Practice everything

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by Gem

Hello again


Having some vague idea of 'refuge' and how morality ties in to it, one can consider what makes a safe community and what role an individual plays in that.

Naturally that relates to practice, and I'm sure most of us see that implication.


The subject, however, is subjective, so it is understood within the actuality of the senses even though these constitute no objective substance. For example, trust, as I mentioned, is entirely subjective, and having no substance nor extension in space, can only be understood in the immediate experience of it.


The fact that something of this nature is subjective does not mean it is invented or imaginatively fabricated. It is a real thing despite it having no objective qualities, and it can be fostered and nurtured through honesty and such wholesome conduct. It can also be misplaced. It can be enticed deceptively and then shattered when the truth is revealed. You could be betrayed, mislead, taken advantage of, used - and that destroys everything.


As such we are wary of intent. There is a risk involved and through our evolution for survival we have become sensitive to what those around us intend, their motive, and we needn't pretend that our own intentions are entirely private. People do pick up on them, and even though they are sometimes misread, generally speaking, people have a pretty good idea of what's going on around them.


IOW, we tend to know what compels each other, and unless we go into the infinite regress of intending to intend to intend... no one of us chooses our intentions. If this is the case, one might question wherefrom intent arises, and if not predetermined by us, what is it's origin?


This will be very difficult to explain, you see. It is not 'in the world' to be examined and articulated. It is 'within you' and one need be self-aware to know in the most intimate, immediate and subjective sense what is actually going on with themselves. You can be pretty sure that others get a sense of it. We are all alert to others and how they affect us even though we overlook ourselves due to our outward focus on the environment in which we exist.


You can only test my points, not by finding out if the the Canon refutes or validates them, but only by discerning for yourself, without any external affirmation whatsoever, entirely on your own, how this applies to you as an individual, and if that's what you were doing so far, then you know this aspect of 'practice', and as a result, the motive for conduct would be influenced in a way you consider to be positive, not by force of will as if we intend to intend to intend to intend... etc., b by the sense of it we can glean through self-knowing.


Before you refute and cut and paste, please understand that I'm very interested in elaboration on any point I made, but I'm not going to be defending any arguments.

Sitting in my garden today with Sunday morning breakfast on my lap, sunshine on my shoulders, I realized something important to the conversation, I was having with my friend. We were talking about houses and finding one to live in at this age/stage of our life. If we look at houses like ‘jesus’ associated our ‘inner world’ as a relationship, to our ‘in house dwelling’ we see that refuge and ‘residence’ becomes as we are.

All our stages and ages whether we choose or don’t choose, ( depending on choice available ) one or ten homes, whether we are homeless or live in another persons home. It all relates to where we are within.

Each of those homes, becomes a representation of our lives and our ‘in house dwelling’ at any given time. If it’s a shared house then it’s a piece of each person associated. It becomes the ‘in house dwelling’ of all connected to that house. Refuge and residency are all intermixed. We might see we have more choices in the latter, by learning through others, how we’d like to live, how we’d like ‘our own house’ to be.

Always, without fail, the house will be what we become as our own ‘in house dwelling’ becomes within.

Being here is no different. It can be seen as a ‘home’ a place of refuge, a place to look at yourself in it. Letting the ‘practice’ be everywhere you are.

Forcing of will, driving things ‘home’ is not ‘being’ at home. It simply means your still ‘driving’ the bus and deciding which route you and all your passengers will go home. By ‘you’ I mean the you that isn’t fully at home..

[Gem]

Originally Posted by JustBe

Sitting in my garden today with Sunday morning breakfast on my lap, sunshine on my shoulders, I realized something important to the conversation, I was having with my friend. We were talking about houses and finding one to live in at this age/stage of our life. If we look at houses like ‘jesus’ associated our ‘inner world’ as a relationship, to our ‘in house dwelling’ we see that refuge and ‘residence’ becomes as we are.

All our stages and ages whether we choose or don’t choose, ( depending on choice available ) one or ten homes, whether we are homeless or live in another persons home. It all relates to where we are within.

Each of those homes, becomes a representation of our lives and our ‘in house dwelling’ at any given time. If it’s a shared house then it’s a piece of each person associated. It becomes the ‘in house dwelling’ of all connected to that house. Refuge and residency are all intermixed. We might see we have more choices in the latter, by learning through others, how we’d like to live, how we’d like ‘our own house’ to be.

Always, without fail, the house will be what we become as our own ‘in house dwelling’ becomes within.

Being here is no different. It can be seen as a ‘home’ a place of refuge, a place to look at yourself in it. Letting the ‘practice’ be everywhere you are.

