|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
|
|
ak33
Canada
229 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 26 2014 : 3:22:07 PM
|
| Nice video. I was reading R. Spira's "lessons" on his website, and was wondering if he employed any type of practice or technique to get to "awareness" (I think thats what he calls it). The main problem I have with advaita is I feel like I'm going in circles around the same topic, reading hundreds of articles and watching videos. It would help if there was a practice associated with his teachings. |
 |
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 27 2014 : 12:04:27 PM
|
Hi Ak33,
Thanks for your comments. Your question brings up the topic of http://www.aypsite.org/325.html Relational Self Inquiry. Spiritual practices create ripeness for inquiry, and avoid going round in circles. Rupert does offer a lot of guided meditations and explorations on his website - if i can find a good one I'll send it to you. When you say "get to awareness" I take it you mean, get to an experience of clearly experiencing that you are awareness? Nobody really has a completely clear answer of how that happens, IMO, even the best of Gurus. There's too many links in the chain to say Do X and you will get Y. In the hope that there's anything relevant there, I just recounted my personal experience below.
Secondly, I think one really needs the chance to have a discussion with a teacher, someone like Rupert, face to face and say: This is what I believe and feel I am (a separate person), you're saying I'm awareness, can we explore what I think and feel about my identity so I can voice all my doubts and objections to what you're saying, and you can help me see if my doubts and objections stand up to investigation?
Preceding the below: 7 years of twice daily meditation, and constantly snapping out of identification with beliefs and thought streams by 'coming to my senses' hundreds of times per day - which I was essentially forced to because the thought-based world I was lost in was so unpleasant that all I wanted was to die, more than anything else.
For me, I'd always been intensely certain about the belief in my identity. In fact, I had never really thought about or questioned my identity, it was just a vague sort of sense of being me, a person. It was a solid belief, since all my emotions and ways of acting and reacting revolved around, and sprung from the sense "I am a separate person". I mean, since I was zero years old, everyone had been referring to this body called "Josh", and telling me that I am this body, so I'd learned to have a pretty firm sense that, yes, I am this body called Josh. If the belief (which is largely stored in feelings/emotions in the body, combined with unexamined assumptions about experience) could be put into words it would've been:
"I am a human being, perceiving an external world. There is a dividing line between me and the world - my skin. Where my skin ends, the world begins. I am inside my skin, inside my body, looking out at the world. Thus I, the body, am separate from what I perceive (the world). A body with consciousness inside it which knows a world by an act of perceiving."
I got into spiritual practice because the only other option was killing myself and when I was 19 and loaded a shotgun and prepared to do this (because I genuinely did just want my inner hell to be over) I put the barrel in my mouth and began to squeeze on the trigger and I was struck by what seemed an incredible epiphany: A) What I was doing was incredibly selfish as my mum would be so devastated as to probably never recover and B) There was nothing too insanely terrible with my external circumstances - my hell was purely made out of my own thoughts and emotions, and perhaps I could learn to change those thoughts and emotions.
I was intent on finding some "state" or "experience" or whatever called "enlightenment" that I could "get" which would finally make me happy and end suffering. The only modalities that really worked were those which took me more deeply into feeling without condition my own emotions, unconditional surrender and opening to emotional energy, without believing the surrounding mental stories. (I.e. The Presence Process).
At some point after 7 years of practices, a stage had been reached where I had quite a bit of inner peace, balance, bliss (from AYP) and happiness but didn't really understand what the hell people where going on about when they talked about no-self, awareness etcetera. At some point I just got more interested in knowing what was absolutely true (i.e. didn't require me to have a single belief about anything, didn't require the slightest unquestioned assumption).
This can really only leave one with questions like: How do I know there is such a thing as time, when memories occurring Now are the only evidence of its passing? How do I know I'm not dreaming? How can I be completely certain that there is such a thing as an external world? What am I? Who or what is conscious of my experience?
For me, these became more urgent than regular life and every day desire fulfillment. I stopped showing up to work, regardless of consequence, and with the help of some vague idea of how to explore experience (Greg Goode, Rupert Spira, Nisargadatta, Peter Dziuban) began to question everything I'd believed about the green-highlighted identity idea above. Under intense scrutiny, the belief fell apart.
This investigation ultimately has to be spontaneous and free, conducted on one's own, and underpinned with an intense desire for truth (or for destroying untruth). No amount of reading or watching is likely to really yield anything, you just end up with learned knowledge, which is of no use - since the kind of understanding the investigation should really bring is a total un-learning and destruction of believing in thoughts and mental ideas.
For me the first step was exploring the question of "What do I believe I am, on an emotional, and mental level?" And beginning by writing an essay for myself of what I really think and feel and act like I am, and why I think that belief is true. Once you've clearly identified what you currently really feel and believe (not what you've learned to believe, or some teacher said is true), then you can intensely explore the veracity of your own belief.
