Todd

Thats a really good question. I suggest you find the answer in your own experience. The question begins with the conditional statement, "If there is one." Why consider the rest of the question, if we haven't established the existence of the prior condition first? Is there one? Is there any level at which you feel one? I am asking about your immediate experience of being, not what you have read, or you have decided to be true, or have experienced in the past. Do you find one anywhere? What is it like?

Perhaps there are two types of war. In one, two fight. In the other, only one is fighting. Which will last longer? If you've answered that question, then how long do you want to be at war? Seriously though, I thought the Jung quotes were the best things in the article.

What Zenbrook and Aiwei said (though I don't understand a lot of what Aiwei says without some mental gymnastics, which isn't a good sign somewhere-- mostly likely within me, since today I've felt pretty crappy and separate). But do you really want to know? Sometimes its convenient to bake up a question that we know cannot be answered to our satisfaction by another. It does expose hesitancy toward truth, though, if we want to look at that. It can also be confirmation that we don't need to look outside for truth (still hoping that maybe it can be given). You already know where aims lead us. Is there another question?

Even better than breaking down is realizing that this is our foot and taking it off the brake. But who wants to do that?

Sure, I'll tell you the big parts of the story, but its not true. Its just a story I'm telling you for the fun of it. Though who knows? Maybe something will resonate. The breaking down actually started in an obvious way when I was 14. I was going to be the greatest writer that ever lived. In pursuit of that I was constantly seeking fresh ways of describing things, attempting to capture the essence of things in few words. Then one day, I was looking at a tree, its branches and leaves moving with the wind, on a sunny day. I wanted to describe it, but then it hit me, that to really describe even just the appearance of this tree, as it was for even just one moment, would take a really long time. Then there was the grass beneath the tree. Then there were other trees in the distance. Then there were houses and sky and clouds and asphalt and insects and street lamps. And this is just one moment, perceived by me, from one point of view. There were six billion other people in the world when this was going on, people who all had different experiences and cultural backgrounds that they were bringing to their own particular point of view. And that was just people. And that was just this world. Basically my mind exploded. I shut up and was in awe. I remember months later noticing that the part of me that I used to identify with was still going on, that there still were movements other than awe happening within me. The feeling was like a gentle breeze lightly caressing my skin. Oh there is sadness. Oh there is happiness. Footnotes to awe. That was kind've powerful, an accidental breakdown of my mind. I never even considered it to be a spiritual event. As powerful as it was, there remained within me the tendency to define and to control. This tendency has turned out to be much more powerful than I ever could have imagined. First there was philosophy, until that was seen as a barrier to what is. Then there were girls, who tended to tear my heart out, or else who I hurt terribly. Then there was pool, where I could watch myself grab on and let go, and I grabbed onto it until my back gave out. There were hundreds and thousands of smaller hopes and dreams. Basically life is set up to disappoint the desire to control, especially when we've lived it long enough. Somewhere in there part of me stopped trying. A lot of me was never really trying that hard, but it started to become more conscious. Standing. Sitting. Walking. Laying down. To no purpose but being. (And to repair my back, though that became much smaller than just watching what is, and never really worked out as long as it remained a desire). The breaking down continues, though now at least I can see what is happening. Now I feel when I am grabbing. I have seen through many of the ways that I grab and push away, though much remains. Also I have growing confidence in truth. I basically wrote about that experience in my first of post on this thread. Does any of this coincide with your experience? It doesn't make sense to talk about it if not. Basically though, I'd say that breaking down is just about the best thing that we can do, just as long as we go all the way. There is more to break down than we ever imagined, so if we ever intend to do this, we might as well get started (or come back from break if thats what we are on). Its fine if that isn't what seems to be happening too.