Forcing of will, driving things ‘home’ is not ‘being’ at home. It simply means your still ‘driving’ the bus and deciding which route you and all your passengers will go home. By ‘you’ I mean the you that isn’t fully at home..

Yes. Houses. Good point!


I think the problem with this thread's popularity is trying to see practice across the board where practice becomes everything about your life, and that expression 'get your house in order' is very relevant.


In Buddhism this starts with morality as the foundation, and perhaps what that implies in practice is missed, but because morality is essential for refuge, there is a deep aspect involved that affects everything in life.


Of course as soon as I speak there is an argument, which I can win by pasting text that supports the view, but suffice to say, the Buddhist notion of 'right' is founded in morality and there is no 8 path without it.


This is a completely different 'right' to the being right in an argument, and if the mind is in an argumentative state it cannot infer the practice implied by the 'right' of 8 path. I know right now as people read this their minds automatically formulate argument, and maybe one or two people are formulating deeper elaborations about what I'm saying, well knowing that I'm not saying everything in this post. In fact, there is incompleteness but no right and wrong in here at all.



The very idea that I'm correct in what I say is a fallacy. It's like I'm saying coffee tastes good. Maybe another doesn't like coffee at all, but does that make them wrong? Well, no, and I'm talking about this subject just I would talk about coffee, and no matter what you do or what text you paste, you can't be right. You can only be 'right' in the Buddhist sense, which is entwined with morality, so when I say the coffee is good, I don't mean virtuous, I don't mean it's correct, I don't mean I'm right, and answering as if I mean those things only indicates a misunderstanding of what I say.


To understand is only possible in a state of mind that does not argue, like when you look at a tree, it looks that way. It does not look right or look wrong, it just so happens to appear as it does. You can look more closely at the patterns of the bark and the veins in the leaf etc, but there is still nothing there to argue against. That closeness of observation is the perceptive state of listening, observing or being mindfully aware.

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes. Houses. Good point!


I think the problem with this thread's popularity is trying to see practice across the board where practice becomes everything about your life, and that expression 'get your house in order' is very relevant.


In Buddhism this starts with morality as the foundation, and perhaps what that implies in practice is missed, but because morality is essential for refuge, there is a deep aspect involved that affects everything in life.


Of course as soon as I speak there is an argument, which I can win by pasting text that supports the view, but suffice to say, the Buddhist notion of 'right' is founded in morality and there is no 8 path without it.


This is a completely different 'right' to the being right in an argument, and if the mind is in an argumentative state it cannot infer the practice implied by the 'right' of 8 path. I know right now as people read this their minds automatically formulate argument, and maybe one or two people are formulating deeper elaborations about what I'm saying, well knowing that I'm not saying everything in this post. In fact, there is incompleteness but no right and wrong in here at all.



The very idea that I'm correct in what I say is a fallacy. It's like I'm saying coffee tastes good. Maybe another doesn't like coffee at all, but does that make them wrong? Well, no, and I'm talking about this subject just I would talk about coffee, and no matter what you do or what text you paste, you can't be right. You can only be 'right' in the Buddhist sense, which is entwined with morality, so when I say the coffee is good, I don't mean virtuous, I don't mean it's correct, I don't mean I'm right, and answering as if I mean those things only indicates a misunderstanding of what I say.


To understand is only possible in a state of mind that does not argue, like when you look at a tree, it looks that way. It does not look right or look wrong, it just so happens to appear as it does. You can look more closely at the patterns of the bark and the veins in the leaf etc, but there is still nothing there to argue against. That closeness of observation is the perceptive state of listening, observing or being mindfully aware.

I think the difficulty is that within the whole context of Buddhist teachings and people arguing about what’s ‘right’ or wrong, is that many are not observing their desire or need to make this be. It’s easy to look at a Buddhist teaching and say, yes that’s true and correct as Buddhism goes, but the very ‘need’ to make it right versus ‘wrong’ can and often will overlook the ‘desire and need’ that could be looked at more closely to deepen beyond that ‘reason’ or ‘need’ that presents itself.

It’s often as you have said previously (in your own words) their are potential ‘traps’ in any ‘teaching’ if you don’t self reflect and look at the mind, body, in all that as yourself within the whole context. A tool to grow through and become as you aware of yourself as a whole.

It could be an obvious ‘containment’ or something very subtle, such as, ‘I know the truth of Buddhist teachings and if I can’t see what your saying in them, then ‘your falling short on your Buddhist ‘knowledge’ and I need to correct you, so you get it right. Yet the very person aware of themselves, mindful and conscious of the truth within themselves as that, will undoubtedly not fair very well up against that ‘knowledge’, especially if the one presenting their argument is not fully aware of their needs and desires as themselves presenting in this way.

