Absolute Self vs. Personal Self

[Orion]

This topic is challenging for me to articulate because it's an emerging issue for me, but I feel this community may be able to offer some insight. The problem is mostly linguistic so I hope you can read between the lines and get what I'm saying.

 

It has become apparent to me that I have spent too much time focusing on the Absolute, or the Non-self. I have spent a large part of my spiritual-seeking life thinking that ego dissolving means abdicating my worldly self to a higher power. To use an analogy, I tried to become all Dao and haven't spent enough time admitting that I'm also one of the 10,000 things. It's almost like I have been trying to escape from being human by going into the Absolute experience, which has sabotaged some of my embodied vitality, and as a result I have underdeveloped my relationship to my human self, making it difficult (but not impossible) to BE HERE.

 

I have been thinking a lot about all the people I have heard or met who speak to the hollowness of the Absolute experience if it can’t come home to the human level self. I find that the more I seek the Absolute experience, the more I find a part of my humanity rebelling... it's not a mere ego but a real, human self trying to assert itself as a human self that is also Divine. Almost immediately after birth the conditioning begins and ego defenses develop, and after this it becomes harder and harder to find the De. But there is a structure like presence that always permeates the ego and body and mind, and this presence is palpable, and human. Hardly anyone ever finds their way home to this shining presence, but for me, this is the secret to human level happiness and peace, and it's the one thing that I have avoided by being so into the Absolute. I've made this really hard for myself. 

 

It's not that "Absolutists" are wrong, it's that I have noticed that when I listen to them now, I feel very lonely. Because of the way I have nurtured it, I also find it a tad disembodying... and I have learned that this ties into health, vitality, and being a present force as a human being.

 

In a nutshell what I’m saying is that when the Absolute resonance takes the form of a human, a resonating “me” is created and this is the real self which our mind/bodies can experience and which allows for the body-based connection we all have lost and seek.

 

The glimpses I get of my human real self indicate to me that it's here in every single moment shining through all the ego level dynamics, memories, thoughts and emotions that form personality patterns. It cares about me deeply and contains all the things that I am seeking on a human level, containing absolutely everything I need... and it is felt and experienced exactly like a normal human self: as me. But these moments of clarity are not consistent and I often find myself sifting through the Dao to find myself, which makes no sense whatsoever. For a lot of mediators, they experience emptiness or oneness, and then when they stop their practices their personality level re-engages. For me, what re-engages is that I don't recognize "my life" or who I really am in the world. It's not just that the De is obscured by a bunch of ego crap, it's that my De has been non-stop sublimated to the One. This has been a problem. One thing I have considered is that maybe it's part of my De to behave this way, but if that's true then I would feel peace instead of conflict.

 

Another symptom is that other people can recognize my essence more readily than I can. They sense my energy, my presence, my real humanity, whereas I have spent many years looking to the beyond. So it's not like real me isn't there, it's that I've trained myself to not see it. What a paradox.

 

The only thing I can think to equate this to is the De, or Virtue, but I'm not sure. I'm not dissociated, it's not like that. I still relate to the world and function in all the ways that matter. I've chosen a life path that is in alignment with my De. Yet somehow I don't feel fully here, as a human being. I feel the All more than I feel my humanity, and it doesn't feel right somehow. So how do I correct this imbalance?

 

One method suggested to me is to think back to before age 7, since most children are closer to their essence or De at that age... think of the things I loved doing, experiencing, etc. In other words, connecting to the inner child is a method.

 

Any others?

Edited May 3, 2016 by Orion

[Nikolai1]

i think lots of people go through this and I'm sure its inevitable that we move too far into the Absolute.  There is a tendency to pathologise this process in the West I think, but I think its far healthier to just trust it.  When the pain of alienation from the world gets too strong I think you will naturally start to look for ways of re-engaging that give you joy and don't make you despair.

 

I hadn't heard of this 'back to childhood' thing, but when I think of my own experience it makes sense.  I was always on the move as a child and was skilled in any sport I tried.  By my late teens I had become a very serious studious person and I wanted to spend my time reading and thinking.  At that time sportspeople always truck me as shallow.

 

I still find talking about sport shallow, but in the past year I have started to play tennis again after being randomly asked to make up a doubles match.  The simple kinaesthetic movement around the court delighted me.  The simple rules and the simple aims were like a tonic.  Ball bounces this side = good, that side = bad.

