A tiny bit of clarity

Here you may share how the words Eckhart Tolle have affected your life.
User avatar
kiki
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4592
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:55 pm
Location: Wherever "here" happens to be

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by kiki » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:41 am

Of course every explanation of Being occurs through the mind, after it re-engages, as just an interpretation. All we are left with is words after the fact, and I do my best to use words as accurately as I can in whatever explanations I use. Sometimes I could put things better; I can't satisfy everyone. Can anybody?
shappy wrote:There is nothing gradual about it.
For most people awakening to one's true nature and then stabilizing in it is gradual. People will have glimpses but not understand it because they can't, no one can. This usually creates confusion. But as one repeatedly dwells in the present moment the clarity of Being is revealed to be what you are rather than any content within the mind, any thought of what you think you are, or any kind of form. If you aren't what you think you are then what are you? That's what is discovered, your real nature - call it what you will.

As you stated, though, the experience of Being (insofar as you can call it an experience) is immediate, and it utterly obliterates everything else. It was here yesterday, it's here now, and it will be here forevermore. It can't get any more immediate than that. And when you see it, there it is, in its fullness - utterly complete, alive, empty yet pregnant with every possibility, aware, and as natural and simple as the open sky - simplicity in the extreme - home. But these are just words and they don't do it justice.
shappy wrote:It is absolutely different from anything that you can imagine. And I'm not trying to be cryptic at all. It is just the simple fact of the matter: It is beyond imagination. There is nothing that happens "there", you are just being in all it's indescribable being-ness. Simply being the utter freedom of who you already are. It is extremely alive and intense yet completely natural.
I agree. It is beyond description, and yet we still make attempts at doing so.
shappy wrote:So I can't help but raise an eyebrow when you claim that you often abide in this being-ness and yet you still discuss nonsense like worry and fear.
First, I only mention fear because there are many people who struggle with this; I no longer do, as I mentioned. I answer out of a desire to get them beyond it. And yes, it is nonsense, but not to those who have turned it into a stumbling block. Am I to totally ignore this issue, an issue which many are dealing with? Is it helpful to simply say fear is nonsense?
shappy wrote:I mean, if you think that we are talking about the same thing, then you must be abiding in this being-ness a lot. Please tell us in your own words what this feels like. I would love to know.
I've already done that in a previous post in this thread, as well elsewhere on the board. Your description doesn't vary with how I experience it. And why should it be something not to be experienced easily, regularly, since it is what you are?
shappy wrote: (on who experiences fear) I don't know what you mean by "you" (in quotes), but it is experienced through me, shappy. Only the person experiences fear.
I'm talking about you as shappy, the person. What do you, shappy, say to others about fear and how to handle it when someone else thinks it's a problem? And what do you do when fear arises?
shappy wrote:The need you express to subdue fear is clear evidence that we are not talking about the same thing.

Again, I answer this as a response to those who have issues with fear. With me fear is no longer an issue. There is no subduing of fear; when it arises it is seen for what it is, another mental construct. Very simple, very direct - it is simply recognized by consciousness and then dissolves. It couldn't be any more simple.
shappy wrote:Secondly, alleviating fear will not have you being.
No, it won't, and I don't recall ever saying this.
shappy wrote:The only reason why you are experiencing a lose of fear is because you have conditioned your mind to do that.
You seem certain about what my experience is. Curious.
shappy wrote:Also, regarding that earlier quote of yours about fear, this talk of fear being future-based has absolutely nothing to do with being and everything to do with conditioning.
I agree, fear is about conditioning and has nothing to do with being. Most people fear what lies in the future, based on past experience, and for those people for whom the ego appears real, this is a big problem. That fear has a cloaking ability which blocks the now. Not the now of what's happening, not the content, but the field in which everything happens. It is only while in that field of now that Being can be sensed. I try to point this out in as many ways as I can; some get it and some don't.
shappy wrote: (on what you do when others ask about how to experience Being) It is the deepest and simplest immediacy of the direct experience.
Yes, I agree with that description, but when someone says, "Yes, but how is that experienced? What should I do?" what do you say?
"Miss Kelly, perhaps you'd like this flower. I seem to have misplaced my buttonhole ... Miss Kelly, you know, when you wear my flower you make it look beautiful." Elwood P. Dowd
---

shappy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by shappy » Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:22 am

