Divorcing the Me

[Guest guest]

Re: Divorcing the Me

 

NonDualPhil , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote:

>

> --

> > >

> > > P: That is very good, Dan! I would only change

> > > the last sentence to read: And therefore, awareness

> > > is the same in all brains. Your sentence could be

> > > understood as if asserting a universal awareness.

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Pete -

> >

> > I agree with you.

> >

> > There is no way to establish some kind of monolithic stand-alone awareness.

> >

> > Awareness and what it is aware of, co-arise in mutuality.

> >

> > -- Dan

>

> P: OK, I see it sort of like that too. An awareness

> without content of any kind would not even be aware

> of itself. I think Nis referred to the absolute as

> awareness not aware of itself.

>

> I agree with you that the " me " is that activity

> which seeks continuity, defense, and acquisition.

>

> But let's discuss activity itself. Actions, thoughts,

> imaginations are mental events which foster separation.

> Not that there is anything wrong with any of that, but

> deep seeing requires moments of inactivity, purposelessly

> attention to just existing. In such moments something

> never noticed before might come into view.

>

> What says thee to that?

 

I say that non-activity is the heart of understanding. I prefer the term

non-activity, because inactivity implies the opposite of activity, that activity

is lacking or missing.

 

Non-activity is how activity can occur, so it's not the opposite of activity.

Being aware as non-activity, all action " falls into place, " each action

occurring within a context including all other actions, the beginning of one

being the end of another.

 

Understanding, in the way we are discussing it, doesn't occur, because an

occurrence is an activity.

 

" A wheel involves sixteen spokes. But the center of the wheel is void. The

wheel's function depends on its center, which is empty. "

 

I'm paraphrasing something I heard a long time ago, from the Tao Te Ching - but

it's a good metaphor.

 

Another metaphor is the center of the cyclone.

 

Actions appear and disappear, occur and stop occurring, begin and end

(apparently).

 

The sense of doing the action is included in the action, because the sense of

doing is activity.

 

Non-action allows all activity to be understood as what it is.

 

Comprehending words is an action.

 

Words that are spoken about non-action are limited, because comprehending what

is said is an action occurring " within " or " because " of the non-action that

can't be provided in words.

 

The Tao te Ching talks about non-action, Buddha talked about " cessation. " Jesus

talked about lilies in the field. These concepts seem quite linked.

 

-- Dan