 

At the intellectual level I must still say that tennis is a simple pastime, but on a deeper level I love it and adore it.  The more you step out of your mind, the better you play.  It is glaringly obvious, and yet beautiful to see the Dao take over the game using your own body as a tool.

 

So anyway, I'm not saying take up tennis.  But tennis is something I loved when I was young, and now again at nearly 40 it is relating closely to my practice in the world.

[Karl]

This topic is challenging for me to articulate because it's an emerging issue for me, but I feel this community may be able to offer some insight. The problem is mostly linguistic so I hope you can read between the lines and get what I'm saying.

 

It has become apparent to me that I have spent too much time focusing on the Absolute, or the Non-self. I have spent a large part of my spiritual-seeking life thinking that ego dissolving means abdicating my worldly self to a higher power. To use an analogy, I tried to become all Dao and haven't spent enough time admitting that I'm also one of the 10,000 things. It's almost like I have been trying to escape from being human by going into the Absolute experience, which has sabotaged some of my embodied vitality, and as a result I have underdeveloped my relationship to my human self, making it difficult (but not impossible) to BE HERE.

 

I have been thinking a lot about all the people I have heard or met who speak to the hollowness of the Absolute experience if it can’t come home to the human level self. I find that the more I seek the Absolute experience, the more I find a part of my humanity rebelling... it's not a mere ego but a real, human self trying to assert itself as a human self that is also Divine. Almost immediately after birth the conditioning begins and ego defenses develop, and after this it becomes harder and harder to find the De. But there is a structure like presence that always permeates the ego and body and mind, and this presence is palpable, and human. Hardly anyone ever finds their way home to this shining presence, but for me, this is the secret to human level happiness and peace, and it's the one thing that I have avoided by being so into the Absolute. I've made this really hard for myself. 

 

It's not that "Absolutists" are wrong, it's that I have noticed that when I listen to them now, I feel very lonely. Because of the way I have nurtured it, I also find it a tad disembodying... and I have learned that this ties into health, vitality, and being a present force as a human being.

 

In a nutshell what I’m saying is that when the Absolute resonance takes the form of a human, a resonating “me” is created and this is the real self which our mind/bodies can experience and which allows for the body-based connection we all have lost and seek.

 

The glimpses I get of my human real self indicate to me that it's here in every single moment shining through all the ego level dynamics, memories, thoughts and emotions that form personality patterns. It cares about me deeply and contains all the things that I am seeking on a human level, containing absolutely everything I need... and it is felt and experienced exactly like a normal human self: as me. But these moments of clarity are not consistent and I often find myself sifting through the Dao to find myself, which makes no sense whatsoever. For a lot of mediators, they experience emptiness or oneness, and then when they stop their practices their personality level re-engages. For me, what re-engages is that I don't recognize "my life" or who I really am in the world. It's not just that the De is obscured by a bunch of ego crap, it's that my De has been non-stop sublimated to the One. This has been a problem. One thing I have considered is that maybe it's part of my De to behave this way, but if that's true then I would feel peace instead of conflict.

 

Another symptom is that other people can recognize my essence more readily than I can. They sense my energy, my presence, my real humanity, whereas I have spent many years looking to the beyond. So it's not like real me isn't there, it's that I've trained myself to not see it. What a paradox.

 

The only thing I can think to equate this to is the De, or Virtue, but I'm not sure. I'm not dissociated, it's not like that. I still relate to the world and function in all the ways that matter. I've chosen a life path that is in alignment with my De. Yet somehow I don't feel fully here, as a human being. I feel the All more than I feel my humanity, and it doesn't feel right somehow. So how do I correct this imbalance?

 

One method suggested to me is to think back to before age 7, since most children are closer to their essence or De at that age... think of the things I loved doing, experiencing, etc. In other words, connecting to the inner child is a method.

 

Any others?

 

Sometimes it's necessary to go to the top of the mountain, or the bottom of the bottle before reality is accepted.

 

I've been where you are now. Some will tell you that the answer is more grounding, or that you have become too fascinated with non-relational self inquiry.

