Anattā (no self)

[sky]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Can you make tea in a pure awareness state without a thought for tea or of yourself?


x daz x

The thought of making tea wouldn't be there, so I have to wait until my thoughts return to make and enjoy my tea

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by sky123

The thought of making tea wouldn't be there, so I have to wait until my thoughts return to make and enjoy my tea

Eggsactly .. and when your thoughts return, when the mind / world / universe returns, then you begin eventually to register / acknowledge the surrounding in reflection of what you know of yourself.

As described before it can take quite a while for some to become integrated back into self awareness ..

Only when this happens can one make the tea and identify with it.

This is all I have been saying ..


x daz x

[sky]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Eggsactly .. and when your thoughts return, when the mind / world / universe returns, then you begin eventually to register / acknowledge the surrounding in reflection of what you know of yourself.

As described before it can take quite a while for some to become integrated back into self awareness ..

Only when this happens can one make the tea and identify with it.

This is all I have been saying ..


x daz x

You make the tea now and I'll provide the cakes

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by sky123

You make the tea now and I'll provide the cakes

Tea and cakes are not permanent, they hold no real substance, it all illusory .. might as well twiddle my thumbs, my thumbs that I only assume are my thumbs ..

No probs regarding the tea .. just make sure there's some granola slices on the cake trolley


x daz x

[sky]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Tea and cakes are not permanent, they hold no real substance, it all illusory .. might as well twiddle my thumbs, my thumbs that I only assume are my thumbs ..

No probs regarding the tea .. just make sure there's some granola slices on the cake trolley


x daz x

Cakes are never permanent in my house, they quickly become illusions anyway so my motto is ' Enjoy them while you can '.

Granola Slices it is then, specially for you

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by God-Like

My comments are circular because there is nothing I have read by means of a reply that is addressing the key aspects. Every answer I have had is riddled with just more conceptual identifications and this in itself seems to be grossly overlooked..

I would like to know what is it that thinks up these concepts that explain the nature of self and this reality of mind.

If there is just some false self non entity present of the mind that makes tea and knows how to make tea, then it has to be the false self that supposedly knows how things actually are.

These are the things that don't make any sense to me when I speak to people that have these type of understandings.

You can't have a false / illusory self understanding the workings of the universe lol, it's bonkers.

It's on the same wavelength as peeps saying there is no-one here typing replies, it's not normal tbh and I get these conversations a lot, I am used to it and there is a pattern of behaviour which is playing itself out.

I have sat in meditation for 25 years lol, I don't need to sit and wait for anything to dawn, I have realized what I have so that I can speak about what I understand about the nature of self and mind .. (which is part of what zen meditation is about if janielee) cares to note.

There is a lot of speculation made about my state of awareness lol and what I need to do, which is baffling considering all I am doing is asking some very simple questions.

This is part of the behaviour that I see, janielee is playing her part by making these speculations about my approach and understandings without knowing anything about what I have experienced / realized.

It's foolish to speculate when I am right here willing to answer questions.



x daz x

The issue is not whether I have replied to your questions - which I clearly have - it’s whether or not you can accept or process the answers.

Copy and paste my seven comments somewhere and go over them carefully in the light of your questions. The take away is this:

Conscious perception, thinking and action (and making tea) are not dependent on a fixed, separate, immutable, essential-self. Life happens of its own accord - no one is doing Life… Life is doing you.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Moondance

The issue is not whether I have replied to your questions - which I clearly have - it’s whether or not you can accept or process the answers.

Copy and paste my seven comments somewhere and go over them carefully in the light of your questions. The take away is this:

Conscious perception, thinking and action (and making tea) are not dependent on a fixed, separate, immutable, essential-self. Life happens of its own accord - no one is doing Life… Life is doing you.

You keep speaking of a 'you' and speaking along the lines that no-one is doing life, life is doing you.

You say that there is a false self floating around and I have said who is this false self?

Is it a separate entity and such likes. In my eyes this false self is just a thought made by you, by what you are.

