'beyond mind...beyond all things experiential.' It requires a shift in locus of seeing that you clearly have no reference for as you continually make assertions from within the dream about appearances that mistake those appearances for having inherent existence...objective existence.

You've yet to see the dependent and empty nature of all appearances, including the ZD body/mind/character. You think that so long as you're not divvying up the appearing body into distinct parts that that somehow constitutes transcendent seeing. You are mistaken. See from beyond the locus of the imagined SVP and it becomes crystal clear, there is no-thing at all perceivable that has inhrent, abiding existence. That which abides unconditionally, without change, does not arise/appear...it it the ground to all that does arise/appear.

That which appears never becomes abiding.

If one can become silently aware, what we call "the world of 10,000 things" doesn't disappear, but the 10,000 things are not imagined as 10,000 separate things.

So long as any-THING at all is appearing, 'distinction,' IS. 10,000 things are no more imagined than one singular thing is imagined. Appearances DO appear, whether it's regarded by mind as essentially one thing, or a whole myriad of things. The Truth of it all is not itself an appearance....the Truth of it all is that whether it's a singular appearance of a whole bunch of appearing things, none of them have their own inherent existence...they are all expression within/to that which abidingly and unwavering exists.

We can't escape the fact that between birth and adulthood humans are conditioned to make millions of distinctions that become internalized in the subconscious.

There is no need to escape that fact....it's non-problematic so long as all appearance is seen for what it is, which means, that 'human' you speak of along with all the conditioning, is also seen to be appearance only...having no inherent existence in it's own right.

We know (gnosis) what we're looking at (beyond name and form) even if the intellect remains totally silent, but it may require sustained mental silence to break through the illusion of separateness that is so deeply ingrained in humans from an early age.

The intellect does not need to remain silent for a realized knowing to co-abide alongside whatever is arising/appearing. SR co-abides just fine with engagement of intellect.

You have posited present arising of intellect as an ongoing obstructing factor to Oneness. Which means, in order for a sage to be a sage, there must be a complete cessation of intellect, and that is simply not the case.

There is more going on with the seeker than merely too much intellectualizing.....realization requires a profound shift in "locus of seeing." And it is a much greater/profound shift than merely from the intellectualizing mind to the intuitive mind...rather, it's a shift "beyond/prior to" all facets of mind.

Seriously ZD...do you have ANY reference for seeing "prior to/beyond mind"? I really don't think so. Otherwise, you would not be conflating transient perceivables with the unchanging.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 9, 2022 20:54:48 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 9, 2022 20:54:48 GMT

Ouroboros: Otoh, you seem to use it more to signify a mental phenomenon around the level of cognition, which by extension is then closely associated with what we usually talk about as consensus trance conditioning.

Zendancer:
Yes.

Okay..here we have it. You are conflating awakening to the "consensus trance" with "awakening/SR."

They are two VERY different things. You should really stop labelling what you talk about as Nonduality. As I've said before ZD, you are a mystic as best, at worst, a self-help/New Age promoter.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 15, 2022 4:59:24 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 15, 2022 4:59:24 GMT

Zendancer: I agree with you about Newton's theory, and virtually all scientific explanations. Scientists primarily deal with ideas about reality rather than reality, itself. The living truth cannot be captured with images, ideas, and symbols.

I often like to ask people, "How do you grow your teeth and bones?" or "How do your blood cells know where to go and what to do?" or "The human heart beats about 100,000 times each day and in 70 years it will pump enough blood to fill three super-tankers. How are you making that happen?"

How is it you do not see that your questions and the erroneous premise inherent to them (teeth and bone that grew over time, blood cells that are not imminently seen/experienced, but rather, imagined, as they supposedly know where to go and what to do, a heart that in 70 years down the road, in the future, will have pumped enough to fill three tankers) are equally dealing with ideas about reality vs. the reality itself.

Reality is always "imminent." Here and now. All those ideas at the crux of your questions, that you suggest are supposedly "pointing to" something beyond the self, all involve the imagining of past/future....you are inviting the seeker to engage in stories and imaginings to then try to see there is no doer involved, but the very question itself invokes separation.

The illusion of selfhood is so powerful that few people are willing to contemplate what these questions are pointing to.

