suffering tends towards enlightenment

[Karl]

I'm pretty active here - yet in six short weeks Karl has posted significantly more than I've done in 3 and half years!!!

 

He has got the time and the frantic desperation to dominate.

 

Most of the threads in General, have deteriorated into the same kind of futile discussion on the role of logic.

 

He's a blight. He just corrupts threads.

 

It could take a long time before he gets bored because he clearly has time on his hands.  And anyone who has reached his age and still has his views is hardly going to be the model of intellectual flexibility.

 

Politely asking him to leave is what I suggest.

 

I would suggest you ignored my posts for the sake of your health.

[Karl]

No, that position is. The koan is intended to encourage one to challenge one's own assumptions and beliefs. In doing so, one might see that there are many meaningful ways to approach it which involve dissolving preconceived notions about "reality."Or you can just dismiss it as "nonsense" because it doesn't fit your concrete rules.If all one has is a hammer, everything must be a nail.

 

I can tell you precisely what it is, but that wouldn't suit your concrete view, so touché my friend.

[Karl]

Karl, I'd say you just hit on a very important point in your response above but probably didn't mean to (?) namely with your words of  "no sound",  so I suggest considering that point along the lines of how can sound exist without no sound in sense of very well defined spaces or timings of no sound between myriad variations of notes, otherwise there would be no distinct sounds or music   

 

(and in a way try to extrapolate that to mind and no-mind without taking the "no" to literally just as some people sometimes take the words "empty" and "nothing" to literally)

 

Are you talking the plain action of physical clapping and the space between beats ? It's not the same as 'one hand clapping' though because there is permanent silence.

 

It is just a version of a and non a. How can something exist that doesn't exist. It a logical loop that the mind cannot untangle and goes into a state of trance. In the trance state it is easy to bypass reasoning, then embed commands directly into the subconscious. I regard it as trespass unless the party knows exactly what the hypnotist is up to and consciously enters into an agreement to allow it.

 

It was always the end question during goal setting visualisation. "What wouldn't you get if you didn't achieve it" ? The client is asked to answer without thinking in order to subconsciously affirm the visualisation. In other words give up all logical control and accept the programme you have just visualised. If you want to get the client on the hook, it would be easy to set easier goals and embed the idea that it was the hypnotist which was creating the conditions for success. I didn't do this, but I know some who earned fabulous sums of money by this trick.

 

It's possible to embed commands within a sentence, a string of numbers, lists, or even by creating a mistake during a presentation, firing off the command (low tone, pace and lead) then pretend to suddenly notice the mistake and erase it. That way everything between noticing the mistake and erasing the mistake disappears from the mind of the audience. I know hundreds of these tricks to bypass the barriers of the mind. I had thought it was all for doing good and helping people, but I don't anymore, it's subterfuge.

[3bob]

and what if you took all the projected points and related arguments you've brought up and turned them on yourself without bias?

[Karl]

and what if you took all the projected points and related arguments you've brought up and turned them on yourself without bias?

 

I don't understand what you mean.

[Spotless]

How can there be knowing if no mind ? How can there be 'language' with no mind. Do you mean something else because clearly mind is needed for any form of language or knowledge retrieval.

 

Awareness is needed - mind is not needed.

 

Mind is not Awareness.

 

Some times one "knows to much" and the books need to be put down, the mind needs to "rest" and one needs to just Practice.

 

When you come to understand that you know nothing - a great deal of former certainty will become quite funny.

 

Karl's comment was in response to my previous post:

 

Quote:

[[My reference in an earlier post to:

 

[ "Geometric mathematical visual language of "no mind" and "knowing" ]

 

we're references to my personal experience - they were not related (to my knowledge) with Gurdjieff or Ouspensky.

 

It is a kind of experiential "language" of extraordinary clarity and speed - it is experienced communication - whole being understanding - also very beautiful.

Edited by Spotless, Yesterday, 09:38 PM.]]

 

End Quote

Edited August 26, 2015 by Spotless

[Spotless]

easy, one hand cannot clap. This is what I meant by controlling definitions. You can get people to believe completely contradictory things. Once they have sufficient contradictory experiences you can tell them anything. I have an example put forward by, Dewey (I think) in modern education, in which he wonders exactly what it would take to get children to believe snow is black.