I don't understand the relationship between what you think you are and what you are.

Again, there are just more conceptual understandings here, more identifications made in regards to what is life and how it happens on it's own accord.

Who/m or what understands how life is? This false self you speak of? The conventional self that you speak of?

Who/m or what are these conventional and false selves you speak of?

They are not entities that exist that can know anything .. the self is just what you are thinks of what they are ..

Without an explanation of these relationships I have no clue on how you have derived at what you have ..

I can't agree with the process if I don't know how the actual process works.

How have YOU self identified / concluded what you have?

Suggesting that life moves by itself means nothing to me without knowing how that is so.

Is life what you are? What you really are?



x daz x

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by God-Like

You keep speaking of a 'you' and speaking along the lines that no-one is doing life, life is doing you.

You say that there is a false self floating around and I have said who is this false self?

Is it a separate entity and such likes. In my eyes this false self is just a thought made by you, by what you are.

I don't understand the relationship between what you think you are and what you are.

Again, there are just more conceptual understandings here, more identifications made in regards to what is life and how it happens on it's own accord.

Who/m or what understands how life is? This false self you speak of? The conventional self that you speak of?

Who/m or what are these conventional and false selves you speak of?

They are not entities that exist that can know anything .. the self is just what you are thinks of what they are ..

Without an explanation of these relationships I have no clue on how you have derived at what you have ..

I can't agree with the process if I don't know how the actual process works.

How have YOU self identified / concluded what you have?

Suggesting that life moves by itself means nothing to me without knowing how that is so.

Is life what you are? What you really are?



x daz x

Yes, of course I use personal pronouns. These are relative/conventional ways of speaking (and referring to the body-mind) of which the alternative is garbled advaita-speak (of which I try to avoid.) Surely you’re not baffled by such a practical device - you’ve been at this for 25 years haven’t you?

Go through my previous answers (as suggested) and you will see what the term ‘conventional self’ refers to. By the way, I’ve never used the term ‘false self’ or for that matter illusory self. The delusion is that of a separate, immutable, inner self.

Understand-ing, know-ing, see-ing, hear-ing, do-ing etc. occur via the play of the body-mind-matrix. So conventionally and practically speaking we say that this particular body-mind (Moondance) is typing or doing etc. (because typing is taking place here.) But on inspection it is seen that there isn’t actually a separate, enduring, immutable (noun-like) type-er, see-er, understand-er, do-er etc. That solidification only occurs as a thought form. This is why I suggested being still… and waiting. Because this is not a mental understanding - it’s a realisation. It has to be lived - it’s not something you can file away.

But having said that, if you are struggling with this sort of answer then you can think of it as Source (or if you like, Self) as ultimately being the doer, understander, knower etc. expressing through the play of the body-mind-matrix. (It amounts to the same thing.)

[Rain95]

So much content in this thread. Too much to reply to without too huge of a post. I will reply to some of your ideas God-Like. I like your passion for trying communicate truths.

These are the things that don't make any sense to me when I speak to people that have these type of understandings.

A thoughtless state will never make sense to somebody trying to know what it is with thought. The only way to know/experience what it is, is to be that way yourself.

You can't have a false / illusory self understanding the workings of the universe lol, it's bonkers.

I think you have it backwards, one has a liberated state, then one tries to communicate it with concepts and descriptions - the state does not start with the descriptions or have much to do with them. It's conceptually pointing to truth. Is never claims to be the truth or state itself.

It's on the same wavelength as peeps saying there is no-one here typing replies, it's not normal tbh and I get these conversations a lot, I am used to it and there is a pattern of behaviour which is playing itself out.

The human body can think, talk, answer, describe, interact, drive, walk, discuss, all while the consciousness or true self is passively in the background. I can be aware of anything without being involved in any way except perceiving what is taking place. The fact is my body and it's brain is here typing.... I know we say "I" am doing it but that is just conditioning. Social and cultural ways we have learned to refer and think about what is. The body and it's brain/mind is a tool of consciousness. Well a "possible" tool as one can be passive and "unconscious" as I said. Fully in the "background." Most of these discussions leave out the fact we are merged with a human body and it's mind while human.