The worst possible outcome of inquiry is that it leads to believing that something is true, or a bunch of ideas about what is true. True inquiry destroys beliefs, and just leaves you with What Is, unfiltered by thought and belief. Any attempt to express What Is in words is just that - an attempt, and as such, the words should never be mistaken for the reality. |
Edited by - mr_anderson on Jan 27 2014 2:00:06 PM |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
|
|
Omsat
Belgium
267 Posts |
Posted - Jan 28 2014 : 08:55:41 AM
|
Hi AumNaturel,
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrZg3RmOYSU&feature=c4-overview&list=UUxXWjjtATq3OM545gMh9PUg
I've never seen anyone explain the cause of conflict so clearly. Beautiful. 
Thanks for sharing.
This does explain the cause of conflict distinctively.
Apart from explaining conflicts, it is hard for me to see that the insight or even the experience of the insight will remove conflicts from one's life though.
For, even when awareness is expanded, the objects of body and mind are still present and may be threatened.
Then, one can choose not to enter into conflict if one is not attached to body and mind. But one could equally choose to defend the body and mind that is threatened. Which could be interpreted as conflict. So that conflict is still there even if one is not identified with it.
Take the case of some body threatening another body with a gun (or is the idea that there are two distinct bodies completely invalid?). Awareness of the thoughts of threat rather than identification with them gives awareness a choice for the body-mind not to respond in a threatened way. Yet, how is this protecting the by gun threatened body-mind? If the threat (gun and shooting ready finger's existence) is valid, conflict can only be avoided by passivity and sacrificing that body-mind.
Are there flaws in this logic?
|
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 28 2014 : 10:08:47 AM
|
Hi Kami,
Thanks for that! Nice video. I liked that a lot also. It definitely takes a while for that understanding to sink in!!  When I first had experiences of recognizing Awareness they were so mind-blowingly beautiful, then of course they'd come to an end, and it would be devastating. I'd tend to think something had been lost. But I was doing exactly what Rupert mentions, mistaking passing experiences for the peace and happiness of true nature, and so eventually the clinging/resisting to even this could be let go.
Hi Omsat,
quote:
Apart from explaining conflicts, it is hard for me to see that the insight or even the experience of the insight will remove conflicts from one's life though.
You refer to a physical conflict, like being threatened with a gun or a knife. In such an instance, who can say what the appropriate response would be. It might well be for the body to defend itself, or to run away. There's a lovely story about Ramana that might be appropriate:
In 1924 there was a robbery at the Ashram. One summer night Sri Ramana and four of his companions were sleeping in one of the thatched huts near the windows, when they heard thieves trying to climb in through the window. Kunju Swami was furious and wanted to confront the thieves, but Ramana dissuaded him saying, “Let these robbers play their role; we shall stick to ours. Let them do what they like; it is for us to bear and forebear. Let us not interfere with them.” He suggested to the thieves that he and his companions would leave the hut so that they could take whatever they wanted. But when they came out, the robbers beat them with sticks. They also beat Ramana on his thigh, who said, “If you are not satisfied yet, you may strike the other leg also.” And to Ramakrishna, who wanted to protect him, he said humorously, that he had only received his appropriate puja (puja in Tamil means worship but also beating).
However, I think for most of us, the far more noticeable type of conflict is not the physical live or die or get attacked type, it's conflict in our relations with other people. This is is really what Rupert was referring to - why do we feel conflict and get into conflicts with others? This conflict may be expressed (as disharmonious interactions and relating to others) or it may not be expressed but experienced internally as emotions (like going into a state of feeling angry with angry thoughts because someone rudely pushes you on the subway, but not expressing it, for example).
Of course the root of outer conflict is always the sense of internal conflict (emotions and thoughts). Trying having a heated verbal fight with someone who is imperturbably calm, peaceful, open, kind and happy - and doesn't feel in any way separate from you. It's not possible, if they are truly rooted in calm, and holding themselves as separate from you, your anger would soon expose itself as futile and dissolve.
What Rupert is really talking about is the internal conflict, which is reacting negatively towards things/others based on the belief that they are external and separate. Over time one experiences less and less conflict with others, and more and more love (which is the absence of feeling separate). It eventually becomes extremely difficult to feel conflict with anything in your live, whether its a salesman calling your home telephone during dinner, a car that cuts you up on the road, a rude and pushy person in the street, or someone close to you (brother/sister/father/partner/friend) whose actions you once found hurtful/annoying/rude/etc but you now find peace is unchanged even when they repeat behaviors that once would've led you into an emotional reaction.