Or, willing to contemplate that the very premise of the questions hings upon images, concepts, ideas. IN this imminent moment, what do you really know of teeth and bones that grow, ZD? Is that a direct, imminent experience, or is it an idea/story entertained by mind?

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 15, 2022 5:09:22 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 15, 2022 5:09:22 GMT

Zendancer:

Z: You're perfectly on target. Just keep doing what you're doing. Shifting attention away from reflective thoughts to what is actually happening in the present moment is the Way.

In the present moment, do you have direct knowing of your cells....of a volume of blood that would fill a bunch of tankers....of a process of growth involving teeth and bone?

ZD: After I had exhausted every strategy that I could think of, I theorized that deep samadhi might be the key to freedom. I went and asked a Zen Master if that was true. He said, "Absolutely not!" I took his word for it, and just gave up because I couldn't think of anything else I could do other than what I was already doing--my ATA-T form of meditation. At that time I thought, "OK, that sucks, but I'll give up thinking about the future because I don't know what else to do that might move the needle." ATST I had a vague intuitive sense that if anything would lead to freedom, staying focused on whatever was happening in the present moment and doing ATA-T was it. Several months later while doing a solo mounting hiking retreat I was overwhelmed with an enormous feeling of gratitude, and I thanked God for everything that had happened in my life (the "bad" as well as the "good"). It was an intensely emotional experience, and a few hours later, I happened to look within and "the little guy in the head" had totally vanished. It instantly became obvious that I was NOT who I had always thought I was, and that the past sense of selfhood had been an imaginary story about an imaginary person. Almost simultaneously I realized who the real doer of everything had been, and I laughed at the cosmic joke that THIS had played upon Itself. The spiritual search for truth thereby came to an end, and freedom, peace, and equanimity ensued. FWIW, the "little guy in the head" and the past sense of "inside" and "outside" never returned. It sounds to me as if you're coming down the home stretch. *bows in honor*

All that focus on trying to remain present and you're still not seeing the movement of mind away from imminent reality in those kinds of silly questions/ideas involving past/future/time passage, (last post) that you present to seekers, in hopes of somehow helping them to see through the doer.

It's pretty clear, you're still not clearly seeing the imagining inherent in all stories of "growth/becoming/volumes of blood pumping." Being present consistently makes it very clear just how much those kind of stories rely upon a movement of mind from the present.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 17, 2022 3:59:07 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 17, 2022 3:59:07 GMT

Zendancer:

So true!

Yesterday I listened to Tyler Matthew's story on Souljourns, and it was fascinating. At the age of 30 he was sitting by a pool in Las Vegas when suddenly a veil lifted, and he was catapulted into THIS. He realized that everything was perfect just as it was, and he lived the next six months in bliss. Then, his oneness with THIS gradually dissipated, and the veil fell back down. What followed was 7 years of pure hell during which every kind of debacle occurred. He considered it the "dark night of the soul." He continued to meditate, had various insights, and finally, after 7 years, reached a state that might be described as "neutral" but without any joy or bliss, and he couldn't understand why. He spent some time with Mike Snider, and one day Mike read him some lines from the 26th chapter of the Ribhu Gita (the treatise that Ramana recommended to everybody). Upon hearing those words, Tyler suddenly apprehended what Mike calls "absolute identity," and that was the end of "Tyler."

Ted Henry, the interviewer, asked Tyler if he could explain the 7 years of hell. Tyler said, "You could call them vasanas, or mind attachments, or egos tendencies, or karma, or whatever, but there's all kinds of suppressed feelings and other self-referential stuff that are sometimes inside the body that may need to come up and be released, and when that happens, it can be a painful process."

FWIW, Tyler is one of the clearest people I've ever met, and many people on the forum would probably find the interview interesting. It can probably be accessed by googling "Ted Henry interview with Tyler Matthew on Souljourns" or something like that.

Actually, that very idea, that suppressed stuff resides "inside the body that may need to come up and be released," is one that needs to be seen through, and thus, itself, "released." Attachments/ego tendencies, self referential stuff that is muddying the waters/obscuring clarity do not reside 'within' the body. The body is itself just an another appearance...as are the attachments/self-referential ideas.