 

At the rarified heights you have reached I don't think it's so easy to simply leap off the mountain. Inevitably what goes up must eventually come down. You may do that in little steps and tarry a while or even stay forever at a lesser height that is manageable. I jumped, but I doubt many would, but that's my nature to discard the useless.

 

I hope you find equilibrium.

[RigdzinTrinley]

So much to say on this topic, too much even. I just split hairs with you, because why not, nikolai was already practical, I be a buddhist snop then:

 

from the buddhist point of view (the one buddhist point of view I am most familiar with) I would say that the more you understand the "absolute" side of things - the more you will pay attention to the relative side of things actually, but now in a much more wholesome way, not merely fixating on immidiate pleasure, blind materialism and consumerism - following all the whims of ego. I mean more from the Point of view of what to do right now to make sentient beings happy (that category of sentient beings includes the practicioner himself or herself)

 

and you know the more your understand the "absolute" side of things correctly - the easier you will manage to generate happiness for self and others

 

so on one level I would say don't just blame it on the absolute, but maybe blame it on your understanding of it.... which brings me to a tricky second part:

 

there is no absolute against or above the realtive

 

from Nagarjunas PoV, and I dare speak as if I would know that.... just give me a doubt here, because I do not actually fully understand nagarjuna -> anyway it is not as if an absolute side of things would exist brother - its only a method to loosen the fixation on the relative side of things, to get a bit "out of that kind of box" if you know what I am saying

 

it is not meant to create a new box called "the absolute"

 

the realtive side of things is the basis for an ultimate side of things... if there would be no relative how could you conceive of an absolute?

 

so based on that it is very easy to see that "absolutes" are just mental fabrication, labels

 

now in buddhism, if one understands the so called "absolute" correctly then this can be used to get out of all sorts of conceptual boxes such as f.e.: relative vs. absolute or relative and absolute are one or whatever have you...

 

that is a very difficult feat to achieve, and it is probably good to be under supervision while attempting this - otherwise one could end up doing all sorts of things like "denegrating" the relative or also "exagerating" the relative etc etc. or falling into any kind of extreme view and hence extreme type of practice... it is not sooo easy, if one is endowed with a critical kind of mind that is. If one is not so much into doubting thinking and philosophy then you know - pure faith and devotion - and sitting sitting sitting can do the trick (I heard that, but also most tibetan masters say this is a rare kind of spiritual practicioner these days)

 

if one is not this kind of pure devotion/healthy ego/spiritual genius by birth type being then I guess a proper intellectual yoga is important - using this yoga one then opens the intellect to awaken (in tibetan you have ordinary intellect and awakened intellect - that is an intellect that works in your favour, that is used to contemplate the nature of things correctly) - so in no way is buddhist practice anti-intellectual for example. it can be a very deep and fulfilling experience also on an intellectual level, if one gets the right view of absolute and relative that is - if not ALAS!

 

instead of getting out of the box, one builds more and more boxes

Edited May 3, 2016 by RigdzinTrinley

[Nikolai1]

Sometimes it's necessary to go to the top of the mountain, or the bottom of the bottle before reality is accepted. I've been where you are now. Some will tell you that the answer is more grounding, or that you have become too fascinated with non-relational self inquiry. At the rarified heights you have reached I don't think it's so easy to simply leap off the mountain. Inevitably what goes up must eventually come down. You may do that in little steps and tarry a while or even stay forever at a lesser height that is manageable. I jumped, but I doubt many would, but that's my nature to discard the useless. I hope you find equilibrium.

 

Its a three phase thing:

 

1) Too far in the world, or away from the world

2) Too far correcting yourself

3) Equilibirum

 

Generally we all spend our first two or three decades involved in the world of things in time and space.  The spiritually sensitive become dissatisfied with this and then dis-engage in pursuit of the other side of things.  It is only when this second search becomes dry and dissatisfying that we harmonise, we bo back to the world, and find equilibrium.

 

I think in your case Karl, the first two phases have been there from the offset.  I mean that your psyche has been split by form and emptiness since you were very young and you never fully bought into form like most do.  What you have done since is try to solve this split by denying the other side.  At present, with your objectivism, you are simply denying emptiness.  This is what most people do, most wholeheartedly in their early decades, but in your early decades you never did it and so must do it now.

 

The equilibrium you imagine you have found is that false equilibrium that comes when we suppress opposing viewpoints.