kiki wrote:What do you, shappy, say to others about fear and how to handle it when someone else thinks it's a problem?
I would tell them the clearest way that I could... it's not real. However, I'm not a teacher and don't try to be one. My only purpose is to be who I already am (which is not "clear presence-awareness"). Just to clarify, I'm not being and not for a second would I think that I am. I'm fully and completely shappy, the person. However, I know this. I'm not trying to fool myself into thinking that I'm being who I already am (which has nothing to do with shappy). I have clearly seen what it is to simply be. I've given up on "clear presence-awareness" because I have CLEARLY seen that it is a dead end. I would still be trapped in the sandbox without even knowing it.
kiki wrote:And what do you do when fear arises?
I get anxious and scared but I know that it is not real (but I know this from memory... not from being this "shappy").
kiki wrote:Again, I answer this as a response to those who have issues with fear.
I don't buy it.

Again, I will quote this:
kiki wrote:When fear comes, which is very seldom now (actually, I can't remember the last time I was gripped by any kind of fear), I immediately realize that it is future based and release it. When thoughts come about the future that could turn into "fearful thoughts" I just see them for what they are and sort of say to myself, "Well, let's see what happens when the time comes. For now I will just stay present."
There is absolutely no need to do any of this "stuff". Reminding yourself to stay present is NOT being!! None of it is necessary! And if you're merely trying to help people when you say this, then you're deliberately confusing them.
kiki wrote:Yes, I agree with that description, but when someone says, "Yes, but how is that experienced? What should I do?" what do you say?
I would tell them to focus on the immediacy of the direct experience. Also, I have some good pointers on my "Experimenting with Consciousness" thread.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6849
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Webwanderer » Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:03 pm

shappy wrote:Reminding yourself to stay present is NOT being!! None of it is necessary! And if you're merely trying to help people when you say this, then you're deliberately confusing them.
kiki wrote:Yes, I agree with that description, but when someone says, "Yes, but how is that experienced? What should I do?" what do you say?
I would tell them to focus on the immediacy of the direct experience. Also, I have some good pointers on my "Experimenting with Consciousness" thread.
So, "staying present"" and "focusing on the immediacy of the direct experience" are two different issues? One leads down the primrose path, and the other to Self-realization? A little more clarity on the distinction would be helpful.
shappy wrote:Yes, here is where life is lived. But the main question is: Who is doing the living? Is it who you think you are trying to be who you really are, or the actual immensity of who we really are living in absolute freedom completley separate from any arisings?
It is What/Who is (Essential Being), living through a perspective of who I think/sense I am; whether that be an ego version a separate-self, or a perception clear of mind and attachment to content. Either way it is Manifest Being. There is no other.
shappy wrote:Not allowing certain arisings of manifestation to bother you (like fear) is NOT being. And there certainly is no being a certain way. These are just two examples... we are clearly talking about very different "things".
Who said anything about not allowing things to bother you? Quite the opposite. It is the resistance to fear that keeps it active within us. Allowing it (or any emotion) full presence allows fear to be seen clearly as energy based on judgments of right and wrong about possible future experiences.

As to resistance to fear not being being, of course it is. It is being in resistance to fear. There is nothing wrong with resistance to fear, or any other experience. Whatever is manifesting, Essence is being that. I do not mean by "certain way" as being exclusive or proper. All ways are particular to how life is being expressed in a given moment. My reference to "certain way" is unique to that moment, but not exclusive of any other posibility. All experiences are legitimate expressions of being.

The issue we frequently address here is how that experience is percieved. Is it from a sense of separation or duality, or from a perspective of spacious inclusion. Being is isness regardless of perspective.

shappy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by shappy » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:42 pm

Webwanderer wrote:So, "staying present"" and "focusing on the immediacy of the direct experience" are two different issues? One leads down the primrose path, and the other to Self-realization? A little more clarity on the distinction would be helpful.
I have tried to make the distinction as clear as I could... that's been the whole purpose of this interaction.
Webwanderer wrote:It is What/Who is (Essential Being), living through a perspective of who I think/sense I am; whether that be an ego version a separate-self, or a perception clear of mind and attachment to content. Either way it is Manifest Being. There is no other.
Yes, who you are already is, no matter what you do. However, the ego can simply have this information and think that it is enough OR the ego can actually get out of the way and let what already is true of you BE and live unobstructed (as much as possible). Two completely different "things". One will have you toiling over who you already are and continuing to fool around with stuff like "clear presence-awareness" and the other will have you simply being free from it all.
Webwanderer wrote:Who said anything about not allowing things to bother you? Quite the opposite. It is the resistance to fear that keeps it active within us. Allowing it (or any emotion) full presence allows fear to be seen clearly as energy based on judgments of right and wrong about possible future experiences.
Yes, I intimately understand how this works. And it's nice because the fear subsides but the thing is, there is a reaction to fear. We're still reacting from who we think we are. Fear has you doing something to alleviate it. There is an extremely subtle process involved that has your mind labeling the emotion as fear and doing something about it (allowing it to be/not resisting it). It becomes conditioning on top of conditioning.