I find it odd how you uphold the body as though it is the source of feelings/painful thoughts, ideas, etc. Seeing through separation takes care of the erroneous idea that the body is in actuality, housing or giving rise to anything else.

If it were true that the body is a fundamental Source to suppressed feelings, that would make the body inherently existent in it's own right. It's not. Wake up and that becomes crystal clear.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 17, 2022 4:18:41 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 17, 2022 4:18:41 GMT

10 hours ago zendancer said:
What happens if one completely gives up all ideas about happiness, unhappiness, roller coasters, a separate "me," and control?

Sree:
One would be completely sloshed and zonked out in bed with two hookers.

Yours is a western approach to spirituality. Hinduism is not about self-gratification.

Zendancer:
"Self-gratification" involves a "me." The question pointed far beyond that. An active imagination is a detriment in this regard.

So does "giving up ideas." Who/what is it ZD that would choose to give up all ideas and then make it happen? In your suggestion that one can simply give up certain ideas, you are positing a doer....or in other words, an SVP.

For erroneous ideas to cease, nothing short of realization/seeing through will do.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 17, 2022 4:24:27 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 17, 2022 4:24:27 GMT

Zendancer:
That's the fundamental issue that the question was pointing to. Who or what is it that sees, thinks, imagines a roller coaster, gives up, or does anything else? The question was for Gopal, but anyone interested can give it a go.

Oh yes, right...you point the fundamental absence of the separate person by suggesting it's possible to simply do away with certain ideas.

BS. What you did there ZD was a reification of the doer/SVP. Nice try though.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 17, 2022 17:53:09 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 17, 2022 17:53:09 GMT

Zendancer: That's exactly why I asked if one could drop ALL of these ideas.

I return that very question to YOU Zd; Can the person just choose to drop an idea?

If one gives up ideas about happiness, this includes ideas about PERMANENT happiness.

So how does one go about "giving up" a particular idea? Again dude, you're invoking a doer where plain and simply, there is none. Ideas are not given up....they must be seen through and only then, they get put in their place.

Duality only exists in imagination, and that's why Zen people point to "non-abidance in mind" or "no mind."

Minding though in general, is not the problem. Mistaking mind's content for something it 'aint, is. Mistaking false ideas for Truth, is.

IOW, all of the discussions and arguments about a roller coaster are TMT.

The discussion about feelings moving up and down is not TMT at all. In terms of relative clarity, it's an important facet of experience to see. It also plays into Truth-talk in that all feelings are transient appearance only....they come and go....nothing "permanent" going on there....

If one wants to engage with or believe these kinds of thoughts, that's okay, but it has nothing to do with what Jesus called "the living truth." The living truth is non-dual.

The living truth includes all of it....that which abides and that which appears/arises, which of course includes, the movement of emotions/feelings up and down.

If one investigates who/what is thinking all these thoughts about happiness, unhappiness, etc, one will discover what lies beyond all ideas.

This is your primary delusion; There is no 'what' that lies beyond all ideas. You continue to conceptualize and objectify 'the abiding ground of awareness,' within/to which all ideas arise.

and all the "investigating" in the world is no substitute for the shift in locus of seeing that is SR. You continue to posit awakening as a 'doing' of the person. It's not.

The only verse in the Bible that points directly to this is Psalms 46:10, "Be still and know (discover) that I am God." Becoming still is the key.

The person, laying down and getting the fuck outta the way is the key, and regardless of how it may appear to you, that is not in the hands of the person.

Figgles
Administrator

Posts: 24,079

ZD's Mistake Nov 17, 2022 17:56:15 GMT

Quote

Post by Figgles on Nov 17, 2022 17:56:15 GMT

Zendancer:
That's why many of us are pointing to how one wakes up from the dream. Awakening from the dream requires penetrating the illusion of ALL thoughts and beliefs, including thoughts and beliefs about dreaming reality.

Yes, in awakening ALL ideas, all appearance, gets seen for such, including ideas about it all 'being alive,'....all things, shoes, people, rocks, 'being conscious, alive, vibrant, experiencing, perceiving.'

Anything at all perceivable is realized to be empty and devoid of it's own inherent existence. And that includes all properties and qualities that you believe each object possesses.