[RigdzinTrinley]

now to be also practical - try counceling, best would be with a therapist/councelor that has experience with spiritual practice and the pitfalls of it

 

or just you know, go for long walks, read a good novel, hang out with good friends - be a good friend also, be a person - an ordinary person, not a hermit or holy person

 

a pretty incredible feat in itself if you ask me, to just be a good ordinary human being, with ordinary problems and ordinary happiness and suffering - all held with as much dignity as possible

 

I still work on that one, and probably will never go beyond trying to be a good ordinary human being. enlightenement is great and all - but to be honest, if I look at my neurotic mind, I am pretty happy to manifest as a less neurotic being step by step

 

that is much lesser pressure on my psyche as well - so I am happy that I do not have to manifest enlightenement in this body no matter what, also to be a good human being is almost attainable and managable, still tough for sure, but much less tough then enlightenment

Edited May 3, 2016 by RigdzinTrinley

[Karl]

Its a three phase thing:

 

1) Too far in the world, or away from the world

2) Too far correcting yourself

3) Equilibirum

 

Generally we all spend our first two or three decades involved in the world of things in time and space. The spiritually sensitive become dissatisfied with this and then dis-engage in pursuit of the other side of things. It is only when this second search becomes dry and dissatisfying that we harmonise, we bo back to the world, and find equilibrium.

 

I think in your case Karl, the first two phases have been there from the offset. I mean that your psyche has been split by form and emptiness since you were very young and you never fully bought into form like most do. What you have done since is try to solve this split by denying the other side. At present, with your objectivism, you are simply denying emptiness. This is what most people do, most wholeheartedly in their early decades, but in your early decades you never did it and so must do it now.

 

The equilibrium you imagine you have found is that false equilibrium that comes when we suppress opposing viewpoints.

Well it's an interesting theory and partially correct. I was certainly more open to the possibility of the spiritual side of things than most people I knew.

 

However, you are completely wrong about equilibrium-I have not found that, neither do I wish it, but I do know that when a seeker gets in a stall or a dive then it's better to level out than just to crash-except in my case I chose a hard landing. If you understood objectivism then you would see that it is neither materialist or spiritually mystic. It is your sense of polarity that imagines it is one or the other, objectivism is effectively an integration. It is the combination of consciousness and body, it is the acceptance of a soul which is inextricably integrated into the physical flesh. I know of no other philosophy which achieves that. It only removes the mysticism from muscle or spirit, but leaves the muscle and spirit intact.

 

Anyway, this is about my hoping that Orion finds equilibrium and not that he discovers Objectivism. I expect he will find his own way in his own time and this isn't the place to go foisting alternatives. I thought your post deserved a reply.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Karl

[Marblehead]

Hi Orion,

 

You already know how I feel about this concept.  It can be seen in many of my posts.  I won't bother you here with many words so I will just say:  You are special and unique.  Experience your Self.

[doc benway]

I think that sometimes we really try too hard.

To do what actually? It really doesn't matter what - we try to be spiritual, we try to be normal, we try to help, we try to get ahead. Try, try, try - effort, effort, effort! It's exhausting. 

 

For me, a lot of spiritual practice has become to learn how to rest. How to let all the effort simply relax into this moment, here and now. It is good to do that on the cushion and it's good to do it in our everyday activity. Rest doesn't mean to do nothing, it means to simply let the body relax, let the thoughts settle, and let the heart and mind be open - let things come and go. Just be present. 

So many things will effortlessly take care of themselves if we simply allow it to happen. 

 

I wonder if Yueya's recent post here would be at all helpful.

He references a discussion of the right and left hemispheres of the brain and how we embody two very different ways of experiencing life. Neither is better but an integration of both I think can help us achieve equilibrium. 

[RigdzinTrinley]

there is this marvelous word in tibetan, usually I like to talk a lot about buddhist philosophy (because most people overlook the richness of the indo-tibetan scholastic side, it is pretty amazing)

 

but Steve made me remember this word through his post, it is probably one of the most important words or "pointers" in Dzogchen Ati-Yoga

 

མ་བཅོས་པ - ma bchos pa (sounds like "machöpa")

 

means: uncontrived

 

to be uncontrived, to rest uncontrived

 

one can have many lifetimes of fun with this one pointer as far as I can tell

Edited May 3, 2016 by RigdzinTrinley

[Nikolai1]

 If you understood objectivism then you would see that it is neither materialist or spiritually mystic.

