Transcendence

Tenka, waking up hinges upon just that! A prising apart (ability to see a distinction) of that which essentially, fundamental vs. that which is temporal...appearance only...empty and devoid of it's own inherent existence.

That which is aware....awareness itself, vs. that which arises/appears within/to awareness.

It is the conflating of the two, which equals identification with the appearing 'me character.'


The mistake of the separate, volitional person hinges upon mistaking the body/mind/character as the domain/ground of awareness, vs. the other way around.

The person is an appearance within/to the abiding ground of awareness, and yet, fundamentally, there is no actual separation between the two; Appearance depends upon the abiding ground for it's brief/fleeting arising....the ground does not depend upon appearance for it's abidance....it never wavers, regardless of what comes and goes.

As usual SN, crystal clear pointing.

Interesting to note though that Sree's take on the appearing/experiential body as "existential reality itself" is shared by a few on ST....Reefs and ZD have both directly attributed specific qualities/properties, (that they erroneously equate with 'essential nature') to all perceived objects/things, ranging from appearing bodies to appearing shoes....paper-clips, etc.

It's interesting that everyone is leaping on Sree as though he's the only one on that forum perpetuating separation/delusion...reifying the appearing body as existent in it's own right....the source of consciousness...seeing....doing...experiencing... and have given a complete pass to the ongoing assertions of ZD and Reefs of a 3 layer cake, complete with absolute knowing that bodies...things....all defined objects, are objective, absolute evidence of discrete, individualized seers/experiencers/perceivers.

You say this as though there can be choice to simply turn off interest in the world and it's affairs, which is nonsense.

When separation is in play, the appearing world, the entire realm of appearance, generally HAS attention sucked in/captured by it. All the lamenting and attempts to avoid 'thinking' about things you believe are a waste of time, but otherwise that pique interest is going to fall flat.

Interest in/thought about the world is not actually the problem. The belief/erroneous sense of separation, of being an existent, separate entity, IS.

Sree on ST is demonstrating precisely what happens when the person makes a valiant effort to deny arising interest in favor of warped, deeply judgmental ideas about shoulds/shouldnt's..../how life is best lived.

To try to purposefully, willfully, volitionally avoid/turn off interest in the world that appears equals a sort of personal denigration of "what is."

If one is feeling 'too' sucked in by certain thoughts/ideas, inquire into the interest in such...inquire into where the emotional pain lies....what's giving rise to it....the specific ideas that go hand in hand with that....the sense of separation that is at the crux.

The absence of the imagined separate, volitional person cannot be manufactured. It's an absence that hinges upon a realization/seeing through that only happens when the locus of seeing shifts from beyond the story to a non-local, non-identified 'position.'

Yes, the natural state generally equals a calm countenance, although, it also leaves room for the arising of excitement...pointed interest...states that are more on the exuberant side.

And yes, there is no willful exertion required for that, in fact, willful exertion is the anti-thesis of the natural state. The natural state is "natural" simply because there is no 'willful manipulator/separate entity' involved.

You are making the same mistake though that all seekers who have a mere conceptual grasp upon 'the natural state/absence of the svp' generally make, and that is in your belief that an absence of willful exertion, is somehow still within the hands of the person.

There's an erroneous belief in play that so long as the attempted manipulations of the person are not overtly/obviously 'effortful' then they qualify as evidence of 'natural state.'

Truth is, the very idea/interest in 'ceasing to resist change,' is evidence of the svp's interest in manipulating.

The only way that the cessation of resisting happens is in the absence of the imagined separate, volitional person.

The only was the svp becomes absent, is when locus of seeing shifts to a non-local position of transcendence of the story/dream...transcendence of all things personal, to reveal that imagined separation...along with the imagined SVP, was just that, only ever erronenously imagined to be.