Ryan, Do you know who wrote it? When? And were the illustrations originally included? The alchemy is a side effect of what I described. To engage in alchemy while maintaining the sense of a self who is doing the alchemy is a lot like driving with one's foot on the brake. It might be useful if we have forgotten that it is our foot pressing on the brake pedal and we really want to get somewhere despite its presence, but it adds a whole lot of friction and is potentially dangerous. Things get a bit more complicated since sometimes we ease up the pressure we're putting on the brake pedal without really knowing what we are doing. Sometimes we really, really want to get somewhere and our unconscious says, "Allright, he really wants to get there and he's probably going to destroy our car if we don't let off the brakes," and then a letting go happens and we get somewhere way faster than we thought possible. The thing is that it was our unconscious that eased up, and as soon we stop to enjoy the view at our destination, the foot goes right back to firmly pressing on the brake. This can be a problem when we decide to go someplace again. Who knows though. Maybe by going through this enough times, a realization that we've got our foot on the brake happens. Or maybe we just realize that there's smoke coming out the hood every time we drive (and the car is us, so maybe we should be a bit worried about that). There are also people who develop a relationship with their unconscious, which is essentially what I did in my life as a pool player. I could get it to ease off the brakes more often than not, at least enough to get some of the things I wanted. There were all sort of neat mystical experiences-- being one with the game, which was everything, or swimming in chaos gleefully, or loving what is no matter what... Problem was, eventually I broke down. Maybe that wasn't a problem. Well anyway, as you say: Be well. Todd

You are right. It wasn't nice of me to ask a question that cannot be answered and then to request that you respond in a fashion different from how you normally would. I'm not sorry though. In regard to what was said in response-- first off, there is no end result. Any mention of seeing or not seeing is a reference to the path onto which you say concentration leads us. There is no conclusion in true seeing, or true not seeing. True anything has nothing to do with what the mind first thinks upon hearing of it, even if those thoughts are very spiritual and subtle. Allright, I'll stop there with regard to the end result, because it doesn't get any better trying to explain it, and either you see it or you don't. With regard to the dual perception perceivable in my statements, I could speak for a long time about the dual nature inherent in everything that you, I, or anyone has said. It is the nature of of words, thought, emotions... They destroy themselves. Pointers to this dual quality and motivation are like lassoes around the feet of people who are running everywhere because they have forgotten that there is such a thing as stopping. The lasso is pretty useless after a person realizes that there is such a thing as stopping, takes the lasso off and starts walking around, and even running if they want. It is also more comfortable just lying or sitting here if we don't have that thing around our feet. To keep the lasso around one's feet amounts to a fear of life, and of folly. Are you participating in this wholeheartedly, or are you assuming a role? Roles and wholeheartedness are not contradictory, but is there assuming? I already know that everything I say is imcomplete and wrong from various perspectives; thankyou for inspiring it, as it is a part of my unfolding.

The Terra Plana Vivo-Barefoot line is another option. I've been wearing them for about a year and I'm just about getting used to them. My feet are healthier than when I started wearing them. They have very thin soles, though, so they definitely take some getting used to. Its a lot like walking barefoot, though you don't have to worry about scrapes or punctures.

This one is easy. There is something rather than nothing. This is what your explanation of privatives points to. Nothingness is just a concept that does not have existence within reality. Even the experience of nothingness has the experience of nothingness. However, everything that we think about this something is made up of self-destroying (in other words, symetrical) polarities. Another way of saying this is that all thought is based upon false duality. This includes the thought of privatives, which is based upon the polarity of existing versus non-existing. Is enlightenment a privative? It depends on what you think enlightenment is. If enlightenment is equated with nothingness, or with something outside of what actually currently is, then yes, it is a privative. It is based upon a thought that something, enlightenment, which actually doesn't exist, exists. Enlightenment as question is much more interesting. It is based upon the destruction of investment in polarities, and not much can be said about that, unless one really wants to.

I got the sense that you were looking for fundamental questions and that is why I replied. When I spoke of wasting time it was just to point to something that wasn't being considered. Also, how many times have you come out of the trance of some thought stream based on an assumption you hadn't thought to question until just one moment when you did and the whole thing seemed so silly and freedom so present? What I am really trying to point to has nothing to do with this particular situation. If I told you what I think the assumption is, that might or might not be interesting to you, and if we were lucky enough, there might even be a bit of that feeling of freedom leaking in. However, what might be even more interesting to you, is if you could tell when an assumption is being made so that you can look for it yourself, and verify it in your own experience as you say. Actually, you probably already know how to do that. So I'll just say some things. What if time, as you are thinking of it, didn't exist? What if there was no past in which you had an experience of the future? If this was the case would there still be predetermination? Would we still need to search for the prime mover of what amounts to a static universe (with no possibility of deviation from a set course once the first movement has occurred)? You might ask, "Well what other options are there?" Just imagine that everything you remember about the past is being created by you in this very moment, which would include memories of knowing what would happen in this moment. However, since it is all being created by you in this very moment, who is to say that it might not be different in the next moment. Perhaps in that moment you will remember hundred of past lives, and milennia in the future with startling clarity. Perhaps in the next moment none of that will be present and all you will have is what? I am not saying that this is true. But do you know it is not? Are these thoughts worth investigating for you?

