|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 16, 2023 18:38:46 GMT
The idea that a sage is 'putting distance between' himself and the pain (or anything else appearing within experience) is misconceived.
There is no need (and really, no way) to actually put distance between yourself and physical pain in it's basic appearance, before judging mind gets a hold of it. Judging mind does put sort of an artificial 'distance' between reality and knowing of it. The sage knows even arising pain to be noneother than God/Godding. The seeker, does not know that....that Truth is being obscured by the SVP and his judgments.
That which appears to you as "mental distancing from pain," is actually the opposite....the absence of an application of mentation/thought/judging ontop of the basic arising of bodily pain sensation.
Same with what you are labelling as Niz's "smoking addiction." Absent mind's judgments that say "I should not be doing this activity that I find to be enjoyable," he did not experience smoking one ciggy after another to be problematic.
The story relative to the physical body/form is that it wears out over time...as the story goes...so far, not in Figgles experience anyway, there are no bodies that live forever..that do not to some degree anyway, age and visibly slow down...and one who accepts that singular facet of the general story, and is at peace with the temporal natural of the body...that apparent facet inherent to being physically alive, has a much different attitude regarding all sorts of activities and behaviors that science says impact health.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 16, 2023 18:48:57 GMT
The persona must be seen through in the sense that it's seen to be devoid of it's own inherent existence....to see that the persona is an appearance arising within/to awareness....to see that the person is not actually giving rise to awareness...that it is the other way around.
Only then is it non-conceptually evident that 'I am all of it.'
The ground of awareness reigns as primordial even in seeing that I am the body and all else that is appearing. No fundamental separation, all fundamental One, but there is a non-conceptual knowing that abides, that appearances are temporal and arise dependent upon awareness, not the other way around.
For the seeker, who merely has a conceptual grasp (or not even) the sense of being a body/person that gives rise to awareness is primary, and then it's from there that he says, I am BOTH the person AND the awareness.
Your "there is only what you are," contains the delusion that the body/mind/person is what gives rise to seeing...knowing....being aware. You've conceptually connected/unified 'being aware' and 'the me/Tenka person,' but you have not yet seen through the Tenka person to see that it has no inherent existence in it's own right....it's an appearance only, arising dependent upon the abiding ground of awareness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 16, 2023 19:35:24 GMT
No, the negation is NOT of "the appearance/relative." Niz didn't deny the appearing disease or the arising/appearing pain per se. The negation is of any absolute, fundamental limitation.
Niz was not negating the appearing pain itself, just any fundamental/actual, 'wrongness/badness/limitation' imagined to be inherent in that temporal appearance.
Limitations DO appear....they are appearance only though and not reflective of that which is fundamentally so. We do not need to deny apparent limitation...apparent boundaries....even in seeing them for empty appearance only, they continue to appear. No need to deny or negate that which appears so long as it's seen to be 'appearance only,' and not indicative of that which is fundamentally/actually/absolutely so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 16, 2023 19:53:54 GMT
Hmmm.. I though perhaps it might have been just a typo--lazy writing, but here again, you express the same idea.
If limitation is seen to be 'non-actual'...'relatively only/material,' then there is no need to negate that appearance.
The appearance of limitation is what it is...apparent limitation. Seen as such...seen to be empty and devoid of fundamental substance, it not a problem...not an issue.
It's only mistaking apparent limitation for "actual/absolute/fundamental" limitation, that problems (suffering) ensues.
When the entire world of appearance is seen through, seen to be devoid of fundamental substance, it's all rendered non-problematic. That's what it means to be free.
This idea that there needs to be/should be 'negation of appearance,' is precisely what's behind the brown-bear scenario of Jeff Foster's, where the appearing world is being denied as an appearance. "What tree...there is no tree..." is no different than "limitation...what limitation?...there is no limitation."
In terms of what appears, there IS apparent limitation. Limitation is a facet of experience. The infinite must be realized...it does not arise as a some-thing per se, that can specifically, be experienced...it cannot be conceptualized as any other experiential thing can be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 16, 2023 20:06:24 GMT
Limitation though, does appear....which means it's not an illusion...not a falsity. Fundamental/actual separation is an illusion/falsity. To imagine that limitation is actual/fundamental Truth, is falsity. But apparent limitation, does appear.