How did you or kiki get to the point where fear seldom bothers you? How did you get to the point where you can be in "clear presence-awareness"? You probably did what we all have done. And that is (in the early stages), you would remind yourself to "be present". Remind yourself that you are not this person and so it doesn't matter what you do or don't do. You thought that you "got it". And there is no "getting it" from who you think you are. Who you think you are will never "get it". Who you think you are is destined to push around the same sand.
Webwanderer wrote:As to resistance to fear not being being, of course it is. It is being in resistance to fear. There is nothing wrong with resistance to fear, or any other experience. Whatever is manifesting, Essence is being that. I do not mean by "certain way" as being exclusive or proper. All ways are particular to how life is being expressed in a given moment. My reference to "certain way" is unique to that moment, but not exclusive of any other posibility. All experiences are legitimate expressions of being.
Yes, but you're still not consciously being. Only thinking that you're getting somewhere. Still trapped in the sandbox.

User avatar
astaroth
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:26 pm
Location: behind the screen

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by astaroth » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:56 pm

I more and more think that you are speaking about the same thing as the moderators, shappy. It is not so easy to describe something with a verb which doesn't happen. How would you describe not-ding? :lol: Of course, your advice could then be "don't do!" or "do not!" to someone but this not-doing is then a verb again if you misunderstand the truth behind this nothing or not-doing.

Or to give another comparison: If a leaf falls into a river and the leaf is carried away by the flow of the river naturally, has the river conditioned itself?

Funny how the whole discussion started. And again I thank shappy for forcing webwanderer and kiki to "say it correctly". I agree with him: The answers you gave to seekerjon were actually not the best ones you've ever posted into this forum. Seems like it's not always easy to give a "solution" for something which only seems to be a problem to something which isn't real. Also to say it's not real may be confusing, as well, I think. It's not more or less real than the forum in which I'm now typing these letters into. This forum seems to be quite real - who could say it's not? - but there's a world outside the internet :lol: There's a user :lol:

It were advices to do something which frustrated me heavily not so long time ago about the whole spiritual thing. "Accept it!" I said to myself many times when my always-lurking painbody went crazy (it's very clever about sneaking in time by time, to me it's all about doubts). "Okay, now I accept it" astaroth said to himself. But there was this bad taste, in fact my "acceptance" had - of course - been nothing more than a bad joke. Acceptance is a natural by-product resulting of the rememberence of one's true nature. No doing, nothing's needed.
The same is with "not believing in mental stories" or "releasing them". All the same. All verbs. All doing.

I think, the egoic tendency is to go closer and closer to something which is seen (by the ego) as a problem. The awakening consciousness' tendency is to step away from it (or stay in distance) like broken glass which would hurt you if you tried to destory it with your fists - this hurting is, of course, the normal state for most people.

Maybe the best (and only) way to give "solutions" for the "problems" here is to show people who they really are. In 9 of 10 cases you are doing a great job :lol:

Anyway, my gratefulness for your work here, dear moderators.

how beautiful to feel the warmth again,
astaroth
Last edited by astaroth on Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:20 pm, edited 3 times in total.
...you might remember me from such educational films as "Zen for couch-potatoes - The wisdom of never doing anything" or "Buddha from da hood - Was he a brother?"

presentlybythesea
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:45 pm

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by presentlybythesea » Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:00 pm

Regarding fear. If someone asked me, "Is this the bus to Cleveland?" I wouldn't respond to him in fine Clintonesque, "That depends on what you mean "is" is. I might say, "No, that's the bus for Peoria; I know because I've been on that frightful bus." We'd be talking at a mind level. We wouldn't need to discuss Being. And so would go the talk about fear. I'd say," Let the issue be for the future." Mark Twain said, "95% of the things I worried about never came to be."