The greater the certainty that you are Pure Spirit/Pure Awareness/True Nature, the more the body loses its ability to feel wronged or hurt or threatened, not just on a physical level, but in all relations with other beings. |
Edited by - mr_anderson on Jan 28 2014 10:18:45 AM |
|
|
|
Omsat
Belgium
267 Posts |
Posted - Jan 28 2014 : 7:58:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
Hi Omsat,
The greater the certainty that you are Pure Spirit/Pure Awareness/True Nature, the more the body loses its ability to feel wronged or hurt or threatened, not just on a physical level, but in all relations with other beings.
Hi mr_anderson,
What you say resonates here.
I have thought and experienced to some level the same earlier.
Yet, some life events brought some additional perspectives.
I've pondered whether the perceived harmony in relationships is owing to the process of inner expansion you describe or the lack of physical expansion in some cases..
It seemed that anyone expanding on the material plane experiences more outer conflict and in periods of withdrawal from outwardly manifestating, when one is already well established on the material plane and focuses on giving and looking inward, harmony follows easily.
Soon can come a point where all one had materially is given (which in many spiritual circles is interpreted as lovely evidence of detachment). The moment expansion on the material plane is sought, then conflicts/challenges arise again.
The story that you describe is showing a beautiful peace of mind indeed. It seems also to me to display a potential lack of care for the body somehow. Which could be seen as a physical giving (giving pain/injury). Where is the love for the body here? If one loves the body's health more than the injuries allowed to incur from letting the offender his will, one will protect his body. Outward conflict is present, even if one is pretty much at peace with it when dwelling on thoughts of expanded awareness.
You distinguished between the physical and emotional. It seems more or less the same here? The giving is emotional rather than physical then.
Maybe from the perspective of Ramana, the body is so unimportant that beating doesn't mean anything. And perhaps by allowing the beating a wonderful thing is taught. Still, I would not be less loving of a story narratating Krishna's arguing to fully engage in fight rather than fully engage in being beaten up.  In the end, it's the same; one of the body's may get injured, unless one is much more skilled at fight than the other. Then, the more skilled may defend without causing injury to the other. The same holds true on the emotional level. One whom is particularly skilled at emotional dance play may change the outcome of the emotional play more skillfully.
I don't feel too satisfied with the explanations/doubts I write in this post though..
I know there's a more heartwarming feel of living/expanding.
Feedback on these thoughts welcome..
Warm wishes 
PS: For those familiar with Hindu deities, I could translate the above as follows:
Vishnu, the preservation energy, brings harmony and peace.
Shiva, the energy of transformation (and destruction) is equally essential in life.
Evolution requires transformation (destruction) which has been interpreted as conflict in my post above.
Then, harmony (lack of conflict) implies somewhat motionless life.
Therefore, as long as there is life, conflict will arise.
|
Edited by - Omsat on Jan 29 2014 03:37:04 AM |
|
|
|
ak33
Canada
229 Posts |
Posted - Jan 29 2014 : 5:03:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
Hi Ak33,
Thanks for your comments. Your question brings up the topic of http://www.aypsite.org/325.html Relational Self Inquiry. Spiritual practices create ripeness for inquiry, and avoid going round in circles. Rupert does offer a lot of guided meditations and explorations on his website - if i can find a good one I'll send it to you. When you say "get to awareness" I take it you mean, get to an experience of clearly experiencing that you are awareness? Nobody really has a completely clear answer of how that happens, IMO, even the best of Gurus. There's too many links in the chain to say Do X and you will get Y. In the hope that there's anything relevant there, I just recounted my personal experience below.
Secondly, I think one really needs the chance to have a discussion with a teacher, someone like Rupert, face to face and say: This is what I believe and feel I am (a separate person), you're saying I'm awareness, can we explore what I think and feel about my identity so I can voice all my doubts and objections to what you're saying, and you can help me see if my doubts and objections stand up to investigation?
Preceding the below: 7 years of twice daily meditation, and constantly snapping out of identification with beliefs and thought streams by 'coming to my senses' hundreds of times per day - which I was essentially forced to because the thought-based world I was lost in was so unpleasant that all I wanted was to die, more than anything else.
For me, I'd always been intensely certain about the belief in my identity. In fact, I had never really thought about or questioned my identity, it was just a vague sort of sense of being me, a person. It was a solid belief, since all my emotions and ways of acting and reacting revolved around, and sprung from the sense "I am a separate person". I mean, since I was zero years old, everyone had been referring to this body called "Josh", and telling me that I am this body, so I'd learned to have a pretty firm sense that, yes, I am this body called Josh. If the belief (which is largely stored in feelings/emotions in the body, combined with unexamined assumptions about experience) could be put into words it would've been:
"I am a human being, perceiving an external world. There is a dividing line between me and the world - my skin. Where my skin ends, the world begins. I am inside my skin, inside my body, looking out at the world. Thus I, the body, am separate from what I perceive (the world). A body with consciousness inside it which knows a world by an act of perceiving."
