Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

The Loop

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Hi Dan,

 

In your response to my post you stated:

 

" what doesn't work must drop. Otherwise the tail-chasing goes round

and round "

 

" you don't have to drop the loop, in fact you can't, because you are

the loop "

 

I am making a connection here, by these statements, that the loop

does or can work and that perhaps the loop is our canvas or " work

sheet " and does not HAVE to be a tail-chasing. But this route in the

loop is very, very narrow.. strait and narrow is the Way that leads

to life and all that.. Perhaps this loop we find ourselves in is

kinda like that saying I read somewhere, " I had a thorn stuck in my

hand and with another thorn I removed the thorn " . Maybe I am

reading this into what you are saying. It seems like Niz, Ramana,

etc. found a way to live with the loop while knowing the difference

of what is Real and fictional. The whole " in the loop but not of the

loop " idea... Could it be that part of this process of realization

is learning how to properly deal with the loop?

 

I hope this post finds you well.

 

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael "

<yacobyisrael> wrote:

> Hi Dan,

>

> In your response to my post you stated:

>

> " what doesn't work must drop. Otherwise the tail-chasing goes round

> and round "

>

> " you don't have to drop the loop, in fact you can't, because you

are

> the loop "

>

> I am making a connection here, by these statements, that the loop

> does or can work and that perhaps the loop is our canvas or " work

> sheet " and does not HAVE to be a tail-chasing.

 

Hi Steve --

 

No, that's not what I meant.

 

What I mean is that the moment you are really clear

that you are the loop, it must drop.

 

You can't drop it.

 

But that clarity forces it to drop, because it

leaves no alternative.

 

You can't make the clarity happen.

 

It takes over, and does what it must.

 

You can't prepare for it adequately,

or do things that will make it

" enter " the loop situation.

 

So, all you can do is look into the

nature of the loop with as much

openness and integrity as you

can muster.

 

It's like a totally different force

from another dimension that for some

reason enters in and disintegrates

the limited supports to a system

that has no meaning from *its* view.

 

Why would it choose your loop?

 

It doesn't. It sees no " your " in the loop.

 

It does what it does, without explanations

that make sense in this dimensionality.

 

And what it does, it does without doing.

 

It never lifts a finger.

 

Nothing happens.

 

This is where it's clear that

the entire loop scenario

depends on a fiction, that

seems temporarily real

from the perspective that

is maintained by artificial

supports within a limited

scenario (i.e., yours and mine,

I end here, something else begins there).

 

>But this route in the

> loop is very, very narrow.. strait and narrow is the Way that leads

> to life and all that..

 

It's one point.

 

The one point where the loop converges on itself,

leaving no outside or inside.

 

Perhaps this loop we find ourselves in is

> kinda like that saying I read somewhere, " I had a thorn stuck in my

> hand and with another thorn I removed the thorn " . Maybe I am

> reading this into what you are saying.

 

The thorn is a conceptuality to remove a conceptuality.

 

Which then gets thrown away.

 

But in truth, it can't work like that.

 

That's just a metaphor to support a certain

way of teaching.

 

Conceptuality can't defeat and end conceptuality.

 

The self can't bring the self-loop to an end.

 

Only truth can, by doing nothing.

 

It seems like Niz, Ramana,

> etc. found a way to live with the loop while knowing the difference

> of what is Real and fictional.

 

It really doesn't matter.

 

For " your " loop, only " you " matter.

 

What you're living with, what's true for you, what

fiction you're believing, etc.

 

> The whole " in the loop but not of the

> loop " idea...

 

Yes, that's so.

 

In other words, it happens of itself.

 

There's no " you " involved, so the action

taken by others as a you doing things,

never is experienced as a you that does

things.

 

> Could it be that part of this process of realization

> is learning how to properly deal with the loop?

 

Only to a point.

 

Then, it's realizing that there's no way to deal

with the loop.

 

It's impossible, contradictory, and depends on

a sense of lack to maintain itself.

