It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's time to wake up!

page: 12
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes, it means observing thoughts in direct experience without assuming anything to be true about those thoughts.
For example, if thoughts arise about yourself. Like, "I am a loser". Instead of believing these thoughts to be true and identify with them, in other words have thoughts about thoughts, you can simply observe the thoughts happening without assuming them to be tied to an imaginary "I".
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
Instead of believing these thoughts to be true and identify with them, in other words have thoughts about thoughts, you can simply observe the thoughts happening without assuming them to be tied to an imaginary "I".

How do these two things differ?

More to the point, what do you gain?



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Thoughts are happening. Most of the times, there are thoughts about thoughts and experience. But thoughts can be observed without assuming anything about those thoughts through directly experiencing this moment as it is.
If the illusion of self is seen clearly using this method then it is very liberating. Although everyone has different responses towards realizing this.
Another thing to note is there is nothing for "you" to gain if you catch my drift. That is another perspective on things.
I'm not sure if this answered your question because I didn't understand what were the two things that differ you mentioned.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
I'm not sure if this answered your question because I didn't understand what were the two things that differ you mentioned.

It didn't.

The two things were seeing clearly the illusion of self or not.

The more I participate in these types of threads the more it seems that you guys have found the answer to a problem that doesn't really exist.

You then create the problem so the answer will fit correctly.
edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

On one level, there is no self, and there is no problem. And even no questions. That is one level.
On another level, although the self is an illusion, the identification with it is still there. And through direct experience and inquiry can one effectively see through this.
I still don't get your question. Seeing the illusion of a self or not. Can you be more specific?
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
On one level, there is no self, and there is no problem. And even no questions. That is one level.
On another level, although the self is an illusion, the identification with it is still there. And through direct experience and inquiry can one effectively see through this.

And if you don't?


I still don't get your question. Seeing the illusion of a self or not. Can you be more specific?

They are your phrases.


If the illusion of self is seen clearly using this method then it is very liberating.


Which would mean that you can either a) see the illusion of self or b) you don't see the illusion of self.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Perspective 1: you can neither see through the illusion of self, or not see it, because there is no you.

P 2: The illusion of it can be seen through or not.

If you don't see through the illusion you spend your life living a fictional character that does not exist. Believing in this entity is what creates most if not all mental suffering. So as you may guess, it has major implications to see through it.
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
Perspective 1: you can neither see through the illusion of self, or not see it, because there is no you.

P 2: The illusion of it can be seen through or not.

You do get that I quoted your words?

Besides, this makes no sense.
edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Ok, then you have to explain why. There are people who would understand this, but they are more well read in this subject then you it appears.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
Ok, then you have to explain why. There are people who would understand this, but they are more well read in this subject then you it appears.

Don't try to put this on me. You words were:

If the illusion of self is seen clearly using this method then it is very liberating.


This says that the method you propose will help someone "clearly see the illusion of self". This implies that not using this method can mean that you don't "clearly see the illusion of self".

Are we on the same page so far?

edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

People can see through the illusion of the self in a few other ways. For some it can happen sponteneously, for some it happens when one is completely hopeless and surrenders. For some, it can happen through extreme pain. But one doesn't need to wait for anything to happen. You can use self-inquiry which is the most direct method and just get it over with.
Are we on the same page?
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
People can see through the illusion of the self in a few other ways. For some it can happen sponteneously, for some it happens when one is completely hopeless and surrenders. For some, it can happen through extreme pain. But one doesn't need to wait for anything to happen. You can use self-inquiry which is the most direct method and just get it over with.
Are we on the same page?

No we are not. Neither you nor I said that the method you proposed is the only way so, that was not in question.

I wanted to establish an understanding that people can either "see through the illusion of the self" or they can continue without "seeing through the illusion of the self".

Those are the two things that I was asking about. In concrete terms, what is the benefit of one over the other?
edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

The benefit over seeing through the illusion of the self is relieving yourself of the burden that you authored thoughts, that when you have thoughts of someone hating you, that these thoughts can be allowed to dissolve since there is no one for the thoughts to attach to. You see reality clearly as it is, and there much more peace and compassion. Compassion because we now understand that people could not have done otherwise. There is more understanding and compassion.

Continuing to believe in the illusion of the self is, well, it is an illusion. What's the point in believing in something that doesn't exist? There are beliefs that we could have done otherwise, that you can be defined by your thoughts, such as " I am a mess, I feel like a loser, I don't love myself." All these have the illusion of self in common. When the self is seen through, these negative ego-rooted thoughts can be dropped. Although it is a process.

It benefits every part of your life without excluding anything. As I said, most if not all mental suffering is ego-driven. So seeing through the illusion of self allows suffering to end. That's the difference and it is big.

I could have explained this in more detail but maybe you get the essentials. Or maybe if you are interested in reading more about the benefits, I can provide link that explain it in more depth.
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Andy1144

Those are not concrete terms.

If suffering is an illusion then what difference does it make if it ends or not?



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Because the experience of the illusion is real. That's why you would want to experience a happy illusion instead of a negative one.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
Because the experience of the illusion is real. That's why you would want to experience a happy illusion instead of a negative one.

But if seeing through the illusion of the self negates the negative experience it must also negate the happy ones.

In the end you are seeking something, just like everyone else, dumping their faith into whatever they believe will spare them from negative experiences.
edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

It doesn't negate negative experiences. Those continue post-awakening. What changes is your point of view. So intstead of seeing negative thoughts and feelings as a personal phenomena, you can see them as impersonal as something that do not belong to "me". This is not some wacky belief. This is what is happening in DE.
So it cannot negate positive experiences because you aren't pushing away or denying anything, you are actually embracing everything fully. Not through blind faith, but through actual direct experience.

The belief part is BS. I've never said believe this, and try to avoid negative feelings through imagining some blind belief. I say look into direct experience. Do not assume, but look. Look at what is happening in your experience. The self is a belief. It's an ignorant belief. This is a fact, which is obvious in neuroscience. So it's not a new age metaphysical idea.
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
It doesn't negate negative experiences. Those continue post-awakening. What changes is your point of view. So intstead of seeing negative thoughts and feelings as a personal phenomena, you can see them as impersonal as something that do not belong to "me". This is not some wacky belief. This is what is happening in DE.

So it's just about thoughts and feelings?

Are you Stuart Smalley?


The belief part is BS. I've never said believe this

I never said that you said this, I said that it is analogous to that.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Our experiences are comprised of thoughts and feelings and our experience with it, so yes it is just about experience. Experience is the only thing we have and the only thing that matters, so it has to do with everything. What is your point here?
edit on 10-11-2015 by Andy1144 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Andy1144
Our experiences are comprised of thoughts and feelings and our experience with it, so yes it is just about experience.

Our experiences are not just thoughts and feelings.

You seem to be playing word gymnastics.

"Experiences = thoughts + feelings + experiences" so this means "it is just about experience".


Experience is the only thing we have and the only thing that matters, so it has to do with everything. What is your point here?

My point is that DE seems to be about remembering that "Stick and stones may break my bones but thoughts and feelings will never hurt me"

Heck, i've been awake since kindergarten.
edit on 10-11-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join