There are some sharp minds and keen intellects on this site. But sometimes I wonder if the intellect misses the mark. It dissects and parses everything down to the atomic level but forgets the big picture. I don't get a sense of peace from some of the discourse here. Mostly analytical diagnosis of other posts. There seems to be a scientific approach in evaluations. As Dr. Phil once again might say, "How's that working out for you?"

Regarding intellect, Osho points out: "Intellect is logical; intelligence is paradoxical. Intellect in analytical; intelligence is synthetical. Intellect divides, cuts into pieces to understand a thing. Science is based on intellect, dissection, division, analysis. Intelligence joins things together, makes a whole out of parts, because this is one of the greatest understandings: that the part exists through the whole, not vice versa. And the whole is not just the sum of the parts, it is more than the sum."

Bear with one more quote: Tolle says in, "A New Earth", "The next step in human evolution is not inevitable, but for the first time in the history of our planet, it can be a conscious choice. Who is making that choice? You are. And who are you? Consciousness that has become conscious of itself."

But when we go that route and try to look at consciousness it tends to become mind again. Kind of like knowing what being humble is but as soon as you think you are humble, you're not.

I think we all agree that the mind is a lot of concepts gathered through life and they tend to haze everything we see with labels, judgments, etc. It's a morass of trouble for people who want the clarity of reality.

I think I get a sense of Self, of Being indirectly. I have knowledge of it, or this sense of it, by the light that comes from it. I know it is of only the qualities of love, compassion, and kindness. I don't know how I know this, I just do. There is something eternal of me that says, "Yes, this I know is true."

So, when what comes from me is of that quality, I know it to be of Being. And when I see it played out before me I know it too. Sometimes it's only a matter of, as was written by C.S. Lewis, "neti, neti" meaning, not that, not that. Chipping away, as the sculptor might chip away from the block of marble all that is not of the elephant, so that only the beautiful elephant remains. You know what it is not. So what it is, is revealed.

I wish you all peace and please, stay off that bus to Peoria.
Presentlybythesea
Every encounter in the present, an opportunity to affect collective human consciousness.

User avatar
heidi
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2703
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:37 am
Location: 42nd parallel, Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by heidi » Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:06 pm

Beautifully written, pleasantlybts. You said it so well, there's nothing to add - we'll just keep chipping away. :)
Heidi
http://www.heidimayo.com
wonderment on the third wave

User avatar
Onceler
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Onceler » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:51 am

I think I achieved the goal of this thread and got a tiny bit of clarity .
Be present, be pleasant.

shappy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by shappy » Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:08 am

astaroth wrote:Funny how the whole discussion started. And again I thank shappy for forcing webwanderer and kiki to "say it correctly". I agree with him: The answers you gave to seekerjon were actually not the best ones you've ever posted into this forum.
My intention was not to point out something specific that was said "incorrectly". Kiki implied that being "present" is being. I know "presence"... I have done it up to this point. Read my past contributions (up to about 2-3 weeks ago)... all discussing "presence" with decent clarity. However, I have clearly seen the distinction between being and "presence". The field of Now or the present moment is wonderful and it is where truth can be found but in order for you to actually BE this truth that you are, you have to go further than that (or rather, before that). To embody who you really are is different from being within the field of Now.

One can always be more present. I mean, did kiki and Webwanderer start out being fully in the field of Now and consciously being it? I don't know. Who they already are did, but who they already are always did so it's beside the point. However, to BE, is instantaneous freedom from thinking that you are the person. There is no "figuring out" anything. It is absolute. There cannot be more of anything. You have gone as far as you can. You are simply being. No experience of being (as perceived by the individual) is more clear or less clear than another. It's always instantaneously completely clear.
astaroth wrote:Also to say it's not real may be confusing, as well, I think.
There is nothing wrong with confusion. Being is not about feeling good. It's not about muting your painbody or taming your ego. Astaroth is the ego/painbody and astaroth is trying to do something about the ego/painbody. Trying to break free from the ego/painbody using the ego/painbody is a waste of energy. It cannot be done. This whole painbody/ego "thing" wobbles and balances itself out no matter what you do (as the person).
astaroth wrote:Acceptance is a natural by-product resulting of the rememberence of one's true nature. No doing, nothing's needed.
But how is this rememberance accomplished? And constantly reminding yourself to be free is not freedom. You don't have to condition your mind to BE, you just have to find it... you have to see it. And you have to continue to see it until you BE it. There is only the seeing of it. There is no need to strive for clarity.