I got into spiritual practice because the only other option was killing myself and when I was 19 and loaded a shotgun and prepared to do this (because I genuinely did just want my inner hell to be over) I put the barrel in my mouth and began to squeeze on the trigger and I was struck by what seemed an incredible epiphany: A) What I was doing was incredibly selfish as my mum would be so devastated as to probably never recover and B) There was nothing too insanely terrible with my external circumstances - my hell was purely made out of my own thoughts and emotions, and perhaps I could learn to change those thoughts and emotions.
I was intent on finding some "state" or "experience" or whatever called "enlightenment" that I could "get" which would finally make me happy and end suffering. The only modalities that really worked were those which took me more deeply into feeling without condition my own emotions, unconditional surrender and opening to emotional energy, without believing the surrounding mental stories. (I.e. The Presence Process).
At some point after 7 years of practices, a stage had been reached where I had quite a bit of inner peace, balance, bliss (from AYP) and happiness but didn't really understand what the hell people where going on about when they talked about no-self, awareness etcetera. At some point I just got more interested in knowing what was absolutely true (i.e. didn't require me to have a single belief about anything, didn't require the slightest unquestioned assumption).
This can really only leave one with questions like: How do I know there is such a thing as time, when memories occurring Now are the only evidence of its passing? How do I know I'm not dreaming? How can I be completely certain that there is such a thing as an external world? What am I? Who or what is conscious of my experience?
For me, these became more urgent than regular life and every day desire fulfillment. I stopped showing up to work, regardless of consequence, and with the help of some vague idea of how to explore experience (Greg Goode, Rupert Spira, Nisargadatta, Peter Dziuban) began to question everything I'd believed about the green-highlighted identity idea above. Under intense scrutiny, the belief fell apart.
This investigation ultimately has to be spontaneous and free, conducted on one's own, and underpinned with an intense desire for truth (or for destroying untruth). No amount of reading or watching is likely to really yield anything, you just end up with learned knowledge, which is of no use - since the kind of understanding the investigation should really bring is a total un-learning and destruction of believing in thoughts and mental ideas.
For me the first step was exploring the question of "What do I believe I am, on an emotional, and mental level?" And beginning by writing an essay for myself of what I really think and feel and act like I am, and why I think that belief is true. Once you've clearly identified what you currently really feel and believe (not what you've learned to believe, or some teacher said is true), then you can intensely explore the veracity of your own belief.
The worst possible outcome of inquiry is that it leads to believing that something is true, or a bunch of ideas about what is true. True inquiry destroys beliefs, and just leaves you with What Is, unfiltered by thought and belief. Any attempt to express What Is in words is just that - an attempt, and as such, the words should never be mistaken for the reality.
If I understood correctly, you're saying that no amount of reading and watching etc. is going to do anything for me. Which makes sense to me on some level, because its only intellectual no matter what you do. But when you talked about writing an essay of your beliefs and scrutinizing those beliefs for truth, isn't that also on an intellectual level? My question is, does advaita serve any other purpose besides expanding your perspective or intensifying your bhakti? Or can actually be applied in order to reach "truth". I've only ever used practices for this goal, so please forgive me if my approach is narrow-minded. |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Jan 29 2014 : 7:50:42 PM
|
Dear Omsat,
Thank you for the thoughtful post. 
Perhaps it is a matter of perspective, but conflict, to me, means inner conflict. It is always the inner state of mind that is reflected outside, is that not so?
In your example of being threatened by a gun, what drives the conflict is the perp's inner state. How the "victim" responds will reflect his/her inner conflict driven by fear, or inner peace driven by knowledge that "I am not this body". Nowhere does it say that one must meekly give in because "I am not this body." In fact, the whole message of the Gita is to fight, not because you are driven by conflict/fear/hatred, but because that is the thing to do in that circumstance. There is no way to theorize what the right thing to do is in a given circumstance - there are infinite possibilities. When there is no inner conflict, the right thing to do simply arises. Thus, the process of giving up identification as the body-mind does something else simultaneously - instills explicit trust in the Universe, in what will arise in the here and now.
Does that make sense?
Much love, and thank you for your loving presence here. |
|
|
|
Omsat
Belgium
267 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 08:11:31 AM
|
Dear kami,
Thank you for the kind words
Yes: It seems most useful, practical and wise to interpret conflict as inner conflict. And that can be very challenging at times
quote:
Originally posted by kami
There is no way to theorize what the right thing to do is in a given circumstance - there are infinite possibilities. When there is no inner conflict, the right thing to do simply arises. Thus, the process of giving up identification as the body-mind does something else simultaneously - instills explicit trust in the Universe, in what will arise in the here and now.