 

> I hope this post finds you well.

 

I'm doing okay.

 

Hope you're enjoying yourself, too.

 

Happy Thanksgiving, at least in this neck of the woods,

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again, Dan, for your timely comments. I realize my last post

was some attempt to justify the loop, which is another way to

perpetuate the loop. Since no effort can bring about " attainment " I

can see that my efforts must focus on this loop to truly verify it's

fictional existence. I can see my double-mindedness on this matter so

I will dig deeper on studying this loop and it's fictional nature.

AS you said to Vert... the hour is late...

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael "

> <yacobyisrael> wrote:

> > Hi Dan,

> >

> > In your response to my post you stated:

> >

> > " what doesn't work must drop. Otherwise the tail-chasing goes

round

> > and round "

> >

> > " you don't have to drop the loop, in fact you can't, because you

> are

> > the loop "

> >

> > I am making a connection here, by these statements, that the loop

> > does or can work and that perhaps the loop is our canvas or " work

> > sheet " and does not HAVE to be a tail-chasing.

>

> Hi Steve --

>

> No, that's not what I meant.

>

> What I mean is that the moment you are really clear

> that you are the loop, it must drop.

>

> You can't drop it.

>

> But that clarity forces it to drop, because it

> leaves no alternative.

>

> You can't make the clarity happen.

>

> It takes over, and does what it must.

>

> You can't prepare for it adequately,

> or do things that will make it

> " enter " the loop situation.

>

> So, all you can do is look into the

> nature of the loop with as much

> openness and integrity as you

> can muster.

>

> It's like a totally different force

> from another dimension that for some

> reason enters in and disintegrates

> the limited supports to a system

> that has no meaning from *its* view.

>

> Why would it choose your loop?

>

> It doesn't. It sees no " your " in the loop.

>

> It does what it does, without explanations

> that make sense in this dimensionality.

>

> And what it does, it does without doing.

>

> It never lifts a finger.

>

> Nothing happens.

>

> This is where it's clear that

> the entire loop scenario

> depends on a fiction, that

> seems temporarily real

> from the perspective that

> is maintained by artificial

> supports within a limited

> scenario (i.e., yours and mine,

> I end here, something else begins there).

>

> >But this route in the

> > loop is very, very narrow.. strait and narrow is the Way that

leads

> > to life and all that..

>

> It's one point.

>

> The one point where the loop converges on itself,

> leaving no outside or inside.

>

> Perhaps this loop we find ourselves in is

> > kinda like that saying I read somewhere, " I had a thorn stuck in

my

> > hand and with another thorn I removed the thorn " . Maybe I am

> > reading this into what you are saying.

>

> The thorn is a conceptuality to remove a conceptuality.

>

> Which then gets thrown away.

>

> But in truth, it can't work like that.

>

> That's just a metaphor to support a certain

> way of teaching.

>

> Conceptuality can't defeat and end conceptuality.

>

> The self can't bring the self-loop to an end.

>

> Only truth can, by doing nothing.

>

> It seems like Niz, Ramana,

> > etc. found a way to live with the loop while knowing the

difference

> > of what is Real and fictional.

>

> It really doesn't matter.

>

> For " your " loop, only " you " matter.

>

> What you're living with, what's true for you, what

> fiction you're believing, etc.

>

> > The whole " in the loop but not of the

> > loop " idea...

>

> Yes, that's so.

>

> In other words, it happens of itself.

>

> There's no " you " involved, so the action

> taken by others as a you doing things,

> never is experienced as a you that does

> things.

>

> > Could it be that part of this process of realization

> > is learning how to properly deal with the loop?

>

> Only to a point.

>

> Then, it's realizing that there's no way to deal

> with the loop.

>

> It's impossible, contradictory, and depends on

> a sense of lack to maintain itself.

>

> > I hope this post finds you well.

>

> I'm doing okay.

>

> Hope you're enjoying yourself, too.