In the introductory paragraphs to Objectivism on wikipedia it says: 'Objectivism's central tenets are that reality exists independently of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, '

 

This is pure materialism; indeed, perhaps it's purest expression.  So you are drastically either misundertanding objectivism , or p´misrepresenting it yourself.

 

As we start to move on with our thinking, I think there is a phase, before we have consciously rejected the old, that we describe the old creed according to our new idiosyncratic way of thinking.  Before long, the purists - our old colleagues - start to object and it dawns on us that we are no longer who we were.

 

Perhaps this is happening with you?

[Karl]

In the introductory paragraphs to Objectivism on wikipedia it says: 'Objectivism's central tenets are that reality exists independently of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, '

 

This is pure materialism; indeed, perhaps it's purest expression.  So you are drastically either misundertanding objectivism , or p´misrepresenting it yourself.

 

As we start to move on with our thinking, I think there is a phase, before we have consciously rejected the old, that we describe the old creed according to our new idiosyncratic way of thinking.  Before long, the purists - our old colleagues - start to object and it dawns on us that we are no longer who we were.

 

Perhaps this is happening with you?

 

It would take too long to explain it fully. Existence exists independent of conscious identification of it. I'm careful not to say 'reality' as we have not yet defined reality, but existence is an axiom as is consciousness.

 

I've given this statement previously: existence is identity ; consciousness is identification.

 

You can google Ayn Rand/Peikoff and materialism and you will see that Objectivism refutes materialism completely. Peikoff describes it as a belief in glandular squirtings and Rand as the mechanistic universe. Materialism is a form of mysticism, as Rand describes it 'mysticism of muscle'.

 

I'm very familiar with it. One thing that's vital in Objrctivism is to be objective about objectivism and to refuse any part that defies reason or definition except where it is axiomatic. Rand and Peikoff have both said the same thing that I will now repeat. I do not care if the whole world disagrees with me, I require no confirmation from anybody else and I have no interest in creating a cult of like minded thinkers. Objectivism is about individualism. If you want to believe in fairies or the great OM then you should go ahead, but, don't try to create a world based around your ideology.

[Nikolai1]

I think Objectivists have a noble aim at heart.  It seems they refuse to reduce consciousness to matter, nor matter to consciousness. And in this they do avoid, at an intellectual level, the age old dichotomy.

 

But when you truly overcome this dichotomy, thought ends.  The subject / object split is seen through.  There is no longer any that, for us in here to talk about.

 

This, I think is intolerable to thinkers like Rand so they get thinking, and get talking.  And when they try to put their words into practice, they come out with the same old materialism...And you Karl, are exactly the same.  

 

It is not for nothing that they can't seem to shrug off this accusation, this association with the materialists.  

[Karl]

I think Objectivists have a noble aim at heart.  It seems they refuse to reduce consciousness to matter, nor matter to consciousness. And in this they do avoid, at an intellectual level, the age old dichotomy.

 

But when you truly overcome this dichotomy, thought ends.  The subject / object split is seen through.  There is no longer any that, for us in here to talk about.

 

This, I think is intolerable to thinkers like Rand so they get thinking, and get talking.  And when they try to put their words into practice, they come out with the same old materialism...And you Karl, are exactly the same.  

 

It is not for nothing that they can't seem to shrug off this accusation, this association with the materialists.  

 

It occurs to me that it is you that is conscious thinking and materialistic writing whilst simultaneously denying one or the other. I have no such conflict I accept both. If I only accepted materialism then I would need to accept determinism and as I don't, then you can take it I'm not a materialist. Conscious humans have choices, their nature is that of man and the nature of man is to have free will. A billiard ball has no choice in its existence, it has no requirement to survive, but man must choose his life as the standard of value first.

 

I will open up an Objectivist thread if you are interested in further discussion, but for now I do not think we should clutter up the thread. It isn't about me, or objectivism, but about Orion.

