|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 21, 2024 18:12:33 GMT
He begins by saying "meditation is NOT what you think it is," and then goes on to describe a process that that does not fit what most generally "think" meditation is. I'd say it's pretty clear. His definition of meditation is that process he describes.
The seeing that the personality is not actually/fundamentally "you," does not necessarily equal "disgust at the personality." In fact, that seeing, in one who is relatively clear and mature and grounded as a person, will likely encompass a sense of compassion and acceptance, even perhaps an embracing and love of the apparent personality.
The personality illuminated as "appearance only," is absent personal judgments "about" that personality. It is true though that in that illuminated viewpoint whereby there is a seeing that is beyond/prior to the personality, various aspects of it may indeed become more obvious and clearly denoted, but even if those happen to be traits that are not personally liked/valued, that does not equal disgust towards the entire, apparent 'personality.'
Again, SDP, seeing through inherent existence relative to that which appears does not equal a vilification of that. Seeing through/realization itself is absent those kinds of personal value judgments. Those may come later as mind is informed, but if you are conflating those with the seeing through/loss/realization itself, then you're version of "realization" is misconceived.
Again, this demonstrates a very weak grasp on human psychology...mind's machinations. An applied judgment that accompanies a sense of 'terror' regarding the personality is far more likely to anchor in those personality traits than to result in a "spontaneous allowance of their fading away."
A feeling of 'terror' indicates a depth of personal judgment that includes the overlay of separation-based, limitation based beliefs that extend to the fundamental level.
While it's entirely possible that certain, specific personality traits CAN indeed fade away/change/shift, that does not mean that the entire "personality" goes away. This idea that the person can somehow operate within the dream, completely absent of ALL personality trait, is nonsense.
It's more than enough to simply see the personality for what it is.....appearance only...an temporal arising within to that which abides as ground to all perceivables.
This idea that there exists some objective reality, beyond immediate perception of it, whereby apparent distorting filters can be "completely/fully" removed to reveal "it" is another nonsense. Indeed, relatively speaking, within the dream, there are views that are more/less distorted by falsity, however, there is no "existent" material reality that is devoid of ALL "filters." The moment material reality appears in perception, a distinction/distortion has arisen within/to that which is devoid of all filters, all judgment, all distinction/limitation/boundary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 21, 2024 18:18:08 GMT
"Satisfaction" is relative....a feeling/sense that comes and goes. As such, the person can at times be "satisfied" with the falsity. That's after all, what "self-help" and mysticism and other spiritual ontologies that stress a "better" dream are all about. I would say "zen & Buddhism" also falls under that umbrella. It's all about having an improved relative experience in constrast to Nonduality that is about "what is/can be known Absolutely/Ultimately." That said, relatively speaking, freedom from the erroneous sense of separation DOES make for a "better" experience, what with the suspension of separation-based, SVP-based suffering, however that falls under "impact" of SR, not the realization/seeing through, itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 21, 2024 18:42:32 GMT
The relative insight that says "clarity has merit" is based upon it becoming clear that being more conscious as a person is "better than" moving through life absent that relative knowledge as to mind's content.
The idea that "meditation, as a practice will successfully ensure this outcome," is glossing over the fact that there's already an arising, present interest in clarity....in seeing what is actually going on vs. living life in less consciously aware manner.
It's not the practice/process of meditation per se that "does/creates" anything. Where the highest interest IS clear seeing....being present and consciously aware as to what's going on in mind, what's actually appearing vs. what's being imagined, assumed, remembered, plain and simply, that's what's gonna happen.
While that may happen, what's at play there is really just an absence of arising, predominant interest in being more consciously aware of what's going on. In any given instant, where the highest interest truly IS that (being present and conscious to what immediately IS) plain and simply, that will happen. No need to commit to some ongoing practice/process. Where there is a true and honest/sincere interest in "being present"...that's what's gonna happen.
Far better to inquire within to accurately and sincerely assess whether or not that truly IS the highest interest or not. We as apparent persons do not actually get to choose or even volitionally "shape" or in any way "create" our highest interest. And that is precisely what folks are attempting to do when they embark upon an action plan/process to meditate in any moment that lies beyond here...NOW.
A true and pure intent to meditate NOW, that is based upon an imminent, primary interest in clarity, will simply play out, NOW, via present meditation. What moneky-mind that interferes with silent mind really is, is a higher interest in thought/minding playing out/having it's way.