It's either the absolute immediacy of who you already are or the constant reminding yourself that you are "clear presence-awareness". One will have you self-realizing and the other will have you thinking that you are self-realizing. There is no in-between. There is no chipping away at anything. There is no climbing up a hill. All that stuff may be important for the person to do but it's not necessary. The immediacy of who you already are is already here waiting for you to see it. It's that simple.



I hope everyone understands that I am not saying being is "better" than "clear presence-awareness". Both are what they are. However, there is a very necessary distinction that I think is important to point out. I hope that I have been able to do so. If not, that's ok... at least it got people thinking about the whole thing. Thanks everyone for an interesting conversation!

User avatar
Onceler
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:35 am
Location: My house

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Onceler » Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:45 pm

Good post, thanks shappy. I am beginning to get what you are saying.
Be present, be pleasant.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6849
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Webwanderer » Wed Dec 12, 2007 11:55 pm

shappy, It seems you are slaying straw men. Your conception of “clear” and “presence” and “awareness” is apparently well defined in your mind, but that definition appears to be restricting what is intended. Yes, you have made a clear distinction between clear presence-awareness and being, but you have done so on your own arbitrary terms. If taken as intended, there is far greater harmony between terminologies than you appear willing to see. And they do stand in such opposition to each other as implied.

However you have defined your concept of “clear presence-awareness”, it is entirely of your own making; and from that limited definition, being (as you indicated) an ego/mind generated concept, I can agree with your characterizations. If you are saying that “clear presence-awareness” is a conceptual, ego generated point of view, then it is you who are creating the concept that you describe. So it is understandable that you would see it through the lens of your own definitions. Again, within those parameters I can agree.

But must we be limited by a particular restrictive definition? Or can the original intent be acknowledged? Taken as the pointer that it is intended, the reality to which it points is beyond the limits of any definitions that words can convey. It references an undefinable essential consciousness, not a concept of any “thing”.

Every word written here is by nature conceptual, as is every word ever written. All references in this column, or for that matter the written words of Tolle, of Jesus or of Siddhartha, are conceptual by design. But beyond the words, beyond the pointers, is the direct realization to which they may point. Not as a concept, but as clear (of concepts) awareness. Clear awareness is representative of being, as is living through the lens of ego in all its expressions. Both are manifest being. One however, is free of false perceptions of separate identity, the other lives through concepts of limitation.

You argument against "fooling around with clear presence-awareness" and just "being" is what the bulk of humanity is engaged in anyway. However, the bulk of humanity is also wallowing in centuries of suffering, primarily due to the lack of understanding of their true nature. Now, if there is a way to "clear" things up, it may be possible for humanity to "be" in more peaceful and loving ways.

shappy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by shappy » Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:15 am

Yes, as we all know it's impossible to define any of this with words. However, the words that are communicated do convey the understanding an individual has. The distinction I'm pointing out is based primarily on this. I should not have attempted to describe what presence is and imply that it is how you or kiki experience it. It was pointless and it was presumptuous of me. I apologize for that.

User avatar
Kutso
Posts: 884
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Kutso » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:00 am

shappy wrote:The distinction I'm pointing out is based primarily on this.
Yes. Because really, there are no distinctions. Everything is one. It's only the mind who sees distinctions where there is none.

Kutso
Not that. Not that. Not that. Not that. Not that. Not that. Not that. Not that.

User avatar
Techguy
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 4:29 am
Location: Spanaway, WA, USA
Contact:

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Techguy » Thu Mar 26, 2009 1:53 am

Better late than never:

Here is the full Adyashanti link from Onceler's post on page 1 of the thread.

http://www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/38 ... this_sound

I never "got" adyashanti, until I read that article. It was very good.

His form of meditation, "True Meditation" which allows the mind to free range, unmanipulated and uncontrolled, has been the the most satisfying method I have ever used.

The questions posed during Meditation: "What Am I?", and "Who is the Meditator?", have really helped to center and ground me in peace.

Your mileage may vary, but try those questions on.
http://bestkarmayoga.com Om...Shanti, Shanti, Shanti... (peace, peace, peace)

User avatar
Sighclone
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6391
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:22 pm

Re: A tiny bit of clarity

Post by Sighclone » Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:00 am

Very funny, techguy:
Your mileage may vary, but try those questions on.
Mileage, traction, etc...To hear him talk, Adya got really lousy mileage out of his 15 years of Zen!

Namaste, Andy
A person is not a thing or a process, but an opening through which the universe manifests. - Martin Heidegger
There is not past, no future; everything flows in an eternal present. - James Joyce

Post Reply