Limitation is an integral facet of experience...absent apparent limitation, there is no unfolding story...no apparent, 'my experience' relative to 'your experience.' The Figgles experience/apparent point of perception is relatively/apparently 'limited' in scope...and that is why it is not immediately privy to Muttley's apparent experience/point of perception.
To deny that apparent limitation then is to deny the appearance of distinct experience..apparent distinct persons/characters.
If you negate apparent limitation, then you also negate that relative appearing facet of the story.
It really is enough to see that all perceivables, any and all experiential facets of the story, are empty appearance only...not Truth.
|
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Esponja on Jan 17, 2023 16:46:11 GMT
Limitation though, does appear....which means it's not an illusion...not a falsity. Fundamental/actual separation is an illusion/falsity. To imagine that limitation is actual/fundamental Truth, is falsity. But apparent limitation, does appear. Limitation is an integral facet of experience...absent apparent limitation, there is no unfolding story...no apparent, 'my experience' relative to 'your experience.' The Figgles experience/apparent point of perception is relatively/apparently 'limited' in scope...and that is why it is not immediately privy to Muttley's apparent experience/point of perception. To deny that apparent limitation then is to deny the appearance of distinct experience..apparent distinct persons/characters. If you negate apparent limitation, then you also negate that relative appearing facet of the story. It really is enough to see that all perceivables, any and all experiential facets of the story, are empty appearance only...not Truth. Can’t argue with that. There’s no escaping the perceived apparent dream so relax and enjoy the limitations. I certainly love my perceived boundary. |
|
Esponja
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Esponja on Jan 17, 2023 16:47:10 GMT
Shouting does not necessarily indicate a sense of fundamental wrongness/separation. All sorts of behaviors can still arise, absent the peace/stillness of being, getting touched/disturbed. It's tempting to observe behaviors, particularly those that very much might 'seem to' us to indicate that the deeper waters are being stirred, to declare, "aha...this means locus of seeing has shifted to an SVP," but there's no way of knowing that for certain just by looking on...short of someone telling you his is suffering, feeling separate, you are merely surmising about the degree of 'upset' that's involved there. My dog barks at the carpenter but then spends a day journaling and asking for forgiveness. Naughty pup! |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 17, 2023 18:32:53 GMT
Limitation though, does appear....which means it's not an illusion...not a falsity. Fundamental/actual separation is an illusion/falsity. To imagine that limitation is actual/fundamental Truth, is falsity. But apparent limitation, does appear. Limitation is an integral facet of experience...absent apparent limitation, there is no unfolding story...no apparent, 'my experience' relative to 'your experience.' The Figgles experience/apparent point of perception is relatively/apparently 'limited' in scope...and that is why it is not immediately privy to Muttley's apparent experience/point of perception. To deny that apparent limitation then is to deny the appearance of distinct experience..apparent distinct persons/characters. If you negate apparent limitation, then you also negate that relative appearing facet of the story. It really is enough to see that all perceivables, any and all experiential facets of the story, are empty appearance only...not Truth. Can’t argue with that. There’s no escaping the perceived apparent dream so relax and enjoy the limitations. I certainly love my perceived boundary. Yup. Although limitation DOES appear, there is no identification with limitation. All apparent limitation arises and falls, ....an appearance only...empty of abiding nature. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jan 17, 2023 18:34:14 GMT
Shouting does not necessarily indicate a sense of fundamental wrongness/separation. All sorts of behaviors can still arise, absent the peace/stillness of being, getting touched/disturbed. It's tempting to observe behaviors, particularly those that very much might 'seem to' us to indicate that the deeper waters are being stirred, to declare, "aha...this means locus of seeing has shifted to an SVP," but there's no way of knowing that for certain just by looking on...short of someone telling you his is suffering, feeling separate, you are merely surmising about the degree of 'upset' that's involved there. My dog barks at the carpenter but then spends a day journaling and asking for forgiveness. Naughty pup!  Funny, but yeah, that explains the point perfectly.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2023 19:18:53 GMT
Satch is delivering some comedy in that thread.
|
|