Very wise and beautifully said
I also feel it that way.
I think I was reacting precisely following my perception that the discussion on conflict in the video implies that certain possibilities are right and others wrong
(I perceived the talk on peaceful ("non-conflict") (inner) being as traditional interpretations of non-violent (outward) behaviour which I have found not always applicable in practical life situations.).
Thank you very much for this en-light-ening and warm reply.
quote:
Originally posted by kami
Dear Omsat,
Thank you for the thoughtful post.
Perhaps it is a matter of perspective, but conflict, to me, means inner conflict. It is always the inner state of mind that is reflected outside, is that not so?
In your example of being threatened by a gun, what drives the conflict is the perp's inner state. How the "victim" responds will reflect his/her inner conflict driven by fear, or inner peace driven by knowledge that "I am not this body". Nowhere does it say that one must meekly give in because "I am not this body." In fact, the whole message of the Gita is to fight, not because you are driven by conflict/fear/hatred, but because that is the thing to do in that circumstance. There is no way to theorize what the right thing to do is in a given circumstance - there are infinite possibilities. When there is no inner conflict, the right thing to do simply arises. Thus, the process of giving up identification as the body-mind does something else simultaneously - instills explicit trust in the Universe, in what will arise in the here and now.
Does that make sense?
Much love, and thank you for your loving presence here.
|
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 5:26:12 PM
|
Hey Omsat - I couldn't possibly improve on what Kami said or how she said it. Nothing to add, except thanks for your comments and presence here.
Hey Ak33 - Thanks for your question, it gets to the heart of the matter. I had to take some time to think about how to answer in a way that is clear. I'm afraid I'm really bad at short, concise answers, it's not my skill. So this is quite long.
quote:
My question is, does advaita serve any other purpose besides expanding your perspective or intensifying your bhakti?
Absolutely. There are some would say that Truth alone, destruction of identification with notions, is the root to realization. I disagree, because there's an energetic and stillness component which is served by meditation.
"Enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It's seeing through the facade of pretence. It's the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true." - Adyashanti
I can't say I totally agree with Adyashanti's quote here, whilst enlightenment (let's just call it 'spiritual awakening or progress', enlightenment is too big deal of a word) maybe isn't about 'being happier' in a "I just got a new BMW and I'm so happy" kind of way, it does end personal suffering (and I know Adya does explicitly agree that it ends suffering) and it massively increases love and joy. I mean if being enlightened made you super depressed and suicidal, who would want it? 
Any spiritual pursuit, (whether it incorporates the intellect or not), can go in one of two directions:
- Learning or unlearning
- Filling the mind up with beliefs, thoughts and ideas or realizing the emptiness of beliefs, thoughts and ideas.
- Increased identification with thought, or freedom from identification with thought.
- Lead us to believing we know, or leading us out into unknowing
The latter direction carries us toward enlightenment, freedom from suffering, freedom from fear and anxiety, and freedom from all disharmony in our relationship with others and with life itself. The former direction generally does not.
What determines the direction the pursuit follows? The inner condition of the practitioner (inner stillness and sensitivity to felt resonances), and the approach of the practitioner.
In schools, and other educational establishments, the mind is taught an extroverted manner of acquiring knowledge, via learning and gathering information from external sources. If I want to find out about the theory of relativity, I simply read about it, and absorb the knowledge. I learn. Unfortunately, the ability to learn doesn't yield any spiritual freedom. One can learn a great deal about Advaita and not be even slightly freer.
Which brings me to your next question:
quote:
Or can it actually be applied in order to reach "truth". I've only ever used practices for this goal, so please forgive me if my approach is narrow-minded.
Yes, the question is how to apply it. Firstly, the learned habit of having an extroverted mind, which seeks knowledge and understanding from external sources and authorities, doesn't serve the pursuit of spiritual realization. Secondly, minds are taught in school that thoughts can be True or Untrue. 2+2 definitely equals 4. So when a mind looks for an answer to a spiritual question, it can end up looking for a True Thought or a True Belief. There's no such thing!
The path of inquiry takes one into area where thoughts are directly realized as empty, and thus we become free of them. Eventually they only arise to serve practical purposes, like planning a journey, or writing an answer on the internet, but they are never believed anymore (our own, or anyone elses!). They're transparent and empty like clouds. Thus they can't make us suffer, they can't give us reasons to feel unhappy, or hurt, or fearful, or unkind, or angry.