>

> Happy Thanksgiving, at least in this neck of the woods,

> Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael "

<yacobyisrael> wrote:

> Thanks again, Dan, for your timely comments. I realize my last

post

> was some attempt to justify the loop, which is another way to

> perpetuate the loop. Since no effort can bring about " attainment " I

> can see that my efforts must focus on this loop to truly verify

it's

> fictional existence. I can see my double-mindedness on this matter

so

> I will dig deeper on studying this loop and it's fictional nature.

> AS you said to Vert... the hour is late...

>

> Steve

 

Steve -- look into this immediately, now, here.

 

Can you detect the first instant of an attempt to

move away?

 

By move away, I mean move to a position of knower,

of one who had an experience and will now decide

what to do with it?

 

Now, that movement away isn't volitional -- it

leads to the sensation of volition.

 

Can you detect the nonvolitional spontaneous attempt

to move to a position of self?

 

If you can, you notice that this instant, there is

no separation of the movement and that from which

it " wants " to move.

 

That destroys the entire configuration of self as

a being with its own existence in time, dissolves

the attempt to manufacture a loop of perception.

 

The self position as the knower, the haver, the doer,

the experiencer, the one who has a continuing being.

 

This acuity of awareness, this spontaneous clarity,

isn't a product of anything you intend, wish,

aim for, and so on.

 

Yet, it includes an intense desire for truth that

overcomes the ingrained tendency to try to

" come from the past " -- to try to exist as a being

formed of memory, a collection of experiences and

tendencies to react from a position.

 

The way that tendency to try to come from the past

is overcome is simply by not doing anything.

Not the kind of not doing that people mean, when

they say, " I'm not going to do that. " But nondoing

as the fullness of the energy you are, without an

intent to make anything be the case.

 

There is no intent to get rid of the tendency -- such

intent is, in fact, the operation of that tendency.

 

So, there is simply observation that doesn't depend on

having a point of view, a predetermined outcome for

what will be seen or known, or even a template for

knowing.

 

Just " what is " as is ...

 

-- Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael "

> <yacobyisrael> wrote:

> > Thanks again, Dan, for your timely comments. I realize my last

> post

> > was some attempt to justify the loop, which is another way to

> > perpetuate the loop. Since no effort can bring about " attainment " I

> > can see that my efforts must focus on this loop to truly verify

> it's

> > fictional existence. I can see my double-mindedness on this matter

> so

> > I will dig deeper on studying this loop and it's fictional nature.

> > AS you said to Vert... the hour is late...

> >

> > Steve

>

> Steve -- look into this immediately, now, here.

>

> Can you detect the first instant of an attempt to

> move away?

>

> By move away, I mean move to a position of knower,

> of one who had an experience and will now decide

> what to do with it?

>

 

 

 

this pointer should be in a text book

 

 

 

> Now, that movement away isn't volitional -- it

> leads to the sensation of volition.

>

> Can you detect the nonvolitional spontaneous attempt

> to move to a position of self?

>

> If you can, you notice that this instant, there is

> no separation of the movement and that from which

> it " wants " to move.

>

> That destroys the entire configuration of self as

> a being with its own existence in time, dissolves

> the attempt to manufacture a loop of perception.

>

> The self position as the knower, the haver, the doer,

> the experiencer, the one who has a continuing being.

>

> This acuity of awareness, this spontaneous clarity,

> isn't a product of anything you intend, wish,

> aim for, and so on.

>

> Yet, it includes an intense desire for truth that

> overcomes the ingrained tendency to try to

> " come from the past " -- to try to exist as a being

> formed of memory, a collection of experiences and

> tendencies to react from a position.

>

> The way that tendency to try to come from the past

> is overcome is simply by not doing anything.

> Not the kind of not doing that people mean, when

> they say, " I'm not going to do that. " But nondoing

> as the fullness of the energy you are, without an

> intent to make anything be the case.

>

> There is no intent to get rid of the tendency -- such

> intent is, in fact, the operation of that tendency.