I have sat in meditation for 25 years lol, I don't need to sit and wait for anything to dawn,

That's like a Zen saying. Well said. It's all here now already. We just have to abandon what is obscuring it.

You already have a sense of yourself prior to sitting alone in a room.

By "you" do you mean my true self? Then yes you are right. I have a sense of my true self. My liberated self.

You already have a sense of yourself that can engage in a 5000 year old meditation practice lol, you already know the conceptual relations regarding what you are and what meditation can do for you.

No you can't assume what I am now by what I have written moments ago. I could be not thinking now, not identified with concepts and thoughts. We all have brains and knowledge, what we do with them, what our relationship is with them, is up to us... you assume in your statement I think and experience myself as my thoughts and I do not. No concept is non-conceptual. Your concepts about no self and no concepts as being the true self are still concepts. Holding the attention on any concept and identifying it as "true" or correct is a delusional and conceptual state of being.


When I had my realization there was no room, no self awareness, there was no mind, no world, no universe.

That is thought coming along after an experience and trying to describe it in a clever unique way. Saying something like that keeps thought in charge and one stuck in the conceptual. To claim there was no room, no self awareness, no mind, no world, no universe is no different than claiming all those things were there. That is a manifestation of the false self, though done in a very tricky way.

The point is to live now non-conceptually. Adding your "I am nothing" concepts are not any better than the "I am something" ones. It means one is focused on thought and conceptual mind based reality now. But then we all seem to want to be teachers of some sort and thinking is all we have to communicate with.

If you are aware of yourself and your surroundings there is a sense that it is you that is sitting.

No awareness and the conceptual are two things, not one. In fact, it is basic logic, if i perceive it, it is not the perceiver. In an absolute sense, what I perceive is "me" in that I am the director of the attention. What I experience of what exists can be determined by me. But then all of this can be determined by the human body and its mind as well. Thus the whole point of an incarnation to become more self aware, more aware of what actually is.

This is why I stand by what I say and by my line of questioning.

You are using a concept to be here now, instead of being here now non-conceptually, you have self identified as nothing when this is the opposite of truth. one should be free of ALL concepts when here now, not come up with an idea of being and seeing and thinking nothing, what "it" is cannot be described, if you describe it you are focusing on the conceptual, the opposite of everything is not nothing, it is neither as one is not in that box of describing at all....no one is there to describe, only one to perceive and experience. Any description, up or down, here or not here, is still a description.

As of yet I haven't heard anything that refutes such a statement.

Only you can question your own "truths."

M.D. has the impression of a false self running around without explaining the relationship between what you are and this thought of oneself.

Knowledge is an aspect of consciousness, it has to be, but yea knowledge is also an aspect of the brain...there are two sources of knowledge, which one a person is accessing at any given time cannot always be known.

Is it the false self thinking it's a false self or is the real self identifying that the real self is experiencing a false self..

I would say we know what a person is by how free they are, how free of conflict and stress and resistance, this is an empty room being filled with thoughts and concepts, persons expressing their thoughts, which self are they accessing or creating with what is available? One can tell by sensing aggression or resistance in their responses, the true self, that source of knowing and knowledge has no agenda, no conflict, no judgment, it just speaks what it knows to be true.

This is why the dreamer is not outside the dream, it feels like to me there are dreamers trying to convince me they are outside of the dream ..

A nothing type state, a selfless state you describe is also a dream, it is a conceptual overlay to what is.

There is no real explanation at all.

There are explanations, they exist, the human mind exists, we exist, what we make out of that is up to us

Can you make tea in a pure awareness state without a thought for tea or of yourself?