As long as we are dealing with ideas, maybe I can add some to the mix, and things may or may not open a bit. All of these questions are based upon an assumption, and any thought that goes into answering these questions, without first ascertaining whether that assumption is true, might be a really big waste of time. It might not be as well, but shouldn't we find out first? The more fundamental our questions become, the closer we are to the right question. If we ask non-fundamental questions we are always at risk of wasting time, since there are always unexamined assumptions behind non-fundamental questions. So what is the assumption being made in all of the questions above?

I almost always end standing practice with anywhere from a few seconds to five minutes of hands folded over my dantian. Then I place the backs of my hands over my kidneys and give myself a sort of foot massage with the ground, shifting my weight first from heel to toe to heel, then side to side (keeping equal weight on both feet), then in circles in each direction. I got that from Ken Cohen's Way of Qigong book. I had noticed a slightly unsettled feeling going directly from standing to movement, which this short routine smooths out. If I stand or sit for more than a short time I almost always do a short self-massage on my head and eyes (after the hands over the dantian, before the "foot massage", when standing). It is described here. The description is on page 4.

I agree.

It is interesting that we are talking to one another and yet I can't see anyone really seeking in this conversation. I am interested in my motivation for contributing. I like to have fun with words, and ideas. I know that neither holds any truth. I do consider it to be a form of practice, however, to enter into relationship and to see what moves me. In many ways it is easier to talk to someone who hasn't had a glimpse of truth that they recognized as such. All there is then is a bit of pointing, or else the topic of spirituality never comes up. With someone who has seen what I am refering to when I speak of spirituality, what is there to say? I wonder if we can really believe anything that we say. I don't even really feel inclined to form coherent thoughts much of the time. The closer to coherence I come, the more I know that I am speaking some form of untruth. But onward to where even fools wouldn't dare, as Adya says. SeanO, I hear what you are saying about the ego co-opting realization. It is a doozy. I find that the ego can co-opt just about anything though, and I think thats just fine. We catch onto its ways bit by bit. It sounds like "confers no advantages" presents itself as a key into mystery for you. I use the same key fairly often, as I feel myself grasping. I have noticed a tendency for my keys to become chains, though, until they are seen through. As a side note, I would say my "confers advantages" viewpoint is based upon an idea that I fall back on in the relative world, that how fast one is going is not important, but rather in which direction. "Right View", as we seem to be referring to it here, has the distinction of being in its own unique location, here, nowhere and everywhere. In my expeirence the movement toward this location only occurs when one is actually "there". It is a lucky thing that we all are already "there", but there is the experience of being not "there", which can be tremendously painful, and only gets worse after one has been "there". The only escape is into truth, or here, or nowhere, however we want to word it, but it isn't an escape that the illusory mind would ever imagine. Nothing changes, only the illusion that anything ever needed to be different, and yet isn't that the best news, even in the middle of what previously seemed such a misery? Or when we are a bit more refined, even in what previously seemed to be a joy that we needed more of? This opens a flow onto which egos have a tendency to grasp, never seeming to learn, but eventually they do (thanks Xenolith, for your pointer to this aspect of learning). Its funny how our prejudices (or ala SeanD, our karma) influences how we express this unfoldment. SeanD The teachings of anyone are only precious when they are. Adyashanti's teachings are a good example. It is true that what he is pointing at can be glimpsed at some level by anybody in no time at all. Such pointing is the essence of his teaching. Yet his words necessarily come from a point of view. There is simple no other way to express oneself. As such, they are constantly changing and often self-contradictory. For example, he consistently maintains that although he did however many years of fairly hardcore zen practice, that time had nothing whatsoever to do with his enlightenment. They are completely different things. His given reason for saying this is that he has seen many people awaken, and perhaps even become "enlightened" (he doesn't use consistent terminology, and doesn't really present awakening as goal) without doing any of the things that he did. On the other hand, he often emphasizes that there is no inherent advantage to his style of teaching. If one sees truth, that can wipe away huge chunks of conditioning, but there is still the body to be dealt with (or perhaps you may substitute the word karma here) and a hell of a long road to go, with much, if not more, suffering along the way. He says that this is where the body-centered and direct-pointing teachings come together. There's no end run around our issues. So which of those teachings are the precious ones? I'd say they don't mean anything unless there is a seeing of truth, in which they come alive. Well, thats enough pretentious posturing for one day. Thanks for humoring me. Todd