In my view, the teachings cannot be separated out, because when you do, you can’t see the inter connected relationship they are as a whole. Which means until you see yourself, in this way ‘aware’ of you as this, you wont see them in this light.

It’s such an intricate and intertwined awareness of yourself that one really has to look at ‘the whys and how’s of themselves in why they do what they do.

I suppose you could say, It might be good to ask yourself. “Do I know myself in these words I’m posting, quoting, setting down as truth for myself?”

“Can I see myself in this and am I allowing the words to ripple through my being, settle in me and am I noticing myself in it?” “Am I conscious of my internal needs, motives, feelings, sensations as I let it move through me first and foremost?”


Then I think you would agree everything changes from there and the ‘clarity of you’ unearthed often moves very differently, often expresses very differently. Sees that truth as itself and so the teaching has supported the truth in you for you, as the human being..

[Gem]

Originally Posted by JustBe

I think the difficulty is that within the whole context of Buddhist teachings and people arguing about what’s ‘right’ or wrong, is that many are not observing their desire or need to make this be. It’s easy to look at a Buddhist teaching and say, yes that’s true and correct as Buddhism goes, but the very ‘need’ to make it right versus ‘wrong’ can and often will overlook the ‘desire and need’ that could be looked at more closely to deepen beyond that ‘reason’ or ‘need’ that presents itself.

Yes I believe that's the point, especially the subject here can't be approached with right vs. wrong or other kind of dichotomy in the mind. We can't reach any conclusion and still have a open mind.

It’s often as you have said previously (in your own words) their are potential ‘traps’ in any ‘teaching’ if you don’t self reflect and look at the mind, body, in all that as yourself within the whole context. A tool to grow through and become as you aware of yourself as a whole.

Exactly, and I can only advocate be driven by the truth. Not the truth as it you learn factual acquired knowedlge, but the truth of yourself 'as you are' from moment to moment to moment, which requires an observance of truth, 'as it is'.

It could be an obvious ‘containment’ or something very subtle, such as, ‘I know the truth of Buddhist teachings and if I can’t see what your saying in them, then ‘your falling short on your Buddhist ‘knowledge’ and I need to correct you, so you get it right.

Of course from my perspective I understand things from a Buddhist perspective from real lived experience, and other's here are book read, but I'm not the expert and don't claim to be and I'm not correcting anyone. Al that is merely a competition to be right, so of course someone needs to made wrong, and this is problematic when it comes to refuge because positioning people so as to orient ourselves is inherently self serving at anothers expense.

Yet the very person aware of themselves, mindful and conscious of the truth within themselves as that, will undoubtedly not fair very well up against that ‘knowledge’, especially if the one presenting their argument is not fully aware of their needs and desires as themselves presenting in this way.

Yea, I'm basically only going advocate for being self-aware, but I doubt it's going to be effective because I'm not offering anything desirable. It's just my ethics to be careful about raising temptations. I don't want to practice to be 'wrongly' motivated.

In my view, the teachings cannot be separated out, because when you do, you can’t see the inter connected relationship they are as a whole. Which means until you see yourself, in this way ‘aware’ of you as this, you wont see them in this light.

It’s such an intricate and intertwined awareness of yourself that one really has to look at ‘the whys and how’s of themselves in why they do what they do.

I suppose you could say, It might be good to ask yourself. “Do I know myself in these words I’m posting, quoting, setting down as truth for myself?”

Yes, Tat would be a good idea, and if posting cut, at least have something to say about it from the real lived experience. Of course that's a risk because someone is bound to make you wrong even though you can't be, as you actually tasted the coffee and you know what it's like..

“Can I see myself in this and am I allowing the words to ripple through my being, settle in me and am I noticing myself in it?” “Am I conscious of my internal needs, motives, feelings, sensations as I let it move through me first and foremost?”

Yes. Well said.

Then I think you would agree everything changes from there and the ‘clarity of you’ unearthed often moves very differently, often expresses very differently. Sees that truth as itself and so the teaching has supported the truth in you for you, as the human being..

For me, I watch that happening as I listen to you, and that's what I mean by 'listening' - to see it affect on the inside and understand it through that self-knowing.

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes I believe that's the point, especially the subject here can't be approached with right vs. wrong or other kind of dichotomy in the mind. We can't reach any conclusion and still have a open mind.





