--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > >fulleru > > I get it - thanks for writing more about it. No more what I call ego > > maintenance thoughts. > > For me, that's part of it, but it depends on how deeply and widely one > personally defines ego. > > A line from a Dylan song I have always liked "she knows too much to argue or > to judge." A very cool and wise woman. And I have found these, among other > things, are ego sustainers. One may judge others to i) put them down and to > contrast with self, that is "whew, at least I am not as F'ed up as him/her". > Or as role model, they have something I don't "I want to be like them", etc. > > And arguments (vs exploratory discussions where parties are after fuller > understanding or seek to respectfully share information) are often the > dynamic of seeking confirmation that "my ideas are great and valid, my POV is > great and valid" (and thus I am great and valid). And ego being inately tied > to "me and mine", that a threat to "my" ideas are a threat to me, so I will > argue forever and a day about how good and valid my ideas are, relentlessly > seek everyones confirmation of that, so that my ego is well, alive and > thriving. And combine this with judging "AND my ideas are so superior to > yours, you dumbshit, I am so much better than you and your dumbshit ideas". > > I sensed when I brought up the topic of thoughtlessness, now and in the past, > that there was a perhaps a natural defensiveness that "Ok, right, I don't > have ego thoughts, but I have lots of other thoughts and they are really > great and this thoughtlessness crap doesn't apply to these great ideas of > MINE". My take is that these thoughts are the more deeply rooted ego thoughts. > > "All thoughts are bums" is my take. They are all intruders. Sometimes valid > and necessary, but still bums. Panhandlers begging for Awareness. To stop the > habit of begging, I find its healthy and helpful to just ignore most thoughts > as something "other", as smudges and stains of congealed Awareness. And > those that have a utilitarian function, let them into the house, but make > them wipe their feet of their mud and usher them out as soon as their work is > done. Don't get all "Ah MY cable repairman is SO great, I am so great because > I have a great cable repairman". Thoughts have nothing to do with ones inner > silence and stillness. > > Another component of the "mine" / ego nexus is that feeling (often not > consciously dealt with) that it is essential for the universe that I express > my unique, wonderful and insightful ideas. Because my ideas are SO GREAT (as > am I by implication.) >
> A further dimension is the feeling and sense that a future state (or past > state) will bring, or has the potential to bring, more contentment and > happiness than what I have RIGHT NOW. That is, the notion that the grass is > always greener on the other side of the time fence (or location fence). SO > MUCH thought is wasted on micro tuning and managing how to find that more > satisfying next or other moment. But "but man, tomorrow never comes" as Janis > Joplin once ranted between songs. Happiness is never "out there, later". Its > right here, right now. Fear, apprehension and worry about the future are the flip side of this of this. Its a concern that a future state may bring less happiness and/or there will be assaults to ones ego (losing a job, being financially wiped out, getting sick, having a relationship end, simply getting older and more wrinkled, loosing memory, being insulted or diminished, etc. "Now" is the buffer to all of that. If "Now" is fulfilling, then "Now" in the future will fulfilling. The ups and downs of life are secondary, fainter. > > All these things are ultimately ego related. However, I observe that many > often have a narrower sense of ego and its manifestations. (Which of course > makes me special, ha!) > Another aspect of ego shining its light on everything, leaving its greasy tell-tale grimy sign on everything, is the sense that one knows something, knows anything. Core beliefs, strong convictions. The reality (bold words for someone who knows nothing) is that we don't know anything for certain. And our information and perceptual data is highly limited relative to what is "out there". But clinging to certainty is necessary for the ego to feel secure. Letting go of that enables a much freer state -- and one where each moment is fresh -- one is not anchored by core beliefs and certainty, beliefs don't cloud perception. One can look fresh at things and obtain greater insights, looking at things from more angles and perspectives. One looses the grip of self-confirmation bias, of finding and seeing mostly that which confirms ones beliefs (making them even more dense and impenetrable) . Being anchored means you stay in one spot. How can anyone hope to actually know much anchored in one spot? "I know nothing" is more the reality, "I am certain" is the delusion of ego dominance. > ------------------------ > > > > I see the distinction as one of non-attachment, to anything. This state of > > mind can't be consciously cultivated, but occurs naturally as a result of > > sadhana. If non-attachment is here, then as you say, life is appreciated > > moment by moment in a fresh way. > > > > Many folks in waking state try to approximate this freshness by moving > > around constantly or exposing themselves to new objective and subjective > > material experiences (why travel and roller coasters and drugs, for > > example, are so popular). Once it settles in though, non-attachment becomes > > almost funny in that the thoughts and experiences turn to teflon vs. glue. > > Day to day experience brings a newness and freshness to it ongoing that > > gross material changes cannot come close to. Simply we become truly > > ourselves and begin consistently enjoying the hell out of life. > > (48) > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > Maybe we (you and others) are saying a similar thing, maybe not. > > > > > > My use of the term "thoughtless" might be misinterpreted from the state I > > > am referring to. I thought "thoughtless" was a bit of a delicious and > > > ironic term -- with the second or third nunanced background wave of > > > meaning reflecting the humorous image of the realized being "thoughtless" > > > as in not considerate of others. And those