[Marblehead]

there is this marvelous word in tibetan, usually I like to talk a lot about buddhist philosophy (because most people overlook the richness of the indo-tibetan scholastic side, it is pretty amazing)

 

but Steve made me remember this word through his post, it is probably one of the most important words or "pointers" in Dzogchen Ati-Yoga

 

མ་བཅོས་པ - ma bchos pa (sounds like "machöpa")

 

means: uncontrived

 

to be uncontrived, to rest uncontrived

 

one can have many lifetimes of fun with this one pointer as far as I can tell

And I don't normally "Thank You" for Buddhist oriented posts so this must be special to me.

[Marblehead]

In the introductory paragraphs to Objectivism on wikipedia it says: 'Objectivism's central tenets are that reality exists independently of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, '

You may call me one of those if you wish.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Just because there is no subject/perceiver standing apart from experience, like a homunculus sitting inside your head... doesn't mean that the mind/body system which is 'you' isn't real. Your thoughts and emotions and memories and desires are all real things, as are everyone else's.

 

Really ponder and internalize that. What even is this distinction between the 'relative' and 'absolute'? Reality isn't split in two chunks like that.

 

Body, feeling, perception, desire, consciousness: these things are real. It's just that they aren't owned by an independent subject. So don't deny anything that actually exists. These things are what your experience is made of. They are your life, live it!

[WisteriaWinds]

It sounds like your cultivation is paying off. My experience has been the more you awaken the more you realize what's being passed off as spirituality is bogus. You start to see how the ancient writings don't mean what everybody told you they mean.

 

This topic is challenging for me to articulate because it's an emerging issue for me, but I feel this community may be able to offer some insight. The problem is mostly linguistic so I hope you can read between the lines and get what I'm saying.

 

It has become apparent to me that I have spent too much time focusing on the Absolute, or the Non-self. I have spent a large part of my spiritual-seeking life thinking that ego dissolving means abdicating my worldly self to a higher power. To use an analogy, I tried to become all Dao and haven't spent enough time admitting that I'm also one of the 10,000 things. It's almost like I have been trying to escape from being human by going into the Absolute experience, which has sabotaged some of my embodied vitality, and as a result I have underdeveloped my relationship to my human self, making it difficult (but not impossible) to BE HERE.

 

I have been thinking a lot about all the people I have heard or met who speak to the hollowness of the Absolute experience if it can’t come home to the human level self. I find that the more I seek the Absolute experience, the more I find a part of my humanity rebelling... it's not a mere ego but a real, human self trying to assert itself as a human self that is also Divine. Almost immediately after birth the conditioning begins and ego defenses develop, and after this it becomes harder and harder to find the De. But there is a structure like presence that always permeates the ego and body and mind, and this presence is palpable, and human. Hardly anyone ever finds their way home to this shining presence, but for me, this is the secret to human level happiness and peace, and it's the one thing that I have avoided by being so into the Absolute. I've made this really hard for myself.

 

It's not that "Absolutists" are wrong, it's that I have noticed that when I listen to them now, I feel very lonely. Because of the way I have nurtured it, I also find it a tad disembodying... and I have learned that this ties into health, vitality, and being a present force as a human being.

 

In a nutshell what I’m saying is that when the Absolute resonance takes the form of a human, a resonating “me” is created and this is the real self which our mind/bodies can experience and which allows for the body-based connection we all have lost and seek.

 

The glimpses I get of my human real self indicate to me that it's here in every single moment shining through all the ego level dynamics, memories, thoughts and emotions that form personality patterns. It cares about me deeply and contains all the things that I am seeking on a human level, containing absolutely everything I need... and it is felt and experienced exactly like a normal human self: as me. But these moments of clarity are not consistent and I often find myself sifting through the Dao to find myself, which makes no sense whatsoever. For a lot of mediators, they experience emptiness or oneness, and then when they stop their practices their personality level re-engages. For me, what re-engages is that I don't recognize "my life" or who I really am in the world. It's not just that the De is obscured by a bunch of ego crap, it's that my De has been non-stop sublimated to the One. This has been a problem. One thing I have considered is that maybe it's part of my De to behave this way, but if that's true then I would feel peace instead of conflict.

 

Another symptom is that other people can recognize my essence more readily than I can. They sense my energy, my presence, my real humanity, whereas I have spent many years looking to the beyond. So it's not like real me isn't there, it's that I've trained myself to not see it. What a paradox.