So blah blah blah, all of this is only so many words. For the more practical stuff, maybe it will help for me to just write some examples of turning Advaita into a practical spiritual practice (rather than an intellectual exercise).
Who or What is Aware? - Practical Example One
I've spent the past 2 years gently bringing my attention back to this question, every single day, many times a day. Perhaps hundreds of thousands of times I've come back to looking at this question, in a still, meditative way. I could put the answer I've received into words here, but the intellectual meaning would be besides the point, and nothing like the on-going living revelation of the answer.
Here's how I structured the inquiry, in a practical sense.
Experience consists of:
-Sense Perceptions:
Bodily Sensations
Visual Images
Sounds
Smells
Thoughts
Emotions
Firstly check that you agree. See if you ever experience anything that isn't a sense perception, thought or emotion. I began like this. I probably spent a few hours trying to find or imagine some category of experience that wasn't a sense perception, a thought or an emotion. Even this was a minor revelation. We're inclined to look at a tree and say "That's a tree", assuming that it has an independent, objective existence. But you never experience an external objective tree, you experience a sense perception, a visual image (apparently created by light meeting the eye and generating impulses in your brain), which thought then calls "a tree". Never experience such a thing, you only ever experience the contents of your own nervous system. Sense perceptions feel very real, and external, but can you somehow get outside of your nervous system, and find the external objects which your sense perceptions apparently refer to? No.
Again, I've contemplated this every day for the past two years. Looking again and again at "external objects" (there's no such thing in experience, we only experience internal sense perceptions - internal to the nervous system). Spending hours staring at a cup, or a penny or a plant - and noticing both the illusion of externality and objectivity, and its unreality in experience. These are meditations in stillness, really looking with unstrained concentration, long and hard at how experience actually IS versus how experience SEEMS. I'm only really just beginning to feel the revelation that there's no externality.
The sense of people, objects, places being "external, out there" has started to fall away almost entirely. When this happens, it's a feeling of great, quiet love.
However prior to this, my main focus was on seeing "What is Aware of experience?"
Again I'd spend hours in meditative contemplation, looking at bodily sensations for example. Is a bodily sensation aware? Or is there awareness OF the bodily sensation? Is visual image aware? Or is there awareness OF the visual image? I'd look in the mirror for this one, for hours - asking: Is this visual image of a person Aware? Is it possible for a visual image to be Aware or Conscious? Is a sound aware or is there awareness OF a sound?
I'm rushing out all these questions here, but for each sensory faculty, I've spent thousands of hours exploring it.
Finally a thought, is a thought aware? Or is their awareness of thought? Is an emotion aware or is there awareness of an emotion?
The question comes down to: Is anything You (whatever it is you refers to, not necessarily a body-mind) are AWARE OF, itself AWARE?
Can you ever find a sense perception, a thought, or an emotion which is conscious of YOU? Or are YOU (whatever that refers to) the one that is conscious of thoughts, emotions and sense perceptions?
These are questions that are very practical. You won't find an answer that comes as a thought which you can believe is true, the answer will come as a revelation not as a belief. You can explore your experience with great curiosity, in a very meditative way, repeating the same question, and looking to see, again and again and again.
This will take you out of your intellect, into the present, into unlearning, and into direct revelation of truth.
Does this resonate at all? There are a lot of other questions that we explore in this way - we don't look to thoughts for the answer, we look at our direct experience, without preconceived notions about that experience.
For books that provide many examples of this practical exploration, I recommend Greg Goode's The Direct Path and Peter Dziuban's Simply Notice. They can help get you started, but it's also probably more fun (and more relevant to you) to invent your own ways of exploring experience. Does help to have their stuff to get you started. Looking with the eyes of a newborn child and separating what experience indicates from what your notions tell you experience indicates. |
Edited by - mr_anderson on Jan 30 2014 5:33:38 PM |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 7:46:26 PM
|
Watching that video was much like watching a man paint a fragile china doll with a brush made of the finest hairs. His words are tender and wispy strokes that are touching a creation that has been crafted with great care. But, overall, there is an overwhelming sense of fragility in the product. It's like you must tip-toe around it, or else it might shatter into a million pieces. Very thin, vaporous, and delicate. And protected. Protected by a glass case of nothingness.
It's a great example of the many angles one can look at the whole awareness thing from. Some prefer the museum; others prefer the jungle. Some pitter-patter with silent steps; others roar and pounce in a rampage.