>

> So, there is simply observation that doesn't depend on

> having a point of view, a predetermined outcome for

> what will be seen or known, or even a template for

> knowing.

>

> Just " what is " as is ...

>

> -- Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Dan,

During my immediate study of the loop after I read your comments I

noticed that, when it comes to what I see with my eyes I can not

detect a moving away. For example: I looked out the window and saw a

tree. I did not think this is a tree (if I did it happened so fast

that it slipped by my obeservation) but rather tried to think

that, " the tree see is just part of the loop. This is fictional. "

However I observed this mental comment as just my mind trying to

believe it is fictional because I was told that it was and I liked

what the idea of the tree or the world as being fictional. I tried

to observe the moving away but I could not. I just see the tree and

it is there and could not understand it as being fictional. However,

where I can verify the fiction is when I observe my likes and

dislikes, my moods, etc. I see these wax and wane. Like the

Ouspensky/Gurdjieff concept of so many " I's " . As for the external

world I am having trouble applying this inquiry. I will say that

when I tried to look into the inquiry the moment I read your

instructions to do so in the first scentence it took quite a bit of

energy and made me tired trying to see the external world as

fictional. I even went and took an afternoon nap thinking that I'd

try again when I woke up. I did and came up with the same results.

I can only inquire on the personal and not on the external. Maybe

this is going to take more practice but I am willing to be steadfast

in the inquiry, so long as I know I am understanding you correctly

and performing it correctly.

 

Your help is GREATLY appreciated and I do want to observe the moving

away. Who is this who wants to observe the moving away? I am tacking

this " who is this " on to everything and just waiting to see what

arises.. so far just more mental commentary. I will say it does take

a bit of energy... so much more than just regular thinking.

 

Thanks again. I am enjoying myself and not letting frustration get to

me.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well,

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael "

> <yacobyisrael> wrote:

> > Thanks again, Dan, for your timely comments. I realize my last

> post

> > was some attempt to justify the loop, which is another way to

> > perpetuate the loop. Since no effort can bring about " attainment "

I

> > can see that my efforts must focus on this loop to truly verify

> it's

> > fictional existence. I can see my double-mindedness on this

matter

> so

> > I will dig deeper on studying this loop and it's fictional

nature.

> > AS you said to Vert... the hour is late...

> >

> > Steve

>

> Steve -- look into this immediately, now, here.

>

> Can you detect the first instant of an attempt to

> move away?

>

> By move away, I mean move to a position of knower,

> of one who had an experience and will now decide

> what to do with it?

>

> Now, that movement away isn't volitional -- it

> leads to the sensation of volition.

>

> Can you detect the nonvolitional spontaneous attempt

> to move to a position of self?

>

> If you can, you notice that this instant, there is

> no separation of the movement and that from which

> it " wants " to move.

>

> That destroys the entire configuration of self as

> a being with its own existence in time, dissolves

> the attempt to manufacture a loop of perception.

>

> The self position as the knower, the haver, the doer,

> the experiencer, the one who has a continuing being.

>

> This acuity of awareness, this spontaneous clarity,

> isn't a product of anything you intend, wish,

> aim for, and so on.

>

> Yet, it includes an intense desire for truth that

> overcomes the ingrained tendency to try to

> " come from the past " -- to try to exist as a being

> formed of memory, a collection of experiences and

> tendencies to react from a position.

>

> The way that tendency to try to come from the past

> is overcome is simply by not doing anything.

> Not the kind of not doing that people mean, when

> they say, " I'm not going to do that. " But nondoing

> as the fullness of the energy you are, without an

> intent to make anything be the case.

>

> There is no intent to get rid of the tendency -- such

> intent is, in fact, the operation of that tendency.

>

> So, there is simply observation that doesn't depend on

> having a point of view, a predetermined outcome for

> what will be seen or known, or even a template for

> knowing.

>

> Just " what is " as is ...

>

> -- Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...