Psychedelics and Yoga are bad? Conflicting advice from teachers

[robdl]

3 minutes ago, Charlotte said:

So let me get this straight... Thought/self is always seeking security in its self for itself...  It doesn't matter about the actual thought content as long as it's always thinking/perpetuating.

Thought 'breeds' best from negativity, attachment, identification, seeking etc?

You got it.  You got the concept of it I'm pointing to.  But thought-self will seek security in this concept, as a form of knowledge -- to perpuate itself.  See the utter subtlety of this?  It must be seen for oneself directly, as a fact, wholly.

 

[Faceless]

Thought is a response from the past and a movement of anticipation to capture and maintain security in the future. 

[Faceless]

2 minutes ago, robdl said:

You got it.  You got the concept of it I'm pointing to.  But thought-self will seek security in this concept, as a form of knowledge -- to perpuate itself.  See the utter subtlety of this?  It must be seen for oneself directly, as a fact, wholly.

 

Yes, we have to see this movement in oursleves. 

[Charlotte]

3 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Without the known there is no knower, which is frightening. 

1 minute ago, robdl said:

You got it.  You got the concept of it I'm pointing to.  But thought-self will seek security in this concept, as a form of knowledge -- to perpuate itself.  See the utter subtlety of this?  It must be seen for oneself directly, as a fact, wholly.

 

Can ego present itself physically when it's frightened? Guys, I've seriously observed this happening in real time and whenever I've become aware of it it's dropped (the thought movement) but in that split second I feel sick, physically, for that few seconds. 

[Faceless]

1 minute ago, Charlotte said:

Can ego present itself physically when it's frightened? Guys, I've seriously observed this happening in real time and whenever I've become aware of it it's dropped (the thought movement) but in that split second I feel sick, physically, for that few seconds. 

A reaction to fear that manifests a physical response. Yes indeed. 

[Faceless]

Which is intelligent response if there is immediate physical danger. But when that response is caused by psychological reaction, that implies thought-fear has associated the thinker with some kind of “problem”...

Psychological problems only exist in association to “some-thing”

Edited June 27, 2018 by Faceless

[robdl]

18 minutes ago, Charlotte said:

Can ego present itself physically when it's frightened? Guys, I've seriously observed this happening in real time and whenever I've become aware of it it's dropped (the thought movement) but in that split second I feel sick, physically, for that few seconds. 

Yes.  Simple pure, passive, choiceless attention of this physical manifestation of fear is necessary.  Then it may evolve into something else (as it did from fear-thought to fear-sensation).

Remember that the specific thought/sensation content isn't the thing.  Just thought-self perpetuating, making use of what it can, and fear is juicy.

Edited June 27, 2018 by robdl

[WindInTheLeaf]

Thoughts and desires are tools, and as with any tool its goal is to become obsolete. If the I is a collection of thoughts and desires, it has to create a self-perpetuating loop to stay alive. I require thoughts and desires to exist. If I did not constantly create problems and goals, I would quickly perish into nothingness. 

But as my true self is nothingness, by perishing I flourish.

Edited June 27, 2018 by WindInTheLeaf

[Faceless]

The i and thought is one and the same movement of, and as desire. 

[robdl]

Yeah, thought/language in its dualistic nature distinguishes  "I", "thoughts," and "desires" into seemingly different things  --- but it's  just one and the same movement, as you said.

Edited June 27, 2018 by robdl

[Faceless]

2 minutes ago, robdl said:

Yeah, thought/language in its dualistic nature distinguishes  "I", "thoughts," and "desires" into seemingly different things  --- but it's  just one and the same movement, as you said.

Indeed...It breaks that which is whole to pieces. 

[WindInTheLeaf]

6 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Indeed...It breaks that which is whole to pieces. 

Yet the whole is already in pieces. It is easier to convey a message if you speak the same language as the listener. Endless frustration can come from trying to explain that which cannot be explained. Better untangle the mess of thought little by little. Back into the cave and talking about shadows we must, if we are to speak with the goal of ending thought.

Edited June 27, 2018 by WindInTheLeaf

[Faceless]

10 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

Endless frustration can come from trying to explain that which cannot be explained.

Yes lol 

10 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

Back into the cave and talking about shadows we must, if we are to speak with the goal of ending thought.

Edited 3 minutes ago by WindInTheLeaf

Yeah let’s not make that a goal lol 

In so doing thought is again at work. 

So tricky and sneaky

Edited June 27, 2018 by Faceless

[robdl]

Some of the pitfalls of communication through duality/thought can be avoided by:

-expressing certain things in a myriad of ways but then frequently pointing out that they're different dualistic expressions for one and the same thing.  When we express it a bunch of different ways but fail to mention it's actually one and the same thing, then it may only fuel thought-self/confusion in another.

-incessantly pointing out that whatever is communicated is just a pointing.  Don't mistake understanding/agreeing with the content that is being given for the direct insight itself, which is not of thought, but directly seeing the whole movement of thought-self itself.   Thought-self compulsively takes knowledge - even non-dual knowledge - to self-perpetuate, but doesn't realize it has done so (self-deception).  Astonishingly subtle and sneaky.

Edited June 27, 2018 by robdl

[Faceless]

4 minutes ago, robdl said:

Some of the pitfalls of communication through duality/thought can be avoided by:

-expressing certain things in a myriad of ways but then frequently pointing out that they're different dualistic expressions for one and the same thing.  When we express it a bunch of different ways but fail to mention it's actually one and the same thing, then it may only fuel thought-self/confusion in another.

-incessantly pointing out that whatever is communicated is just a pointing.  Don't mistake understanding/agreeing with the content that is being given for the direct insight itself, which is not of thought, but directly seeing the whole movement of thought-self itself.

Indeed. To see how everything connects as one unitary movement 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Faceless

[WindInTheLeaf]

8 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Yes lol 

Yeah let’s not make that a goal lol 

In so doing thought is again at work. 

So tricky and sneaky

By writing, thinking, speaking, we are already in the cave. How do you explain the light to those who have never been outside the cave, other than through the use of the familiar, that is the shadows?

As with any big truth, most cannot handle all of it at once, so you have to give it in pieces.

Edited June 27, 2018 by WindInTheLeaf

[WindInTheLeaf]

5 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

As with any big truth, most cannot handle all of it at once, so you have to give it in pieces.

I believe this is why everything is shattered. The light is too strong as one, to remain one.

Edited June 27, 2018 by WindInTheLeaf

[robdl]

9 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

By writing, thinking, speaking, we are already in the cave. How do you explain the light to those who have never been outside the cave, other than through the use of the familiar, that is the shadows?

As with any big truth, most cannot handle all of it at once, so you have to give it in pieces.

By not explaining the light, but by getting them to understand the nature of the cave in which they occupy -- to see the cave for what it is, purely.   For to explain the light, it will inevitably be viewed through their cave lens.

They have not looked closely enough at the cave that they're occupying.

Edited June 27, 2018 by robdl

[Faceless]

7 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

By writing, thinking, speaking, we are already in the cave. How do you explain the light to those who have never been outside the cave

You cannot explain the light. You can only point to the light. 

What @robdl and I do is to show all the subtle inter-relationships of thought. To point so one can see in oneself how each “particular” movement of thought is actully one unitary movement. 

We share the significance of investigating the nature of thought-self. 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

4 minutes ago, WindInTheLeaf said:

I believe this is why everything is shattered. The light is too strong as one, to remain one.

Indeed, that which is fragmented/broken cannot capture that which is whole. 

In order to see the whole (infinite) that which is (fragmented-finite) must cease to move. 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Faceless