It's not my cup of tea, but I appreciate you sharing it, because it gives me yet another view, another glimpse at somebody's experience. The diversity of all this circus makes it all the more realer to me. I find the One through diversity--I realize, more and more. "Diversity is the spice of life."  |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 8:32:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
"Enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It's seeing through the facade of pretence. It's the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true." - Adyashanti
I can't say I totally agree with Adyashanti's quote here, whilst enlightenment (let's just call it 'spiritual awakening or progress', enlightenment is too big deal of a word) maybe isn't about 'being happier' in a "I just got a new BMW and I'm so happy" kind of way, it does end personal suffering (and I know Adya does explicitly agree that it ends suffering) and it massively increases love and joy. I mean if being enlightened made you super depressed and suicidal, who would want it?
I'm pretty sure Adya's statement quoted above was referring solely to the process of letting go into inherent wholeness.
Wholeness, or oneness, or the natural state, or whatever we want to call it, is what's already here, when not occluded by fragmented perspective.
And so, the process is simply learning not to reference fragmented perspective -- which is what Adya meant by "destructive" -- he was referring to the dissolution of the fragmented perspective with which suffering is projected and experienced.
Wholeness is what we are, inherently --- the body-mind is just taught, and references, conceptual fragmentation .... hence all the trouble.
In any moment fragmented perspective is absent, wholeness (or oneness, or any other name we might care to give it) is present.
|
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 8:36:31 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman - exactly. The fragmented perspective is for beliefs, thoughts and feelings, not our ever present Self, Awareness.
Bodhi - glad you enjoyed it, and I appreciate you sharing your perspective. Whilst I see (my thoughts see) from a slightly different perspective, I appreciate yours also, just like you say, diversity is the spice of life :) Can't disagree with that. |
|
|
|
Omsat
Belgium
267 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 9:14:23 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
Hey Omsat - I couldn't possibly improve on what Kami said or how she said it. Nothing to add, except thanks for your comments and presence here.
Thank you..
Love reading your posts
Affinity
|
|
|
|
Omsat
Belgium
267 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 9:35:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
Watching that video was much like watching a man paint a fragile china doll with a brush made of the finest hairs. His words are tender and wispy strokes that are touching a creation that has been crafted with great care. But, overall, there is an overwhelming sense of fragility in the product. It's like you must tip-toe around it, or else it might shatter into a million pieces. Very thin, vaporous, and delicate. And protected. Protected by a glass case of nothingness.
Like a flower, a butterfly..?
Ethereal..
Flowers are said to be the enlightened beings of the plant kingdom..
Observing (being in the presence of) flowers and people/animals that move about delicately in their behaviours, speech, actions brings quietness, peace, beauty and joy. Thank God for their presence.
Flowers on
Strong huge old trees..
and
Solid mountains..
Withstanding hurricanes..
Thank God for their presence..
Bodhitree
|
Edited by - Omsat on Jan 30 2014 9:44:48 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 9:54:45 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
Hi Kirtanman - exactly. The fragmented perspective is for beliefs, thoughts and feelings, not our ever present Self, Awareness.
Thanks, Mr. Anderson.
Yes.
In fragmented perspective, awareness (and therefore wholeness) seems to be missing, and reaction reigns.
In wholeness, nothing is missing.
|
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 9:55:30 PM
|
Hi Josh and K'man,
Heyyyy K'man!!! What is the "fragmented perspective" that you are referring to? Do you mean seeing that all "things" arise and are not owned by "me"?
A not-so-new revelation here is that the fundamental problem is addiction - addiction to the notion that a bunch of sensations is "me". When investigated, this "me" is not to be found any 'where'. So it is an undoing, a destructive process, as Adya says. It isn't all joy and love, just a quiet dissolving of untruths upon which so much is built, so much placed at stake. Sure, it is freeing and joyful and generates an open acceptance, because wide-open acceptance is actually who we are. That could be called love, I suppose.
Thus, going backwards from a thought/emotion/memory/body sensation - each is inherently empty, given the coloring by this "me". Because of the coloring given by "me", it becomes "mine", another "thing " added to the conglomeration of stuff I take to be "me". Because of the coloring I give it, it is brought up again and again as "me vs. not me" and creates the conflict described by Spira. Yet, "me" remains un-findable. How mental (as Ron in Harry Potter might say ) is this? How incredibly insane!!
Do share your thoughts, please?
|
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 10:15:48 PM
|
I will comment in more detail in the morning, but tbh Kami you express my take on this matter again. I don't really differ or have anything new to add.
It's not just an addiction to sensations as 'me', it's an addiction to what I call an "emotionally charged conceptual thought structure" which contains an imaginary reference to an "objectively existing me". The objectively existing me can't be found, but the emotional charge to the conceptual referent of me, appears to give the "me" its reality or solidity.
A practical example is, if you watch someone in a movie get called "a stupid idiot", you don't feel hurt, upset or annoyed. But if your friend calls "you" a stupid idiot, you may well feel hurt, upset and annoyed. What's the difference? Merely an emotionally charged thought structure that arises in response to the words "you are an idiot" (when directed at 'your body-mind' by your friend) that contains a referent to a "me" that is being insulted or harmed by these words!!