of a more bound nature as > > > being thoughtful (considerate), and writing thoughtful posts (well > > > considered, reasoned, digested, even wise). > > > > > > My sense of humor and irony aside, the state is not a permanent > > > thoughtless state. Ebill said something like if thoughtless state was the > > > thing, then lots of dull sort of folks are realized. And I will add pot > > > smokers. Or those partaking a bit to much irish whiskey. Or simply deep > > > sleep. All such can produce a thoughtless state, the first and last from > > > dullness, the others by temporarily restructuring the pathways of > > > awareness. These are not the state I am referring to. > > > > > > What I am referring to is the ability and nature of the mind to sit in > > > its own nest, a collapsed wave, no choppy waters. Along with the > > > characteristic of a full powerful well shaped wave arising when an > > > external need arises (a work project, a question, etc.) A core state > > > utterly still waters, then rising into large waves, fluctuations when > > > called upon. But no internal need or impetus for the generation of > > > thoughts. A clear waters type state of mind, like a stil, glassy lake > > > when there is no breeze. No thought for an hour might be the norm, then > > > a single clear fluxuation to meed a need. Like a store keeper. Silent > > > behind the counter for some time. then sprining to life when needed to > > > serve and help a customer. No need to be pacing around, tapping fingers, > > > and all. Just stillness, sitting behind the counter. > > > > > > This is in contrast to everyday minds that rarely settle down, and have > > > constant choppy waters, the internal vasanatic breeze constantly causing > > > ripples and turblulence. Mind chatter. Frequently judging this or that. > > > Contrasting self to others, evaluating any foibles it can find. Having > > > the need to be right, to be esteemed. That mind can also rise up high and > > > powerful when needed. But often, having less of a silent platform, the > > > full expansion of thoughts that lead to fulfilling purposeful thoughts, > > > are diffused, cluttered and churned up with the background turbulence -- > > > such tends to break up the waves of purposeful thoughts. > > > > > > That mind, also can constantly and repeatedly be glombing on to hopes > > > about the future. Being jackhammered by the fears and regrets of the > > > past. Not being able to simple drop things, but rather a compulsion to > > > make the universe aware of its important and crucial (as it appears to > > > that mind) fluctuations. > > > > > > Signal to noise ratio is a helpful analogy to me. In the naturally quiet > > > and still mind, its core state is like a glassy still lake, there is > > > little self generated "noise". Purposeful thoughts are not distorted and > > > churned up by any background turbulence. Signal to noise is very high. > > > The mind with a turbulent core state has lower signal to noise ratios -- > > > the noise sometimes predominating and the signal gets pretty distorted. > > > > > > People's writings, conversations, even photos, seem to have a signal to > > > noise signature. Look at Ramana's picture and one sees awareness that is > > > not cluttered or turbulent, just silence, resting in its core state, > > > until a question or need arises elsewhere. Even then you can feel the > > > gentleness of his response. Conversations are telling. People who need to > > > keep grabbing the conversation, interupting to make there oh so > > > important point, almost as a compulsion, appear to be riding big > > > turbulent inner choppy waves. As is reflected also in writing to a > > > degree. Its an interesting energy to observe. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Right on. Nothing wrong with thoughts, except by those plagued by their > > > > own, seeking an artificial relief and stillness. Even the > > > > accomplishment of that stillness is only half the battle won. > > > > Liberation as you so astutely say is complete when the mind is the > > > > servant of the Self vs. the isolated ego. And addiction to anything > > > > goes away with self liberation. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" <raviyogi@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > There is a definite reduction in thoughts but that's merely a > > > > > consequence of losing the identification of me and mine. Mind is a > > > > > great utility like the body. Like I usually say mind should be under > > > > > the payroll of Self and not the ego. But I don't currently believe in > > > > > a thoughtless enlightened state, it just seems to fantasy projected > > > > > by people like Vaj, the vakrabuddhi(twisted or crooked intellect), > > > > > fascinated with and tormented by their thoughts. You can be the > > > > > master of the thoughts but the notion of a thoughtless state shows > > > > > how much the person is bounded by it. > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > As always, Turq has presented a thoughtful piece on the dynamics of > > > > > > consciousness. I am eager to hear his thoughts on the influence of > > > > > > the Gayatri Mantra in his scheme of things. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, Ramana, Tolle, Adyashanti and many others suggest that the > > > > > > core indicator of spiritual progress is number of thoughts that > > > > > > arise (in activity). Tolle says his experience is an 80% reduction. > > > > > > I am guessing Ramana would have a larger number. > > > > > > > > > > > > Adyashanti digs deeper and talks about thought-addiction as being > > > > > > the core characteristic of the non-realized, along the lines of a > > > > > > compulsion, coupled with a fundamental belief that "the Universe > > > > > > just HAS to hear what I have to say, that it will go woefully > > > > > > hayware without my thoughts being expressed", often at > > > > > > progressively louder intensity and higher frequency pace. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just a thought (I am so unrealized), perhaps its the 3000 members > > > > > > of FFL who don't post who are the realized ones. Silent witnesses > > > > > > beyond the gunic (or is it goonic) compulsion to correct and > > > > > > enlighten the universe with ones special and abundant thoughts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