Hi Sean, Thanks for that story. It really lays out a couple ends of a spectrum of paths and even manages to get in a little pathless path wisdom to boot! One thing that I would like to highlight a bit more, is that I can't entirely agree that seeing truth offers no advantages. I do agree that it can be the wrong thing for some people in terms of how quickly they come to stable realization (though I can't speak from direct experience here), however, for the limited self, things speed up considerably after realization. As SeanD says, vipassana is a practice for enlightened beings. Nevermind that it isn't a practice, and that there isn't really such a thing as an enlightened being, it doesn't bear any fruit in consciousness until after realization. It is a funny thing when there is no self and yet things are moving, and yet this is the experience of vipassana. This is also our everyday experience, though not often seen. Perhaps you are correct in the ultimate sense. The question that comes up is where does realization occur? I see realization as both something that has only to do with the ultimate realizing itself, and as the limited self engaging in a process of falling away, with nothing really changing in the ultimate. The "nothing really changing in the ultimate" point of view leads me to think all progress is only in terms of the limited self. The realization realizing itself is a little more open ended and I am a bit more drawn to it recently, though certainly neither of these points of view are truth. I just thought I'd bring it up since we're laying out spectrums recently. Todd

Have you considered that the first step of the eightfold path, "Right View", might be referring to realization of nondual awareness, and everything else is an outgrowth of that? In a way, I feel that sort of right view is the easiest step to take along the path, and the other seven are where we fall off the wagon. However, it isn't really possible to take those next steps (which I tend to think of as an unending deepening in all dimensions, not really linear) without first taking a good look. Of course, the eightfold path may have some merit before realization too. I'm not really sure.

Taomeow, What you are basically saying is that the now cannot be grasped. I agree with you. However, not being able to grasp the now does not change the fact that it exists. It just doesn't exist in the way that you want it to, in the way that gives you ownership of it. It is true, the past and the future can be grasped. This is what provides the illusion that we are not now, not here. There are infinite objects to be grasped in either the past or the future. As Cameron says, good luck with that. It'll probably be a fun ride, but where to? Its really not far to go from using the now to grasp onto the past and future, and seeing that without grasping, the past and the future are but aspects of a question that can never be answered. That seeing might change nothing about what you choose to do, and it might be the greatest relief that you ever felt. Todd

Nicotinic acid and nicotine are not the same thing. They just have similar sounding names.

You might consider getting his retreats through audible.com. If you sign up for a monthly plan, they give you a free credit, plus one or two credits per month. One retreat is one credit and the first 3 months are half off. You can burn to CDs if you want too. Adya's Spontaneous Awakening and True Meditation are on there too. I haven't felt strong pull to listen to Eckhart's stuff, but its nice to know that I can do it cheaply if I want to.

Thanks for the response. It sounds like he did some good for the teeth points along with going for the root imbalances. I'm glad it worked for you.

What points did you use and with what manipulations? Was your treatment based on correcting some imbalance or was it more like, these are good for teeth? I've seen points with indications for tooth pain and I've always wondered what exactly that meant. Is it just symptomatic relief or is there something else going on there? It seems that you have had the experience to answer that question. Please share as you see fit.

I learnt to play the piano just to play the Raindrop Prelude. I'm not sure what it has to do with the Dao more than anything else, though I was thinking just yesterday about why I was drawn to it. It has that repeating note out of which the melody emerges. The initial and ending sections are lighter and seemingly inconsequential and the middle section is more elemental and "beautiful" as opposed to "pretty", and yet they echo one another in both timing and melody Well anyways, you're not alone on this board in appreciating it.