On realizing the emptiness of this emotionally charged conceptual thought structure, what is left of the me? Nothing but the thought and emotion itself!
WRT to a Fragmented Perspective, i equate this with an emotionally charged conceptual thought structure. It's like an overlay on top of the pure awareness, which claims the existence of a separate self, apparently fragmenting awareness into self and other, when in fact... this is just an empty conception.
Does this make sense?
Like you say Kami this undoing is not all love and joy (it does result in that) but often it's hard, frightening and involves not engaging in one's instincts! |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Jan 30 2014 : 11:05:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr_anderson
It's not just an addiction to sensations as 'me', it's an addiction to what I call an "emotionally charged conceptual thought structure" which contains an imaginary reference to an "objectively existing me". The objectively existing me can't be found, but the emotional charge to the conceptual referent of me, appears to give the "me" its reality or solidity.
Emotionally charged conceptual thought structure. Love it! Yes, that is exactly it. Very much like the movie example, here's another observation. In a given day, we are bombarded by zillions of bits of information. Yet, most of flies by, and only some retained.. Whatever does not pertain to "me" doesn't even register. But anything that I have invested emotionally in grabs my attention and is "internalized", "added" to the conceptual thought structure. More emotional charge. Vicious cycle.
A more personal example is how I interpret someone's words. The same words are interpreted as an insult by one, wise as another, idiotic by yet another. Emotional coloring resulting in each. Yet, neither the words themselves, the emotional coloring nor thought form is "personal". Each, by itself, is empty of "me-ness". Put together, another story (literally and figuratively).
Fragmented, because it is thought to be "cut up" as mine, his, hers (due to above)..
Thank you. |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 11:09:31 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Omsat
Like a flower, a butterfly..?
Ethereal..
Flowers are said to be the enlightened beings of the plant kingdom..
Observing (being in the presence of) flowers and people/animals that move about delicately in their behaviours, speech, actions brings quietness, peace, beauty and joy. Thank God for their presence.
Flowers on
Strong huge old trees..
and
Solid mountains..
Withstanding hurricanes..
Thank God for their presence..
Bodhitree
Thank you for continuing the never-ending poem of self-exploration in which we are collectively engaged.
P.S. To paraphrase the venerable and much-loved Vietnamese monk Thich Nhat Hanh: It's more dangerous to become attached to the notion of no-self than the notion of self.
Also, if you want to watch a hilarious video, check this out! (forwarded to me by Chas ):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KXidr0z1RY
Happy trails. |
|
|
|
ak33
Canada
229 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 11:18:19 AM
|
Thank you Josh and kami, it is a pleasure reading your posts. I remember thinking to myself last week that Josh's posts are very long and should be more concise, I guess that got transmitted to you somehow . Nonetheless, your posts have a lot of richness. I have purchased "The Direct Path", and am really excited for the experiments and such.
Bodhi - Haha thats just a great video. I discovered it last year. When I first began on the path I remember doing this (although not so extreme) |
|
|
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 11:41:11 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
Also, if you want to watch a hilarious video, check this out! (forwarded to me by Chas ):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KXidr0z1RY
Happy trails.
Just watched it... That video is awesome (and hilarious)!
Enjoy the moment. |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 12:10:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by ak33
Thank you Josh and kami, it is a pleasure reading your posts. I remember thinking to myself last week that Josh's posts are very long and should be more concise, I guess that got transmitted to you somehow . Nonetheless, your posts have a lot of richness. I have purchased "The Direct Path", and am really excited for the experiments and such.
|
|
|
|
mr_anderson
USA
734 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 1:06:43 PM
|
Thanks AK33! I'm going to work at being more concise! Your feedback is noted
Please let me know how you get on with The Direct Path. There's a facebook group for the book, and it can be very useful to post anywhere you are feeling 'stuck' with the experiments. Often Greg or others may help out. I corresponded with Greg for a quite a while and he really helped me to see clearly. He's a great guy, I was amazed that he kindly took the time to respond to my constant bothering.
Check out a Rupert Spira retreat if you get the chance. The main practice he teaches is "non-dual yoga", which is a deep meditative exploration of the body, sensations and emotions as arisings in awareness.
Best wishes to you. |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Jan 31 2014 : 1:12:08 PM
|
Josh and ak33, check this out: exactly what I was trying to describe about emotional coloring arising from stories of "me". Gosh, what synchronicity that this shows up on my FB wall while the exact thing is being experienced!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCtCMuoVEhI&sns=em
Loving Rupert Spira!!
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
The Cause of Conflicts in Relationships - R.Spira