 

The only thing I can think to equate this to is the De, or Virtue, but I'm not sure. I'm not dissociated, it's not like that. I still relate to the world and function in all the ways that matter. I've chosen a life path that is in alignment with my De. Yet somehow I don't feel fully here, as a human being. I feel the All more than I feel my humanity, and it doesn't feel right somehow. So how do I correct this imbalance?

 

One method suggested to me is to think back to before age 7, since most children are closer to their essence or De at that age... think of the things I loved doing, experiencing, etc. In other words, connecting to the inner child is a method.

 

Any others?

[Orion]

Body, feeling, perception, desire, consciousness: these things are real. It's just that they aren't owned by an independent subject. So don't deny anything that actually exists. These things are what your experience is made of. They are your life, live it!

 

Live your life, yes... that's the conclusion. So why did I just go through all that realization when I could've just lived my life in the first place? Is there really a difference between someone who's awake and someone who isn't? Because as you say, that's a dualistic mindset.

 

Because you can't get it wrong or get it right. Either way you're "it". So what's the difference between a newborn baby and an adult who has had a bunch of realizations about the reality of what they are?

 

I'm starting to not get the point of all the meditation, practices, etc... that we all go through, if all you're doing is trying to become the thing you already are. I'd sooner just be the thing than concern myself about whether or not I'm the thing. In other words, the practice becomes about letting go of the practice. It's an issue before it's a non-issue. You need the framework before no framework is needed.

 

Is that the difference between pre and post? To be able to abide in the freedom of your De without impediment? I'm sorry to talk about it so linearly because I know it's all One Thing, but for the sake of discussion.

 

Am I making any sense here? There's no here or there so what exactly do we think we're attaining? Just live! It sounds like what I'm stating is very simple but I'm coming at this through a rather complex pathway.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Orion

[Karl]

Live your life, yes... that's the conclusion. So why did I just go through all that realization when I could've just lived my life in the first place? Is there really a difference between someone who's awake and someone who isn't? Because as you say, that's a dualistic mindset.

 

Because you can't get it wrong or get it right. Either way you're "it". So what's the difference between a newborn baby and an adult who has had a bunch of realizations about the reality of what they are?

 

I'm starting to not get the point of all the meditation, practices, etc... that we all go through, if all you're doing is trying to become the thing you already are. I'd sooner just be the thing than concern myself about whether or not I'm the thing. In other words, the practice becomes about letting go of the practice. It's an issue before it's a non-issue. You need the framework before no framework is needed.

 

Is that the difference between pre and post? To be able to abide in the freedom of your De without impediment? I'm sorry to talk about it so linearly because I know it's all One Thing, but for the sake of discussion.

 

Am I making any sense here? There's no here or there so what exactly do we think we're attaining? Just live! It sounds like what I'm stating is very simple but I'm coming at this through a rather complex pathway.

 

Perfectly :-) it's worth noting that you can't give up until you choose to give up and that giving up cannot just be something you refuse to do, but something you have reasoned sufficiently is unnecessary. I would say welcome to the club, but it's probably more accurate to say welcome to life as a fully realised, seperate, independent individual.

 

I should also say, if you haven't got all your conceptual dots lined up and your definitions crossed- it's highly likely that you haven't- then you will not fully accept your position and likely begin to feel a certain longing to return to known practices. Don't let that put you into a quandary where you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. It takes a while to fully understand and hammer out reality in a way that you are totally confident in your developed philosophy. If you relapse a bit don't sweat it, sometimes that happens.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Live your life, yes... that's the conclusion. So why did I just go through all that realization when I could've just lived my life in the first place? Is there really a difference between someone who's awake and someone who isn't? Because as you say, that's a dualistic mindset.[...]

 

Someone who isn't awakened thinks that there is body, feeling, etc, AND some kind of subject/perceiver which has/owns the experience of those things, standing a bit apart and impossible to pin down. Someone who is awakened knows that the idea of that separate, impossible to pin down subject is an illusion. That there is just body, feeling, etc.

 

In either case what your body/mind system is, is the same set of stuff. But when you aren't awakened, and think there's some homunculus owning that stuff, this perceptual distortion causes many tensions and conflicts with the simple truth. It's like you're constantly trying to see something out of the corner of your eye, and when you realize there's actually nothing there you can let that fruitless search go. So yeah there's absolutely a difference between awake and asleep - one sees clearly the simple truth, one stresses themselves out concocting random confusing crud.