I can make tea, and think of myself, and be in a "pure" state of awareness. The only problem I have with this sentence is the use of the word "pure" that is an assumption of some final absolute state and none exists. Awareness is on an infinite scale, the potential of consciousness and its aspect of intelligence and awareness is unlimited. We cannot now even imagine what is possible for us to become... it is unfathomable

These states we talk about here are baby steps..... that "pure" is kindergarten... a consciousness discovering it is not the body and its mind is like a kindergartner learning where his or her crayons are.

I would not get all puffed up about this stuff, if you are on earth in a human body your journey has just begun, you are on the lowest ladder of "spiritual achievement."

Eggsactly .. and when your thoughts return, when the mind / world / universe returns, then you begin eventually to register / acknowledge the surrounding in reflection of what you know of yourself.

As described before it can take quite a while for some to become integrated back into self awareness ..

Only when this happens can one make the tea and identify with it.

This is all I have been saying ..

I still think you have this backwards, all of these ideas you have about the real self and knowing nothing is an overlay that comes "after" experience......nothing and something, no difference, it's a clever ruse by ego and thought to defend itself though......pretending you are not there in spiritual being or experience is really conceptual thought based non-sense because you are fully there,,,,, it is thought imagining you were not.... like I said it is the opposite of what is going on, thought was not there, you were.... and like I said before ..thought has no consciousness, it is not a being..... so your logic is just a trick of ego defending itself as the doer, as the self

"I was not in the experience"...typical thought dominated consciousness non-sense. The experience could not exist without you. You are that which experiences. Tea is not a nothing. Tea exists fully with or without a concept about it existing. Awareness exists with or without the conceptual existing. The conceptual has no power over awareness. That is backwards. When awareness is present, when seeing is present, the conceptual and thought based reality melts away like ice in the summer. One doesn't need a theory or concept about what "pure" states are. One just lives them.

Thinking in any direction or form is still thinking. Conceptualizing yourself as no self, as nothing, is still a concept, still thinking

Knowing what tea is, naming it, having opinions about it, enjoying its taste and sensation and smell, none of this prevents any kind of "enlightenment." Consciousness and awareness has all the power. Concepts and thought have no power to do anything, to prevent anything, to be anything, We give them power. They have no power on their own. They are like a book alone on a mountain top in the middle of nowhere. It is nothing, means nothing, does nothing. It's ink and paper and that's all. But if a human shows up and picks up that book and begins to create this and that with it..... now it's having an effect, but the human is creating the effect, and the consciousness in that body is responsible, though if the consciousness is passive, background, then that consciousness does not have the power or awareness or self knowledge to have much of an influence on what is being created or projected.

I can name the tea, know what it is, and still be in the present moment living non-conceptually. The conceptual knowledge is there, I am aware of it, I am not a vegetable or asleep, I am aware of everything. But I also am aware I am none of that. It is what I am perceiving, it is not I the perceiver. I would not limit conceptually what is humanly possible to be or do in this moment with awareness and consciousness.

Thinking, oh if you name tea, or are aware of a thought or concept, you are stuck and not free, not aware, not liberated, that thought is limiting, constrictive, burdensome. Let go of that and see what's possible.

Saying any sense of self, any reference to self, any knowing of self, any naming things, any knowledge of conceptual reality, means one is not living non-conceptually, means one is not liberated is false. I can be in a room of drunk people, be aware of them, smell the alcohol and not be drunk myself. In the same way, I can be aware of the conceptual and not be living in the conceptual world myself.

This also is an opposite conclusion of what is true. One HAS to be aware of the conceptual to be free of it, the idea it must not be there is false. It is always there, one just places the attention somewhere else and what the attention is on determines experience and what self manifests as.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by God-Like

You say that there is a false self floating around and I have said who is this false self? In my eyes this false self is just a thought made by you

Every word posted here is a thought. Saying "just" only shows what you are deciding it is. Every sentence is a thought, but only a thought? That's up to the writer and the reader, what it is or becomes or leads to.

Thoughts can lead to discovering truths or they can be tossed to the side and discarded as meaningless. "False self" can be a meaningless thought to one person, and a known discovered lived reality to somebody else.