Trust.

[muffin]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

trust is all very nice, but in the end all you can get through that path is what others are willing to give you. Simply trusting isn't reliable to get you to a particular end that you might want...

OTOH it is icky having to choose a particular end and have to practise to get there...

Good afternoon FallingLeaves


You get what you need, not what you want

So when do you starting trusting in your self

[psychoslice]

Or is that, you get what you get, not what you need, or what you want ? just saying.

[muffin]

Originally Posted by psychoslice

Or is that, you get what you get, not what you need, or what you want ? just saying.

Good afternoon psychoslice

You could do, if you wish

Or is it in what you already have

Just saying like

[winter light]

Originally Posted by Iamit

Yes of course experience can be described in conversation, but that doesnt get one any nearer to experiencing the experience of others. For that reason it is never known whether the description accuractely describes the experience.

Sorry in advance for this rather impersonal analysis but I feel the need for precision to discuss these subtle ideas. It seems like the uncertainty principle you can either describe ideas or be present but hard to do both at the same time. I'm now seeing why I normally shy away from deep philosophy discussions.

A conversation begins as sharing that is already is real and true. Another person's description of reality becomes your immediate experience. Each moment begins in non-duality, shared whole and complete.

The questioning of accuracy shared from another person suggests pre-existing dualistic ideas. Already in process and carried in from the past. Questioning accuracy is also likely to be seen as form of mistrust. That means it is likely the conversation will react into duality and separation right from the start. Then a shift of awareness must occur in order to regain trust.

It seems that trust is a natural occurrence in non-dual states and mistrust common to dual states. Which is kind of obvious but sometimes you gotta do some math to give structure and gain confidence in the intuitions.

However back to the original post question which was more to the effect of how a student gains trust in the process or the teachings. I guess in a one-sided communications it would depend on a teacher that had already mastered the art of returning to non-dual states. And how well that teacher is able to encourage students to have trust in themselves. In two-sided conversations it also depends on how well the teacher can listen and pick up on and respond to the cues from the student. Or barring all of that it would depend on some kind of serendipity in their relationship.

I would just say trust yourself and trust the process and do not worry. The path seems uncertain but the outcome is not.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by winter light

Sorry in advance for this rather impersonal analysis but I feel the need for precision to discuss these subtle ideas. It seems like the uncertainty principle you can either describe ideas or be present but hard to do both at the same time. I'm now seeing why I normally shy away from deep philosophy discussions.

A conversation begins as sharing that is already is real and true. Another person's description of reality becomes your immediate experience. Each moment begins in non-duality, shared whole and complete.

The questioning of accuracy shared from another person suggests pre-existing dualistic ideas. Already in process and carried in from the past. Questioning accuracy is also likely to be seen as form of mistrust. That means it is likely the conversation will react into duality and separation right from the start. Then a shift of awareness must occur in order to regain trust.

It seems that trust is a natural occurrence in non-dual states and mistrust common to dual states. Which is kind of obvious but sometimes you gotta do some math to give structure and gain confidence in the intuitions.

However back to the original post question which was more to the effect of how a student gains trust in the process or the teachings. I guess in a one-sided communications it would depend on a teacher that had already mastered the art of returning to non-dual states. And how well that teacher is able to encourage students to have trust in themselves. In two-sided conversations it also depends on how well the teacher can listen and pick up on and respond to the cues from the student. Or barring all of that it would depend on some kind of serendipity in their relationship.

I would just say trust yourself and trust the process and do not worry. The path seems uncertain but the outcome is not.

Niz asked some seekers to trust that they are already what they seek.

Trusting that does not require experiencing what Niz was experiencing.

[winter light]

I'm not saying we can experience whatever Niz experienced. That would be impossible. You cannot even have your own experience more than once.

I can see the problem. You quote seekers should trust they are already what they seek. The answer is a void and assumes you can completely detach from the world and know yourself. That is a post-enlightenment perspective. It can be too direct and people cannot do that all in one go. That may explain why many of Niz's guests became frustrated with his answers even though his answers were correct and thoughtful.

Maybe we can expand that process of self-discovery in relationship to the world. Learning to trust a little at a time. Validating ourselves one moment at a time. Until the self trust is in a sense earned through experience. Over time the self is no longer required because it is replaced with a kind of devotion. That would be a more gentle path to non-dual awakening.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by winter light

I'm not saying we can experience whatever Niz experienced. That would be impossible. You cannot even have your own experience more than once.

I can see the problem. You quote seekers should trust they are already what they seek. The answer is a void and assumes you can completely detach from the world and know yourself. That is a post-enlightenment perspective. It can be too direct and people cannot do that all in one go. That may explain why many of Niz's guests became frustrated with his answers even though his answers were correct and thoughtful.

Maybe we can expand that process of self-discovery in relationship to the world. Learning to trust a little at a time. Validating ourselves one moment at a time. Until the self trust is in a sense earned through experience. Over time the self is no longer required because it is replaced with a kind of devotion. That would be a more gentle path to non-dual awakening.

Trusting was suggested by Niz to seekers who had become dissolutioned with practise. To others he suggested practise, so it seems he was paying attention to where he felt seekers were at, and varied his advice accordingly.

Trusting involves only the ability to trust, not completing the enormous, potentially bottomless task of knowing yourself in every respect. If unable to trust, seekers could look at just the conditioning that relates led to that lack of trust, and hopefully uncovering that, may resolve the issue.

[psychoslice]

Originally Posted by muffin

Good afternoon psychoslice

You could do, if you wish

Or is it in what you already have

Just saying like

Hi muffin, yes i like that also, very sneaky lol.