|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
 Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 2:23:17 PM
|
Great lesson. Made me confused! 
This description is great, I recognize this way of observing/thinking:
quote:
For example, we might catch the mind (actually it is doing it all the time!) saying, "Oh, I hate this?" or, "How did I come to this?" or, "I think she is not nice," etc., and notice it and go, "Ah, there is the mind doing it's thing" – and then drop it.
I always thought this was the mind watching the mind, and thus non-relational, and I have dismissed it all... In the lesson this is "confirmed" as being relational, from a place of stillness:
quote:
You are seeing your mind, thoughts, and perhaps your ego, as objects of perception from the point of view of rising inner silence (the witness). This is a good thing, and sets the stage for self-inquiry, which you are already naturally doing in your comments here.
Can anyone give a concrete example of how it would sound if it was the mind watching the mind in a non-relational way?
Thank you for any input! |
|
|
Yonatan
Israel
849 Posts |
Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 3:26:49 PM
|
I think it might be something like that:
"I think she is not nice", "why am I thinking that, she did all these good things for me and here I am thinking she's not nice, that's wrong"
"but I want to accept my thoughts and feelings, arrg..." "life sucks.." "I want to be happy.." and on and on |
 |
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 4:22:26 PM
|
| I don't think it is something that can be analyzed or judged. I think it is a matter of rising inner silence creating a buffer between you and your thoughts that loosens your attachment to them. |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5242 Posts |
Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 6:20:52 PM
|
Hi emc:
It may be that the best way to recognize relational self-inquiry is in noticing what it is not. If there is strain, expectation, judgment, headache, etc., those would be signs of non-relational self-inquiry, and it is best to lighten up (self-pace) in those instances. In time, those things will be absent, and we will simply be noticing thoughts and feelings to be more like objects in our awareness, no longer classifying them or hanging on to them, no longer seeing them as extensions of our self, or even as "baggage" to be carried around. They will be seen to be outside our sense of self.
If inquiry is increasingly joyful and luminous, through both "good times" and "bad times," we can be pretty sure it is becoming relational. That is, released in stillness (the witness).
For those who are interested in a possible progression of stages in self-inquiry, see Lesson 350. It is a long lesson, but perhaps one of the clearer ones so far on the various stages of self-inquiry from the AYP point of view: http://www.aypsite.org/350.html
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 10:09:27 PM
|
Hi Yogani, emc & All,
emc - I, too, was confused by the terms "relational & non-relational", as used in AYP.
I think (irony noted .... ) ... I just "got" it:
*Relational* is when there's "relation to" thinking (from the silent awareness of the witness state, or beyond) .... all form(s) appearing in awareness are experienced as different from the awareness itself.
In "non-relational" inquiry ... thinking is conducting the inquiry, from the feeling that the thinking is who/what it is ... which is basically a good recipe for frustration, and/or not getting anywhere with inquiry.
Is that (at least approximately) correct, Yogani?
And, by the way, I did this one myself {so-to-speak } -- "non-relational inquiry", if I understand the terms correctly now, way back when (2005ish; that's a LONG time in AYP Years!  ) -- upon reading Ramana Maharshi for the first time, the thought-me thought, "Who Am I?" Then, the thought me thought: "What a bunch of crap! Nothing happened! Like doing *that* for years is *really* gonna work!")
"I" was expecting an answer from thought, in the form of thought --- the only "way" the thought-me could understand.
It doesn't work that way.
It all begins and ends with the field of silent awareness, that's actually living every moment.
Thought happens within silent awareness; that's how the witness-state, and the shift of identification from form (thoughts, feelings, "sense of self") to the formless field of silent awareness ... facilitate realization.
It is literally experienced that all the thinking comes and goes; shifts, changes; the pure awareness *prior* to thought that is *actually* living every moment does not change.
Tattvam Asi - You Are That.
I find the six-pointed star to be very helpful, actually -- imagining the "downward pointing triangle" either pointing down ... or straight out from awareness/sense-of-self.
Why?
Because it helps to reinforce reality: the awareness we are is both formless and limitless.
In every moment of perception ... pure awareness *focuses* ... like the broad base of a triangle narrowing to a point .... whatever the object of awareness is ... your hand, seeing the hand, the thought/sense of "I", looking at my hand.
It's as if halfway to the point, someone drew a horizontal line ... so that only the narrow half of the triangle exists.
That narrow aspect of the triangle is what most of us think of as "our life".
We confuse the objective (specific, focused) aspects of consciousness with reality.
It's not that they're unreal; it's conceiving that form is the *totality* of reality that is unreal.
I've said, off and on:
We don't so much "attain" enlightenment as we *back into it*.
*Back* across the veil of Maya; of thinking that language-based concept and conditioning is the entire story, and that "I" am a person who experiences silence, when I'm fortunate.
That *is* the dream.
"I" don't experience silence; I AM the Silence that experiences *me*.
On this side of Maya, so-called objects are still here (heck, I'm typing out a post on a computer keyboard, as conventional language would express it) .. but the objects are *experienced* as aspects of awareness; "formings" in awareness.
Subjective "view" from the body-mind are no more the actual "I" than the computer keyboard ... both are objects in awareness.
The thought/language being used to communicate this, via this post, are objects in awareness.
I AM *actually* the experiencER - the silent awareness which cannot be an object; that which has no form.
How do I know this?
Enough experiential silence to experience the distinction; in reality, distinction, definition, delineation ... are known to be aritificial.
Sure, they're part of the experiencing of "daily life" ... but they're only waves on the surface of the awareness I AM.