 

Koans are about control in which the student will look to the master for the masters version of reality. It gets obedience from the student and gives power to the master. It's a Svengali.

 

Karl - you are really new at this!

 

A Koan is nothing of the sort you describe - the cardboard view holds no water - bring life to your studies in these endeavors - have you done no practice what so ever?

 

It is not possible to understand this stuff intellectually - and from an intellectual standpoint you are still so dry and unimaginative - are you also an Athiest? You have the flavor of an open and shut case - that has not been around the block much.

 

Anyway - you are so far off on the Koan and so below par in your understanding that you can start with definitions in Websters and go from there.

 

My god - make an attempt!

[Spotless]

Hi 3bob -

 

I was aware of the Ouspensky reference - and brought it up in a post because Karl was wondering where your reference to it came from.

 

With regard to what I was referencing it was not the same thing and I wanted to clarify that.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

[Koan is] a logical loop that the mind cannot untangle and goes into a state of trance.[...]

Karl, I must ask - do you do any sort of practice other than philosophical reasoning? There's not much point being here unless you do some sort of meditation, yoga, qigong, something. Reason is useful and necessary and good to develop, but nobody ever built a car using just a screwdriver.

 

You seem to put a lot of different states and stages under this label 'trance' that really don't belong there. A hypnotic or between-awake-and-asleep trance is different from the alert blissful focus which counteracts the physical senses and thought you get through shamatha, is different from the various perceptual shifts occurring through vipashyana, is different from the koan's Great Doubt and kensho.

 

There are many experiences and shifts this stuff can produce which to an outside observer may look like trance ('they don't seem to hear me, must be in trance') but are actually very different.

 

If you want to understand koan, go to original sources or, better yet, engage it fully yourself. You really sound like a caveman trying to deduce what a computer is from his own experiences of flint and spears - his reasoning may be logical, but he doesn't have enough data to reach the right conclusion.

 

I haven't practised koan myself, but my understanding is that the whole value of it is that you can't untangle it. The idea is to focus all the mind's investigative power towards something it cannot solve until a point is reached called 'Great Doubt', a giving up of the attempt to intellectually solve the koan, a shift in the conceptual framework. This results in 'kensho', gnosis of the true meaning of the koan or what it's really getting at.

 

Of course A can't also be something other than A. But what really is A?

Edited August 26, 2015 by Seeker of Wisdom

[Karl]

Karl, I must ask - do you do any sort of practice other than philosophical reasoning? There's not much point being here unless you do some sort of meditation, yoga, qigong, something. Reason is useful and necessary and good to develop, but nobody ever built a car using just a screwdriver.

You seem to put a lot of different states and stages under this label 'trance' that really don't belong there. A hypnotic or between-awake-and-asleep trance is different from the alert blissful focus which counteracts the physical senses and thought you get through shamatha, is different from the various perceptual shifts occurring through vipashyana, is different from the koan's Great Doubt and kensho.

There are many experiences and shifts this stuff can produce which to an outside observer may look like trance ('they don't seem to hear me, must be in trance') but are actually very different.

If you want to understand koan, go to original sources or, better yet, engage it fully yourself. You really sound like a caveman trying to deduce what a computer is from his own experiences of flint and spears - his reasoning may be logical, but he doesn't have enough data to reach the right conclusion.

I haven't practised koan myself, but my understanding is that the whole value of it is that you can't untangle it. The idea is to focus all the mind's investigative power towards something it cannot solve until a point is reached called 'Great Doubt', a giving up of the attempt to intellectually solve the koan, a shift in the conceptual framework. This results in 'kensho', gnosis of the true meaning of the koan or what it's really getting at.

Of course A can't also be something other than A. But what really is A?

 

I've said many times that I have over 8 years of solid practice. Twice daily meditation, spinal breathing, sutra. Then self inquiry plus mindfulness daily. I can meditate without sitting in particular spots or, poses easily able to quieten the mind. SI/mindfulness is more or less continuous so I'm hardly conscious of it unless I wish it. Trivium was added after all of that, prior to that I believed mystic things and talked like everyone else on here.

 

When I was working as a therapist I would create all manner of trance States. From hyper awareness, relaxed learning to hallucination. The technique of creating a logic loop in which the mind hunts for patterns has been known for a long time. Then using 'artfully vague' language, the gaps can be filled in the subconscious mind and the client brought out of trance. If you get chance study one of Obama's speeches. Pretty much a master class of hypnotic pattern speech; trace, pauses, pace, tonality down perfect. Even though I know what he is doing its difficult to counter. At a mass rally it must be overwhelming.