The highest interest in any given moment is what plays out. There is no getting around that for the person regardless of how it might seem. Take the most seemingly selfish OR self-less of behaviors/actions....there's no bucking highest interest playing out.
It's that idea, that a moment of silent mind....quietly observing breath, enjoying that feeling, is ultimately "achieving/causing" something else, down the road from that moment, is what needs to be seen through.
Where there is true, primary interest in paying attention to breath, that will happen. Where there is not, it won't. Seeing THAT is where the gold lies!
This describes a mind game where competing interests continue to swap position and an increasing strength of interest in clarity, gets mistaken for having been caused by the preceding practice/process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 24, 2024 19:19:57 GMT
By what means do you arrive at this assertion SDP?
This is nothing but a personal opinion put forth as a fundamental Truth.
The idea that there is some objectively existent/Truthful "point" to the manifest world or a "fundamental/Truthful" point to creativity rides upon a mind-based need for there to BE "a point"....Liberation frees you from that need and frees you from the search and misconceived answers like the one above, that you might arrive at.
Can you see how that idea, falsely asserted as a "Truth," then gives way to a whole story that rides on that one idea?
These kinds of ideas are revealed in awakening to be misconceived and based upon mind's incessant need to to possess material knowledge about fundamental Truths.
That "seeking urge to know and have it all wrapped up" that I'm pretty sure you regard to be some kind of rare gift that has gained you deeper views than most into existence, is actually your ball and chain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 24, 2024 19:29:04 GMT
Yes! That sense SDP has the he, as an existent individual, has the volition to place focus/attention "freely and willfully," while compelling as can be, has a misconception at it's crux.
Highest interest is always playing out and we don't choose our interests. (And even that assertion involves a concession to mind).
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 25, 2024 23:30:54 GMT
You sound very sure of that. By what means is it known with such certainty?
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 26, 2024 14:09:56 GMT
But what means do you "know" any of this? All of it involves assumption...imagination. There is no means by which this can be known with the Absolute certainty of direct/immediately known Truth.
You cannot step out of the dream-scape, while simultaneously identifying with the me character OF the dream-scape. Only a shift in locus of seeing will do.
In a sincere pursuit of Truth, There must be an interest in abandoning all knowledge that is not imminent/immediately evident....direct....here and NOW. That means, all surmising...all concluding....all imagining, even if it 'seems' to be based on a deep intuition, must be abandoned.
It does though seem via what you're saying there, that you'd be on board with the assertion that the fact of experiencing relative to other people in your experience, cannot be known for Absolute certain?..experience can only be known via direct, immediate arising of such. The baby and all other character's apparent experience, are facets of 'your' direct experience. (The awakened view is that direct or not, the 'you' that seems to be having a 'direct' experience, is actually part and parcel of the experience. Awareness as abiding ground, gives rise to all of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 26, 2024 20:47:06 GMT
The knowing/apprehension of "existence" itself, is beyond/prior to a knowing of "life energy."
Again, cannot over-stress the importance of clearly seeing the distinction between that which abides, exists independent of any and all content...any and all perceivables vs. that which is an expression within/to that.
"life energy" is experiential and arises within/to existence itself. Existence itself defies property/quality...it's a misconception to apply such to 'it.'
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 28, 2024 5:09:44 GMT
It is not a case of one or the other. Those assertions are not at war. The relative truth rides along just fine, couched within the realization of fundamental, Absolute perfection.
The perspective by which the fundamental freedom is seen/known/realized, is not one that hinges upon "getting fed." It's actually an absence of such.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Aug 30, 2024 17:56:36 GMT
If we're talking Truth/liberation, the distinction between what you are denoting as Mind/mind content vs. body, is of little importance. Both thoughts/ideation AND the experienced "body" are appearance only/perceivables. Transcendence means a pov that is "beyond/prior to," all minding, including the very "sense of" the body.
If we're simply talking about becoming more consciously aware of specifically, "mind content," then a focus specifically on the body is a detraction away from minding/mind content per se...but it's still a focus upon that which is temporal, ephemeral....an appearance only that is devoid of it's own inherent existence.
Being free means a primary locus of seeing that is beyond minding...beyond ideation/thought AND beyond the experiential body or anything else that might arise as experiential content.
Is there an interest at all to "pay" attention to that which abides and lies as ground to the appearing body? In a true shift to that ground, the one who previously seemed to be that which was "paying" attention, dissolves and there is simply "attention"....awareness awareing. That's the ground that's being sought by the seeker who sincerely is interested in the "loss" that equals transcendence.
|
|