 

IMHO the mistake you've made is denying too much. You've been dissociating from your humanity, your own emotions and experiences, your own body, thinking that by doing this you reach a higher 'absolute' truth. But the truth of no-self isn't a higher truth, it is a radically imminent truth. You see it by really seeing your body and feelings and emotions, all your human experiences, just as they occur to you, seeing how they occur with no need, no place for, this weird homunculus thing. You see it in this moment. This flash of anxiety, this tension in your stomach, this thought of dinner, this itch in your eyebrow.

 

You become awake not by dissociating to a higher truth, but by descending into an imminent truth.

[Nikolai1]

Live your life, yes... that's the conclusion. So why did I just go through all that realization when I could've just lived my life in the first place? Is there really a difference between someone who's awake and someone who isn't? Because as you say, that's a dualistic mindset.

 

Because you can't get it wrong or get it right. Either way you're "it". So what's the difference between a newborn baby and an adult who has had a bunch of realizations about the reality of what they are?

The point is that your life will change for the better.  You will become more peaceful, more loving and the nitty gritty of your life will become surprising and miraculous.  Ever seen a newborn baby when it's hungry? - the little sweet face puckered up in fury?  Ever seen the childish, brutal man swearing and cursing at the referee when the decision in the game doesn't go his way?

 

All this is of the Dao, but also so is the desire to move on from this.  Awakening is not just learning to watch ourselves behave as we always did.  There will be a positive transformation that will be pleasing to you and all those around you.

 

When we have moved squarely into the Absolute, we feel alienated from life.  Two years ago we swore as furiously from the grandstand, but now we see it as all a game.  But this doesn't stop us from feeling a certain guilt over our loss of passion, and a nostalgia for the times when we were participating full-bloodledly.  But please don't pathologise your state and imagine that - when you 'get over it' -you will return to the fray in the way that you once were.  And don't allow yourself to feel inferior to all the unconscious brutes who are living in the thick of life, and suffering as a result.  Chapter 20 of DDJ address this point.

 

Is that the difference between pre and post? To be able to abide in the freedom of your De without impediment? I'm sorry to talk about it so linearly because I know it's all One Thing, but for the sake of discussion.

Your De will come to you as a revelation, and it is totally unknown to you as an individual prior to awakening.  

 

An unconscious person's De is collective in nature.  It is conditioned by the time and place and culture and circumstance.  It can be recognised as a pattern because so many people particpate in it.  The individual De is authored moment by moment and can't be predicted nor formulated.  The sage leaves no tracks that can be followed.

 

What we call aimlessness is actually nothing other than conduct that can't be intellectually summarised.  Actual aimlessness is impossible.  But the awakening individual will start to feel guilty over their aimlessness because they are no longer prodded and driven by the collective illusions.  It's a really beautiful moment and a huge relief to see that your life is, and always has been valid and worthy and that your aimlessness is actually the virtue of liberation from unconscious drives.  This freedom and relief gives us the confidence to live our lives exactly as we want to in our hearts in each moment- and this is the discovery of our De.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Nikolai1

[Bindi]

I have noticed an association between 'giving up' followed shortly by 'awakening', can anyone explain the mechanics of this? 

[doc benway]

Bindi - I think that's an astute observation and I share it. Here's how I would try to explain it -

The one who tries and exerts effort is the one who keeps us asleep.

That very effort is the obstacle as it reinforces the illusion of the one who is exerting effort.

When we are able to let go of that effort we can simply rest in a state which is uncontrived (thank you Rigdzin Trinley for that word).

That state is the most conducive to awakening. 

 

My teacher says it very succinctly - "effort is the exit"

[Kar3n]

Bindi - I think that's an astute observation and I share it. Here's how I would try to explain it -

The one who tries and exerts effort is the one who keeps us asleep.

That very effort is the obstacle as it reinforces the illusion of the one who is exerting effort.

When we are able to let go of that effort we can simply rest in a state which is uncontrived (thank you Rigdzin Trinley for that word).

That state is the most conducive to awakening. 

 

My teacher says it very succinctly - "effort is the exit"

Yes, yes, and yes!

 

The more I want the less there is, the more I search, the less I find.

When searching and wanting cease, the field of vision opens up to more...