Exactly, and I can only advocate be driven by the truth. Not the truth as it you learn factual acquired knowedlge, but the truth of yourself 'as you are' from moment to moment to moment, which requires an observance of truth, 'as it is'.




Of course from my perspective I understand things from a Buddhist perspective from real lived experience, and other's here are book read, but I'm not the expert and don't claim to be and I'm not correcting anyone. Al that is merely a competition to be right, so of course someone needs to made wrong, and this is problematic when it comes to refuge because positioning people so as to orient ourselves is inherently self serving at anothers expense.





Yea, I'm basically only going advocate for being self-aware, but I doubt it's going to be effective because I'm not offering anything desirable. It's just my ethics to be careful about raising temptations. I don't want to practice to be 'wrongly' motivated.




Yes, Tat would be a good idea, and if posting cut, at least have something to say about it from the real lived experience. Of course that's a risk because someone is bound to make you wrong even though you can't be, as you actually tasted the coffee and you know what it's like..




Yes. Well said.







For me, I watch that happening as I listen to you, and that's what I mean by 'listening' - to see it affect on the inside and understand it through that self-knowing.

Yes. I do it as I’m listening to you or another. It’s that level in feeling, you know if there are any reactions, subtle or not so subtle, you address them. For me, it’s all about paying close ‘attention’ from my being, not my head. I’m always aware I’m attentive and observing what’s moving through me, so it’s easy to address in the moment. I know what clarity feels like as myself aware, in my outward expression or presence with another.

I do feel, that until you reach the point of balance within, where you can be your own witness ‘aware’ it’s difficult to address things in this way. Certainly there is a shift that can support this, simply by being more attentive, paying closer attention to ‘you’ in any given situation.

I tend to ask my body all manner of things.

Like ‘why is my hip still aching, why isn’t it holding strong?”
Often through this self enquiry, my balance allows for more direct ‘knowing’ more ‘awareness’ of what is still contained in these pockets. And as the awareness and information through whatever means reveals I can be present and deepen into that ‘holding’ and work deeper with it. Let the process move differently.

Like this morning I asked my body and what arose was a trauma picture that ‘activated a very slow subtle awareness of trauma still held. I stayed with it all and listened even further to the unravelling, getting a ‘clearer picture of it, to work with it.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by JustBe

Yes. I do it as I’m listening to you or another. It’s that level in feeling, you know if there are any reactions, subtle or not so subtle, you address them. For me, it’s all about paying close ‘attention’ from my being, not my head. I’m always aware I’m attentive and observing what’s moving through me, so it’s easy to address in the moment. I know what clarity feels like as myself aware, in my outward expression or presence with another.

I do feel, that until you reach the point of balance within, where you can be your own witness ‘aware’ it’s difficult to address things in this way. Certainly there is a shift that can support this, simply by being more attentive, paying closer attention to ‘you’ in any given situation.

Certainly. We become distracted and lose sight of ourselves, but with deliberate intention we get better at staying centred as the one aware.

I tend to ask my body all manner of things.

Like ‘why is my hip still aching, why isn’t it holding strong?”
Often through this self enquiry, my balance allows for more direct ‘knowing’ more ‘awareness’ of what is still contained in these pockets. And as the awareness and information through whatever means reveals I can be present and deepen into that ‘holding’ and work deeper with it. Let the process move differently.

Like this morning I asked my body and what arose was a trauma picture that ‘activated a very slow subtle awareness of trauma still held. I stayed with it all and listened even further to the unravelling, getting a ‘clearer picture of it, to work with it.

Yes I usually find that feelings in the body are relater to mental/emotional contents, and first of all we feel adverse toward them as if they have to be fixed, and yes they need healing, but that doesn't work through aversion toward the ailments/impurities that impels the desire that it need be other than it is. Indeed, when these things enter conscious awareness you can notice of yourself how you've always reacted adversely to these things in the past, which puts you at a level behind the one who is concerned with all this, and once you're back there you watch the whole of it playing out, the feeling, the contents, the reactive process, and you are no longer the one who feels adverse and wants things to be otherwise, and thus become free from the aversion and desire, regardless if you are healed or remain with the aliments, which is not really the concern of the one aware. However, since from this perspective you are not concerned with the mind/body arisings and passings, there's no resistance nor strain since you are also behind watching that as well, and the whole thing is left to change as it must do, and that's what they call 'letting go'.


Just the other day, being under pressure with the business and plagued by self doubt due to some very real shortcomings in skillsets, I felt a bit anxious and distressed, and I suddenly thought, I can just put this down and leave it alone, and that's what I did, right there and then. Like finding out I was carrying a stone, and like 'why am I carrying this'?...