Non-duality isn't a big deal; it's just experiencing awareness as a field, rather than all these objects chopped up into pieces .... "me -> experiencing -> world".
It's actually:
Awareness-{Me, Experiencing, World}-Awareness
I Am the ocean; objectivity ... all of it, equally ... thoughts, feelings, "others", experiences, are concept-appearances .... arising, displaying, subsiding ... every moment.
Do I always experience it this way? Not exactly ..... as the Buddhists say:
One minute a Buddha, one minute a sentient being.
Some days, much of "my day" is spent as a "sentient" being .... though, if there's ever leaning too far into objectivity-only ... I let sense-of-self relax into the full field of awareness.
And I'm knowing: I'm the space; not the stuff appearing in it.
We create unenlightenment by thinking we're the stuff we think and feel, and that's all we are.
We *literally* create unenlightenment by taking all of conscious attention across the veil of Maya, into the constricted universe of objectivity only, and thinking-feeling/concluding-with-thought that the objects in awareness, including the object called "me" that we think of as the "subject".
Ego-mind is like a two-dimensional *representation* of depth on a printed page; it may look like depth, but it's only an illusory version.
Formless, limitless silent awareness *is* the actual depth, in which it is seen that length and breadth - horizontal and vertical - happen *within* depth.
We don't "obtain" samadhi; we *relax* into it ..... "Ahhhhh"!!
All the trouble, all the suffering, can be avoided by retaining even a bit of awareness in the silence, and/or returning to it immediately if attention "bounces" all the way out to objectivity-only.
What "we" are seeking is where we start from, and where we end.
All discussion, all suffering, is thinking that waves and foam are the totality of the ocean.
Silent awareness is the depth we actually are.
Even "me" and "not me", "inside" and "outside" are artificial, conceptual, linguistic-conceptual distinctions.
Reality isn't "I'm this wave, the world is that wave" ... reality is: "I'm this ocean, and 'I'm-wave' and 'world-wave' arise out of, and subside into, what I am."
Me-Perceiving-World arise and subside *together*; silent awareness ever is.
The thinking mind will never agree to this; that's why it has nothing of value to add, here.
Results can be obtained by letting go, practicing, making progress.
Much faster and more direct, however, to drop the sense of "I'm" that's letting go, practicing, making progress.
If this feels impossible, or non-sensical -- cultivate more silence.
You (anyone reading) can't "not know" this forever; it's who and what you actually *are*.
I hope this helps.
Intending The Peace Of Knowing Self As Formless Awareness For All,
Kirtanman
PS- Listening to (suprise, surprise ) LIVE - Mystery -- "Heaven is real, so why believe, when you can see it for yourself."
Yep. Belief is prejudice; belief obscures; faith reveals the knowing of the truth that is the freedom we are .... it all lies in the direction of opening, relaxing, accepting, allowing.
We were all (hopefully) taught as children: point the sharp end (focus) *away* from you; ego-mind is pointing the sharp end *toward* "self" - and being surprised when we suffer .... as awareness moves "toward" you ... it *expands* .... into the liberated infinity we each and all are, now.
 |
Edited by - Kirtanman on Aug 16 2009 10:17:46 PM |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5242 Posts |
Posted - Aug 16 2009 : 11:42:32 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman and All:
The term "relational" was coined to identify a relationship between abiding inner silence (the witness) and thoughts. That relationship consummates with the release (letting go) of thoughts in stillness, the blending of one into the other, which is samyama. It is the basis of effective self-inquiry, divine outpouring, stillness in action, spontaneous siddhis (small and large), etc.
Prior to the rise of inner silence as an abiding presence, this relationship cannot occur. Then it is thoughts interacting with thoughts with the aforementioned difficult symptoms. The term for that is "non-relational," meaning thoughts not occurring in relationship to stillness.
The reason why I came up with these terms is to clarify the essential point that self-inquiry is not a viable practice without at least the beginnings of the witness stage, which is not difficult to cultivate in deep meditation, but is often ignored in neo-advaita teachings. I say "neo-advaita" because if we dig a bit we will find that the great advaita and jnana yoga teachers clearly recognized the role of the witness, bhakti, and yoga practices. Neo-advaita is prone to strip it all down to the the bare logic and expect that to be a viable "stand-alone" approach for everyone at every point on the path. Clearly it is not.
So "relational" and "non-relational" have been born in an attempt to make the distinction between self-inquiry with witness and self-inquiry without witness as clear as possible. The experiences of many here have verified the development of this dynamic going from non-relational to relational. Whatever we may choose to call it, the shift is quite noticeable. Many here are delving into self-inquiry these days with pretty good results, whereas a few years ago it was, well, non-relational.
What we don't want to be doing is turning these terms into have and have-not labels. That is not their purpose. The purpose is to inspire the continued favoring of daily deep meditation (and samyama) when self-inquiry is not yet working for us as well as we would like. If there were no clear guidance offered on this, there may be a tendency to beat our head against the wall for a long time in thought-based only self-inquiry, or drop spiritual practices altogether. We'd like to avoid that situation, so point to a more viable approach as clearly as we can.
The recent addition of a powerful self-inquiry sutra to core samyama practice in Lesson 351 is also for the purpose of helping smooth the transition from non-relational to relational inquiry. This can be included as soon as we are able to undertake core samyama practice, and it does not carry the risks of outright non-relational self-inquiry, even if the presence of our abiding witness is at an early stage.
The wise farmer drives the plow around the stump, and not through it, right Ether?
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Aug 22 2009 : 02:00:50 AM
|
| * Remember that silence is sometimes the best answer.* (-¿-) |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Latest lesson 354
