On Apr 3, 2011, at 3:37 PM, tartbrain wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@...> wrote: >> >> >> On Apr 2, 2011, at 11:45 AM, tartbrain wrote: >> >>> I would venture that caring about labels to assign to the degree of the >>> unfoldment of Awareness is also a trap. One could argue that without such >>> labels, how does one know if they are on the path and advancing. >> >> >> But then you still "remain in doubt", as you would have gained no certainty. >> Nonduality remains a "mysterious object". >> > > The quest for certainty appears to me to be a hindrance. When are we ever > certain?
That's the problem. If you're ready, you can get it right away. If you're not ready, you might or might not "get it", but there are ways to clear any obscuration, so why not at least, try? Go for the "highest", the most radically nondual that you can. The point is certainty can be had and drop dat questing shit. It's a given that you already knew that. > As Empty Bill pointed out (I am probably botching his thought, just giving > credit), the state of "I know nothing" preceds unfoldment. Though I get it > you are not talking about certainty of things but of a state. That's only true to the extent that people who "don't get it" -- but still do -- get "it" (the mysterious object). Our true nature is the only secret. (Like your eyelid over your eyeball, it's that close, we just can't believe it.) But you really do still need to be able to laugh about yourself. Otherwise you're just too likely to end up some narcissistic dolt. > > >> It's really not at all about labels, but having an authentic View of >> reality, rather than some half-baked or deluded one. And so yes, some >> Batgappers might want to go back to remaining in doubt until they uncover, >> more authentically, the "mysterious object" that is their true nature. >> >> The metaphor of the mysterious object is about how after a direct >> introduction into our true nature, that experience is like a mysterious >> object kept in a dark room. Someone turns on the light and you see it for a >> moment. Later you don't remember 'was it green', 'was it round', etc.? So >> you need to go back, unlock the door and re-experience the mysterious >> object. Eventually, you're so familiar with the mysterious object, that you >> no longer remain in doubt as to it's nature. It's as if you carry it in the >> palm of your hand wherever you go. You no longer remain in doubt as to the >> nature of the mysterious object, which symbolizes your enlightened, natural >> state. >> >> The comment wasn't about questioning everything or testing everything, which >> of course, we should -- like we would test gold. >> > > I see your point about coming to know the mysterious object more clearly now. > And it sounds good. However, how is one certain that they are receiving the > full an accurate transmission? Actually in that same commentary by HHDL emphasizes just how important a legit teacher is and what the simple criteria are. Basically, they have to embody nonduality, at will. Rare creds indeed. > How are they sure that the transmitter is whole thing, the real thing. What > many of us once took with certainty, turned out to be half truths Well exactly the point. I don't know that i can give any definitive answer not knowing you personally, but merely as an online persona. > > (Not arguing just exploring), further, concepts are not Unfoldment. Indeed > they can be a hindrance. States of consciousness are conceptual frameworks. > And that there is a single end point of unfoldment is a concept. Unfoldment > is beyond concepts. Perhaps beyond certainty because there absolutely nothing > to hang on to. There's not, but there is. :-) > > And some say Unfoldment is self-validating. Well yes. "Getting it" is (ironically) "the state beyond verification". It's self-verifying, as the dualistic processes of validation needing a validator through a medium of validation is "gone". Buh-bye. > No question of "is this it" because there is no possibility of other, no "is > this it" or "that it". Both those are relative. Full unfoldment is One > without another. If so, then one would not always be in doubt. Doubt would be > gone. Just Self validating Oneness. It deflates every thing. > > And self-validation will always be a higher mark of clarity than validation > from another. Well, consider it a symbiotic relationship. You think you got it, so therefore you ask someone who claims to qualified. The balls of unity! > Teachers can be wrong in assessing the progress of their students. One > particular recent case comes to mind from BatGap, (And sometimes there is a > teaching ego -- "look at how well my students have done" and like grade creep > (everyone is above average and all get A's or B's) > > Yet self-validation can be deceiving also, as recent examples illustrate. Yep. The qualifications of such a master are important. There are some things that cannot be found on any resume. > > And seeking to me appears to be a joke. Seeking unfoldment and seeking > certainty about the degree of unfoldment are hindrances not aids, IMO. No, it's another dharma trap sometimes, for some people. But having said that, for the right person, a certain amount of "trial and error" is to be expected. > Thats not coming from reading some neo-advaita books but rather a personal > insight some time ago (which also may be delusion.) The seed thought behind > my insight was that desiring the desireless state is folly. And seeking > certainty about unfoldment is counter to the a grand mahavakya "I don't know". Well, consider that "I don't know" is still as equally caught in polarities as "oh, I got it!". > > And the process and result of mahavakyas are not the teacher saying "you are > there" but rather a tool for the student to realize that this is Unfoldment. That's not how I was taught the mahavkyas. They were different levels of nondual integration, in my own experience of a nondual contemplation/samadhi. They were merely four level of integration in nondual abiding. He all do what we can, when we can. In that way we're all heroes and heroines, do the degree we can be.