 

I don't know how Koans were used that way, but I know what they allow. The conscious, discriminating mind is switched off and the subconscious will take instruction directly If done in the right way. If the Koan is worked on in isolation then the subject creates a trance state that the master can initiate immediately by anchoring techniques. It's a Pavlovian response.

 

'A 'exists, is a thing, with a separate identity. It is what it is.

 

 

 

 

[Karl]

Awareness is needed - mind is not needed.Mind is not Awareness.Some times one "knows to much" and the books need to be put down, the mind needs to "rest" and one needs to just Practice.When you come to understand that you know nothing - a great deal of former certainty will become quite funny.Karl's comment was in response to my previous post:Quote:[[My reference in an earlier post to:[ "Geometric mathematical visual language of "no mind" and "knowing" ]we're references to my personal experience - they were not related (to my knowledge) with Gurdjieff or Ouspensky.It is a kind of experiential "language" of extraordinary clarity and speed - it is experienced communication - whole being understanding - also very beautiful. Edited by Spotless, Yesterday, 09:38 PM.]]End Quote

I threw away the books a long time back. Mind, thoughts, perceptions are things we are aware of. We aren't aware of awareness. I already know, I know nothing- so what of it ? That's easy. There is no absolute truth and change is moment to moment. However the essential self remains intact always like a boat on the sea. Weather changes, storms etc, these things become part of the learning experience.

 

Let self exist as it is without attachment, but living within the framework of values, then there is no effort. If an attachment is created-here I include religion, practices, material things, ideology-then it is the self living through that web. Now there is a doer, but it cannot be seen as self.

 

All that is a very complicated way of saying 'know thyself' and be careful to mentally ingest only those things which do not create false ego. Then live with integrity. Right thought, right action, right habit.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Karl

[Bud Jetsun]

Much good wisdom, incomplete, but so is any arrangements of symbols.

 

If you dont want to label your daily meditation as practice, that's fine, seems to be effective towards realizations of the nature of human reality.

 

Its missing realizations that require perception beyond mind to empirically self-realize. However, from a pragmatic quality of human experience view, that is not a requirement, as you will find out irregardless when the minds moment receives it's singular entitlement.

 

With unlimited Love,

-Bud

[Karl]

Much good wisdom, incomplete, but so is any arrangements of symbols.

 

If you dont want to label your daily meditation as practice, that's fine, seems to be effective towards realizations of the nature of human reality.

 

Its missing realizations that require perception beyond mind to empirically self-realize. However, from a pragmatic quality of human experience view, that is not a requirement, as you will find out irregardless when the minds moment receives it's singular entitlement.

 

With unlimited Love,

-Bud

 

I strive for incompleteness and I have never been anything other than self realised-I just wouldn't allow myself to discover it. :-) Everyone is self realised-we were born that way-it's a matter of acceptance, which is the harder part. If you think you have got some where, or are going somewhere, then you made a mistake. You already are and have always been.

 

"To be the rock and not the roll".

[Kubba]

I strive for incompleteness and I have never been anything other than self realised-I just wouldn't allow myself to discover it. :-) Everyone is self realised-we were born that way-it's a matter of acceptance, which is the harder part. If you think you have got some where, or are going somewhere, then you made a mistake. You already are and have always been. "To be the rock and not the roll".

Thinking this way is Only partial truth. There is also embodiment of this true required

[Ichigo]

Less talking words, more practicing...

[Karl]

Less talking words, more practicing...

 

What are you practising for ?

[Tibetan_Ice]

What are you practising for ?

Karl,

You shouldn't be going around trying to undermine someone's impetus to practice. It's bad karma.

You practiced for eight years, had a bad experience that you could not handle and went running to materialistic objectivism, Rand and trivium. Perhaps that is what you need at this time but that still does not give you the right to attempt to push others off of their path.

[Karl]

Karl,

You shouldn't be going around trying to undermine someone's impetus to practice. It's bad karma.

You practiced for eight years, had a bad experience that you could not handle and went running to materialistic objectivism, Rand and trivium. Perhaps that is what you need at this time but that still does not give you the right to attempt to push others off of their path.

 

Less words more practice.